High inflation, rising energy costs around the world, rising food prices, supply chain issues…
These are all policy disasters and they’ve got little to do with what your government says the root causes are.
A thread 🧵 for your awareness 👇
California declaring every new vehicle sold after 2035 must be green, then asking residents to stop charging vehicles when the energy grid is stressed… it’s energy policy is a joke
German energy policy has been a huge disaster in this decade. First think about energy independence, then think about shutting down your nuclear power plants for some green reasons. Don’t put your energy dependence on other nations who could easily take advantage of it 🤷♂️
Follow China 🇨🇳 if possible only for your nuclear energy policy. Don’t follow China for the coal & fossil fuel based energy policy. China has been the largest green house gas emitter and they need to bring this down drastically.
Way too much power is given to oil producing nations like Saudi 🇸🇦
Nations should be slowly weaning off fossil fuels. They should have strategic reserves of oil stored. Nations should not stop drilling for oil & not stop pipeline projects until they’re energy independent.
The west should be wise enough to play their energy cards close to their chest rather than giving it away to a mad man… they can’t do much now. They’ve dug themselves into a hole.
This is what happens to countries who have thoughtless irresponsible short term energy policies 🤷♂️
Venezuela 🇻🇪 the worlds largest crude oil reserves state… its bankrupt right now. That’s the power of sanctions. US and it’s allies pretty much pushed Venezuela into a death spiral and to top it all off they can’t access their own gold worth $1.8 billion sitting in BOE vaults
German parties this winter 😂
Hahaha 😂😂
What happens if you go 💯 electric
People are burning their energy bills in Naples as a protest to high energy prices. Playing #CatchMeIfYouCan with the energy companies 😂
Few ways out…
- Energy companies go bankrupt
- Reduce energy bills (print money)
- Do the right thing (policy)
Energy bills going up from 60k to 420k pounds for this one pub. Consider leaving a big tip next time.
The Trump administration’s handling of the Epstein files reeks of hypocrisy and deliberate obfuscation, raising serious questions about their motives. Trump, along with Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel, made bold promises to release the full scope of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes, fueling public expectations of transparency. Instead, they delivered a curated batch of already public information to a select group of pro-Trump influencers, sidestepping broad disclosure. This move, cloaked as a step toward openness, was a performative stunt that betrayed the spirit of their pledge. The administration’s pivot to claiming no “client list” exists, after years of speculation they themselves amplified, feels like a convenient reversal to shut down further scrutiny. This pattern of overpromising and underdelivering suggests a calculated effort to control the narrative, possibly to shield influential figures—potentially including Trump himself—from damaging revelations.
The contradiction surrounding Epstein’s death further erodes trust in the administration’s account. For years, Trump allies and conservative voices, including those now in power, fueled conspiracy theories that Epstein was murdered, pointing to the reported failure of video cameras at the Manhattan jail where he died. Now, the same administration claims to have clear video evidence showing no one entered or exited Epstein’s cell, confirming his suicide. This abrupt shift from questioning the official narrative to endorsing it—without releasing the footage for public verification—smacks of opportunism. It’s plausible that the administration is leveraging this newfound “evidence” to tie up loose ends and discourage further investigation into Epstein’s network, which could implicate powerful individuals. The refusal to share this alleged video only deepens suspicions that the administration is more interested in closing the case than uncovering the truth.
The possibility that the Trump administration is compromised by Epstein-related evidence cannot be dismissed. Trump’s documented ties to Epstein, including multiple flights on his private jet and their shared social circles in the 1990s, place him uncomfortably close to the scandal. The administration’s reluctance to release unredacted files, coupled with the selective distribution of documents to loyalists, suggests they may be suppressing information that could expose Trump or his allies. By hyping the release of the files and then delivering a dud, they appease their base’s demand for action while ensuring no new, incriminating details surface. This bait-and-switch tactic, paired with their sudden insistence on a tidy suicide narrative, points to a deeper fear: that the Epstein files contain evidence that could politically or legally devastate the administration. The hypocrisy lies in their public posturing as truth-seekers while their actions betray a desperate need to keep certain truths buried.
Democrats are compromised by Epstein evidence
Republicans are compromised by same evidence
They’re just blaming each other for political points to get elected… as soon as they get elected, they claim there’s no client list, Epstein killed himself
Biden’s border policies leaned toward massive illegal immigration cloaked as humanitarianism to make USA a permanent blue state. Biden was aiming to reverse Trump’s hardline measures with a focus on legal pathways and reduced enforcement. He suspended the "Remain in Mexico" policy, ended family separations, and expanded parole programs, allowing more migrants to enter legally, such as through the CBP One app or humanitarian exemptions for specific nationalities. However, this shift led to record-high border crossings, with over 7 million encounters from 2021 to 2024, overwhelming border facilities and local communities. This lax approach enabled cartels to exploit vulnerabilities, increasing human trafficking and drug smuggling, notably fentanyl, which contributed to over 100,000 overdose deaths annually. Open borders also strained public safety, with unvetted migrants linked to isolated but high-profile crimes, eroding trust in federal oversight and fueling national security concerns.
