rhombus10 retweeted
‘60 Minutes’ proudly unveiled its latest heartbreaking deportation exposé. The grieving family. The devastated children. The carefully arranged interviews. All the emotional ammunition needed to make immigration enforcement look like an act of unspeakable cruelty.
Then DHS General Counsel James Percival announced he'd pulled the actual immigration file.
Fifty-one fucking minutes after CBS promoted its masterpiece.
Imagine the sheer embarrassment.
CBS had an entire investigative-news operation producing this thing. Reporters, producers, editors, researchers, and presumably somebody whose job involves checking whether the story survives contact with the underlying evidence.
Percival had a file.
And that file, according to him, identified sexual orientation as Moussa Diawara's claimed reason for fearing persecution in Mali, while CBS emphasized his conversion to Christianity.
That's a discrepancy any competent investigative newsroom should have thoroughly examined.
It gets better.
CBS acknowledged that America had the legal authority to deport Diawara. His protection concerned removal to Mali. American authorities flew him to Ghana, whose government subsequently sent him to Mali.
Those distinctions apparently weren't nearly as exciting as another close-up of a grieving family.
And therein lies the magnificent absurdity of this whole production.
The legendary ‘60 Minutes.’ The gold standard of investigative television. The institution that interrogates presidents, confronts corporations, and prides itself on uncovering what powerful people desperately want concealed.
Yet its carefully packaged immigration tragedy was publicly challenged by a government lawyer who said he'd done something apparently revolutionary in modern television journalism.
He checked the fucking paperwork.
CBS spent all that effort assembling a prime-time emotional spectacle, only to discover that inconvenient questions can survive the editing room.
America's premier investigative-news program managed to last roughly 51 minutes before somebody investigated the investigators.
Hell, the stopwatch in the ‘60 Minutes’ logo has a longer attention span than its fact-checkers apparently did.
(article below)
82 Criminal Aliens Arrested by ICE in Sanctuary Massachusetts During Three-Day Operation breitbart.com/border/2026/10… via @BreitbartNews
rhombus10 retweeted
HISTORY LESSON ON YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY CARD:
Just in case some of you young whippersnappers (& some older ones) didn’t know this. It’s easy to check out, if you don’t believe it. Be sure and show it to your family and friends. They need a little history lesson on what’s what and it doesn’t matter whether you are Democrat or Republican. Facts are FACTS.
Up until the 1980's, Social Security cards expressly stated the number and card were not to be used for identification purposes.
Since nearly everyone in the United States now has a number, it became convenient to use it anyway and the "NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION" message was removed.
Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. His promises are in black, with updates in brackets.
1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary [No longer voluntary],
2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program [Now 7.65% on the first $90,000, and 15% on the first $90,000 if you’re self-employed],
3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year [No longer tax deductible],
4.) That the money the participants put into the independent ‘Trust Fund’ rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program [Under Johnson the money was moved to the General Fund and spent], and
5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income [Under Clinton & Gore up to 85% of your Social Security can be taxed].
Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month — and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to ‘put away’ — you may be interested in the following:
Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent ‘Trust Fund’ and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?
A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically controlled House and Senate.
Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?
A: The Democratic Party.
Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?
A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the ‘tie-breaking’ deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US
AND MY FAVORITE:
Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?
A: That’s right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it!
Now, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!
And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it! If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe changes will evolve. Maybe not, though. Some Democrats are awfully sure of what isn’t so — but it’s worth a try.
rhombus10 retweeted
With the proliferation now of self driving vehicles, when can we expect to hear a county song where a guy's truck leaves him too?
Festive Crowd Defies French Rioters as Upbeat Paris NFL Match Completed breitbart.com/europe/2026/10… via @BreitbartNews
Purchased a MAGA hat? Jack Smith and Biden DOJ know who you are, where you live americanthinker.com/blog/202…
rhombus10 retweeted
🚨BREAKING: Justice Amy Coney Barrett delivered a sharp rebuke to Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson in the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision limiting nationwide injunctions by U.S. district judges.
