Althouse: Sunrise — 6:52, 7:18, 7:22.

October 20, 2025

Sunrise — 6:52, 7:18, 7:22.

Write about whatever you want.

And thanks to everyone who uses Amazon going in through my link — here. I appreciate the encouragement!

97 comments:

narciso said...: https://scitechdaily.com/?p=498214; 10/20/25, 7:27 PM
Iman said...: Someone needs to remind members of Congress that they are not leaders, specifically, they are NOT our leaders, they are the peoples’ representatives.; 10/20/25, 7:32 PM
Inga said...: Not so Young Republicans…

Paul Ingrassia, President Donald Trump’s embattled nominee to lead the Office of Special Counsel, told a group of fellow Republicans in a text chain the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday should be “tossed into the seventh circle of hell” and said he has “a Nazi streak,” according to a text chat viewed by POLITICO.

Ingrassia, who has a Senate confirmation hearing scheduled Thursday, made the remarks in a chain with a half-dozen Republican operatives and influencers, according to the chat.

.“MLK Jr. was the 1960s George Floyd and his ‘holiday’ should be ended and tossed into the seventh circle of hell where it belongs,” Ingrassia wrote in January 2024, according to the chat.

Using an Italian slur for Black people, Ingrassia wrote a month earlier in the group chat seen by POLITICO: “No moulignon holidays … From kwanza [sic] to mlk jr day to black history month to Juneteenth,” then added: “Every single one needs to be eviscerated.”

POLITICO interviewed two people in the chat and granted them anonymity after they expressed concerns about personal and professional repercussions. One retained the messages and showed the text chain in its entirety to POLITICO, which independently verified that the number listed on the chain belongs to Ingrassia. The person said he came forward because he wants “the government to be staffed with experienced people who are taken seriously.” The second person has since deleted the chain and didn’t recall specifics about it, but did confirm the discussions took place.“

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/20/paul-ingrassia-racist-text-messages-nazi-00613608?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR7-gNfneXjdqC91WnDl-eVzq3tk_NblqsSoP5GoTRFfwa9pqYdFdbjngVq6Sw_aem_lksl4IIHa7f0KaCP7TVoDA; 10/20/25, 7:33 PM
Aggie said...: Thus perpetuating the contention that whenever a Republican utters the word 'Nazi', it invariably is a declaration of identity, whereas when a Democrat utters the word 'Nazi', it invariably is an accusation directed at a Republican.; 10/20/25, 7:36 PM
narciso said...: That looks legit lol; 10/20/25, 7:41 PM
Beasts of England said...: Love the smooth gradients in the top photo… :); 10/20/25, 7:47 PM
narciso said...: Longer lense on the first picture?; 10/20/25, 7:49 PM
narciso said...: https://x.com/i/status/1979270999041343640; 10/20/25, 7:50 PM
narciso said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 10/20/25, 7:51 PM
narciso said...: https://theaviationist.com/2025/10/13/a-10-uas-kill-markings/; 10/20/25, 7:54 PM
Inga said...: Trump is demolishing the East Wing of the White House to build a ballroom. What a shame.; 10/20/25, 8:08 PM
Peachy+2 said...: Progress more like.
Nothing in those images appears architecturally interesting.; 10/20/25, 8:15 PM
Peachy+2 said...: Jay Jones(D) said what?
The left stand by /promote (then deny) Leftist authoritarian antifa thugs and the left are Charlie Kirk assassination builders - but Fuentes and politico's access to internal chats.; 10/20/25, 8:17 PM
Aggie said...: Inga, we already know you object. It's associated with Trump, so of course whatever it is, you are against it. But: Tell us philosophically, intellectually, morally, why you object.; 10/20/25, 8:19 PM
Breezy said...: Are we really going to have text thread wars now? Do people really think those of Jay Jones, VA AG wannabe, can be matched and cancelled out?; 10/20/25, 8:23 PM
Peachy+2 said...: The corrupt left are desperate to find something worse than Jay Jones. Good luck.; 10/20/25, 8:25 PM
Peachy+2 said...: Good News, Inga. You can join Joe Walsh and bring your crowbar.; 10/20/25, 8:30 PM
hanuman_prodigious_leaper said...: @Inga said... asking for future Americans ... need there be any concern about asbestos or lead paint in East Wing?; 10/20/25, 8:32 PM
RCOCEAN II said...: One retained the messages and showed the text chain in its entirety to POLITICO, which independently verified that the number listed on the chain belongs to Ingrassia. The person said he came forward because he wants “the government to be staffed with experienced people who are taken seriously.”

