SwampTrapper retweetet
SwampTrapper
10.5K posts

SwampTrapper retweetet
SwampTrapper retweetet
SwampTrapper retweetet

I honestly don’t know how he stays this calm. 😳 > Watching him handle this with zero hesitation is actually mesmerizing. It’s one thing to be brave, but to be this precise and composed? That’s a different level of "bold."
I don’t think I’d even attempt to be in the same zip code as that snake, let alone move it! 😂
Gentlemen, on a scale of 1-10, how’s your technique compared to this? Ladies, are we impressed or just terrified? 👇
English
SwampTrapper retweetet

I had Grok break down Trump’s EO, and there were some interesting points:
1) This EO includes the involvement of DHS creating state citizenship lists for every state. DHS’s role in election security is expanding.
2) Mail-in ballots are being reformed, with “unique intelligent mail barcodes”, and these ballots can only be mailed to citizens on the state citizenship lists created by DHS and SSA.
3) The order also directs the AG to prioritize investigations and prosecutions of election-related crimes, particularly related to distributing/collecting illegal ballots to/from non-citizens.
In conclusion, Trump is using DHS to secure elections via managing the voter rolls and preventing mail-in ballot fraud, while the DOJ has been instructed to prosecute any attempts to cheat.
This is what the Dems have been worried about the entire time. This is why they have been refusing to fund DHS and throwing a fit about ICE. It was always about election security.
English
SwampTrapper retweetet
SwampTrapper retweetet

SwampTrapper retweetet

BREAKING: Howard Lutnick explains Trump’s new mail-in ballot crackdown.
Every ballot envelope will now get a USPS barcode and code. One envelope per vote. Full tracking. This is how you can ensure real accountability can be delivered if needed!
Lutnick: “None of this time where we have no idea, there’s no observers to mail, there’s no envelopes, there’s no certainty. That’s all going to go away.”
Mail-in voting just got SECURED.
English
SwampTrapper retweetet
SwampTrapper retweetet
SwampTrapper retweetet
SwampTrapper retweetet

What a misleading headline from The Daily Mail.
The ATF ran a tool mark analysis on a bullet jacket fragment recovered from Charlie's autopsy.
The result was "inconclusive" — not "no match."
The jacket was too fragmented to compare, which also partially explains the lack of an exit wound.
The bullet shattered on impact.
"Inconclusive" means insufficient evidence to draw any conclusion.
It doesn't mean the bullet "did NOT match" the rifle like the headline says.
The defense wants to use "inconclusive" as exculpatory evidence — but the prosecution wants to run chemical or molecular analysis comparing the jacket alloy to ammunition recovered with the gun.
Unlike tool mark analysis, it doesn't require an intact bullet.
The defense is trying to block that testing from happening.
That's the nuance of the real story.

Daily Mail@DailyMail
Bullet used to kill Charlie Kirk did NOT match rifle allegedly used by suspect Tyler Robinson, new court filing claims trib.al/sWEJfeN
English
SwampTrapper retweetet

Jordan Peterson shared one of the most sobering statistics I’ve heard in a long time.
The U.S. Armed Forces — after over a century of careful psychometric research driven by life-and-death necessity — will not induct anyone with an IQ below 83. They concluded that there is simply nothing in the military (at any level) that such a person can be trained to do without being counterproductive.
Peterson noted that this threshold captures roughly one in ten people. And if the military’s complexity is even roughly comparable to broader society, that means about 10% of the population has no viable place in our cognitively demanding world.
He emphasized that this isn’t about lack of money or short-term training. The data shows it’s extremely difficult to turn low cognitive ability into the kind of adaptive, creative problem-solving that modern society requires.
It’s a raw, uncomfortable truth about human variation that most people prefer not to discuss openly.
What do you think — is this statistic something society needs to confront honestly, or is there a better way to think about it?
English
SwampTrapper retweetet
SwampTrapper retweetet

#post-3574732" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">longrangehunting.com/threads/intern…
ZXX
SwampTrapper retweetet
SwampTrapper retweetet
SwampTrapper retweetet












