Democrats Have Earned All the Bad Things

Townhall 

Since the Olympics are happening, Meet the Press was preempted – because, if it’s Sunday, it’s Meet the Press…unless they have something better to run. That freed up Adam Schiff to go on This Week with Jeffrey Epstein’s good friend, George Stephanopoulos. Why? Because he’s what is called in the business “A good b*********r.”

If being a creepy jackass caused cancer, Adam Schiff would be smoking in human form; he’d be the equivalent of chewing asbestos. Host Jon Karl gave Schiff a verbal massage on the level of what you’d expect on a gay OnlyFans page – asking only one question that could be considered “from the right” about why Adam doesn’t support voter ID. When Schiff refused to answer, instead defaulting to the Democrat idea that black people are too stupid to prove they are American citizens, Karl let it go because of “journalism.”

The next segment was about a “racist” video Trump tweeted out because someone made the Obamas into monkeys, along with a whole bunch of other politicians. I really couldn’t care less about it, but I do find it funny that Johnny Karl lets slide the idea that black people couldn’t possibly be expected to live up to the standards of white or Asian people, because it helps Democrats, then wets himself over a snippet of a video because Democrats declared THAT to be racist.

You have to wonder if these people even listen to themselves? There weren’t any questions for Schiff about his close friend, big donor and bringer of death to young black men, Ed Buck, that would challenge the left-wing orthodoxy. If you watched the interview, you would be justified in thinking that Karl and Schiff were on the same team…mostly because they are.

I’m not a violent person. If there were a charity event where you could attempt to smack the smug off the faces of those two, I’d mortgage my house…

Then again, we could pay off the national debt if there were an arrangement like that with nearly every Member of Congress or the media.

As these people soil their sheets over the idea of people losing their jobs at the Washington Post, ask yourself if you remember anything close to that level of concern when normal people lost their jobs? If a factory closing under a Democrat administration even made the news, it was less than 30 seconds and done, like I must imagine the torture Mrs. Schiff or Karl go through once a month. (At least it’s over quickly, the poor ladies.)

Yes, 300 people lost their jobs at the Post, mostly because the public wasn’t interested in what they were doing. The book section? Is someone entitled to a job for their entire life because they held it for a while? The sports section? Why pay someone to go cover the Olympics when you can find out what happened immediately via social media?

Would the world be better if we reverted to simpler times when people read the newspaper? Probably, but it’s not going to happen, and the news in those papers is propaganda anyway. I don’t like to see people lose their jobs, but I also can’t care.

The people in the media are either bad at their jobs or bad people (sometimes both).

In the “round table,” Donna Brazile pretended to be “sad” about the “racist” video, Chris Christie pretended to be so upset by it that he could only eat two pounds of bacon that morning, the poor dear.

Ask yourself this question: Who was the last person in the media you thought worth their weight in anything, be it gold or dog excrement? Is there anyone in the media you’d suspect would throw you anything other than a brick, were you drowning? Why wouldn’t you return that attitude?

These people are gross, and they’re bad people, they genuinely are. Why should anyone care what happens to them on any level, in any corner of the globe?

The fact is, you should not. Don’t cheer bad things – from the newsroom clearing out at the Post, to the deaths of morons trying to run over or fight with ICE agents. Yes, it’s impossible to get worked up over someone burning their hand by touching a hot stove – what did these idiots think would happen? – but you don’t have to cheer it.

Then again, Democrats have burned the rule book, along with all societal norms and nearly all things considered decent in America, so maybe they deserve that too.

Podcast thread for Feb 9

 

Not long until the weather warms up. :)

So You Wanna Be a Democrat?

American Thinker 

A firm believer in individual rights and free choice, I’ve got no problem with young people who think they might like to become card-carrying Democrats.

As a public service, then, let me educate potential Democrats on what will be necessary for them to fit in with their fellow donkeys.  The following are things you must believe in and loudly advocate for, lest your fellow Dems suddenly turn on you and visit, bearing torches and pitchforks:

Killing People

Dems just love to kill people, especially unborn babies.  Doesn’t matter how far along in gestation an unborn human is; Democrats are always ready to off him or her.  Or zem.  Whatever...