Gordon Wax.; 10/20/25, 8:35 PM
Beasts of England said...: ’ You can join Joe Walsh and bring your crowbar.’

Is he bringing The James Gang, too? Because that would be groovy…; 10/20/25, 8:35 PM
Iman said...: Dickhead Gavy!

https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/1979734164141465630?s=19; 10/20/25, 8:36 PM
RCOCEAN II said...: Jason Beeferman = friend of Wax from NYC; 10/20/25, 8:36 PM
Mason G said...: "The corrupt left are desperate to find something worse than Jay Jones."

They don't have mirrors, apparently.; 10/20/25, 8:37 PM
Jaq said...: " Tell us philosophically, intellectually, morally, why you object."

"You are a stupid poopy head," she explained.; 10/20/25, 8:41 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: "Bari Weiss asked ‘60 Minutes’ senior staffers why the country thinks they’re biased"

That must've left a mark.; 10/20/25, 8:42 PM
Eva Marie said...: Scott Adams’ verdict: if the Democrats were trying to win back voters they lost - Hispanics, Blacks, men - then No Kings Day was a disaster. It’s possible though, they’re just trying to hold on to the base they have left. Inga, turn off the lights please, when you leave.; 10/20/25, 8:47 PM
Mason G said...: D.C. Resident is Shocked That Trump Was Able to Make Democrat Cities Safe Again

DAVID SACKS: “Trump just did it with a stroke of a pen. This is a choice. We don't have to live this way.”

https://x.com/TheChiefNerd/status/1980250647250247797; 10/20/25, 8:53 PM
Jaq said...: I really like their explanation why so few actual minorities are at the rallies. They said it was because these people lacked sufficient privilege to be able to attend these things, but you know what else is possible? These are the people most affected by massive immigration in the job market, and by crime, which the Q-Tips attending these rallies are insulated from by that very "privilege."; 10/20/25, 8:54 PM
Jaq said...: If you have enough verbal fluency, you can spin being utterly out of touch with the experiences of people unlike yourselves into frissons of self congratulatory bliss.; 10/20/25, 8:58 PM
Beasts of England said...: ’They said it was because these people lacked sufficient privilege to be able to attend these things…’

The price of privilege is sky high these days, so that makes sense. And it never goes on sale…; 10/20/25, 9:09 PM
Peachy+2 said...: speaking of poopy heads</a. some have squinty eyes.; 10/20/25, 9:20 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: CNN: "A Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling Monday will allow the Trump administration to deploy National Guard troops in Portland, saying it is likely to succeed on its appeal of an order that blocked the deployment."

AI: "The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has historically been considered liberal-leaning, largely due to the majority of its judges being appointed by Democratic presidents since 1998"

Conclusion: No Kings was a bust.; 10/20/25, 9:33 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: My friend Kevin's theory that the Mariners wining over the Jays was a better fit for Madison Ave is on the line tonight.

Mariners 3 - Blue Jays 4 - Bottom of the 8th.; 10/20/25, 9:40 PM
FullMoon said...: If Paul Ingrassia actually was stupid enough to text the things he is accused of, he needs to give it up.; 10/20/25, 9:41 PM
Mason G said...: "saying it is likely to succeed on its appeal of an order that blocked the deployment."

Trump delayed deployment awaiting a court ruling on an appeal?

