November 4, 2025

To answer Orrex's daily question:

October 10, 2025

BREAKING NEWS: White House designates Bigfoot as a domestic terrorist organization

Citing violence and civil unrest in cities such as Portland and Chicago, the Trump administration designated the legendary cryptid creature Bigfoot—also known as Sasquatch—as the “number one domestic terrorism threat today for the American people.”

The decision was announced at a joint press conference this morning attended by Attorney General Pam Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem and several conservative social media influencers.

“Let there be no mistake about it,” Attorney General Bondi said. “These Bigfoot, er, Bigfeet?—and honestly, we haven’t yet decided on the proper nomenclature—that roam the forests and mountains of the Pacific Northwest are the sole reason that cities like Portland are the lawless hellscapes that you see on the news.”

“You may think Bigfoot are shy, harmless and evasive creatures that merely wish to be left alone in nature,” Secretary Noem added. “That is anything but the truth. These are vicious, bloodthirsty monsters that hate traditional American values and will tear your head off the very moment they see you.”

Less clear was how the purported existence of Bigfoot had any impact whatsoever on crime rates or civil unrest, but FBI Director Patel offered his own personal theory.

“For years, the people of Portland have lived with tales of Bigfoot lurking high in the hills above their city,” Patel explained. “That type of daily psychological terror the public has been subjected to has had an undeniable impact on the collective psyche, causing many people to snap and act out in the most violent and unlawful of ways.”

The administration officials provided testimonials from people who claim to have been victims of Bigfoot.

“I have been attacked by Bigfoot on a near daily basis,” conservative blogger Andy Ngo told the gathered media. “There isn’t a morning where I haven’t stepped outside my door only to see those beady little eyes staring right back at me, waiting to chase me, maul me, dox me, try to devour me and otherwise have its way with me. All simply because I have dared to speak out about the growing evils of socialism in America.”

Besides the Sasquatch creatures themselves, the Trump administration also seeks to target those who in their words “harbor support or sympathy for the Bigfoot population in America, or who hold views similar to that of Bigfoot.”

“Those who are Bigfoot-oriented in this country, take note,” Bondi warned. “This includes hikers. Naturalists. Anyone over 6 foot 6. Men with unruly back hair. Subaru Outback drivers. Harry and the Hendersons star John Lithgow. Tread very carefully, because the Department of Justice will be watching you every single step you make.”

Administration officials also stated that Bigfoot’s reach extended far beyond Portland and the Pacific Northwest.

“We have a strong belief that much of the violence you see in Chicago can be attributed to the Big Muddy Monster lurking in Illinois,” Patel said. “The Skunk Ape of the Florida Everglades, the Ohio Grassman, Momo the Monster…there isn’t a square mile left in this beautiful country that isn’t threatened by the hairy reach of these terrifying, abominable creatures.”

Even more concerning, officials claimed, was that Bigfoot may not simply be a domestic phenomenon but rather tied to a larger, global organization.

“Strong evidence suggests that Bigfoot may be connected to a group of apelike creatures originating out of Central Asia known as The Yeti,” Noem stated. “Not to be confused with the camping supply company, of course. Which is lovely.”

In the meantime, Trump officials vowed to crack down on all Bigfoot-related activities and did not rule out expanding its efforts to other well-known cryptids.

“The Jersey Devil, El Chupacabra, Mothmen, the Flatwoods Monster, Big Goose—your day of reckoning is coming, too,” Bondi warned. “Any shadowy creature of the dark that dares to strike fear into the hearts of ordinary God-loving Americans will be defeated at all possible costs. For this is the very reason that the Department of Justice still exists in this country today.”

DETAILS AT ELEVEN.

October 6, 2025

It's a bit of a miracle that the fallout from the Kent State massacre wasn't bigger

Yes, the death toll was only four people--and we seem to have mass shootings with that type of casualty count at least every month these days--but it was four unarmed protesters. Shot dead by members of the military.

While I know there was instant reaction during the time, I'm a bit surprised it wasn't more significant and didn't lead to more escalating civil unrest. Consider that we all learned that one of the precipitating events of the American Revolution was the 1770 Boston Massacre, which had a death toll of 5.

For anyone who was around at the time, is there any explanation how public reaction to the shootings was more or less contained to a peaceful one?

I was not alive when the Kent State massacre took place. I do remember watching the Vietnam documentary by Ken Burns a few years back and sitting in stunned silence as they described the events that occurred, followed by Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young's "Ohio" playing over the end credits.

