The CEO of a major oil company has said that it is “too expensive and too polluting” to return operations to Venezuela, despite the urging of Donald Trump.

TotalEnergies boss Patrick Pouyanne said the company had pulled out of the South American country “because it clashed with our strategy. It was too expensive and too polluting and that is still the case.”

The French multinational energy company left Venezuela in 2022 but, along with others, faced pressure to return from Trump following the U.S. military operations to capture the ousted president Nicolas Maduro on January 3.

Following the high-octane removal of Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores from their home in Caracas, Trump said the U.S. would “run” Venezuela until the country was stable enough for democratic elections. He also urged U.S. energy firms to invest $100 billion to rebuild Venezuela’s oil industry, pledging to support them, and claiming that previous problems were “because they didn’t have Trump as a president.”

Read more: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/oil-totalenergies-ceo-trump-venezuela-b2918621.html

This shrieking Harpy is the Attorney General of the United States.  She is the highest law enforcement official in the United States.

If her lips are moving, she is lying.

She is a disgrace to the position and to the nation.  She is unqualified to be even an ambulance chasing lawyer.  She has no moral courage, no moral compass.  Her loyalty is for sale.

She is trash.

I realize that she will not face any consequences right now, since Trump’s DOJ would never prosecute her for lying to Congress over and over.   However, the statute of limitations for lying to Congress, generally charged under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (false statements) or 18 U.S.C. § 1621 (perjury), is five years from the date the false statement was made. This means federal prosecutors must initiate charges within this five-year period.

2029 is coming.

This is America and their people all are Americans:

Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Haiti, Antilles, United States of America, Canada, and Puerto Rico.

Why are Trump, his supporters, and Republicans in general so filled with hate?

The short answer is: because hate is the point. But let me break it down.

Grievance as identity

MAGA isn’t a political movement built on policy. It’s built on resentment. The core message has always been “you’ve been wronged” — by elites, by immigrants, by cities, by universities, by the media, by women, by minorities, by anyone who isn’t you.

This isn’t a coalition that comes together to BUILD something. It comes together to tear things down. Hate isn’t a byproduct of the movement. It’s the fuel.

Zero-sum thinking

They genuinely believe that if someone else gains, they lose. Rights for gay people? That’s an attack on Christians. Immigrants succeeding? They must be stealing from “real Americans.” A Black president? He must be illegitimate.

There’s no concept of shared prosperity or expanding opportunity. Just winners and losers. And they’re terrified of losing.

The dominance hierarchy

A lot of MAGA is rooted in evangelical and authoritarian psychology. There’s supposed to be a natural order: white at the top, Christian at the top, male at the top, straight at the top.

When you’ve been at the top of a hierarchy your whole life, equality feels like oppression. Giving others a seat at the table feels like theft.

The media ecosystem

Fox News → OANN → Newsmax → podcasts → Twitter/X. It’s a 24/7 rage machine. Every algorithm rewards outrage. Every host competes to be more extreme than the last.

These people are literally addicted to anger. Neurologically. They get dopamine hits from feeling righteous fury. They wake up and immediately check their phones to find out what they should be mad about today.

Turn it off for a week and they go through withdrawal.

Economic anxiety — weaponized

Here’s the thing: a lot of the underlying pain is real. Deindustrialization gutted their towns. Opioids killed their families. Wages stagnated while costs exploded. The American Dream stopped working for them.

But instead of blaming the corporations that shipped jobs overseas, or the billionaires that rigged the economy, or the politicians that deregulated everything — they’re taught to blame immigrants. To blame welfare recipients. To blame Black people in cities. To blame trans kids.

Classic fascist playbook: take legitimate economic anger and redirect it at the vulnerable.

The permission structure

Trump didn’t create the hate. He just gave it permission.

For decades, these people were told to keep the quiet part quiet. Be polite. Use dog whistles. Then Trump came along and said the loud part loud — and nothing happened. No consequences.

He showed them they could be openly racist, openly cruel, openly contemptuous of democracy — and not only survive, but win.

“He fights” doesn’t mean he fights for them. It means he’s mean to people they don’t like. The cruelty is the point.

Community built on enemies

This is the part people miss: MAGA is a community. For a lot of these people — especially older, rural, isolated Americans — it’s their entire social world. Their friends are MAGA. Their family is MAGA. Their church is MAGA.