Worst. Dictator. Ever.; 10/20/25, 9:43 PM
Derve said...: You go, proffY!
(Do you appreciate the encouragement, or just cold hard cash laundered through amazon? Words matter! lol... silly proffy, you could likely never spend everything you have... but the boys! You single moms always grab for more b/c... you have to support the cheeeldren and who ever will help you? Hit m' tip jar.. I'm a single mom you know! Did you take up a waitress job in law school while you were pregnant to get the extra tips too? Ingenius! Hope you make your goal selling the idea that gay men are manly b/c what is more masculine than two guys having sex without a woman? lol... I think you believe this now that Chrissy has gone over to the other side. Good night, hope you hit your goal and can afford a trip outside madison again.); 10/20/25, 9:44 PM
FullMoon said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 10/20/25, 9:45 PM
FullMoon said...: Neo. worth a look. Links there to commenter huxley worth a minute as well.May 1972. Three members of the Japanese Red Army recruited by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine attacked Lod Airport … near Tel Aviv, killing 26 people and injuring 80 others. .; 10/20/25, 9:49 PM
FullMoon said...: Convicted terrorist gets special help wiping his ass via Federal JudgeA federal judge agreed to consider “whether defendants have substantially burdened the exercise of Mr. Mostafa’s religion by limiting him to use a bidet to clean himself.” That same judge ruled that “Mr. Mostafa has demonstrated that forcing him to be housed in a cell where he lacks a means of ritually cleaning himself places a substantial burden on the exercise of his religion” and that the prison must install a bidet in both of Hamza’s prison cells, not just one. .; 10/20/25, 9:59 PM
Michael Fitzgerald said...: Renovating the White House has pretty recent precedent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Reconstruction; 10/20/25, 10:07 PM
Maynard said...: We already know you are a hoaxer and a freaking nutcase Igna. Yet, you have to constantly reinforce that with your bleatings.

She is the Party base folks.; 10/20/25, 10:25 PM
Yancey Ward said...: Trump delayed deployment awaiting a court ruling on an appeal?

Worst. Dictator. Ever.

He is just a king, not a dictator.; 10/20/25, 10:32 PM
gadfly said...: Despite his pledge not to change the standing White House walls, the back wall of the East Wing is being ripped down to build a single ballroom that is expected to cost at least $250 million. There is no budget for this construction, and the government is closed down.

Fuck the people. The ballroom must be built for no reasonable purpose.; 10/20/25, 10:34 PM
Yancey Ward said...: Gadfly again shows that he is a complete fool. The renovation is being funded privately and the construction workers aren't government employees.; 10/20/25, 10:43 PM
Jim at said...: Yeah. You'd think some people would get tired of stepping on rakes. But, nope.; 10/20/25, 11:11 PM
gadfly said...: Yancey: The only fucking fool here is you. The same person who said the current structure would remain untouched - Donald Trump - is the same liar who claims that the ballroom will be paid for from private funds.; 10/21/25, 3:13 AM
Dan from Madison said...: I don't like these pictures either, and I probably never will.; 10/21/25, 3:59 AM
wendybar said...: No Gad. It's you. Cry a little harder. It is hilarious to read your idiotic takes every day. Never stop.; 10/21/25, 4:00 AM
Jim at said...: This is what they're reduced to.

Powerless, drifting aimlessly - with an unhealthy attachment to assassination chic - bitching about a fucking ballroom.; 10/21/25, 4:55 AM
Political Junkie said...: Chess player here.
You might have heard a prominent American chess grandmaster, Daniel Naroditsky, has died unexpectedly at 29. Cause of death unknown, presently.
He was a kind soul, great teacher and chess player, smart as hell, and will be greatly missed.
The shock reminds me of Len Bias passing in 1986 and Hank Gathers passing in 1990.
Chess players understand the pain of Daniel's unexpected passing.
Very, very sad.; 10/21/25, 4:57 AM
Leland said...: If the government is shutdown, the ballroom is using public funds, and the workers are thus government employed; then why is the botfly bitching that work is being done? It wouldn’t be done, because no one is getting paid. Unless, botfly is wrong.

Don’t really care. This is so unimportant. Since a line of Democrat leaders keep blocking access to these facilities from the public, while saying lies like “the peoples house”; only a few people will remember the East Wing Wall or enjoy the ballroom.; 10/21/25, 5:30 AM
Big Mike said...: Over at PowerLineblog John Hinderaker summarizes the weekend in a sentence: “Elderly white people protest against democracy.”; 10/21/25, 5:49 AM
Ronald J. Ward said...: Jaq @ 8:54 AM, that’s a clever narrative, but it misses the reality.

Minority turnout at large-scale protests often has less to do with “privilege” and more to do with risk. People who’ve already felt the weight of unequal policing or economic precarity can’t always take a day off, travel, or risk being misidentified in a crowd. That’s not “lack of interest”; it’s lived caution.

And it’s worth noting that many of the very issues driving No Kings — voting rights, abuse of executive power, erosion of civil protections — directly affect those same communities.

