Our Base Is Feuding, the Dem’s Base Is Fracturing

posted by Kurt Schlichter at Townhall 

Sure, we Republicans have our problems with circular firing squads, but look at the Democrats and be glad you’re not them. After all, they’re about to elect a communist to be mayor of New York City. Not a wild-eyed liberal. Not even a socialist. Homeboy is a straight-up Instagram Karl Marx.

And it’s uniquely destructive, hopefully. It’s not that I wish anything bad on New York City. Oddly enough, while I’ve lived on several continents, the first time I visited New York City was in 2011, and it was wonderful. It was kind of like Las Vegas before the mob sold off the casinos and they started catering to obnoxious manchildren in cargo shorts playing quarter slots, a place you could go and be an adult and then go home after you got tired of it in about three days. At that time, NYC was still on the upswing after being cleaned up by Rudy Giuliani. Then New Yorkers, deciding that doing the things that made civilization civilized was mean, stopped doing them, and New York degenerated into a festering cesspool of weirdos, losers, and mutations, all wandering through a haze of dank weed smoke.

One would think that the smart play would be to find somebody who is going to put the city back together again. Eric Adams tried, and he’s on the ballot, but nobody likes him for whatever reason – something about corruption, but he doesn’t seem any more corrupt than the usual New York politician. Andrew Cuomo is on the ballot for some reason, and so is Curtis Sliwa, who is becoming the Harold Stassen of New York City politics. None of these guys can win, and none of their egos will allow them to drop out, so the winner by default is going to be Zohran Mamdani, the human nexus of all the worst aspects of Marxism and jihadism in one insufferable package. You gotta hand it to New York City. It didn’t seem possible to make things worse, but they found the perfect guy to do it.

This guy presses all the buttons, from re-distributing the means of production – hilariously, the Official Licensed™ fact-checkers officially proclaimed that this kind of talk had nothing to do with communism – to being for perversions, feminism, and, of course, Palestinian sympathizing. The city with the largest concentration of Jewish people outside of Israel is about to elect a guy who booed the end of “Schindler’s List.” I would advise against it, but as I’ve grown older, I’ve come to realize that I can’t care more about other people than they care about themselves.

New York richly deserves this guy, and I hope they get him good and hard. But the Democratic Party deserves him even more, and I hope it gets him even gooder and harder.

Mamdani is the candidate of the kind of affluent white leftist who can either afford to get out of town or who can call up his parents to get him out of town. This is a boutique Bolshevik, the candidate of the gender studies majors and the girls with daddy issues. He’s the candidate of progressive pinkos of pallor. The working class, which is primarily minority, is absolutely against him. Blacks don’t want him. Hispanics don’t want him. The white working class doesn’t want him. But they have jobs, and therefore, they’re hard to organize and activate. The leisure leftist class has nothing better to do and plenty of money to spend, as well as an eager accomplice in the regime media. They’re going to install this guy, and it’s going to be hilarious. If you think the formerly Golden State’s Gavin Newsom is bad, wait until this commie goof gets hold of the Big Apple.

Spoiler: When the city goes bankrupt and crime gets even more rampant, it’s all going to be Trump’s fault because shut up, you’re racist.

But while they will effortlessly spin it in the five boroughs, outside, we’re all going to see what is happening. The regime media is no longer the gatekeeper. It doesn’t get to set the agenda, and it doesn’t get to establish the truth, which coincidentally is never remotely like the truth. No, we’re going to see New York go to hell, and we’re going to savor it.

You know who’s not savoring it? Chuck Schumer is not. While a bunch of Democrat dummies have rushed to praise the Marxist newcomer, Chuck Schumer has yet, as of this writing, to endorse him. Hakeem Jeffries has failed to endorse him, which is pretty amazing because Hakeem is a pretty dumb guy. But he’s not so dumb as not to see how poisonous to the Dem brand having a literal communist who kisses terrorist tush is in the rest of America. As GOP Congressman Mike Lawler of New York observed, this is going to put a lot of New York seats in play. It’s going to put seats in play all over the country. Between Governor Hairstyle and this Maoist moron, we Republicans are going to have plenty of ammunition for good, old-fashioned, compare-and-contrast messaging. Sure, history is against us keeping the House, much less expanding it, and we have tempests in the teapot like the whole Epstein nonsense occasionally sending us off on tangents if we get the economy going – and history tells a combination of tax cuts, deregulation, and not being communist gets the economy going – we’ve got a chance to run up the score in 2026 with Pol Pothead the cherry on top.

