What about Trump's diaper malfunctions?

 

Dog continues his adventure down the demented trail.
An article about Americans being murdered by ILLEGAL MIGRANTS is too long for his puppy dog concentration to deal with.
But he can obsess endlessly about Trump's body and in particular his poop.

We may need an intervention. Perhaps a few weeks in the Nevada brothels would reseat his intellect.

 

Russia and North Korea sign mutual defense partnership

• April Rubin

Updated 6 hours ago -World

Axios - Breaking news, U.S. news and politics, and local news

 

Biden DHS docs suggested Trump supporters, military and religious people are likely violent terror threats
Internal documents show that the board suggested 'most of the Domestic Terrorism threat' in the U.S. comes from Trump supporters.
Published June 22, 2024 12:45pm EDT

A Department of Homeland Security (DHS) advisory board suggested that supporters of former President Donald Trump – as well as those who served in the military or are religious – have a greater possibility of posing domestic terrorism risks, according to internal files obtained by America First Legal (AFL).

Named the "Homeland Intelligence Experts Group," the now-disbanded board was created in September 2023 to provide DHS with "expert" analysis on subjects like terrorism and the trafficking of certain controlled substances like fentanyl.

The panel, according to the conservative legal nonprofit's findings, included former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and former CIA Director John Brennan, both of whom signed onto an October 2020 letter falsely dismissing Hunter Biden's infamous laptop as Russian disinformation.


The documents revealed that the board suggested "supporters of the former president" accounted for "most of the Domestic Terrorism threat" in the U.S.

"There is a political backdrop to all of this. It seems that most of the Domestic Terrorism threat now comes from supporters of the former president. It is not like you want a political advantage, but people have attacked the government and its institutions for the last six years," meeting notes from the board stated.

Citing unnamed "researchers," the board also claimed that specific traits – like those who served "in the military" or are "religious" – are "indicators of extremists and terrorism" that the U.S. should be "more worried" about.

"If you ask researchers to dive into indicators of extremists and terrorism, they might indicate being in the military or religious," the board said. "This being identified as an indicator suggests we should be more worried about those. We need the space to talk about it honestly."

The files were released Friday as the second installment of AFL's "#DeepStateDiaries," which was described by the organization as a "multi-part series of releases including newly obtained documents."


Read here:
www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-dhs-docs-suggested-trump-supporters-military-religious-people-likely-violent-terror-threats

 

Whatever it takes.
The despicable goal is to keep Trump off the ballot, or in the alternative beat him at the poll, or impeach him.

No matter what it takes, no matter the constitution or the law, get trump.

 

'Absurd and Shameful': Here's What Biden Is Allowing Iran to Do on American Soil

Spencer Brown | June 25, 2024 10:45 AM

In another case of "what are they thinking?!" the Biden administration has decided to allow the Iranian regime to set up absentee vote collection sites in the United States for its June 28 presidential election to replace Ebrahim Raisi following his death earlier this year. Indulging the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism and legitimizing Iran's sham elections is ludicrous — even Canada under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau doesn't allow Iran to run an absentee ballot operation on its soil.

Critics call the decision "absurd and shameful," according to an exclusive report published by Voice of America, and rightly so:

Iranian Foreign Ministry official Alireza Mahmoudi told state media on Sunday that Tehran is planning to set up more than 30 ballot stations across the United States for the June 28 vote to replace Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, who died in a helicopter crash last month.

Mahmoudi said ballot boxes for Iranian absentee voters would be set up at the Iranian Interests Section of the Pakistani embassy in Washington and in New York but did not identify other locations.

[...]

In a statement reported exclusively by VOA, the U.S. State Department said on Friday it has no expectation that Iran’s presidential election will be free or fair. The Islamic republic’s ruling clerics permit only loyalists of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to run for offices such as president and parliament, which are subservient to him on key policy issues.

Iran’s last parliamentary and presidential elections, in March and 2021, respectively, drew record-low official turnouts, with the lack of choices leaving much of the electorate disinterested.

Opponents of Iran’s clerical rulers at home and abroad repeatedly have called for boycotts of Iranian elections, which they view as shams, and they have done so again for the June 28 vote. They also have noted that the Islamic republic seeks legitimacy for its 45-year authoritarian rule by trying to boost turnout for such elections.

VOA asked the State Department how authorizing ballot stations in the U.S. for Iran, whose poor human rights record it has strongly criticized, is consistent with the U.S. view of Iranian elections as neither free nor fair.

