76.6 F
Chicago
Wednesday, October 14, 2026
type here...
Home Blog Page 1190

Charlie Kirk Assassination Suspect Lived With Transgender Partner, Discord Denies Use

survivalnomics
-
0
Charlie Kirk Assassination Suspect Lived With Transgender Partner, Discord Denies Use

While the left oscillates between celebrating Charlie Kirk’s murder and insisting the suspect, Tyler Robinson, is a conservative, today we learn that Robinson was living with a transgender partner who was in the process of transitioning from male to female, Fox News‘ Brooke Singman first reported. 

The individual is now “fully cooperating with the FBI” on its investigation into Kirk’s assassination. 

According to Singman, “the FBI had texts and other communications between Robinson and the individual that helped FBI authorities solidify that Robinson was indeed the shooter.”

On Friday, federal and state authorities revealed in a press conference that a “roomate” cooperating with their investigation told them about communications from a contact named “Tyler,” which described bullet casings similar to those found at the scene of the murder, along with the “need to retrieve a rifle from a drop point.”

When investigators contacted the roommate, he said Robinson “made a joke on Discord,” a social messaging app, which caused law enforcement to ask him to show them the messages, according to an arrest affidavit.

The messages from “Tyler” stated a “need to retrieve a rifle from a drop point, leaving the rifle in a bush, messages related to visually watching the area where a rifle was left and a message referring to having left the rifle wrapped in a towel,” the affidavit shows. –NY Post

Other messages “also refer to engraving bullets,” and the fact that Tyler’s rifle was “unique,” according to law enforcement.

“Messages from contact Tyler also mention that he had changed outfits,” an affidavit states. 

And what’s this? 

Discord Disputes

While investigators say that Robinson was communicating on Discord, Discord says that never happened, and that there’s “no evidence that the suspect planned this incident or promoted violence on Discord.”

“The messages referenced in recent reporting about planning details do not appear to be Discord messages,” the company said, adding “These were communications between the suspect’s roommate and a friend after the shooting, where the roommate was recounting the contents of a note the suspect had left elsewhere.

“We have removed the suspect’s account for violating our off-platform behavior policy.”

Transtifa Problem

As we noted last month following the horrific attack on a Christian school by a transgender mass shooter, America has a “Transtifa” problem.

Andy Ngo, senior editor at The Post Millennial, has covered in-depth for quite some time about the disturbing rise of “trans militancy” across America. 

Ngo’s recent report, titled “The Violent Ideology and Lies Fueling Trans Militancy,” warns that the transgender mass shooter attack on Christians in Minneapolis last week “wasn’t an isolated attack.” 

In the last five years alone, several mass shootings have been committed by transgenders or pronoun people: 

  • November 19, 2022 – Club Q Nightclub, Colorado Springs, CO

    • Perpetrator: Anderson Lee Aldrich

    • Gender Identity: Non-binary (they/them pronouns, per court documents)

    • Casualties: 5 killed, 19 injured

    • Details: The shooter targeted an LGBTQ+ nightclub. Non-binary identification was stated post-arrest and accepted in legal proceedings.

  • March 27, 2023 – The Covenant School, Nashville, TN

    • Perpetrator: Audrey Hale

    • Gender Identity: Transgender (he/him pronouns, identified as male)

    • Casualties: 6 killed (3 children, 3 adults), shooter killed by police

    • Details: The shooter attacked a Christian elementary school, leaving a manifesto referencing gender identity and hormones.

  • January 4, 2024 – Perry High School, Perry, IA

    • Perpetrator: Dylan Butler

    • Gender Identity: Alleged genderfluid (he/they pronouns, posted LGBTQ+ symbols)

    • Casualties: 2 killed, 6 injured, shooter died by suicide

    • Details: Friends described Butler as genderfluid, but authorities did not confirm transgender identity.

  • February 11, 2024 – Lakewood Church, Houston, TX

    • Perpetrator: Genesse Moreno

    • Gender Identity: Alleged transgender (used male aliases but identified as female)

    • Casualties: 0 killed, 2 injured, shooter killed by police

    • Details: Claims of transgender identity were debunked by authorities.

  • August 27, 2025 – Annunciation Catholic School, Minneapolis, MN

    • Perpetrator: Robin Westman

    • Gender Identity: Transgender (she/her pronouns, name changed from Robert to Robin in 2020)

    • Casualties: 2 killed (both children), 18 injured (14 children, 4 adults), shooter died by suicide

    • Details: The shooter expressed admiration for other mass killers and had a documented interest in school shootings.

Earlier this month we carried an article from Jason Curtis Anderson of One City Rising detailing the ‘socialist NRA’ and the alarming rise of far-left militancy following the Minneapolis shooting. 

In the aftermath, investigators uncovered the shooter’s personal journal. On it, a sticker of a gay pride flag emblazoned with an assault rifle and the words “defend equality.” That very same flag is also displayed by the Minneapolis chapter of the Socialist Rifle Association (SRA), a self-proclaimed left-wing gun club that advocates armed struggle. Andy Ngo shared the images here.

pic

Say what you will about America’s increasingly bitter culture wars, but we cannot ignore the fact that much of the rhetoric surrounding the modern trans movement isn’t just about self-defense, but about “fighting back,” like this flyer, advocating for a trans day of vengeance. 

What exactly do you think they mean by that? 

The Socialist Rifle Association has more than 50 chapters nationwide, with several states hosting multiple chapters. We’ve been told for decades that America’s great domestic terror threat comes from far-right militias in camo gear. But there is obviously a militant movement on the other side of the spectrum: a growing network of far-left militias preparing for what they themselves call “the revolution.”

What say you?

*  *  *

Reminder: Secure your order by Sunday night for Wednesday delivery

Tyler Durden
Sat, 09/13/2025 – 15:45

Ether Vs Bitcoin Treasuries: Which Strategy Is Winning In 2025?

survivalnomics
-
0
Ether Vs Bitcoin Treasuries: Which Strategy Is Winning In 2025?

Authored by Dilip Kumar Patairya via BitcoinMagazine.com,

The treasury model: Why corporations and nations hold crypto

In recent years, companies and countries have increasingly included cryptocurrencies in their treasury strategies. Traditionally, corporate treasuries relied on cash, gold or government bonds to maintain value, ensure liquidity and provide financial stability. Governments had gold reserves to back their currencies.

However, cash loses purchasing power. Bonds carry rate and duration risk. Foreign exchange shocks hit balance sheets without warning. Ideally, you want a reserve that holds value, moves fast across borders and plugs into digital rails. That is why Bitcoin, Ether and, in some cases, stablecoins now sit beside cash, gold and T-bills.

