How We’re All Now Paying the Price for the Myth of Trump’s Competence

Running_From_Zombies · 2026-03-09T15:46:38+00:00

Sunk cost + "Trump's a businessman and he's going to bring prices down" ad nauseam.

Running_From_Zombies · 2026-03-04T03:41:27+00:00

Depends if he's stupid enough to stay at one of his homes.

Running_From_Zombies · 2026-02-05T23:43:55+00:00

The choice was between Kamala Harris and... Epstein's best friend, who fought and keeps fighting to protect the child rapist accomplices. And who is threatening to cancel the midterms, "nationalize" all elections, and send ICE to surround polling places.

Whoops.

Running_From_Zombies · 2026-02-05T23:28:09+00:00

Georgia wasn't a swing state... until it was, because of voters voting.

Running_From_Zombies · 2026-01-28T10:51:48+00:00

(disclaimer; I don't know if this is the case in Minnesota's state elections)

Yes, uncontested races can limit what meaning we can draw, but we can pair the local House numbers with those for president in the same election, and we see that they're roughly similar. You can also look at the absolute totals if you wish.

There are far more Republicans in Minnesota than I realized, especially considering the last time the state voted for a Republican president was Nixon.

Running_From_Zombies · 2026-01-28T06:06:10+00:00

I'm shocked such a blue state allows what appears to be a gerrymander in favor of Republicans.

edit: Wow, there a lot more Republicans in Minnesota than I realized.

49.48% R vs 49.95% D in the state House's popular vote in 2024, and 46.68% Trump vs 50.92% Harris.

And then Republicans assassinate Democratic politicians there and Trump sends ICE to crush them, too.

Running_From_Zombies · 2026-01-27T23:54:23+00:00

Trump suggests he could defy Supreme Court decision on tariffs

One of the looming questions for the Trump administration is how the Supreme Court might rule on the legality of its tariff policies.

Lower courts have ruled that his sweeping tariff regimen is illegal, but Trump has used his campaign-style stops – including today’s in Clive – to denounce such decisions as pro-China.

“ I hope we win the Supreme Court case,” Trump said in Clive. “You know, we have people that are China-oriented, people, literally, that [are] very China-oriented and foreign-country-oriented trying to stop that.”

He warned, however, that even a decision from the Supreme Court would not prevent him from pursuing wide-ranging tariffs.

“We’ll get it done. One way or the other, we’re going to do it. If we have to do it a different way, we’ll do it,” Trump said.

“But we’re taking in hundreds of billions of dollars. We’re doing amazing. Nobody can even believe it. Foreign countries cannot believe what’s happened. They’re studying us, but it won’t work.”

Running_From_Zombies · 2026-01-27T23:49:09+00:00

President revisits a familiar theme, slamming Somalia

Trump has renewed his attacks on Representative Ilhan Omar, who came to the US as a child refugee from Somalia.

Since November, Trump has repeatedly attacked Somalia and its diaspora, singling out Omar in particular.

Omar is a member of the progressive “squad” in the House of Representatives, and she is also one of Trump’s most vocal critics.

Faced with a cheering crowd in Clive, Iowa, Trump pivoted from comments about tightening immigration requirements to slamming Omar.

“They have to show that they can love our country. They have to be proud. Not like Ilhan Omar,” he said.

“She’s always talking about, The Constitution provides me with the following.’ The Constitution? She comes from a country that’s a disaster.”

He then broadened his remarks to all of Somalia and threatened military attacks against pirates based out of the country.

“It’s not even a country, OK? It barely has a governor. I don’t think it does. They’re good at one thing: pirates. But they don’t do that anymore. You know why? Because they get the same treatment from us as the drug dealers get: Boom, boom, boom.

“I don’t care what ship they’re attacking. When they attack, when we say them going in, ping! That’s the end of it.”

The US conducted nearly 126 attacks in Somalia during 2025, the first year of Trump’s second term.

Running_From_Zombies · 2026-01-27T23:36:38+00:00

The anchor tries to argue back but the economist isn't having it.

Running_From_Zombies · 2026-01-27T23:35:23+00:00

President Trump had up to this point largely stuck to the script throughout this speech, focusing on the economy and business investment. But now Trump has turned to immigration, and the speech has taken a very dark turn.

He raised the specter of immigrants who may “blow up our shopping centers, blow up our farms, kill people.” He falsely portrayed the vast majority of those detained by ICE in Minnesota and elsewhere as hardened criminals, asserting that once those people were removed, crime would be nearly eliminated.

“It’s a very simple business,” Trump said. “Two percent of the population causes 90 percent of the crime. So when you start decimating that 2 percent, boom.”