A spokesperson responded by noting that Iran set up U.S.-based ballot stations for previous presidential elections, in 2021 and 2017, with approval from the Biden administration and its predecessor, the Trump administration, respectively.

“This is nothing new,” the spokesman said, in reference to the planned ballot stations for next week's vote.

Read entire story here: www.townhall.com/tipsheet/spencerbrown/2024/06/25/biden-admin-allows-iran-to-set-up-absentee-voting-sites-in-us-for-election-it-knows-is-rigged-n2640916

 

Interesting.
Wonder how many terrorists we could catch if we watched the ballot boxes?
Course, even if we knew they were in the country as ILLEGAL MIGRANTS and were on a terrorist watch list, we couldn't touch em, cause, brandon.

 

UCLA Urges Federal Court to Reject Jewish Students’ Civil Rights Claims


Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times via Getty
10 Jul 2024

The University of California of Los Angeles (UCLA) claims that it should not be ordered by a federal court to protect Jewish students from antisemitism when they return to campus in the fall, after the “encampment” this past spring.

UCLA was the scene of some of the most egregious and violent antisemitism among the dozens of “encampment” protest that swept the nation. Jewish students were barred by pro-Palestinian activists from entering some public areas of campus, and from reaching some of their classes. While there were pro-Israel counter-protests, Jewish students continued to be harassed; police only intervened after pro-Israel vigilantes attacked the encampment.

Three Jewish students are suing UCLA in federal court under civil rights law, demanding a preliminary injunction requiring the university to guarantee their safety when they return to campus. Their lawyers, from the Becket and Clement & Murphy PLLC firm, said:

UCLA … helped a group of activists as they set up an encampment where they harassed Jewish students and stopped them from accessing classes, the library, and other critical parts of campus. UCLA reinforced these zones—both by providing metal barriers and by sending away Jewish students—while taking no effective action to ensure safe passage for Jewish students. UCLA’s policies harm Jewish students and violate numerous provisions of the U.S. and California Constitutions and multiple civil rights laws.

In its response, filed Monday in federal court, UCLA admits providing the metal barriers around the encampment, but claims that it did so to prevent the encampment from expanding, not to reinforce its boundaries (made of wood and old furniture).

UCLA denies helping the pro-Palestinian activists, but admits that it decided not to call police at first, and “chose to first try de-escalation strategies to remove the encampment peacefully and durably.” The university claims that it hired “third party” security officers who “policed neutral zones with a charge of deterring violent escalation,” but that is false: the security personnel obeyed the orders of the pro-Palestinian activists and did not prevent violence.

The university claims that it did not infringe upon free speech through its policies: “UCLA’s actions neither suppressed nor coerced speech.” That, too is false: this journalist was assaulted by members of the encampment.

UCLA says that its existing policies are sufficient to comply with federal civil rights laws and that it is currently investigating any past civil rights violations on campus — whether against Jewish students, Arab students, or others.

The case is Frankel v. Regents of the University of California, in the Central District of California Western Division – Los Angeles, No. 2:24-CV-4702-MCS.

 

During the run up to elections we see a lot of seemingly unrelated articles that don't seem to be a political article, but in fact are.
Brandon's school loan forgiveness scheme has gotten a lot of poor press ever since his state of the union address, where we learned that one of the people present was a MILLIONAIRE teacher who got a six figure school loan forgiven cause, you know, politics.
And since then we've discovered that most of the school loans being forgiven are loans that rich people have, in particular rich LIBERAL people.

So the propaganda machine has fired out an article that is designed to blunt those embarrassing little tidbits. A poor, brain injured lady with $150,000 in school loans and a $40K job.
AWWWW!!​

After various degrees and a brain injury, I owe $150,000 in student loans. The lawsuits and election only make it worse. (msn.com)
After various degrees and a brain injury, I owe $150,000 in student loans. The lawsuits and election only make it worse.
Story by atecotzky@businessinsider.com (Alice Tecotzky)
• 5h

• Shanna Hayes owes more than $150,000 in private and federal loans, 20% of which is interest.
• After a traumatic brain injury, she couldn't pay her loans for months and her credit score tanked.
• The ongoing court battles and upcoming election only add uncertainty to her repayment plan.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Shanna Hayes, who is a special education teacher in the DC metro area, owes more than $150,000 in loans, and has worked with the Student Debt Crisis Center. It has been edited for length and clarity.

As a kid in upstate New York, I never questioned whether I would go to college — my mom made it clear that higher education was a must and happily handed me the Fiske Guide to Colleges when I was a teenager. In 2011, I graduated from New England College with a Bachelor's in secondary mathematics education and became the first person in my family to earn their college degree.