I worry we are working ourselves up to another similar deadly confrontation in Chicago, Portland or some other location, and I fear the fallout to that will somehow be much, much worse.

September 10, 2025

I wrote this piece for DU back in May 2024 while President Biden was still in office.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218949261

It was an alternate history fiction piece, imagining what the global situation in 2024 would have been like if Trump had been elected to a second term back in 2020.

Mostly it dealt with the impact on Ukraine--Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine did take place as it did in 2022. Under that scenario, Trump had attempted to negotiate a peace settlement between Ukraine and Russia that involved Ukraine ceding large parts of its territory in exchange for an end in violence; however, Russia soon ignored the ceasefire and moved into more Ukrainian land.

But I mentioned other things, too.

Sporadic attacks by Russia into NATO countries like Poland.

Deputization of the National Guard into US cities.

Talk of a third Trump term in office.

Don't ask me for the next set of Powerball numbers, however, because I won't be able to tell you.

The thing about predicting the future is that it's actually rather easy...when the future is very predictable.

August 21, 2025

BREAKING NEWS: Russia agrees to direct bilateral talks with former Ukrainian leader Yanukovych

In what the White House has hailed as a “major breakthrough” in peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin has announced he has agreed to direct, one-on-one negotiations with the individual who they believe to be Ukraine’s “true and legitimate sovereign leader.”

That individual happens to be none other Viktor Yanukovych, the former Ukrainian President who left office in 2014 and fled to Russia after massive protests against him erupted throughout the country due to claims of his rampant corruption and subservience to Moscow’s heavy influence.

The Kremlin all but ruled out any chance that Putin would engage in any direct talks with Ukraine’s current president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

“Zelenskyy is the fruit of the poisonous tree,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in a statement issued to the press. “He is the bastard child of Western powers who eleven years ago engaged in an illegal coup of Ukraine’s last true leadership and installed their own puppet to act in accordance with their own whims and desires.”

Zelenskyy was democratically elected Ukraine’s president in 2019, five years after the events of what has commonly been referred to as the Maidan Revolution took place. He succeeded Petro Poroshenko, who came to office in May 2014 in elections that were likewise deemed fair and democratic by international observers.

Yanukovych himself was elected in 2010, but soon fell into disfavor with the Ukrainian people after allegations of corruption swirled. During his time in office it is believed he and his allies may have pocketed up to $37 billion from the nation’s treasury.

In 2013, Yanukovych spurned a proposed trade deal with the European Union in favor of closer relations with Russia. Large protests against Yanukovych in Kyiv’s Independence Square erupted as a result. The protests were initially peaceful, but Yanukovych ultimately sought to crack down on the movement with his Berkut special police force.

Undeterred by Yanukovych’s violent crackdown, the protests continued through February 2014. A night of sniper shootings left over 100 people dead on the square, all while Yanukovych was already reportedly packing up his belongings at his luxurious suburban Kyiv estate. Yanukovych left Kyiv by helicopter the night of February 22, 2014, ultimately landing in Russia where the Kremlin had granted him asylum.

He has not left Russia or returned to Ukraine since.

Four days after Yanukovych abdicated power, Russian military under secret cover seized Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula, later annexing it as its own territory. Shortly thereafter, separatist forces in Ukraine’s Donetsk and Luhansk regions—heavily supplemented and supported by the Russian military—began an armed conflict against the Ukrainian government. That conflict in Ukraine’s eastern regions simmered all the way up to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

Yanukovych—now residing in the southern Russian city of Rostov-on-Don—was asked to comment on the developments and whether he’d agree to Moscow’s offer.

“Sure, why not?” Yanukovych reportedly said. “It is not like I have much else going on at the moment. It will probably be a lot of fun, to be honest.”

Meanwhile, the Trump administration—fresh off a summit with Putin in Alaska as well as a meeting with Zelensky and European leaders in Washington—has enthusiastically viewed Putin’s offer to meet with Yanukovych as a positive step towards ending the years-long conflict.

“It’s a great thing, a wonderful, beautiful thing,” President Donald Trump said to a group of gathered reporters. “I honestly don’t care who Putin meets with, so long as it stops this terrible, horrible war that was started by Biden and Zelenskyy, and it would never have ever started if I were President. I can tell you that now.”

DETAILS AT ELEVEN.

