Hello everyone, and welcome to the part 6 of this super-topic. To not waste time with recaps and clarifications, just below, in a separate section, I will put the previous parts, with their respective links, and the disclaimers corresponding to this one, also separately.

---

Parts prior to this one

Part 1: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11204491/

Part 2: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11208155/

Part 3: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11211973/

Part 4: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11215613/

Part 5: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11219798/

Disclaimers

1. Any act of denial and refutation against any data, statements and proof mentioned or presented in this journal based on mentions, suggestions or uses of information sources coming from and/or promoted by hegemonic media (US, UK and others), social media, Wikipedia (including variations thereof as well), Fact Checkers and any entity pertaining to and/or related to the oligarchy, may be ignored and/or taken with great skepticism by any reader, in case he/she so desires. The reasons are based on the absence of credible, reliable and/or truthful information, whether in part or in whole, from the aforementioned sources/entities/groups/organizations due to many of the controversies and/or scandals associated with them.

2. The use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" per se, or similar to that, which is linked to what it means in the entertainment media and/or the hegemonic media as a primary method of denial and/or disapproval of the content of this note, as well as the sources attached to it, will not be taken as truthful either.

3. The owner of this journal doesn't have any kind of personal adherence (personal/selfish reasons), contractual (legal reasons) or constitutional (constitutional reasons) with political figures, political parties, social organizations/entities and/or countries/nations based on the use of political agendas and/or any kind of activism that causes damage to material goods, the environment and/or towards other human beings (whether physical or psychological) for any reason that is considered unjustified after being first analyzed based on reason and ethics, with the sample or presence of compelling evidence corresponding to the cases mentioned above. The rejection of such agendas and/or activism will be even higher and forceful in cases that imply going against human nature in terms of any harm, deprivation, destruction and deterioration of the individuality of the human being and/or any society composed of human beings for unjustifiable reasons.

---

That said, and to get to the point, here is the third and last section of the subtopic dedicated to the main political parties in the United States, which contains general information about them, some of their members, and related topics:

Evidence that ratifies or refutes some of the things associated with the two main political parties in the United States (the Democratic Party and the Republican Party), as well as, occasionally, their relationship with other people (political figures or not), and Donald Trump as well.


8) Since its founding, in 1948, practically every US administration has provided financial, military, and logistical support to Israel.

Evidence A.

U.S. Aid to Israel in Four Charts (Last updated on November 13, 2024)

https://www.cfr.org/article/us-aid-israel-four-charts

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “How much U.S. aid does Israel receive?

Israel has been the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign aid since its founding, receiving about $310 billion (adjusted for inflation) in total economic and military assistance. The United States has also provided large foreign aid packages to other Middle Eastern countries, particularly Egypt and Iraq, but Israel stands apart.”

2- “How does Israel use the aid?

Most of the aid—approximately $3.3 billion a year—is provided as grants under the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program, funds that Israel must use to purchase U.S. military equipment and services. In October 2023, the Joe Biden administration said Israel had nearly six hundred active FMF cases, totalling around $24 billion. Israel has also historically been permitted to use a portion of its FMF aid to buy equipment from Israeli defense firms—a benefit not granted to other recipients of U.S. military aid—but this domestic procurement is to be phased out in the next few years. U.S. aid reportedly accounts for some 15 percent of Israel’s defense budget. Israel, like many other countries, also buys U.S. military products outside of the FMF program.”

3- “Are there any conditions or restrictions attached to the aid?

...Congress can block a sale through a joint resolution, although this has never happened. In special cases, the president can bypass the congressional review if they deem that a national security emergency exists. President Biden has used this expedited waiver process for both Israel and Ukraine. For smaller transactions that don’t meet the dollar threshold, no congressional review is required.”

Warning 1: The source cited above, as evidence (A), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence B.

FACT SHEET: Memorandum of Understanding Reached with Israel (September 14, 2016)

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/09/14/fact-sheet-memorandum-understanding-reached-israel

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “Under the new MOU with Israel, the Obama Administration has made the largest single pledge of military assistance in U.S. history:

• The total value of the new MOU, which covers FY2019- FY2028, is $38 billion ($3.8 billion per year). It will succeed the current $30 billion MOU signed in 2007, which will expire at the end of FY2018.
• This amount represents a significant increase over the current MOU by every measure, and will enable Israel to acquire additional advanced military capabilities from the United States.
• It includes $33 billion in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) funds and an unprecedented $5 billion commitment in missile defense assistance. This funding will be disbursed in equal increments of $3.3 billion in FMF and $500 million in missile defense funding each year for the duration of the understanding.”

2- “Under President Obama to date, Israel has received a record amount of Foreign Military Financing (FMF) funds:

• Israel remains the leading recipient worldwide of U.S. FMF. Since President Obama took office, the United States has provided Israel over $23.5 billion in FMF assistance (from 2009-2016).
• In FY2016, the United States provided Israel $3.1 billion in FMF assistance to support Israel’s ability to defend against threats. This is in line with assistance provided in FY2014 and FY2015 and represented approximately 51.4% of the U.S. global FMF account in FY2016.”

3- “President Obama has also provided Israel with unprecedented levels of missile defense funding:

• In addition to FMF funding, under President Obama’s leadership, the United States has provided over $3 billion in missile defense funding for programs and systems for Israel.
• Since 2011, the United States has provided Israel with over $1.3 billion for the Iron Dome system alone. Iron Dome batteries and interceptors have saved an untold number of Israeli lives, particularly during the conflict with Hamas in 2014.”

4- “In addition to FMF and missile defense funds, the United States under President Obama has provided other forms of valuable support to Israel:

• Signed by President Obama in December 2014, the U.S.-Israel Strategic Partnership Act authorizes $3 million to be spent on research pilot programs between Israeli government agencies and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
• The Department of Defense’s chemical-biological defense response units work with the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to provide equipment and training.
• The Department of Defense has sold or provided free of charge millions of dollars’ worth of U.S. excess defense articles to the IDF, supporting their need for spare parts, weapons, and simulators to maintain their current fleets.

Warning 2: The source cited above, as evidence (B), still may have really low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence C.

Joe Biden is pressing Congress to send $14B to Israel. What is the emergency aid for? (February 20, 2024)

https://www.jta.org/2024/02/20/politics/joe-biden-is-pressing-congress-to-send-14b-to-israel-what-is-the-emergency-aid-for

Warning 3: The source cited above, as evidence ( C ), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence D.

US military aid to Israel under scrutiny as Biden signs $26B in new assistance | VOANews

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZDisxOOBSc

Evidence E.

Trump Admin Bypasses Congress to Send Israel $4B as It Blocks Aid Into Gaza (March 4, 2025)

https://truthout.org/articles/trump-admin-bypasses-congress-to-send-israel-4b-as-it-blocks-aid-into-gaza/

Warning 4: The source cited above, as evidence (E), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (8).

For more context about what has been stated, showed, and shared in this segment, I recommend that everyone go to the journal “Seven Countries in Five Years”, made by me; nothing more to add about it.


9) The big majority of politicians in the United States (important figures or not), the Democratic Party and the Republican Party respectively, hold dual nationality with Israel, and related.

Evidence A.

Members in US politics who hold dual US/Israeli citizenship (September 5, 2015)

https://www.thelibertybeacon.com/members-in-us-politics-who-hold-dual-usisraeli-citizenship/

Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:

“1.Attorney General – Michael Mukasey
2. Head of Homeland Security – Michael Chertoff
3. Chairman Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board – Richard Perle
4. Deputy Defense Secretary (Former) – Paul Wolfowitz
5. Under Secretary of Defense – Douglas Feith
6. National Security Council Advisor – Elliott Abrams
7. Vice President Dick Cheney’s Chief of Staff (Former) – “Scooter” Libby
8. White House Deputy Chief of Staff – Joshua Bolten
9. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs – Marc Grossman
10. Director of Policy Planning at the State Department – Richard Haass
11. U.S. Trade Representative (Cabinet-level Position) – Robert Zoellick
12. Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board – James Schlesinger
13. UN Representative (Former) – John Bolton
14. Under Secretary for Arms Control – David Wurmser
15. Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board – Eliot Cohen
16. Senior Advisor to the President – Steve Goldsmith
17. Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary – Christopher Gersten
18. Assistant Secretary of State – Lincoln Bloomfield
19. Deputy Assistant to the President – Jay Lefkowitz
20. White House Political Director – Ken Melman
21. National Security Study Group – Edward Luttwak
22. Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board – Kenneth Adelman
23. Defense Intelligence Agency Analyst (Former) – Lawrence (Larry) Franklin
24. National Security Council Advisor – Robert Satloff
25. President Export-Import Bank U.S. – Mel Sembler
26. Deputy Assistant Secretary, Administration for Children and Families – Christopher Gersten
27. Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for Public Affairs – Mark Weinberger
28. White House Speechwriter – David Frum
29. White House Spokesman (Former) – Ari Fleischer
30. Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board – Henry Kissinger
31. Deputy Secretary of Commerce – Samuel Bodman
32. Under Secretary of State for Management – Bonnie Cohen
33. Director of Foreign Service Institute – Ruth Davis”

Warning 5: The source cited above, as evidence (A), still may have really low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence B.

89% of our Senators and Congress hold dual citizenship citizenship with Israel (June 22, 2018)

• https://prepareforchange.net/2018/0.....p-with-israel/
• https://nexusnewsfeed.com/article/g.....p-with-israel/

Warning 6: The sources cited above, as evidence (B), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence C.

Dual Citizenship Allowed for Top US Government Officials, but not Israeli (November 14, 2024)

https://dearscotland.substack.com/p/dual-citizenship-allowed-for-top

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “US-born and bred Ron Dermer, former Israeli Ambassador to the United States from 2013-2021 and Strategic Affairs Minister since 2022, was required by Israel to renounce his US citizenship before taking up these positions. The logic behind this requirement is hard to dispute - top governmental officials of any nation cannot serve two masters.”

2- “Another Israeli Ambassador to the US, US-born Michael Oren, also relinquished his American citizenship. Both are committed Zionists.”

3- “However, Amos Hochstein, the US “peace” envoy to Israel and US Senior Advisor for Energy Security, was born in 1973 in Israel. He served in the IDF as a tank crewman until the mid 1990s and took part in Israel’s 1993 invasion of Lebanon...

...In a 2012 interview, Hochstein’s wife said, “My husband is Israeli…” At that time, Hochstein was Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Diplomacy in the US State Department.

I could find no information on whether Hochstein has renounced his Israeli citizenship. When he’s been asked, he’s not responded.”

Warning 7: The source cited above, as evidence ( C ), still may have really low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence D.

Dual Citizenship -- Loyal to Whom?

http://www.viewzone.com/dualcitizen.html

Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:

“Recently, in their much lauded paper, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, Harvard professor, Stephen Walt, and University of Chicago professor, John Mearsheimer, focused attention on the strong Israeli lobby which has a powerful influence over American foreign policies (see BBC article). They detail the influence that this lobby has exerted, forming a series of international policies which can be viewed as in direct opposition to the interests and security of the American people. These acts and policies are more often than not carried out by US government appointees who hold powerful positions and who are dual American-Israeli citizens. Since the policies they support are often exclusively beneficial to Israel, often to the detriment of America, it has been argued that their loyalties are misdirected.”

Warning 8: The source cited above, as evidence (D), still may have really low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (9).

For more context about what has been stated, showed, and shared in this segment, I recommend combining what is in this segment with the information showed and shared in the segment 8, present in this same part (sixth part of this super-topic), plus the information showed, shared, and developed in the journal “Seven Countries in Five Years”, made by me; nothing more to add about it as well.


10) Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, as well as practically all US presidents to this day (date of publication of this journal), are (were) distant cousins of royal ancestors.

Evidence A1.

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton revealed to be distant cousins as family trees show they share same set of royal ancestors (August 25, 2015)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3210778/Donald-Trump-Hillary-Clinton-revealed-distant-cousins-family-trees-share-set-royal-ancestors.html

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “Presidential candidate Donald Trump may criticize rival Hillary Clinton regularly, but the Republican and Democratic front-runners are actually distant relatives.

Both the real estate tycoon and former Secretary of State are the direct descendants of 14th century 1st Duke of Lancaster John of Gaunt and his third wife Katherine Swynford, according to the ancestry site MyHeritage.com.”

2- “John of Gaunt, a royal in the 14th century, was the son of King Edward III and featured in the Shakespearean play Richard II, named after his nephew.

Swynford was at first Gaunt's mistress, but they later married and their offspring were legitimized.

Gaunt's children by Swynford include Trump's 17th great-grandfather John Beaufort and Clinton's 17th great-grandmother Joan Beaufort, according to MyHeritage.”

Links to the images showed in the article corresponding to this evidence (A1):

• https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/201.....0542123375.jpg
• https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/201.....0542248780.jpg

Evidence A2.

Israeli Genealogy Website: Trump and Clinton Related! (April 20, 2016)

https://www.algemeiner.com/2016/04/20/israeli-genealogy-website-trump-and-clinton-related/

Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:

“Family tree-building service Geni.com, which is owned by the Israel-based MyHeritage.com, revealed back in August 2015 that the Democratic and Republican candidates have been found to be distantly related via John of Gaunt, the first Duke of Lancaster, and his third wife Katherine Swynford, the Duchess of Lancaster. Both ancestors, who lived in the 1300s, are the two contenders’ shared 18th great grandparents.

This means that Trump and Clinton are, in fact, 19th cousins!”

Evidence A3.

Hillary Clinton And Donald Trump Are Related And Share Royal Blood (October 15, 2016)

https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-related-royal-blood/

Evidence A4.

Israeli startup claims Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are related (April 18, 2016)

https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/israeli-startup-claims-hillary-clinton-and-donald-trump-are-related-451591

Evidence A5.

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are Related

https://www.familytree.com/blog/donald-trump-and-hillary-clinton-are-related/

Warning 9: The sources cited above, as evidence (A1, A2, A3, A4 y A5), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information in general; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence B.

New Election, Same Old Blood

https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/tag/bloodline-of-presidents/

Warning 10: The source cited above, as evidence (B), still may have really low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence C.

All U.S. Presidents Are Related -12 Year Old Girl Discovers That All But One US President Are Directly Related To Each Other

https://curiousmindmagazine.com/all-us-presidents-including-trump-are-descendants-of-the-same-english-king/

Link to the video showed and shared in the article corresponding to this evidence ( C ):

Are all the US Presidents related?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9shzqqcfvfw

Warning 11: The sources cited above, as evidence ( C ), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information in general; readers discretion is advised.


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (10).

Regarding what was showed and shared in this segment, I can only say two things:

• first, take all of this with a huge grain of salt;
• and second, all of this will be quite relevant in the last part of this topic, i.e., in the conclusion.


11) Many of the US politicians (important figures or not), for several decades, were clients of the Maxwell family (Robert Maxwell and his daughter, Ghislaine Maxwell), as well as Jeffrey Epstein.

Evidence A.

Video made by reallygraceful in which she talks about the hidden history of Ghislaine Maxwell, as well as of her father, Robert Maxwell, the connection between her and Jeffrey Epstein, and more. Here is the video in question, with its respective title and link:

Will GHISLAINE MAXWELL Be a Free Woman Soon?