Dems are also fond of killing the elderly, as long as there’s some sort of half-assed justification: terminal disease, oppressive mental illness, or merely attending a rowdy rally on January 6.

If Democrats somehow regain power in my lifetime, I fully expect them to institute government health care and the same kind of active “assistance in dying” so popular in Canada.

Hating Whitey

These days, Democrats reduce everyone to white and non-white, a characteristic that, except for Michael Jackson, is unalterable.  And they’ve decided that in every sordid tale, the “person of color” is the victim, and whitey’s the perp.

George Floyd was a vicious career criminal, chock-full of fentanyl and violently resisting arrest, when he died while being restrained by a Caucasian cop in a Democrat-run city.

Who went to jail?  The cop doing his duty.

Who was ordained an American hero?  The black felon.

Hating Masculinity

These days, Democrats are the party that openly discriminates against men, putting absolute dumbbells like Kamala Harris, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Karen Bass in positions of power regardless of their inability to speak or write coherently, much less do their jobs.  They have ovaries and XX chromosomes, and to Dems, that’s all that matters — although it helps if they possess a certain level of skin pigmentation (see Whitey, Hating).

Allowing Men to Play Women’s Sports

If a man truly wants to appeal to Democrats, it greatly helps if he slips on a dress, shaves his chest hair, and applies makeup and mascara.  Then it’s quite acceptable for him to set NCAA women’s swimming records, stand on the podium as a ladies’ cycling champion, or beat the snot out of a female boxer in the Olympics.  Although donkeys find big, masculine men toxic, paradoxically, when it comes to athletic competition, they clearly believe that folks born with penises and testicles make better women.

Loving Criminals

I’ve circled the sun almost seventy-three times, and all while living and working in the belly of the Democrat beast: New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut.

And during that time, I’ve read — and become enraged by — countless stories of innocents murdered by criminals with rap sheets almost as long as the alphabet.  Democrat politicians, police chiefs, and judges are always shedding tears for the animals they refuse to properly punish, and never for their helpless victims.

Unless, of course, the donkey in charge himself becomes a crime victim, at which time, as the old joke goes, he becomes a Republican.

Hating America

Who hates America more than Democrats?  Nobody.  China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea can’t hold a candle to what Dems are doing to destroy our historically great country.  The party of donkeys teaches kids in school to judge and resent our founders, they try to kill our energy sector with Green New Deal nonsense, and they undermine our thrice — yes, thrice — elected president, calling him Hitler and his federal law enforcement heads Gestapo.

During the recent reign of pudding-brained puppet president Joe Biden, Dems purposely opened the floodgates for millions of unvetted criminals, drug-dealers, child-traffickers, mental patients, and welfare queens from all over the world.  If you were trying to rapidly take down our country, what would you do differently?

Electoral Cheating

Let’s face it: If Democrats don’t lie about what they truly believe and plan to do, why, they’d never win another election.  So, while pretending to care about the citizenry, they come up with every cockamamie scheme in the world to cheat during elections: early voting, late voting, absentee voting, cured voting, harvested voting, and my personal favorite: no-ID-required voting.

If the spineless GOP-majority Congress that President Trump is desperately trying to herd like a bunch of truculent cats in suits ever passed a law requiring photo ID to vote, the Democrat party would implode in a cloud of smoke.

When it comes to elections, donkeys just gotta cheat.

Lie, Lie, Lie

If a Democrat thought leader’s lips are moving, he’s lying.  Run for office on affordability, get elected, and immediately raise taxes.  Tell the public the vegetable Biden’s sharp as a tack, watch him totally phase out during the presidential debate, and then claim you somehow didn’t notice his abject senility.  Tell the world Trump’s a Russian stooge, accept Pulitzer Prizes for your blatant falsehoods, and cry crocodile tears when you most deservedly get laid off.