The people in the streets aren’t “Q-Tips insulated by privilege”; they’re citizens using theirs to push back before others lose theirs altogether.

If that sounds self-congratulatory, maybe it’s just because some of us still believe civic engagement is supposed to come from privilege — not hide behind it.; 10/21/25, 6:47 AM
Jaq said...: Like I said, Ronald, if you have enough verbal fluency, you can spin an explanation any way you want, but the ground truth is that these issues of mass illegal immigration and inner city crime don't hit rich old white people not needing jobs and living in safe neighborhoods in the same way that they hit minorities.

The days when the Democrats were the representatives of the working class are now long gone, the Democrats represent the little cabal of kings... err, excuse me, billionaire oligarchs who organized and funded these protests.; 10/21/25, 7:03 AM
Jaq said...: "“We would have enough votes” to reopen the government “if people were not terrified of getting the guillotine,” the second person said."

Wait, wut? "Guillotine"! Democrats are talking about guillotines, blood, heads literally rolling! Oh, it's a metaphor when Democrats say it.; 10/21/25, 7:06 AM
Jaq said...: Only a rich cosseted liberal could imagine that other people they don't actually know are perfectly happy living without law enforcement in a way that they would never consider.; 10/21/25, 7:09 AM
Jaq said...: never consider for themselves.; 10/21/25, 7:13 AM
Ronald J. Ward said...: Jaq, I don’t disagree that working people and minorities feel the hardest hits — that’s exactly why No Kings matters.

The real “cabal of oligarchs” isn’t funding protests; it’s funding politicians who bust unions, cut taxes for billionaires, and tell working people to blame immigrants for what corporate greed caused.

And calling that out isn’t “spin.” It’s just refusing to mistake populist slogans for working-class loyalty.; 10/21/25, 7:14 AM
Jersey Fled said...: You need to start your posts with your thesis (main idea) Inga, so we can figure out what you’re talking about. As I just did.

But I am impressed with your knowledge of Italian vegetables.; 10/21/25, 7:22 AM
narciso said...: We know its gonna be ridiculous just how much is the question; 10/21/25, 7:24 AM
Iman said...: No Kings is just comprised of halfwits acting out. Have some pity for them or relentlessly ridicule them… it doesn’t matter. It’s all the same.; 10/21/25, 7:37 AM
narciso said...: Its like waiting for guffman but less self aware; 10/21/25, 7:38 AM
narciso said...: As bill engvall would say 'theres your sign'; 10/21/25, 7:44 AM
Jaq said...: "it’s funding politicians who bust unions.."

Oh, I get it, you imagine that we could flood the US with cheap labor, but if they only belonged to unions, we could overrule the laws of economics.

What has destroyed union power in the US is that we moved our manufacturing base overseas, to benefit the billionaires, who didn't get rich "overpaying" for labor.

You can say that importing millions of cheap workers has no impact on employment, but that requires a faith in your unproven economic theories, and you can say that allowing millions to migrate here with no background checks of any kind, absolutely no vetting, would not tempt criminal gangs or lead to human trafficking, but once again, that's just some kind of bizarre faith on your part that bad people would turn down the opportunity to follow their victims here.

Where I live, in the spring, when openings start appearing in the ice, and the migrating ducks gather there, you can usually spot an eagle or two in the distance, following them, to prey on them. Well, when the victims of the gangs in South America come here, the gangs that prey on them are going to follow them here because of the same dynamic. And since these gang members tend to be brown, well, we aren't allowed to deal with them because that would be racist. Do I have that right?

I am just trying to understand why you think that economics doesn't apply, and why addressing criminal gangs is racist, even as the vast majority of the victims of these gangs are brown themselves.; 10/21/25, 7:46 AM
Jaq said...: BTW, the traditional economic approach taken by governments to protect jobs in their country, and keep them from moving overseas is.... wait for it.... tariffs.; 10/21/25, 7:47 AM
Jaq said...: Union rank and file are with Trump, because they haven't been bought off, the way their leaders have.; 10/21/25, 7:49 AM
Ronald J. Ward said...: Jaq, a few things to untangle there.

First, nobody serious argues that “economics doesn’t apply.” What I’m saying is that the way we apply it too often favors billionaire-owned corporations over working people. When we offshored manufacturing, it wasn’t because union wages made products unaffordable — it was because Wall Street demanded higher profits. The same executives who lobbied for cheap overseas labor now bankroll politicians who gut unions at home.