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnHMH5eXsPI
• https://www.bitchute.com/video/UT4EGWAfuHdt/
• https://rumble.com/v6wrafe-will-ghi.....oman-soon.html

Links to the majority of the sources mentioned in the reallygraceful videos (same video; different platforms), just above, placed in two separate parts for easy understanding:

The relationship between Donald Trump, Ghislaine Maxwell, and Jeffrey Epstein, and related to them (between minutes 00:00 and 16:21):

00:15: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCbfTN-caFI
00:56: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aI_RiOHr6bE
00:56: https://x.com/Acyn/status/1945254821482914162
01:30: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news.....s/85240733007/
01:51: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonald.....63203348237352
03:15: https://archive.ph/dg73F
03:20: https://external-content.duckduckgo.....62c01aedce96c1f1c9aff8c9b4&ipo=images
03:34: https://www.reuters.com/article/wor.....idUSKCN1VI2M3/
03:54: https://mediaproxy.snopes.com/width.....on-wedding.jpg
03:54: https://vip.nypost.com/wp-content/u.....;amp;strip=all
04:43: https://www.foxnews.com/video/6376118929112
04:45: https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploa.....74367764-2.jpg
04:59: https://www.axios.com/2025/07/22/tr.....illary-clinton
05:27: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
06:47: https://constitution.congress.gov/b.....e-3/section-3/
07:17: https://www.mensjournal.com/news/po.....rch-paper-says
07:43: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/doj.....y?id=124021785
07:56: https://abcnews.go.com/US/deputy-ag.....y?id=124064062
09:12: https://www.newsweek.com/ghislaine-.....lawyer-2104150
10:42: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViuHxX0krC4
11:32: https://external-content.duckduckgo.....a1b587470531bbe018fb8a1421&ipo=images
14:23: https://e3.365dm.com/21/12/1600x900.....20211208171756
15:37: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRZd861Pog0

The Maxwell family in general (Robert Maxwell and his daughter, Ghislaine Maxwell) (between minutes 16:22 and 29:10):

16:40: http://www.maps-of-europe.net/maps/.....hoslovakia.jpg
18:29: https://flashbak.com/wp-content/upl.....7-744x1024.jpg
19:19: https://static01.nyt.com/images/201.....;amp;auto=webp
19:33: https://financnenoviny.com/wp-conte.....L-1-scaled.jpg
19:44: https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/incomi.....sary-party.jpg
20:42: https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detai.....hoto/480799743
20:49: https://media.gettyimages.com/id/11.....cSnNYEgn9NVOw=
21:39: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EPJs0MIWkAM_aEU.jpg
21:50: https://ia803202.us.archive.org/1/i.....MIS%201981.pdf
22:00: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqxc-KzcOz4
22:37: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB2U8yQRMN0
23:02: https://alchetron.com/cdn/robert-ma.....resize-750.jpg
23:17: https://c8.alamy.com/comp/B4XGJX/ro.....use-B4XGJX.jpg
23:54: https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/wp-c.....C4U0AAoupe.jpg
24:02: https://static.timesofisrael.com/fr.....91266844-1.jpg
24:45: https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.....;newspapertitle=daily%2bmirror&sortorder=dayearly
24:45: #
24:59: https://archive.org/details/robertm.....ellisr0000thom
24:59: https://ia800109.us.archive.org/25/.....07/maxwell.pdf
25:35: https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/1.....0821587233.jpg
25:35: https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/1.....0821586895.jpg
25:42: https://www.webdesignmuseum.org/exh...../magellan-1996
26:13: https://grazingthesurface.com/wp-co.....eStudy_FBI.pdf
26:24: https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch.....-98b61b01de3f/
26:24: https://grazingthesurface.com/wp-co.....ngton-Post.pdf
26:35: https://www.inknowvation.com/sbir/s.....i-ceo-industry
27:50: https://nypost.com/2020/07/02/coron.....axwell-arrest/
28:07: https://www.scmp.com/news/world/uni.....e-maxwell-held

Warning 12: The sources cited above still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information in general; readers discretion is advised.


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (11).

The information showed and shared in this segment still remains related, in an indirect way, to the information showed and shared in the segments 8 and 9, in this same part (sixth part of this super-topic), too. Beyond that, there is nothing more to add about it.


Phew.

Okay, folks. I inform to everyone that we have finally reached the end of this subtopic; not the topic itself, by the way. Regarding this last section, I want to apologize again if it turned out to be longer than the previous two, but , I want to clarify that I did my best to include the most important and essential information regarding what was stated in each one of the segments present in this part.

However, what matters now is the fact that the final part of this super-topic, i.e., the conclusion, is just around the corner, which I am sure must be good news for those reading this, especially for me, ha. And for those who want to know something, or at least have a clue, about what's coming in the last part, i.e., the seventh one, I can only recommend going to the first part of this topic and reading what's in the second paragraph of the section called ”Explanation and clarification of the development of the topic in terms of ordination and content.” that's all I can say for now.

Well, folks, I hope that the content of this part, or at least part of it, has been interesting and informative for everyone, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings and have a nice day/night to all of you.

Hello everyone, and welcome to the part 5 of this super-topic. To not waste time with recaps and clarifications, just below, in a separate section, I will put the previous parts, with their respective links, and the disclaimers corresponding to this one, also separately.

---

Parts prior to this one

Part 1: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11204491/

Part 2: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11208155/

Part 3: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11211973/

Part 4: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11215613/

Disclaimers

1. Any act of denial and refutation against any data, statements and proof mentioned or presented in this journal based on mentions, suggestions or uses of information sources coming from and/or promoted by hegemonic media (US, UK and others), social media, Wikipedia (including variations thereof as well), Fact Checkers and any entity pertaining to and/or related to the oligarchy, may be ignored and/or taken with great skepticism by any reader, in case he/she so desires. The reasons are based on the absence of credible, reliable and/or truthful information, whether in part or in whole, from the aforementioned sources/entities/groups/organizations due to many of the controversies and/or scandals associated with them.

2. The use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" per se, or similar to that, which is linked to what it means in the entertainment media and/or the hegemonic media as a primary method of denial and/or disapproval of the content of this note, as well as the sources attached to it, will not be taken as truthful either.

3. The owner of this journal doesn't have any kind of personal adherence (personal/selfish reasons), contractual (legal reasons) or constitutional (constitutional reasons) with political figures, political parties, social organizations/entities and/or countries/nations based on the use of political agendas and/or any kind of activism that causes damage to material goods, the environment and/or towards other human beings (whether physical or psychological) for any reason that is considered unjustified after being first analyzed based on reason and ethics, with the sample or presence of compelling evidence corresponding to the cases mentioned above. The rejection of such agendas and/or activism will be even higher and forceful in cases that imply going against human nature in terms of any harm, deprivation, destruction and deterioration of the individuality of the human being and/or any society composed of human beings for unjustifiable reasons.

---

That said, and to get to the point, here is the second section of the subtopic dedicated to the main political parties in the United States, which contains general information about them, some of their members, and related topics:

Evidence that ratifies or refutes some of the things associated with the two main political parties in the United States (the Democratic Party and the Republican Party), as well as, occasionally, their relationship with other people (political figures or not), and Donald Trump as well.

5) Both sides of the political spectrum in the U.S. (prominent figures and others) have, for a little more than three decades, blamed violent video games for creating violence in that country, with the aim of implementing unjustified restrictions or rules against the citizens of said country.

5.1) What regular politicians, and related, in that country, said about violent video games:

Evidence A.

Violence In Video Games - Highlights of the American Senate Committee Hearings in 1993

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhwM3ZMTCR0

Evidence B.

Senate Hearings on Video Game Violence (12/09/1993)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuELWWB1mOE

Evidence C.

Senate Hearings on Video Game Violence (12/09/1993)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpIBLTPMN_U

Link to the source corresponding to the evidences A, B, and C, above:

1993 U.S. hearing on video games

https://archive.org/details/1993-hearing-videogames

Evidence D.

The Senate Hearing on Video Game Violence ( circa 1994 )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePQm-hxolcY

Link to the source corresponding to the evidence D, above:

The Senate Hearing on Video Game Violence ( circa 1994 )

https://archive.org/details/youtube-ePQm-hxolcY

Evidence E.

What Hillary Clinton, in that country, said about violent video games:

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ggQGkcuKB8
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3GTJOZLaPY

Evidence F.

What Barack Obama, in that country, did (not just said) about violent video games:

Videos:

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCWL-n8hKhk
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbTa3g23b_A
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vnDniUo-iA

No videos:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/gaming/2013/01/16/obama-gun-violence-video-games/1839879/

Evidence G.

What Joe Biden, in that country, said about violent video games:

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDlIhvfH_MA
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsgqhRDSKPY

Evidence H.

What Donald Trump, in that country, said about violent video games:

President Trump Blames Video Games For School Shootings And Violence, White House Says | TIME

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j1dKluNZT8

5.2) What others said, through generally good arguments, about politicians in that country, and related, regarding what they said about violent video games:

Evidence I.

Politicians’ History of Blaming Violent Video Games

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibjDJ3YmURE

Evidence J.

Compilation Of Politicians Blaming Video Games For Violence

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtYo79TXFxQ

Evidence K.

BLAMING VIDEO GAMES FOR GUN VIOLENCE! 3 TIMES MEDIA TRIED TO STOP GAMING - TRUMP BLAMES VIDEO GAMES

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0Kz6TYggdk


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (5).

Nothing to clarify or explain here that has not already been stated, shown, and shared in this segment.


6) Joe Biden pardoned his son, Hunter, with a little complicity from Donald Trump here and there, even though he had said on multiple occasions that he would never do it.

Evidence A.

All the times Joe Biden and the White House said he wouldn’t pardon Hunter

https://nypost.com/2024/12/02/us-news/all-of-the-times-joe-biden-and-his-administration-said-he-wouldnt-pardon-hunter/

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “Both Biden and the White House told the public nearly a dozen times that the president would not pardon his son — both before and after Hunter was convicted of gun charges and pleaded guilty to tax felonies earlier this year.”

2- “Plea deal collapse

In July last year, shortly after Hunter Biden’s no-jail plea agreement imploded in court, the White House clarified the president’s stance against a pardon.

“No,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre simply told reporters at the time...

...“This is a personal matter for Hunter Biden, this is a personal issue,” Jean-Pierre also told reporters at the time. “This has been done in an independent way by the Department of Justice, it has been led by a Trump-appointed prosecutor.””

3- “December 2023

Against the backdrop of Weiss’ team announcing nine charges against Hunter Biden over the tax evasion case, the White House flack again insisted that the president hadn’t changed his mind.

“Nothing has changed,” she told reporters on Air Force One during a gaggle. “That is still the case.””

4- “Biden declares he won’t pardon Hunter

Finally, last June, while his scandal-scarred son was on trial for the three-count firearm case, the president publicly declared that he wouldn’t issue a pardon.

“Yes,” the president said in a terse reply when asked by ABC News’ David Muir if he had ruled out a pardon.

The 82-year-old also “admonished his then-rival” former President Donald Trump for “railing against the justice system” as he grappled with 88 criminal counts at the time, most of which have since gone away.

“He’s trying to “undermine it”,” Biden argued at the time. “He got a fair trial. The jury spoke.””

5- “Hunter gets convicted

...“As I said last week, I am the President, but I am also a Dad. I love our son, and we are so proud of the man he is today,” Biden said in a statement on June 11, 2024. “As I also said last week, I will accept the outcome of this case and will continue to respect the judicial process as Hunter considers an appeal.””

6- “Hunter pleads guilty in the tax case

The first son shocked observers by pleading guilty to the nine counts in the tax case against him. And the White House again claimed the president wouldn’t pardon him.

“It’s no, it’s still no,” Jean-Pierre told reporters on Sept. 5.”

7- “Donald Trump open to pardoning Hunter

Trump, 78, said during an interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt in late October that he wasn’t ruling out a pardon for Hunter Biden.

“I wouldn’t take it off the books. See, unlike Joe Biden, despite what they’ve done to me, where they’ve gone after me “so viciously”, despite what — and Hunter’s a bad boy. There’s no question about it. He’s been a bad boy,” Trump said at the time.”

8- “Biden pardons Hunter

On Sunday evening, the president announced his “shocking reversal” and “justified” his actions by claiming that his son was treated “unfairly” by the justice system.

“From the day I took office, I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making, and “I kept my word” even as I have watched my son being “selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted”,” the president said in a statement.

“It is clear that Hunter “was treated differently,”” he added. “The charges in his cases came about only after several of my “political opponents” in Congress instigated them “to attack me and oppose my election”.””

9- “Jean-Pierre also rejected the notion that the president’s actions substantiate Trump’s allegations that the justice system “has been weaponized for political purposes.”

“No. Read the president’s statement. Seriously. Read the president’s statement. He said “he believes in the Department of Justice”,” she told reporters Monday. “He also “believes” that … politics infected the process, and it led to a “miscarriage of justice”. He “believes” his son was “unfairly targeted”.””

General note 1: Readers are advised to pay special attention not only to what is underlined and/or in bold in the fragments cited above (evidence A), but also to the words or phrases between quotation marks (“”); more context later on.

Warning 1: The source cited above, as evidence (A), still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (6).

Almost nothing to clarify or explain here that has not been stated, shown, and shared in this segment, except to follow the links to the sources mentioned at minute 16:21 of the video “Land of the Free, Home of CORRUPTION” by Upper Echelon, presented as primary evidence (evidence A) in the segment 1, of the first section of this subtopic, i.e., in the fourth part of this super-topic, for more context.


7) The vast majority of politicians (important figures or not) in the United States, either Democrats or Republicans, as well as many of the important figures related to them, graduated from Yale University, Harvard University, or the University of Pennsylvania.

7.1) Important political figures graduated from Yale University, and related:

Evidence A.

Yale University (Wikipedia article)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yale_University

Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:

“One of the most popular undergraduate majors is political science, with many going on to serve in government and politics. Former presidents who attended for undergrad include William Howard Taft, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush while former presidents Gerald Ford and Bill Clinton attended Yale Law School. Vice President JD Vance graduated from Yale Law School. Former vice president and influential antebellum era politician John C. Calhoun also graduated from Yale. Former world leaders include Italian prime minister Mario Monti, Turkish prime minister Tansu Çiller, South Korean prime minister Lee Hong-koo, Mexican president Ernesto Zedillo, German president Karl Carstens, Philippine president José Paciano Laurel, Latvian president Valdis Zatlers, Taiwanese premier Jiang Yi-huah, and Malawian president Peter Mutharika, among others. Prominent royals who graduated are Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden, and Olympia Bonaparte, Princess Napoléon.

Alumni have had considerable presence in U.S. government in all three branches. On the U.S. Supreme Court, 19 justices have been alumni, including current Associate Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Brett Kavanaugh. Alumni have been U.S. Senators, including current senators Michael Bennet, Richard Blumenthal, Cory Booker, Sherrod Brown, Chris Coons, Amy Klobuchar, Sheldon Whitehouse. Current and former cabinet members include Secretaries of State John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Cyrus Vance, and Dean Acheson; U.S. Secretaries of the Treasury Oliver Wolcott, Robert Rubin, Nicholas F. Brady, Steven Mnuchin, Janet Yellen, and Scott Bessent; U.S. Attorneys General Nicholas Katzenbach, Edwin Meese, John Ashcroft, and Edward H. Levi; and many others. Peace Corps founder and American diplomat Sargent Shriver and public official and urban planner Robert Moses are Yale alumni.”

Warning 2: The source cited above, as evidence (A), still may have medium levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence B1.

