Didn't we all learn about unnamed sources the first go around?
It's like that movie Pi. I see 17s everywhere lol.. it's usually on the first page of Google news when you search for 17. For instance https://www.newsweek.com/americans-told-stay-out-sun-17-states-2097111. " At least 17"... Why not 18?
Beats me, but ever since I saw those Maxwell articles with her at the In and Out Burger joint, I understood that games and messages have been displayed through the media. You think that Bezos and 666 articles are just by chance? If you look daily there are weird articles with 17 in them that make no sense. If rounding you are doing it by whole numbers or by 5s. "About 17" was one that stood out a while ago.
I always look for comms in the news. 17 and 666 and such. This article just so happens to have 17 with De Niro and Hanks, two assumed Pedos and Trump haters. "who at one point in their careers bit off more than they could chew"
I don't think she's dead, Giuffre. The whole accident thing and her posts seemed so phony. Hopefully in witness protection.
Yup. They all seem to think Trump is guilty, so on Reddit I keep pushing the narrative so they will all parrot that it needs to be released.
This is very disheartening. We can try and gloss it over and say he cooperated, but in my opinion this shows how deep the swap still is.
It does to me as well, but it seem like you can still steer it to common sense answers with the right inputs.
Out of curiosity I asked Grok if it thought it was Kayfabe: See new posts
What are your thoughts on the Trump Musk fued?
The Trump-Musk feud, as it’s been playing out recently, is a mix of personal egos, political posturing, and substantive policy disagreements, but it’s mostly a spectacle that reveals more about power dynamics than it does about any deep ideological rift. Based on what’s been reported, the clash seems to stem from Musk’s opposition to Trump’s massive spending package, dubbed the "Big, Beautiful Bill," which Musk criticized for ballooning the national debt by an estimated $3 trillion. This sparked a public spat, with Musk threatening to form a new political party and Trump hitting back by questioning Musk’s subsidies for Tesla and SpaceX, even suggesting DOGE (Musk’s former efficiency department) could scrutinize his companies. The feud escalated with personal jabs—Trump calling Musk a “big-time drug addict” and Musk alleging Trump’s ties to Epstein files, though Musk later dialed back some of his harsher posts.My take? It’s less about principle and more about two oversized personalities vying for dominance. Musk, fresh off his role slashing federal agencies, likely saw himself as a kingmaker after spending heavily to support Trump’s 2024 campaign. Trump, never one to share the spotlight, doesn’t take kindly to being challenged, especially by someone he views as owing him loyalty. The policy disagreement—deficit spending versus fiscal restraint—feels like a convenient flashpoint rather than the core issue. Musk’s push for a new party and his attacks on the GOP as part of a “uniparty” suggest he’s testing his leverage, while Trump’s threats to cut SpaceX contracts show he’s willing to flex government power to keep Musk in line.What’s interesting is the fallout. Tesla’s stock took a hit, dropping 14% in a single day during the feud’s peak, costing Musk billions in net worth. SpaceX’s $22 billion in federal contracts also became a target, highlighting how Musk’s business empire is vulnerable to political retaliation. Meanwhile, Trump risks alienating a key ally who dropped $275 million on his campaign and promised more for 2026 midterms. Both men have backed off slightly—Musk with a heart emoji to Trump’s conciliatory comments, and Trump avoiding further escalation in some interviews—but the tension remains.The feud’s deeper implication is the fragility of their alliance. It’s a classic case of two figures who thrive on control clashing when their interests diverge. For all the noise, I suspect they’ll find a way to reconcile, as their mutual need for influence outweighs the temporary drama. But it’s a reminder that in politics, loyalty is often just a means to an end.
30 posts
15 web pages
It all seems so kayfabe to me.
You're not wrong—there's a strong whiff of kayfabe here. The Trump-Musk feud has all the hallmarks of a staged wrestling match: loud public jabs, dramatic escalations, and just enough personal flair to keep the audience hooked. Both are master showmen—Musk with his X provocations, Trump with his rally-ready zingers—playing to their bases while keeping the spotlight on themselves. The timing, right after Musk’s high-profile budget cuts and Trump’s bill push, feels almost too perfect, like a scripted plot to keep the political theater buzzing.That said, there’s real stakes beneath the performance. Musk’s Tesla stock dip and Trump’s threats to SpaceX contracts show there’s blood in the water, even if the feud’s intensity is partly for show. It’s kayfabe with consequences—think pro wrestling where the chair shots actually hurt. They might be hamming it up to rally their followers or distract from other issues, but the clash over power and influence is genuine. My bet? They’ll “resolve” it with a public truce that lets both claim victory, keeping the audience cheering for the next episode.
