Joe Sanders

I should point out calling Trump and his voters fascists and authoritarians and such served two purposes. First, they hoped it would help them win. That’s clearly out the window. Next, it was insurance for if he won. The capitol BADLY needs to be cleaned out of rampant corruption throughout the bureaucracy, security agencies, lobbyists, the entire political machine. If Trump through Musk and others starts doing immense good, democrats will scream bloody murder that “the fascist authoritarians are destroying our democratic institutions.” That’s also why they have redefined our system of govt as “democracy” and redefined “democracy” as “institutions of the state”. When they have been speaking about defending democracy, they don’t mean to defend the constitutional republic and its system of voting for representatives, they mean the institutions and bureaucracy and apparatus of the state. If Trump and Musk and such clean that apparatus out, they will be doing humanity a massive service that will lead to generations of unimagined prosperity. And democrats will be shrieking holy hell the entire time.

Tesla’s @Tesla_Optimus will be doing this soon, thankfully

How about "No" You are a signee of UNCLOS, Iran. You don't own the Strait... never have. And any threat to global commerce is an act of piracy. This is basic shit, folks. And yet, everyone wants to side with these asshats. zerohedge.com/markets/oil-pl…

@Not_the_Bee This comment section is a major turn off to religion.

Billionaire owner of OnlyFans dies of cancer at 43 notthebee.com/article/onlyfa…

OK, sure, maybe Muslim immigrants in Denmark cost the country a little more — alright alright, a lot more — but, you know, you also need to take into account that they... uhm... rape more.

@mkma918 @RockChartrand You must hate all Marxist forms of govt that have little choice of employment and no chance of upward mobility. The cure for what you claim to oppose is robust capitalism as free markets offer virtually infinite options for someone looking to better himself.

@RockChartrand Accepted wages? Or wages with no choice but to accept?

The difference is simple. The government takes from what you’ve actually earned. Your employer doesn’t take your pay. They pay you what you agreed to. The “500% they stole from you” only exists in a theory no one consented to. The wage you accepted is the reality. One is an actual transfer from your income. The other is a claim on income that was never yours to begin with.

The current chaos at airports is just another argument for privatizing airport security. TSA agents are horrible at their jobs. The DHS admitted back in 2017 that, when tested, TSA misses up to EIGHTY PERCENT of weapons and contraband smuggled through screening. And now we have to wait in line for three hours because funding for an incompetent agency with an 80 percent failure rate is being held hostage. The whole thing is insane. Get the government out of airport security. They suck at it. And it's just another bargaining chip these sociopaths can use for their own political agendas.

It was obvious at the time. This isn’t some new revelation.

A bartender in Galveston, Texas was arrested for serving a drunk customer who killed someone. She makes $25 an hour. A federal judge makes $236,000 a year and has absolute legal immunity for every decision on the bench, including releasing violent offenders who kill again. 42 states have dram shop laws. The bartender’s causation chain has two links: pour drink, person crashes. Exposed window? Sometimes three hours. She can be charged with criminal negligence, sued in civil court, and lose her livelihood. All for failing to eyeball whether a guy at a crowded bar was too drunk for one more round. The judge has a pre-sentencing report, a criminal history score, a risk assessment algorithm, victim impact statements, and a prosecutor arguing the case in front of them. Every tool the system can produce. And when they get it wrong? Nothing. Absolute judicial immunity, codified since Bradley v. Fisher in 1871, means a judge cannot be sued for any act performed in judicial capacity. How absolute? In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in Stump v. Sparkman that a judge who signed a petition to sterilize a 15-year-old girl without her knowledge or consent was fully immune. The court acknowledged the act was reprehensible. Didn’t matter. Judicial act, judicial immunity, case closed. That precedent still controls today. The recidivism data is where this gets obscene. The U.S. Sentencing Commission tracked violent offenders released in 2010 across eight years. 63.8% were rearrested. Median time to rearrest: 16 months. These numbers haven’t moved in two decades. The 2005 cohort and the 2010 cohort produced statistically identical outcomes. Judges aren’t making unpredictable calls. They’re making well-documented bets with other people’s lives, and the base rates have been published and available the entire time. The bartender gets three hours of ambiguous signals. The judge gets the full weight of the federal data apparatus. One of them can go to prison for getting it wrong. The other can’t even be named in a civil suit.

@ZackPolanski Those are really fucking stupid suggestions. You’re not a serious person.

This is no time for half-measures. Protect families from the energy price hike. Paid for by: A tighter oil & gas windfall tax. Taxing income from wealth the same as from work. And double down on renewables and energy efficiency to protect us from future shocks.

@MikkoKorhonen12 @bell00david @DrNeilStone I mean, he laid it all out for you… 😂

@bell00david @DrNeilStone Not a ridiculous question at all. Let's see some numbers for these things you listed.

Name a human invention that has saved more lives than vaccines

@lanechanged @DrNeilStone x.com/joesanders33/s…

@DrNeilStone I don't think i can. Its absolutely vaccines with seatbelts coming in 2nd, prob.

@DrNeilStone - Clean water / sanitation systems - Antibiotics - Antiseptics and sterilization techniques - Insecticide-treated bed nets and mosquito control (e.g., DDT in its early use) - Safe blood transfusion and blood typing - Anesthesia and modern surgery To name a few

@TonyClimate His point here is sound though.

President Trump has largely lost his ability to persuade with words and ideas, and now relies on the military for his power. He is a completely different person than who I supported in three elections.

@Angry_Staffer Except Iran actually abiding to it.

Oh. So they want Obama’s nuclear deal minus Obama’s signature. Got it.

@travisakers Nothing was “in place”

Trump is literally proposing the same exact plan that President Obama already had in place before Trump ended it.

@duncancampbell 1) Europe 2) Texas adds to his point

For this to be persuasive you need to: 1) Demonstrate the expensive countries were cheap before solar and wind started being deployed. 2) Not ignore Texas.

@llana @scottsantens It’s never been necessary.

This. Never forget how critical UBI is. No matter what is happening in the world, UBI remains necessary.

@scottsantens Tax cuts aren’t spending 😂

For my entire life it has been true that every time Republicans are in power, they increase deficit spending, and whenever they aren't in power, they complain about deficit spending and pinky swear they will reduce deficit spending if only you vote them back into power. And what do they use that spending for? Tax cuts for the rich, subsidies for big corporate donors, and wars in the Middle East. If you voted Republicans into power again in the belief they would reduce the deficit and not go to war, sorry, but you were lied to and you fell for it, despite being able to learn from the past to avoid that. Yes, you voted for all of this. You may not understand that you did, but you did. This is all just the newest variation of what we see every time the GOP gets handed the reigns of the economy. Democrats need to stop playing this game and instead use deficit spending to make our lives better by focusing on our basic needs and our costs of living. Spend less on the military and more on healthcare and a basic income floor. Also, to hell with the two party system. We need more choices. We need other parties to win via proportional representation.

@scottsantens No, it’s meant to usher in Marxist rule.

UniversaI Basic Income is meant to ensure nobody falls below a non-zero floor, and to distribute a dividend from an economy we all help create. The floor is the point. The dividend is the justice. In the simplest terms—UBI IS A FOUNDATION. Everything else exists on top of it.

@Travis1 2 Jordan and Bird together is game over.

Which team are you taking?