So, I’m all for Zohran Mamdani, for whatever that’s worth. Now, a lot of people thought that Donald Trump would be a disaster for us in 2016, and so pushed him, but he turned out to be a disaster for them. There’s always a chance this makes the guy a player and we come one step closer to the kind of nightmare scenario I write about in my new novel, "American Apocalypse: The Second Civil War" (coming July 17, 2025). Still, history teaches that anything communist touches turns into dung, so I’m not that worried. But again, it’s not like we have a choice – we’re flying standby here, and we’ve got to take the seat they give us. The people of New York City are going to do with the people of New York City as they do, regardless of our urgings, cajolings, or warnings. As legendary NYC mayor Ed Koch once observed, “The people have spoken … and they must be punished.”

The Conditions at Alligator Alcatraz are Breakin’ My Heart!

Leftist hyperbole aside, the conditions are exactly what they should be and no worse than what Americans experience, whether in jail or boot camp.

posted by Stu Tarlowe at American Thinker 

Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-FL (I can’t help but remember how Rush Limbaugh used to call her “Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz”), has been railing about the “inhumane” conditions at “Alligator Alcatraz”: e.g., the detainees have to use jailhouse toilets which combine sink and toilet in one stainless steel unit, and there are “insects everywhere.”

In an e-mailed statement to Newsweek, she declared,

This inhumane camp mirrors the despicable imprisonment that Japanese Americans endured in internment camps without due process in World War II. Like then, Trump and DeSantis ethnically target individuals without formal trials or charges, and detain them in makeshift barracks, or in this case, cages. And just like that ugly chapter in America’s past, these Everglades detainees lack any privacy or humane treatment, and face inadequate food, sanitation, medical and living conditions. The immoral treatment of human beings on this Florida site unmistakably echoes a similarly shameful American chapter.

Schultz was particularly outraged that while those manning (Oops! Can we still say “manning,” or must we say “personing”?) the facility were fed “large pieces of roast chicken and large sausages,” the detainees had to make do with “small, gray turkey and cheese sandwiches and apple and chips, and that’s it.”

“We’re talking about fully grown men being fed very small portions,” the Florida Congresswoman kvetched.

Golly, they get apples? Isn’t that fresh fruit? I remember the time or two that Iwas in jail. We got three meals a day, and every one was the same: a slice of bologna between two slices of dry white bread, and black coffee. And I was, and am, an American citizen, not an illegal alien.

Maybe Schultz could take these poor, oppressed individuals into her own home, where she could give them the kind of food, lodging, privacy, and care that she thinks they deserve. Heck, she could even cook for them and bring them their meals and fresh towels like room service!

I can’t help but be reminded of reading, when I was a kid, some of my dad’s old copies of Yank, The Army Weekly from World War II. One memorable item was supposed to be a letter to a soldier from the folks “back home,” telling how everyone, even on the homefront, was forced to make sacrifices. Those sacrifices included having steak only twice a week, and “no more cherries in our cherry Cokes.”

Florida Democrat Maxwell Frost (no, not the same as “Max Frost and the Troopers”!) was upset that Alligator Alcatraz was a place “where people are forced to eat, sleep, shower, and defecate all in the same room.”

Please! You’re breakin’ my heart! It’s a jail, a detention facility! Where did you get the notion that being in jail was supposed to be comfortable? The conditions in such a facility are supposed to be part of the deterrent to doing stuff that will land you up in such a facility; where did you get the notion that it was supposed to be a country club, a spa, or even a summer camp?