August 15, 2025

Two different presidents, two very different stories about their experiences with the homeless

First, here's the current guy:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/aug/10/trump-homeless-golf-course-washington-dc

And then there's the guy we were lucky enough to have in office for four years (the story is from 2018):

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/17/594421324/joe-biden-and-a-homeless-veteran-have-a-very-human-moment





Could the difference in basic, decent humanity between these two men be any greater? Could the difference between what is right and what is wrong be any more clear?

Last night, Donald Trump used the FBI--the FBI!--to evict homeless people living in the streets.

Both of these men profess to be Christian. One certainly seems to take his faith to heart. The other one most definitely does not.

But maybe Donald Trump was out golfing the Sunday where they talked about the Good Samaritan?

July 26, 2025

I've had 8 Presidents during my lifetime, 4 of them Democrats.

Each of the 4 Democrats has a specific attribute I admired about them.

I was too young to remember Carter but my dad absolutely loved him. I found him to be the most decent and honest President of my lifetime (and possibly even in our history.)

Clinton had some flaws both politically and personally but I am absolutely fascinated by him. He is brilliant, has a magical way of connecting with people and has this ability to explain complex topics in a simple, straightforward way like no other. He was the best pure politician of my lifetime and probably my favorite president of my lifetime.

Obama was probably objectively the “best” president of my lifetime. He had a level of gravitas and calm leadership that rose above all others, and history will certainly remember him the most.

Biden was probably the most personal and human president of my lifetime. He had a natural empathy to him above all others which was exactly what we needed coming out of the twin horrors of Covid and Trump. He’ll also be considered one of the best one-term presidents in history when all is said and done.

As for the rest…

Bush Sr. was probably the “least worst.” Mainly because there was only 4 years of him. And he signed the ADA into law, which was cool.

Reagan and Bush Jr. were both terrible shit shows as President. The best I could say about them is at least they had some basic elemental understanding as how to act as President and not be so completely blind as to their elected role.

Then there’s Trump. I won’t say more because words cannot accurately describe the horror of the man as President.

July 17, 2025

MAGAworld really brought this whole "Epstein's list" headache upon themselves.

How, exactly?

Because they started obsessing. Not about the case as a whole, but rather very specifically about a very specific list that they claim existed.

They believed that Epstein actually kept what amounted to a literal guest list for his private island, which would in turn infer that anyone on that list would have either have participated in any sexual activities on that island or at the very least would have had knowledge of such activities.

They obsessed about the list. Talked constantly about the list. Everything was all about the list.

And who would be on the list? Well, obviously, it would be Democrats who were on the list. Democrats and left leaning celebrities. After all, they were the only people capable of deviancy and debauchery, so it would make perfect sense that only they would be on the list.

Not Donald Trump, of course. Even though he had once gone on the record calling Epstein his friend and talked about how he liked "younger" women.

But Bill Clinton, who in the early 2000s (before Epstein's crimes were known) accepted Epstein's offer of a plane to use for travel for his foundation (which was still in its infancy and did not have a plane of its own)? Well, clearly he had to be on the "list." Because he was a Democrat, after all.

Eventually, social media took over, and far right figures claimed to release what they insisted was this "list." Like this guy, for example:

https://x.com/Markafc87/status/1743437933728903614

Of course, you had the Clintons. You had the Obamas. You had Joe Biden. All partying down at Epstein Island, they claimed.

You also had people like Tom Hanks, Drew Barrymore, Stephen Spielberg on this "list." Oh, and Seth Green--you know, Scotty Evil from the Austin Powers movies? He was on the list too!

List, list, list. It was all about the list.

That this "list" wasn't revealed during the first Trump presidency didn't seem to phase them. But when Biden took over, it became an obsession--Democrats were suppressing the "list"!

And it became a rallying cry for them. Once Trump got back into office, he was going to release this "list."

And the Trump campaign knew this was a big seller for the crowd. So they ran with it, and promised that, yes, they would release this list if Trump was elected.

Then Trump was elected, and the dog caught the car, so to speak.

The major problem being?

Well that there actually was no actual "list" at all.

There was an investigative file--depositions, interview transcripts, evidence. A big file. Huge. Thousands and thousands of pages, to be exact.

And within those thousands of pages there were plenty of names. The vast majority of those names probably being completely innocuous and incidental to Epstein's illicit activities.

And maybe just a few--an inconvenient few--who might have been not so innocent. Or at least embarrassing, if nothing more.