The hate is the membership card. The shared enemies are what bind them together. Leaving the movement doesn’t just mean changing your politics. It means losing everyone you know.

So they double down. And double down again. Because the alternative is being alone.

The bottom line

Why is MAGA so hateful?

Because scared people + relentless propaganda + permission to be cruel + community built on shared enemies = hate as a lifestyle.

They’re not going to be reasoned out of it. They weren’t reasoned into it.

The only thing that works is making it socially and politically costly to be part of it. Outvoting them. Out-organizing them. And building something better that gives people a different place to belong.

QUOTED FROM:  https://jessica.substack.com/p/theyre-coming-for-our-daughters

My daughter has had a difficult few months in school. By some administrative fluke, she ended up in a class where she was the only girl—it was just Layla, surrounded by a dozen or so 15-year-old boys. She could have found it tolerable, I think, if not for the rape jokes.

That’s right, in the year 2026—in a progressive Brooklyn high school—my daughter had to listen to her classmates ‘joking’ about rape. These are boys she thought were her peers and friends, some of whom she’s known since pre-school. And though the school ended up handling it well, I watched Layla’s light dim a little every time she came home from that class. For her, it was a regular reminder that the world sees her as less human, less worthy of dignity. Just less.

It’s a feeling I remember well, and one I couldn’t stop thinking about this weekend as I considered conservatives’ plan for the next generation of girls and young women. Because what they have in store for our daughters isn’t just about policy and politics, but dimming their collective lights.

A few weeks ago, the Heritage Foundation—the powerhouse organization behind Project 2025—released a 250-year roadmap to “save America.” Written by authors with close ties to the Trump administration, the document is a how-to guide for subjugating girls and young women: a detailed plan to push them out of college, funnel them into early marriage and motherhood, and then trap them there.

The document is part of a broad, well-funded campaign to reassert misogynist control by targeting women while they’re young and pliable—and chip away at one of Democrats’ most supportive demographics in the process.

According to Heritage, the future of the country relies on more straight married couples having more children. To make that happen, the group says, the government has to address multiple factors that “conspire” to drive down birth rates:

“These include the proliferation of birth control, more prospects for women to receive higher education and work outside the home…”

In other words, pretty much every major advancement for women’s rights and freedom is a problem. And whether it’s eradicating “cheap and ubiquitous” access to contraception or appointing family court judges hostile to divorce, Heritage has the answer.

Like the conservative movement more broadly, the organization wants young women to believe this is all being done for their benefit: that work is soulless and unfulfilling, that feminism has made women miserable, and that the real path to happiness is being a stay-at-home mom. The latest right-wing mantra for women? “Less burnout, more babies.”

This isn’t some fringe effort. From the tradwife explosion to MAHA disinformation about birth control, conservatives are pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into convincing the next generation that the rapid erosion of their rights isn’t a political and moral crisis—but a lifestyle upgrade.

Why bother with the horror of the professional and public world, young women are told, when you can just opt out? That message isn’t limited to Turning Point USA conferences, either: over the last year, outlets from CBS News to NPR have hosted earnest ‘debates’ on whether feminism “failed women.”

Even the Vice President of the United States is advising women to give up work for motherhood. At the March for Life last month, JD Vance said, “you’re never going to find great meaning in a cubicle or in front of a computer screen—but you will find great meaning if you dedicate yourself to the creation and sustenance of human life.” (He said something near-identical in a 2022 tweet.)

But there’s only so much choice conservatives plan to give young women in the matter—and other powerful misogynists are done bothering with pretense. This week, billionaire pro-natalist Elon Musk—who bemoans birth control and built an AI tool that lets men “undress” women’s images—co-signed this chilling X post:

When I say they’re coming for our daughters, I’m not exaggerating. The powerful people obsessed with the (white) birth rate and enforcing ‘traditional’ values and norms know they need young women to do it—whether those young women like it or not.

What do you think provocateur Jordan Peterson meant when he talked about “enforced monogamy” as a solution to men’s violence in 2018? Or why, nearly a decade later, one of the country’s most popular podcasts would seriously debate whether young men’s inability to find sexual partners and have children is a “mass extinction event” akin to “genocide”?