“There are insects everywhere!” Well, Duh! It’s in the Everglades! Is it any worse than what U.S. Marine Corps recruits go through at Parris Island? They get eaten alive by sand fleas, and they’re not even supposed to swat ‘em! Are the detainees at Alligator Alcatraz forbidden to swat the insects that plague them? Has any detainee ever been singled out for swatting an insect and then been forced to dig a grave and bury the insect, the way more than one Marine recruit has been forced to do?

And, by the way, I’m not a Marine. But I’ve heard enough stories of Boot Camp at Parris Island to believe them. I’ve even had Marines tell me that they reached a point where they were so exhausted and sleep-deprived and hot and sweaty and sore and eaten alive by sand fleas that they questioned what they had gotten themselves into, and seriously considered quitting, at which point the Drill Instructor would remind them of what the letters “USMC” actually stood for: ‘U’ Signed the Motherf***ing Contract!

Such are the conditions endured by those American citizens who have volunteered to be among “the few and the proud.”

The detainees at Alligator Alcatraz didn’t sign a contract. But they did enter the USA illegally. And that is reason enough for their detention, let alone whatever other crimes they may have committed (and, apparently, many of those detained have committed other crimes, including theft, murder, rape, child-molestation and drug- and gang-related crimes; the facility was built in order “to safely detain the worst of the worst”). If they didn’t want to be forced to live in such inhumane conditions, they shouldn’t have sneaked across the border (even if former DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and other Biden Administration officials were—figuratively—encouraging them with open arms, big smiles and banners declaring ¡Bienvenidos!).

But wait, there’s more! The recently-appointed executive director of the ACLU of Florida and a former officer of the Southern Poverty Law Center, one Bacardi Jackson (did her parents name her after a popular brand of rum?), brought up a whole ‘nother reason to be outraged about Alligator Alcatraz: It’s built, you see, on “sacred, indigenous land,” and is, therefore, “a direct assault on humanity, dignity, indigenous sovereignty, and the constitutional protections we all share.”

Somehow, when I hear the words “direct assault,” I’m reminded less of “indigenous sovereignty” and more of the kind of direct assault suffered by Laken Riley or any of the countless other victims of violent illegal immigrants. Detention and deportation seem far more “humane” than what many of these criminals actually deserve.

🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 

Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 

man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 

Biden Was Never Fit For Office To Begin With

Who approved the Biden administration’s 11th-hour clemency decisions and authorized use of the autopen? Because it certainly wasn’t Biden.

by John Daniel Davidson for The Federalist

At this point, you would be hard-pressed to find any reasonably informed American who honestly thinks President Joe Biden wasn’t in a state of serious cognitive decline at the end of his term in office. Yet the New York Times has at least two reporters who are willing to pretend they believe this.

On Sunday, the Times ran a piece by notorious Russia collusion hoaxer Charlie Savage and Tyler Pager about the thousands of clemency decisions recorded with autopen in the final days of the Biden administration. The piece is meant, on the surface, to be a defense of Biden and his administration’s use of the autopen.

But anyone who reads the entire article carefully will immediately see that its real purpose is damage control: The Trump White House, Justice Department, and Congress are all investigating the high-profile clemency decisions that came down in the final days of the Biden presidency, and it sure looks like Biden’s top aides were making decisions on their own, without the president’s knowledge.

Despite the article’s framing — “Biden Says He Made the Clemency Decisions That Were Recorded With Autopen” — there’s no evidence presented in the piece that Biden personally authorized any of the last-minute pardons. Indeed, the article states that “Biden did not individually approve each name for the categorical pardons … Rather than ask Biden to keep signing revised versions, his staff waited and then ran the final version through the autopen, which they saw as … routine”

The overall picture that emerges from the article is that the entire pardon process was directed by top Biden staffers, not by Biden himself. Emails reviewed by the Times “show that use of the autopen was managed by Mr. Biden’s White House staff secretary, Ms. Feldman. She wanted to receive written accounts confirming Mr. Biden’s oral instructions in the meetings before using it to produce the warrants recording the clemency actions, the emails show.” Those written accounts were drafted by aides who themselves were not in the room when Biden supposedly gave verbal authorization for the pardons, and instead came entirely from Biden’s chief of staff, Jeffrey D. Zients, and Biden’s White House counsel, Ed Siskel.