I didn't think about my loans much as an undergraduate. Yes, I'd taken out $100,000, but I assumed that with a stable career I would be able to manage my repayments. Nobody ever explained to me how interest accrues or anticipated the endless stream of lawsuits to come.

I wasn't prepared for the reality of my teaching salary or complicated nature of interest on student loans.
I'm 35 now and have a long, winding history with my student debt, from income-driven repayment plans, to in-school deferments, to the SAVE plan, which an appeals court just blocked. I've held various jobs, earned three degrees, and even survived a traumatic brain injury, but still I owe more in loans now than I took out in the first place. And with the lawsuits and delays, my $150,000 of worth of debt in private and federal loans is now in limbo.

When I landed my first teaching job out of college at a public school district in New Hampshire, I thought my $29,000 annual salary was a huge win. And why not? I was making more money than some members of my family, more than I'd ever made in my previous minimum-wage positions. But I soon realized that I could barely afford rent and basic necessities.

The easiest, fastest way to a higher salary was another degree — and with it, more debt. So I went to graduate school in 2015 and took out $35,000 more in loans. While in school, I was placed on in-school deferments and started paying off my debt again in the fall of 2016. By that point, I was earning $10,000 more per year, thanks to my new degree. Finally, things felt a little bit more stable. Not easy, but possible.

A traumatic brain injury knocked my life — and my loans — off balance.
Then, on January 10, 2016, I sustained a traumatic brain injury that left me unable to do much of anything. I had to relearn how to walk, tie my shoes, punch in my phone number. To be honest, I didn't even remember I had loans, let alone know how to pay them off. Throughout my many months of recovery, though, my bills piled up and interest accrued. By the time I called my student loan lender in late March of 2016, my credit score had plummeted more than 400 points.

My lender told me they couldn't help, even though I hadn't been physically able to make my payments. I hadn't consolidated my loans, so each semester counted as its own bill — between my years of undergraduate and graduate school, I had more than a dozen loans. It was as if I had 15 different car payments and didn't pay a single one. Really, it looked like I hadn't paid any of my bills for months.

Between getting on another income-driven repayment plan, going back to school for a bit, and spending hours on the phone, I eventually got on the SAVE plan. The plan took my wife's loans into consideration, too, and it was the most affordable program I'd been on during my eternity as a borrower.

The stability didn't last, though, in no small part to the lawsuits that never seem to end. I got off of SAVE before the 8th circuit court blocked it, when I applied to consolidate my loans at the end of May — who knows how I'd feel if I were still a SAVE borrower, stuck in no-man's land. Now, my consolidation has been processed, but my application for a new plan hasn't, even though I applied three months ago.

The lawsuits only make my situation more complicated and I fear my financial future hangs in the balance this election.
My payments are on pause as I wait for the processing, but interest continues to accrue. The lawsuit blocking SAVE doesn't help — it only reminds me how unstable everything is and how long it takes to get clarity. I want to believe that consolidating my loans was the right choice, but as of now I have no guarantee. I thought I was doing something in my long-term interest, but with the delays and rollercoaster of litigation, I may end up paying more than I expected.

Even now, at 35-years-old and with three degrees, I don't feel like I understand the state of my loans. It's impossible to know who can answer my questions. It takes hours to get through to a loan servicer, and that's only if I click the right button or yell into the phone long enough. If I do ever talk to someone, they rarely know the answer.

The lawsuits feel political to me, but I just don't see why politicians are interested in hindering my ability to survive. There are so many misconceptions about who benefits from loan forgiveness — usually, it's not doctors or lawyers making hundreds of thousands a year, but people like me.

I have no problem paying for the loans I took out, but I do have a problem with how interest compounds. My current debt is 20% interest, and that number just keeps growing. The election looms before me, with my financial future depending on who occupies the White House and how they feel about student debt.

Off the SAVE plan and stuck in between processing hold-ups, court delays, and political battles, I feel like I'm back where I've always been: waiting for an end to my debt, with no clear end in sight.

So here are some questions for our heroine;
1) You have all those degrees, including a Bachelor's in secondary mathematics education and you don't understand how interest works? Seriously?
2) In your quest for all that education, did you ever check to see what kind of income your chosen field generates? A $40K job that requires $150K in school education seems a bit out of kilter, don't you think?
3) Who or what convinced you that school loan debt was a positive career move???????

No matter. As the election heats up we're confident that Kamala will be pointing to this lady, or someone like her, to justify a few BILLION more in US debt. What the hell, it's only paper, right?
​