How ’bout Tampon Tim (D-Mini-Somalia)?  Telling us he’s a gun-toting soldier, an avid hunter, an accomplished football coach, and simply a man’s man, who had no idea that all the illegal aliens he warmly welcomed here were ripping off America to the tune of billions of dollars?

In order of appearance, no, nope, nein, not even close, and r-i-g-h-t!

In conclusion, if you’re young and anxious to join the political fray as a Democrat, you must be ready to

• kill people, especially unborn babies and the elderly;
• hate all white people;
• hate men, especially masculine men;
• let males dominate women in sports;
• love criminals, perverts, and evildoers generally;
• despise your country and its founding;
• cheat like hell electorally; and above all,
• lie, lie, lie!

If all that’s too much of a stretch for you, consider supporting President Trump and joining the MAGA movement.

On the other hand, if you’re fine with all the dastardly Democrat doings listed above, register as a Democrat, or, alternatively, seek intensive psychotherapy while there’s still time to save yourself.

Men Are Going to Strike Back

Townhall 

There’s a clip going around where some obnoxious woman decides that a guy walking out of a Quik-i-Mart is a nice guy and she takes it upon herself, being the heroine and the main character of the epic saga that is her life, to knock his cup of coffee from his hands. He’s a fairly big guy, fit, and he doesn’t lay her out across the parking lot with a right cross. It’s not that she doesn’t deserve it – she does. It’s that he is still defaulting to the male role in a chivalry system that no longer exists. This dumb woman is relying on the very guardrails she has bulldozed; she’s going to try it again, and this time she’s going to lose a bunch of teeth.

Oh well.

It’s no surprise to anybody who is paying attention that the complex system that governed the relationship of men and women throughout the ages has been disrupted in the last 50 years. Two Helens have recently made a splash talking about this. Helen Andrews gave a powerful speech at last year’s Nat Con that got a lot of attention about the feminization of culture. More recently, Helen Smith, a.k.a. Mrs. @Instapundit, just published her important new book His Side, which commits the revolutionary act of asking men what they think about the current war on the unfair sex. We people with penises are not supposed to talk about any of this stuff. We’re not supposed to talk about how society has changed, for the worse, by the domination of feminine values over our institutions, institutions that were built to greatness through masculine values.

If you don’t know the difference between masculine and feminine values, I can’t really help you. You’ve bought into the gender-same lie. But when you see our institutions failing, having taken themselves off-mission and instead refocused on emotionality and the prioritization of feelings, that’s a big part of the cause of their downfall. And it’s no surprise that women have veered sharply to the left, the left’s priorities being the opposite of masculinity. Most of us remember that Simpsons episode where Lisa escapes a girl’s math class after the teacher (who comes off as one of those harridans shrieking at ICE heroes) asked the girls how the numbers make her feel; that’s pretty much all of society now.

This isn’t to say that women and femininity are bad. They aren’t. They are a part of humanity. But so are men and masculinity; the problem is the dedicated campaign to stamp out the male part. The sexes combine to create a functional society of human beings, the yin and yang, if you will. You need both, in proper proportion. Disrupt that balance and you get, well, this current mess.

Somewhere along the way, some women decided masculinity is bad, and some men played along with this nonsense. Today, if you’re tough, aggressive, and don’t take guff from half-wits, or if you are aggressively heterosexual, you are toxically masculine. It’s possible to be a jerk in a distinctly male way; again, the problem is too much, or a perverted practice of the thing. Again, you need both sexes, properly understood. This is why you have a man and a woman, the two parts of humanity that come together and create a functioning society.

But we stopped doing that. As Helen Andrews observed, our society has gone way too far in the feminine direction, which is a problem because hostile societies have maintained their traditional, masculine focus when it comes to the areas of business and conflict. When you get a bunch of soft men, and they come up against hard men, the hard men win. This is why the most popular birth name in Europe is “Mohammed.” See, we have to help, so out rolls the welcome mat to people who hate us. It feels so good to be so nurturing, right? Resist? That’s mean. The impotent euro-eunuchs, whose great-grandfathers once conquered the world, cannot be bothered to either breed or defend their inheritance from people who do nothing but breed and take other people‘s inheritance.