In other words, Zients and Siskel were running the show, and the only evidence we have that Biden was actually authorizing these pardons is that Zients and Siskel insist that he was, verbally, in late-night, closed-door meetings. And the account of these meetings strains credulity: “At the Jan. 19 meeting, which took place in the Yellow Oval Room of the White House residence, Mr. Biden kept his aides until nearly 10 p.m. to talk through such decisions, according to people familiar with the matter.”

So you’re telling me a president in obvious cognitive decline, who clearly could not function after a certain point in the early afternoon, whose White House regularly called a lid at noon, “kept his aides until nearly 10 p.m.” on his last day in office? I’m sorry, but that’s just not believable. 

What is believable is that Biden’s presidency was run by a faceless syndicate of aides, lawyers, and senior White House staff — the deep state, in other words. And not just in the final days regarding clemency decisions. Early on in the 2020 campaign it was obvious to anyone who cared to pay attention and be honest that Biden wasn’t all there and wasn’t really in charge. He awkwardly hid in his basement instead of campaigning, using Covid as the excuse. Once he took office, Biden’s decline was undeniable. His routine confusion on stage and in formal settings, his physical frailty and penchant for tripping, and his incessant verbal gaffes and nonsense made it obvious that he wasn’t all there.

Biden once repeatedly looked for a dead congresswomen in the crowd at a White House event and called out her name. That was in September 2022 — long before his disastrous debate performance with Trump made it obvious that he was unfit to run for a second term, let alone serve as commander-in-chief. 

All along, the media ran cover for him, insisting anyone who questioned his mental acuity was a conspiracy theorist or acting in bad faith. Some, like CNN’s Jake Tapper and Axios’ Alex Thompson, have tried to retcon all of this, writing an entire book about how the Biden White House  hid the president’s mental decline and “deceived” the press. For Tapper to co-author such a book is almost pathologically shameless, since he was one of the major media figures who ran interference for Biden by attacking everyone who noticed the president’s decline.

Like nearly everything else about the Biden presidency, the autopen scandal reveals just how far the deep state was willing to go to keep a mentally compromised figurehead in office. They ran a coup against Biden last summer after the debate with Trump, only once it became obvious and undeniable that Biden wasn’t all there.

The New York Times can cite anonymous sources all it wants to try to “contextualize” the use of the autopen at the eleventh hour of Biden’s term, but like Biden’s obvious unfitness for office throughout his presidency, the truth is right in front of us, plain for all to see. His presidency stands as one of the greatest political scandals perpetrated against the American people in a generation, and eventually someone needs to answer for that.

Feds Find Adam ‘No One Is Above The Law’ Schiff Likely Committed Mortgage Fraud

Beth Brelje reporting for The Federalist 

If you see Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., refusing to sit down, it is probably because his tuchus is sore from his words coming back to bite him in the backside.

“No one is above the law,” Schiff has been fond of crowing in his numerous attempts to tie President Donald Trump up in bogus lawfare. Schiff desperately advocated to put Trump behind bars over the Stormy Daniels lawsuit. 

“No one is above the law.”

When you say things like that, you better make sure your own house is clean. Or at least your mortgage papers are honest. But it looks like Schiff has run afoul of the law.

In a social media post on Tuesday, Trump announced that Schiff had been investigated by Fannie Mae’s Financial Crimes division, which found Schiff may have committed mortgage fraud for more than a decade after he refinanced one of his homes — the one in Maryland, not the one in California. According to Trump, from 2009 to 2020, Schiff allegedly declared the Maryland home his primary residence “to get a cheaper mortgage and to rip off America,” Trump wrote. “Mortgage Fraud is very serious and CROOKED Adam Schiff (now a Senator) needs to be brought to justice.”  

The Federalist asked Fannie Mae’s Financial Crime team for more detail, but a communications person said in an email, “We respectfully decline comment.”  

It is not the first time the issue of Schiff’s claims about his primary residence has come up. The difference now is that it has been criminally investigated. It was widely reported in 2023 — even by CNN — that Schiff claimed both his Maryland and California homes as primary residences.