Top honors – Which US presidents have honorary degrees from Yale? (May/June 2021)

https://yalealumnimagazine.org/articles/5314-top-honors

Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:

“Twenty years ago, at Yale’s 300th commencement, George W. Bush ’68 was awarded an honorary degree. Bush is the most recent of the 15 US presidents who have been so honored and one of seven whom Yale recognized during their presidencies. Seven were honored before taking the office, and one, Gerald Ford ’41LLB, afterward. All were awarded a Doctor of Laws—except Wilson, who received a Doctor of Letters while a professor at Princeton. Four of the five alumni who have served as president have received honorary degrees; only Bill Clinton ’73JD has not.”

Link to the image shown in the article corresponding to this evidence (B1):

https://yalealumnimagazine.org/uploads/images/11700117/1618360040/16-L&V-Opener-yale_MayJune21%20copy.jpg

Evidence B2.

Elis in the Trump administration (March/April 2025)

https://www.yalealumnimagazine.com/articles/6016-elis-in-the-trump-administration

Highlighted/extracted information from the article above, by way of evidence (B2):

• J. D. Vance
• Scott Bessent
• Roman Pipko
• Stephen Vaden
• Jim O’Neill
• James Danly
• Daniel Driscoll
• Elbridge Colby
• Daniel Katz
• Bo Hines

Warning 3: The sources cited above, as evidence (B1 y B2), still may have really low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence C.

Yale alumni no strangers to the Trump White House (April 9, 2018)

https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/Yale-alums-no-strangers-to-the-Trump-White-House-12815852.php

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “NEW HAVEN — President Donald Trump has more Yale graduates in the top levels of his administration than any president in recent memory.

But the reason the conservative Republican president has chosen Yale alumni “may” have more to do with Yale’s status as an elite institution, graduates’ attractiveness to high-profile law and business firms and to “pure coincidence” than to any affinity for those who attended the famously liberal university.”

2- “And, according to professor Gary Rose, who teaches political science at Sacred Heart University, it makes sense that Trump, a billionaire who received his bachelor’s degree from the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, is comfortable with others who attended top-level schools.

That “would” account for the choice of Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, class of 1985, who worked for investment firm Goldman Sachs and later founded his own financial institutions before becoming finance chairman for the Trump campaign. According to a story in The New Journal, Mnuchin fought with the editorial staff of the Yale Daily News when he was publisher of the paper and pushing for less editorial space in order to increase profits.

Trump’s “interplay with the circle he has moved in,” as Rose put it, “would” also explain his choice of Wilbur Ross, class of 1959, as secretary of commerce, who specialized in restructuring bankrupt or struggling companies in many industries, including helping Trump keep control of his failing Atlantic City casinos, according to Forbes.”

General note 2: Readers are advised to pay special attention not only to what is underlined and/or in bold in the fragments cited above (evidence C), but also to the words or phrases between quotation marks (“”); more context later on.

Warning 4: The source cited above, as evidence ( C ), still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

7.2) Important political figures graduated from Harvard University, and related:

Evidence D.

The Eight Presidents Who Went To Harvard

https://breznikar.com/article/the-eight-presidents-who-went-to-harvard/1342

Evidence E.

The Eight US Presidents With Harvard Degrees

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-eight-us-presidents-with-harvard-degrees.html

Evidence F.

Harvard University (Wikipedia article)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_University

Highlighted/extracted information from the article above, by way of evidence D, E and F):

• Second President of the United States, John Adams.
• Sixth President of the United States, John Quincy Adams.
• Nineteenth President of the United States, Rutherford B. Hayes.
• Twenty-sixth President of the United States, Theodore Roosevelt.
• Thirty-second President of the United States, Franklin D. Roosevelt.
• Thirty-fifth President of the United States, John F. Kennedy.
• Forty-third President of the United States, George W. Bush.
• Forty-fourth President of the United States, Barack Obama.

Warning 5: The sources cited above, as evidence (D and E), still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Warning 6: The source cited above, as evidence (F), still may have medium levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

7.3) Important political figures graduated from University of Pennsylvania, and related:

Evidence G.

University of Pennsylvania (Wikipedia article)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Pennsylvania

Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:

“Since its founding, Penn alumni, trustees, and faculty have included eight Founding Fathers of the United States who signed the Declaration of Independence, seven who signed the United States Constitution, and 24 members of the Continental Congress.

Penn alumni include two presidents of the United States (William Henry Harrison, and Donald Trump) 32 U.S. senators, 163 members of the U.S. House of Representatives, 19 U.S. Cabinet Secretaries, 46 governors, and 28 State Supreme Court justices, 36 billionaires, and as of 2023 there have been 38 Nobel laureates affiliated (see List of Nobel laureates by university affiliation) with the University.

Prior to becoming president of the United States, Joe Biden was a Benjamin Franklin Presidential Practice Professor at University of Pennsylvania, where he led the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement, a center focused principally on diplomacy, foreign policy, and national security.”

Warning 7: The source cited above, as evidence (G), still may have medium levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (7).

Almost nothing to clarify or explain here that has not been stated, shown, and shared in this segment, except that what is presented in this one will also be important in the last part of this super-topic, i.e., in the conclusion. As for why Wikipedia articles were used as evidence, A, F, and G in this case, it is because the information they contained regarding those who graduated from those universities was well organized and presented overall, which made it easy to use, regardless of whether the rest of the information might be relevant, reliable, or misleading.


* inhale *

Well, folks, that's all for today. The last section of this subtopic, regarding this super-topic, will be published in the next one, that is, part 6, which means that the end of this topic is getting closer and closer; so that you take it into consider, please.

Okay, I hope that the content of this part, or at least part of it, has been interesting and informative for everyone, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings and have a nice day/night to all of you.

Hello everyone, and welcome to the part 4 of this super-topic. To not waste time with recaps and clarifications, just below, in a separate section, I will put the previous parts, with their respective links, and the disclaimers corresponding to this one, also separately.

---

Parts prior to this one

Part 1: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11204491/

Part 2: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11208155/

Part 3: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11211973/

Disclaimers

1. Any act of denial and refutation against any data, statements and proof mentioned or presented in this journal based on mentions, suggestions or uses of information sources coming from and/or promoted by hegemonic media (US, UK and others), social media, Wikipedia (including variations thereof as well), Fact Checkers and any entity pertaining to and/or related to the oligarchy, may be ignored and/or taken with great skepticism by any reader, in case he/she so desires. The reasons are based on the absence of credible, reliable and/or truthful information, whether in part or in whole, from the aforementioned sources/entities/groups/organizations due to many of the controversies and/or scandals associated with them.

2. The use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" per se, or similar to that, which is linked to what it means in the entertainment media and/or the hegemonic media as a primary method of denial and/or disapproval of the content of this note, as well as the sources attached to it, will not be taken as truthful either.

3. The owner of this journal doesn't have any kind of personal adherence (personal/selfish reasons), contractual (legal reasons) or constitutional (constitutional reasons) with political figures, political parties, social organizations/entities and/or countries/nations based on the use of political agendas and/or any kind of activism that causes damage to material goods, the environment and/or towards other human beings (whether physical or psychological) for any reason that is considered unjustified after being first analyzed based on reason and ethics, with the sample or presence of compelling evidence corresponding to the cases mentioned above. The rejection of such agendas and/or activism will be even higher and forceful in cases that imply going against human nature in terms of any harm, deprivation, destruction and deterioration of the individuality of the human being and/or any society composed of human beings for unjustifiable reasons.

---

That said, and to get to the point, here is the first section of the subtopic dedicated to the main political parties in the United States, which contains general information about them, some of their members, and related topics:

Evidence that ratifies or refutes some of the things associated with the two main political parties in the United States (the Democratic Party and the Republican Party), as well as, occasionally, their relationship with other people (political figures or not), and Donald Trump as well.

1) The two main political parties in the U.S., regardless of the prominent political figures within them, have problems with financial corruption.

Evidence A.

Video made by Upper Echelon, on YouTube, in which he exposes the financial corruption present in the two main political parties in the US, the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, with their respective tittle and link:

Land of the Free, Home of CORRUPTION

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F108d1GqSXc

Links to the sources mentioned in the Upper Echelon video (just above):

• 01:24: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/nvidia-story/
• 01:28: https://es.scribd.com/document/5828.....Report-July-14
• 01:35: https://speakeremeritapelosi.house......newsroom/72022
• 01:39: https://www.journal-advocate.com/wp.....7/DUN22612.pdf
• 02:03: https://disclosures-clerk.house.gov.....2/20021438.pdf
• 02:09: https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/202.....1491659131628/
• 02:45: https://www.businessinsider.com/nan.....ts-2022-7?op=1
• 02:52: https://stockzoa.com/ticker/tsm/
• 03:03: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin.....n-visit-op-ed/
• 03:07: https://www.washingtonpost.com/tech.....eeting-taiwan/
• 03:44: https://disclosures-clerk.house.gov.....1/20018539.pdf
• 03:55: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/31/mic.....r-us-army.html
• 04:26: https://disclosures-clerk.house.gov.....1/20019004.pdf
• 04:37: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti.....i-to-slow-down
• 04:47: https://time.com/6168761/congress-b.....oly-antitrust/
• 04:54: https://nypost.com/2021/11/04/nancy.....-insiders-say/
• 06:38: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t20HLmbpMvs
• 07:30: https://www.aol.com/finance/rich-ma.....165536618.html
• 07:48: https://www.celebritynetworth.com/r.....ene-net-worth/
• 08:32: https://www.quiverquant.com/congres.....Greene-G000596
• 08:50: https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/at.....LQNTNVUI6ZEBI/
• 08:50: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/marj.....195932815.html
• 10:26: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg.....COMPS-9860.pdf
• 10:42: https://campaignlegal.org/update/pa.....ading-congress
• 11:16: http://pfds.opensecrets.org.s3.amaz.....%20%281%29.pdf
• 11:28: https://x.com/SenatorBurr/status/12.....08837479542786
• 12:28: https://indyweek.com/news/archives-.....bers-congress/
• 12:55: https://www.news9.com/story/5e790ac.....rading-scandal
• 13:06: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/.....-trades-258693
• 13:26: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/.....before-market/
• 13:44: https://www.businessinsider.com/geo.....g-2020-12?op=1
• 14:56: https://gettrumpmemes.com/
• 14:57: https://melaniameme.com/
• 14:59: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencie.....fficial-trump/
• 15:01: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/melania-meme/
• 15:07: https://www.justice.gov/pardon/medi.....5001/dl?inline
• 15:17: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/p.....s-fraud-scheme
• 16:21: https://www.justice.gov/pardon/pard.....iden-2021-2025
• 16:21: https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews......ecipients-.pdf
• 16:21: https://www.justice.gov/pardon/medi.....0206/dl?inline
• 16:42: https://abc7news.com/post/how-city-.....tion/15767057/
• 17:09: https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/Pres.....leases/8522-22
• 17:35: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/p.....nk-secrecy-act
• 18:55: https://www.justice.gov/pardon/medi.....4996/dl?inline
• 19:01: https://www.bitmex.com/
• 19:48: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news.....ump-crypto-doj

Warning 1: The sources cited above still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information in general; readers discretion is advised.

Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (1).

I have almost nothing to say about this, except that the Upper Echelon video, which is shared and shown in this segment ( evidence A), plus the links to the sources mentioned in that video, serve very well as a starting point for this subtopic; that is all.


2) Almost all US presidents (intentionally or not) increased the country's debt.

Evidence A.

U.S. debt by president: dollar and percentage 2025

https://www.consumeraffairs.com/finance/us-debt-by-president.html

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “During Barack Obama’s presidency, the U.S. total outstanding debt increased by almost $8.34 trillion, the biggest dollar increase of any president. In terms of percentage change, Abraham Lincoln’s term had the highest increase at 2,860%, increasing the U.S. debt from about $90.6 million in 1861 to $2.68 billion in 1865 when he was assassinated.”

2- “As of April 5, 2024, the national debt has grown by about $6.17 trillion, or 21.7%, since Joe Biden was inaugurated in 2021, according to the U.S. Treasury Department. In his first year in control of the federal budget from September 2021 to September 2022, the debt grew by about $2.5 trillion. In his second year, it grew by $2.24 trillion. The national debt has grown by $1.43 trillion so far this year.”

3- “From the beginning of Donald Trump’s presidency in 2017 to its end in 2021, the national debt increased by 40.43%, about $8.18 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury Department. It rose the most from September 2019 to September 2020, when Trump spent $3.6 trillion on coronavirus pandemic relief.”

4- “George W. Bush, who also served two terms, increased the national debt by $6.1 trillion, about 105%, which comes out to an average of $3.05 trillion per term.

During Bill Clinton’s term from 1993 to 2001, the debt grew by $5.81 trillion.”

Warning 2: The source cited above, as evidence (A), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (2).

Nothing to clarify or explain about it that I haven't said before about the US debt, and related.


3) Every U.S. president, from 1953 to the present, has refused to show evidence that there is still gold in Fort Knox.

Evidence A.

Video made by reallygraceful, in which she talks about the history of Fort Knox, why it was built, the importance of gold, and some unanswered questions about why Fort Knox has not been audited since 1953, with its respective title and links:

What the Media Won't Tell You About Fort Knox

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTlFB_x8h0U
• https://rumble.com/v6szo8v-what-the-media-wont-tell-you-about-fort-knox.html

Links to most of the sources mentioned in the reallygraceful videos (same video, in fact):

02:57: https://www.foxbusiness.com/media/e.....-sen-rand-paul
03:01: https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/bus.....there/6157138/
03:05: https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereks.....-what-we-know/
03:09: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDYmDC97Uw8
03:39: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgbUTAWblRA
04:36: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXnqcPkUrEY
05:31: https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-an.....225218892.html
06:55: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zo4b8ZPlzrw
08:31: https://x.com/RennickGBR/status/1891051795159429514?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1891051795159429514%7Ctwgr%5E01cee17785400c252ba2b8cdd0e8d8b91e811348%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Flets-do-it-rand-paul-supports-fort-knox-physical-audit-after-zerohedge-suggestion-goes
08:51: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixGAXme_qHI

Warning 3: The majority of the sources cited above (not all) still have medium levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information in general; readers discretion is advised.


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (3).

About the reallygraceful 's video, in this segment (evidence A), there are two things I want to say:

1) For more context on the topic mentioned in that video, I recommend they go to the journal "US and its money problem (1)", made by me, and watch the video “THE HISTORY OF AMERICAN MONEY (Explained in 5-ish Minutes)” located there, also by reallygraceful.

2) Next I will put a comment that I found in the comments section of that video, which is quite accurate regarding the topic mentioned in it, as well as for any other topic that has to do with what is mentioned in that comment:

“I am a retired lawyer.
There is a discovery rule of law that provides that when a party known to be in possession of evidence and has a duty to reveal such evidence and fails or refuses to permit discovery, then the judge is required to advise the jury that this failure or refusal to allow inspection of the evidence is taken to establish as a fact that such evidence either does not exist or that the evidence would prove the opposing parties claims.
In this case, the people have a right to know whether the gold is still there, and the failure or refusal of the government to allow inspection of the gold would be considered as proof the gold is not there. The administration could file a lawsuit to force the treasury department to prove the existence of the gold it claims is held for the people, but they will not do that since they already know the gold is not there and revealing that fact as a matter of public record would undermine the trust of the people in their government. All such sensitive matters are referred to as matters of national security. This is why there are so many secrets kept from the American people.
Moral: If they cannot provide evidence to disprove a conspiracy, it is probably true.”
robertperry4439 ~ YouTube user

4) The two main political parties in the U.S. conned, and continue to con, the American people with the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as “Obamacare.”

Evidence A.