For corporations, the brief is simple: hedge inflation, diversify currency exposure, keep 24/7 liquidity and test digital settlement.

For sovereigns, meanwhile, the brief expands to strategic reserves, sanctions resilience and access to neutral, global liquidity. 

Bitcoin treasuries: The digital gold standard

Since its inception, BTC has held a unique position as the first and most well-known cryptocurrency, often referred to as the digital equivalent of gold. It is an appealing option for treasuries looking to safeguard against inflation and risks associated with traditional currencies.

Senator Cynthia Lummis in the US has proposed a bill called the Bitcoin Act. If it becomes a law, the bill would require the US Treasury to acquire 1 million BTC over five years for a federal reserve. Earlier, in March 2025, President Donald Trump announced the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, a reserve asset funded by the US Treasury’s forfeited BTC.

El Salvador gained attention in 2021 by adopting BTC as legal tender, while countries such as Bhutan have quietly included Bitcoin in their reserves. In the corporate world, Strategy is known for continuously acquiring BTC, making it the main asset in its treasury.

Bitcoin offers several advantages. It is highly liquid due to active global markets, scarce because of its limited supply and widely recognized across the financial world. To make earnings with BTC lying idle, you need to pair it with external lending or derivatives strategies. 

While it does have its drawbacks, like price volatility affecting balance sheets, the positives outweigh the negatives.

Did you know? Semler Scientific emulated Strategy but at a smaller scale. The firm added 210 more BTC to its balance sheet, acquiring the additional coins from July 3 to July 16 for approximately $25 million at the time, or an average price of $118,974 each.

Ether treasuries: The programmable alternative

While BTC remains the cornerstone of crypto treasuries, Ether has gained traction as an attractive alternative, particularly after its 2022 shift to proof-of-stake (PoS), known as the Merge. This change reduced energy consumption and introduced staking, which generates annual returns of 3%-5%, making ETH a productive asset unlike BTC. For treasuries, this positions ETH as both a store of value and a source of income.

Ethereum’s ecosystem adds to its value. Through decentralized finance (DeFi), treasuries can access liquidity without selling their holdings. The growing use of tokenized real-world assets, such as bonds or commodities, strengthens Ethereum’s role as a financial platform.

Institutional adoption of ETH is increasing. Companies are starting to hold ETH, and asset managers have introduced Ether-based exchange-traded funds (ETFs) for regulated investment.

Even decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) are using ETH as a reserve to ensure long-term stability.

However, challenges remain. Regulatory uncertainty in major markets, risks related to staking performance and Ethereum’s technical complexity create hurdles. Despite these, in 2025, ETH stands out as a versatile treasury asset, combining value storage, income potential and practical utility.

Did you know? Long before ETH ETFs launched in 2024, institutions gained exposure through Grayscale, showing early institutional faith in Ether.

2025 data: Comparing Bitcoin and Ether treasury holdings

As of Sept. 10, 2025, BTC remains the leading choice, with companies and institutions holding over 1 million BTC. ETH, though less widely held, is gaining popularity, with corporations, DAOs and asset managers increasingly adding ETH to their reserves.

Data from blockchain analytics highlights different strategies: Bitcoin treasury holdings are typically kept idle for long-term storage, while a larger portion of Ether holdings is actively staked, earning steady returns.

As of Sept. 10, 2025, Strategy alone controls approximately 638,460 BTC worth billions in valuation, highlighting a long-term hodl strategy focused on holding rather than generating yield.

The number of listed firms holding BTC grew from 70 in December 2024 to 134 by mid‑2025, accumulating nearly 245,000 BTC.

This difference in returns between Bitcoin and Ether is significant. BTC serves as a stable but passive reserve, while Ether’s 3%-5% staking yields make it a more active, income-generating asset, illustrating the choice between Bitcoin’s reliability and Ether’s growth potential.

Considering ETH reserves, as of Sept. 10, 2025, 73 entities held 4.91 million ETH, worth $21.28 billion. Bitmine Immersion Tech (BMNR) was the top holder of Ether with 2.07 million ETH, worth $9 billion. SharpLink Gaming (SBET) comes second with 837,230,000 ETH, worth $3.7 billion.

What are dual strategies?

As the cryptocurrency market matures, some governments and corporations are adopting a dual treasury strategy by holding both BTC and ETH. This approach combines Bitcoin’s stability and global recognition as a reserve asset with Ether’s potential for generating yield and its programmable features.

Here are two examples of dual treasury strategies.

United States federal government (Strategic Crypto Reserve)

  • BTC Reserve: In March 2025, an executive order set up the US Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, which holds an estimated 198,000-207,000 BTC (approximately $17 billion-$20 billion), as of Sept. 9, 2025, obtained through seizures and other means.

  • ETH allocation: A US Digital Asset Stockpile has been created for non-Bitcoin assets, including Ether. As of Aug. 29, 2025, this stockpile contained approximately 60,000 ETH, worth around $261 million, according to an Arkham Exchange analysis of government-owned addresses.

BitMine Immersion Technologies (BMNR)

  • BTC Holdings: BitMine, a company focused on crypto mining and treasury management, maintains a moderate Bitcoin reserve of 192 BTC worth over $21 million, as of Sept. 10, 2025.

  • ETH Holdings: As mentioned before, Bitmine Immersion Tech (BMNR) holds 2.07 million ETH, with an estimated value of approximately $9 billion, as of Sept. 10, 2025.

This dual-asset approach highlights BitMine’s shift from solely Bitcoin mining to a diversified crypto reserve strategy. It is now more focused on combining Bitcoin’s value preservation with Ether’s income-generating potential.

Did you know? Institutions are issuing billions of dollars in tokenized government bonds directly on the Ethereum blockchain, intertwining ETH with TradFi.

Which strategy is winning in 2025?

The competition between BTC and ETH treasuries showcases their unique strengths. As of mid-2025, the trend points to a future where treasuries may increasingly adopt both assets.

BTC, for instance, stands out for its stability, widespread trust and global recognition, acting as the crypto world’s “reserve currency.” Its role as digital gold makes it the preferred choice for institutions and nations focused on long-term wealth preservation and straightforward liquidity.

Ether, on the other hand, has gained traction due to its ability to generate income, offer practical utility and support a growing ecosystem of tokenized assets. Treasuries holding ETH can earn 3%-5% annual returns through staking, access liquidity through DeFi and engage in markets for tokenized real-world assets, positioning ETH as an active, income-producing reserve.

