Daina Janitis

This is real stuff. Can we read it, absorb it, and put it to bed? Tomorrow is Tuesday. Spring is in the air. Let's get back to chasing billionaire evil, encouraging education, and protecting the weak, the hungry, and the innocent. x.com/glenn_tunes/st…

Kimmel did a harsh roast and called Melania an “expectant widow,” which is ugly but still a joke in a late‑night monologue, not an actual call for violence. If we’re going to say that “shouldn’t be allowed into our homes,” ( a demand that he be fired?) then we should be equally bothered by years of Trump cheering on crowds chanting “lock her up,” smearing whole groups as “animals,” or glorifying people who assaulted journalists and opponents. We defend free speech and some mean political JOKES, or we start demanding censorship whenever jokes target our own side.

@BarackObama Here's your pal Jimmy Kimmel making an interesting comment a couple of days ago 🤔

Although we don’t yet have the details about the motives behind last night's shooting at the White House Correspondents Dinner, it’s incumbent upon all us to reject the idea that violence has any place in our democracy. It’s also a sobering reminder of the courage and sacrifice that U.S. Secret Service Agents show every day. I’m grateful to them – and thankful that the agent who was shot is going to be okay.

From what’s been reported, Kimmel did a harsh roast and called Melania an “expectant widow,” which is ugly but still a joke in a late‑night monologue, not an actual call for violence. If we’re going to say that “shouldn’t be allowed into our homes,” ( a demand that he be fired?) then we should be equally bothered by years of Trump cheering on crowds chanting “lock her up,” smearing whole groups as “animals,” or glorifying people who assaulted journalists and opponents. We defend free speech and some mean political JOKES, or we start demanding censorship whenever jokes target our own side.

@JoJoFromJerz @FLOTUS Kimmel is inciting violence. Such speech is not protected. Learn the constitution. Trump initiates policies. Your side divides and hates him overtly, publicly, and with violent rhetoric. Biden was destroying our sovereignty, our economy, and our world reputation. No one shot him

Kimmel’s hateful and violent rhetoric is intended to divide our country. His monologue about my family isn’t comedy- his words are corrosive and deepens the political sickness within America. People like Kimmel shouldn’t have the opportunity to enter our homes each evening to spread hate. A coward, Kimmel hides behind ABC because he knows the network will keep running cover to protect him. Enough is enough.  It is time for ABC to take a stand.  How many times will ABC’s leadership enable Kimmel’s atrocious behavior at the expense of our community.

Sarcasm and wit are not threats- curse wrods are closer: From what’s been reported, Kimmel did a harsh roast and called Melania an “expectant widow,” which is ugly but still a joke in a late‑night monologue, not an actual call for violence. If we’re going to say that “shouldn’t be allowed into our homes,” ( a demand that he be fired?) then we should be equally bothered by years of Trump cheering on crowds chanting “lock her up,” smearing whole groups as “animals,” or glorifying people who assaulted journalists and opponents. We defend free speech and some mean political JOKES, or we start demanding censorship whenever jokes target our own side.

@JoJoFromJerz @FLOTUS You need a MEAL TICKET you vile, disgusting excuse of a human being. YOU THREATEN THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA every fucking time you open your mouth. FUCK OFF.

It’s hard to evaluate this without the exact words in front of us. From what’s been reported, Kimmel did a harsh roast and called Melania an “expectant widow,” which is ugly but still a joke in a late‑night monologue, not an actual call for violence. If we’re going to say that “shouldn’t be allowed into our homes,” then we should be equally bothered by years of Trump cheering on crowds chanting “lock her up,” smearing whole groups as “animals,” or glorifying people who assaulted journalists and opponents. Either we defend free speech and accept that political comedy gets mean sometimes, or we start demanding censorship whenever jokes target our own side.

@JoJoFromJerz @FLOTUS Certainly sounds like a threat to me. Cheung or Miller, the Stevie-word-thugs, should be more careful about how they phrase things.

Unbelievable. No one has to watch the Kimmel or Colbert shows - or my favourite Jon Stewart's Daily Show. Through them, however, we are reminded that some parts of America still have wit, intelligence, moral judgment, and a desire to reveal truth. Your "community" is not everyone's. BTW- who wrote this for you?

