When Mutants Attack

Townhall 

There is no bottom to the depravity of the political left; there just isn’t. Whatever issue you think I’m referring to there, you’re right. There isn’t much of anything, with the possible exception of a sandwich order, that those people can do that wouldn’t disgust me at this point (honestly, whatever kind of sandwich they eat is probably disgusting, too). There is something fundamentally wrong with them – like they were dropped on their heads as babies or their parents traded them for meth or something. Whatever it is, the word “gross” comes to mind.

Why this, and why now? Well, first off, why not? They are all of those things and more. But also the temper tantrum that saw Democrats flee Texas because too many voters in Texas elected people not belonging to the Democratic Party. You see, denying the majority what they want is “what democracy looks like.” 

Wait, that’s the exact opposite of true. But I could have sworn that’s what the angry, obese lesbian 2-spirit male-thing was screaming in order to prevent someone with whom they disagreed politically from speaking on a heavily taxpayer subsidized bastion of free speech called a college campus. Have I mentioned that I despise these people yet? 

But it’s more than just Democrats running away from their jobs to block the duly elected representatives of the people from following the state Constitution; it’s pretty much everything. 

Is there anything these people do that doesn’t disgust you? 

This guy needs to have is electronic devices and basement searched for kids. pic.twitter.com/vYdbTeDFUG

— PNW Conservative (@UnderWashington) August 10, 2025

Take a look at this thing – I assume it is a man suffering from gender dysphoria or some other malady for which people are now no longer allowed to admit was a common diagnosis just a couple of years ago (which likely had an effective treatment, too). Nope, now they pretend that some fugly guy in a dress is every bit a real woman as their own mothers (probably the ones who traded them for meth). 

The weirdest part of all of this is how the “male” liberals who insist the loudest that “trans women ARE women” are incapable of defining what a woman actually is, but they all become gynecologists when it comes to their personal dating lives, isn’t it? Bill Clinton never hooked up with a tucked-back dude, though some of the women who’ve come forward could’ve passed as one (the guy has horrible taste in women, just look at what he married).

This creature is lecturing the unstable on the prospect of them being able to carry a baby to term. Why? Because butchery is part of the process, and misery loves company.

Cheering something that Josef Mengele would have dismissed as insane is, well, insane. But it is also what these people do regularly. 

Talking about reality with someone whose existence depends on the denial of it is no longer allowed by Democrats, which is evil, honestly. That they want to do it to children is more disgusting than damn near everything sick and twisted human beings have ever cooked up. And they need to be stopped.

These people cannot be allowed to win; they must not be allowed to win even on one individual level. There is help for those willing to seek it, to accept it, but those things are now considered evil by the defenders of child butchers. 

Democrats try to manipulate the masses with emotional blackmail, a mental harassment meant to instill fear. But can you ever really “save” anyone unwilling to accept reality?

Reality, in spite of how Democrats seem to think, is not dependent upon anyone’s belief in it, not even someone with gender dysphoria. Any treatment meant to help that person must be based on that same level of embracing reality. Everything short of that is not meant to help anyone; it’s meant to manipulate and keep them on the hook for voting purposes only.

And that’s the real catch, isn’t it? These people don’t give a single damn about anyone or anything other than their own power, and they’re the “compassionate” ones. 

They are the mutants – the twisted monsters hell bent on victory at any cost, no matter who or how much damage they leave lying in their wake. Every sick person who is indulged and harms themselves has their blood on the hands of Democrats. Never forget it, and make sure everyone else never forgets it either.

X22, And we Know, and more- August 12

 

Inside the August Acceleration: How Comey and Company Ignored the Red Flags

American  Thinker 

Previously, using “off-the-books” Situation Room meetings outlined in Ben Rhodes’ 2018 book as our backdrop, we went through the highly consequential events of July 2016.  They showed how the Russia-Russia-Russia machinations had pushed James Comey further and further into the center of the concentric circles Obama was drawing around the coup, itsconspirators, and the intel agencies whose imprimatur was needed to carry it out.