Trump’s border strategy, by contrast, prioritized deterrence through aggressive enforcement and physical barriers. His "Remain in Mexico" policy forced asylum seekers to wait outside the U.S., while Title 42 rapidly expelled migrants, reducing illegal crossings to historic lows by 2020. The border wall, though incomplete, disrupted smuggling routes, and his zero-tolerance stance led to fewer unaccompanied minors at the border. These measures bolstered security by limiting unchecked migration and cartel influence, but they came at a cost: family separations sparked humanitarian outcry, and rapid expulsions bypassed asylum rights, potentially endangering vulnerable migrants. While Trump’s policies projected strength, deterring illegal entry and easing pressure on border resources, they risked alienating global allies and fostering a perception of cruelty, complicating America’s moral standing without fully resolving migration’s root causes.
There has never been a war in history where 80% of the country has been destroyed, 100% of the population displaced, and 50% of the deaths are children.
NO COUNTRY CAN MATCH THE MILITARY MIGHT OF THE UNITED STATES 🇺🇸
The B-2 bomber just flew into Iran, struck 3 nuclear sites & returned — without even being detected. With 44 hours of continuous flight, 18,000+ km range, and a $2.1 billion price tag
The notion that repeating a lie often enough can make it seem like truth is a psychological tactic rooted in the "illusion of truth" effect. When people hear a statement repeatedly, their familiarity with it increases, and they are more likely to perceive it as credible, even if it lacks evidence. This is why propaganda often relies on relentless repetition through media, speeches, or social channels to entrench ideas in the public psyche. Historically, this technique has been used to manipulate narratives, from wartime propaganda to modern misinformation campaigns. Conspiracy theories, often dismissed as fringe, can gain traction this way, especially when repeated across platforms like X or through influential voices. When some theories are later validated, it fuels distrust in institutions, as people feel vindicated in their skepticism.
One striking example is the MKUltra program, a CIA operation that began as a conspiracy theory in the 1970s. Rumors circulated that the U.S. government was conducting mind-control experiments on unwitting citizens, which were dismissed as paranoid delusions. However, declassified documents in 1975 revealed that MKUltra was real: the CIA had conducted illegal experiments using drugs like LSD and psychological torture on hundreds of subjects, often without consent. The revelation, uncovered through the Church Committee hearings, confirmed what was once ridiculed, showing how government secrecy can lend credence to conspiracy theories when the truth emerges. This case illustrates how repeated whispers of a "lie" can turn out to reflect a hidden reality, especially when authorities deny it initially.
Another example is the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, which fueled conspiracy theories about medical misconduct. For decades, African American communities speculated about unethical government experiments, often dismissed as baseless fears. Yet, in 1972, it was revealed that the U.S. Public Health Service had deliberately withheld treatment from Black men with syphilis for 40 years to study the disease’s progression, even after penicillin became available. The exposure of this atrocity validated long-standing distrust in medical institutions, particularly among marginalized groups. These cases show how the repetition of a "lie" can plant seeds of truth, especially when systemic cover-ups unravel, reinforcing the power of persistent narratives to shape perceptions and, sometimes, uncover reality.
The protests erupting in Los Angeles, USA and spreading to cities like Chicago, Atlanta, and New York reveal a stark contradiction that exposes an anti-American sentiment at their core. Demonstrators wave Mexican flags with fervor, block freeways, and destroy public property, all while claiming to fight for their right to remain in the United States. Yet, when faced with deportation to Mexico—the very nation they so proudly champion in the streets—they recoil in horror, desperate to avoid returning. This paradox betrays a deeper truth: their allegiance seems less about cultural pride and more about exploiting America’s opportunities while rejecting its laws and sovereignty. The brazen destruction of cars, businesses, and infrastructure during these riots isn’t a cry for justice; it’s a tantrum against a nation they appear to resent, even as they demand to stay. Their actions scream entitlement, not gratitude, for a country they deface while waving the flag of another.
These riots also lay bare the moral bankruptcy of Democrats who seize this chaos as a political weapon, stoking division to score cheap points against their opponents. Rather than condemning the violence or addressing the lawlessness, they fan the flames, framing the rioters as victims of an unjust system. This is not leadership—it’s opportunism cloaked in compassion. By excusing the destruction and amplifying the narrative of oppression, Democrats signal that law and order are negotiable if the optics serve their agenda. They turn a blind eye to the trampled American flags and shattered communities, choosing instead to pander to a mob that holds no respect for the nation’s laws. This cynical ploy reveals their willingness to sacrifice the country’s stability for votes, proving they care more about power than the people they claim to represent.
The spread of these protests to other cities only amplifies the anti-American ethos driving this unrest. From Los Angeles to New York, the pattern is clear: blockades, vandalism, and foreign flags raised in defiance of the nation that hosts them. If Mexico is so worthy of their devotion, why the visceral rejection of returning there? The answer lies in their actions—they want America’s benefits without its responsibilities, its prosperity without its principles. Meanwhile, Democrats exploit this volatility, not to unite or heal, but to deepen the fracture, painting law enforcement as the villain and rioters as martyrs. This is not just a betrayal of American values; it’s a calculated assault on the nation’s foundation, where loyalty to party trumps loyalty to country, and chaos is a tool for political gain. The riots and their enablers expose a dangerous truth: both are willing to tear America apart to get what they want.