Zzzzzzzzz...
Wednesday, July 8, 2026
AP Warns Against Trump's 'Darkly Political' Anti-Communist Remarks
Communism is an evil philosophy. Communist regimes have killed hundreds of millions of people and made millions more live in a police state. But somehow, speaking ill of communism alarms the same journalists who constantly suggest democracy is in peril under President Donald Trump. Authoritarianism is bad—unless it's communist.
Trump denounced communism in a July 3 speech underneath Mount Rushmore in South Dakota. A three-person team at Associated Press—Steven Stone, Steve Peoples, and Michelle Price—penned a story headlined: "Trump hails U.S. exceptionalism before veering into darkly political speech to usher in America 250."
AP began by claiming Trump offered "soaring rhetoric about American exceptionalism before veering into a darkly political speech with warnings about a sinister threat of communism that evoked one of the country's ugliest chapters."
Trump said communism was a "mortal threat to American liberty." That's considered "darkly political," even if it's factual. American liberty and Soviet communism were polar opposites in the Cold War: democracy and tyranny. Somehow, reporters don't like "dark" words about Stalin and Mao and Castro and Pol Pot. They were somehow never a "sinister threat" to anyone.
As for the ugliest chapter? The AP trio lectured: "Indeed, Trump's language evoked the Red Scare of the 1950s, when alleged communists were persecuted and blacklisted from jobs across America, from Washington to Hollywood."
This is a mind-boggling sentence. They're still saying "alleged communists"? Every journalist should have taken the time to learn that there were communist spies in the federal government and there were communists in powerful positions in Hollywood. Leftist journalists spent decades claiming Alger Hiss wasn't a Soviet spy, but post-Soviet records clearly established he was. There is a shelf of books underlining the evidence, including "Blacklisted by History" by M. Stanton Evans.
As for the entertainment world, Allan Ryskind, whose father was a Hollywood screenwriter, wrote an engrossing book that came out in 2015 called "Hollywood Traitors" about the communists who infiltrated the movie business. Sen. Joseph McCarthy might have gotten the number of Soviet spies wrong, but journalists have spent decades ridiculously pretending the number was zero.
It's a little humorous that this anti-anti-communist story was picked up online by both NPR and PBS. NPR's headline was "In Mount Rushmore speech, Trump veers from U.S. exceptionalism to warnings about communism." The PBS headline put communist "threat" in quote marks, like it was crazy talk.
Right after their "Red Scare" laments, the AP scribes uncritically added "Mayor Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist, delivered his own address that cast America as a nation of contradictions, 'working each day towards the perfection in which it was conceived.'" That's their only Mamdani speech quote in this piece.
Mamdani has openly spoken of seizing the "means of production," but that would only make him an "alleged communist." Graham Platner identified himself as a communist on Reddit, and Darializa Avila Chevalier spoke warmly of Marx and communist dictators on her X account "Darializabonet," until she took it down. But an AP Fact Check genius wrote an article objecting to anyone claiming there are communists in the Democratic Party, because none of them were actually members of the Communist Party. They missed the obvious point: They're pro-communist members of the Democratic Party.
Journalists who constantly smear President Trump and his supporters as "fascists" (with no fuss from the "fact checkers") find it "darkly political" when someone does a version of what they do—except conservatives have the actual facts on their side.
π πππ πππππ¨ ππΎπΆπΈπ», ππΎπΌπ²π¬, ππ»π½, ππππ π£ππ‘πππ
Welcome to
The πππ πππππ¨ ππΎπΆπΈπ», ππΎπΌπ²π¬, ππ»π½, ππππ π£ππ‘πππ
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 Majority of Democrats Say They'd Rather Live Elsewhere
We've seen poll after poll about Democrats hating America, feeling disappointed in their country, and rejecting patriotism. All of this is rooted in a very childish mindset: their party doesn't control Washington D.C. right now, so everything sucks.
There's another poll that shows a majority of Democrats would actually prefer to live in another country. Some 55 percent of Democrats said yes, when asked if there was another country they'd rather live in, with 38 percent of independents also responding in the affirmative.
Yet they somehow never seem to leave.
Weird, that.