Now August arrives with, as Don McLean would phrase it, bad news on the doorstep.

On August 3, 2016, Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan found out that the Dutch had found out that Hillary Clinton was going to run a dirty Russian-themed op on Donald Trump.  Uh-oh.  They’ve got spies too.  Brennan briefed the White House about it.

Time to pull back?  Nope.  Time to step on the gas.

On August 6th, Hillary posts her first Trump+Russia-themed tweet:

On August 8th, Comey’s hand-picked guy, Peter Strzok, issues his infamous “We’ll stop it” text to his paramour, Lisa Page, when she worries that Trump is “not ever going to become president, right? Right?!”

More from Comey’s FBI.  Via CNN:

“… In a text from August 15, 2016, Strzok tells Page: ‘I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office’ – an apparent reference to Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe – ‘that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40 …” 

Ten days later, Brennan goes nuclear; he goes to the Hill.  From Fox News:

“…On August 25, 2016, Brennan went to Capitol Hill to brief Harry Reid…”

If any of them even entertained the thought there was a way, there was definitely no turning back now.

Two days later, August 27th, Reid sends a letter to James Comey, urging him to open an investigation into Trump’s Russia ties.

Now back to Ben Rhodes’ book.  Pages 391-392:

At the beginning of September [2016], we flew to China for the G20 summit, where Obama would have his final meeting with Putin before the election.

This would be the infamous meeting when Obama thought it was all big and bad to tell Putin to “cut it out.”  He was widely mocked in conservative media for being so ridiculous.

Rhodes goes on:

After about an hour [and after Putin had gone], I was asked to leave the room, and Obama stayed behind with Susan Rice. Later, we all came together before Obama’s press conference, and went through the questions he was likely to get asked. Josh Earnest and I raised the issue of Russian hacking. Obama waved his Styrofoam teacup at us: “I know how I’m going to handle that,” he said. He and Susan looked at each other, and I realized this must have been one of the subjects that was covered when I was out of the room.

Something else happened “at the beginning of September.”  Peter Strzok messaged Lisa Page:  “POTUS wants to know everything we’re doing.”

Also in early September, more of the coup plotters went to the Hill.  Via The Washington Post:

In early September, [Jeh] Johnson, James Comey and [Lisa] Monaco arrived on Capitol Hill in a caravan of black SUVs for a meeting with 12 key members of Congress, including the leadership of both parties. [Emphasis added]

They were now all-in on selling the narrative, and would later want congressional buy-in, but Leader McConnell and the Republicans writ-largewere skeptical.

By the beginning of October, the Russia-Russia-Russia narrative was taking on a life of its own. Democrats had started running with it — hard — and the pressure on Obama to act was enormous. The Democrats, on a wholesale basis, were actually buying the Russia-Russia-Russia narrative and were screeching for Obama to act aggressively against Putin.  Obama had to do something.  So, Susan Rice was trying to organize two things: a bipartisan letter of concern — which Mitch McConnell famously refused to sign on to — and a statement from the I.C.

Page 395:

“On October 7, the [I.C.] statement was finally ready for release. … Referring to the release of hacked documents, the statement said that the ‘thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process…’"

Meanwhile, Trump was noticing Comey was up to no good.

Come the end of October — just nine days before the election — The New York Times actually does some journalism-ing, and kicks the coup-plotters in the groin.

From the October 31, 2016 New York Times:

“For much of the summer, the F.B.I. pursued a widening investigation into a Russian role in the American presidential campaign. … None of the investigations so far have found any conclusive or direct link between Mr. Trump and the Russian government. And even the hacking into Democratic emails, F.B.I. and intelligence officials now believe, was aimed at disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump.”

Now, keep this in mind as you read the following from our fabulist, Ben Rhodes. 

“I did not know of any FBI investigation of the Trump campaign until I learned about it in the press after I had left government.” [Emphasis added]

Mr. Rhodes told the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence this October 25, 2017.  It was an obvious lie.