Masculinity is about creation and destruction. Men build, and men destroy. Both things are important, including destruction. This needs to be explained to those who are soft and don’t understand, or are unwilling to accept, the occasional necessity of it. And when I say “creation,” I mean building things – bridges, pipelines, aircraft carriers, rockets to the moon. That’s the domain of men. I do not mean some teenage girl scribbling away breathlessly about her feelings in her pink dream journal. That’s the domain of women.

The fact is that men and women are different, something there’s been a concerted effort to not merely ignore but to overthrow by informal social coercion and the force of law. Oddly, it’s the feminine side that propels this campaign. If you track back the roots of the worst cultural trends of the last century, they all originate in a perversion of the feminine. For example, the greatest advocates of bizarre transsexual deviance are not men, though a significant number of men go along either passively or actively – they probably think they’re going to score if they show their tolerance bona fides. It’s women who are driving this big rig, the only kind of big rig women drive as a rule. It’s the women who decide that young Billy is really Susie and schlep over to the local butcher in her minivan. The invertebrate dad just sort of nods along. It’s the women pushing for men in women’s locker rooms, ironically. Imagine it getting traction if men had been at the forefront of the “Let us leer at you in the shower” movement. It would have never started, and if women right now said, “No,” this would end overnight. But for some reason that real men can’t fathom – maybe it’s the Chardonnay, maybe it’s the SSRIs, maybe it’s the dissatisfaction that comes with having leftist partners who can’t satisfy them –women as a whole refuse to reject this nonsense. And so it persists.

Orwell was right when he pointed out that women are the most eager to enforce the left’s ideologies. They’re the ones taking the lead to keep illegal alien criminals here – someone else can explore the deeply psycho-sexual underpinnings of the total dedication of affluent white ladies to keeping brutal Third World rapists here among them. Regardless, it is largely (and, often, large) women screaming obscenities at the heroes of ICE who are tossing out the Third World perverts that these women drool over.

Sadly, the same broken creatures have hijacked the institutions. Take the schools, please. It’s women who run the education system and turn campuses into conformity factories. Gone are the male role models that those of us from Gen X had. My old PE teacher, Stan Bingham – whose head was so riddled with skin cancer we called him “The Lizard” – probably fought it out at Pork Chop Hill, judging from the way he treated us. And we dug him.

As Helen Smith shows, men are undervalued, under-appreciated, and under fire. They are the worst, they are told, and when they react as rational beings to the incentives they face, the calumny only increases. Take the Great Opt-Out. Where are all the good men? Well, a lot of men who would’ve been good men are sitting at home on their couches, playing video games, smoking weed, and making wild, passionate love to their internet browsers. It’s gross, but what does it say about women that so many men have decided that kind of pathetic existence is preferable to being with girls?

There are a lot of good, conservative women out there and good, conservative men who have their heads on straight and who are out there building lives and families. But there are a lot of casualties from the gender wars. Many of these misguided women expect men to fulfill the role men used to play in the system that used to exist, but those women don’t want to fulfill the role they used to play in the system that used to exist. They want a man like their old-school dad, but they don’t want to act like their old-school mom.

Systems only function if all the parts work as designed. You can’t refuse to do your part in a system and expect it to keep functioning. When you change your input, you alter the output. Which brings us back to the Quik-i-Mart parking lot. Part of the system of chivalry that kept men from using their superior physical strength – yes, men are overwhelmingly physically stronger than women – against women is that women did not initiate physical threats against men. When a conflict arises, a normal man is not going to beat the hell out of you if you are a woman because he’ll probably hurt you out of proportion to your ability to hurt him, but your part of the bargain is not to make that conflict physical. Yet, what that dumb woman did with the guy’s coffee cup breached that unspoken agreement. She changed the rules. And she’s lucky that he defaulted to the system that used to exist. But if women keep pushing it, that’s going to stop. And it’s not going to work out well for the women.