The choice depends on goals. Bitcoin suits those prioritizing capital security and established trust, while Ether attracts those seeking growth and income potential. While BTC currently leads in total treasury holdings, ETH is catching up by drawing companies and DAOs that value its programmable financial features.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 09/13/2025 – 15:10

Trump Backs Off Promise To Sanction Russia, Issues Ultimatum To NATO

survivalnomics
-
0
Trump Backs Off Promise To Sanction Russia, Issues Ultimatum To NATO

President Trump’s prior two week deadline where he vowed to make a big decision on Russia has come and gone. He’s now backing off the prior threat to impose heightened sanctions on Russia, including secondary sanctions which would seek to punish its trading partners, particularly China and India.

There’s been no peace agreement, and the latest out of both Russian and Ukrainian leaders suggests negotiations are effectively dead at this point, as Moscow forces keep advancing in the east village by village. There’s been little to no momentum from the Alaska summit with Putin.

On Saturday Trump made clear in a long Truth Social post that he’s backing off pulling the trigger on new sanctions, and listed things NATO members would have to do for it to happen. He set some new standards which are very unlikely to met by all NATO countries – or rather a significant ultimatum. 

Momentum has waned in the weeks after the historic Trump-Putin summit.

All NATO countries must stop buying oil from Russia and in parallel agree to sweeping tariffs on China, Trump explained Saturday, throwing down the gauntlet. 

“I am ready to do major Sanctions on Russia when all NATO Nations have agreed, and started, to do the same thing, and when all NATO Nations STOP BUYING OIL FROM RUSSIA,” Trump wrote Social Saturday morning.

He described his words as a letter to America’s allies and to the world: “As you know, NATO’S commitment to WIN has been far less than 100%, and the purchase of Russian Oil, by some, has been shocking,” he continued.

“China has a strong control, and even grip, over Russia, and these powerful Tariffs will break that grip,” Trump’s ‘letter’ continues. He then made his position clear that tariffs on China would “be of great help in ENDING this deadly, but RIDICULOUS, WAR.”

China and India are of course at this moment the two biggest importers of Russian oil, in that order, but what’s less well known is that NATO member Turkey is the third largest. Ironically, Turkey maintains the second largest military in NATO, next to the United States.

It continues, alongside Orban’s Hungary and Fico’s Slovakia, to be a thorn in the side of ‘NATO unity’ regarding Russian energy imports. According to one recent energy industry study:

In the first half of 2024, Turkey has risen from being the 14th largest buyer of Russian crude oil before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, to the third largest importer.

In the same period, three Turkish refineries have used EUR 1.2 bn worth of Russian crude to create oil products that are then imported by G7+ countries.

Imports of refined oil products from Turkey’s STAR Refinery, Tupras Izmit Refinery, and the Tupras Aliaga Izmir Refinery have generated an estimated EUR 750 mn in tax revenues for the Kremlin to finance its brutal war on Ukraine. 

The Russian oil and gas sector is a crucial revenue stream for the Kremlin, contributing 32% to the federal budget in 2023, a decrease from 42% in 2022. Furthermore, the Kremlin allocated a third of all 2024 spending on the military.

This means that getting all of NATO on the same page regarding both Russian energy imports and China tariffs would be all but impossible.

Trump additionally pointed out in his fresh message, “This is not TRUMP’S WAR (it would never have started if I was President!), it is Biden’s and Zelenskyy’s WAR. I am only here to help stop it.”

*  *  *

Reminder: Secure your order by Sunday night for Wednesday delivery

Tyler Durden
Sat, 09/13/2025 – 14:35

Economic Measurement & The Mirage Of Exactness

survivalnomics
-
0
Economic Measurement & The Mirage Of Exactness

Authored by Peter C. Earle via the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER)

In contentious political environments, economic data rarely stand as objective measures. They are transformed into talking points and wielded to justify policies as much as to describe reality. A monthly jobs report, a quarterly GDP release, or an inflation figure splashed across financial headlines is treated with the solemnity of a laboratory result. Markets react, central bankers pontificate, and legislators posture—all on the basis of a handful of daunting numbers. Yet beneath the veneer of rigor lies a reality that economists have long known but the public too rarely hears: economic measurement is messy, contingent, and riven with flaws. To take these figures as seriously as one might an engineering calculation is to misunderstand their very nature.

The Concept-Measurement Gap

Unlike the physical sciences, where experiments can be replicated under controlled conditions, economic data arise from millions of decentralized transactions, informal exchanges, and shifting definitions. The “measurement gap” describes the yawning space between what we wish to know and what our tools can actually capture.

For instance, gross domestic product (GDP) is intended as a comprehensive measure of economic output. Yet among other shortcomings it fails to account for the shadow economy and values government services at cost rather than output. Likewise, productivity metrics often rely on assumptions about hours worked that blur the line between logged time and effective effort. The gap is structural: We seek neat aggregates in a world of fluid, heterogeneous activity.

Periodicity Versus Accuracy

Part of the problem stems from the tradeoff between the regularity of data publication and the accuracy of the estimates. The public and policymakers demand frequent updates. Employment figures are released monthly, GDP quarterly, inflation monthly. This rhythm provides a semblance of continuous monitoring, but it comes at a cost. Initial estimates are often based on partial surveys, extrapolations, or seasonal adjustment algorithms that rely on historical patterns. As more information arrives, revisions follow—sometimes minor, sometimes seismic. GDP growth in a given quarter may be reported at 2.5 percent, only to be revised months later to 1.2 or 3.4 percent. Markets and pundits rarely revisit their earlier pronouncements; the initial number is what shapes expectations and headlines. In this sense, economic statistics resemble a kind of Heisenberg problem: the very act of requiring frequent measurement reduces their reliability, and yet without regularity, the public and policymakers would demand answers from even shakier conjecture.

If employment or inflation data were released only quarterly, the estimates might gain in accuracy, but each observation would capture a far larger temporal gap—implying greater structural and cyclical changes between each data point. Conversely, producing employment or price measures weekly, or even daily, would rapidly push reported figures toward statistical noise. Shorter intervals would yield estimates that rapidly approach randomness, while longer intervals risk creating more accurate but discontinuous, contextless “islands” of spaced-out information with limited practical application.

The False Allure of Precision

The inclination to take economic statistics with engineering-like seriousness is understandable. Numbers carry authority and convey expertise at work. A decimal place conveys credibility. When unemployment is reported at 4.2 percent, the impression is that it is truly 4.2 percent. In reality, margins of error of half a percentage point or more are common, and survey nonresponse, definitional ambiguities, and model-based imputations mean that the figure could as reasonably be 3.8 or 4.7 percent.

