BRAD ~ Your snarky insinuation—that Joy Behar’s genuine fear for the 2026 election is identical to Trump’s feigned outrage over 2020—proves you aren't just ethically bankrupt; you’re a hack. You aren't even a pretend pundit; you’re just cosplaying one in a cheap suit of false equivalencies. If punditry is beyond your ken, I suggest a pivot to Abject Sycophancy. You’ve already done the internship.

Forging a "both sides" narrative here requires either a profound ignorance of the facts or a total indifference to the truth. When Behar warns of GOP interference, she is making a rational conjecture based on proven history. When Trump whined about 2020, he wasn't expressing concern; he was crafting a cover story for his own corrupt attempts to forge certifications and rig the results himself.

To illustrate the sheer, gross absurdity of your logic, let us step into a fractured fairy tale.

Location: Ye Olde Typical Grimm’s Black Forest

Characters:

Black Forest Ham: [Stage name of The Wolf]. A nefarious narcissist and notorious pussy-grabber. He is the infamous founder of the Evil Nemesis Comedy Club and proud proprietor of the Den of Thick Thieves.

Little Blue Riding Hood: Veteran reporter and prolific opiner for The Black Times. She is an omnigigworker—singer of CookieGrams (where the MA/XXX ratings pay the bills), occasional postwoman (and sporadical postman, depending on the moon), and FoodOnFoot volunteer. Finally, she is the partner of Deep Woodsman, dwelling with him in the beautiful darkness of missionary anal, savoring the feedback loop of linked eyes and that slow-motion slide toward the "freeze-frame" moment—a no-motion explosion that lasts forever, outside of time and mind.

The Backstory:

A year ago, the Wolf’s inner predator devoured Little Blue’s homebound Grandma. While the evidence was "lost" in the Den of Thieves, the forest knew. Yet, the Wolf—as his comedian persona—penned a letter to the editor weeping over the "lack of safety in the woods," pointing his hairy finger at his enemies to provide cover for his own hunger. The public saw through the Maya of his projection then, and they see it now.

Today, the Wolf’s pack has grown. They aren't just howling; they’re building traps. When Little Blue uses her column to sound the alarm, she isn't "complaining." She is practicing Right Mindfulness—calling out the predator before the teeth sink in. You, Brad, are merely the Wolf’s mouthpiece, trying to convince the forest that the reporter’s warning is just as "dangerous" as the predator’s bite.

The moral of the story is: The man who screams "Fire!" while holding a match is a criminal; the person who screams "Fire!" because they smell smoke is a witness. Conflating the two is not "balance"—it is a total eclipse of the soul.

Brad, if you truly want to understand the "freeze frame" I described, step out of your cynical skin. You’d benefit from identifying with the heroine; opening yourself up to a righteous reaming might finally trigger a flash of Satori, stripping away your ego and leaving you with an honest perspective.

But if awakening is too terrifying, stay in the Den and pay lip service to empathy: go ahead and thoroughly rim the Asshole you idolize. Just don't be surprised when all you find there is a "beautiful darkness" of a much less enlightened kind.

Vincent Oshana --- Vinny --- I've read that you claim to be a comedian, so I take that claim into account as I try to figure out where you're coming from.

Usually, if a person's behaviors and statements are within a standard deviation from the mean (in other words, in the middle 2/3rds of normal humanity), I presume, barring evidence to the contrary, that inferring the person's motivations is a relatively-simple, linear, and non-reiterative process.

Part of the reason statistically-normal behavior patterns lend themselves to easier motivation analysis is that it lowers the probability there is any consistent and/or persistent conscious remolding of behaviors by the people in question themselves in order to intentionally create a specific response in other people (that is, the likelihood that the people in question are purposefully and systematically attempting to manipulate others in non-trivial ways.)

People behaving normally (toward the mean) are likely to be more authentic and less complicated, because relatively-unsophisticated manipulators, which includes most of us, are likely to change our behavior in unnatural, patterned, and improbable ways, thinking to maximize the immediate impact on our audience. Our clumsy attempts to create a false persona resembles Kabuki theater ---- overly broad movements and overly stylized, mimetic themes ---- more than it does Stanislavski/ Strasberg method acting, where the lifting of an eyebrow can imply the character state of mind and convey a subliminal message. Most of us unsophisticates are AI fighter pilots dumping shit, not peanut farmers helping to build homes for needy people.

