Politicians routinely lie, hide facts, evade taxes, help their kin with lucrative contracts. Media is complicit mostly because of the negative repercussions they might have to face.
They falsify / hide records, they blame things on opponents. A 🧵 for your awareness👇
If you’re holding the most powerful position on earth, don’t be like this guy. Mr. Biden needs an elderly care home or a hospital more than the Oval Office at the White House.
To carry out the daily tasks, he needs mental & physical fitness. Stop 2024.
Simple questions:
- why do we have so many pedophiles and womanizers in Washington DC
- why are our tolerance levels so high with these morons in high posts
- why are the media houses and journalists silent on these crimes
Isn’t it ironic to hear the corrupt standing for fighting the corruption
It’s like FBI investigating their own corruption crimes and finding nothing
If only it was this easy to change & rewrite the constitution, every president would do it in USA too
Time would never consider anyone worthy like @elonmusk anyway
As long as you have elite pedophiles, adulterers and incestuous people in the Washington DC swamp… they don’t have any moral high ground to virtue signal anyone else.
For Biden (Brittney >> Paul)
Rate the trade 1-10 😂
Biden family is a laughingstock for the USA… the whole world actually 😂
Tulsi Gabbard: One of the main reasons I left the Dem Party is because of their obsession with race, sexuality & other externals instead of merit. America is the greatest country in world because it’s a meritocracy, not because of superficials.
Sam Brinton our favorite Biden appointed nuclear energy guy makes a salary of $178,063 per year.
Why does he keep stealing luggages across airports?
IS HE A HABITUAL THIEF, GO TO THERAPY, GET HELP DUDE
Now that #TwitterFiles exposed all their corrupt practices, democrats get to enjoy freedom 😂
“And I grew strong
And I learned how to get along
And so you're back
From outer space
I just walked in to find you here with that sad look upon your face”
Crime statistics stand as irrefutable pillars of truth, drawn from meticulously documented police reports, arrests, and victim surveys compiled by agencies like the FBI and Bureau of Justice Statistics, offering a clear lens into societal realities without bias or agenda. For instance, data reveals that Black males aged 14-49, comprising just 3% of the U.S. population, are responsible for 43% of all murders, a stark disparity rooted in verifiable trends from 1980-2008 and echoed in more recent FBI Uniform Crime Reports showing Black offenders accounting for over 50% of homicides despite being 13% of the population. These numbers aren't fabricated; they're cross-verified through methods like the Supplementary Homicide Reports and National Crime Victimization Survey, exposing patterns that demand attention rather than denial, such as the overrepresentation in violent crimes that persists across decades and guides effective policy when embraced honestly.
Yet, governments and officials often undermine this objectivity by manipulating data or reshaping narratives to fit political ideologies, eroding public trust and hindering real solutions. Examples abound, from the Biden administration's claims of historic crime lows based on selective FBI stats later criticized as misleading, to investigations into D.C. police allegedly altering felony classifications to downplay crime rates, and New York PD's documented pressure on officers to underreport incidents for favorable optics. Such efforts, often driven by a reluctance to address uncomfortable racial disparities, only perpetuate cycles of violence by diverting focus from root causes like socioeconomic factors and urban decay, proving that twisting the truth serves no one and stalls progress toward safer communities.
A thread on three letter agencies and their subordination to political narratives👇
Lip reading, often portrayed in media as a foolproof method for deciphering spoken words from visual cues alone, falls far short of reliability when used as primary evidence in criminal cases. The human mouth produces visually similar movements for numerous words and sounds—consider how "pat," "bat," and "mat" appear nearly identical on the lips—leading to error rates that can exceed 50% even among trained professionals. Factors such as poor lighting, camera angles, facial obstructions like beards or masks, accents, or rapid speech further exacerbate inaccuracies, turning what might seem like clear footage into a guessing game. Studies from organizations like the National Deaf Children's Society highlight that lip reading is context-dependent and subjective, with interpreters potentially injecting unconscious bias or misinterpreting non-verbal cues, rendering it unsuitable as standalone proof of guilt in high-stakes legal proceedings.
In courtrooms, where evidence must meet rigorous standards of admissibility and scientific validity, relying on lip reading as the main pillar of a prosecution risks miscarriages of justice. Legal precedents, such as those in U.S. cases invoking the Daubert standard, emphasize that expert testimony must be based on testable, peer-reviewed methods with known error rates—criteria lip reading often fails to satisfy due to its interpretive nature and lack of standardization. Courts in the UK and elsewhere have similarly dismissed or heavily scrutinized lip reading evidence, noting its vulnerability to challenge and the potential for alternative explanations. Ultimately, elevating such a flawed technique to primary status undermines the principle of "beyond a reasonable doubt," inviting appeals, wrongful convictions, and eroded public trust in the justice system; it should instead serve, at best, as corroborative support alongside more robust forensic or auditory evidence.
In the shadowed annals of empire, the invasion of Iraq revealed the blueprint: invent an existential threat, amplify it through every megaphone of power, then unleash hell under the banner of salvation. Weapons of mass destruction—those ghostly specters that never materialized—served as the perfect phantom, terrifying enough to silence dissent yet vague enough to evade accountability when the lie collapsed. The true prize was never aluminum tubes or yellowcake; it was the second-largest proven oil reserves on Earth, waiting to be liberated from a dictator and delivered into the hands of Western corporations. The war was sold as a moral crusade, but the receipts came later in the form of no-bid contracts and decades of guaranteed crude flowing through friendly pipelines.
Venezuela now stands in the crosshairs of the same script, only the boogeyman has been rebranded for a new century. Where once we feared mushroom clouds, we are now instructed to tremble before weapons of mass intoxication—tons of cocaine allegedly funneled through Caracas by a regime painted as the kingpin of global narco-terrorism. The opioid crisis ravaging American towns becomes the emotional battering ram, the humanitarian catastrophe of Venezuelan migrants the moral veneer, while the real objective glitters beneath the Orinoco Belt: the largest oil reserves on the planet, currently outside the grip of ExxonMobil and Chevron. The pattern is identical—demonize, destabilize, invade or install a compliant regime—only this time the pretext is not yellowcake but white powder, and the war will be waged not with tanks rolling across the desert but with sanctions, proxy forces, and perhaps, when the moment is ripe, a "limited intervention" to stop the drugs and secure the wells. History does not repeat; it simply changes costumes.