Obamacare: The Biggest Insurance Scam in History (October 30, 2013)

https://truthout.org/articles/obamacare-the-biggest-insurance-scam-in-history/

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “A scam is a fraudulent operation designed to make money. A scam unfolds over time with a team of swindlers seeking to rob the victim without the victim ever knowing they have been scammed.

In Confessions of a Confidence Man, Edward H. Smith lists the “six definite steps or stages of growth in every finely balanced and well-conceived confidence game.” Let’s go through these six steps and see how the process of selling the ACA to the public fits.”

2- “1. Develop the Foundation

The foundation of a scam is the preparation done ahead of time to set up the scheme. In the case of the ACA, the foundation began with the health law passed by Massachusetts in 2006. The template was created by Stephen Butler of the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. The law was passed under a Republican governor, Mitt Romney.

The next task was to sell this idea to Democrats. The Robert Wood Johnson foundation gave a major assist when it made large grants to state health reform groups in 2008 to promote Massachusetts-style reform in their states, called the “public-private partnership” model.

To further sell the ACA, Roger Hickey, a longtime Medicare-for-all advocate of the Campaign for America’s Future (closely allied with the Democratic Party), took an idea from Jacob Hacker to create a new public insurance modeled after Medicare to ‘compete’ with private insurance. Hickey sold the model to progressive groups, and Hacker’s proposal was used by the Obama campaign.”
3- “2. The Approach

The approach is the way that the con artist gets in touch with the victim. The vehicle for the ACA con was the tech-savvy political campaign of Barack Obama. The candidate promised hope and change. Obama, who had supported single payer before running for president, was able to point to all of the problems in the US health care system and excite people with the potential of a new leader who understood the crisis and would fix it.

After his election, the campaign organized Health Care House Parties in December 2008. People were encouraged to invite friends and neighbors to their homes, and the Obama transition team provided the materials. The booklet that was used was tightly scripted to build support for the ACA rather than actually elicit citizen input on what kind of health system was desired.”

4- “3. The Buildup

In this stage, the victim is excited about the prospect and is filled with anticipation so their judgment is warped and caution is thrown away, setting them up to fall for the scam.

Throughout the winter and spring of 2009, the Obama administration gave the appearance of bringing all of the “stakeholders” together to work for health reform. The president held a White House Health Summit in March 2009, which included representatives from health insurance corporations, hospitals and pharmaceutical companies. The only groups that were not included, until there was a threat of protest, were those who advocate for Medicare for all. The single-payer advocates did not speak, but the insurance spokesperson opened and closed the White House summit.”

5- “4. The Convincer

The convincer for many who supported real health reform was “the Public Option.” The idea was that the law would force the uninsured to purchase insurance but would include the choice of a public health insurance plan. The public was told that this option would be more cost-effective than private insurance and, thus, less expensive, which would make it more attractive…

…What most people did not understand at that point was that the public option was not only a non-solution to the health care crisis but that it was not even destined to be in the final legislation. Senator Max Baucus reported in March 2009 that it was a “bargaining chip” to get health insurers to accept regulations. Glenn Greenwald exposed this more fully when the Democratic leadership in the Senate actively worked to keep the public option from being included in the Senate health bill. The public option was just part of the con.”

6- “5. The Hurrah

The Hurrah phase of a con involves some sort of crisis that must be overcome. This phase started in August 2009, when the Tea Party, backed by Americans for Prosperity (a Koch brothers front group), came out very aggressively against the ACA at local town halls. They called it “government-run” and opposed its fictional “Death Panels.” This served to energize the progressive groups to rally around the president and come out strongly in favor of the law. Rallies in favor of health reform were organized across the country.

Health reform advocates were activated further to support the law as the House and Senate struggled to come to consensus. As more aspects of the law that were important to health reform supporters were jettisoned, such as coverage for immigrants and inclusion of reproductive services, and the public option was whittled down to nothing, support for the law became a partisan statement of support for President Obama.”

7- “6. The In-And-In

The purpose of the final phase of the con is to make sure the victims do not realize they’ve been conned.

Obama signed the ACA on March 23, 2010. Immediately the marketing began. The three words we heard the most to describe it were “universal, affordable and guaranteed.” Of course, the ACA is none of those. But members told us personally that if they told the truth, they wouldn’t be re-elected.

Progressive groups started the work of explaining the advantages of the new health law to the public. The few positive aspects of the law were promoted without explaining the big picture. Overall, the ACA is similar to other neoliberal economic policies; it defunds and destroys our public health insurances and further privatizes health care…

…At the same time, leading single-payer advocacy groups fear further marginalization in their communities and so are afraid to tell the truth about Obamacare. The public has been so hoodwinked by the partisan debate between Republicans and Democrats, based on misinformation from both sides, that single-payer advocates are afraid if they tell the truth, their allies, many whom are Democrats, will push them away. So the truth has few emissaries, while the well-funded deceivers continue the ACA con.”

General note: Readers are advised to pay special attention not only to what is underlined and/or in bold in the fragments cited above (evidence A), but also to the words or phrases between quotation marks (“”); more context later on.


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (4).

Because many already know that “Obamacare” is a scam, I decided to include multiple fragments of the article shared here (evidence A) based on how the scam was pulled off, since many don’t know how it happened in the first place. However, if anyone wants to know more about the “Obamacare” scam, all they have to do is go to the article shared as evidence in this segment; there’s nothing more to add.


So, that's all for today. The next section of this subtopic, regarding this super-topic, will be published in part 5; it's just that.

Well, I hope that the content of this part, or at least part of it, has been interesting and informative for everyone, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings and have a nice day/night to all of you.

Hello everyone, and welcome to the part 3 of this super-topic. To not waste time with recaps and clarifications, just below, in a separate section, I will put the previous parts, with their respective links, and the disclaimers corresponding to this one, also separately.

---

Parts prior to this one

Part 1: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11204491/

Part 2: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11208155/

Disclaimers

1. Any act of denial and refutation against any data, statements and proof mentioned or presented in this journal based on mentions, suggestions or uses of information sources coming from and/or promoted by hegemonic media (US, UK and others), social media, Wikipedia (including variations thereof as well), Fact Checkers and any entity pertaining to and/or related to the oligarchy, may be ignored and/or taken with great skepticism by any reader, in case he/she so desires. The reasons are based on the absence of credible, reliable and/or truthful information, whether in part or in whole, from the aforementioned sources/entities/groups/organizations due to many of the controversies and/or scandals associated with them.

2. The use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" per se, or similar to that, which is linked to what it means in the entertainment media and/or the hegemonic media as a primary method of denial and/or disapproval of the content of this note, as well as the sources attached to it, will not be taken as truthful either.

3. The owner of this journal doesn't have any kind of personal adherence (personal/selfish reasons), contractual (legal reasons) or constitutional (constitutional reasons) with political figures, political parties, social organizations/entities and/or countries/nations based on the use of political agendas and/or any kind of activism that causes damage to material goods, the environment and/or towards other human beings (whether physical or psychological) for any reason that is considered unjustified after being first analyzed based on reason and ethics, with the sample or presence of compelling evidence corresponding to the cases mentioned above. The rejection of such agendas and/or activism will be even higher and forceful in cases that imply going against human nature in terms of any harm, deprivation, destruction and deterioration of the individuality of the human being and/or any society composed of human beings for unjustifiable reasons.

---

That said, and to get to the point, here is the last section of the subtopic dedicated to Donald Trump (started in the first part and continued in the second one), which contains more general information about him, and related:

Evidence that ratifies or refutes some of the things associated with Donald Trump, as well as, occasionally, his relationship with other people (political figures or not), and political parties in the United States as well.

4) Donald Trump never was a Christian or a Catholic.

Evidence A.

Trump: 'Why Do I Have to Repent or Ask for Forgiveness If I Am Not Making Mistakes?' (Video)

https://www.christianpost.com/news/trump-why-do-i-have-to-repent-or-ask-for-forgiveness-if-i-am-not-making-mistakes-video.html

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “Following Donald Trump's appearance last week at the Family Leadership Summit in Iowa, CNN's Anderson Cooper sought out clarification on Trump's assertion that he's unsure if he ever asks God's forgiveness.”

2- “Clarifying his comments on forgiveness, Trump declared, "I go to communion and that's asking forgiveness, you know, it's a form of asking forgiveness." During the interview the current GOP frontrunner stressed that he "likes to work where he doesn't have to ask forgiveness."”

3- “Cooper followed up asking Trump if "asking for forgiveness" is a central tenet in his faith life.

"I try not make mistakes where I have to ask forgiveness," Trump answered.

When further asked about repentance again by Cooper, Trump said "I think repenting is terrific."

"Why do I have to repent or ask for forgiveness, if I am not making mistakes?" asked Trump. "I work hard, I'm an honorable person."

In talking about his Iowa appearance, Trump said, "We were having fun when I said I drink the wine, I eat the cracker, the whole room was laughing."”

Warning 1: The source cited above, as evidence (A), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Links to the video mentioned in the source cited above as evidence (A), plus an additional one:

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKLVIm7Q0IQ
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXaC0zqPFRM

Evidence B.

Trump Responds To Pope Saying He's 'Not Christian' [FULL RESPONSE]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36qhTfCWdiw

Evidence C.

Trump Responds To Pope Saying He's 'Not Christian' [FULL RESPONSE]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36qhTfCWdiw

Evidence D.

Trump elicits laughter quoting Bible verse to evangelicals

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PX2SicPw1A

Evidence E.

Trump: 'Religion And Christianity Are The Biggest Things Missing From This Country'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFhjhgf0vn0

Evidence F.

Donald Trump admits that he is not a Christian and his plans to dismantle democracy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XthEwsqcVGE

Evidence G.

DONALD TRUMP SECRETLY CONVERTED TO JUDAISM IN 2017

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIAQkgTJyKA
• https://www.bitchute.com/video/PHsOUtDqJfhh/
• https://rumble.com/v3e4710-the-first-american-jewish-president.html

Link to one of the sources mentioned in the videos above, as evidence (G):

Donald Trump converted to Judaism two years ago, according to White House official

https://web.archive.org/web/20190829004959/https://israeltodaynews.blogspot.com/2019/02/donald-trump-converted-to-judaism-two-years-ago.html

Warning 2: The source cited above, as evidence (G), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence H.

"..my Kabbalah teacher, Eitan Yardeni.."

Quote from the book TRUMP The Way to the Top: The Best Business Advice I Ever Received de Donald Trump (2004), page 188.

Link to the sources corresponding to the above citation, as evidence (H):

• https://archive.org/details/trumpwa.....0dona/mode/2up
• https://ifunny.co/picture/quote-from-his-2004-book-the-way-to-the-top-308lPZJNB

Links with additional information about who Eitan Yardeni is:

• https://theorg.com/org/kabbalah-cen...../eitan-yardeni
• https://onehouse.kabbalah.com/en/pe.....eitan-yardeni/
• https://www.jewsforjudaism.org/know.....ottest-cult-1/
• https://www.jewsforjudaism.org/know.....ottest-cult-2/
• https://www.jewsforjudaism.org/know.....hottest-cult-3

Warning 3: Some of the sources cited above, regarding Eitan Yardeni, still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information in general; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence I.

Sanhedrin Calls on President Trump to Uphold Seven Noahide Laws (January 26, 2017)

https://israel365news.com/313462/sanhedrin-blesses-trump-calls-president-uphold-seven-noahide-laws/

Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:

“The Sanhedrin then calls on President Trump to follow the Seven Noahide Laws, given by God as a binding set of laws for all of humanity. The Sanhedrin described the laws as a framework that will benefit all mankind.

“It is essential to return to the divine order that was given at Mount Sinai to all of Man, to the fundamental principle that is common courtesy and common sense preceding everything,” the letter emphasizes. “It is important to return to the seven guidelines given to Noah and his offspring that protect all human and moral obligations.”

The Sanhedrin also urges the president to adhere to his campaign promise of renewed support of Israel, including moving the US embassy to Jerusalem, so that Israel can fulfill its Biblical role as a light unto the nations.

“As an honorable President, you are aware of the importance of Israel as an ally, especially a cultural ally, of the United States. The whole world anticipates the instilling of Bible values – God’s morality given on Mount Sinai for all the world.

“We must work together so that these values will be the inalienable property of all mankind,” the rabbinical body proposes.”

Warning 4: The source cited above, as evidence (I), still may have very low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Links with additional information about what the Seven Noahide Laws are:

• https://judaicapedia.org/explaining.....-noahide-laws/
• https://www.chabad.org/library/arti.....ahide-Laws.htm

Warning 5: The sources cited above, regarding the Seven Noahide Laws, still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information in general; reader discretion is advised.


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (4).

Considering that the rules and clarifications regarding the content of this topic (part one), as well as the disclaimers present in this one, will not be sufficient in this case for some individuals, especially given that this segment has content based on religions, cults, and Donald Trump all rolled into one, I am going to take a small detour to address this in another way. But since I don't know how to do it without offending someone in the process, I'll do it anyway while ranting a little; sorry, not sorry.

To get to the point, for anyone reading this, regardless of their tastes, preferences, beliefs, and thoughts about something or someone, here are some additional clarifications/statements to keep in mind:

• one, yes, everyone has the right to like something or someone, as well as the opposite of that, regardless of the tastes, preferences, beliefs, and thoughts of other individuals;
• two, no, any act that is considered transgressive, based on whatever motives, after being analyzed first on the basis of morality and ethics, is not and will never be tolerated, regardless of the legality of the act itself;
• three, I am agnostic;
• four, I am a philosopher;
• five, I am indifferent to most of the tastes, preferences, beliefs, and thoughts of other people, and I only oppose the actions of other individuals (if possible, of course) when they are considered transgressions, after being analyzed based on morality and ethics first;
• sixth, for everything else, again, read or re-read the disclaimers if necessary about something or someone.

On the other hand, for any Christians or Catholics reading this ( without meaning to offend, of course), here are some other additional clarifications/statements to keep in mind:

• one, no, Christianity (religion) and Catholicism (cult) are not the same thing, and never will be, no matter how much one may believe so;
• two, no, the Crusades, and everything related to that, is and always has been about Catholicism, not Christianity;
• third, forgiveness (Christianity) is something that is obtained, only and only, when one makes amends the faults one committed, through actions based on repentance, commitment, and devotion;
• fourth, yes, every person that professes a religion has the right to act based on the beliefs, rites, and traditions of that religion, as long as they do not become transgressions against other individuals or groups, after being analyzed based on morality and ethics first;
• fifth, yes, every person that professes a religion has the right to defend their beliefs, as well as the rites and traditions associated with it, from transgressions by other individuals or groups, as long as this does not create conflicts with what is mentioned in the fourth point;
• sixth, since I was a child, I went to multiple Christian and Catholic schools, and in the first ten years of schooling, I had to read and study as much the Old Testament as the New Testament, and believe me when I say that I still have basic information about the difference between the two, in general terms;
• and seventh, I have many relatives, family members, and friends who are Christians or Catholics, and believe me when I say that, even to this day, I can see the difference between the two groups, in general terms as well.

And as for Donald Trump... Well, the fact that he pretends to be whatever he wants in order to get what he wants won't change who he really is, regardless of what anyone believes or thinks about him; that's not only a fact, it's also life. Besides, considering how enormously douchey, shameless, childish, and eccentric he is, if it were discovered that all this time, he actually always worshipped Apollo, the Roman god of the sun, as seen in some of the paintings in his exclusive penthouse on Fifth Avenue in New York, I don't think that would be a surprise for some, including me...

(Ahem) So... Yeah, that's all I wanted to say; we better get going.