In the majority opinion, Barrett wrote:
“JUSTICE JACKSON, however, chooses a startling line of attack that is tethered neither to these sources nor, frankly, to any doctrine whatsoever. Waving away attention to the limits on judicial power as a ‘mind-numbingly technical query,’ she offers a vision of the judicial role that would make even the most ardent defender of judicial supremacy blush.”
She continued:
“We will not dwell on JUSTICE JACKSON’s argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries’ worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself. We observe only this: JUSTICE JACKSON decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary.”
The Court ruled that district judges generally cannot issue nationwide injunctions that block federal policies across the entire country for parties not before the court.
rhombus10 retweeted
CNN’s Dana Bash: “I also don't want to use this interview to allow you to say things that aren't entirely true. It is also factually true that the COVID vaccine worked. The COVID vaccine prevented deaths. There is data, upon data, upon data.”
HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: “You think the COVID vaccine protected children?”
Dana Bash: “I have talked to scientists and doctors…”
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: “Can you show me one study that shows that children were protected by the COVID vaccine?”
“That that vaccine did more good than harm to children? Can you show me one study that shows that?”
Dana Bash: “There have been studies that show that, because of vaccine disinformation, there could have been 100K to 200K in the U.S. saved But because people didn't get the vaccine, that's why.
Robert F. Kennedy: “You are saying nonsense. You are saying something that you cannot show me a single study.”
Dana Bash: “Excuse me! Excuse me!”
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: “Cite me the study that you’re talking about. You said you’ve seen studies. Cite me the study.”
Dana Bash: *Can’t cite the study*
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: “You're talking nonsense. You're making assertions you can't support, and then when I call you on them, you're telling me I'm arguing with you.”
You can’t make this stuff up.
Source: trust me, I read the studies.
Conservative Landslide in British Columbia Sends Warning to Mark Carney
newsweek.com/conservative-la…
rhombus10 retweeted
This video is very important for Europe. It shows that those who loot, destroy cars, set fires and cause chaos speak Arabic. And if they speak Arabic, they are not Europeans. Let's assume many people won't want this video to spread, because it tells too much truth.
rhombus10 retweeted
To whoever painted the back of this semi trailer: You owe me a new set of underwear and a seat cushion.
rhombus10 retweeted
Far-left podcaster Jennifer Welch is panicking because Elon Musk is threatening to sue her for defamation. On October 19 she called him an “untreated drug addict,” a white nationalist, and a Nazi on her podcast. She posted a response video on October 22 looking terrified once her comments, the fallout, and Musk’s response spread.
In the days since Welch’s reply she still hasn’t posted a retraction of the defamatory comments she made about Musk. That was the window to limit the damage. In her reply to Musk she offered explanations for what she called him but skipped her drug-addict claim. That’s the one that creates real legal exposure for Welch.
She has zero evidence Musk is a drug addict because he isn’t. She dropped the accusation into a string of unhinged remarks and now pretends glossing over it makes the statement go away. It doesn’t. And it’s too late to offset the harm she’s already caused. That’s why she’s panicking.
When you state something as fact without saying “allegedly” or “I think,” and that false statement damages someone’s reputation and finances, you own the consequences. Welch needed to post a full retraction and apology right away. She didn’t.
Musk is well within his rights to sue her into bankruptcy. A lawsuit would send a clear message that knowingly lying for clicks isn’t free speech when it costs people money. Musk should sue Welch. It’s the right thing to do.
LOL - the Elon Musk hit piece movie just flopped and has already been pulled from theaters - 😂
The film concludes its theatrical run with a $571,902 box-office performance. mashable.com/entertainment/c…
End of an era as New Hampshire’s famed Hanging Boulder finally falls youtube.com/shorts/iYlEVHisZ… via @YouTube
Obama Gets DESTROYED After Making Bizarre Claim About Iran pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/20…
'Now is the time': Rubio asks Cubans to enter discreet 'partnership' with CIA oann.com/newsroom/now-is-the… via @OANN


