This tendency to misinterpret approximations as finely measured truth is neatly captured in an old joke: a man was once asked how old the pyramids were. He confidently answered, “Exactly 4,504 years old.” When pressed on how he came up with such a specific figure, he explained, “Well, four years ago someone told me they were built 4,500 years ago.” The absurdity lies in mistaking a rough estimate for an exact data point—an error that gives the illusion of exactness while straying further from accuracy.

Moreover, concepts evolve. Inflation indices now incorporate hedonic adjustments, imputing quality improvements into price data. A smartphone that costs the same as last year but now has a sharper camera is treated as “cheaper” in real terms. This may be defensible, but it is hardly intuitive—and it introduces further scope for both debate and misinterpretation.

Bureaucratic Incentives and Political Objectives

Even if economic measurement were a purely technical endeavor, it would remain prone to error. But the reality is that numbers are produced in a political environment. Statistical agencies face resource constraints, pressures to maintain credibility, and the ever-present possibility of political interference. Bureaucrats, like all individuals, respond to incentives: budgets, prestige, or the desire to avoid controversy. Meanwhile, political figures have every reason to weaponize statistics.

A favorable inflation print will be heralded as evidence of prudent stewardship; an uptick in unemployment will be attributed to opponents’ policies or to global shocks conveniently beyond control. Numbers do not speak for themselves. They are framed, spun, and selectively emphasized.

Variability Beyond Malfeasance

It is tempting to view puzzling fluctuations in economic data as the result of manipulation. A GDP figure that surprises on the upside, or a sudden revision to employment data, can look suspicious to the cynical observer. But the truth is usually more mundane and more troubling: the sheer multiplicity of errors, approximations, and compromises in measurement more than accounts for the volatility.

Sampling error, late survey responses, benchmark revisions, and definitional tweaks combine to create a statistical fog that obscures as much as it reveals.

Caution Is the Watchword

None of this is to argue that measurement is futile. Imperfect statistics are arguably better than flying blind. But a greater humility is warranted in how we interpret them. Economic figures should be seen as estimates, surrounded by wide confidence intervals and conditioned on assumptions. Numbers are best treated as fuzzy inputs toward decisions, not substitutes for them. Headline numbers must be treated with considerable caution, especially the first release of any major statistic. Revisions can, and often do, change the story. Second, recognize that the authority of numbers does not make them apolitical. They are generated in bureaucracies, filtered through political incentives, and presented in ways that serve narratives; sometimes several at the same time.

In the end, the multiplicity of errors and compromises in measurement explain far more of the wild and suspicious variations than do any grand conspiracy theories. Numbers are indispensable, but nevertheless incomplete, persnickety guides. To treat them as precise representations of the current state of a phenomenon, rather than rough maps of a shifting and inherently complex terrain, is to demand of economics what only the hard sciences can provide.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 09/13/2025 – 14:00

Pelosi: Democrats “Won’t Be Responsible” For Years Of Violent Rhetoric Against Trump

survivalnomics
-
0
Pelosi: Democrats “Won’t Be Responsible” For Years Of Violent Rhetoric Against Trump

“Fascist”… “Fascist”… “Fascist.” 

For the past decade, Democrats at the highest levels have screamed that President Trump – and every single person they disagree with – is a “fascist,” “racist,” or “Nazi.”

The conditioning is clear and deeply alarming. Fueled by woke indoctrination in schools, 24/7 propaganda from globalist corporate media, Hollywood, NGOs, and the nonstop toxic rhetoric from much of the Democratic Party, this revolutionary drumbeat of inciting violence eventually culminated in the political assassination of Charlie Kirk. 

Democrats have become the party of chaos, and their far-left, billionaire-funded NGO networks serve as the revolutionary arm the Trump administration is preparing to confront (read here). 

However, some Democrats – or perhaps just their strategists – are beginning to recognize that labeling Trump and his supporters as “fascists,” “racists,” and “Nazis” for more than a decade has backfired, and may now be fueling the latest episode of political violence, the Charlie Kirk assassination by a far-left brainwashed kid. 

Now, former U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is declaring that, despite years of hateful and dangerous rhetoric from her party, there will be no accountability for the chaos those words have unleashed across the nation like cancer. 

Pelosi and Democrats knew exactly what they were doing for the past decade, labeling Trump and his supporters fascists. In fact, it’s part of the Communist playbook…

Just remember how Mao’s bloody Cultural Revolution began… Radicalized students. 

Kirk’s TPUSA movement was the counterrevolution to the Marxist revolution at its ground zero: schools and universities – something Democrats despised. And just like that, he was taken out with a bullet by a leftist radical – or at least that’s how it appears so far. This past week has been a wake-up call that decades of far-left radicalization are spiraling America into a cultural war that is turning hot. Not a big surprise with the Fourth Turning entering the latter stages. 

*  *  *

Reminder: Secure your order by Sunday night for Wednesday delivery

Tyler Durden
Sat, 09/13/2025 – 13:25

The Dangerous Market Outlook The Cowards On Financial Media Can’t Tell You

survivalnomics
-
0
The Dangerous Market Outlook The Cowards On Financial Media Can’t Tell You

Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

I recently talked to Adam Taggart of Thoughtful Money and gave him my comprehensive take on all things macro, markets, and the fragile psychology underpinning both. The video is at the bottom of this post.

My goal was to get a full hour of telling you the things directly to your face that the cowards and hapless sell side imbeciles on financial media won’t tell you to your face — at least until the shit hits the fan and they are begging for market shutdowns and running off the newsdesk like they are having an impending bowel movement.

The charts that accompany many of my points in this interview can be found here.

What I Argued On The Show

I opened by pointing out where we are in this cycle: “we’ve got a stock market at all-time high valuations.” On multiple measures—market cap to GDP, Shiller PE, and others—we’re “either at or damn close to all-time highs.”

I argued this isn’t about fundamentals anymore. Instead, the tape is dominated by flows and mechanics. A narrow group of companies—Nvidia, Tesla, Amazon, Microsoft—have outsized influence. The buying that props them up, in my view, is coming from “an incessant passive bid” and from “options gamma” that forces dealers to buy stock whenever calls are purchased.

That dynamic has been amplified by a new generation of market participants. I described “an entire generation of young… speculators” who only know options. If you scroll WallStreetBets, I said, “every post… the wins and the losses are options.” Mechanically, that matters because when retail piles into calls, dealers have to buy the underlying shares.