“Adam’s California and Maryland addresses have been listed as primary residences for loan purposes because they are both occupied throughout the year and to distinguish them from a vacation property,” Marisol Samayoa, a spokeswoman for Schiff’s campaign at that time, told CNN.

“His spokesperson also told CNN the properties were both claimed as primary residences for loan purposes,” CNN reported.

That is cheating. The CNN piece also noted Schiff had posted a photo of himself in Maryland on the day of a primary election in 2022 wearing an “I voted” sticker. His spokeswoman said he voted in California by mail. But what is to stop him from voting in both places, if he fraudulently calls both homes his primary residence?  

Schiff is not known for honesty. In 2023 the U.S. House censured him for “misleading the American public and for conduct unbecoming of an elected member of the House.” The censure called for an ethics investigation into Schiff’s “falsehoods, misrepresentations, and abuses of sensitive information.”

Schiff pushed the bogus Russia collusion hoax. And in 2019, he read into the congressional record an imagined script of a phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that made Trump sound like a gangster. California voters responded to his lies by giving the then-House representative a promotion to Senator.

Schiff called Trump’s post a “baseless attempt at political retribution,” in a responding post Tuesday.  

Schiff has never felt real consequences for lying in Congress. The censure? Meaningless.

It is time to throw the book at him, an appropriate response since that is the treatment he has long prescribed for others.

Congress Broke The Military, Now It Must Fix It

Only Congress can fully undo the mess it made.

by William A. Woodruff for The Federalist 

Congress created the “woke” military. Now it has the responsibility to return the Armed Forces to its mission of defense instead of promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).

During his 2024 presidential campaign, Donald Trump railed against the “woke” military and promised to refocus the armed forces on merit and combat effectiveness. Upon his inauguration and the confirmation of Pete Hegseth as secretary of Defense, the president began disassembling the military’s DEI bureaucracy through executive orders.

But executive orders cannot nullify acts of Congress. Only Congress can eliminate positions, programs, and policies specifically created by Congress, the branch of government with the constitutional authority to “make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces.”

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2026, on the calendar for consideration this week, presents what could be the last opportunity for Congress to restore merit and eliminate divisive, destructive, and demoralizing policies that elevate race and gender quotas over military effectiveness.

Will Congress Act?

The short answer is no, if the draft version of the 2026 NDAA that has emerged from the respective Armed Services committees is enacted without amendments. Neither the Senate nor the House versions address the meritocracy issue. Congressional silence sends the message that Congress does not consider ending DEI and establishing a merit-based military personnel system important. That message will be heard loudly and clearly by those in the Pentagon bureaucracy who have embraced the DEI philosophy.

Maybe the current administration can keep its finger in the dike for the next three years. But without legislative action a new administration can reestablish the DEI priorities with the stroke of a pen. Diversity will once again become a “strategic imperative.”

Instead, members of Congress should end the “diversity is our strength” mantra once and for all by writing legislation that follows four simple principles, outlined below.

Require Merit

First, Congress must specify that all military personnel actions, from recruitment and accessions, to assignments, promotions, and separations must be based solely on merit. Unless Congress affirmatively imposes a merit requirement, the imbedded DEI culture that has permeated the Pentagon for years will worm its way back into personnel policy. Current leadership may vigorously resist these subversive tactics, but leaders change. The effectiveness of the military cannot be based solely on the good intentions of any single individual or executive action.

Forbid Favoritism and Discrimination

Second, after imposing a statutorily mandated merit requirement, Congress must specifically forbid the use of racial and gender preferences in all military personnel actions. Unless Congress tells the Department of Defense (DOD) by statute that it cannot grant racial and gender preferences to “balance” demographic makeup of the force, the DEI bureaucracy will look for ways to continue advancing its discriminatory goals.

By forbidding the use of race and gender in personnel actions, Congress will return the military to the historical goal of equal opportunity envisioned by President Harry Truman in integrating the military and President John F. Kennedy’s efforts to end racial discrimination in the armed forces. Equal opportunity, not equal outcomes, will motivate the best and brightest to achieve their potential. 