Which brings me back to you, Vincent Oshana. You are not a real human being. You are an animated caricature-drawing exaggeration of a stereotype. Your unprovoked hyper-belligerence, relentlessly high-decibel, socially incompetent, simplistic, unnuanced steady-state is a one-man act. You're on an endless tour of venues. The pay is good, I assume (or else why sell your soul?)

But you are not a real human being.

Piers Morgan knows this, of course. He brings you on his show when he needs the clicks.

I'm not sure if he thinks the panel discussions when you're on the panel serve to enlighten his audience, rather than simply enflame them.

My guess is, the answer is no.

I think he's just sitting in front of this fireplace, banking the coals, nursing a brandy.

Speaking of nursing, I hope your hip heals well, Piers.

Some Republicans agree we need to attack Iran. Some don't.

Likewise, Democrats are divided on this matter.

Where the parties part ways, however, is on the question of whether Trump needs prior authorization from Congress. It's not so much Fetterman's opinion that Iran should be attacked that separates him from most other Democrats. Instead, it's his unwavering support for Trump's illegal, unconstitutional and corruptly immoral efforts to infiltrate every political institution and process that the United States has historically developed, sometimes at great cost, to try to safeguard our democracy. Trump is attempting to jam up this machinery of democracy and perversely repurpose it into producing the plutocracy he craves. Trump is intentionally an agent of Chaos.

Fetterman has shown his utter indifference to the rule of law, due process, equality under the law, adherence to standards, and the respect for the historic roles, rules and rituals which are the core principles of the Democratic Party and which stand in stark contrast to the guiding principles of the modern Republican Party, which is fear (fear of strangers, fear of newness, fear of the uncertain future), a feeling of helplessness in the face of waves of social change impossible to control, and hate (so much hate) (because it's much easier, of course, to point fingers and shake fists in defiant individualism, than to admit inadequacies and the need for help, and to link hands in common cause.

Bottomline: Fetterman appears to be more at home with oppressors than with oppressed. It's obvious that Fetterman has been trying to position himself for

1) a probable switch to the Republican Party before the 2028 primaries, and

2) barring that, a gig as a Fornicating Faux News Fact-free Fabulist.

Continuing to pretend to represent the Democratic Party, however, is not in his future. (I know, because I cast rat entrails. How divine!)

Robbie ~ Again, you do not disappoint. Virtually the entirety of Trump's performance was the showcasing of outstanding Americans, and him stealing unearned reflected glory from them. Another good part of his speech involved him describing the gruesome details of the victims of crimes that coincidentally happened to have been committed by undocumented immigrants, which predictably aroused universal sympathy, which Trump used to suggest he had a heart: stolen humanity on top of the stolen valor

The pièce de résistance was the charade of calling for all members of Congress to stand who thought their first duty was to protect American citizens against illegal aliens . That must've been a Stephen Miller warped idea of a gotcha!!! A twist on the classic "When did you stop breathing your grandmother?" chestnut

And as far as policy, he came up empty, unless you honestly think suggesting his beloved tariffs would replace the income tax is a good idea. Yeah, right: switching to the most regressive possible tax system would absolutely solve our catastrophic wealth/income inequality crisis...

Robbie, be on the side of America, for a change.

Greg asks, "Who do you believe?"

Normally, when an American president says one thing,

and the Iranian government says the opposite,

any patriotic American citizen would naturally assume the Iranians are lying.

But, as Greg well knows,

Trump tells the truth a lot like a broken clock tells the correct time:

accidentally, infrequently, and unreliably,

So

When Greg asks, "Who do you believe?"

Patriotic Americans could reasonably say, "Neither Trump nor Khomeini,"

Because with Trump, the correct approach is always, "Disbelieve until proven otherwise,"

and, with the Iranians, well, there's that whole "State sponsor of terrorism" thing.

Greg knows all this, how Trump lies the way normal people breathe,

so when Greg blames the fact that people don't automatically believe Trump

on their mythical "TDS,"

he's deliberately working on Trump's behalf to distract us from the truth,

that IT'S TRUMP FAULT THAT PEOPLE DON'T BELIEVE HIM,

because TRUMP LIES FROM DAWN TO DUSK

& BACK TO DAWN, AGAIN... ad nauseum.