Overlay that with two decades of monetary policy rescues and you get a mindset where “people just believe nothing bad can ever happen.” My conclusion: “we have a pornographically overvalued market” and a “batshit insane investor psychosis” sitting on the edge of reality.

Everything’s fine…or is it?

Why The Jobs Data Matters For Markets

The recent labor data was, in my words, “one of the first real clarion calls” that the economy is slowing. But the importance goes beyond economics. The passive machine is directly linked to employment. When people lose jobs, they turn to “brokerage and retirement accounts” for liquidity. Many funds don’t hold cash to meet redemptions, so they would “become sellers of stocks.” That’s when “the machine that’s been going one way for 25 years” could suddenly “start to go in reverse.”

That’s also when valuations will matter again. I said, “no one cares about historical PE when passive flows keep buying,” but when redemptions force selling, everyone will drag out the charts and remember that the historical mean is closer to 16x earnings, not 38x.

Positive Real Rates As A Time Bomb

I said that “positive real rates” are “like putting a time bomb into the plumbing of the economy.” It just takes time for the pressure to work its way through. Then “you start to see cracks”—first in discretionary spending, then “credit card delinquencies, then auto loan delinquencies,” and eventually housing.

Student loans make it worse. The delinquency line “just shoots straight up.” Re-imposing a monthly bill that didn’t exist for five years “right as the economy is starting to crack” is “pushing the snowball down the hill faster.”

The Jenga Tower Economy

I compared the system to a house that’s been added onto for decades. Every policy tweak has been another addition, until “our little house has become this mile-long, top-heavy monstrosity.” Now it’s one loose block away from collapse, like a Jenga puzzle.

That block could be commercial real estate and the regional banks that financed it. I warned there’s “a ton of… subprime crap… that hasn’t been marked and even ‘AAA’ pieces are wobbling.” The Sillicon Valley Bank episode showed how quickly confidence can vanish.

The other candidate is the bond market itself. I said there will be a point when “the bond market really does crack up,” and then “there’s nothing left other than for the Fed to step in and start buying bonds”—QE or even yield curve control.

What Happens When Policy Arrives

If and when the Fed steps in again, it will be confronting a more skeptical public.

During COVID, memes about “money printer go brrr” turned policy into a joke. Next time “the print will be larger,” but now more people understand the game—thanks to Bitcoin, memes, and lived experience with inflation.

That’s why I said the path looks like this: “we’re doing 100 miles an hour right now; we’ll slam on the brakes down to 20,” and then after the rescue, “we’re going up to 300.” Translation: a sharp deleveraging, then an inflationary aftermath.

How I’m Positioned (Not Financial Advice)

I told Adam that I “love to own gold… sound assets… things that can’t be printed.” I prefer world markets to U.S. equities, and I keep diversified both in and out of the dollar—gold, gold miners, silver, silver miners, a little Bitcoin, and a little real estate.

This isn’t a recommendation; it’s my approach. My one rule of thumb is universal: “if you don’t understand it, don’t invest in it.”

I stressed that the bigger risk is psychological. Investors have been coddled by policy and by financial media. Even a 30% drop followed by ten years of sideways grinding would be a “psychological death march” that many aren’t prepared for.

That’s why I said that the next crash could “push us out of our financial safe space.”

Markets now demand both equity analysis and psychological analysis. As I put it, “bad news isn’t just bad news. Bad news is good news when people expect stimulus.”

When flows reverse, that mental model will reverse too.

Where I Net Out

To sum it up: we are at “a truly unprecedented jumping-off point.” Positive real rates are eroding the cushion. Delinquencies are rising. Student loans are back. Breadth is deteriorating even as a few giants levitate the indices. The economy is grinding to a halt while markets are pricing perfection.

I’m preparing for “violent repricing,” followed by a massive money print.

As always, read my disclaimer and be sure to pressure-test your own thinking and decisions with your own financial advisor.

Here’s my hour with Adam:

QTR’s Disclaimer: Please read my full legal disclaimer on my About page here. This post represents my opinions only. In addition, please understand I am an idiot and often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning. Contributor posts and aggregated posts have been hand selected by me, have not been fact checked and are the opinions of their authors. They are either submitted to QTR by their author, reprinted under a Creative Commons license with my best effort to uphold what the license asks, or with the permission of the author.

This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning. None of this is a solicitation to buy or sell securities. I may or may not own names I write about and are watching. Sometimes I’m bullish without owning things, sometimes I’m bearish and do own things. Just assume my positions could be exactly the opposite of what you think they are just in case. If I’m long I could quickly be short and vice versa. I won’t update my positions. All positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice and at any point I can be long, short or neutral on any position. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe. If you see numbers and calculations of any sort, assume they are wrong and double check them. I failed Algebra in 8th grade and topped off my high school math accolades by getting a D- in remedial Calculus my senior year, before becoming an English major in college so I could bullshit my way through things easier.

The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I did my best to be honest about my disclosures but can’t guarantee I am right; I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. I edit after my posts are published because I’m impatient and lazy, so if you see a typo, check back in a half hour. Also, I just straight up get shit wrong a lot. I mention it twice because it’s that important.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 09/13/2025 – 11:40

Leftists Cheer For Charlie Kirk’s Assassin Then Falsely Claim He Is “Right Wing”

survivalnomics
-
0
Leftists Cheer For Charlie Kirk’s Assassin Then Falsely Claim He Is “Right Wing”

The political left’s narrative dilemma is that they want to promote and applaud violence against conservatives, but they don’t want to take any responsibility for that violence when it actually happens and consequences are inevitable.  This has led to multiple psy-op campaigns in which progressive operatives and “influencers” encourage ideological murders and then try to label the killers as “right wing” after the fact.

It seems like bewildering nonsense, but this same strategy is being used by a number of left-wing propagandists online in the case of suspected Charlie Kirk shooter Tyler Robinson.  Luckily, the internet has been quick to debunk the false claims.

The disinformation campaign started with falsified records claiming that Robinson was a registered Republican and had donated to Donald Trump’s election campaign.  As it turned out, they had dug up the identity of a person the the same name as the shooter then pretended as if it was his information.  This claim has now even been debunked by the mainstream media, but there still leftist accounts spreading the lie. Robinson has never been a registered Republican or Trump voter.

Then there was an effort to spread fake images featuring Robinson wearing a Trump t-shirt.  The images have been identified as manipulated and the accounts spreading them have been exposed.

It’s important to note that there was a blitz of Democrat accounts that ran with this false information and none have yet apologized for doing so.  Some have erased the older posts to hide their complicity. 