Provide Reasonable Accommodations

Third, Congress must consider the realities on the ground when developing policies that work effectively in the complicated and dangerous world in which we live. For example, a covert mission in an African nation with an overwhelmingly black population requires American soldiers who can blend in. Considering the race of the special operators, along with their military skills, is appropriate, expected, and required for mission success.

Similarly, Congress must consider and respect reasonable accommodations for sex differences. Men and women may be fungible in their ability to pilot a drone, but they are different in ways that warrant respect and consideration in other settings. Insofar as the operational environment permits, privacy expectations of men and women in their respective personal spaces must be respected. Reasonable accommodations of those differences are important.

The same can be said for accommodating certain religious beliefs. If a faith-based college or university hosting an ROTC program requires its faculty members to be members of the sponsoring faith group, assignment of active-duty ROTC instructors should conform to those expectations.

Define Key Terms

Last, but certainly not least, Congress must define key terms to preclude entrenched bureaucrats from manipulating definitions to hinder the policy goals of the legislation. If Congress fails to define the key terms, DOD bureaucrats will create their own definitions that may defeat the purpose of the legislation.

For example, “sex” must be defined based on biological reality and not include subjective notions like “gender identity” or “gender expression.”

“Merit” must be defined to encompass only objective, measurable, and recognizable accomplishments, qualifications, and skills. The definition must exclude vague, amorphous, and unrelated concepts that could be used to subvert legislative policy goals. 

Congress Created the Problem

The Pentagon’s diversity and inclusion bureaucracy was born with the 2009 NDAA, which created the Military Leadership Diversity Commission, with a mandate to “conduct a comprehensive evaluation and assessment of policies that provide opportunities for the promotion and advancement of minority members of the Armed Forces, including minority members who are senior officers.”

In 2020, Congress created a “chief diversity officer” for the DOD with the responsibility of overseeing and implementing diversity and inclusion goals.

With the 2026 NDAA, Congress must undo such legislation and restore merit to our military.

O'Keefe Media Group Catches J&J Scientist Admitting Their COVID Vaccine Was Never 'Safe and Effective'

Bob Hoge reporting for RedState 

Investigative journalist James O’Keefe and his O’Keefe Media Group (aptly shortened as "OMG") are at it again. O’Keefe made his name first with Project Veritas and later with his newer outfit by catching politicians and big company executives saying things on undercover video that they really wish they hadn't.

Now, one of his reporters captured a “Lead Scientist in Regulatory Affairs” at pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson saying the company did not test its COVID vaccine properly and that it wasn’t actually effective.

Color me shocked. Actually, I’m not in the slightest.

“We didn’t do the typical tests,” said Joshua Rys… [who] revealed on hidden camera that the typical clinical process was abandoned for the COVID-19 vaccine, knowingly bypassing standard testing protocols under pressure from the U.S. government and public demand. He added, “This was just, ‘let’s test it on some lab models… and just throw it to the wind and see what happens.’”

He acknowledged that the public wasn’t informed about the shortcuts, asking, “Do you have any idea the lack of research that was done on those products?” Rys claimed, “People wanted it, we gave it to them.”

Ok, so they didn't test it properly. But it would at least stop you from getting the virus, right?

Not according to Rys:

While public officials claimed the vaccines were “safe and effective,” Rys pushed back. “There’s no proof. None of that stuff was safe and effective,” he said, adding that the industry relies on a benefit-risk tradeoff to justify product launches.

Watch:

I knew back in 2021 that the J&J vax was junk for two reasons. You see, I took it—I did not want to, but it was the only way I would be allowed to see a seriously ailing close relative—and the very next day the government issued a temporary pause on its use due to concerns it could cause blood clots. That sure made me feel good.

Not too much longer after that, I came down with COVID. Some vaccine. Months later, Joe Biden was still telling us that if you got the jab, you wouldn’t get the Wuhan Flu. That, to put it mildly, was simply not true, just like so much else of what they sold us.

---

Needless to say, I refused all “boosters” and thankfully never got a dose of the experimental mRNA shots that were being peddled by Pfizer and Moderna. Raise your hand if you know someone who got addicted to getting boosted endlessly but seemed to come down with the virus once a month.