Also, they learn quickly that other nations have strict immigration laws that, unlike here in the U.S. under Democrats, are strictly enforced.
We're sure there are many who would volunteer to help them with this.
They always act like this is a threat that's supposed to make the rest of us feel bad.
It's not.
In fact, it's the exact opposite. We welcome your departure.
They always seem to overlook this. They have no idea how good they have it here.
It costs less than $500 to renounce one's citizenship. They should put their money where their mouths are.
But perhaps they've seen videos like this, of a woman who moved to Costa Rica to escape President Trump, only to regret it.
"And it's so weird to like want to move to America right now with everything that's going on but I just left so many privileges and resources behind and I want them back," she said.
Turns out America isn't so bad after all.
If Anyone Can Birth An ‘American,’ Citizenship Means Nothing
American citizenship is a priceless inheritance, not a cheap commodity to be harvested by those who wish us harm.
If you’ve been wondering why America’s 250th feels so hollow, the Supreme Court’s June 30 ruling on birthright citizenship should provide ample clarity. If anyone, from anywhere in the world, can travel to America and give birth to an “American” citizen, then American citizenship is meaningless and based purely on the happenstance of birth.
As Justice Samuel Alito noted in his dissent, this system of “soil and servitude” was emphatically rejected by our Founders in the Declaration of Independence. Yet, the Court has once again saddled our nation with this ancient understanding, negating everything the Founders pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor to reject, and resurrected a form of medieval English feudal rule.
At the center of this debate is the 14th Amendment, which was drafted to ensure that freed slaves were recognized as full citizens, given that, as Justice Clarence Thomas argues in his dissent, freed slaves “had no other homeland” and were “liable to be called upon to defend [America] in time of war.”
The Constitution’s Citizenship Clause demands that one not only be born in the United States but also be “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Legal scholars who reject universal birthright citizenship under consent theory argue that full jurisdiction requires mutual political consent.
Sen. Lyman Trumbull, a principal architect of Reconstruction-era legislation, explained that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” meant “not owing allegiance to anybody else” and “subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States.”
To this point, Justice Thomas explained in his dissent that this jurisdictional requirement was historically understood as demanding a legal domicile, meaning a permanent home, rather than a fleeting visit to our shores by tourists, temporary foreign workers, or illegal aliens.
This conclusion stands in direct contrast to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s “universalist” vision of citizenship.
The author of the Citizenship Clause, Sen. Jacob Howard, stated during the Senate debates over the 14th Amendment that automatic birthright citizenship would not “include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons.”
The Supreme Court majority’s response to Howard’s assertion is to argue over commas, insisting “foreigners” and “aliens” merely describe diplomat families. But if diplomat families are foreigners by definition, why even list foreigners and aliens separately? Should birthright citizenship truly rest on grammatical semantics?
By ignoring the plain words of the amendment’s own authors, the court’s majority has enshrined a historical lie. For decades, open-borders advocates have repeatedly told the American public that this debate was permanently settled in 1898 by the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark because this understanding benefits the left demographically and electorally.
When the children of illegal aliens and birth tourists turn 18, they are eligible to vote in our elections. When they turn 21, they unlock the power of chain migration, allowing them to sponsor their foreign parents for legal permanent residency. One only needs to look at the wave of Democratic Socialist victories in recent municipal elections, driven by rapidly shifting urban demographics, to see where this leads.
But the current understanding of Wong Kim Ark is wrong, and the dissenting opinions take direct aim at this lie. As Justice Alito thoroughly explained, the holding in Wong Kim Ark was explicitly limited to children whose non-citizen parents had established a “permanent domicil and residence” in the United States.
Because the legal category “lawful permanent resident” did not exist in 1898, Wong’s parents were considered “lawfully domiciled” in the U.S. under common law because there was no statute making their presence unlawful. Additionally, being Chinese, they could not apply for naturalization.
They had done, as Justice Alito stated, “everything within their power to express their desire and intent to become Americans.” As such, they were fully part of the national community to the extent that the law allowed at the time.
The promise of American citizenship remains a massive incentive for illegal immigration, while the subversive “birth tourism” industry will continue to profit openly from the Court’s refusal to defend the nation.