As for immigration, yes — there are real issues around border security and trafficking. But the idea that unions want “millions of unvetted migrants” is nonsense. Historically, unions have supported legal pathways and worker protections precisely because those keep labor markets fair. When workers — documented or not — can be exploited for pennies, it drives down everyone’s wages. That’s not about race; it’s about power.

And on tariffs: you’re right that they can protect domestic jobs — if they’re paired with policies that invest in American labor. But tariffs alone, without enforcing fair wages and union rights, just become another subsidy for corporate middlemen.

Union rank-and-file know who’s been on their side. They remember which politicians fought to raise wages, protect pensions, and fund the NLRB — and which ones broke strikes and handed tax cuts to the people who shipped their jobs overseas.

That’s not “bought off.” That’s paying attention.; 10/21/25, 7:58 AM
Jaq said...: "But the idea that unions want “millions of unvetted migrants” is nonsense."

Oh great, another Inga. When did I say that? Are you confused, or are you trying to confuse me with three card monte?

Nobody is more anti-Trump than the Wall Street Journal, BTW.

"it was because Wall Street demanded higher profits. The same executives who lobbied for cheap overseas labor now bankroll politicians who gut unions at home."

How is this different than what I am saying, these globalists have gutted the American economy, financialized it. There are more private equity firms in the US than branches of McDonalds. They are the same oligarchs to financed the "No Kings" rallies.

You should probably read my posts more than once, and with care, before responding to them, because I am starting to feel, like with Inga, that I am trying to shout across the Dunning Kruger thermocline, and the signal is not getting through, and while that has become abundantly clear with Inga, I think that the reason you have for not understanding what I am writing is likely emotional.

And Democrats have lost the Union vote to Trump because they know that the Democrats have given up on bringing manufacturing home.

"And on tariffs: you’re right that they can protect domestic jobs — if they’re paired with policies that invest in American labor."

This is more faith on your part. If you don't create the ground truth economic conditions, increased domestic manufacturing, no amount of "programs" are going to create union power, they are only going to create grifts for connected Democrats to keep their activists employed between elections.; 10/21/25, 8:08 AM
Aggie said...: "...CNN: "A Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling Monday will allow the Trump administration to deploy National Guard troops in Portland....."

This type of reporting has become commonly accepted, but I strongly object to it. It's wrong. The Court of Appeals allows nothing. The Court of Appeals does not have the power to grant permission, in my opinion. More properly stated, the Court of Appeals found no grounds within the law to prevent the President from exercising his powers, and that's what he's going to do. I wonder if CNN is trying to condition the public to think that the courts hold a final authority over what the President decides to do - but they are only a function that checks that it is within the law.; 10/21/25, 8:13 AM
narciso said...: Blake Neff on X: "Breaking: The no-confidence motion against Oxford Union President George Abaraonye has CARRIED by a vote of 1228-501, forcing Abaraonye’s automatic resignation. https://t.co/EbxNZDm09d" / X https://share.google/7Ts2bCfea2oLT2JYW; 10/21/25, 8:14 AM
William50 said...: Political Junkie said...

Chess player here.
You might have heard a prominent American chess grandmaster, Daniel Naroditsky, has died unexpectedly at 29. Cause of death unknown, presently.
----------------------
Did he get the jab?; 10/21/25, 8:26 AM
Mason G said...: "I wonder if CNN is trying to condition the public to think that the courts hold a final authority over what the President decides to do..."

While a Republican's in office? Nahhhh- they'd never do that.; 10/21/25, 8:48 AM
wildswan said...: King of No Kings
George $oros
King George IV; 10/21/25, 8:50 AM
lonejustice said...: Christopher Moynihan, one of the "peaceful" J6 protestors whom Trump pardoned, was arrested Sunday after saying in text messages that he planned to "eliminate" Jeffries when the top House Democrat spoke at an event in New York City on Monday.

Jeffries spoke at the Economic Club of New York on Monday.

According to a court filing by prosecutors in the New York state criminal case, Moynihan wrote, "Hakeem Jeffries makes a speech in a few days in NYC I cannot allow this terrorist to live. Even if I am hated, he must be eliminated, I will kill him for the future," the filing said.; 10/21/25, 8:55 AM
Ronald J. Ward said...: Jaq, you and I actually agree on more than you realize — which makes your tone all the more unnecessary.