As in someone who had their photograph taken with Epstein on several occasions. Or called him his friend. Or talked about how he liked "younger" women.

But there was no actual "list". MAGA insisted for years there was a list and fantasized about the day that this list would be released, but sadly for them, this was impossible because there was no actual list. It was never that easy or straight forward. Thinking Epstein's crimes could all be rolled up into one tidy, simple "list" was always going to be a fantasy.

But now Trump (and by that virtue, Bondi, Patel and Bongino) are in a pickle. Because they promised a list, but there's no list to release.

They could make up a list--like all those geniuses on social media--but that would fall apart faster than a paper hat in a rainstorm.

So instead, they have to come out and do something that they absolutely hate to do: Tell the truth.

And the truth is that there is no actual singular "Epstein List" to speak of.

That's bad and angers the MAGA folk who for years insisted that there was a list and Trump was going to be the one to release it.

It's only compounded, however, by the fact that while there might be no list, there certainly is a file. And within that file, it could certainly be possible that there was at least a reference or two to Donald Trump that could be considered, well, less than flattering.

So all of a sudden, there's no list and the Epstein file is a now bad thing to focus on. Hence, Trump's freak out over social media. And MAGA's sudden ire at him.

All of this was an unforced error on MAGA's part, for years of fantasizing and building up the notion of a simple "Epstein List" that damns only Democrats and liberals, given that in the end, there was never such a list.

All I can say is...sucks for them.

July 15, 2025

I was on vacation while the whole Epstein thing exploded.

That being said, my assessment of the story is more or less unchanged.

First, there still is nothing that leads me to believe that there is some grand master "Epstein List" that contains names of people who conspired with Epstein for sex trafficking purposes or what not.

So as much as I hate to say it, Pam Bondi is probably technically correct in that respect.

The idea of an "Epstein List" is basically a myth perpetrated by mostly those on the right who want there to be some proof of massive amounts of Democratic politicians and left-leaning celebrities being in cohorts with Epstein and his worst offenses. There are dozens of fake "lists" floating online whose list of supposed "Epstein Island Visitors" contain entries as laughable as Seth Green, Meryl Streep, Miley Cyrus, Patton Oswalt, and Tom Hanks. Gullible right wing nut jobs ate up this bullshit like candy and propagated it as if there was the undisputed truth.

Bondi was basically placed between a rock and a hard place. Either she would have to come out and admit there was no actual "list" to speak of, or she could attempt to slap together some obviously transparent and idiotic "list" of her own that anyone with half a brain cell would be able to expose as fake. In the end, being risk adverse she chose the former and not the latter.

And the fact Bondi's very-reluctant admission shattered the far-right wing illusion of some massive list of Democrats and liberal celebrities who were conspiring with Epstein is the reason for the freakout by those on the right.

The concept of a "Epstein list" was basically a Ponzi scheme, inevitably destined to collapse. And it just did. So the right-wing is all upset.

So if there was no actual "list," what is there?

Well, there was a huge investigative file that looked into everything relating to Epstein's activities. And the thing about Epstein was that he was a huge narcissist who loved rubbing elbows with the rich, famous and powerful. So anyone he came in contact with could have found their names at various points in the file documents. This would include a lot of big names. Overwhelmingly, most of those peoples' names inclusion is 100% innocuous. There are probably a small few, however, who might not be.

So, just for example, back in the early 2000s--before Epstein's activities were known to the public--when the Clinton Foundation needed an airplane to travel to various countries and Epstein volunteered his plane, without the benefit of foresight they accepted it and that's something that could have brought in President Clinton's name to the entire file. Ultimately, it certainly is embarrassing, but not a shred of evidence of culpability in any crimes. But the right wing will insist otherwise simply because it fits their agenda. Nothing more and nothing less.

On the other hand, it appears that people like Alan Dershowitz and Prince Andrew might have a lot more involvement in Epstein's illicit activity, if the evidence turns out to be true. But even that hasn't been proven to support probable cause of a crime, let alone proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

So what to make of Donald Trump's freak out regarding the Epstein case?

Well, he certainly knew Epstein well enough to be photographed with him multiple times. And he once went on the record about how Epstein "liked them young," so an inference could be made that he at least may have had some knowledge about Epstein's sexual predilections.

Does that mean Trump was a culpable co-conspirator? I objectively cannot say and will not say. But I do think whatever mentions in the investigative files of Trump's name were certainly embarrassing enough to someone whose skin is as thin as Donald Trump to cause him to freak out. As a malignant narcissist Trump is very image sensitive, and the mere idea that he could be connected to Epstein--especially after the civil judgment in the Carroll case--would likely have caused him to freak out.