In 2023 alone, mothers who were unauthorized immigrants or held only temporary legal status accounted for an astounding 320,000 births in the United States, representing 9 percent of all U.S. births. If the restrictions of President Trump’s executive order had been properly upheld, roughly 260,000 of those children would not have qualified for automatic citizenship.
Even more alarming is the strategic weaponization of this loophole by adversarial nations such as China. As Peter Schweizer has documented in his book, The Invisible Coup, we are currently facing what he terms “civilizational warfare.”
Wealthy Chinese nationals, sometimes with ties to the Chinese Communist Party, exploit visa loopholes in U.S. territories like Saipan, turning them into tropical maternity wards.
A sophisticated industry charging more than $45,000 coaches these birth tourists on how to deceive customs officials so they can deliver their children on American soil and instantly secure a U.S. passport. The result is the creation of what Schweizer calls a “Manchurian Generation.”
There are an estimated 750,000 to 1.5 million of these “American citizens” currently being raised and indoctrinated in mainland China, taught to hate America and Western civilization as a whole.
As Justice Alito warned, this ruling continues to allow a person whose only connection to this country is a brief stay on American soil at birth to travel the world on a U.S. passport, enter our country freely, vote in our elections, run for political office, and retain citizenship even if they harbor deep hatred for America or actively plot to harm it.
If an adversarial government can effectively manufacture U.S. citizens at will through birth tourism, then birthright citizenship needs to be seen as the massive national security threat that it is. The American Revolution itself was premised on the idea that governments derive just powers from the consent of the governed, which means citizenship and government must be considered a two-way relationship.
As Justice Alito pointed out, while Congress holds the power to confer citizenship on others by statute, the Constitution itself does not mandate the degradation of American citizenship for everyone who happens to cross our borders.
Birthright citizenship was never intended to serve as a constitutional loophole for trespassers, temporary tourists, or hostile foreign powers. American citizenship is a priceless inheritance, not a cheap commodity to be harvested by those who wish us harm. No sovereign nation can survive if it abandons the right to decide who belongs to its national family.
Monaco Bomber Found Dead in Kiev, Shot 4 Times in Back of Head – Ukraine Intelligence Agent Arrested
Oh, this is interesting for those who walk the deep weeds.
On June 29th a woman dressed as a man placed a package bomb at the Monaco residence of Ukrainian business tycoon Vadym Yermolaiev who refused to take sides in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Yermolaiev, a Ukrainian property tycoon, was sanctioned by Kyiv in 2023 over his alleged business activities in Russian-occupied Crimea.
Immediately after the bombing suspect was identified as Ukrainian national Anastasiia Berezovska, the Zelenskyy government said she was operating as a Russian asset and had not been to Ukraine in years. Ukrainian sources suggested she was born in Kazakhstan, holds a Russian passport, and lived in occupied Crimea. {citation}
All reasonable/non-pretending people recognized immediately Ukraine was the likely source of the terrorist attack, and Zelenskyy was just trying to cover his tracks. Well, Ukraine’s narrative has just collapsed as the bomber was just found in Kiev, shot four-times in the back of the head, and the suspect in her killing is a Ukraine intelligence agent.
This news breaks this morning just as Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is prancing around the NATO summit in Turkey, despite Ukraine not being a NATO member.
CTV – KYIV, Ukraine — Ukraine’s Security Service on Tuesday said it found the body of Ukrainian national Anastasiia Berezovska, who had been wanted by authorities in Monaco in connection with the bombing targeting Ukrainian business tycoon Vadym Yermolaiev.
The security service, also known by its local abbreviation SBU, said an officer serving in Ukraine’s military intelligence agency confessed to killing Berezovska with the help of a former law enforcement officer. He claimed he acted on his own initiative and without informing his superiors, the statement said.
The attack on June 29 reportedly targeted Yermolaiev, who has links to Russia, and his family. Three people were injured, including a child. The incident shocked Monaco, a coastal playground for the rich and famous known for its tax-friendly incentives, royal family and Formula 1 Grand Prix. Its head of state, Prince Albert II, described the blast as “an odious act” and said all public services were mobilized to ensure security.