“Does society have a responsibility to intervene in some way, to course correct this?,” Diary of a CEO host Steven Bartlett asked.

If this were just about men’s overwhelming desire to advance their genetic lines, we’d hear podcasts and pundits talking about IVF or how to incentivize surrogacy. And if conservatives were simply concerned about the birth rate, they’d propose policy solutions that actually help families—like paid parental leave, affordable child care, and laws that don’t kill pregnant women.

Pretending this is some noble pursuit to save civilization is just a way to launder rape apologia and misogyny. The actual goal is good old-fashioned control and a world where women—young women, especially—have no choices.

And let’s be blunt: abortion bans and forced pregnancy were just the beginning.

Key to conservatives’ plan is getting girls and young women married and pregnant as early as possible. How early? Well, Heritage cites women in their early twenties as “more fertile” (yuck), but the authors also scold Democrats for “stigmatizing teen mothers.” One of those authors, Emma Waters, is working with the White House on a campaign to “persuade” women to have more babies—an effort that includes scrapping sex education in favor of “menstrual cycle classes” designed to teach the optimal time to conceive.

At the same time, the Trump administration has blocked funding for teen pregnancy prevention programs, blasting them as “radical indoctrination,” while Heritage has quietly dropped its hand-wringing about teen pregnancy in favor of a new term: the “non-marital teen birth rate.”

In other words, the problem is no longer that girls are getting pregnant before adulthood—it’s that they’re not married first. Pair that with the fact that most teen pregnancies are fathered by adult men, and with Republicans’ ongoing resistance to child marriage bans, and you start to see exactly what kind of future they’re fighting for.

Consider what all of this means for girls across the country, especially those in conservative-led states. Sex education is being eliminated or replaced with propaganda like ‘Baby Olivia’ videos, lessons telling girls that sex makes them ‘dirty’, and Trump’s menstrual classes. Planned Parenthood and other reproductive healthcare clinics are being shuttered in favor of crisis pregnancy centers, which doesn’t just make it harder for young people to access abortion—but contraception, too.

In fact, it’s only a matter of time before Republicans argue teens shouldn’t have birth control at all. They’ve already laid the groundwork by banning gender affirming care for minors, arguing that hormones harm young bodies.

Girls who would normally turn somewhere for help will also be out of luck. Conservatives aren’t just systematically stripping away support systems for teens, they’re eradicating basic information. Attorneys general in several states are fighting to ban ads for pro-choice groups that share information about abortion, while legislators across the country are introducing bills to make those sites illegal in the first place.

Lawmakers are also working to quash pro-choice speech in high schools and colleges—like banning campus health centers from even mentioning abortion, including in states where it’s legal. And under so-called ‘abortion trafficking’ laws, grandmothers and older sisters could face felony charges for helping a teen end their pregnancy. There are even attempts to criminalize lending a young person gas money to leave the state, or sending them a text message with a URL to an abortion clinic.

They want our daughters and granddaughters to have zero information about their bodies and sex, no ability to protect themselves from pregnancy, limited choices for an intellectual and professional life, and—once our girls have been corralled into early marriages—few opportunities to leave.

Push them into the home, force them to get pregnant, rinse and repeat.

And while it’s certainly easier for the Heritage Foundation and their allies if American girls fall in line, conservatives in power are just as happy to force them onto that narrow path. As with all coercive men, the fact that young women don’t want this is part of the appeal.

The truth is that the next generation is as ambitious as ever. The futures they want for themselves are broad and bright. Sometimes that includes husbands and children, sometimes it doesn’t. The most recent studies show that young men are actually far more likely to name children as their top marker of personal success. (Women cite financial independence and their careers.) It’s young men who are having a hard time finding partners, and it’s young men who are lonely.

In other words, despite years of cultural messages to the contrary—it’s men, actually, who are desperate for marriage and babies.

I suppose that’s what Heritage’s roadmap and the conservative agenda is really about: building the world that men want, and forcing women to live inside it.

I’m far more interested in the big, bright life my daughter wants, and ensuring it stays her own.

Last night’s NFL Super Bowl game was great. The guys wearing blue beat the guys wearing red, and Bad Bunny and Lady Gaga made MAGA snowflakes cry.