5) Donald Trump, as an outsider, ruined the Republican Party of the United States after taking it over.

Evidence A.

Did Donald Trump Break the Republican Party or Was It Already Broken? (March 14, 2016)

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/did-donald-trump-break-republican-party-or-was-it-already-n540241

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “Marco Rubio's withdrawal from the presidential primary, after he was blown out in his home state by Donald Trump, was a resounding rejection by voters of a candidate embraced by influential Republicans. It suggests the power of party elites is “overstated” in the GOP, and perhaps in politics overall.”

2- “For a while, the 2016 Republican race had no clear form, with so many candidates combined with the rise of Trump confusing many party insiders. On the eve of Super Tuesday, however, the Republican Party in effect did make a decision: it tapped Rubio. The Florida senator received a wave of endorsements from sitting governors and senators in the last two weeks of February.

Just as significantly, Ted Cruz and Trump, who had actually already won primaries and caucuses, “were endorsed by almost no one.””

3- “And it’s not just that Rubio lost, but that all of the elite-backed candidates “failed”. Last spring, many party donors and officials backed Jeb Bush. A more conservative bloc of the establishment was behind Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, while “another wing” viewed Rubio as “a more electable, charismatic alternative” to those two men.

Instead, three "outsider" candidates are in the final round of the nomination contest. Cruz and Trump are both hated by many Republicans in Washington. Ohio Gov. John Kasich was not encouraged to run by party elites, in part because Bush, Rubio and Walker were already in the race.”

4- “...Trump is a highly unusual candidate, both appealing to an untapped but large segment of GOP voters (those without college degrees and in rural areas in particular) and able to command media attention like no one else.”

5- “...decades of wage stagnation and the growing diversity of the country had created a weary, frustrated GOP electorate that establishment candidates were ill-equipped to appeal to. (Looking back, perhaps the Cuban-American candidate who wrote a bill to create a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants (Rubio) and the man who bragged of speaking Spanish more than English at home (Bush) were very imperfect fits for the Republican voters of 2016).”

General note 1: Readers are advised to pay special attention not only to what is underlined and/or in bold in the fragments cited above (evidence A), but also to the words or phrases between quotation marks (“”); more context later on.

Warning 6: The source cited above, as evidence (A), still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence B.

Why Trump’s control of the Republican Party is bad for democracy

https://theconversation.com/why-trumps-control-of-the-republican-party-is-bad-for-democracy-221828

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “...There are three reasons “personalist parties” are harmful to democracy, all of which have clear parallels to experiences with Trump and the Republican Party.

1. Loyalty to the person, not the party

Personalist party elites are loyal to the leader. A classic indicator of party personalization is the ouster of politically experienced people in the party elite, who are often highly qualified and more independent of the leader – and their replacement with less experienced people who are personally loyal to the leader. These people are more likely to view their political success as being intertwined with that of the leader rather than the party. They therefore are more likely to support the leader’s agenda, no matter how harmful it may be for democracy.”

2- “2. Official endorsement of leader’s actions

In personalist parties, elites endorse the leader’s actions, cueing (some) voters to do the same. Ordinary citizens* who support personalist parties “often” go along with leaders’ efforts to dismantle democracy, even if they care about democracy, because they are highly receptive to signals provided by the party elite. When the party higher-ups endorse – rather than condemn – the leader’s undemocratic inclinations, supporters get the message that nothing is wrong, and they* fall in line.”

Note about the second fragment: It is advised to reread this fragment, especially for what is underlined, replacing the words marked with an asterisk (*), in this case, “Ordinary citizens” with “Those,” and “they” with “some of them”; more context later on.

3- “3. Polarizing society with controversy

Leaders of personalist parties polarize the societies they govern.

While many kinds of leaders demonize their political opponents, we have found that “personalist party” leaders’ anti-democratic behaviors – such as attempting to overturn an election they’ve lost – split society into polarized factions: those who support them and everyone else.

When opponents of the leader raise concerns that the leader’s actions are harmful to democracy, as the Democrats regularly have since Trump won office in 2016, (some) supporters dig in their heels in defiance, incredulous that there is cause for concern. Affective polarization, where citizens increasingly dislike their opponents, deepens. With the opponents vilified, the leader has the political support to take actions to keep the other side out of power, even if those actions undermine democracy in the process.”

General note 2: Readers are advised to pay special attention not only to what is underlined and/or in bold in the fragments cited above (evidence B), but also to the words or phrases between quotation marks (“”), between parentheses “()” and/or marked with asterisks (*) as well; more context later on.

Warning 7: The source cited above, as evidence (B), still may have medium levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (5).

Regarding to the information presented in evidence A, in this segment, I can only say that it will be quite relevant at the end of this super-topic, that is, in the conclusion. And regarding to the information presented in evidence B, also in this segment, I will only clarify three things, and nothing more:
1) it can still be used for cases related to the Democratic Party in the United States, as there is no mention of any reason why it cannot be done;
2) it is related to what I mentioned and shared in the segment 3, part 2, of this topic;
3) it will have some importance at the end of this super-topic, that is, in the conclusion;
4) In terms of human behavior, it talks about things related to fanaticism and collectivity, which I already explored in one of my journals more than five months ago, What does “echo chamber” actually mean?.


6) The majority of the main political donors in the US (directly or indirectly) bet on Donald Trump's victory in the 2024 presidential elections.

Evidence A.

The Biggest Political Donors of the 2024 Election

https://www.usnews.com/news/elections/articles/2024-11-05/the-biggest-political-donors-of-the-2024-election

Highlighted/extracted information from the article above as evidence:

Top contributors of the Republican Party (by rank)

1. Mellon, Timothy > Dem.: -$2,900 | Rep.: $172,042,500
2. Uihlein, Richard & Elizabeth A. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $137,775,196
3. Adelson, Sheldon G. & Miriam O. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $136,855,700
4. Musk, Elon > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $133,038,600
5. Griffin, Kenneth C. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $101,405,484
6. Yass, Jeffrey S. & Janine > Dem.: $1,500 | Rep.: $96,122,180
7. Singer, Paul E. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $59,299,100
8. Schwarzman, Stephen A. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $39,103,046
9. Dunn, Timothy M. > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $35,415,200
10. Bigelow, Rob > Dem.: $0 | Rep.: $34,991,500

Top contributors of the Democratic Party (by rank)

1. Bloomberg, Michael R. > Dem.: $43,453,634 | Rep.: $1,000,000
2. Moskovitz, Dustin & Cari > Dem.: $38,785,700 | Rep.: $0
3. Eychaner, Fred > Dem.: $31,057,700 | Rep.: $0
4. Simons, James H. & Marilyn > Dem.: $ 30,757,103 | Rep.: $0
5. Hoffman, Reid Garrett > Dem.: $26,659,700 | Rep.: $400,000
6. Mandel, Stephen F. Jr. & Susan Z. > Dem.: $22,934,500 | Rep.: $63,200
7. Simon, Deborah J. > Dem.: $19,830,960 | Rep.: $0
8. Jordan, Wayne D. > Dem.: $14,488,811 | Rep.: $0
9. Larsen, Christian > Dem.: $13,442,479 | Rep.: $6,600
10. Heising, Elizabeth D. > Dem.: $12,638,350 | Rep.: $6,600

Warning 8: The source cited above, as evidence (A), still may have really low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (6).

I can only say that the information in this segment will be very important at the end of this super-topic, that is, in the conclusion; that's all.


Phew.

Okay, folks, I want to inform you that we have reached the end of the subtopic of Donald Trump per se, and related...

My excitement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHsJdUv7k9Y

* breath * Which means that only two-thirds remain to finally finish this super-topic...

My excitement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLTZctTG6cE

The next part of this topic, part 4, on the other hand, is where we will begin with the subtopic dedicated to political parties in the United States, in general, and related to them; that's all for now.

Well, I hope that the content of this part, or at least part of it, has been interesting and informative for everyone, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings and have a nice day/night to all of you.

Hello everyone, and welcome to the part 2 of this super-topic. To not waste time with recaps and clarifications, just below, in a separate section, I will put the previous part, with its respective link, and the disclaimers corresponding to this one, also separately.

---

Part prior to this one

Part 1: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11204491/

Disclaimers

1. Any act of denial and refutation against any data, statements and proof mentioned or presented in this journal based on mentions, suggestions or uses of information sources coming from and/or promoted by hegemonic media (US, UK and others), social media, Wikipedia (including variations thereof as well), Fact Checkers and any entity pertaining to and/or related to the oligarchy, may be ignored and/or taken with great skepticism by any reader, in case he/she so desires. The reasons are based on the absence of credible, reliable and/or truthful information, whether in part or in whole, from the aforementioned sources/entities/groups/organizations due to many of the controversies and/or scandals associated with them.

2. The use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" per se, or similar to that, which is linked to what it means in the entertainment media and/or the hegemonic media as a primary method of denial and/or disapproval of the content of this note, as well as the sources attached to it, will not be taken as truthful either.

3. The owner of this journal doesn't have any kind of personal adherence (personal/selfish reasons), contractual (legal reasons) or constitutional (constitutional reasons) with political figures, political parties, social organizations/entities and/or countries/nations based on the use of political agendas and/or any kind of activism that causes damage to material goods, the environment and/or towards other human beings (whether physical or psychological) for any reason that is considered unjustified after being first analyzed based on reason and ethics, with the sample or presence of compelling evidence corresponding to the cases mentioned above. The rejection of such agendas and/or activism will be even higher and forceful in cases that imply going against human nature in terms of any harm, deprivation, destruction and deterioration of the individuality of the human being and/or any society composed of human beings for unjustifiable reasons.

---

That said, and to get to the point, here is the continuation of the subtopic dedicated to Donald Trump (started in the first part), which contains more general information about him, and related:

Evidence that ratifies or refutes some of the things associated with Donald Trump, as well as, occasionally, his relationship with other people (political figures or not), and political parties in the United States as well.

2) Donald Trump never represented, or cared about, ordinary people and/or regular workers.

Evidence A.

The 1990 Playboy Interview With Donald Trump

https://www.playboy.com/read/playboy-interview/playboy-interview-donald-trump-1990/

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “The billion-dollar baby was born in the exclusive Jamaica Estates in Queens, New York, on June 14, 1946, to a mere millionaire, real-estate developer Fred Trump, who had racked up his $20,000,000 fortune building low-to-middle-priced homes and apartments in Brooklyn and Queens.”

2- “Taking a hard look at Manhattan’s troubled fortunes, he fastened onto the bankruptcy of the Penn Central Railroad as his ticket into the big time and nimbly plucked options on Penn’s Hudson River railroad yards, now the site of New York’s Convention Center, and its 59-year-old Commodore Hotel, now the Grand Hyatt. The coup was in his persuading bankers to lend him $80,000,000 and in talking politicians into awarding him a $120,000,000 tax abatement.”

3- “In 1979, at the age of 33, he snapped up the Fifth Avenue site of the old Bonwit Teller for $20,000,000, won a $140,000,000 tax abatement and three years later finished Trump Tower, a 68-story dazzler that includes a six-story atrium and today draws 100,000 visitors daily, with residents such as Johnny Carson and Steven Spielberg.”

4- “Playboy: Okay. But here we are at the start of a new decade. How do you respond when people call you ostentatious, ego-ridden and a greedy symbol of the Eighties?

Trump: Rich men are less likely to like me, but the working man likes me because he knows “I worked hard and didn’t inherit what I’ve built”. Hey, “I made it myself”; I have a right to do what I want with it.

Playboy: With so much poverty on the city streets, isn’t it embarrassing for you to flaunt your wealth?

Trump: There has always been a display of wealth and always will be, until the depression comes, which it always does. And let me tell you, a display is a “good thing”.

It shows people that you “can be successful”. It can show you a way of life. Dynasty did it on TV. It’s very important that people aspire to be successful. The only way you can do it is if you look at somebody who is.”

5- “Playboy: You have a lot of enemies in New York City, among them a group that opposes your building a huge Trump City on the Hudson that will include the world’s tallest building–on the theory that it will ruin the West Side and cause unbearable congestion. What do you say to them?

Trump: Point one: There were more people living on the West Side of New York in the Forties than there are today. “Very few people understand that”.

Point two: Trump City is going to be an “architectural masterpiece”.

Point three: “The city” desperately needs the taxes, the housing and the shopping that will produce billions of dollars in revenue. Yet that community group [West Pride] fights every job.

“Those people fight for the sake of fighting”. I honestly believe that if I proposed an eighty-acre park, they would come out and fight me.

“Selfishly”, they like what they have and don’t want to give it to anybody else. We need another Rockefeller Center–especially now that Mitsubishi has bought most of the one we had.”

6- ““If I had been the son of a coal miner, I would have left the damn mines. But most people don’t have the imagination—or whatever—to leave their mine. They don’t have ‘it.'””

7- ““Well even if I ever ran for office, I’d do better as a Democrat than as a Republican—and that’s not because I’d be more liberal, because I’m conservative. But the working guy would elect me. He likes me.””

Evidence B.

BEFORE THE GOLD RUSH How Angelo Donghia Tried (And Failed) To Make Trump Tower Tasteful by Jesse Kornbluth

https://web.archive.org/web/20170201090352/https://www.buzzfeed.com/jessek49223aa90/before-the-gold-rush-the-legendary-decorator-who-tried-and-f?utm_term=.onmPkx7BB#.edmJ91mBB

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “In the early ’80s, when he was a rising real estate mogul with dreams of being accepted into Manhattan high society, Donald Trump hired superstar decorator Angelo Donghia to turn his massive new midtown triplex into a tastefully appointed showcase of class and taste. You will absolutely believe what happened next.”

2- “Now consider the Trump Tower triplex. Its esteemed decorator had a staff of 125, owned 10 companies, didn’t take a residential job that cost less than $300,000 — Angelo Donghia was considered America’s first superstar designer. In 1983, when Trump cut the ribbon on his tower and moved in, he was still years away from the yacht and the plane and the Trump Shuttle and The Art of the Deal. So Angelo Donghia designing and decorating the triplex didn’t, back then, add to Donghia’s status; it added to Trump’s. But the image of Trump’s home that you envision when you close your eyes — the all-gold everything — isn’t Donghia’s work. Trump took Donghia’s subtle, sophisticated approach and turned it into his version of a showplace — a sunglasses-required vulgarity that Tony Montana and Saddam Hussein would envy.”

3- “Most articles about the tower cite Trump’s exaggeration of the building’s size as if it were correct. And in every article about Trump’s triplex I’ve seen, Angelo Donghia is named as the designer. That’s not quite accurate. The triplex has been Trumpified — an unnamed designer turned it into a Vegas funhouse. In Jane Mayer’s New Yorker piece about Tony Schwartz, who co-authored The Art of the Deal with Trump, she wrote that the ghostwriter’s impression of the apartment when he started working with Trump late in 1985 was that the apartment looked “unlived-in, like the lobby of a hotel.” Or, perhaps, the lobby of a casino. “All the gilded boiserie was put in after we finished,” says Chuck Chewning, who was creative director of Donghia Inc. for eight years and curated the Angelo Donghia: Design Superstar exhibit at the New York School of Interior Design in 2015. “Ivana hired a casino designer to redo it. There’s very little of Angelo left.”

Donghia’s entrance hall remains intact, but once you get upstairs his clean, luxurious decor has been vulgarized to the point of self-parody. A ceiling features paintings of scenes from Greek mythology. The Greek influence continues with a bronze statue of Eros and Psyche. Above the fountain is a painting of Apollo, riding his chariot.