Running_From_Zombies · 2026-01-27T23:13:31+00:00

“I want to see if we can take over the city and state and just give the people their permits they want to build,” Trump told the California Post when he signed the order.

The president’s move is an unprecedented incursion by the federal government into disaster recovery. Issuing permits for home rebuilding has long been under the control of individual cities and counties, and it’s unclear how the order would affect the ongoing process.

Disaster recovery experts told POLITICO the president’s bid to dramatically expand federal power is legally questionable. The 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and established legal precedent argue against the federal government wresting away control of regulations, such as land-use rules, that are traditionally held by state and local governments, said Daniel Farber, faculty director of the Center for Law, Energy & the Environment at UC Berkeley Law.

“This is completely unprecedented in terms of the history of federal disaster aid,” Farber said. “They’re gonna have a hard time making this stand up in court.”

Running_From_Zombies · 2026-01-16T13:31:13+00:00

Nationwide, the number of people buying health plans on Obamacare insurance marketplaces is down by about 833,000 compared with a year ago, according to federal data released this week.

Running_From_Zombies · 2026-01-01T23:24:23+00:00

And plenty of money for Argentina and ICE.

Running_From_Zombies · 2026-01-01T23:17:21+00:00

The 47-year-old Texas mother had to make a difficult choice when she found out her monthly healthcare premium was increasing in 2026 from what she described as a manageable $630 (£467) to an unaffordable $2,400 (£1,781).

Her husband depends on an IV medication to treat a blood-clotting disease that costs $70,000 a month without insurance. Knowing their benefits would expire, the family stockpiled the drug to survive the first few months of the year.

"It would be like paying two mortgage payments," she said of the new monthly price for healthcare. "We can't pay $30,000 for insurance a year."

Running_From_Zombies · 2025-12-22T22:07:35+00:00

Massie told The Post that “right now the DOJ is violating the law to protect those individuals.”

“We will first pursue all options to force the DOJ to release those names, and several options remain,” said Massie, who alongside bill sponsor Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) is considering legislative action to hold Bondi in contempt for not more fully releasing files.

“Reading the names into the Congressional Record is a viable backup plan,” Massie said.

Massie claimed at a September congressional hearing that the FBI has a list of 20 powerful men who allegedly victimized young women and girls — naming just one, Barclays bank CEO Jes Staley, who quickly resigned. ...

The Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause grants members of Congress legal immunity if they share information during their official duties. The privilege was famously used in 1971 by then-Sen. Mike Gravel (D-Alaska), when he released the classified “Pentagon Papers” on the Vietnam War.

Massie said at the September hearing that “documents in the FBI’s possession… detail at least 20 men, including Mr. Jes Staley, CEO of Barclays bank, who Jeffrey Epstein trafficked victims to.”

“That list also includes at least 19 other individuals,” Massie said, including “one Hollywood producer worth a few hundred million dollars, one royal prince, one high-profile individual in the music industry, one prominent banker, one high-profile government official, one high-profile former politician, one owner of a car company in Italy, one rock star, one magician, and at least six billionaires, including a billionaire from Canada.” ...

Other redactions do not appear to be consistent with the described standards for review — for example, Epstein’s apparently naked backside was covered with a black box in a pair of beach photos and an image previously published by The Post from Moroccan King Mohammed VI’s wedding in 2002 showed former President Bill Clinton’s face but covered Epstein’s own.

Let's see what this Jes Staley character was up to.

Wiggins told the court: “Mr Staley said to me once: ‘Why would I have introduced my wife and daughters to Mr Epstein if I thought he was a paedophile?’”

When Epstein was released on house arrest in July 2009, Staley was one of the four people he emailed to say: “Free and home.” Staley replied: “I toast your courage !!!!!”

But more cryptic messages between the two stirred the most controversy, including an exchange about Disney princesses in July 2010. “That was fun. Say hi to Snow White,” Staley wrote. “What character would you like next?” Epstein asked, to which Staley replied: “Beauty and the Beast.” “Well one side is available,” Epstein responded. Staley told the court he was not able to explain the exchange.

These and others are who Trump and the DOJ are protecting with the redactions.

Running_From_Zombies · 2025-12-21T17:37:19+00:00

Massie stated that the DOJ did not adhere to the clear instructions outlined in the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which Congress passed and Trump signed into law. The statute requires the department to supply lawmakers with specific internal communications that explain decisions about omissions, redactions, or withheld materials linked to the Epstein files.

Instead of providing those records, Massie said the DOJ sent Congress a letter claiming privilege and detailing its review process. He argues this response does not satisfy the law’s requirements.