You’re describing an “us vs them” world that exists on both sides, not just “the Left.” Data on U.S. political violence since 2016 shows incidents from both left‑ and right‑wing extremists. No camp has a monopoly on either virtue or violence. There have been plots and attacks against Democrats and Republicans: from the 2020 far‑right kidnapping/assassination plot against Michigan Gov. Whitmer to attempts targeting conservative figures and Trump himself. None of that is acceptable, no matter who it’s aimed at. And Trump is not some uniquely dehumanized innocent bystander here. Studies of his speeches show heavy use of “us vs them” language and dehumanizing rhetoric about immigrants and opponents, which fuels the same polarization you’re blaming on “the Left.” That cycle is what’s dangerous.

A lot of what you’re listing is framing, not facts. Political violence and “us vs them” rhetoric have sadly come from both left and right in recent years, including plots and attacks against Democratic and Republican officials, and even assassination attempts against Trump himself. Trump’s own rhetoric has repeatedly dehumanized opponents and fueled that same polarization you’re blaming on “the Left.” Calling everyone who disagrees with you “fascist” just keeps the cycle going; it doesn’t change the reality that no side has a monopoly on either virtue or violence.

EVERY DEMOCRAT WANTS YOU DEAD. EVERY ONE. Every single one of them harbors this desire. They leave the physical act of pulling the trigger to others. The moment the bullet finds its mark, the masks drop and the celebration begins. "For the common good." "To protect our democracy." These are the same blood-soaked incantations they have recited since 2016. They will claim violence has no place in our politics while immediately pivoting to label MAGA as the real threat. The translation is clear. Your death is an unfortunate necessity demanded by the Republic. This represents the logical endpoint of a decade-long campaign of demonization. They call Trump Hitler. They label MAGA a cult. They equate border enforcement with racism and election skepticism with insurrection. Every institution they control from the media and academia to the DOJ and Big Tech has spent years programming their followers to view conservatives strictly as vermin. When the vermin start dying, the faithful refuse to mourn. They meme. They ratio. They trend phrases like "one down, millions to go." History is littered with regimes that spoke in the language of the common good while stacking bodies. The Jacobins, the Bolsheviks, and the Red Guards all began with noble rhetoric and ended with mass graves. The modern American Left has simply updated the vocabulary to weaponize terms like equity, sustainability, and the idea that democracy dies in darkness. It is the exact same meat grinder operating under new branding. Their rhetoric is its merciless clarity. It destroys the comfortable illusion of equal culpability between both sides. One side argues policy. The other side argues that your existence is a hate crime. There is no negotiating with that level of hostility. Reaching across the aisle is impossible when the opposition views the aisle itself as a moral obscenity. The path forward requires us to stop pretending. We must stop apologizing for noticing reality. We must stop ceding the moral high ground to people who cheer when we bleed. The shooting tonight is Exhibit A in the case for political realism. They want us erased. We want to win. Only one of those goals is compatible with survival.

x More than 60 post‑2020 lawsuits, including in front of Republican and Trump‑appointed judges, did not find evidence of the kind of widespread fraud that could change the result. Nationwide audits and recounts showed the vote counts were accurate, with error rates on the order of thousandths of a percent.T he federal agency in charge of election cybersecurity (CISA) called 2020 “the most secure election in American history” and found no evidence that voting systems deleted, lost, or changed votes. Furthermore ... You don’t have to like Biden or believe he’s a great candidate, but personal insults aren’t evidence, and repeating a disproven “stolen election” narrative is exactly how democracy gets weakened, not protected.

@DJanitis @WoodshopJoe27 @FinalTelegraph And let’s not get started on elections. It has been proven that the 2020 election was stolen. Biden the Alzheimer’s patient did not receive 81 million votes, this was not the most secure election in history. The Left went hard on anyone who said otherwise. Fascism.

You might want to review some facts... the National Trust filed the lawsuit for Historic Preservation—a nonprofit chartered by Congress in 1949 to protect historic sites. The judge ruled construction must halt because Trump bypassed required legal reviews, didn't seek congressional approval, and violated multiple federal laws including the National Environmental Policy Act. The judge found 'no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have' to demolish part of the White House and build a $400M addition without Congress. This isn't about aesthetics—it's about whether a president can unilaterally alter a national landmark without following the law."

@GuntherEagleman She did not file the lawsuit alone; so who is funding her litigation? That is where the real issue lies.