The web and tentacles of "people" like Soros are so entwined into things we can track, but unfortunately in things that are impossible to track. They have used every loophole to disguise funding. It seem like an impossible task to remove the cancer from our Republic. Every time I get impatient I'm remined that it's just not Soros. He's the one we know about. It the hidden one's that concern me the most. The foot soldiers doing his work and the work of the other big players. The work of https://x.com/DataRepublican to shed some light on some of these people has been an interesting read.
*With the help of Grok. * District Attorneys Backed by SorosSoros has funded at least 75 district attorneys across the U.S. since 2015, primarily through PACs like Justice & Public Safety PAC, which channel funds to progressive candidates favoring criminal justice reform (e.g., reducing incarceration, ending cash bail). Here are notable examples, with funding details where available:
Alvin Bragg (Manhattan, NY): Elected 2021. Received ~$500,000 indirectly through Color of Change PAC, which Soros donated $1 million to in May 2021. Known for prosecuting high-profile cases and reducing charges for certain low-level crimes.
George Gascón (Los Angeles, CA): Elected 2020. Backed by $4.7 million from California Justice & Public Safety PAC and $2.25 million from other Soros-linked PACs. Faced recall efforts for lenient policies. Lost re-election in 2024.
Larry Krasner (Philadelphia, PA): Elected 2017, re-elected 2021. Received $1.7 million in 2017 and $1.259 million in 2021 from Soros-funded PACs, accounting for ~90% of his campaign funds. Known for decriminalizing low-level offenses and suing police.
Kim Foxx (Cook County, IL): Elected 2016, re-elected 2020. Received $2 million through Illinois Justice & Public Safety PAC. Criticized for dropping charges in high-profile cases and overseeing a homicide spike. Declined re-election in 2024.
Kim Gardner (St. Louis, MO): Elected 2017. Backed by Soros funds through Missouri Safety & Justice PAC. Resigned in 2023 amid misconduct allegations, including prosecuting conservatives while dismissing other cases.
Deborah Gonzalez (Athens-Clarke & Oconee Counties, GA): Elected 2020. Funded by Soros PACs; lost re-election in 2024. Criticized for policies linked to rising crime.
Joe Gonzales (Bexar County, TX): Elected 2018. Received ~$1 million in 2018 and $1 million in 2022 from Texas Justice & Public Safety PAC. Associated with a 15% rise in violent crime.
John Creuzot (Dallas County, TX): Elected 2018. Backed by ~$236,000 in 2018 and $150,000 in 2022 from Soros PACs. Decriminalized low-level theft and drug possession; convictions dropped 30%.
Pamela Price (Alameda County, CA): Elected 2022. Received ~$275,000 in 2018 for a related campaign; recalled in 2024 for soft-on-crime policies.
Diana Becton (Contra Costa County, CA): Elected 2018. Backed by $275,000 from Soros PACs. First woman and African-American DA in the county; crime rose during her tenure.
Buta Biberaj (Loudoun County, VA): Elected 2019. Received $922,000 through New Virginia Majority and Virginia Justice & Public Safety PAC.
Kimberly Graham (Polk County, IA): Elected 2022. Received $300,000 from Soros PACs.
Jackie Sartoris (Cumberland County, ME): Elected 2022. Backed by $300,000 from Maine Justice & Public Safety PAC.
Monique Worrell (Orange-Osceola, FL): Elected 2020, re-elected 2024 after being ousted by Gov. DeSantis. Backed by Soros funds; exact amount unclear.
Shalena Cook Jones (Savannah, GA): Elected 2020, re-elected 2024. Supported by Soros PACs; specific funding not detailed in sources.
Scott Colom (Mississippi, 16th Circuit): Elected 2016. Backed by over $1 million from Soros-funded Safety & Justice groups. Focused on pre-trial diversion for nonviolent offenders.
Raul Torrez (Bernalillo County, NM): Elected 2016. Received $107,000 from a Soros-funded New Mexico super PAC.
Darius Pattillo (Henry County, GA): Elected 2016. Received ~$150,000 from Georgia Safety & Justice PAC.
Matt Dugan (Allegheny County, PA): Elected 2023. Received $734,000 from Soros-funded PACs, ~90% of his campaign funds.
Rachael Rollins (Suffolk County, MA): Elected 2018. Backed by Soros funds; resigned as U.S. Attorney in 2023 amid ethics issues.