Interpol had identified 39-year-old Berezovska as the main suspect.
[…] The SBU said investigators had focused on the two men after discovering they had repeatedly transferred cryptocurrency and money through bank accounts to Berezovska. During searches, authorities also found what the SBU described as a basement resembling a torture chamber at the former law enforcement officer’s home.
Investigators found Berezovska’s body during a reconstruction of the crime based on one suspect’s testimony. She had gunshot wounds to the head, and investigators recovered spent pistol casings at the scene, the SBU said. (read more)
The Sun also has a media report on the issue – SEE HERE.
What is now clear is that Ukraine Intelligence was behind the bombing in Monaco, and then tried to cover their tracks. However, one note of caution: why shoot someone “4-times in the back of the head“? One of the motives for such a brutal method of killing is to graphically disfigure the face of the person killed.
Zelenskyy really is a Nazi terrorist; yet there are a lot of European and Canadian leaders who align themselves with him.
Carney and Zelenskyy Announce Creation of New Canadian Bank for NATO/Climate Money Laundering, with $900 Million Seed Money from Canadian Taxpayers
WOW…
Things are coming together quickly now as Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney begins unveiling details to support his illusion of meeting NATO obligations, with a smart money laundering assist from Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
To establish part of the background, remind yourself that former Canadian Minister Chrystia Freeland was appointed by Zelenskyy to lead a Ukraine redevelopment operation. Today, speaking from Ankara, Turkey, Carney and Zelenskyy announced a $900 million fund for short, mid-term and long-term investment in Ukraine. WATCH:
But wait, it gets much better. A few hours later Prime Minister Carney and Volodymr Zelenskyy announced a new Canada-based financial institution called the Defense, Security and Resilience Bank (DSRB). {citation}
CANADA – […] “Mark Carney, welcomed the support for the Canada-led DSRB by: Albania, Belgium, Greece, Latvia, Luxembourg, Romania, TΓΌrkiye, and Ukraine. These countries will be entrusted with defining the initial policies and directives of the Bank, shaping its operations and ensuring benefits flow to members’ economies.”
[…] Leveraging a strong credit rating, the Bank will provide long-term, low-cost financing for defence, security, and resilience initiatives across supply chains.” (more)
When you see the term “resilience initiatives” think climate change. Specifically, think carbon capture and carbon trading mechanisms. The DSRB banking approach, in combination with Chrystia Freeland heading the Ukraine Economic Development operation, then takes us to the carbon capture deal with Alberta [carbon capture and storage (CCS) project] and then, wait for it,…. The TKMS submarine purchase contract with Germany.
You see, unbeknownst to most people, TKMS has a subsidiary that was just founded, literally just founded weeks before Carney announced the $20 to $30 billion submarine contract.
In announcing the TKMS contract, CBC noted: “The German government also proposed establishing a carbon capture facility deploying TKMS technology in partnership with Alberta.” That would be TKMS Calvion GmbH (TKMS-CG) which was a company formed within TKMS on May 16, 2026.
So, think about this. Mark Carney tells Alberta Premier Danielle Smith that a condition for the Alberta pipeline is authorization of a carbon capture scheme that will be contracted to the recently created subsidiary of TKMS, TKMS-CG. who Carney knows is about to get the submarine contract. Pretty slick.
All of this spending (military and resilience initiatives) then becomes part of Canada meeting their NATO obligations, which will be wrapped into a NEW BANK (DRSB) controlled by Mark Carney, Volodymyr Zelenskyy and likely Chrystia Freeland, and funded (at least in part) by Canadian taxpayer money flowing to Ukraine. All other nations within DRSB providing the patina of credibility to hide the laundry.
The “private sector” investments, noted within the banking charter, will almost certainly stem from companies like TKMS and TKMS-CG, who will create a circular process. Taxpayer funds to TKMS. TKMS funds to bank. Bank funds to TKMS-CG. With Carney, Zelenskyy and Freeland prepositioning investments ahead of the arrival of deposits.
Brilliant.
Here’s a great video recap that was created before the $900 million and DRSB bank announcement, and when you add in those two components it all makes sense. Information packed 20 minutes. WATCH: