GROUNDED: When Mexican drug cartel drones penetrated US airspace near the El Paso International Airport the US Army responded with electronic countermeasures and the FAA closed the airspace. In response Democrat Rep Veronica Escobar demanded the FAA reopen the airspace claiming… pic.twitter.com/A30kQn2ldz

— @amuse (@amuse) February 11, 2026

And here is:

Lt. General Thomas McInerney

The official proceedings of January 6, which were disrupted by the FBI, were in fact part of a criminal conspiracy enabled by Mitch McConnell, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and Muriel Bowser.

And:

They toppled the U.S. government… pic.twitter.com/NZNgPEOPIU

— 🇺🇸RealRobert🇺🇸 (@Real_RobN) February 13, 2026

SHOCKING: Arizona Senate audit just blew the lid off 2020!

74,243 mail-in ballots counted with no record they were ever issued or sent. The numbers don't lie - Trump was the rightful winner in Arizona, period.

Congress rubber-stamped a massive fraud and the cover-up is finally… pic.twitter.com/ShoUnoQe1I

— Bill Mitchell (@mitchellvii) February 13, 2026

🚨 CIA WHISTLEBLOWER: THE "VENEZUELA CODE" IS REAL

Former CIA Officer Gary Berntsen exposes the specific architecture inside US voting machines.

He details the "God Mode" backdoor originally built for the Chavez regime—and explains why it is STILL active in American systems… pic.twitter.com/3DuWirTh7h

— Joe Pags Pagliarulo (@JoeTalkShow) February 13, 2026

What a total embarrassment!
AOC on a U.S. foreign policy panel is asked about defending Taiwan, and she totally flakes. You can actually see her doing her hardest thinking before she succumbs to complete humiliation.pic.twitter.com/E1IBew4wb3

— Tudor Dixon (@TudorDixon) February 14, 2026

MI Lawyer Matt Deperno has even more evidence of the astounding evidence that the 2020 Election was RIGGED AND STOLEN. The machines were remotely accessed and ballots were not being counted for Republican ballots.

JUST A MATTER OF TIME!! 💥💥
TREASON!! pic.twitter.com/qUjiBd7NHz

— 🇺🇸🍩 JULIE DONUTS 🇺🇸🍩 (@Juliedonuts) February 14, 2026

🚨 HOLY CRAP! Sec. Marco Rubio just got a MASSIVE standing ovation in Germany after he told Europe we need to move back toward Christianity and against 3rd world migration

Marco is CRUSHING it and the whole world sees it! 🔥

We LOVE MARCO. 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/PmZFHR5W53

— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) February 14, 2026

Roses are red,
violets are blue,
Tariffs are taxes,
just hidden from view.

— Tax Foundation (@TaxFoundation) February 14, 2026

OMG this is insane level noticing that you will never see on CNN or FOX news pic.twitter.com/CtGsf6icfr

— Furkan Gözükara (@FurkanGozukara) February 13, 2026

caryking said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

caryking said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

caryking said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

caryking said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

From the world wide webs:

The following agreements were negotiated and took effect (or were renegotiated) within the last ~25 years:
1. AustraliaUnited States FTA signed 2004 (effective 2005)
2. BahrainUnited States FTA signed 2005 (effective 2006)
3. Dominican RepublicCentral AmericaU.S. FTA (CAFTA-DR) signed 2004 (effective 2006) with Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Dominican Republic
4. ChileUnited States FTA signed 2003 (effective 2004)
5. ColombiaUnited States Trade Promotion Agreement signed 2006 (effective 2012)
6. JordanUnited States FTA signed 2000 (effective December 2001) (on the edge of the 25-year window but typically counted here)
7. MoroccoUnited States FTA signed 2004 (effective 2009)
8. OmanUnited States FTA signed 2004 (effective 2006)
9. PanamaUnited States Trade Promotion Agreement signed 2007 (effective 2012)
10. PeruUnited States Trade Promotion Agreement signed 2006 (effective 2009)
11. SingaporeUnited States FTA signed 2003 (effective 2004)
12. United StatesKorea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) signed 2007 (effective 2012)
13. United StatesMexicoCanada Agreement (USMCA) renegotiated and signed 2018 (effective 2020), replacing NAFTA (originally 1994)

So ~13 FTAs have been put into force by the United States over the past 25 years. These cover trade liberalization with about 20 partner countries in total.

---

Now, go read each one of those FTA's details and the actual execution and find out of these FTA's were truly what you think are FTA's.

Actually, define, in your belief what a FTA actually is, then research the actual FTA's you posted.

For me, FTA means unfettered free trade including business access for companies.

---

yeah, I'm not going to complete a book report for you. I answered your question. There are countries that dropped their tariffs to 0 and Trump still tariffs them.

---

Actually, you answered my question from an uninformed position. Trade is not only about what you think it is. Trade also includes business activity within a country. Foreign companies have had unfettered access into the US forever. The same can't always be said for US companies.

---

These are all deals we made and they were mutually beneficial. The USMCA was literally negotiated by Trump. We've tariffed counties that we have a trade surplus with. We insist on tariffs for countries volunteering to drop theirs.. we put tariffs on an uninhabited island full of penguins.

No one in this administration is actually arguing this is a stick to get to mutual free trade. It's been used illegally as leverage for a whole host of other reasons

---

Curious, where did you get your Law Degree? Which court do you currently sit on to provide your judgement?

---

I can cite numerous lawyers who would argue this is an illegal use of tariff power. It's with the Supreme Court so obviously plenty of legal experts agree with me.

Trump is citing emergency powers. What emergency is caused by the Swiss president taking a tone he did not like? What emergency caused him to rip up his own free trade agreement? What emergency requires us to tariff penguins?

---

I'm sure you can. Guess what, so can I…

I'm not the one sitting here saying they are illegal. You are! My position is very simple…. Presidents enact a number of EO's that may or may not be within their purview. Like Civ always says, the courts will decide this.

In the meantime, I support these actions 100%. If they get overruled, then try something different. Heck, if it were Biden he would go back to the well with the same illegal act. Remember student loan forgiveness. Didn't a court rule on that; yet, he did it again…

---

Expert legal opinion is heavily on the side of this use of tariffs being illegal. All independent analysis of the arguments on both side will acknowledge the majority opinion is against. All lower courts have gone against Trump.

https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB11332?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Of course you support it. You believe in protectionism for some reasons and consume a media diet the validates your priors. Yes Biden's attempt at student loan forgiveness was also illegal and it was correct for the courts to shut it down. I'm glad they did.

---

I use ChatGPT as well and realize that it's not the most reliable source for information as it's a gathering place for mainstream media. That said, if the lower courts ruled anything that had meat, tariff's wouldn't be in place right now, right?

ChatGPT result

For Trump's broad, across-the-board "reciprocal / Liberation Day"-style tariffs, the main legal hook his administration has pointed to is the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), arguing that the tariff program responds to a declared national emergency.

That said, not all Trump tariffs use the same law:

• Steel/aluminum and many "national security" tariffs: typically justified under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962.
• Country-specific retaliation for "unfair trade practices": often run through Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (and sometimes other trade statutes).

I support tariff's because it's been one-sided for too long. Heck, we built the China land development via free trade. A communist country that has only one mindset. World dominance at the expense of anyone in the way.

I support tariffs as the free trade mentality has decimated industries in the US. I believe we need a vibrant industrial base.

I support tariffs as a tool to get countries to be more responsible for certain actions, like: illegal crossings at our border, drugs, child trafficking through our country.

Now, until otherwise ruled, the Trump admin is using certain laws (examples above) that allow the executive branch to use them for certain purposes. The Supreme Court, if it takes this up, will rule based on his usage to the law he's stating that gives the power. We will see, right?

One last thing… you know the Trump Admin placed significant tariffs (40% on products my company bought) on China during his first term. I don't think they were ratified via legislation. If true, where was all this vitriol back then?

Edit: go read the article posted by Oldsouljer and you will see another reason to tariff certain countries that don't hold our values. In fact, any free trade agreement should be torn up with those countries. Where would China fit in on that one?

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yep.

CNN forced to admit that a MAJORITY of Americans think the Democrat Party has gone too far left.

Democrats have become the party of far-left radicals.pic.twitter.com/8QcJx1UwEx

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) February 12, 2026

---

The old school democrats are aging out and they are being replaced with radicals brainwashed from an early age.

These radicals are hatful and violent.

---

Moreso than the millions of righty radicals that gobble up Nick Fuentes and Candace Owens' hateful loonery, or nah?

---

There is no way you can compare the behavior of the left vs. the right.

Civ, I would consider you to be one of the old school. We don't agree on much but we can have a conversation. You think I could ever talk with Smapty? He's probably 20 years younger than you and his type is replacing your type.

---

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

caryking said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

caryking said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

caryking said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

caryking said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

From the world wide webs:

The following agreements were negotiated and took effect (or were renegotiated) within the last ~25 years:
1. AustraliaUnited States FTA signed 2004 (effective 2005)
2. BahrainUnited States FTA signed 2005 (effective 2006)
3. Dominican RepublicCentral AmericaU.S. FTA (CAFTA-DR) signed 2004 (effective 2006) with Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Dominican Republic
4. ChileUnited States FTA signed 2003 (effective 2004)
5. ColombiaUnited States Trade Promotion Agreement signed 2006 (effective 2012)
6. JordanUnited States FTA signed 2000 (effective December 2001) (on the edge of the 25-year window but typically counted here)
7. MoroccoUnited States FTA signed 2004 (effective 2009)
8. OmanUnited States FTA signed 2004 (effective 2006)
9. PanamaUnited States Trade Promotion Agreement signed 2007 (effective 2012)
10. PeruUnited States Trade Promotion Agreement signed 2006 (effective 2009)
11. SingaporeUnited States FTA signed 2003 (effective 2004)
12. United StatesKorea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) signed 2007 (effective 2012)
13. United StatesMexicoCanada Agreement (USMCA) renegotiated and signed 2018 (effective 2020), replacing NAFTA (originally 1994)

So ~13 FTAs have been put into force by the United States over the past 25 years. These cover trade liberalization with about 20 partner countries in total.

---

Now, go read each one of those FTA's details and the actual execution and find out of these FTA's were truly what you think are FTA's.

Actually, define, in your belief what a FTA actually is, then research the actual FTA's you posted.

For me, FTA means unfettered free trade including business access for companies.

---

yeah, I'm not going to complete a book report for you. I answered your question. There are countries that dropped their tariffs to 0 and Trump still tariffs them.

---

Actually, you answered my question from an uninformed position. Trade is not only about what you think it is. Trade also includes business activity within a country. Foreign companies have had unfettered access into the US forever. The same can't always be said for US companies.

---

These are all deals we made and they were mutually beneficial. The USMCA was literally negotiated by Trump. We've tariffed counties that we have a trade surplus with. We insist on tariffs for countries volunteering to drop theirs.. we put tariffs on an uninhabited island full of penguins.

No one in this administration is actually arguing this is a stick to get to mutual free trade. It's been used illegally as leverage for a whole host of other reasons

---

Curious, where did you get your Law Degree? Which court do you currently sit on to provide your judgement?

---

I can cite numerous lawyers who would argue this is an illegal use of tariff power. It's with the Supreme Court so obviously plenty of legal experts agree with me.

Trump is citing emergency powers. What emergency is caused by the Swiss president taking a tone he did not like? What emergency caused him to rip up his own free trade agreement? What emergency requires us to tariff penguins?

---

I'm sure you can. Guess what, so can I…

I'm not the one sitting here saying they are illegal. You are! My position is very simple…. Presidents enact a number of EO's that may or may not be within their purview. Like Civ always says, the courts will decide this.

In the meantime, I support these actions 100%. If they get overruled, then try something different. Heck, if it were Biden he would go back to the well with the same illegal act. Remember student loan forgiveness. Didn't a court rule on that; yet, he did it again…

---

Expert legal opinion is heavily on the side of this use of tariffs being illegal. All independent analysis of the arguments on both side will acknowledge the majority opinion is against. All lower courts have gone against Trump.

https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB11332?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Of course you support it. You believe in protectionism for some reasons and consume a media diet the validates your priors. Yes Biden's attempt at student loan forgiveness was also illegal and it was correct for the courts to shut it down. I'm glad they did.

---

I use ChatGPT as well and realize that it's not the most reliable source for information as it's a gathering place for mainstream media. That said, if the lower courts ruled anything that had meat, tariff's wouldn't be in place right now, right?

ChatGPT result

For Trump's broad, across-the-board "reciprocal / Liberation Day"-style tariffs, the main legal hook his administration has pointed to is the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), arguing that the tariff program responds to a declared national emergency.

That said, not all Trump tariffs use the same law:

• Steel/aluminum and many "national security" tariffs: typically justified under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962.
• Country-specific retaliation for "unfair trade practices": often run through Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (and sometimes other trade statutes).

I support tariff's because it's been one-sided for too long. Heck, we built the China land development via free trade. A communist country that has only one mindset. World dominance at the expense of anyone in the way.

I support tariffs as the free trade mentality has decimated industries in the US. I believe we need a vibrant industrial base.

I support tariffs as a tool to get countries to be more responsible for certain actions, like: illegal crossings at our border, drugs, child trafficking through our country.

Now, until otherwise ruled, the Trump admin is using certain laws (examples above) that allow the executive branch to use them for certain purposes. The Supreme Court, if it takes this up, will rule based on his usage to the law he's stating that gives the power. We will see, right?

One last thing… you know the Trump Admin placed significant tariffs (40% on products my company bought) on China during his first term. I don't think they were ratified via legislation. If true, where was all this vitriol back then?

Edit: go read the article posted by Oldsouljer and you will see another reason to tariff certain countries that don't hold our values. In fact, any free trade agreement should be torn up with those countries. Where would China fit in on that one?

---

Good morning!

You want a particular end - more equitable trade outcomes. Fair.

But when all the research from the last year points (exactly as predicted) to 90% - 95% of tariff costs being borne by American consumers, why do you continue thinking that tariffs are the best way to achieve the outcome you're gunning for?

Even if you take the most gracious position that tariffs are not the end - that actually more favorable trade agreements are - why doesn't it give you pause that the number of new trade agreements signed has been a tiny fraction of those promised (remember "90 agreements in 90 days"? - we've signed like five final deals and have some other looser deals with another dozen or whatever).

AND none of those deals were supremely favorable to the US, sufficiently so to justify the chaos and economic underperformance of our economy over the last year?

Finally, you simply can't ignore the totally arbitrary and capricious levying of tariffs on countries that piss Trump off, and aren't tethered in any way to the underlying economic realities. His totally open expression of the motivation for these types of punitive tariffs will likely ultimately be their legal undoing.

Long story short, tariffs aren't an efficient or effective way of getting into better trade deals, and they're actively damaging consumer confidence, business investment in the US, and the broader economy.

They're illegal, and practically speaking the juice clearly isn't worth the squeeze.

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yep.

CNN forced to admit that a MAJORITY of Americans think the Democrat Party has gone too far left.

Democrats have become the party of far-left radicals.pic.twitter.com/8QcJx1UwEx

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) February 12, 2026

---

The old school democrats are aging out and they are being replaced with radicals brainwashed from an early age.

These radicals are hatful and violent.

---

Moreso than the millions of righty radicals that gobble up Nick Fuentes and Candace Owens' hateful loonery, or nah?

---

There is no way you can compare the behavior of the left vs. the right.

Civ, I would consider you to be one of the old school. We don't agree on much but we can have a conversation. You think I could ever talk with Smapty? He's probably 20 years younger than you and his type is replacing your type.

---

Sure there is. Look no further than the preponderance of political violence perpetrated by the extreme right in recent decades, or January 6, or the totally boorish and often illegal behavior of our actual current Republican leaders to see the right has more than their share of bad behavior. A clear-eyed assessment would recognize all that, and also that there has been an uptick in violence from the far left in the last few years.

You're just more focused on the left's poor behavior than the right's, and all of our news algorithms when we're scrolling confirm our prior biases unless we really seek out more centrist or contrarian viewpoints.

---

Good morning!

Respectfully, I stopped reading at January 6…I understand that's your birthday, Christmas and 4th of July but I'm tired of hearing. It's like the boy who cried wolf. J6 is no different from the countless "mostly peaceful" protests we have seen from the left over the last TEN years.

Just like the race bait, find something else to celebrate because it doesn't work anymore.

---

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yep.

CNN forced to admit that a MAJORITY of Americans think the Democrat Party has gone too far left.

Democrats have become the party of far-left radicals.pic.twitter.com/8QcJx1UwEx

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) February 12, 2026

---

The old school democrats are aging out and they are being replaced with radicals brainwashed from an early age.

These radicals are hatful and violent.

---

Moreso than the millions of righty radicals that gobble up Nick Fuentes and Candace Owens' hateful loonery, or nah?

---

There is no way you can compare the behavior of the left vs. the right.

Civ, I would consider you to be one of the old school. We don't agree on much but we can have a conversation. You think I could ever talk with Smapty? He's probably 20 years younger than you and his type is replacing your type.

---

Sure there is. Look no further than the preponderance of political violence perpetrated by the extreme right in recent decades, or January 6, or the totally boorish and often illegal behavior of our actual current Republican leaders to see the right has more than their share of bad behavior. A clear-eyed assessment would recognize all that, and also that there has been an uptick in violence from the far left in the last few years.

You're just more focused on the left's poor behavior than the right's, and all of our news algorithms when we're scrolling confirm our prior biases unless we really seek out more centrist or contrarian viewpoints.

---

Good morning!

Respectfully, I stopped reading at January 6…I understand that's your birthday, Christmas and 4th of July but I'm tired of hearing. It's like the boy who cried wolf. J6 is no different from the countless "mostly peaceful" protests we have seen from the left over the last TEN years.

Just like the race bait, find something else to celebrate because it doesn't work anymore.

---

I'm enjoying the pleasantries this morning, we need more of that in the Cooler.

I hear you regarding January 6, but when it happens, encouraged by the President, and then the President pardons all those responsible for the biggest and most violent demonstration against our government in 150 years , people aren't going to stop talking about it.

And it's unique because it was explicitly encouraged by the President, not for any broader cause, but because he was butthurt he lost the election, and because he was looking for ways to violently disrupt the constitutional transfer of power.

That was unprecedented. Comparing it to George Floyd or whatever is laughable given the little-d-democratic implications.

That hasn't happened in 250 years. It's now in the history books and very historically relevant. It's not going away.

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yep.

CNN forced to admit that a MAJORITY of Americans think the Democrat Party has gone too far left.

Democrats have become the party of far-left radicals.pic.twitter.com/8QcJx1UwEx

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) February 12, 2026

---

The old school democrats are aging out and they are being replaced with radicals brainwashed from an early age.

These radicals are hatful and violent.

---

Moreso than the millions of righty radicals that gobble up Nick Fuentes and Candace Owens' hateful loonery, or nah?

---

There is no way you can compare the behavior of the left vs. the right.

Civ, I would consider you to be one of the old school. We don't agree on much but we can have a conversation. You think I could ever talk with Smapty? He's probably 20 years younger than you and his type is replacing your type.

---

Sure there is. Look no further than the preponderance of political violence perpetrated by the extreme right in recent decades, or January 6, or the totally boorish and often illegal behavior of our actual current Republican leaders to see the right has more than their share of bad behavior. A clear-eyed assessment would recognize all that, and also that there has been an uptick in violence from the far left in the last few years.

You're just more focused on the left's poor behavior than the right's, and all of our news algorithms when we're scrolling confirm our prior biases unless we really seek out more centrist or contrarian viewpoints.

---

Good morning!

Respectfully, I stopped reading at January 6…I understand that's your birthday, Christmas and 4th of July but I'm tired of hearing. It's like the boy who cried wolf. J6 is no different from the countless "mostly peaceful" protests we have seen from the left over the last TEN years.

Just like the race bait, find something else to celebrate because it doesn't work anymore.

---

I'm enjoying the pleasantries this morning, we need more of that in the Cooler.

I hear you regarding January 6, but when it happens, encouraged by the President, and then the President pardons all those responsible for the biggest and most violent demonstration against our government in 150 years , people aren't going to stop talking about it.

And it's unique because it was explicitly encouraged by the President, not for any broader cause, but because he was butthurt he lost the election, and because he was looking for ways to violently disrupt the constitutional transfer of power.