What’s sometimes described as “French rococo design” is also the theme in rooms that guests never see. Violating the universal rule that you avoid overhead lighting in a bedroom, Donald and Melania’s bedroom features a massive chandelier. The bed? Gold. It’s been reported that Trump says the gold on the headboard and the bench is real.

Picture an entire room dipped in gold, right down to throw pillows that bear a golden Trump coat of arms. How much gold is in the triplex? So much that when Donald and Melania’s son Barron was born, Ellen DeGeneres sent a matching golden stroller as a baby present.”

4- “In his final months, did Angelo Donghia brood about Trump’s desecration of his work? Not likely. “I suspect the redecoration may have been redone shortly after he died,” Tim Macdonald told me. “I have no idea if Angelo even knew it was in the works. I certainly didn’t.””

Evidence C.

We visited Trump Tower, and it perfectly epitomizes its eccentric, contradictory owner

https://qz.com/646029/we-visited-trump-tower-and-it-perfectly-epitomizes-its-eccentric-contradictory-owner

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “The golden elevators are flanked by men in black suits. One of them is Johnny Gonzalez. “I don’t feel like a doorman here,” he said. “Everybody is really nice, and Mr. Trump knows all of us by name.”

The 27-year-old Puerto Rican American has worked at Trump Tower for over eight years, even appearing in a couple of shots in “The Apprentice.” Aside from his full-time job, Gonzalez is studying accounting at the European School of Economics located on the 19th floor of the building. (The private British business school has no connection to Mr. Trump or to his scandal-embroiled Trump University). Once he has his degree, Gonzales hopes to work for one of the many financial firms in Trump Tower. (He isn’t the only one who sees his current job as a stepping stone. Another doorman, who didn’t want to be named, completed his MBA a while ago.)

Gonzalez is excited about Trump running for president. “We were all hoping he would do it,” he said. “Everybody here, we all love Trump. We know the real Trump.””

2- “A couple of controversy-laden months later, people were more cautious. “Some of the stuff he says is okay, some of the stuff he says is, you know, asinine,” said Nick Ingrassia, a young filmmaker from Long Island. “As long as he keeps leading, we will not be able to get rid of him.””

3- “...During the fall, Trump’s presidential campaign was confined almost exclusively to Trump Tower. He hosted several rallies and required networks to do all his political interviews in the atrium. “Now we see Mr. Trump a lot less,” said his doorman Johnny Gonzalez. “We used to see him almost every day, now we see him maybe three or four times a month.” But the Trump Tower staff—a lot of them minorities who passionately defend Trump against all accusations of racism—still get to share in some political moments.”

4- “While Trump is flying around the country, his staff is masterminding his campaign on the fifth floor. The biggest surprise about the campaign offices is how “very much at odds they are with the rest of building,” said Ali Elkin, a former Bloomberg Politics reporter, who visited them in the summer. Housed on the former set of “The Apprentice,” the offices set a stark contrast to the splendor of the rest of the building. Bloomberg photos show raw walls, exposed pipes, and loose-hanging cables surrounding the handful of people trying to get the political outsider elected.”


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (2).

Regarding the many fragments quoted from the article corresponding to evidence A, I apologize for that, but I needed to show enough to understand the context, as well as the relationship between that evidence and what is established in this segment. Regarding evidence B, the excuse is similar to that for evidence A, except that it was also for the purpose of refuting some things associated with the Trump Tower triplex, as well as exposing a little more of Donald Trump's personality. And regarding evidence C, for more context, it is recommended to read between the lines of what is underlined in the fragments quoted therein.


3) Donald Trump was never a Republican, nor did he belong to the right wing (based on what those two things mean in US culture, of course).

Evidence A.

FOX & Friends, April 11, 2016

• https://archive.org/details/FOXNEWS.....0_FOX__Friends
• https://dn720709.ca.archive.org/0/i.....X__Friends.mp4
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIQQyakx5_U

Highlighted fragment from the main video above as evidence (between 2:53 and 3:02).

“i'm coming in to do something positive. i'm an outsider. the system is rigged. i see it. i see it now, 100%. and by the way, not just on our side. i think it's worse on the republican side...”
Evidence B.

Donald Trump tells Joe Rogan he us to be a Democrat

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/8i9rsBkQ9Zg

Evidence C.

Donald Trump: I was a Democrat (CNN interview with Don Lemon)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUlUZ9MywWI

Warning 1: The source cited above , as evidence ( C ), still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence D.

Donald Trump: A Secret Democrat? | msnbc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhhYQBmWOL4

Warning 2: The source cited above , as evidence (D), still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence E.

Donald Trump in 2004: Democrats Are Better for U.S. Economy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k2og1ZmZhw

Evidence F.

Jeb Bush: Trump Doesn't Have a Conservative Record, He's Been a Dem for Majority of Past Decade

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boahINNLYUo

Evidence G.

The 1990 Playboy Interview With Donald Trump

https://www.playboy.com/read/playboy-interview/playboy-interview-donald-trump-1990/

Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:

““Well even if I ever ran for office, I’d do better as a Democrat than as a Republican—and that’s not because I’d be more liberal, because I’m conservative. But the working guy would elect me. He likes me.””
Evidence H.

Donald Trump was once a registered Democrat and party donor. So why did he jump ship?

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/donald-trump-was-once-a-registered-democrat-and-party-donor-why-did-he-jump-ship/wj85mj5yq

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “But before they were political rivals, Trump was actually one of Harris' financial donors.

State records show that Trump donated US$6,000 ($9,107) in total to the then-California attorney-general's campaign — US$5,000 ($7,589) in September 2011 after she was first elected, and another US$1,000 ($1,518) in 2013.

At the time of both donations to Harris' campaign, Trump was registered as a Republican.”

2- “"It's very common, not unlike it is in Australia, for individuals and businesses to donate to both major parties, basically in the hope has a kind of insurance move, I suppose, in the hope of maintaining influence when and if somebody gets into a position of power – so I think it's likely that he was seeking to influence something in the Harris campaign.

"It's also more broadly an indication that Trump doesn't really have an ideology, he will swing to wherever he thinks it's politically convenient to him."”

Link to the graph shown in the article corresponding to this evidence (H):

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%2Fid%2FOIP.EtxWm-qqbRnTDz8w3z_0rwHaFf%3Fpid%3DApi&f=1&ipt=7f5cb2e91dc45e393b3a1ea278ac3c4886e03332e37321a4832684cdd90d5ebe&ipo=images

Warning 3: The source cited above , as evidence (D), still may have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Evidence I.

Is Trump Republican? Timeline of President's Shifting Political Views After He Sides With Democrats (September 7, 2017)

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-republican-democrats-president-661340

Highlighted fragments from the article above as evidence:

1- “In 1987, the year his famed book The Art of the Deal was released, Trump registered as a Republican in New York, according to Politifact. The following year, he even floated the idea of running for the party's presidential nomination. Yet, despite his stated allegiance to the GOP, Trump donated more money to Democrats than Republicans between 1989 and 2009.

Further demonstrating his political promiscuity, Trump turned his back on both major parties in 1989 by registering as an independent. In 2000, he mounted his first actual run for president, as a candidate for the Reform Party. Despite an early withdrawal from the contest, he won the party's primary in California.

Trump's allegiance switched again in 2001, when he registered as a Democrat. Speaking in 2004, Trump shed some light on his rationale.”

2- “But before long, Trump was turning once again. In 2009, less than a year after Barack Obama's election win, he had switched back to the Republican Party. That would last for just two years, however, before the real-estate magnate registered as an independent in order to leave his options open for a third-party run in the 2012 election. As it turned out, Trump returned to the GOP fold just a few months later and endorsed Republican candidate Mitt Romney in his losing battle against Obama.

Since that time, Trump has been a reliable and prolific donator to the GOP. He has not, though, been a reliable follower of the party line. During the 2016 campaign, he frequently launched vociferous attacks against his Republican primary opponents, the Republican leadership and past Republican presidents. He also refused to rule out running as an independent if he failed to secure the Republican nomination.”

Evidence J.

Most of Donald Trump's Political Money Went To Democrats — Until 5 Years Ago (July 28, 2015)

https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/07/28/426888268/donald-trumps-flipping-political-donations

Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:

“...Since 1989, donations in Donald Trump's name have totaled around $1.4 million (adjusted for inflation) to national-level parties, candidates, and other committees. Around two-thirds of that has gone to Republican groups and candidates, according to an NPR analysis of data from the Center for Responsive Politics. However, Trump's decisive tilt toward giving to Republicans has only come in the last few years.

(That grey bar in 1999 comes from when Trump donated $50,000 to the "Donald Trump New York Delegate Committee — a committee to which he was the sole listed donor, per CRP.)

...Between 2010 and 2015, 97 percent of all of his donations have gone to Republicans. Prior to that, Democrats had been the primary beneficiaries, taking more than half of Trump's donations between 1989 and 2009."
Evidence K.

Awkward: How Trump’s past donations could haunt 2020 Dems

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/05/2020-presidential-dems-trump-money-1202938

Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:

“Harris, Booker and Gillibrand — along with Joe Biden, John Kerry and Terry McAuliffe — all share a common bond of receiving Trump family donations, adding another wrinkle to a crowded primary where candidates are expected to trumpet their distance from the president.

An ideological shapeshifter whose decades in the public eye have spanned stints as a Republican, Democrat, Reform Party candidate and independent, Trump has donated across the spectrum from the establishment left to the far right. The recipients include both Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and politically exiled Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa).”
Evidence L.

Political positions of Donald Trump – Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Donald_Trump

Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:

“The organization and website On the Issues has classified Trump in a variety of ways over time:

• "Moderate populist" (2003)
• "Liberal-leaning populist" (2003–2011)
• "Moderate populist conservative" (2011–2012)
• "Libertarian-leaning conservative" (2012–2013)
• "Moderate conservative" (2013–2014)
• "Libertarian-leaning conservative" (2014–2015)
• "Hard-core conservative" (2015)
• "Libertarian-leaning conservative" (2015–2016)
• "Moderate conservative" (2016–2017)
• "Hard-core conservative" (2017–present)”

Warning 4: The source cited above , as evidence (L), still may have medium levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (3).

Regarding the why of the overabundance of evidence in this segment, there is a simple and direct answer, and it is with the purpose of addressing what is in it from all possible angles to avoid and minimize any possible doubt, controversy, and/or conflict associated with it, on the part of any reader.

About the evidences themselves, I have nothing to say since I am saving myself for when I have to give the conclusion of this super-topic, which will mention some of the things related to this segment, either as a revelation/twist; that's for sure. And finally, regarding the Wikipedia fragment, mentioned and shown in evidence L, that's just out of curiosity.


* deep breath *

Okay, that's all for this part , regarding this subtopic. I apologize if this part is longer than the previous one, but it's important to clarify that what you see here is the bulk of the subtopic in question. The next part, part 3, will not only be just as substantial as this one—my apologies again—but it will also be the last part of the subtopic on Donald Trump per se, and related; just wanted to add that.

Well, I hope that the content of this part, or at least part of it, has been interesting and informative for everyone, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings and have a nice day/night to all of you.

---

Disclaimer 1: Any act of denial and refutation against any data, statements and proof mentioned or presented in this journal based on mentions, suggestions or uses of information sources coming from and/or promoted by hegemonic media (US, UK and others), social media, Wikipedia (including variations thereof as well), Fact Checkers and any entity pertaining to and/or related to the oligarchy, may be ignored and/or taken with great skepticism by any reader, in case he/she so desires. The reasons are based on the absence of credible, reliable and/or truthful information, whether in part or in whole, from the aforementioned sources/entities/groups/organizations due to many of the controversies and/or scandals associated with them.

Disclaimer 2: The use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" per se, or similar to that, which is linked to what it means in the entertainment media and/or the hegemonic media as a primary method of denial and/or disapproval of the content of this note, as well as the sources attached to it, will not be taken as truthful either.

Disclaimer 3: The owner of this journal doesn't have any kind of personal adherence (personal/selfish reasons), contractual (legal reasons) or constitutional (constitutional reasons) with political figures, political parties, social organizations/entities and/or countries/nations based on the use of political agendas and/or any kind of activism that causes damage to material goods, the environment and/or towards other human beings (whether physical or psychological) for any reason that is considered unjustified after being first analyzed based on reason and ethics, with the sample or presence of compelling evidence corresponding to the cases mentioned above. The rejection of such agendas and/or activism will be even higher and forceful in cases that imply going against human nature in terms of any harm, deprivation, destruction and deterioration of the individuality of the human being and/or any society composed of human beings for unjustifiable reasons.

---

Hello, everyone. Today's topic is quite special, as it will be:

• the culmination of a theme that was started several months ago,
• the end of a schedule,
• a reboot,
• and a super-topic.

But before I begin, there are three things I want to do first, in the sequence shown below:

1. Explain and clarify the points mentioned at the beginning of the topic (excluding disclaimers, of course) to give the reader information and context about them.
2. Explain and clarify to the reader how this topic will be developed, in terms of ordination and content.
3. Establish rules and/or additional clarifications for the purpose of advising, informing, and warning the reader about the content presented in this topic.

Explanation and clarification of the four points mentioned at the beginning of the topic.

With the purpose of covering more ground, in less time, it is necessary to clarify that the first, second, and third points (in descending order, from top to bottom) are based on the fact that this topic is the reboot of the third and final part of the topic “The United States and its problem with money,” which had to do with a scheme started about six months ago based on the same topic. As for the reboot itself, including the title change, that was because I wanted the topic to be aligned with the new scheme, rather than the old one.

The super-topic thing, in the fourth and last point (mentioned at the beginning of the topic, above; in descending order, from top to bottom), on the other hand, is because this one will be much more extensive compared to other previous extensive topics, which are few, by the way. Basically, this topic will have an estimated six parts in total, and that is because the volume of information contained in it far exceeded what was originally anticipated when the old schedule was still on the table; sorry for the inconveniences.

---

For more context on the topic “The United States and its problem with money,” in this small section, separate from the rest of the topic, I will leave you the links to the journals corresponding to parts 1 and 2:

Part 1: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11068188/

Part 2-1: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11071966/

Part 2-2: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11086555/

---

Explanation and clarification of the development of the topic in terms of ordination and content.

The structure of the super-topic will have two main subtopics and a conclusion; that is, two large sections (subtopics) and a small section at the end (conclusion). In terms of sequence and content, the first of these subtopics will be dedicated to ratifying or refuting some of the things associated with Donald Trump, in a general way, as well as his relationship with the two main political parties in that country (the Democratic Party and the Republican Party), in some occasions, through the use of multiple pieces of evidence.

The other subtopic, in this case , the second one, will be dedicated to ratifying or refuting some of the things associated with the two main political parties in that country (the Democratic Party and the Republican Party), as well as their relationship with Donald Trump, in some occasions, in a similar way to the first one. And finally, in third place, the conclusion of the super-theme itself, which will contain my arguments, opinions, the occasional revelation/twist, and other related things about what has been shown and shared in the subtopics of it; that would be the whole explanation, by the way.

Advices, warnings, and additional information about the content of the topic, in form of rules and/or clarifications.