You’re right that global financiers and private equity hollowed out American manufacturing for profit. That’s not in dispute. Where we differ is on who’s been trying to hold them accountable. Those same billionaire interests bankroll the politicians who oppose stronger unions, oppose higher wages, and oppose bringing supply chains home unless it’s heavily subsidized.

That’s not the “No Kings” crowd funding protests — that’s the donor class writing policy. The No Kings events were built around rejecting that kind of concentrated, unaccountable power — political and corporate alike.

And as for Democrats “losing” union workers, that narrative misses something: most union leadership and national membership surveys still show majority Democratic support. What’s grown is frustration — not because Democrats abandoned labor, but because billionaires have spent forty years convincing workers that their enemy isn’t the boardroom, it’s their neighbor.

That’s not emotion on my part. It’s economic arithmetic.; 10/21/25, 8:58 AM
FullMoon said...: Newsome turns down National Guard, sends Highway Patrol to L.A.; 10/21/25, 9:12 AM
Aggie said...: Broderick Crawford is on the way !; 10/21/25, 9:32 AM
Yancey Ward said...: Gadfly, I don't give a shit if the East Wing needs to get enlarged to hold a larger ballroom- your first comment questioned how it was being done with the government shut down and out of funds and I explained it to you. I take it you are denying it was the truth- so prove it, dumbass.; 10/21/25, 9:40 AM
Curious George said...: "Newsome turns down National Guard, sends Highway Patrol to L.A."

Ponch & Jon!; 10/21/25, 9:42 AM
Gospace said...: Ronald J. Ward said...
Jaq @ 8:54 AM, that’s a clever narrative, but it misses the reality.

Minority turnout at large-scale protests often has less to do with “privilege” and more to do with risk.

Why others avoid concerts and public celebrations on Martin Luther King Ave/Blvd/St, not matter what city it's in. Risk analysis.

Of course, that's a BS reason for minorities not attending a gathering consisting mostly of old white people. Not a lot of spontaneous violence breaks out at them.; 10/21/25, 10:06 AM
Jersey Fled said...: Fun fact of the day:

New England's six states vote about 40 percent Republican, and have zero republican representatives in Congress.; 10/21/25, 11:26 AM
Ronald J. Ward said...: Gospace, the difference is that for many minorities, “risk analysis” doesn’t start or end with whether a crowd might get rowdy — it’s about whether law enforcement will treat them as the rowdy ones.

When peaceful protesters — especially Black Americans — have seen tear gas, kettling, and disproportionate arrests for simply showing up, that shapes decisions about where and how to participate. It’s not fear of the crowd; it’s mistrust of how the system responds to that crowd.

And you’re right that “old white people” gatherings rarely erupt in violence — but they also rarely get policed like potential riots before they begin. That’s part of the very imbalance movements like No Kings are trying to bring into the open.; 10/21/25, 11:49 AM
Jaq said...: "That’s not the “No Kings” crowd funding protests "

Who is actually funding the "No Kings" protests, not who you seem to think, people have looked into it.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/fueled-billionaires-no-kings-prepares-color-revolution-style-mobilization-against-trump

It looks a lot like the "color revolutions" that these globalist billionaires have funded worldwide. They even fund the SPLC and guess what they get in return? A finding from the SPLC. that words like "globalist" are dog whistles for white supremacism.

There are a lot of layers, and unpacking them is fascinating. What these protests are about is to flood the US with cheap labor, which undermines unions, there is no way around it. If you think of the US border as a picket line and illegal migrants as scabs, it makes perfect sense. These migrants are willing to work for wages that US workers refuse. Plain and simple.

And as for risks, if you mean that illegals are shying away from attending protests about US politics, well cry me a river.; 10/21/25, 11:52 AM
Jaq said...: What is frustrating to me is that you keep blending my words together into things I never said and never meant to say. That's what brought up the comment about the signal just bouncing off of the D-K thermocline.; 10/21/25, 11:53 AM
Ronald J. Ward said...: Jaq, ZeroHedge isn’t exactly a neutral source — it’s been flagged repeatedly for laundering conspiracy narratives through pseudo-economic language. If you strip away the loaded phrasing, the funding story still doesn’t hold up: the No Kings events were organized largely by civic coalitions and grassroots networks that publish their finances openly.