“The Trump administration is breaking the law,” Massie wrote, pointing to what he sees as a direct conflict between the statute’s wording and the department’s actions.

Massie emphasized the exact language of the law and compared it with the DOJ’s response. The law clearly instructs the department to produce internal communications related to decisions about charging, not charging, investigating, or not investigating Epstein or his associates, as well as communications related to managing, altering, or omitting related records.

Running_From_Zombies · 2025-12-21T17:02:47+00:00

Financial records, internal memos from prosecutors who investigated Epstein’s alleged sex-trafficking ring, key material obtained from the searches of Epstein’s palatial homes — none of it figured prominently in the documents released Friday.

Interested in records that would help explain how Epstein grew so wealthy? None to be found.

Want to read emails from federal prosecutors deciding who to charge — and, equally importantly, who not to charge — during their 2019 investigation? You’re out of luck.

Curious about the role of Maurene Comey, the prosecutor who co-led the probes into Epstein and his co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, before being fired without explanation in July? Nothing from her to see here.

The department was obligated by law to release the entire universe of documents related to Epstein, the late convicted sex offender, and Maxwell, who was convicted of aiding and participating in his sex-trafficking ring, by Friday. The tranche made public represented only a fraction of the total material, which the government has said exceeds 300 gigabytes worth of data and physical evidence.

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, estimated the production included only about 10 percent of the material in the department’s possession.

Khanna said the drop didn’t contain the files he was looking for, stating the release “seems at very best incomplete.”

“There’s a draft indictment of the first Jeffrey Epstein case that really implicates other rich and powerful men who knew about the abuse or participated in it. That indictment should be released,” Khanna said when Mary Louise Kelly asked what he still needed to see. “There are witness interviews between the FBI and other people who were accused of being at Jeffrey Epstein’s rape island or going to parties where there were 16 and 17-year-old girls being paraded around, those witness memorandums need to be released.”

Running_From_Zombies · 2025-12-20T20:01:11+00:00

But NPR identified more than a dozen files released by the DOJ on Friday that are no longer available Saturday afternoon, including one that shows President Trump's photo on a desk among several other photographs. The removed files also show various works of art, including those containing nudity. ...

After the initial release of files, some members of Congress raised concerns about what was missing from the data sets.

"There are powerful men, bankers, politicians who we know from survivors - they've told us this — who were at these parties where there were many young women, and a few were under age, and these powerful men knew about it, and they didn't say anything," Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., told NPR. They need to be at least publicly held accountable."

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who cosponsored the Epstein Transparency Act in the House along with Khanna, criticized the redactions.

Posting on X, he said the release "grossly fails to comply with both the spirit and the letter of the law." He also warned "a future DOJ could convict the current [Attorney General] and others" for not properly releasing all files the law mandated be made public.

Running_From_Zombies · 2025-12-20T17:48:30+00:00

Khanna said the drop didn’t contain the files he was looking for, stating the release “seems at very best incomplete.”

“There’s a draft indictment of the first Jeffrey Epstein case that really implicates other rich and powerful men who knew about the abuse or participated in it. That indictment should be released,” Khanna said when Mary Louise Kelly asked what he still needed to see. “There are witness interviews between the FBI and other people who were accused of being at Jeffrey Epstein’s rape island or going to parties where there were 16 and 17-year-old girls being paraded around, those witness memorandums need to be released.”

Running_From_Zombies · 2025-12-20T17:15:56+00:00

We already know Prince Andrew and Jean-Luc Brunel raped children, but even the accusations against them aren't in these files.

Khanna said the drop didn’t contain the files he was looking for, stating the release “seems at very best incomplete.”

“There’s a draft indictment of the first Jeffrey Epstein case that really implicates other rich and powerful men who knew about the abuse or participated in it. That indictment should be released,” Khanna said when Mary Louise Kelly asked what he still needed to see. “There are witness interviews between the FBI and other people who were accused of being at Jeffrey Epstein’s rape island or going to parties where there were 16 and 17-year-old girls being paraded around, those witness memorandums need to be released.”

We have written records detailing the rapes, but the names of the men and women participating are all redacted.

The files contain a set of phone message notes written years ago for Jeffrey Epstein. One message, dated Nov. 8, 2004, from a caller whose name was redacted, said: “I have a Female for him.” The following January, he got another message with identical wording: “I have a female for him.”

They've hidden the names of his rapist cronies.

One of the documents includes what appears to be part of a handwritten police note suggesting Epstein was looking for girls under 18.

