Trump threatens to Federalize DC
Elon musk just posted on X that a Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) employee had recently rushed to help a woman who was in danger of being assaulted in her car only to be beaten up by the gang of teenagers himself. It turns out that the ex-DOGE worker is Edward Coristine, also known as our beloved “Big Balls.”
Edward Coristine: AKA "Big Balls."
Coristine tried to protect a woman who's car was apparently being hijacked. It was a fairly savage beating, and DC has become a very savage place. It is after all a very lenient, progressive anti-Trump enclave. DC's juvenile arrest rate is nearly double the national average. Those who live there regularly report feeling unsafe, both on the metro and on the streets. Groups of violent teens threaten people with regularity and without fear. Despite the improvement that President Trump has made on crime, DC continues to be one of our most dangerous cities. For the most part, homicides declined in major U.S. cities, by more than 50% in some places during the first six months of the year.
Reports from 68 law enforcement agencies showed a 19% drop in homicides in the first six months of 2025 compared to the same period in 2024, according to stats compiled by the Major Cities Chiefs Association .
Why is DC still a place where people are afraid to walk down the street. Trump is right once again. It is time to federalize DC and make it safe and clean up the homelessness.
In other news:
Rwanda agreed to help Trump’s deportation efforts by accepting 250 illegal migrants deported from the US.
Attorney General Pam Bondi authorized a grand jury investigation into the Russia hoax.
Sen Adam Schiff is reportedly under federal investigation for alleged mortgage fraud after a federal housing agency sent a criminal referral to the Justice Department in May regarding the California Democrat’s ownership of a Maryland home.
As part of recent settlements, Columbia and Brown will give the Trump administration information about the race of applicants, as well as their test scores and grades.
Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein’s longtime associate, asked a federal judge to deny the government's request to unseal grand jury transcripts.
The House Oversight Committee subpoenaed the Justice Department for its files related to Epstein as well as issuing subpoenas for Bill & Hillary Clinton among others.
The gunman who killed four people in a Manhattan office building last week had a history of mental health problems, including at least one instance when police had him committed.
Stock in American Eagle rose by more than 20% yesterday.
The New York Post is planning on establishing a west coast version of its newspaper to be called the California Post.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
112 visitors
Good morning and welcome to the news.
Today is the 80th anniversary of the launching of the atomic bomb (August 6th, 1945)
The real tragedy is that the US allowed others to have access to such a weapon. Today we have to negotiate with terror states and Communist regimes simply because we allowed them to have nuclear weapons.
You've said a lot of crazy things but this is right up there. You do realize there are no patents on how to build a nuclear bomb, dont you? In large part the people who made the first atomic bomb were educated in European universities. Hostile European countries like Russia would have gotten the bomb sooner or later, as well as China, etc.
There is one thing that is true - the use of the atomic bombs in Japan have served as a warning to all the nations on earth as to the reasons they should never be used again.
You do realize that Israel and the US have taken out nuclear sites in the middle east, right?
Syria and Iran do not have a nuclear weapon.
That is how it is done.
So you would bomb Russia and China , forever, when they started to go nuclear. And you think that is feasible in the real world?
Yes, I would have bombed their nuclear sites.
The world would have been a better place.
Just one man's opinion.
That is because they didnt have competitive militaries that could defend their nuclear research. In 1945 the American people were tired of war. Thousands and thousands of American pilots and crews had died in the skies over Europe and Japan, and you think people would have been happy with immediately starting a new war with Russia ? That is crazy.
Neither does anyone without nuclear deterrence. They didn't get the chance.
In 1945 the American people were tired of war.
Yes, I'm sure that was the guiding motivation for most of Truman's policies and the reason he fired a General. He also demobilized the US military in rapid time.
Thousands and thousands of American pilots and crews had died in the skies over Europe and Japan, and you think people would have been happy with immediately starting a new war with Russia ?
Russia lost far more not only in lives, but their country was in ruin. We had nuclear bombs, and they showed us they had one. I doubt they would have gone to war then with a nuclear power. Instead, we had a president go along with them taking land from various countries, especially Poland and exerting influence over most of eastern Europe. Truman bought Stalin's promises. How did Truman put it years later: "That son of a bitch lied to me."
That is crazy.
No, it isn't. It is an opinion.
If we bombed Russia right after world war two, would we have then been at war with them?
There is no way in hell the American people would have supported that.
A single strike would have been accepted.
They accepted the Korean War, didn't they?
A single strike would not have prevented Russia or China from building nuclear weapons.
You mean they would keep building sites, and we would keep destroying them?
That seems to be kind of expensive.
Wait.... you think we could have launched an airstrike on a Soviet base in Sarov?
In 1949?
From where? Using what?
But did we really?