🎭 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. 

The IC Nut is Cracking – Washington Post CEO, Will Lewis Quits

posted by Sundance at Conservative Treehouse 

I said a few days ago, “with DNI Tulsi Gabbard putting strategic pressure from the inside, and We The People putting accountability pressure from the outside, this Deep State intelligence nut just might begin to crack. In fact, I might even argue that cracking is exactly what we are starting to see.”

Today, we see evidence of just that; perhaps even the first signs that John Ratcliffe is on board. Perhaps.

The context here is important.  Within the larger administrative state network: CNN is the preferred PR firm of the State Dept.; the CIA use The Washington Post; the FBI use Politico and the New York Times; the DOJ use the New York Times and Wall Street Journal; while the control lawfare embeds within the domestic IC spread their narrative distribution to the NYT, WSJ and Politico depending on the context.

When we see the Washington Post contracting, shrinking or otherwise limited in their activity, we can be confident the feeder system from the CIA is subsequently diminishing. If the CIA was operating at full narrative weapon capacity, the Washington Post newsroom would be bustling. The opposite is also true, although we have not seen much of that until recently.  So, that’s the context:

WASHINGTON – Washington Post CEO Will Lewis stepped down from his position on Saturday — throwing the prestigious Jeff Bezos-owned newspaper into further turmoil just days after the publication laid off some 300 staffers. The Washington Post announced that Lewis would be resigning effective immediately.

He was succeeded by Jeff D’Onofrio, the former Tumblr CEO who joined the newspaper this past June as its chief financial officer. D’Onofrio will assume the role of acting publisher and CEO.

Lewis framed his departure as the culmination of a difficult but necessary transformation, saying “now is the right time for me to step aside” after two years leading The Washington Post. (more)

If we see CNN get sold to David Ellison and Paramount, that will indicate the Marco Rubio operation at the State Dept. has similarly been successful. Though I wouldn’t look too optimistically toward the NYT, Politico or WSJ because the DOJ and FBI leadership are still struggling to get their arms around it.

The diminishment of the Washington Post is a very good sign and should not be downplayed.  However, a follow up note of caution always exists because the worst elements of the control state have signaled a shift, moving public opinion operations toward social media platforms and outlets.

The power of the Silicon Valley technocrats has already started enmeshing with the alure of political sway. As traditional media has lost all credibility, control operations need to adapt, modify and shift toward venues where stakeholder equity finds the greatest value.  Larry Ellison has prepositioned his assets to be a strategic player in this regard.

Thus, we must not diminish our smile at noticing the cracks in the Intelligence Community, which are also represented in the apoplexy toward Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.  So, we should call this Washington Post diminishment another good crack in the nut.

Senate Intel Vice-Chairman Mark Warner Apoplectic About DNI Tulsi Gabbard Election Review

Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Vice-Chairman, Mark Warner, a man of exceptionally dubious intelligence, appears on Face the Nation for a pre-scripted interview with CBS’s Margaret Brennan.  The video and transcript are below.

From his position on the SSCI, Senator Warner was one of the key players in the deployment of the Intelligence Community against President Trump’s first term in office, including his background conversations with Chris Steele and his leaking of the Carter Page FISA warrant to promote the Trump-Russia conspiracy claim and stimulate the appointment of a DOJ special counsel.

Within President Trump’s second term in office, Warner’s primary concern is having a Director of National Intelligence (DNI) who doesn’t conform to the goals and objectives of the Fourth Branch of government, the intelligence apparatus.  In reality, DNI Tulsi Gabbard appears to be methodically taking apart the intelligence community weaponization system.  This, when combined with Gabbard’s review of election integrity issues, has triggered the deep concern of Warner, one of the IC’s primary enablers. WATCH:

[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: Good morning and welcome to ‘Face the Nation.’ We begin this morning with the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Virginia’s Mark Warner. Good to have you here.