What we should do as Floridians (& elsewhere) is

1) ALL REGISTER AS REPUBLICANS,

2)TURN OUT EN MASSE TO VOTE IN THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARIES,

3) CREATE GENERAL ELECTIONS BETWEEN WOKE VS. WOKER, and

4) SHOVE THAT UP DESANTIS' ASS. (NO LUBE)

8️⃣6️⃣4️⃣7️⃣🔜🔥🔥😈🔥🔥

Michael ~

I'm in the not-sure camp on all three, but not because there are details of the events that are blaringly inconsistent with the assassination attempts being genuine.

To be honest, I haven't exhaustively researched the publicly available accounts of the alleged attempts, nor have I read many of the commentaries either pro- or anti-conspiracy. The only thing I've taken from those reports & commentaries I have viewed is that there are no facts that absolutely rule out the possibility that one or more of the attempts were staged.

For most other politicians, Occam's Razor and the lack of counter-narrative evidence of possible conspiracy would lead me to assume they were probably genuine assassination attempts.

What prevents me in this case is: Trump.

Trump is a proven liar. He has lied to manipulate public opinion to achieve political goals. He has lied to attack/diminish his personal enemies, or support his allies. He has lied to hide his sins and faults or to clothe himself in non-existent virtues and achievements. He has lied to stir up a tempest in a teapot in order to distract our attention from a real-life brewing storm. He has lied because it's fun. He lies out of habit.

Man has been defined as, "the animal that uses tools."

Trump can be defined as, "the animal that lies." It's what he is.

Other defining characteristics:

Trump's empathic ability is virtually non-existent.

His relationships are almost entirely transactional, quid pro quo, always haggling for personal advantage.

Trump's morality is one of utilitarian egoism, in which the "good" is defined as that which most effectively benefits Trump. The potential benefit or harm to other people is not an ethical factor in his calculations, because he simply doesn't care about other people.

Trump's sociopathic narcissism, however, is made worse by his extreme lack of impulse control. His inner "baby Trump" id is strong and urgent, egged on by the warped ghost of his psychopathic father haunting his superego. He has found it difficult to exercise restraint, to go for the greater long-term overall gains that might result from him taking into account possible negative feedback and, therefore, moderating his impulse to grab immediate gratification. (Pussy-grabbing-they-let-you-do-it)

Trump, you must remember, has spoken glowingly of some of the most vicious dictators of our time, including Vladimir Putin, Kim Jung Un, and MBS.

Given the way these autocrats have embraced the use of political violence (*see following), and the way Trump has embraced and idolized these autocrats,

it's not unreasonable to believe Trump perfectly morally capable and willing to stage a mock assassination attempt against himself, even if that required the death of one or more other people.

I hold nothing past this man.

So, Michael, while I don't think it's PROBABLE that all of the assassination attempts were staged by Trump, I certainly think it's marginally POSSIBLE.

And, when it comes to the likelihood that at least one of the supposed attempts were staged by Trump, I believe it's sufficiently possible to warrant investigation, because I think the biggest mistake we can make with Trump is to underestimate his capacity for inhumanity, villainy, corruption, evil.

And, of course, self-pity, whining and pettiness.

8️⃣6️⃣4️⃣7️⃣🔜🔥🔥😈🔥🔥

[*Putin's record of the use of political violence includes: the2018 Novichok poisoning of Sergei Skripal, the 2006 polonium-210 poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko, the.alarmingly high number of high-profile Russians—including oligarchs and critics— who have died of "Mysterious Death Syndrome" in suspicious circumstances, such as fatal falls from high-story windows, unexplained plane crashes (e.g., Yevgeny Prigozhin), and sudden heart failure.

Kim Jong Un’s non-stop public brutality includes the execution of his own uncle Jang Song Thaek using an anti-aircraft machine gun that literally pulverized the victim, and the public 2017 assassination of Kim's half-brother, Kim Jong Nam, at a Malaysian airport by two hitwomen using VX nerve toxin.

MBS infamously ordered the murder and dismemberment of Jamal Khashoggi.]

The Faux News Five Have Trademarked Lies

January 27, 2026

The Faux News Five have trademarked lies.

They make no bones about it: their moral code's

Been rewritten—so finding favor in his eyes

Now trumps all truth; and trust in truth erodes.

But he corrupts; he corrodes: we see change

From common conman to some Thing strange

Yet still these venal pundits laud

This rough beast, as if it were a god.

(Note: to that theoretical 1 person who might care about such literary side trips: the overall structure and much of the key words/rhymes are patterned on "Ariel's Song" in Shakespeare's Tempest, while the "rough beast" mentioned in the last line can be found in Yeats' 1919 poem, "The Second Coming.")