The “color revolution” framing is clever propaganda, but it’s borrowed from the same Kremlin playbook that gets recycled every time citizens mobilize against an authoritarian figure — whether in Kyiv, Tbilisi, or Washington.

As for immigration and unions, history tells a different story. The biggest blows to organized labor haven’t come from immigrant workers but from deregulation, offshoring, and anti-union legislation funded by the same billionaire class you claim to oppose. Immigrants don’t write right-to-work laws; lobbyists do.

So, if you really see the border as a “picket line,” the people crossing it aren’t the scabs — they’re the ones being used as leverage by employers to keep all workers divided and underpaid. That’s the real con.; 10/21/25, 12:14 PM
narciso said...: So is the new york times purveyor of myriad conspiracies; 10/21/25, 12:47 PM
Ronald J. Ward said...: Narciso, that’s fair to ask — any outlet, left or right, can get things wrong. The difference is whether they correct errors, cite sources, and show their work.

When a claim rests on anonymous blogs or unverifiable leaks, skepticism is healthy.

When it’s backed by transparent reporting standards and accountability, that’s evidence — even if we don’t like the conclusion.

My point wasn’t that ZeroHedge is “bad” because it’s conservative, but because it repeatedly pushes unverified political narratives that never check out. That’s not journalism; it’s a dishonest strategy.; 10/21/25, 12:52 PM
narciso said...: Their printing presses are soaked in blood for stali. Castro mao et al; 10/21/25, 12:54 PM
Jaq said...: "Kremlin playbook..."

OMG. What has happened to the Democrats that they are all on board with war with Russia?

So, if you really see the border as a “picket line,” the people crossing it aren’t the scabs — they’re the ones being used as leverage by employers to keep all workers divided and underpaid. That’s the real con.

Isn't that pretty much what I just what I said? But the question is who invited them across the border in the millions to enable this? Who brings scabs in from out of town? Employers! Sure employers use the scabs, and they are scabs if they are taking jobs for lower wages than Americans are willing to do them for. You can't just spew some word salad and make my argument go away, you have to refute it.

You just grant them the same rights and privileges as American citizens because Joe Biden looked the other way as they crossed the border, totally unvetted, meaning, of course, that in their numbers are violent criminals. And before you go off on that, please look to the literal meaning of that sentence, don't "mind read" some dog whistle there because "only the Democrats" care about labor. That's simply not true.; 10/21/25, 1:33 PM
Ronald J. Ward said...: Jaq, I hear your point about employers and labor — yes, companies use immigration to lower costs, and that’s a real economic dynamic. That doesn’t refute what I said: immigrant workers themselves aren’t the “scabs” in a moral sense; they’re people trying to survive while being used as leverage.

The responsibility lies with policy and enforcement, not the individuals crossing borders. Painting them as criminals or inherently harmful is misleading — the majority are not violent, and most are seeking work and safety.

So if the question is “who invited them,” the real answer is the system and the employers exploiting it, not the workers themselves. Focusing on the people rather than the structures is exactly the kind of distraction No Kings is warning against.; 10/21/25, 1:46 PM
Jaq said...: So you reject out of hand Zerohedge's story. I assume that means you know where the money actually comes from, and have the evidence to back it up.; 10/21/25, 1:47 PM
Jaq said...: "immigrant workers themselves aren’t the “scabs” in a moral sense; they’re people trying to survive while being used as leverage."

Scabs always are. Who chooses to be a scab?

"The responsibility lies with policy and enforcement, not the individuals crossing borders. Painting them as criminals or inherently harmful is misleading — the majority are not violent, and most are seeking work and safety."

What does that have to do with whether they violated the law coming here illegally, which may not be violent, but it causes economic harm to working Americans, while enriching wealthy Americans who own business, who hire maids, cooks, and landscapers...

How do you keep a string of polo ponies if you have to pay health insurance, overtime, and give paid vacations to the boys in the barn taking care of the horses?