That was unprecedented. Comparing it to George Floyd or whatever is laughable given the little-d-democratic implications.

That hasn't happened in 250 years. It's now in the history books and very historically relevant. It's not going away.

---

Civ, the pleasantries will fall apart when you say things like… "encouraged by the President"

I hope you realize that's your opinion and stating it as fact, put people who see it differently on the defense. Perhaps you should add the qualifier of "it's my opinion".

Also, recognize that other people do see January 6th no differently than George Floyd peaceful protest (the peaceful protest part was used as it was projected as such).

---

🚨 BREAKING: NFL Star Mike Evans Just Dropped a BOMBSHELL on Trump – And the Left is SHAKING! 🔥

Tampa Bay Buccaneers' powerhouse receiver Mike Evans is turning heads and sparking MASSIVE debate in the NFL world! He boldly praised President Trump, hailing the unbreakable… pic.twitter.com/Zxv0Nw0X4d

— Reverend Jordan Wells (@WellsJorda89710) February 14, 2026

Civilized said:

---

caryking said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Gulfstream4 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yep.

CNN forced to admit that a MAJORITY of Americans think the Democrat Party has gone too far left.

Democrats have become the party of far-left radicals.pic.twitter.com/8QcJx1UwEx

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) February 12, 2026

---

The old school democrats are aging out and they are being replaced with radicals brainwashed from an early age.

These radicals are hatful and violent.

---

Moreso than the millions of righty radicals that gobble up Nick Fuentes and Candace Owens' hateful loonery, or nah?

---

There is no way you can compare the behavior of the left vs. the right.

Civ, I would consider you to be one of the old school. We don't agree on much but we can have a conversation. You think I could ever talk with Smapty? He's probably 20 years younger than you and his type is replacing your type.

---

Sure there is. Look no further than the preponderance of political violence perpetrated by the extreme right in recent decades, or January 6, or the totally boorish and often illegal behavior of our actual current Republican leaders to see the right has more than their share of bad behavior. A clear-eyed assessment would recognize all that, and also that there has been an uptick in violence from the far left in the last few years.

You're just more focused on the left's poor behavior than the right's, and all of our news algorithms when we're scrolling confirm our prior biases unless we really seek out more centrist or contrarian viewpoints.

---

Good morning!

Respectfully, I stopped reading at January 6…I understand that's your birthday, Christmas and 4th of July but I'm tired of hearing. It's like the boy who cried wolf. J6 is no different from the countless "mostly peaceful" protests we have seen from the left over the last TEN years.

Just like the race bait, find something else to celebrate because it doesn't work anymore.

---

I'm enjoying the pleasantries this morning, we need more of that in the Cooler.

I hear you regarding January 6, but when it happens, encouraged by the President, and then the President pardons all those responsible for the biggest and most violent demonstration against our government in 150 years , people aren't going to stop talking about it.

And it's unique because it was explicitly encouraged by the President, not for any broader cause, but because he was butthurt he lost the election, and because he was looking for ways to violently disrupt the constitutional transfer of power.

That was unprecedented. Comparing it to George Floyd or whatever is laughable given the little-d-democratic implications.

That hasn't happened in 250 years. It's now in the history books and very historically relevant. It's not going away.

---

Civ, the pleasantries will fall apart when you say things like… "encouraged by the President"

I hope you realize that's your opinion and stating it as fact, put people who see it differently on the defense. Perhaps you should add the qualifier of "it's my opinion".

Also, recognize that other people do see January 6th no differently than George Floyd peaceful protest (the peaceful protest part was used as it was projected as such).

---

What does that have to do with pleasantries? We can't pleasantly disagree?

I'm not going to preface everything I say on here with "my opinion is that..." That's silly and obvious. Cordial tone and good-faith conversation is the litmus test for pleasantness, not prefacing everything with qualifiers about it being opinion.

The morning of the riots, Trump was using his normal combative language telling people to come and "fight like hell," and other similar statements.

He also had the opportunity to calm the crowd for several hours while they rioted, and he chose not to, which was a clear implicit signal he didn't mind them rioting in support of him.