As this tactic failed, progressives turned to a new strategy of guilt by association.  Meaning, leftists seized upon the fact that Robinson’s family is conservative and asserted that this means he was conservative, too.  They are essentially arguing that a person’s politics are inherited through their genetics.

Of course, this claim doesn’t hold under basic scrutiny.  Tyler Robinson is not the first leftist to turn against his conservative family.  Just take a look at far-left influencer Steven Bonnell II (Destiny), who grew up in a conservative catholic household yet he says he hates conservative Christians like Charlie Kirk.

Furthermore, interviews with Robinson’s friends indicate that he was, indeed, a hardcore political leftist who often “ranted” and sparked arguments with his family.  Friends indicated that Robinson:

“…Was “pretty left on everything” and was “the only member of his family that was really leftist…..The rest of his family was very hard Republican…”

Around sophomore year, the friend said, Robinson became more extreme in his political views and would “always just be ranting and arguing about them”.

When one friend saw the news on Friday, he said that he was shocked.

“I knew he [Robinson] had strong political views, but I never thought it would even go near that far.”

This information supports previous information from the FBI which revealed that ammo used by the shooter was inscribed with Antifa messages including:  “Hey fascist, catch!” and “O Bella Ciao, Bella Ciao, Bella Ciao Ciao Ciao” (a reference to an Italian anti-fascist song).

Setting aside the ridiculous notion that a “conservative Trump supporter” would want to assassinate Charlie Kirk (a conservative Trump supporter), all evidence indicates that Robinson is a far-left extremist. One would think that this news would excite Democrats and progressives since they openly applauded Charlie Kirk’s murder across the internet.  However, they are now attempting to disavow instead and tie the shooter to the right wing.  

Another false narrative that has circulated is that Robinson is a “Groyper”, or follower of right wing commentator Nick Fuentes.  They base this claim on a single image taken of Robertson posing in a track suit, which they claim is symbolism for Fuentes fans.  In fact, the image was referencing a meme called the “Slav Squat” which has nothing to do with Fuentes.   Even CNN called out the claim as “grasping at straws”.

In other words, the Democrats and the woke movement have been demonizing conservatives and Trump supporters for a decade as “fascists, Nazis and enemies of democracy”, which has inspired a generation of impressionable young people to believe that murder is a justifiable action against those who oppose their ideas. 

Democrats are calling for peace and reconciliation in the wake of the shooting, while also refusing to take responsibility and attempting to falsely dump Charlie Kirk’s assassination at the feet of conservatives. 

Meanwhile, the next left-wing shooter has just been inspired to make a move because millions of woke activists are jumping for joy over Kirk’s death.  As long as the political left acts as if these shooters are heroes there will always be more crazies to follow in their footsteps.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 09/13/2025 – 11:05

Senior Trump Official Declares War On Far-Left NGOs Sowing Chaos Nationwide

survivalnomics
-
0
Senior Trump Official Declares War On Far-Left NGOs Sowing Chaos Nationwide

Update (Saturday morning): 

The Trump administration is finally getting serious about radical left groups, including dark-money, billionaire-funded NGOs that openly call for the destruction of capitalism and the Western world. These groups, together with rogue far-left politicians, spread dangerous rhetoric amplified by globalist corporate media outlets, pouring toxic cocktails for liberal, educated people, indoctrinated in progressive schools, who believe anyone with a dissenting opinion is a “Nazi,” “fascist,” or “racist.”

Democrats have become the party of hate and violence, and their left-wing NGO network and leftist echo chambers on popular websites and social media channels are driving some of this political violence.

These leftist groups have waged nonstop color revolution operations against the administration, brainwashed an entire generation in schools, and pushed destructive, nation-killing progressive policies (criminal justice reform) that have transformed some of America’s cities into, as Trump puts it, “hellholes.” They supported an open border that resulted in the greatest land invasion ever, flooding tens of millions of third-worlders into this nation. It’s as if these groups, some funded by rogue billionaires outside the U.S., such as in Communist China (read more at the end of this note), want to see the destruction of the U.S. by sowing social instability in what appears to be irregular warfare. 

White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller spoke on Fox News’ Hannity last night to outline the severity of radical leftists waging an all-out assault on this nation. 

“These radicalized people – there is a domestic terrorism movement in this country,” Miller warned on the Hannity show last night. In fact, Miller should’ve used the word “civil terrorism,” as we explained before, to more accurately describe what’s unfolding. 

Miller continued, “The last message that Charlie Kirk gave to me before he joined his creator in heaven was that he said, we have to dismantle and take on the radical left organizations in this country that are fomenting violence.” 

“And we are going to do that. Under President Trump’s leadership. It could be a RICO charge. It could be a conspiracy charge. Conspiracy against the United States, insurrection… We are going to do what it takes to dismantle the organizations and entities that are fomenting riots, doxxing, that are trying to inspire terrorism and committing acts of violence,” he explained. 

Miller ended with this, “You want us to live in fear. We will not live in fear. You will live in exile. The power of law enforcement under President Trump’s leadership will be used to find you, take away your money, power, and freedom if you break the law.” 

It’s becoming more obvious than ever that the left’s war on America is getting hotter:  

If Miller’s team doesn’t tackle the radical leftist NGO monster, it will consume them. USAID was a start to cut some funding lines. Now it’s time to bust up the NGO world. Gates’ decision to sever ties with Arabella is seen as a distancing move by the billionaire ahead of the enforcement period, which appears to be approaching.

*   *   * 

 

After President Trump told Fox & Friends hosts that Charlie Kirk’s assassin is “in custody,” he went on to comment about radical leftist organizations, stating, “We are going to look into Soros. It looks like a RICO case.”

Recall that on Wednesday night, just hours after Kirk’s assassination, President Trump addressed the nation from the Oval Office, calling it a “dark moment for America.” He vowed to crack down on radical left movements across the country that have fueled chaos and even death this year.

Then on Thursday night, Texan News reporter Cameron Abrams wrote on X that Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, and two dozen others in Congress called for a select committee on “the money, influence, and power behind the radical left’s assault on America and the rule of law.”

“Enough is enough. We must follow the money to identify the perpetrators of the coordinated anti-American assaults being carried out against us and take all steps under the law necessary to stop them,” the lawmakers stated. 

Just weeks ago, Trump stated on Truth Social that George Soros and his radical leftist son, Alex Soros, “should be charged with RICO because of their support of violent protests.”

Around that time, the “dark money” leftist NGO network operated by Arabella Advisors reportedly lost one of its top funding sources: Bill Gates. 