But the NFL can also teach Americans a huge lesson about economics, “socialism,” and the differences between Republican “free market” nuts and FDR’s re-regulation of the American economy that created the largest middle class in history and the first in the world to include more than half of a nation’s citizens.

Most Americans would be highly offended, for example, if the NFL took big bucks from Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg or somebody like these monopolists to change the rules so whichever team gave the League the most money could have an extra three players on the field at all times.

But that’s pretty much exactly what Reagaonics and deregulation have brought us in our marketplaces; it’s the staggering difficulty that every small business in America faces today in the form of massive corporations like Walmart, Facebook, X, Google, and Amazon.

For capitalism to work in a way that doesn’t produce oligarchs and monopolies, it must be regulated. Capitalism, after all, is just a game that people play using money and mutually agreed-upon rules. Just like football.

The NFL heavily regulates football in the United States, at least the football played by its teams. Those regulations include how many players are on the field at any time, exactly what constitutes a down or a touchdown, and rules about how players may physically contact each other, and under what circumstances.

The NFL’s super-socialist regulations also decide which team gets first pick of new players: they decided that the worst-performing teams should have first choice of newly available players, giving every team an opportunity to rise up through the ranks in the following season.

It’s much like progressive income taxation and the estate tax, giving the little guy a chance while slightly restraining those already at the top. These regulations guarantee the safety and stability of the game itself, and also guarantee that fans of football have a consistent experience, because everybody understands and follows the rules.

That’s not meritocracy; it’s planned redistribution of future resources to maintain league balance. If American public policy worked this way, the millionaire opinion bots at billionaire-owned Fox “News” would spontaneously combust.

The league also pools its television and licensing revenue and divides it equally among all teams: No owner gets richer just because they’re in a bigger market. In a pure “free market,” the Cowboys and Giants would drown everyone else in cash. The NFL says, “Nope, everybody eats.” That’s redistribution by design.

And they impose a hard salary cap so rich owners can’t simply buy championships, and they require owners to spend what is effectively a minimum wage on players rather than hoarding profits. Teams that overspend are punished: that’s collective control of capital to prevent oligarchy, the exact thing conservatives scream about.

NFL teams are also required to spend a minimum percentage of shared revenue on their players. Owners can’t just hoard money; they must reinvest in labor. That’s closer to social democracy than laissez-faire capitalism.

The NFL figured out something America forgot after Reagan: markets only work when rules prevent the powerful from rigging the game.

In other words, the NFL is a regulated market with enforced rules that prevent monopolies, protect labor, and preserve competition. And because of that, small-market teams can win, dynasties don’t last forever, and fans get a fair game.

If the American economy were run more like the NFL, we’d have fewer oligarchs, more competition, and a much healthier middle class.

But imagine if Milton Friedman, Robert Bork, or the other idiots like them who first advised the Reagan administration and now have guided Republicans ever since were to have taken over the NFL.

The teams with the wealthiest owners would always get the best players, and thus would win every game. They might even decide that the team that gave the NFL the most money could have an extra player or three on the field at various times.

They’d assure us that the teams that didn’t perform as well just have to “pull themselves up by their bootstraps.” Perhaps their problem is just that their players are “lazy,” these people would tell us, and the solution is to cut their salaries and reduce the amount of protective equipment they can wear so that they will have a “incentive” to play harder and increase their performance.

Then the richest teams would begin buying the poorer teams, until all the teams are owned by three or four billionaires. Sounds like every industry in today’s America. But conservatives would try to convince you it would create a football paradise, right?

Of course it wouldn’t be a paradise: Fans would stop watching, kids would stop dreaming of playing, and the game itself would collapse under the weight of rigging and unfairness. Not to mention that if the socialist NFL ever actually tried some crazy “free market” stupidity like that, Congress would be holding hearings within a week and the public outrage would be deafening.

But when the same thing happens in our economy, we’re told by Republicans that it’s just “the free market.” We’re told that “monopolies are natural,” that “billionaires are geniuses,” and that working people who can’t get ahead in a rigged system somehow “deserve their fate.”

We’re told by these fools that any attempt to re-write the rules so the American economy is fair again and our middle class can recover from the massive $50+ trillion hit it’s taken from 45 years of Reaganomics is “socialism,” even though FDR’s system is exactly how every successful capitalist system in history has worked.