In the end, while the actions of Epstein were undoubtedly horrific and there stands a chance that at least some knew of his activities and may have even acted along with him, as a political scandal I still believe the Epstein story is fools gold, for both the left and right alike.

It will flare up every so often, as it did last week, but I don't see it as having any sort of lasting impact. People have way too short memories for that.

June 23, 2025

BREAKING NEWS: White House announces President Trump as recipient of the Noble Prize

The White House announced today that President Donald Trump has been awarded what it claims to be “the most prestigious peace prize ever, period.”

During a briefing in front of reporters, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt announced that President Trump was the sole recipient of the 2025 Noble Prize for Peaceful Peaceability and Peace.

For the record, the Noble Prize for Peaceful Peaceability and Peace is not to be confused with the Nobel Peace Prize, the well-known medal named in honor of Swedish inventor and industrialist Alfred Nobel. That award has been bestowed annually since 1901 to individuals who demonstrate outstanding contributions towards peace for humanity in efforts such as arms reduction, negotiated resolutions aimed at ending longstanding conflicts, and measures meant to reduce global poverty, disease and hunger.

On the other hand, there appears to be no public record of any Noble Prize being awarded to any individual before 2025.

Levitt bristled at the idea that the White House had somehow manufactured the award in the hopes of confusing the public into thinking that Trump had actually been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

“Noble means ‘good’ or ‘honorable,’” Leavitt told reporters. “As in peace being good and honorable. I don’t know how many of you all actually know that, but it’s just plain, basic English, okay? It has absolutely nothing to do with some silly, made-up Swedish word that you’d probably find on a coat rack at IKEA.”

Leavitt stressed that the Noble Prize was not simply made up for the benefit of Trump’s ego and as a means to assuage his frustration at not ever having been honored with its longstanding counterpart.

“Would the recipient of the 2013 Michigan Man of the Year lie to the public about winning a non-existent award?” Levitt asked. “I think both you and I know the answer to that question.”

Leavitt also denied that it was Trump himself who came up with the award, stating that “others” had been involved in awarding Trump the Noble Prize, but was immediately pressed by reporters to identify such persons.

“The kids—well, at least Don Jr. and Eric,” Leavitt responded. “Not sure about the rest. Um, Stevie Miller definitely had a hand in it. Oh, and Catturd! Catturd was absolutely a key player throughout the process.”

Leavitt described the Noble Prize itself as the “most magnificent and fashionable” of all the peace prizes.

Unlike the medal for the Nobel Prize—which is 6.6 centimeters in diameter and comprised of 18 carat gold—Leavitt said the Noble Prize is 6.6 inches in diameter, because “this is America and we don’t do metric.”

Additionally, the Noble Prize medal will be made of full 24 carat gold, as Leavitt said, “President Trump will accept no substitutes.”

Leavitt added that the Noble Prize comes with additional perks and benefits for the winner, including $10 billion (made payable either in U.S. dollars or Bitcoin), a lifetime membership to the Noble Cheese of the Month club, and a coupon for half-off the purchase price of the foreign airliner of his or her choice.

Leavitt said that Trump “absolutely” would be wearing his medal every chance he possibly gets, adding, “He earned it, so why shouldn't he?”

The White House press secretary was then asked exactly what basis Trump had actually earned the purported Noble Prize.

“President Trump has been solely responsible for negotiating a peaceful end of so, so many of the world’s deadliest armed conflicts raging today,” Leavitt answered. “Just to name a few off the top of my head, I’m talking about Israel-Iran. Israel-Palestine. Russia-Ukraine. India-Pakistan. Rwanda-Congo. United Kingdom-Northern Ireland. Japan-South Korea. And so, so many more. Thanks to President Trump, war is over and peace rules the land.”

At that point, some members of the media pointed out that nearly all of those wars or disputes Leavitt listed remained ongoing to date, the conflict between the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland ended nearly 30 years ago, and that Japan and South Korea are close trading partners and not engaged in any current state of hostilities with one another.

“Yet,” Leavitt attempted to correct the press. “They’re not at war with each other yet. But you just wait and see. They will be at war with one another soon enough, we guarantee you that. And when that happens, President Trump will be the one who ends it.”

DETAILS AT ELEVEN