Rys also pointed to the immense pressure the company was under as people wanted a solution to the global crisis. “The government is like, ‘We need help… You’re solving this problem,'" he said. “People panic, so they try to solve it in whatever way they think is good.”

Unfortunately, we cannot know how much truth is being told here, because sometimes in these undercover situations, the unwitting subjects can boast, try to impress a date, make themselves sound more important at their companies than they really are, etc.

Nevertheless, I am still looking forward to hearing what J&J has to say about these remarks. Rys was confronted on camera by O'Keefe about his comments, but quickly clammed up and tried to get away as fast as he could. 

OMG ends their article with: “Stay tuned for part two.” That should be interesting indeed.

CEO of Activist Group Reveals He Was Offered $20 Million to Provide Demonstrators for Anti-Trump Rallies

Teri Christoph reporting for RedState 

If you've ever wondered how the left manages to get people to show up at its protests, hold shiny, pre-printed signs, and scream out in supposed rage against all the things, but especially Donald Trump, we may have the answer for you: rent-a-crowd. It's just like Rent-a-Center, where you can, for a price, get all the items you need to temporarily furnish your home or office, but it instead involves people willing to show up, again at a price, to protest The Current Outrage.

Adam Swart, CEO of an activist group called Crowds on Demand, revealed in an interview on Tuesday that his organization, which helps provide bodies at protests and demonstrations, had been contacted by "interests aligned" with the upcoming "Good Trouble Lives On" protests to help out. According to Swart, he was offered a cool $20 million by these unnamed individuals or organizations to "organize huge demonstrations around the country."

What exactly is "Good Trouble Lives On," you ask? Good question. The short answer is that it's the latest iteration of No Kings, the Women's March or any number of radical leftist protests that target President Trump and often end in violence. Think "fiery, but mostly peaceful." The longer answer is that there exists a web of dark money that funds these demonstrations, and all roads typically lead back to the Tides Foundation and George Soros. 

"Good Trouble Lives On" takes its name from the late Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), who apparently coined the term "good trouble" as "the action of coming together to take peaceful, non-violent action to challenge injustice and create meaningful change." Here's what the group of very murky origins says they stand for:

A core principle behind all Good Trouble Lives On events is a commitment to nonviolent action. We expect all participants to seek to de-escalate any potential confrontation with those who disagree with our values and to act lawfully at these events. Weapons of any kind, including those legally permitted, should not be brought to events.

What they are protesting is anybody's guess. You have to show up to find out, I suppose. I'm putting my money on abortion, immigration raids, law enforcement, DOGE, and, of course, Donald Trump. Maybe with a little bit of gun control and Tesla smattered in for effect.

The group is planning nationwide protests on July 17, and that's where Crowds on Demand comes in. If Mr. Swart is to be believed, and there's no reason not to, hard-left organizers are busy trying to get warm bodies on the ground in order to swell the numbers at these events.

Crowds on Demand describes itself as "your home for impactful advocacy campaigns, demonstrations, PR stunts, crowds for hire and corporate events." Swart told NewsNation's Brian Entin Tuesday that his firm has "large network of people from every political perspective," and the people he works with are passionate about the campaigns and events. Swart also said the protestors can be paid "hundreds of dollars a day" for their time.

Could this guy just be spinning tales in order to get his name and brand out there? Sure. But, many Americans have wondered about the crowds, made up of folks seemingly with copious amounts of free time, that seem to pop up out of nowhere and just happen to have pre-printed signs. You'll recall that Tesla protest where all the demonstrators seemed to depart at the same time, almost as if the "quittin' time!" whistle from The Flintstones had gone off.

Back in the day, the left loved to accuse the Tea Party movement of being "astroturf," A/K/A, fake. Contrived. Phony. But that was just to deflect from the fact that they themselves have big money behind their gripe du jour. The tell is when the protestors are asked to explain why they are participating, and many fumble around for a response or simply spew out talking points. Scratch the surface too much and dollar signs start to appear.

In case you were wondering, Swart says he turned down the money "Good Trouble Lives On" offered because he thought the protests this week would be "ineffective" and "make us look bad."