Franklin Roosevelt understood this. He knew markets don’t self-police any more than football does. Without referees, rules, and consequences, the biggest and most ruthless players take over, the game stops being a game, and democracy itself is put at risk. And when the morbidly rich write the rules, they inevitably only benefit themselves; everybody else gets screwed.

The NFL doesn’t regulate football because it hates competition: it regulates football and “redistributes” wealth and opportunity so competition can exist at all. America once did the same thing with capitalism, and the result was the greatest middle class the world had ever seen.

Two-thirds of us were in the middle class when Reagan came into office, and could get there with a single paycheck thanks to FDR‘s and LBJ‘s “socialist” New Deal and Great Society policies. Today it’s only roughly 45% of us, and requires two paychecks. All because of 45 years of Reaganomics.

The choice in front of us is simple. We can keep pretending that letting billionaires write the political and economic rules and own the media is “freedom,” or we can remember that a fair game is what freedom actually looks like.

Because when the rules only work for the owners, the rest of us aren’t players anymore. We’re just there to watch, pay, and lose what little we have so the billionaires can buy another super-yacht.

 Surprise, Surprise?! TrumpRX is a fake: read the fine print. 

Most drug companies offer introductory specials on their new drugs, where if you contact them they’ll give you a substantial discount for the first one or two months. Trump’s new TrumpRX website claims to reduce the cost of drugs for Americans, but all it does is link you to the drug companies’s websites where these very limited coupons are available. It’s just another grift, as one should always expect from this professional grifter…

Trump bankruptcies and failures (a partial list )

• Trump Taj Mahal
• Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino
• Trump Castle Casino Resort
• Plaza Hotel in New York City
• Trump Hotels & Casino Resort
• Trump Entertainment Resorts
• Trump Steaks — these were discontinued after only two months due to extremely low sales.
• Trump Vodka (2005–2011): Launched with high expectations to compete with top-shelf brands, it failed to capture market share and ceased production in 2011.
• Trump Mortgage (2006–2007): Launched just before the housing market crash, the company failed within 18 months, with reports of misrepresented leadership and low revenue.
• Trump Magazine (2007–2009): Originally branded as Trump Style and later Trump World, this publication shut down amid the recession and declining ad revenue.
• GoTrump.com (2006–2007): A travel website that failed to gain traction in a competitive market and shut down after one year.
• Trump: The Game (1989/2004): A Monopoly-style board game that failed to sell well in its initial release and a subsequent relaunch.
• Trump University (2005–2011): A real estate training program that faced lawsuits alleging fraud and, in 2017, resulted in a $25 million settlement.
• The Trump Network (2009–2012): A multi-level marketing company that sold vitamins and home test kits before folding.
• Trump Fragrances (2004–2015): Lines such as “Success by Trump” were discontinued due to low sales.
• Trump Ice (2000s): While it had some intermittent success, this bottled water brand failed to establish a permanent, successful place in the market.
• Trump Shuttle (airline)
• Other Failed Goods: Trump Mattresses (Serta), Trump Shirts, and various other branded items were discontinued. 
• Trump First Presidential Administration – failed
• Trump Second Presidential Administration – failing

You need to read this book:  The Last American President:  A Broken Man, A Corrupt Party, and the World on the Brink, by Thom Hartmann.

Hartmann pulls no punches in this recent book that summarizes the convergence of (1) a man with no morals, a man whose entire life has been one failure after another, but who plays the part of a genius, (2) obscenely wealthy men who want to control government, and (3) a political party that threw away principles to gain power.

The Last American President rips open America’s wounded democracy to expose a terrifying truth: Donald Trump isn’t an anomaly—he’s the inevitable product of a system engineered to fail. This searing investigation reveals how a man forged by childhood trauma, pathological narcissism, and calculated cruelty didn’t hijack democracy—he was handed the keys by those who should have been its guardians.

Hartmann uncovers the unholy alliance between Trump’s damaged psyche and America’s rotted institutions. From Fred Trump’s brutal parenting to Roy Cohn’s lessons in shamelessness, from a Republican Party that traded principles for power to billionaire donors who treated democracy as a profit center, this book exposes the assembly line that manufactured an authoritarian.