Seems like a bit of a stretch to claim "we" allowed them to have nuclear weapons. Could we have been better at protecting our secrets? Clearly. But that's far from "allowing" anything.
Putin considers stopping Ukraine air attacks to placate Trump:
"Russian dictator Vladimir Putin is reportedly mulling an air truce with Ukraine to halt its record-breaking drone and missile bombardments as a key concession to President Trump ahead of his Friday deadline to make peace."
Putin considers stopping Ukraine air attacks to placate Trump: reports
Bla bla bla.
We do have people who deal with that.
My job is NEWS.
Sounds lime you have something against Ukraine?
Why is that? Is it that you believe, like when the war first started, that leftists cheered the demise of Ukraine because they said the country was filled with nazis and white supremacists?
How have they dealt with Russia violating cease fires???
You misread what I said.
We have people who deal with Bla bla bla.
No I didn't. How did the "people who deal with it" handle Russia violating cease fires???
Ask her.
"Trump-Modi bromance sours over trade talks, Russian oil."
"India fired back at the United States after President Trump pledged to increase tariffs on New Delhi over the country’s purchase of Russian oil.
In a statement Monday , India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said the purchase of Russian oil is a “necessity” to “ensure predictable and affordable energy costs” and was once “encouraged” by the U.S. “for strengthening global energy markets stability.”
India fires back at US over Russian oil tariff threats
Odd. I was told for years that trump worked for Putin and now he’s punishing countries for doing business with Russia? How is that possible?
(D)epends on the narrative of the hour.
It got us distracted from Hillary's private e-mails. Wasn't that the goal?
That is what the emails released revealed.
A recent poll has revealed that 54% of likely U.S. voters believe that members of former President Barack Obama’s national security team likely committed crimes by promoting a false narrative about Donald Trump’s ties with Russia.
Rasmussen Reports conducted a national telephone and online survey of 1,172 U.S. likely voters last week, inquiring about the following questions:
1. How closely have you followed recent news about investigations of national security during the Obama administration?
2. A recent report from the Director of National Intelligence concluded that President Obama’s national security team manipulated and manufactured intelligence to promote a false narrative about Russia and Donald Trump. How likely is it that Obama administration officials committed serious crimes in manipulating intelligence?
3. Do you agree or disagree with this statement about the manipulation of intelligence in the Obama administration: “Accountability has to take place. … It is critical for the survival of our country that people who perpetrate such crimes are held accountable?”
The poll found that among the 54% that consider it “likely” that Obama’s team committed serious crimes, 37% consider it “very likely.” 41% don’t think it’s likely, including 28% who answered “not at all likely.”
“86% of Republicans, 59% of Democrats and 62% of unaffiliated voters at least somewhat agree with the Gabbard quote about how important it is ‘that people who perpetrate such crimes are held accountable,’” the Rasmussen analysis reported. Meanwhile, 69% of participants in the Rasmussen survey—more than two-thirds—agreed with the idea that there must be accountability for the crimes committed, siding with the Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. The poll followed a White House press briefing led by Gabbard and White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on July 23rd. During the briefing, Gabbard summarized the House Intelligence Committee’s 2020 report, which revealed that Putin’s primary aim was undermining faith in the U.S.’s democracy rather than favoring any particular candidate."
69% Agree: ‘RussiaGate’ Requires Accountability - Rasmussen Reports®
I would bet that no more than a tenth of that 54% could explain the so called Russia hoax , in any detail whatsoever , even if their lives depended on it.
I think the vast majority of people now know that the Clinton campaign created the hoax and the FBI & CIA & the msm perpetuated it.
It was fairly simple.
To the dumbasses of the world, that may be true. There was no "Russia hoax", the Russians wanted to influence the election in Trumps favor, that is why they offered hacked Hillary Clinton (John Podesta) and DNC emails to Wikileaks to disseminate. Russia disseminating such material themselves would have been extremely problematic. The Trump campaign , including Roger Stones attempts to co-ordinate Wikileaks dump with Trump campaign desires in terms of timing , welcomed the Russian meddling. Donald trump Jr accepted a very specific Russian offer of "dirt" on Hillary Clinton, and went so far to physically meet with someone that he was told represented the Russian government. There was no "Russia hoax".
There was the Steele Dossier that did not pan out.
Lie # 1
that is why they offered hacked Hillary Clinton (John Podesta) and DNC emails to Wikileaks to disseminate.
Anyone could have got into them. They used an unsecured server. The password was "password."
welcomed the Russian meddling.
Lie # 2
Donald trump Jr accepted a very specific Russian offer of "dirt" on Hillary Clinton, and went so far to physically meet with someone that he was told represented the Russian government.