I love how you guys always seem to claim that factually, literally true statements are misleading because you mind read the people reading them, and knowing that they are bad people, in your mind, you assume the worsts with no evidence. It's called the "attribution fallacy," if you are interested.; 10/21/25, 1:53 PM
Ronald J. Ward said...: Jaq, good question — I don’t claim to have a certified list of every donor behind the No Kings protests. What I do know comes from the organizers themselves and credible reporting:
Organizers describe the movement as people-powered, emphasizing grassroots mobilization and city-level coalitions.
Press coverage highlights involvement by membership-based civic organizations like Indivisible, the ACLU, and other groups that are open about their operations.

Your ZeroHedge article makes a big claim about billionaire funding and “color revolution-style mobilization,” but it doesn’t provide verifiable sourcing — no audited accounts or named donors tied directly to the event logistics. Because of that, I treat it as a hypothesis, not confirmed fact. If you have concrete evidence — filings, audited records, or public donor disclosures — I’m happy to review them.

That said, the question of who funds a protest is separate from the message of the protest itself. Even if wealthy donors exist, that doesn’t automatically invalidate the concerns raised: citizens mobilizing to resist the concentration of executive power, protect the rule of law, and defend democratic norms is still a legitimate civic action.

So yes — funding transparency is important. But it doesn’t erase the core point of No Kings: executive overreach matters, the Constitution matters, and citizens acting to defend both is a discussion worth having.; 10/21/25, 1:55 PM
Jaq said...: There are eight billion people in the world? Is it our job to make sure that all of them are "safe"? Can we even do that? Isn't that the same kinds of arguments they use to get us involved in war after endless war? At some point, we have to accept that stuff happens, and that sometimes a sparrow will fall to the Earth, and there is nothing we can do about it.; 10/21/25, 1:56 PM
Jaq said...: Indivisible is the organization behind "No Kings" per their own website:

https://indivisibleteam.medium.com/the-strategic-logic-of-the-no-kings-protests-e92e9dd27465

Indivisible is an organization that would have to fold if it weren't funded by George Soros.

https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/grants/past?filter_keyword=indivisible

According to its website, in 2023, Indivisible received $14.0 million in total contributions, 23 percent of which came from “small dollar” donations. It also reports 73 percent of its funding came in the form of “major gifts” or from foundations. 38 Additionally, it reports that one of its donors consisted of 23 percent of its funding in 2023 and that same donor made up 14 percent of its revenue in 2022.

https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/the-indivisible-project-indivisible/

So most of its money comes from large donors. Its money comes preponderantly from large donors.

That's all the free research I am going to do for you, which is a lot considering you just quoted the AI summary of a search on donors. We all know that AI simply regurgitates the mainstream opinion, and the press, which is owned by billionaire oligarchs itself, is foursquare behind these "No Kings" protests, and so getting to the bottom of the funding is kind of low on their priority list.

I liked the old "Question Authority" left, better.; 10/21/25, 2:14 PM
Jaq said...: I used to post on some other website with the handle "The Deprogrammer" but it's just not worth it, most people do. not. want. to be shorn of their illusions, but if you could only see, you would see that you are being played into betraying American workers by the same billionaires who support these endless wars by convincing you that any questioning of the US war complex is "Kremlin disinformation."

It is really hard to accept that we are run by a cabal of sociopaths who, not having normal emotions themselves, are able to play our emotions like tuning nobs. I know somebody who worked with "neurodivergent" children, which includes young sociopaths, who make up 1% of the population, and she told me that they are scary before they learn to hide it after figuring out that they are different.; 10/21/25, 2:49 PM
Ronald J. Ward said...: Jaq, I think we’re now in about the third round of shifting goalposts. We’ve gone from border policy to protest funding to the psychology of sociopaths. I’m not sure that’s progress toward clarity.

For the record, I don’t deny that Indivisible receives large‑donor contributions — most large civic organizations do, left and right alike. The Tea Party was famously boosted by the Koch network, Heritage, and others. That’s not “proof of conspiracy”; it’s how political movements scale in America.

If your argument is that moneyed interests shape activism, I’m with you — that’s a real and bipartisan issue. But that doesn’t erase the message of No Kings: citizens should resist concentrating power in a single leader. You don’t have to agree with every donor or every chant to support that principle.

As for “saving the world,” nobody claimed that — I’m just talking about preserving basic democratic balance.

At this point, though, it feels like we’re less in a dialogue and more in a monologue about hidden cabals. So I’ll leave it here before we start diagnosing each other’s neurology.; 10/21/25, 3:20 PM