🚨 RICK SCOTT NAILS IT: “Trying to stop a ballroom? This is Trump Derangement Syndrome.” A federal judge actually halted White House ballroom construction because some liberal dog walker complained it was “ugly.”

Actually, the lawsuit was filed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation—a nonprofit chartered by Congress in 1949 to protect historic sites. The judge ruled construction must halt because Trump bypassed required legal reviews, didn't seek congressional approval, and violated multiple federal laws including the National Environmental Policy Act. The judge found 'no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have' to demolish part of the White House and build a $400M addition without Congress. This isn't about aesthetics—it's about whether a president can unilaterally alter a national landmark without following the law.

@GuntherEagleman Find the home of the liberal dog walker and then use the exact same court to have that house demolished because it is “ugly.”

Actually ...Actually... the lawsuit was filed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation—a nonprofit chartered by Congress in 1949 to protect historic sites. The judge ruled construction must halt because Trump bypassed required legal reviews, didn't seek congressional approval, and violated multiple federal laws including the National Environmental Policy Act. The judge found 'no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have' to demolish part of the White House and build a $400M addition without Congress. This isn't about aesthetics—it's about whether a president can unilaterally alter a national landmark without following the law.

@GuntherEagleman And yet we can’t get a talking filibuster or appointment approvals or the SAA passed but a dog walker can be offended and everything stops? Make that make sense… @LeaderJohnThune @SenateGOP

Yup...Actually, the lawsuit was filed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation—a nonprofit chartered by Congress in 1949 to protect historic sites. The judge ruled construction must halt because Trump bypassed required legal reviews, didn't seek congressional approval, and violated multiple federal laws including the National Environmental Policy Act. The judge found 'no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have' to demolish part of the White House and build a $400M addition without Congress. This isn't about aesthetics—it's about whether a president can unilaterally alter a national landmark without following the law.

@GuntherEagleman Public infrastructure disputes often get simplified online, but the legal issues are more complex.

Worth repeating...Actually, the lawsuit was filed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation—a nonprofit chartered by Congress in 1949 to protect historic sites. The judge ruled construction must halt because Trump bypassed required legal reviews, didn't seek congressional approval, and violated multiple federal laws including the National Environmental Policy Act. The judge found 'no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have' to demolish part of the White House and build a $400M addition without Congress. This isn't about aesthetics—it's about whether a president can unilaterally alter a national landmark without following the law.

@GuntherEagleman The injunction was not because someone said it was ugly. Judge Richard Leon halted above-ground work unless Congress approved it, with a carveout for genuine security needs.

I repeat - sorry - Actually, the lawsuit was filed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation—a nonprofit chartered by Congress in 1949 to protect historic sites. The judge ruled construction must halt because Trump bypassed required legal reviews, didn't seek congressional approval, and violated multiple federal laws including the National Environmental Policy Act. The judge found 'no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have' to demolish part of the White House and build a $400M addition without Congress. This isn't about aesthetics—it's about whether a president can unilaterally alter a national landmark without following the law.

@GuntherEagleman East Wing renovations happened quietly for years. Now ONE JUDGE says Congress must vote on beauty standards? Scott’s TDS call is spot on...build the damn thing. 🔥

Does Rick Scott not know the law? Oh...yes ... Actually, the lawsuit was filed by the National Trust for Historic Preservation—a nonprofit chartered by Congress in 1949 to protect historic sites. The judge ruled construction must halt because Trump bypassed required legal reviews, didn't seek congressional approval, and violated multiple federal laws including the National Environmental Policy Act. The judge found 'no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have' to demolish part of the White House and build a $400M addition without Congress. This isn't about aesthetics—it's about whether a president can unilaterally alter a national landmark without following the law.

@AmericanAlphaX @GuntherEagleman How did that happen? If anyone knows about robbing, it would be Rick Scott.

Rick Scott got ROBBED of the Senate Leader position! I’m still upset about that! The man who actually fights for America, cuts waste, and backs Trump gets sidelined while the usual insiders play their games. This is exactly why voters are fed up with the swamp. Scott earned it the Senate leader role and the RINOs screwed him. He was the people’s pick! Time to make it right!

Yup ... x.com/OrevaZSN/statu…

@ronnoc1952 @FinalTelegraph I’ll stick to facts; you can handle the animal noises.

@DJanitis @FinalTelegraph Scalded dog hollers