That is true, but irrelevant. The Clinton campaign actively sought dirt on Trump from anyone, including Russian actors. In the end the Clinton campaign paid for a made-up dossier and got the media to perpetrate the myth. Obama got his Intel chiefs to put forward a BS CIA analysis.
There was the Steele Dossier that did not pan out.
The fake Steele Dossier was used by the CIA, FBI and everyone else to obtain warrants and investigate Trump. And they knew it was fake.
Dont ever join a debating society.
No John, I don't need a debating society experience to defeat people who hang on to debunked stories.
Even if you disregard all the other evidence, you must at least admit that:
1. Russia wanted to undermine American democracy and targeted our 2016 election.
2. Based on the evidence, and Putin's own words, Russia put most of its resources behind attacks on Hillary and offered the Trump campaign aid whether or not you believe they accepted it or not.
Conclusion: It doesn't matter whether Russia attacked Hillary and offered aid to Trump simply because they wanted to undermine our election process or if they had some secret connection to Trump with actual quid pro quo as some liberals feared, the results were the same which was that Russia accomplished what they set out to do. They got into conservative's heads and undermined our Democracy and they're still doing it. Conservatives blaming Democrats for being easy targets is only helping Russia in its goal to undermine western democracy.
Case in point.
Nothing so far in anything Gabbard has released undermines the totality of the findings in the Republican Senate investigation that concluded, yes , the " Trump campaign chairman had regular contact with a Russian intelligence officer and says other Trump associates were eager to exploit the Kremlin’s aid , particularly by maximizing the impact of the disclosure of Democratic emails hacked by Russian intelligence officers. " Senate panel finds Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. election | PBS News
What a cop out. First you try calling verified facts "lies", now you're just dismissing as irrelevant admitted proven facts that completely shred your previous claim of "Lie". Perhaps you mistakenly think putting the word "Lie" in bold would make it true, but no matter how much you wish it, no matter how much you squeeze your eyes shut and flex your neck muscles, that just isn't happening.
That's just stupid. They said they didn't, you don't trust them, and now you believe your "sources" aka the bottomless rectum that is rightwing conservative rag media and claim the Steele Dossier was somehow "the thing" that allowed the investigation. The Republican led Senate Investigation has NOT been debunked, the findings are still valid. They found many other legitimate reasons which were the reasons used to proceed with the investigation.
Look, I get it, you're desperate to defend Trump and rightwing conservatism. You're desperate to find anything you can use to attack your mortal enemies the Democrats. Like a public defense attorney, you're trying your best to reject the overwhelming evidence against your client and pointing to the bloody glove of the Steele Dossier and screaming "If the glove don't fit, you must acquit!". But even you must realize that the Republican led Senate investigation found a LOT of shit the Trump campaign did wrong and they found a LOT of connections to Russia and intentional interference which, whether they cared about the candidate or not, ended up favoring Trump and Trump himself openly welcomed their interference. "Russia, if you're listening...". How can that not bother the shit out of you? That's YOUR chosen candidate begging Russia for help in his first campaign for President. I'm not sure how anyone can pretend to be a patriotic American and not be extremely bothered by that.
"It doesn't matter" might be the dumbest rationalization yet for democrats lying about collusion. Just perfect.
The single fact that so many lies were attached to and the fallback point for the defenders of the conspirators. The Russians never could hope to undermine democracy the way Brennan, Clapper and Comey did.
2. Based on the evidence, and Putin's own words, Russia put most of its resources behind attacks on Hillary and offered the Trump campaign aid whether or not you believe they accepted it or not.
What evidence?
How about the evidence that had been hidden for so long: The creation of the Intelligence Community Assessment of 2017, in which then-CIA Director John Brennan pushed for the inclusion of the now-discredited anti-Trump dossier, despite knowing it was based largely on "internet rumor."
First you try calling verified facts "lies", now you're just dismissing as irrelevant admitted proven facts that completely shred your previous claim of "Lie". Perhaps you mistakenly think putting the word "Lie" in bold would make it true, but no matter how much you wish it, no matter how much you squeeze your eyes shut and flex your neck muscles, that just isn't happening.
Saying that Russia meddled in order to help Trump is a lie. They meddled but not on behalf of Trump. Saying that Trump welcomed Russian meddling is also a lie. If you notice those claims can never legitimately be backed up. Claiming that Donald Trump Jr was willing to meet with people who claimed to have dirt on Hillary is irrelevant especially when people presenting that as an argument ignore the fact that Hillary Clinton ACTUALLY DID SOLICITE anyone who could produce dirt on Trump whether it was real or imagined.
They said they didn't, you don't trust them
We have a confession from Kevin Clinesmith (FBI attorney) that they did exactly that. Where have you been?
I'm not sure how anyone can pretend to be a patriotic American and not be extremely bothered by that.