More here.

And this. 

Civil terrorism expert Jason Curtis Anderson of One City Rising states: 

After the political assassination of Charlie Kirk, President Trump is interested in pursuing a RICO case against George Soros, America’s primary financier of far-left NGOs. What will likely be revealed is a complex web of dark money that observers have warned about for 20 years but never acted on.

At the center of this web are the various George Soros Open Society Foundation legal entities—four separate tax-exempt charities and one 501(c)(4) dark-money channel. Next are the Tides Foundation organizations, funded primarily by the Pritzker family, which include three separate tax-exempt charities and one 501(c)(4) dark-money channel. Following them are the Rockefeller Foundation nexus, NEO Philanthropy, the Ford Foundation, and a host of similar operations, including the Singham network. Collectively, these entities form America’s dark-money ecosystem. They fund permanent protests, bail demonstrators out of jail, finance legal efforts to sue local governments and police departments, influence immigration policy, promote drug decriminalization and criminal-justice reforms, and help elect district attorneys who decline to prosecute crime. On top of all of this, they also have entities like the Working Families Party that elect local politicians.

The money flows from donations to tax-exempt charities into non-tax-exempt 501(c)(4)s, and then trickles down to local groups. From there, funds reach the most radical organizations, which can’t even qualify for 501(c)(3) status and are instead “fiscally sponsored” by parent organizations. Because of this fiscal-sponsorship loophole, the books of these groups remain opaque. Everything from terror financing to protests-turned-riots connects in some way to these foundations.

The revolution against the West is, in effect, a network of tax-exempt charities operating as a powerful parallel government that no one ever voted for. It must be stopped before it’s too late.

President Trump’s messaging suggests his administration may finally be ready to combat the radical left’s dark-money, billionaire-funded NGO networks, accused of sowing chaos, hate, and division; fueling what some describe as “civil terrorism“; and orchestrating color revolutions that continue to this day. Growing concern remains that foreign money (think communist billionaire Neville Roy Singham) is feeding this anti-American woke machine. More evident than ever, the administration – if only for its own survival – must begin to counter the out-of-control NGO sphere. There’s a reason Bill Gates severed ties with Arabella. The pressure begins. 

*  *  *

Why are there zero reviews? We’ve sold a ton!

Tyler Durden
Sat, 09/13/2025 – 10:49

Zelensky’s Incentive Problem: Unmasking The Media’s Darling

survivalnomics
-
0
Zelensky’s Incentive Problem: Unmasking The Media’s Darling

Authored by Steve Cortes via American Greatness,

You won’t hear this from the mainstream press, but you’ll hear it here first: Volodymyr Zelensky, the Western media’s darling, is in real political trouble at home.

I just commissioned credible polling from inside Ukraine. The war-weary population there wants a new president and a negotiated peace.

This reality makes Zelensky less a heroic statesman and more a vulnerable incumbent with a perverse incentive: to keep slow-walking peace, continue milking Western taxpayers, and delay the elections he’s almost certain to lose.

The Best Data We Have

To learn the truth within Ukraine, we used experienced pollsters who surveyed more than 1,000 citizens. These results represent the clearest and most reliable snapshot of Ukrainian opinion:

  • In a hypothetical presidential election against General Valerii Zaluzhnyi, Zelensky loses by -13 points.

  • Zaluzhnyi, Ukraine’s former armed forces chief, isn’t even in the country. He now serves as ambassador to the United Kingdom—an appointment widely seen as a “consolation prize” from Zelensky meant to marginalize his most popular potential rival. But that move has backfired badly: instead of diminishing Zaluzhnyi, it has only underscored Zelensky’s insecurity and boosted the general’s stature. A man sidelined abroad now leads him by double digits.

  • 71% of Ukrainians say corruption is one of the country’s major problems. Just 1% say it isn’t serious.

  • A majority, 53%, view Zelensky’s powerful chief of staff, Andriy Yermak, as corrupt. Only 15% disagree.

  • By contrast, 64% of Ukrainians do not view Zaluzhnyi as prone to corruption.

  • 77% want the war to end through diplomacy alone or through a combination of diplomacy and military action. Only 13% favor a purely military solution—the maximalist line Zelensky and Yermak promote.

Taken together, these numbers reveal fatigue. Ukrainians are tired of corruption, tired of maximalist slogans, and tired of a leader whose act has worn out its welcome—even as the rival he tried to sideline has eclipsed him.

The Perverse Incentive to Stall

That fatigue creates a dangerous dynamic. Zelensky and Yermak know that once the war ends, elections must follow—and polling suggests they will almost certainly lose. Hence, they slow-walk diplomacy, prolong the fighting, and keep Western money flowing to delay the day of reckoning.

It’s a survival scheme, not a real strategy.

The Entertainer Act

Zelensky is an entertainer, not a statesman. His image was carefully built for Western elites to virtue-signal over—a custom-made performer cast as a wartime saint. But entertainers live on image, not accountability. And polling shows the halo has already slipped where it matters most: inside Ukraine.

Ukrainians now see him less as a heroic leader and more as that shady relative you always knew was a scam artist—the Uncle Rico-style hustler with his hand in your pocket. The type you spot as a fraud before anyone else does, until one day it becomes obvious to everyone.

The U.S. Angle

Americans get it, too. In my national polling, 62% of U.S. voters said we should disengage if Kyiv and Moscow cannot negotiate a peace. Ordinary Ukrainians and ordinary Americans both want diplomacy, not blank checks.

But instead of aligning with the people, Washington keeps footing the bill for a leader whose act has already worn out its welcome. As for Putin? To borrow from former NFL coach Dennis Green, he is who we thought he was. An adversary, a rival, a problem—but never a media darling. No halo, no surprise.

The Way Forward

President Trump deserves credit for forcing both sides into talks.

If Kyiv and Moscow remain obstinate, he knows how to raise the cost. For Putin, that means harsh secondary sanctions. For Zelensky, that means drawing down American financial and intelligence support. Unlike Biden, Trump understands that endless giveaways create weakness, not strength.

Because here’s the lesson—one I highlighted in my Obama documentary, and one Americans keep learning the hard way: hero worship is a trap. The harder the media sells you a halo, the more likely there’s a heel underneath it.

And the best, most accurate polling available proves it: Ukrainians are fatigued, Americans are fatigued, and Zelensky’s halo won’t survive the unmasking.