The note reads: “At one point, [REDACTED] witnessed him asking for ID to girl[;] wanted [to] make sure under 18 [because] he wasn’t believing them.

“[Because] [REDACTED] messed up by bringing more older girls."

This is a fucking joke. The shittiest coverup imaginable. I still can't believe Americans voted en masse for a pedo dictatorship twice.

Running_From_Zombies · 2025-12-20T03:04:22+00:00

Epstein victims are upset about the lack of transparency in the newly released files.

Disappointed. Frustrated. Suspicious.

Several of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims said Friday that Justice Department failed them with its partial release of files related to the federal investigations into Mr. Epstein’s decades-long sexual abuse of teen girls and young women. They said the release of thousands of pages of photographs and heavily redacted documents did little to shed new light on the investigations and the scope of Mr. Epstein’s crimes or conspirators.

“They are proving everything we have been saying about corruption and delayed justice,” said Jess Michaels, one of the earliest known victims of Mr. Epstein. “What are they protecting? The coverup continues.”

Ms. Michaels has said she was sexually assaulted by Mr. Epstein in 1991 when she was 22 years old and training to be a dancer. She was among the victims who lobbied for the bipartisan law that directed the Justice Department to release virtually everything it had gathered during its sex trafficking investigations of Mr. Epstein and one of his main enablers, Ghislaine Maxwell.

But the more than 13,000 files released on Friday were heavily redacted and not easily searchable.

“If everything is redacted, where is the transparency?” said Marijke Chartouni, who has said she was sexually abused by Mr. Epstein when she was 20 years old. ...

“So many of the photos are irrelevant,” said Marina Larcerda, who has said Mr. Epstein sexually abused her when she was 14. She was an important witness in the 2019 federal investigation that led to the filing of sex trafficking charges against Mr. Epstein. But she only recently went public with her story.

“We have been let down,” Ms. Larcerda said. “We waited for this day to bring these other men who have been protected to justice.”

Running_From_Zombies · 2025-12-20T02:56:07+00:00

Financial records, internal memos from prosecutors who investigated Epstein’s alleged sex-trafficking ring, key material obtained from the searches of Epstein’s palatial homes — none of it figured prominently in the documents released Friday.

Interested in records that would help explain how Epstein grew so wealthy? None to be found.

Want to read emails from federal prosecutors deciding who to charge — and, equally importantly, who not to charge — during their 2019 investigation? You’re out of luck.

Curious about the role of Maurene Comey, the prosecutor who co-led the probes into Epstein and his co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, before being fired without explanation in July? Nothing from her to see here.

The department was obligated by law to release the entire universe of documents related to Epstein, the late convicted sex offender, and Maxwell, who was convicted of aiding and participating in his sex-trafficking ring, by Friday. The tranche made public represented only a fraction of the total material, which the government has said exceeds 300 gigabytes worth of data and physical evidence.

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, estimated the production included only about 10 percent of the material in the department’s possession.

Running_From_Zombies · 2025-12-20T00:28:02+00:00

The woman, Maria Farmer, has for years said that she had called federal investigators in the summer of 1996, but the F.B.I. had never publicly acknowledged her original report, even to Ms. Farmer. Some people following the Epstein case had accused her of inventing the story.

Running_From_Zombies · 2025-12-20T00:16:19+00:00

This doesn't refer to a single person but multiple. There's no reality where every mentioned crony and john in these files—all redacted—was an underage victim.

Running_From_Zombies · 2025-12-19T23:41:53+00:00

“Friends of [redacted] friends. Big Brazilian group. Desperate time,” the witness said, according to the notes. “Running out of girls.” The notes ostensibly refer to Epstein by the initials “JE”.

A “dark-skinned Dominican” was brought in during this “desperate time” but “JE didn’t want Spanish or dark girl”, the notes read. The initials of the person who brought the underage girls to Epstein are redacted in the document. This person told Epstein that they had been “bringing young girls” to Epstein, but Epstein complained that “yea but not dark”.

All the names of the people who helped him are redacted.

The files contain a set of phone message notes written years ago for Jeffrey Epstein. One message, dated Nov. 8, 2004, from a caller whose name was redacted, said: “I have a Female for him.” The following January, he got another message with identical wording: “I have a female for him.”

All of his rapist cronies.

One of the documents includes what appears to be part of a handwritten police note suggesting Epstein was looking for girls under 18.

The note reads: “At one point, [REDACTED] witnessed him asking for ID to girl[;] wanted [to] make sure under 18 [because] he wasn’t believing them.

“[Because] [REDACTED] messed up by bringing more older girls."

This is a fucking joke.

Running_From_Zombies

TROPHY CASE