As I have told another here: Your beliefs are being challenged, and we are reaching the turning point.
Total nonsense.
Fact Check: Is the Russian hoax real?
1. Summary of the results
The analyses reveal a deeply polarized debate about Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election, with sources presenting fundamentally contradictory conclusions. Sources supporting the "hoax" narrative include Fox News reports claiming the Obama administration "manufactured and politicized" intelligence to create a false narrative about Russian election interference [1] . These sources quote Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard describing a "treasonous conspiracy" by Obama-era officials to enact a "years-long coup" against President Trump [1] . Sources contradicting the "hoax" claim provide substantial evidence of actual Russian interference. The FBI documented a federal grand jury indictment against 12 Russian military intelligence officers for their alleged roles in interfering with the 2016 elections [2] . Multiple investigations reached the same conclusion about Russia's influence and motives [3] . The Cato Institute analysis concludes that the Durham probe "failed to provide evidence of a 'hoax' or 'witch hunt'" and found no evidence supporting claims that the investigation was a hoax or that Trump was the victim of a conspiracy [4] .
2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints
The original question lacks crucial context about the specific investigations and their findings. The analyses reveal that President Donald Trump and his supporters frequently use the term "Russia hoax" to downplay or deny investigation findings, characterizing them as baseless or politically motivated [5] . Key missing context includes:
Financial and political beneficiaries of each narrative include:
3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement
The phrasing "Is the Russian hoax real?" contains inherent bias by accepting the premise that Russian interference investigations constitute a "hoax." This framing mirrors language used by Trump and his supporters to characterize legitimate investigations as fraudulent [5] . The question fails to distinguish between:
The analyses suggest that while there may have been procedural issues with some aspects of the investigations, the underlying evidence of Russian interference remains substantiated by federal indictments and multiple independent assessments [2] [4] . The term "hoax" appears to be a politically motivated characterization rather than an accurate description of documented Russian activities.
This gives us a good indication of the percentage of likely U.S. voters who have their heads up their own ass. Just because a bunch of stupid people believe in complete nonsense doesn't magically change it into truth.
Maybe it proves what Lincoln said about trying to fool the people.
"Residents of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s congressional district slammed the lefty pol for ignoring a crime-plagued strip while sending a newsletter reminding locals they could list “X” as their gender on passports.
Shop owners and residents along the Roosevelt Avenue corridor in Queens — nicknamed “The Market of Sweethearts” — have criticized the liberal darling for ignoring quality-of-life issues in the area she represents while chasing national attention."
Exclusive | AOC blasted for ignoring crime-plagued strip in her district while pushing 'X' gender option in newsletter
Yet she will probably get voted in again.
The 14th Congressional District is an odd mix. I'm not condemning them. They need to show up for primaries.
She's a glass of water in a democratic district. People get what they vote for.
Her victory was decided in the primary, where progressives are most likely to show up. Once she won that the (D) behind her name took the general election.
JUST IN:
Trump raises tariffs on India by 25 percent over Russian oil purchases.
Trump raises tariffs on India by 25 percent over Russian oil purchases
I don't agree with this. I don't think tariffs should be used to try and get a country to bend to your will unless it is specific to finance. Donald is putting India in a shitty situation. Rather than just punish them try to work a deal where they can get their oil elsewhere.
This comes under the category of a secondary tariff. Those can be damaging. Trump doesn't want anyone buying Russian oil.
[deleted][✘]
I think it has to be placed under federal control. It is too far gone.
I think that would be a terrible visual and will give the dems a chance to play the victim which is right in their wheelhouse. The mean part of me says let them burn it down until the voters are tired of it.
As I understand it, it can only be done by Congress and I'm sure the Democrats would block any such action. By statute, the U.S. attorney (who is appointed by the President and confirmed by the US Senate) is responsible for prosecuting both federal crimes and all serious crimes committed by adults in the District of Columbia. So if criminals are getting off easy, that would be on the citizens who make up juries for such trials. It would appear that the people are getting what they want.
Not sure that there is much that Trump can do other than bitch on social media.
That is another problem. I feel like I'm an indicting an entire city population, and I am.
Who buys the dems BS anymore?
They're not. I was there less than 60 days ago. People on the street everywhere.
Um, where is my check?
Too bad he didn't do that for the January 6th rioters who stormed the Capitol.
He pardoned the whole lot of those criminals and has even proposed paying them instead of letting the court damages imposed on them to be paid back for trashing the U.S. Capitol.
No amount of gold leaf paint can wash away that travesty.
If you look at crime in DC it seems to have risen in his second term or they are amplifying incidents in spite of lower crime simply to enact dictator tactics of a police state.
The police arrested some teens so crazy Musk and his sensationalist pandering doesn't match the reality of the incident.