Amazingly, (admirably?) he repeated the lie to an interviewer a year and a half later, in April of 2019.

“[Ben Rhodes] told journalist Nicholas Ballasy that the Obama administration was unaware and uninvolved in the FBI’s investigation into then-candidate Donald Trump.

‘Literally, I learned about the investigation into Trump as a private citizen in the freaking Washington Post,’ Rhodes said.”

I guess if you’re gonna be a liar, being consistent is essential to being good at it?

There’s just one tiny problem.

He finally got invited to a meeting.  It was a December 9, 2016 meeting in the Situation Room with the coup plotters.  It simply strains credulity that the subject of supposed Trump-Russia criminality wasn’t a topic of discussion there.  Otherwise, why hold it in the Situation Room?  And how to explain the cascade of critical events that emanated from it?

(Source: Obama Administration)

December 9th was a hugely consequential day.  Three events took place:  1. The Washington Post ran with a piece which said that Brennan had told the Hill the Russians hacked the DNC and tried to hurt Hillary and help Trump win.  Mind you, they had zero proof for these allegations.  Zero. 2. Senator John McCain personally handed the complete dossier to James Comey “during a meeting at the latter’s office.” And 3. President Obama gave the order for the I.C.A. (the Intelligence Community Assessment to “prove” Russia interfered in our election on behalf of Trump).

It simply strains credulity that Mr. Rhodes saw no evil, heard no evil, spoke no evil in that December 9 meeting.

That ticks us into the next year, 2017, when James Comey’s malfeasance turns from preventing a president to removing one.

Barack Obama and the Predictable Coup

American  Thinker 

The most intriguing part of the storm surrounding Barack Obama’s involvement in the effort to remove Donald J. Trump from office is that some people still refuse to believe the allegations.  There are certain Americans who continue to deny any claims concerning Barack Obama’s negative impact on the country.

Perhaps it’s that grin and laid back attitude.  Or perhaps it’s his rhetorical skill set or his ability to , or maybe it is just his knack for evoking that causes half the nation to make excuses for Barack Obama’s troubling track record.  Whatever the reason, the Obama façade is in the process of crumbling, and many Americans are admitting that people don’t change unless they agree to recognize their issues.  Ergo, Barack Obama has not changed and will not change.

Surpassing even the opinions of the majority, for twenty years, the former president has displayed a level of smugness that suggests he believes he alone knows what is best for America.  His sense of superiority is unmistakable, and with that kind of confidence, it’s understandable that the former community organizer would feel justified in pursuing whatever goals he deems necessary to reform America’s core ideals.  Add to that his apparent self-importance and the disdain he’s shown toward things like our founding document, and toward grandmothers praying , and toward Donald Trump — and it all begins to make sense. 

Despite his rhetoric about “” and creating a “more perfect union,” Obama’s divisive policies have fostered the us-versus-them mentality that America now struggles with every day.  From Henry Gates to Trayvon Martin, throughout his political career, Obama seized every opportunity to deepen racial divides in a country that for over two centuries had worked together to address complex issues.

Obama is committed and has consistently shaped to punish any group or belief system he despises.  In weaponized, politicized Obama circles, rest assured that the shadowy figure leading the anti-American crusade has always been the one at the top.  However, because of the racial tensions he escalated and his ability to manipulate the nation’s mindset with words, the man who was awarded the for the “diplomatic accomplishment” of being half-black has, until now, been shielded from the scrutiny he deserved for his deceitfulness, corruption, ineptitude, and ruthlessness.

An unknown author once wrote, “A toxic person only changes his victims, never himself.”  , reproving, , and stealing are common for someone who believes he is justified in doing anything to advance his agenda.  For Barack Obama, progress involves secretly promoting socialist Marxist ideas on Chicago’s South Side; infiltrating the U.S. Senate; occupying the Oval Office; and, if necessary, tampering with election results.

