Big Blitz

Bondi is bombastic. She was asked in February and she said “she had the FILES on her desk to be reviewed.” But the impression wasn’t “we have to review” the impression was “we got names and they’re coming.” Trump himself always issued caution about the documents no matter what Homeloser is trying say today. He always said “I’ll release them BUT..” They have more. This leak caught them off guard and bc they aren’t career politicians corrupt to the core they didn’t know how to respond. If they were really shady and a bunch of evil pedo defending liars why didn’t they just deny the leak? Do with the list what Biden did which was never release it or talk about it. Something is up. Nothing official from anyone. And apparently it’s still an open investigation.

Save it all for 2028 Reminder, that despite all the hysteria over the last few days, absolutely nothing has been officially stated by the Trump admin. The leaked memo from Axios was a very informal draft, not finalized, no header, no date, no signature, and there has been no official statement from the FBI/DOJ on the Epstein matter. No authority ever officially said the Epstein case was closed. It was just an Axios article, with an alleged leaked draft of a memo, followed by an Internet frenzy. Nothing was official. But the FBI/DOJ just officially admitted in court, that their search efforts for Epstein information are STILL ONGOING, meaning that this is not over, and that the Deep State have likely either hidden or destroyed the most incriminating information about the Epstein operation, and presumably other topics as well.

Why were illegals getting Medicaid?

Thousand more like this that Ds are actively trying to prevent law enforcement from arresting.

Hahahahaha look at this clown nodding along with him

We always do. When you raise minimum wage. When you impose regulations. Etc. The horror stories of “ugh, you idiots are now going to pay 80% more for an iPhone” are just ridiculous. It’s not 1929 anymore. How many times have we said this. And like he says here and I agree - they’re neither a panacea nor a poison. The manufacturing long run goals are true; so is the desire for revenue and increasing leverage with competitors. https://fortune.com/2025/01/05/tariffs-donald-trump-us-economy-jobs-wages-producers-consumers/ https://finance.yahoo.com/news/different-now-tariffs-boost-u-205119631.html In a column in Foreign Affairs late last month, he argued that today's U.S. economy is much different from the one that was crushed by disastrous tariffs in the 1930s. The key difference is that America now has excessively high consumption, while it had low consumption and excess savings when the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act was passed in 1930…. …But Pettis cautioned that tariffs are neither a panacea nor poison, because their impact varies depending on what the economic circumstances are. In the case of the Smoot-Hawley tariffs, they went into effect during the Great Depression, when demand was crashing as other countries were taking similar steps on trade. The U.S. also had the world's largest trade surplus and top global exporters with production outstripping domestic demand. Fast-forward to today: The economy is nearly the total opposite and is no longer producing far more than it can consume, Pettis noted. While tariffs act as a tax on consumers, they also essentially subsidize domestic producers, who can add jobs and raise wages that eventually lead to more consumption, he explained. But if U.S. firms were facing weak domestic demand, tariffs would make matters worse. And if the global economy couldn't absorb more U.S. exports, then tariffs would depress domestic production. "In this case, tariffs (properly implemented) would have the opposite effect of Smoot-Hawley," Pettis added. "By taxing consumption to subsidize production, modern-day tariffs would redirect a portion of U.S. demand toward increasing the total amount of goods and services produced at home. That would lead U.S. GDP to rise, resulting in higher employment, higher wages, and less debt." Since Americans are the world's consumers of last resort, tariffs would serve another purpose too: U.S. producers would no longer have to accommodate the needs of foreign rivals, he said. Rather than aiming to protect certain sectors or businesses, tariffs could counter the economy's "pro-consumption and antiproduction" stance. "In the end, tariffs are simply one among many tools that can improve economic outcomes under some conditions and depress them under others," Pettis pointed out. "In an economy suffering from excess consumption, low savings, and a declining manufacturing share of GDP, the focus of economists should be on the causes of these conditions and the policies that might reverse them." Manufacturing as a share of GDP has gone from roughly 30 percent in the 1920s to less then 10 percent today. https://prosperousamerica.org/u-s-manufacturings-shrinking-share-of-gdp-and-how-to-catch-up/

Good. Do Ohio to.

No no no. Everything must be awful. Jon Oliver said so!

It just hit me. HomeloserTime has been doing this for 10 years! Just Imagine that. Spending dam near every single day posting about 1 man. Not an issue, or principles HomeloserTime cares about. There isn’t any. Just one man. Trump. All his posts are about Trump - most of them dumb low info memes or Last Week Tonight loser commentary. Do any conservatives here still post anything about Obama - or Biden unless they are completely relevant to the discussion? Like today Biden’s doc refusing to testify bc he knows. Just insane. What a waste of time - and by the time Trump leaves - near 4 years from now - it will be almost 14 years of one man occupying and living rent free in his head. The subject of daily posts. And that just makes me

Gas was 2.80 today. Im spending less at the private sector grocery store then I was a year ago. But economists warn that may not last.