But regardless, there's no good reason to feel defensive because someone else has a different opinion than us. We're all entitled to our opinions and often just land in different places.

---

UCLA professor was sending Jeffrey Epstein emails advising him how to get babies to "suck harder on pacifiers" by playing recordings of their mother’s voice.

You know exactly why he wanted this information, this is pure evil. pic.twitter.com/0f1JXTV4qH

— Derrick Evans (@DerrickEvans4WV) February 14, 2026

packgrad said:

---

Be pleasant while Dems lie. Typical Dem substance.

---

HOLY SH*T 🚨 Rep. Tim Burchett is smiling as he exposes Democrat Politicians having to use thier Photo ID to vote against Photo ID’s in Elections

"213 Democrats just used their photo ID to vote against photo ID’s in elections”

LMAO YOU CAN’T MAKE THIS UP 🤣 pic.twitter.com/PLjjVvse3F

— MAGA Voice (@MAGAVoice) February 12, 2026

🚨 JUST IN: PA Sen. Dave McCormick just lit up the Senate floor DEMANDING passage of the SAVE America Act!

“I lost by 950 votes in 2022… then won by 15,000 out of 7 million in 2024. When races are THAT close, election integrity isn’t optional, it’s MANDATORY!”

“These… pic.twitter.com/eaqZnHyJaa

— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) February 12, 2026

Here we go again. The new Democrat shutdown — this time of the Dept. of Homeland Security — will hit some VERY important programs like FEMA disaster response, TSA security lines, and Coast Guard operations.

That means delayed disaster aid, airport chaos, and weakened law…

— Speaker Mike Johnson (@SpeakerJohnson) February 14, 2026

SmaptyWolf said:

---

Happy Valentine's Day!

---

“You guys will protest literally everything. And then they come out and they say that they eat babıes and nobody’s protesting.”

He’s got a point 🤔👇🏼 pic.twitter.com/OCoodrm3vW

— TONY™ (@TONYxTWO) February 13, 2026

pic.twitter.com/qaSH8ZPrgG 🚨 Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY) rejected polling indicating strong support for voter ID requirements, including reported majority support among Black voters.

When asked about a poll showing 76% support, Clarke stated she does not accept the figure and…

— #WalkAway Campaign (@RealWalkAway) February 13, 2026

🚨 MAJOR BREAKING: Susan Collins has now BACKED the SAVE America Act, meaning Republicans now have 51 VOTES in the Senate, including JD Vance

LET’S GO!!!

Time to finally NUKE the Zombie Filibuster and get this to Trump’s desk, @LeaderJohnThune! 🔥 pic.twitter.com/Oze5XH5FRs

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) February 13, 2026

Watch Senator Josh Hawley question invited expert witness Haywood Talcove during this Senate hearing on alleged large-scale fraud.
Watch the exchange. Then decide for yourself.#JoshHawley #HaywoodTalcove #SenateHearing #GovernmentFraud #PublicAccountability #DO pic.twitter.com/WZKEJsk5X6

— Doc Vince (@docvincev) February 14, 2026

This is one of the best speeches against communism and pro-Western Civilization that I’ve ever heard..,

Marco Rubio is incredible here.

I started to pull quotes from it, but there are too many.

This is a must watch.
pic.twitter.com/1RNdhyfIgP

— Tim Young (@TimRunsHisMouth) February 14, 2026

Who's mother is going to turn up missing next for new distraction? Savannah Guthrie's distraction is not gonna carry much longer. Who did her husband work for? What did her husband do for the Clintons?

🚨WATCH: Josh Hawley DESTROYED Minnesota AG Keith Ellison on alleged corruption!

Hawley read him the transcripts of a conversation where Ellison seems to have conversations with fraudsters and possibly accepted $10,000 in bribes.

Good job Senator! @HawleyMO 🔥 pic.twitter.com/5qOG4yqNk8

— Red Shorts Politics (@RedShortsPoltcs) February 14, 2026

"Minnesota Democrat elite are diverting people’s attention from their Somali fraud scandal to ICE." --Political cartoonist A.F. Branco pic.twitter.com/YDMjtJ5dpC

— United Patriots Uprising with Gary Binford (@united_gary) January 23, 2026