SEN. MARK WARNER: Thank you, Margaret.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to talk about elections and security. Back on January 28, the FBI went to Fulton County, Georgia and seized ballots and 2020 voting records linked to the presidential election. The Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, then was spotted outside the elections office, and she argued that her presence there had been personally requested by the president of the United States, and she had broad statutory authority to coordinate, integrate and analyze intelligence related to election security. What would justify her involvement? Is there any foreign nexus that you have been informed of?

SEN. WARNER: We have not been informed of any foreign nexus. The job of the director of national intelligence is to be outward facing about foreigners, not about Americans, and remember, many of the reforms that were put in place actually took place after the Watergate scandal under President Nixon, where a president was directly involved in certain domestic criminal activities and appeared with the Watergate break-in. And my fear in this case is it almost seems Nixonian. If the president asked Gabbard to show up down in Georgia on a domestic political investigation- first of all, how would he know about the search warrant even being issued? That’s not his job. And then to have the irector of national intelligence down there, which is totally against her rules, unless there is a foreign nexus, and she has not indicated any foreign nexus to us to date.

MARGARET BRENNAN: There’s been no communication with the committee whatsoever on this issue?

SEN. WARNER: We have asked. We then subsequently found that this was not the first time she was involved in domestic activities. She went down and seized some voting machines in Puerto Rico earlier in the year. Again, we had no knowledge of that. And then the question of what she was doing in Georgia. There’s been three or four different stories since it broke. First, she said the president asked, then the president said he didn’t ask her. Then he said it was Pam Bondi, the attorney general. So we don’t have the slightest idea other than the fact that the whole thing stinks to high heaven, and the fact is, Donald Trump cannot get over the fact that he lost Georgia in 2020 that he lost the election in 2020. My fear is now he sees the political winds turning against him, and he’s going to try to interfere in the 2026 election, something a year ago I didn’t think would be possible.

MARGARET BRENNAN: That’s a tremendous statement. But just to clarify here, it was Reuters that first reported that Gabbard went to Puerto Rico back in the spring to seize voting machines. Was Congress informed at all? Did you learn about it in the press?

SEN. WARNER: I believe the first we ever heard about this was from the press itself.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Wow. So the- you’ve laid out that the intelligence agencies usually focus overseas, but the White House is arguing that the director was there for good reason, and that federal law, they argue, assigns a DNI statutory responsibility to lead counter intelligence matters related to election security, election voting system risk, software, voter registration databases. You’re concerned, but are your fellow Republicans on the committee concerned?

SEN. WARNER: Here’s the ironic thing, Margaret, many of the protections for our election system were put in place during the first Trump administration. We set up CISA, the cybersecurity agency, to help work with state and local elections. There was an FBI center set up for foreign malign influence, foreign influence. And then we put into law something called the Foreign Malign Influence Center at the Director of National Intelligence office. All of those entities have been basically disbanded. CISA cut by a third. The FBI center cut back. The ODNI center cut back, which we think is, frankly, counter to the law. But it all- in terms the ODNI has to be involved, of foreign involvement, there has been no evidence of that to date.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Where is Chair Cotton on this, though?

SEN. WARNER: We have jointly been making sure that we get updates on election security, and I think we see more of that to come, because this is critical. And my concern is that when we see artificial intelligence tools and others- it was almost child’s play. What happened in 2016 China, Russia, Iran others could be interfering. We’ve not seen evidence to date. Gabbard, if she’s got any evidence, should have provided it to the Congress. I think this was an effort where Donald Trump can’t get over the fact that he lost Georgia so obsessed. And it begs the question is, what was Gabbard doing there? And it frankly, begs the question is- question is, why was the president even aware of this investigation before the search warrant was issued?

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, we would, we would love to put those questions to the director, and have asked to do so. But now that you are here, can you just button this up for me? Because we’re talking about 2020, and that’s what Fulton County. The focus was about but you also said, you think in 2026 there’s an effort to interfere. What evidence do you have of that?