Barack Obama’s treatment of people has provided sporadic glimpses into the former president’s nature toward those he considers adversaries.  To teach the defiant tough lessons and to drive home a message, Obama sent transgender people into the military and drag queens into women’s restrooms.  To influence gun control in the U.S., Obama allowed firearms to cross the border into cartels’ hands.  Obama even organized and instructed the IRS to review and deny tax-exempt status to applications that included political themes considered “anti-Obama” (whatever that means).  The man has the innate ability to be cruel, self-serving, and spiteful.  Just ask Putin; Netanyahu; Sam Alito; and the bitter gun-toting, Bible-clinging, anti-immigrant, racist “tea baggers,” whom Obama had just a few days before making that statement accused of being domestic terrorists.

Having spent two decades trying to navigate the minefield of division and destruction he caused from day one, Obama still publicly criticizes anyone who dares to disagree with him.  The former president is proficient at manipulating an audience.  Whenever Obama discusses a controversial theme, it’s with an assertiveness that suggests no one on earth dares to differ in opinion.  Unpopular policies and sentiments are often presented as if there were a consensus among the majority.  In his farewell speech to the nation, clever as he is, Obama found a subtle way to diminish Trump by using his all-inclusive weapon of choice, personal pronouns, to warn Americans that after he leaves office, we “must guard against a weakening of the values that makeus who we are.”

No, Obama, what needed to be addressed were the values that make you who you are!

Despite Barack’s graceful style when suggesting that his views are mainstream, they are not, and the 2016 election proved that.  To put America first, voters rejected Obama in 2016 and chose a candidate who promised a fundamental change that not only some Americans could believe in, but all Americans.  The 2016 election must have been a shock because, at the time, a confident Obama was riding high on his perceived achievements.  The former president fully expected a smooth transfer of power to a like-minded successor, Hillary Clinton.  The obstacle to that plan was Donald Trump, who unexpectedly emerged from Trump Tower with a plan to truly “Make America Great Again.”  Trump campaigned against and opposed every policy his predecessor had implemented.  That clearly didn’t sit well with the person tasked with transforming the world from what it is into what he felt it should be.

Throughout his life and, most certainly, throughout his political career, the former president has never shown any significant change or softened his rhetoric, nor has he expressed any remorse for fiascos like Benghazi or the death of a 16-year-old American citizen in Yemen, who died in a drone strike he ordered.  If detractors criticized him, he historically responded by doubling down on his position.  Ask him, and he’ll probably tell you that he still believes that babies born alive in botched abortions should be left to die without oxygen, warmth, or hydration.  The fact that Obama would likely reaffirm that belief makes his walking guns across the border, sending men into bathrooms with little girls, sending $1.7 billion in cash to the Iranians, and exchanging five Taliban prisoners for Bowe Bergdahl seem somewhat tame.

From the start, Barack Obama’s “Yes We Can” mantra was more “Yes, I can do and say whatever I want.”  And based on the shocking revelations surrounding the 2016, 2024, and very possibly the 2020 elections, that’s exactly what he’s been doing all along.  That’s why, for those of us who see who and what he is, Barack Obama being the central figure in a bloodless coup against Donald Trump is not all that far-fetched.

Democrat Mayors Report Violent Crime Down 40% Since They Redefined ‘Violent’ And ‘Crime’

 Politics

·Aug 12, 2025 · BabylonBee.com

U.S. — Despite claims by President Donald Trump that American cities are being overrun by criminals, Democrat mayors across the country reported that violent crime was actually down 40% since they redefined the words "violent" and "crime".

Trump vowed to clean up America's streets, starting with ordering the National Guard into action to bolster law enforcement efforts in Washington, D.C., eliciting an outcry from mayors who pointed to a sharp drop in crimes now that the definition of crime had been completely changed.

"There's actually almost no crime when you look at it a certain way," said D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser. "Ever since we determined that the word ‘violent' shouldn't include murders, rapes, assaults, or armed robberies and the word ‘crime' doesn't really have anything to do with committing acts that violate the law, we've seen a noticeable drop in violent crime. Trump is just trying to scare everyone into accepting his dictatorial rule."

Analysts admitted that redefining what words mean has had a significant impact on the data, with almost no homicides being committed since the definition of the word "homicide" was modified to exclude human lives taken by other humans. "Crime has virtually disappeared in parts of the country. That's going by the new definition of ‘crime,' of course."

"In fact," Mayor Bowser continued, "if acts of violent assault are called ‘loving' and breaking the law is referred to as ‘kindness,' then we've actually seen a huge spike in loving kindness in our city. So there."

At publishing time, Democrats were reportedly working on redefining the word "law" to mean now "oppressive" and the word "order" to mean "fascism".

🎭 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. 

China's Arctic Maritime 'Research' Isn't. It's Reconnaissance.

RedState 

China is still poking and prodding. In the latest, we see the United States Coast Guard warning us that Chinese "research vessels" are nosing around in the U.S. Arctic. 

Research, indeed.

The Coast Guard warned of "increased Chinese research vessel activity" in the U.S. Arctic as it responded to multiple vessels in the region.  

The agency said it recently "detected and responded to two Chinese research vessels operating in the U.S. Arctic and is currently monitoring a total of five similar vessels in or near the U.S Arctic."

"On August 5, a C-130J Hercules fixed wing aircraft from Air Station Kodiak responded to the Chinese research vessels Ji Di and the Zhong Shan Da Xue Ji Di.  Both vessels were transiting northeast in the Bering Sea," the Coast Guard said. 

"On August 6, the crew of U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Waesche (WMSL 751) again responded to the Zhong Shan Da Xue Ji Di as it was transiting north in the Chukchi Sea above the Arctic Circle, after passing through the Bering Strait," they added.

Now, part of this is the old Cold War "freedom of navigation exercise" game, that we've been playing since World War 2 - with China, with the Soviet Union/Russia, with Cuba, with North Korea, with pretty much every Communist regime that has any ocean frontage. It's a way of thumbing our nose at them and they at us, without the necessity of actually having to go to war.

But it's a safe bet there's more to it with these Chinese "research" vessels. It's more than likely that what they are doing isn't research - it's reconnaissance.

The Coast Guard released a photo of the Zhong Shan Da Xue Ji Di as taken from the C-130J Hercules. They noted that the aircraft and Waesche were "patrolling under Operation Frontier Sentinel, an operation that responds to adversaries operating in and around Alaskan and U.S. Arctic waters." 

"In July, Coast Guard Arctic District deployed a C-130J Hercules fixed wing aircraft from Air Station Kodiak to query the Xue Long 2, another Chinese research vessel, approximately 290 nautical miles north of Utqiagvik, Alaska," the Coast Guard also said. 

The sightings of the Chinese ships are part of a "three-year trend of increased activity" in the region, according to officials.

They could be up to a number of things, aside from some badly-needed practice in ship-handling.

---

Winning! Chinese Ships Collide While Harassing Philippine Coast Guard

Want to Know Why Microsoft Uses Chinese Engineers to Maintain Defense Systems

---

China has been ramping up its naval output, building ships and submarines. It's possible these ships are mapping the sea floor around these Alaskan and U.S. Arctic waters, the better to eventually deploy submarines there. This is something that China's still a ways from doing, but they do tend to think in the long term.

They could also be looking for resources beneath the icy waters. The Arctic is known to be a treasure trove, with vast oil and gas reserves; they are difficult to exploit, but not impossible. China is growing more energy-hungry by the day, and while they are encroaching on American waters with this "research," again, they do tend to take the long view.

Bear in mind that this is pure speculation, but that doesn't mean it's not likely.

China's not a friendly nation. They are an adversary, and one day they may be an enemy. They are sounding us out daily, and this is just another example of China's ambitions - and the fact that they may be growing just a little too big for their britches.

Watch the North Pacific. China and Russia are both interested in that area. In 1935, General Billy Mitchell, speaking of Alaska, said it was the "most strategic place on the planet." You could say that of much, probably most, of the Arctic, and competition for Arctic resources is only going to increase.