Ok so no one was at fault. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

So where was the failure here - how was this Trump’s fault? That’s what that moron at the dying Buffalo News is saying. What specifically happened or didn’t that normally would have happened. Right now - here is what normally didn’t happen but it did this time:

Restructure or eliminate. Or a new one. The rest of the story for those not of the low info news cult: The president also appointed a council of cabinet members, governors and emergency management experts, tasked with recommending changes to FEMA. That group, the FEMA Review Council, had its first meeting in May, and is supposed to make recommendations by mid-November. The council is expected to complete its work by May 2026, suggesting that the Trump administration intends to eliminate or restructure FEMA in the period between the 2025 hurricane season and the 2026 hurricane season. Why is the Trump administration proposing this? FEMA has a long history of failing to serve those who need help the most after disasters. Under the Biden administration, the agency was taking steps to address those problems. For example, the agency simplified paperwork, expanded on-the-ground help after disasters and made it easier for survivors to get money for diapers, food and other immediate needs. The Trump administration is taking a different approach. The president has repeatedly suggested that FEMA is hopelessly flawed. At the first meeting of the FEMA Review Council, the council's co-chair, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, said, "The president and I have had many, many discussions about this agency. I want to be very clear. The President wants it eliminated as it currently exists. He wants a new agency." One only need to reference Helene Puerto Rico Katrina And then who’s not getting the aid: Why FEMA Aid Is Unavailable To Many Who Need It The Most https://www.npr.org/2021/06/29/1004347023/why-fema-aid-is-unavailable-to-many-who-need-it-the-most#:~:text=The poorest renters were 23,to receive adequate disaster assistance. Shocker. Federal agency that sucks at its job. Maybe its focus over the years became Muslim outreach.

Here is Roundy’s response to the CA wildfire fallout which we can and actually do have direct evidence that state policy were to blame. He wasn’t hearing that tho because they were Commie policy He mocked those reasons.

Rando. Ok. I see rando garbage all the time. SHE WAS A CITY EMPLOYEE APPOINTED BY THE MAYOR OF HOUSTON - TO THE FOOD INSECURITY BOARD (yes they have that)

Omg

He lowered IQ and physical standards. He made hiring based on DEI a priority: Let us begin plainly. Chief Joel Baker was not hired because he was the best firefighter. He was hired because Austin, reeling from a fire department engulfed in scandal, needed a symbol. In the year prior to his 2018 appointment, the Austin Fire Department was under state, local, and federal investigation for alleged violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, including claims of both racial and sexual discrimination and harassment. Multiple lawsuits and sharp criticism from across the political spectrum made one thing clear: the city needed an identity hire to stem the bleeding. Baker, a black man with leadership experience, fit the profile. Since taking the post in December 2018, Baker has made it his mission to recruit based on race, sex, and sexual identity. He has said so proudly and publicly. Programs like "Pass the Torch," which deliberately prioritize nonwhite, nonmale, and nonheterosexual applicants, are the centerpiece of his administration. The result? A fire department that is more diverse, but less competent. The traditional qualifications for a firefighter, strength, stamina, intelligence, rapid decision-making under pressure, have not changed. But the standards have. In response to the predictable failure of his preferred demographics to meet existing thresholds, Baker simply changed the thresholds. He launched investigations into why minority applicants were underperforming. The answer was as predictable as the question: the tests were too hard. So Baker made them easier. Lowered the IQ bar. Softened physical expectations. All to ensure that more boxes could be checked on quarterly DEI reports. The irony is brutal. The very teams Chief Baker refused to deploy, the Swift Water rescue units, are disproportionately composed of white men. They represent the last meritocratic redoubt within the Austin Fire Department. Many have years of experience and have saved hundreds of lives. But Baker did not build them. He has not promoted them. In fact, he has worked to marginalize them in favor of his DEI vision. So when Governor Abbott issued the request for pre-deployment on July 2nd and 3rd, before the floodwaters peaked, Baker balked. But the story is larger than one man’s failure. It is about the machinery that elevated him in the first place, a bureaucracy more concerned with appearances than outcomes. DEI, diversity, equity, inclusion, sounds benign. In practice, it has become a license to discriminate against the competent and elevate the compliant. Consider the broader pattern. In 2021, local media reported that nearly 75% of cadet interest cards came from "diversity targets," a term that flattens human individuality into demographic quotas. African American interest increased 10%, Hispanic interest 21%, while traditional candidate pools shrank. Recruitment staff, under Baker’s orders, reoriented outreach toward these demographics, often to the exclusion of others. Qualified white male applicants were not merely overlooked; they were openly discouraged. Promotion boards began emphasizing identity over service record.