SEN. WARNER: This was what I’m seeing from the president’s own comments about nationalizing elections and putting Republicans in charge, counter to the constitution. We’ve seen these activities in Georgia, where could there be some effort that suddenly gives him an excuse to try to take some of these federalization efforts we’ve seen ICE. We focused a lot of this activity on ICE in terms of they’re going rogue in Minneapolis. But there is a very real threat, without reforms at ICE, that you could have ICE patrols around polling stations, and people would say, “well, why would that matter?” If they’re all American citizens–

MARGARET BRENNAN: –Noncitizens cannot vote.

SEN. WARNER: –Because we’ve seen ice discriminate against Latinos families. We’ve seen as well mixed families where someone may be legal and others not. And candidly, you don’t need to do a lot to discourage people from voting, and we’ve more recently seen ICE starting to use technology where they can get information about Americans. Recently, there was an individual in Minnesota that got denied a global entry card to get through TSA quicker because he or she appeared at a protest rally. Do we really want ICE having that information?–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Is that what DHS said?

SEN. WARNER: Hypothetically- that was what happened in Minnesota. Hypothetically, if ICE is getting information, and you’ve got an unpaid parking ticket, would you go vote if you’ve got an unpaid parking ticket, thinking that an ICE patrol might be at a polling station, this is uncharted territory, and yet you’ve got the president’s own words, in many ways, raising concerns, because he says, well, gosh, we Republicans ought to take over elections in 15 states.

MARGARET BRENNAN: We’re going to talk about some of that and the operations at the local level with David Becker, our elections expert ahead in the show, and the immigration reform. But I want to ask you about what’s going on with Director Gabbard, because there was a whistleblower who filed a complaint against her personally and offered to come to Congress to share the information. According to the attorney for this whistleblower, this is about a complaint that two inspectors general, one of them Biden-era, concluded had a non-credible nature. You’ve viewed a redacted version of the complaint as I understand it. Do you accept their conclusions?

SEN. WARNER: Well, first of all, the previous Inspector General, who’d been a long term professional, viewed it as credible. The new–

MARGARET BRENNAN: — Which of the two complaints?

SEN. WARNER: The original- I can’t talk about the contents of the complaint. I’m old fashioned. It’s classified, and the complaint is so redacted, it’s hard to get to the bottom up, I got additional questions. My concern- what the director did, is that this information was not relayed to Congress. There is a process, and we didn’t even- we, and I mean, we the Gang of Eight, didn’t even hear about the complaint until November. We only saw it in February, and we’ve got this complete contradiction where the then lawyer for Director Gabbard said she shared the responsibility she had to share this with Congress in June, the legal responsibility. She later stated that she was not aware of her responsibility. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse if you’re the Director of National Intelligence.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, as I understand it, because when it’s deemed non-credible, it is not necessarily an urgent concern that would —

SEN. WARNER : — There was a ruling of urgency by the first inspector general. That was contradicted by the Trump Inspector General, but the process was still ongoing. The fact that this sat out there for 6,7,8 months now, and we are only seeing it now, raises huge concerns in and of itself.

MARGARET BRENNAN

Well, I know you said you will not share what the intercept and the intelligence was about, or the complaint itself, but CBS has been told by a senior intelligence official the whistleblower complaint included reference to an intelligence intercept between two foreign nationals in which they mentioned someone close to President Donald Trump. US intelligence did not verify whether the conversation itself was more than just gossip. Will you be able to speak to the whistleblower? Will you be able to see this underlying intelligence?

SEN. WARNER: My understanding is the whistleblower has been waiting for guidance, legal guidance, on how to approach the committee.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Does the whistleblower still work for the US government?

SEN. WARNER: I don’t have any idea.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Will you be able to view the intelligence, the intercept itself that she’s accused of not sharing?

SEN. WARNER: My question is- we are trying to get both the redactions and the underlying intelligence, and that’s- that is in process. I’m not going to talk to the content itself, but this whole question, remember, this whistleblower came forward in May. It’s now February of the following year, and we’re still asking questions.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Tom Cotton, the chair, says he’s- he’s comfortable with- with the process to date, but on the–

SEN. WARNER: — I’m- I’m not comfortable with the process, the timing, and I can’t make a judgment about the credibility or the veracity, because it’s been so heavily redacted.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, the director is frustrated with you personally and issued this really long blistering statement saying you’ve repeatedly lied to the American people, that the media also lies, and that that she never had the whistleblower complaint in her possession and saw it for the first time two weeks ago. I guess, the actual hard copy. So, do you care to respond to this accusation that you were lying?

SEN. WARNER: I would respond that I do not believe that Director Gabbard is competent for her position. I don’t believe that she is making America safer by not following the rules and procedures on getting whistleblower complaints to the Congress in a timely fashion. I believe she has been totally inappropriate showing up on a domestic criminal investigation in Georgia around voting machines. I think she has not been appropriate or competent in terms of, frankly, cutting back on investigations into foreign malign influence, literally dismembering the foreign line influence center that’s at the Director of National Intelligence, and we are going to agree to disagree about who’s telling the truth, and I believe her own general counsel, who’s now her deputy general counsel, testified this week that he shared with Director Gabbard, in June her legal obligations.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, the NSA has released a statement saying that they are abiding by the law. We do invite Director Gabbard on this program. Before I let you go, I have to ask you about Iran. There have been a number of think tanks who have published photos of what they believe is evidence of Iran reconstituting and rebuilding its nuclear program that the US bombed eight months ago. Are they rebuilding?

SEN. WARNER: When we struck Iranians nuclear capabilities, our military did a great job. It was not totally obliterated. So, that standard that the President himself set and Iran has been indicated in public documents, is trying to reconstitute. What I fear is that we don’t have the ability to bring the full power of pressure against Iran. A few weeks back, when the Iranian people bravely were in the streets, and there might have been a moment, we couldn’t strike, because the aircraft carrier that was usually in the Mediterranean was off the coast of Venezuela, doing the blockade there. On top of that- on top of that as well, we were unable to bring the full force of pressure of our allies in Europe against Iran, because at that very same moment, President Trump was disrupting NATO with his Greenland play. We are stronger when we use our allies, when we have our full military capabilities in region, and that military is getting stretched, as good as we are, as the President gets engaged in activities all over the world.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You support the diplomacy underway now?

SEN. WARNER: I support the diplomacy. Absolutely.

MARGARET BRENNAN: All right. Senator. Mark Warner, thank you for your time today, Face the Nation will be back in one minute. Stay with us.

[END TRANSCRIPT]

Wonder Why the WaPo Is Failing? Leftist Rag's Pick for 'Most Relevant' NFL Player Tells You All

RedState 

As we’ve reported, the Washington Post has laid off hundreds of staff as their years of gaslighting, serving as a mouthpiece for the Democrat party, and acting as an outlet for progressive fanaticism have finally caught up to them and bitten them in the tuchus.

Lying, performative theatrics, and endless virtue signaling have a way of coming back at you in the modern age, especially when you have platforms like RedState and X bringing you the truth.

As if to prove their point that they are anti-American propagandists, the outlet penned a love letter for a familiar figure as they feted his toxic past efforts to infuse the National Football League with social justice dogma.

His name is Colin Kaepernick, and he's the most “relevant player,” the shameless outlet wrote, despite the fact that he isn’t a player and hasn’t been for years.

They wrote:

The Super Bowl is being played in Colin Kaepernick’s former home stadium, at a societal moment that echoes the issues he forced football fans to confront nearly 10 years ago, after he kneeled during the national anthem before a 49ers game.

They waxed poetic: “The most relevant figure to Super Bowl LX is absent from it.“ No, WaPo, he is not the most relevant figure; in fact, he’s nothing but an afterthought to most fans. An unfortunate one, at that.

Although there are numerous WaPo writers whining on social media that they’ve lost their jobs, they only have themselves to blame:

Look in the mirror, people:

Let’s be honest: Colin Kaepernick is not, and was never, a unifying figure. Although he showed flashes of greatness early in his 49er career, he quickly overshadowed that with his bizarre hair antics and his anti-American diatribes.