Tyler Durden
Sat, 09/13/2025 – 10:30

Retarded Or Evil? Leftist Arguments Justifying The Murder Of Charlie Kirk

survivalnomics
-
0
Retarded Or Evil? Leftist Arguments Justifying The Murder Of Charlie Kirk

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us

If you’re like me and have been watching the news feeds and social media for developments on the Charlie Kirk assassination, you have probably also come across a disturbing army of leftists online cheering for the conservative speaker’s death. Some posts, featuring people laughing and celebrating, have tens-of-thousands of upvotes. It’s not just the comments, it’s the mob of crazies supporting the comments.

What I see in this mountain of degenerate psychopathy is confirmation. I and many other analysts have been warning for years that the fight for what remains of the western world will happen on two fronts: The globalists at the top, and the leftist hordes on the bottom. While it’s true that globalists often fund woke groups through NGOs and corporations, they are simply giving aid to people that already have the will and the intent to destroy the US.

That is to say, the idea of the “false left/right paradigm” no longer applies. At the bottom of the pyramid there are millions of insane people with violent intentions that want to see you dead because you disagree with them. They won’t go away simply because the globalists go away. They represent a parallel threat.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is truly delusional and I have no patience for such stupidity any longer. Look at it this way – The woke movement is a death cult. In every cult there are certainly people who are useful idiots who do bad things because they are told to, but there are also many people who are consciously evil.

And if you want to see pure evil, take a gander at the endless array of grotesque reactions from activists to Kirk’s death. Endless social media posts cheering for Kirk’s murder. Leftist leaders like Ilhan Omar essentially blaming Kirk for his own assassination. Democrats trying to stop a silent moment of prayer for Kirk in Congress. Witnesses even report that leftist protesters at the Utah cheered right after Kirk was shot.  The list of horrors is mind boggling.

If you have any doubts about the nature of the progressive cult just watch how they revel in the blood and maybe then you will understand. These people are not human beings, they are monsters, and now they feel very emboldened because they think they can get away with political killings.

A prime example is in the numerous arguments they present to justify Kirk’s assassination. Social media is rife with them, thousands of posts supported by hundreds of thousands of people. What I would like to do is break some of the most common arguments down and identify if the ideas are retarded, or evil (or both). Let’s get started…

Leftist Claim: “Charlie Kirk’s words were offensive and caused harm, therefore he deserved to die.”

Diagnosis: Retarded And Evil

The political left has long treated words as being equal to violence. For them there is no distinction. This is the foundation of the “wrong think” ideology. Charlie Kirk never harmed a living soul and under the law he had every right to express his views regardless of whether or not people get offended. He never led a mob to burn down a city block. He never organized a terror cell. He never advocated for violence. He never even punched a commie. The most he did was advocate for the right to self defense.

If opinions are violence, then anyone can be killed for their opinions. Thinking you are immune because you have the “right opinions” is perhaps the most ignorant assumption a person can make, but leftists are generally low IQ individuals.

On the other hand, there is also the underlying agenda among elitist groups to make “hate speech” a subject of government enforcement. We have seen this in full swing in the UK the past year and it’s getting ugly. ANYTHING can be designated hate speech, from posting jokes online to flying your national flag.

Strangely, only conservatives seem to get arrested for speech violations. It’s almost as if only conservative ideas are being outlawed.

Hate speech laws are the doorway to mass censorship, and if progressives and their globalist partners can’t put those laws in place, then they have decided to enforce color of law through political violence so that conservatives are afraid to speak.

Leftist Claim: “It’s Ironic That Charlie Kirk Was Pro-Gun And Then He Was Killed By A Gun…”

Diagnosis: Retarded

It’s actually not ironic at all. Kirk often pointed out that the majority of gun violence is committed by leftists – In leftist controlled cities and in minority neighborhoods which vote predominantly Democrat. If leftists were removed from the equation, gun crimes (and crime overall) in the US would plummet.

Charlie was most likely murdered by a leftist (the evidence released so far indicates this). We’ll find out soon enough. If so, then the assassination only supports his argument that the political left is the danger. Not gun rights.

Leftist Claim: “Where Was The Good Guy With A Gun To Protect Charlie…?”

Diagnosis: Retarded

Good guys with guns stop at least 1.8 million crimes per year according to surveys on DGU (Defensive Gun Use) data. But Kirk never argued that the presence of good guys with guns makes him bulletproof. Good guys with guns die all the time, especially if they are targeted for political assassination. The gun is to give someone a fighting chance if they see the threat coming. It doesn’t make them invincible.

Leftist Claim: “If only Charlie hadn’t defended gun rights, maybe he would be alive today…”

Diagnosis: Evil

When leftists make this argument what they are really saying is: “If you don’t give up your gun rights, we have the right to shoot you.”

Leftist Claim:  “Kirk would have been saved by the increased gun control he opposed…”

Diagnosis:  Retarded

The murder weapon was a basic .30 Cal hunting rifle, probably holding a maximum of four rounds.  It’s not the type of firearm on any ban wish list that the Democrats have put forward.  

If leftists are going to make this argument then they will have to admit that their true intention is to ban ALL guns, not just scary “black rifles”.  

Leftist Claim: “Charlie Kirk Lived By The Sword And Died By The Sword…”

Diagnosis: Retarded

As noted earlier, Kirk never attacked anyone, never harmed anyone, and only fought for the right to speak his views without being censored or threatened. If debate is a threat to the political left then their ideas must not hold up to public scrutiny. In other words, they killed Charlie Kirk because he exposed their ideas as faulty.

That’s not “living by the sword”, that’s being nice. Leftists don’t want to see us truly take up the sword, which is why the media is currently scrambling to call for peace.

Leftist Claim: “Kirk Was A Radical And Now Is A Time To Abandon Radicalism And Make Peace…”

Diagnosis: Evil

Lets be clear, the vast majority of the violence is only coming from one side, and that’s the progressive Marxist/globalist side.  It’s rather convenient that progressives suddenly want peace after years of violent rhetoric and actions. Why are they doing this? Because they know that retribution on a large scale is so near. When an opponent has waged aggressive war for years and then suddenly wants a ceasefire, it’s usually because he’s about to get hurt and he wants to regroup.

Woke activists have been begging for an ass kicking for at least the past decade and now they are starting to realize they just might get it.  They desperately want our anger over Kirk’s death to fizzle out over time.

Kirk was not a radical in the slightest. He only spoke the facts to the best of his ability, Facts cannot be radical. The truth is never extreme. However, now that he has been killed, I suspect leftists are going to see a lot of actual “radicals” in the near future.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 09/12/2025 – 23:25

1...1,1891,1901,191...4,523Page 1,190 of 4,523

About Us

Popular Category

Editor Picks