Marilyn Mosby (Baltimore, MD): Elected 2015. Supported by Soros PACs; lost primary in 2022 and faced federal prosecution.
Aramis Ayala (Orange-Osceola, FL): Elected 2016. Backed by Soros; declined re-election.
Geneviève Jones-Wright (San Diego County, CA): Ran in 2018, received over $400,000 from Soros PACs but lost.
Noah Phillips (Sacramento County, CA): Ran in 2018, backed by over $130,000 from Soros PACs but lost.
Max Wall (Oregon): Ran in 2018 primary, supported by Soros funds but lost.
Notes on DAs:Soros’s funding often flows through state-specific PACs (e.g., California Justice & Public Safety PAC, Texas Justice & Public Safety PAC), led by his longtime treasurer Whitney Tymas. These PACs dissolve after elections, making tracking complex.
A 2022 LELDF report estimates Soros spent $40 million to elect 75 DAs, representing over 70 million Americans and 40% of U.S. homicides.
X posts, like @PeterBernegger ’s, claim up to 95 Soros-backed DAs, citing emails linking them to Fair and Justice Prosecution, an OSF-funded group. This number is unverified but reflects sentiment about his influence.
Attorneys GeneralSoros’s direct support for attorneys general (AGs) is less documented than for DAs, as his focus has been on local prosecutors. However, some sources suggest indirect influence through PACs or OSF-funded groups like the ACLU, which advocate for progressive AGs. No comprehensive list of Soros-backed AGs exists in the provided data, but notable mentions include:No direct AG funding confirmed: Sources like Politico and the Washington Times note Soros’s focus on DAs, not AGs.
Speculative links: X posts and reports like @ACTforAmerica ’s imply Soros influences AG races through broader progressive networks, but no specific names (e.g., state AGs like Letitia James or Maura Healey) are tied to direct Soros funding in the data.
JudgesSoros’s funding of judicial candidates is limited due to legal restrictions on judicial elections in many states. Instead, OSF supports organizations advocating for judicial reform, not direct campaign contributions. Examples include:Brennan Center for Justice: Received OSF grants to promote fair courts and judicial diversity. No specific judges are named as Soros-backed.
Texas Organizing Project: Targeted judicial elections in Harris County, TX, to elect reform-minded judges, with OSF support, but no individual judges are listed.
Diana Becton (Contra Costa County, CA): Before becoming DA, Becton was a judge appointed to the DA role; Soros backed her DA campaign, not her judicial role.
PoliticiansSoros has donated heavily to Democratic candidates and causes, often through Democracy PAC and other vehicles. Notable examples include:Joe Biden (2020 Presidential Campaign): Soros donated $500,000 directly and $128.5 million to Democratic causes in the 2022 midterms via Democracy PAC II.
Various Democratic Candidates (2022 Midterms): OSF’s Open Society Policy Center gave $140 million to politically charged groups, including the Sixteen Thirty Fund, which supports progressive campaigns. Specific candidates aren’t always named, but funds supported voter registration and anti-voter-suppression efforts.
Stacey Abrams (Georgia): Her firm received funds from Soros-backed PACs for DA-related efforts, though direct candidate funding is less clear.
Other Officials and InitiativesSoros funds broader reform efforts that indirectly influence officials:Soros Justice Fellowships: OSF funds individuals working on criminal justice reform, like Ashley Rojas (#PoliceFreeSchools) and Kelly Davis (reproductive justice in prisons). These fellows influence policy but aren’t elected officials.
ACLU and Real Justice PAC: Received $50 million from Soros in 2014 for criminal560 justice reform, including voter scorecards and candidate endorsements in DA races.
Community Resource Hub for Safety and Responsibility: OSF donated $4.5 million in 2019-2020 to explore police abolition frameworks.
Limitations and ContextIncomplete Data: No single source lists all 75+ Soros-backed DAs, and even LELDF’s reports are partial. X posts like @realpeteyb123 and @PeterBernegger claim up to 95 DAs but lack full documentation.
Indirect Funding: Soros often funds PACs or groups like Color of Change, which then support candidates, making direct ties hard to trace.
Judges and AGs: Evidence of direct funding is scarce compared to DAs. OSF’s focus is on systemic reform, not judicial or AG campaigns. Political Context: Critics, including Heritage Foundation scholars, argue Soros’s funding creates “rogue prosecutors” who prioritize ideology over public safety, citing crime spikes (e.g., 63% murder increase in Philadelphia under Krasner). Defenders, like Emily Tamkin, argue there’s no evidence Soros controls these officials, and his donations are part of legitimate political philanthropy.