• The super-topic will contain content based on publicly available information, which is (for the most part) accessible and reliable, but which could be considered controversial by certain individuals; reader discretion is advised.
• In terms of evidences, the subtopic dedicated to Donald Trump per se, that is, the first one, will not mention any of the executive orders made by him during his administration (2025). Not to mention that mentioning them as evidence will make the subtopic dedicated to him more redundant and extensive than it is necessary.
• The information presented in this super-topic, in each one of its parts, is the minimum and indispensable amount that one needs, or will need from now on, to understand the context of everything related to the political spectrum in the United States, and countries linked to it, in general.
• Whatever the individuals mentioned and/or shown in this super-topic (political figures or not) have done in media or platforms of a public nature, whether based on make announcements, comments/messages of any kind, conferences, interviews, statements, treaties, agreements, presentations or advertising, regardless of their trustworthiness and credibility, is and will continue to be their responsibility, as it is based on their own actions. Not to mention that any act based on ignoring, omitting, and/or concealing information from the general public, based on the above, may be, or will be, considered as a lack of transparency (partial or total), as well as trust, towards the latter, regardless of the wishes of said individuals.
• Any public act carried out by the individuals mentioned and/or shown in this super-topic (political figures or not) may be, or will be, mentioned, criticized, and/or judged by the public, whether deserved or not. Not to mention that the general public may use such acts as evidence, regardless of the desires of the supporters and/or followers of such individuals, in the case that it is proven that they were made with malevolent intents. And regardless of whether one likes such a statement or not, it is intrinsically based on human curiosity, common sense, responsibility, and impartiality, which must be respected.
• The owner of the publications of this topic, i.e., me, does not know nor has any relationship of any kind with the people named in the information showed and shared in this super-topic, whether they are political figures or not.
• Any act of petition or demand made to the owner of the publications of this topic, i.e., me, based on divulging or sharing additional information regarding the information shared/showed here will be immediately ignored and denied.
• The owner of the publications of this topic, i.e., me, advises any reader to read, or re-read as many times as necessary, the disclaimers present in the parts of said topic, in case there are any doubts or internal conflicts about the content of the same with respect to the position of the owner of the same.


After saying all that, and as mentioned earlier, the first of the subtopics to be developed will be the one about Donald Trump...

My excitement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLTZctTG6cE

Evidence that ratifies or refutes some of the things associated with Donald Trump, as well as, occasionally, his relationship with other people (political figures or not), and political parties in the United States as well.

1) Donald Trump, for the most part, always used dirty and/or fraudulent tactics (legal or otherwise) to get rich.

Evidence A.

The 1990 Playboy Interview With Donald Trump

https://www.playboy.com/read/playboy-interview/playboy-interview-donald-trump-1990/

Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:

“No insomnia, no gnawing worries. “Pressure,” he surmises, sipping an iced Coke, “doesn’t upset my sleep,” a standard four hours nightly. “I like throwing balls into the air–and I dream like a baby.” Three hours later, blond hair marshaled, he announces, with standard chutzpah, his seven-and-a-half-billion-dollar bid to gobble down the nation’s premiere airline, American.

On the strength of his 120-dollar-a-share bid, the stock vaults from 16 dollars to 99 dollars. The 43-year-old billionaire, who owns huge blocks of American Airlines stock, smiles broadly. A week later, with the market tumbling 190 points, he withdraws his offer, perhaps temporarily.

Despite some reports that insinuated his American raid was only cardboard, a ploy to rattle up his stock, Trump stares into space: “Nope. I want it.”Yup. If it’s the best, and it’s for sale, Donald Trump’s stomach begins to growl.””

Evidence B.

The 1990 Playboy Interview With Donald Trump

https://www.playboy.com/read/playboy-interview/playboy-interview-donald-trump-1990/

Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:

“He captured troubled Saudi financier Adnan Khashoggi’s onyx-and-gold-plated yacht for a mere $29,000,000–now it’s worth $100,000,000. Then he bought the Eastern Shuttle for $365,000,000 and transformed it overnight into the Trump Shuttle, complete with comfortable cabins and stewardesses rustling in virgin wool and pearls.”

Evidence C.

The 1990 Playboy Interview With Donald Trump

https://www.playboy.com/read/playboy-interview/playboy-interview-donald-trump-1990/

Highlighted fragment from the article above as evidence:

“Ah, well. To be young, blond and a billionaire. It doesn’t seem to matter. The most daunting entrepreneur since the Astors, Vanderbilts and Whitneys, Donald John Trump has made his “art of the deal” work—not just for making money but for crushing adversaries, too. Case in point: Merv Griffin.

Ten months after Griffin bought Trump’s Resorts International Inc. for $365,000,000, for which Trump had paid $101,000,000 the year before, Griffin found himself holding a busted balloon.

Not only had he inherited the hotel-casino’s $925,000,000 debt but he embarrassingly had to report first-half losses of $46,600,000. There’s now talk of a possible bankruptcy for Merv and a possible lawsuit against Trump. Looking beyond his one-billion-dollar Taj Mahal opening in Atlantic City next month, Trump has plenty to consider.”

Evidence D.

Video made by Coffeezilla on his alternative YouTube channel, voidzilla, in which he exposes Donald Trump's scam with his memecoin, with its respective title and link:

trump memecoin is insane

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zjBj194el8

Link to one of the sources mentioned in the Coffeezilla video:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9vmym2jvy9o

Warning 1: The source cited above still contains low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.

Links to websites about the sources mentioned in the Coffeezilla video:

• https://crypto.news/how-many-offici.....-total-supply/
• https://www.reuters.com/technology/.....on-2025-01-20/

Warning 2: The sources cited above still contain low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; readers discretion is advised.


Clarifications and explanations regarding the evidences presented in this segment (1).

I don't have much to clarify, except that the fragments corresponding to the article “The 1990 Playboy Interview With Donald Trump,” in the evidences A, B, and C, were intended to inform the reader of the “dirty business” and/or frauds committed by Donald Trump many years ago. Not to mention, that the evidences mentioned previously fit well with evidence D, in the sense that he never renounced using such deceptive and fraudulent tactics, even in recent times; that is all I wanted to clarify.


And before closing this part and retiring for today, I want to apologize again; this time for how long it is, but since this is a quite extensive topic, the basic information, as well as the clarifications and rules, had to be included in it, for obvious motives. The next part, part 2, on the other hand, will be easier to follow than this one, but no less extensive, as it will be based mainly on showing and sharing the rest of the general information of the subtopic started in this part; keep that in mind from here on out please.

Okay, that would be all for today. I hope that the content of this part, or at least part of it, has been interesting and informative for everyone, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings and have a nice day/night to all of you.

Hello everyone. Today I bring you more music of DAGames on YouTube. Here is the title of the song and the link to said video about that new song:

DAGames - FlashDrive SSD (Yellow) LYRIC VIDEO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GplInx-z6TQ

I hope that the song has been to your liking and, with nothing more to say, see you another time with more songs. Greetings to all. :3

Hello everyone. Today I bring you more music of The Stupendium, about “The Amazing Digital Circus” animated show, on YouTube. Here is the title of the song and the link to said video about that new song:

THE MERRY-GO-ROUND | The Amazing Digital Circus Song! ENDING A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nDK7u0RyH0

I hope that the song has been to your liking and, with nothing more to say, see you another time with more songs. Greetings to all. :3

Hello everyone. Today I bring you more music of CG5, 2 YouTube videos in this case, one about the KPop Demon Hunters Netflix film, and the other one about the videogame Five Nights at Freddy's: Secret of the Mimic. Here are the titles of the videos and the links to said videos about those songs:

Your Idol - SAJA BOYS (Cover by CG5) [Kpop Demon Hunters]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLsDFD04a_s

CG5 - Join Us For A Bite (FNAF Song Cover Animation)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVQTosYhN3Y

I hope those music videos have been to your liking and, with nothing more to say, see you another time with more songs. Greetings to all. :3

Hello, everyone. I just came to let everyone the notice that the third and final part of the topic “US and its money problem” will be published in the next two weeks (in approximately 14 days), as if it were a somewhat different topic than originally planned, that is, as a reboot. For more context, below I will leave the links to the journals corresponding to parts 1 and 2:

"US and its money problem (part 1)"

https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11068188/

"US and its money problem (part 2)"

2-1) https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11071966/

2-2) https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11086555/


The reboot of this topic will count on multiple parts, and it will be called “The Fallout.” Regarding the total number of parts that this topic will have, due to uncertainty, I can only say that there will be more than 5; that much is certain. One of the motives is due to the large volume of information that this topic will contain, which is much more than I had originally anticipated when the old schedule was in place, and due to revisions too; I sorry for the inconveniences.

As for the title change, on the other hand, it is because I wanted the new one to indicate and reflect, in a figurative and cool way, the content of said journal, which has to do with the new schedule, of course. Moreover, when the same would be, in a way, the last part of a topic started a bit more than 6 months ago, and a good title is completely necessary to show the end of this long journey; nothing personal against those who live in the United States by the way.

However, in order to avoid future problems based on misunderstandings, discomfort, and/or unexpected surprises, I would like to inform everyone in advance that the purpose of this topic is to refute and prove several things about US politicians through the use of public and (somewhat) accessible and reliable information, which involves Donald Trump and the rest of the politicians in that country. And in case anyone questions me, I would like you to read everything I have to say before questioning me, please.

To answer the most obvious question that many must be having after what I said earlier, regarding whether I had already talked about Donald Trump per se in previous topics, the answer is no. In past topics, I talked about him and/or what his administration has done, but not about him precisely, which means that the upcoming topic will do so; I just wanted to clarify that before talking about the content of said topic.

To give you a preview of what the content of “The Fallout” , the super-topic that will be published over the next two weeks, will be like, it will feature two main subtopics and a conclusion; that is, two large parts (subtopics) and a small part at the end (conclusion). In terms of sequence, the first one of these subtopics will be dedicated to refute some of the things associated with Donald Trump, in a general way, as well as his relationship with the two main political parties in that country, through the use of multiple pieces of evidence as examples.

As for the other subtopic, that is, the second one, it will be dedicated to refute some of the things associated with the two main political parties in that country, as well as their relationship with Donald Trump, similar to the first one. Sorry if what I said in the previous sentence sounded somewhat redundant, but I couldn't think of another way to say it when writing this journal.

Basically, everything mentioned in the sixth and seventh paragraphs of this notice is how the information will be published in that super-topic when it is published. But before concluding this notice, I would like to clarify a few other things first, which are as follows:

• The section dedicated to Donald Trump, in that super-topic, will not mention any of the executive orders made by him during his administration (2025), as evidence, due to the fact that there are too many to explore properly. Not to mention that mentioning several of them will make the topic even more extensive than necessary.
• Some of the points mentioned in this notice will be incorporated into “The Fallout” since the topic will explain itself, as well as how to proceed with it, and, because of that, any kind of reiteration with it, is inevitable.
• Each part of this super-topic will be published with a separation of 5 to 7 days between each one after the last, with the purpose of to avoid or reduce any possible mental tiredness or weariness on the part of the reader.
• “The Fallout” is and will be the only, and last, topic dedicated to Donald Trump per se (as a person, celebrity and/or political figure to be exact). However, it should be clarified that this statement has no effect or validity in future journals regarding any possible topic that comes after this one, where he is discussed, whether as a figure of authority, member of a political party, head of state in a country, several of the previous ones at the same time, or all of the previous ones at the same time, either directly or indirectly.
• Yes, “ The Fallout” will display and share content based on public, (for the most part) accessible and reliable information, which could be considered controversial by certain individuals; discretion is advised on the part of any potential future reader.


Before concluding this notice, I would like to apologize for its length, but it was necessary to clarify everything related to this super-topic, for the motives mentioned above. And lastly, I would also like to let you know that in the next two weeks (taking this notice as a reference point), before the publication of “The Fallout,” I may publish a few other things in between; that is all I have to say on the matter.

So, yes, that's all for today. Sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings and have a nice day/night to all of you.

Hello, everyone. Today I have something quite interesting to share with you all, and that is a stand-up comedy video about one of the best comedians and sociocultural critics of US society, George Carlin. As the title of this article suggests, the video in question is about the sterilization of US language, based on the excessive and forced use of word replacement and euphemisms, which is often a major problem in many parts of the world, not just in that country.

That being said, below I'll post the video of said stand-up comedy, with its respective title and link:

George Carlin on soft language

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o25I2fzFGoY

Regarding what George Carlin said in that video, I have nothing to say about it since he speaks with truth, even more so when one takes into account that what he said back then is quite relevant today. And because of that, I can only recommend the video to anyone who has read this journal; it's totally worth it.

Well, that's all for today; I just wanted to share that with all of you. I hope that this topic was entertaining, interesting, and/or informative for everyone, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings and have a nice day/night to all of you.

Hello everyone. Today I bring you more music of LittleVMills, about the videogame DELTARUNE Chapter 3, on YouTube. Here is the title of the song and the link to said video about that new song:

DELTARUNE - Black Knife (Metal Cover by Little V)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n39tCSlRU8c

I hope that the song has been to your liking and, with nothing more to say, see you another time with more songs. Greetings to all. :3

Hello everyone and welcome to the second and last part of this topic. In order not to waste time with formalities and recapitulations, below I will post the link to the journal of the first part for those who need to know what this topic is about, as well as the context of it:

Part 1: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11189555/

But first, I will leave some disclaimers below for everyone's discretion:

Disclaimer 1: Any act of denial and refutation against any data, statements and proof mentioned or presented in this journal based on mentions, suggestions or uses of information sources coming from and/or promoted by hegemonic media (US, UK and others), social media, Wikipedia (including variations thereof as well), Fact Checkers and any entity pertaining to and/or related to the oligarchy, may be ignored and/or taken with great skepticism by any reader, in case he/she so desires. The reasons are based on the absence of credible, reliable and/or truthful information, whether in part or in whole, from the aforementioned sources/entities/groups/organizations due to many of the controversies and/or scandals associated with them.

Disclaimer 2: The use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" per se, or similar to that, which is linked to what it means in the entertainment media and/or the hegemonic media as a primary method of denial and/or disapproval of the content of this note, as well as the sources attached to it, will not be taken as truthful either.

Disclaimer 3: The owner of this journal doesn't have any kind of personal adherence (personal/selfish reasons), contractual (legal reasons) or constitutional (constitutional reasons) with political figures, political parties, social organizations/entities and/or countries/nations based on the use of political agendas and/or any kind of activism that causes damage to material goods, the environment and/or towards other human beings (whether physical or psychological) for any reason that is considered unjustified after being first analyzed based on reason and ethics, with the sample or presence of compelling evidence corresponding to the cases mentioned above. The rejection of such agendas and/or activism will be even higher and forceful in cases that imply going against human nature in terms of any harm, deprivation, destruction and deterioration of the individuality of the human being and/or any society composed of human beings for unjustifiable reasons.


Now, to get to the point, I can only say that the additional evidence that proves that the societies of the United States, United Kingdom and Australia ended up being “idiocracies” (only in part), is found in the fact that the governments of those countries used all kinds of tactics, for many years, to promote, recommend and force fluoride consumption against their inhabitants. The result of the use of such tactics for so many years by those governments eventually caused a slow, gradual and subtle decline in the intelligence quotient (IQ) in most of the inhabitants of those countries, especially in the case of the United States.

To put it simply, the consumption of fluoride made most of the people in those countries stupider, which made them more susceptible and preponderant to act more idiotic in general as well; that would be the short version of it all. And for those of you wondering, yes, I have sources that prove that what I said above, in this part, is real, quite a lot in fact. Below, I will give you the sources you need, and more, separately, with their respective subheadings and with links to the web sites corresponding to them.