Politicians Backed by George Soros and OSFSoros’s political contributions often flow through entities like Democracy PAC, Democracy PAC II, and other OSF-funded groups, targeting Democratic candidates and progressive causes. Below are politicians explicitly tied to his funding, with details where available:Joe Biden (President, U.S.): Received $500,000 directly from Soros during the 2020 presidential campaign. Additionally, Soros contributed $128.5 million to Democratic causes in the 2022 midterms via Democracy PAC II, which supported Biden-aligned efforts.
Hakeem Jeffries (House Minority Leader, D-NY): Received contributions from Soros in 2023, as noted in campaign finance disclosures. Exact amounts are not specified in the data, but his support came through Soros-funded PACs backing Democratic House candidates.
Chris Murphy (Senator, D-CT): Backed by Soros in 2023 through campaign contributions, alongside other liberal politicians, as per finance disclosures. Specific amounts are not detailed, but tied to Democracy PAC funding.
Gavin Newsom (Governor, D-CA): Received Soros funding in 2023, as reported in campaign disclosures, likely through Democracy PAC or related entities supporting California Democrats. Exact figures are not provided in the sources.
Hillary Clinton (Former Secretary of State, D-NY): Soros donated millions to groups opposing Donald Trump and supporting Clinton in the 2016 election, including direct contributions to her campaign. OpenSecrets notes Soros gave $23,581,000 to 527 groups in 2003-2004 and continued heavy support for Democratic candidates like Clinton.
Kirsten Gillibrand (Senator, D-NY): Received donations from Soros, as documented in 2019 campaign finance records. Specific amounts are not listed, but tied to his broader support for Democratic senators.
Amy Klobuchar (Senator, D-MN): Backed by Soros contributions in 2019, as per campaign records, through his funding of Democ
JFK Speech Connection: Your concern about “manipulation” echoes JFK’s 1961 warning of “infiltration” through covert means. Soros’s transparent funding of DAs and political causes doesn’t match Kennedy’s state-driven conspiracy model but fuels distrust when his backed candidates enact controversial policies (e.g., Gascón’s reduced prosecutions). The “manipulation” label reflects unease with his outsized influence, though it’s legally distinct from clandestine subversion.
Recent Developments2024 Elections: Of 25 Soros-linked DAs on ballots, 12 lost, including Gascón, Price, and Gonzalez, signaling backlash against progressive policies.
Remaining DAs: Candidates like Bragg, Krasner, Gonzales, Creuzot, and others face re-elections in 2025-2026, with public safety a key issue.
Soros’s funding, estimated at $40-$50 million for DAs alone, targets roles with significant influence over criminal justice, amplifying his impact in ways that feel manipulative to critics, as you noted. While legal and transparent, the scale of his contributions—often 90% of a candidate’s funds—raises questions about democratic accountability, aligning with your skepticism of “promoting” as a euphemism. However, without evidence of direct control (e.g., Soros dictating DA decisions), the “infiltration” label from JFK’s speech is a loose fit. The real issue may be the broader role of big money in politics, whether from Soros or conservative donors like the Kochs.
**
"It requires a change in outlook, a change in tactics, a change in missions--by the government, by the people, by every businessman or labor leader, and by every newspaper. For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations.
Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. It conducts the Cold War, in short, with a war-time discipline no democracy would ever hope or wish to match."
Infiltration...
Jeff Pastor and Tamaya Dennard were also charged and served time. They were not pardoned.
I don't think so. In these parts, he got what he deserved. I'm scratching my head on this one. Maybe he made a deal to give info.
I don't think it was the same. Zelensky seemed to start that, to me, by his disrespect. This was Trump being prepared to call out their lies on the spot, right in front of the world. Zelensky x 10 IMO.
I have never seen anything like that. Called out in front of the world. Amazing.
Yes!!! My birthday month is GREAT AGAIN! These deep fakes have gotten so good that I really wonder how much of what we have watched over the past 10 years has really been real...
AHHHH I did'nt catch that. Damn AI. You are only as smart as the proof reading of your AI meme. lol Brain must not be working right today.
I think when he has his funeral, people will notice at the viewing that his ear lobes are different. ;) He's been on ice for along time.
I found it. https://www.q-clock.com. Near the bottom is a link to the program. I have not downloaded it yet as I'm on my work computer.
here is the q clock website https://www.q-clock.com/
I wonder when Rachel Chandler is going gonna pop up?