Evidence showing and proving that the following countries promote, recommend and force the consumption of fluoride to their inhabitants in drinkables and edibles:

United States

• https://fluoridealert.org/wp-conten.....ly-21-2020.pdf
• https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10706776/
• https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10741400/
• https://dailyhealthpost.com/fluorid.....bottled-water/
• https://www.cdc.gov/oral-health/pre.....-fluoride.html
• https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10243485/
• https://www.center4research.org/fluoride-benefits-risks-research/

The United Kingdom, especially in Great Britain

• https://www.gov.uk/government/publi.....dation-toolkit
• https://www.gov.uk/government/publi.....r-fluoridation
• https://wellnesswater.co.uk/areas-o.....and-tap-water/
• file:///home/adrian/Descargas/Extent%20of%20Water%20Fluoridation%20-%20Printable.pdf
• https://www.gov.uk/government/publi.....r-england-2014
• https://www.gov.uk/government/publi.....r-england-2018
• https://www.gov.uk/government/publi.....r-england-2022
• https://www.dental-update.co.uk/content/guest-editorial/water-fluoridation-what-why-where-and-when/

Australia

• https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/sites/defa.....ridationqa.pdf
• https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/health-adv.....h/fluoridation
• https://www.eatforhealth.gov.au/nut.....e-updated-2017
• https://health.adelaide.edu.au/arcp.....-australia.pdf
• https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11.....ment/103128018
• https://www.ama.com.au/qld/campaigns/fluoride

Evidence showing and/or proving the developmental fluoride neurotoxicity:

In the form of documents.

Developmental Fluoride Neurotoxicity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp.1104912

Developmental fluoride neurotoxicity: an updated review

https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-019-0551-x

In the form of videos.

MUST SEE! Fluoride Can Actually Make You Stupid

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Lw-uA_gwEw

Neuroscientist explaining that chemicals such as fluoride have been used intentionally to dumb down

https://www.bitchute.com/video/HHVTn69ffgeh/


So, there you have it, people, the evidence above is the ultimate proof one needs to know that “idiocracies”, even if they are not completely so, are real; about that, that's all I have.

And for those who want to know which products contain fluoride in them to avoid its consumption, below are links to some websites that provide such information:

Nutrient Ranking Tool – MyFoodData

https://tools.myfooddata.com/nutrient-ranking-tool/Fluoride/All/Highest

Foods Highest In Fluoride List - FoodNutri

https://foodnutri.com/foods-highest-in-fluoride-list

Largest List Of Foods That Contain Fluoride (Search 503+ Foods) - Truth About Fluoride

https://truthaboutfluoride.com/foods-that-contain-fluoride/

Products Containing Sodium Fluoride - EWG

https://www.ewg.org/skindeep/browse/ingredients/706065-sodium_fluoride/


Well, people, with this we come to the end of this topic, and to finish with this, I can only say one last thing, in the way of a recommendation, and that is.... never give a human being, especially a child or a pregnant woman, things that contain fluoride! Period!

(Ahem.) Okay, that's all for today. I hope everyone found this journal interesting and informative, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings and have a nice day/night to all of you.

Hello, everyone. Continuing with the schedule, here is a new topic for today, which will be divided into two parts, and I am sure many of you have an idea of what it will be about, so I will let each of you draw your own conclusions. And in case anyone is wondering, yes, it is necessary to discuss this topic because some of the following journals will deal with issues related to what is happening in the societies of the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and probably other countries as well, either directly or indirectly, which cannot be ignored; sorry for that.

But first, below I will include some disclaimers for everyone's consideration:

Disclaimer 1: Any act of denial and refutation against any data, statements and proof mentioned or presented in this journal based on mentions, suggestions or uses of information sources coming from and/or promoted by hegemonic media (US, UK and others), social media, Wikipedia (including variations thereof as well), Fact Checkers and any entity pertaining to and/or related to the oligarchy, may be ignored and/or taken with great skepticism by any reader, in case he/she so desires. The reasons are based on the absence of credible, reliable and/or truthful information, whether in part or in whole, from the aforementioned sources/entities/groups/organizations due to many of the controversies and/or scandals associated with them.

Disclaimer 2: The use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" per se, or similar to that, which is linked to what it means in the entertainment media and/or the hegemonic media as a primary method of denial and/or disapproval of the content of this note, as well as the sources attached to it, will not be taken as truthful either.

Disclaimer 3: The owner of this journal doesn't have any kind of personal adherence (personal/selfish reasons), contractual (legal reasons) or constitutional (constitutional reasons) with political figures, political parties, social organizations/entities and/or countries/nations based on the use of political agendas and/or any kind of activism that causes damage to material goods, the environment and/or towards other human beings (whether physical or psychological) for any reason that is considered unjustified after being first analyzed based on reason and ethics, with the sample or presence of compelling evidence corresponding to the cases mentioned above. The rejection of such agendas and/or activism will be even higher and forceful in cases that imply going against human nature in terms of any harm, deprivation, destruction and deterioration of the individuality of the human being and/or any society composed of human beings for unjustifiable reasons.


To get straight to the point, today's topic is about how society in the United States, and related countries, closely resembles what is depicted in the film “Idiocracy.” To provide a clear understanding of the film's content, I will share one of the best reviews I found on IMDb, which summarizes everything one needs to know about it.

“"Idiocracy," a satirical masterpiece by Mike Judge, is a film that was truly ahead of its time. Released in 2006, its portrayal of a future society plagued by anti-intellectualism, rampant consumerism, and a general decline in critical thinking skills seemed like a far-fetched exaggeration. However, watching it today, the film's satirical commentary feels eerily prophetic and uncomfortably close to reality.

In an age where misinformation spreads like wildfire on social media, and political discourse often devolves into name-calling and ad hominem attacks, "Idiocracy" hits uncomfortably close to home. The film's portrayal of a society where entertainment and spectacle are valued over knowledge and critical thinking serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of apathy and intellectual laziness.”
malik-khalid-ejaz ~ IMDb user-reviewer

Now, to answer the question posed in this topic, today I have two videos to share, one main video and one supplementary video, which will be very helpful in this case. The first video (the main one), made by Upper Echelon, will explain the relationship between the movie “Idiocracy” and the society in the United States, and related countries too, in terms of idiocy and related topics, through a well-structured analysis with reasonable and sound arguments, which is backed up by solid evidence, by the way.

The second video (the complementary one), made by Vanessa Wingårdh, on the other hand, will focus on the relationship between people's idiocy and their misuse of self-learning algorithms and social media in more detail. In addition, similar to the main video, it is backed by solid evidence, with reasonable and sensible arguments, and is well made overall.

So, without further ado, here are the videos, sorted by relevance, with their respective titles and links:

Main video: “Idiocracy is Becoming Real”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtDWDWY_7Bc

Supplementary video: “ChatGPT Brain Rot Is Real (And Getting Worse)”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aVRQDKJ9Dg


Regarding the information shown in the videos above, there is not much to add on my part, except that those who say that “Idiocracy” is a documentary and/or that the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, especially the former, are on their way to becoming dystopias like the one portrayed in that movie, or similar, are very, very wrong; it is much worse than that in fact. The countries mentioned in the previous sentence are not only already dystopias, but have been for many years, and, even worse, none of them present a future as optimistic as that of the film, not at all.

And to put it simply and directly, so that most people understand what I am talking about here, I will give you as an example, an approximation and an explanation of what kind of dystopias the countries mentioned in the paragraph above actually are:

• Countries of the United Kingdom → “1984” + Demolition Man + “Blade Runner” + [Great Britain - “Idiocracy”] + [Great Britain - “Psycho-Pass”]
• United States → “1984” + Demolition Man + “Idiocracy” + “Blade Runner”
• Australia → “1984” + Demolition Man + “Idiocracy” + “Blade Runner”


That's all I have for today regarding the first part of this topic; the next part, part 2, will only be to add additional material, as evidence, as well as other things, to confirm, reaffirm, and, in a way, refute just a little bit of what was mentioned in the videos above, in this part. As for the film itself, I can only say that it's quite funny, that the social commentary in it is quite well done, and that it's a must-see for lovers of good comedy and science fiction in general. So, yes, I highly recommend the film; it's well worth it.

Okay, I hope everyone found this journal interesting and informative, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings and have a nice day/night to all of you.

Hello everyone. Today I bring you more music of STARSET, 2 YouTube videos in this case, one as an official visualizer and the other as an official music video. Here are the titles of the videos and the links to said videos about those songs:

STARSET - SILOS (Official Visualizer)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eS3Z-jcYs4k

STARSET - SILOS (Official Music Video)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=596KxKwW6fY

In case someone wants to buy said song, here is the link to bandcamp where they can find it:

https://starset.bandcamp.com/track/silos

I hope those music videos have been to your liking and, with nothing more to say, see you another time with more songs. Greetings to all. :3

Hello everyone. Today I bring you more music of Black Gryph0n, featuring Baasik, as an animated music video, about the videogame Five Nights at Freddy's: Secret of the Mimic, on YouTube. Here is the title of the song and the link to said video about that new song:

VOICES (A FNAF Song) - Black Gryph0n & Baasik

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSWcrKoIKzE

I hope that the song has been to your liking and, with nothing more to say, see you another time with more songs. Greetings to all. :3

Hello everyone, and welcome to “part 4,” i.e., the bonus content for this topic. But before I begin, especially for those who may need information, context, and/or precautions regarding the content of this part, below I will provide, separately, two sections: one with the previous parts, and another with the disclaimers.

---

Previous parts about this topic

Part 1: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11179469/

Part 2: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11181129/

Part 3: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11182965/

Disclaimers

1. Any act of denial and refutation against any data, statements and proof mentioned or presented in this journal based on mentions, suggestions or uses of information sources coming from and/or promoted by hegemonic media (US, UK and others), social media, Wikipedia (including variations thereof as well), Fact Checkers and any entity pertaining to and/or related to the oligarchy, may be ignored and/or taken with great skepticism by any reader, in case he/she so desires. The reasons are based on the absence of credible, reliable and/or truthful information, whether in part or in whole, from the aforementioned sources/entities/groups/organizations due to many of the controversies and/or scandals associated with them.

2. The use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" per se, or similar to that, which is linked to what it means in the entertainment media and/or the hegemonic media as a primary method of denial and/or disapproval of the content of this note, as well as the sources attached to it, will not be taken as truthful either.

3. The owner of this journal doesn't have any kind of personal adherence (personal/selfish reasons), contractual (legal reasons) or constitutional (constitutional reasons) with political figures, political parties, social organizations/entities and/or countries/nations based on the use of political agendas and/or any kind of activism that causes damage to material goods, the environment and/or towards other human beings (whether physical or psychological) for any reason that is considered unjustified after being first analyzed based on reason and ethics, with the sample or presence of compelling evidence corresponding to the cases mentioned above. The rejection of such agendas and/or activism will be even higher and forceful in cases that imply going against human nature in terms of any harm, deprivation, destruction and deterioration of the individuality of the human being and/or any society composed of human beings for unjustifiable reasons.

---

That said, and to get to the point, I will only say that the surprise is based on giving them Epstein's complete flight records, that is, the passenger list of those who went to Jeffrey Epstein's island, which dates from November 17, 1995, to August 19, 2015. But, before any of you lose your minds or anything, below I will provide several important clarifications/rules for everyone's discretion:

1. The owner of this publication, i.e., me, does not know/did not know and does not have/did not have any relationship of any kind with any of the people mentioned in the source shared in this journal.
2. The purpose of this journal is to share public information and nothing else.
3. The information shown/shared in this journal does not say, suggest, or imply, in any way that those mentioned in the information shared/shown here are offenders and/or criminals, based on what the law suggests, at all. The information displayed/shared here only states who went to that island and when, and nothing else. At best, the information shared/displayed here can be considered circumstantial evidence.
4. Any act of request or demand towards the owner of this publication, i.e. me, based on divulging or sharing additional information regarding the information shared/displayed here will be immediately ignored and denied.
5. The owner of this publication, i.e., me, advises any reader to read, or re-read as many times as necessary, the disclaimers in this journal in case there are any doubts or internal conflicts about the content of the journal with respect to the position of the journal's owner.


Having clarified all that, below I will leave them Epstein's complete flight records, with a link to the site containing that information:

Epstein's full flight logs - UNREDACTED

https://archive.org/details/epstein.....02304/mode/2up


So, there it is, folks; that would be the surprise... (ahem) I know that's not what some of you were hoping for, but the reality of the situation, is that I can't do any more than that. My recommendation, if anyone wants it, is to take that information and at least have something, while it's still available, since things have been pretty chaotic recently (date of publication of this diary); sorry for that.

Hmm, yeah, that's all for today. I hope everyone found this journal interesting and informative, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings and have a nice day/night to all of you.

---

Disclaimer 1: Any act of denial and refutation against any data, statements and proof mentioned or presented in this journal based on mentions, suggestions or uses of information sources coming from and/or promoted by hegemonic media (US, UK and others), social media, Wikipedia (including variations thereof as well), Fact Checkers and any entity pertaining to and/or related to the oligarchy, may be ignored and/or taken with great skepticism by any reader, in case he/she so desires. The reasons are based on the absence of credible, reliable and/or truthful information, whether in part or in whole, from the aforementioned sources/entities/groups/organizations due to many of the controversies and/or scandals associated with them.

Disclaimer 2: The use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" per se, or similar to that, which is linked to what it means in the entertainment media and/or the hegemonic media as a primary method of denial and/or disapproval of the content of this note, as well as the sources attached to it, will not be taken as truthful either.

Disclaimer 3: The owner of this journal doesn't have any kind of personal adherence (personal/selfish reasons), contractual (legal reasons) or constitutional (constitutional reasons) with political figures, political parties, social organizations/entities and/or countries/nations based on the use of political agendas and/or any kind of activism that causes damage to material goods, the environment and/or towards other human beings (whether physical or psychological) for any reason that is considered unjustified after being first analyzed based on reason and ethics, with the sample or presence of compelling evidence corresponding to the cases mentioned above. The rejection of such agendas and/or activism will be even higher and forceful in cases that imply going against human nature in terms of any harm, deprivation, destruction and deterioration of the individuality of the human being and/or any society composed of human beings for unjustifiable reasons.

---

To not waste time with formalities and recapitulations, even more when this journal is the third part of a rather long topic, I will put below the links of the previous parts for those who need to know what this topic is about, as well as the context of it:

Part 1: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11179469/

Part 2: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11181129/


Today's journal will be to talk about the incident/controversy that occurred on Twitter, two weeks ago (date of publication of this journal), following the commissioning of artificial intelligence (a real one by the way), known as Grok 4, for the “benefit” of the users of that platform. But as some of you may have already guessed, or did guess at the time, the activation of Grok 4, similarly to what happened with Tay in 2016 at the time, ended in a huge incident, as well as controversy. Not to mention, the problems caused by that artificial intelligence was even more so for some of the users on that platform, for those who work there, and for the owner of the platform as well (in this case, Elon Musk); that would come to be the summary of what happened at the time, by the way.

But before I begin, and with the purpose of to avoid as much as possible any kind of drama, confrontation and/or controversy, either as a direct or indirect result of the content of this part, especially for personal reasons, there will be mention below, in the form of multiple important clarifications/rules, in order to accomplish such goals. After saying that, below I will put, one by one, the clarifications/rules, of the above mentioned, for everyone's discretion here:

1. The information presented in this journal is the minimum, indispensable and necessary that one requires to understand the context surrounding the Grok 4 incident/controversy, and nothing more.
2. The information presented in this journal is not and was never intended to denigrate, insult and/or harass those involved in such incident/controversy, ever.
3. The owner of this publication, i.e., me, does not know or have any relationship of any kind with the persons mentioned in this journal.
4. Any act of request or demand towards the owner of this publication, i.e. me, based on divulging or sharing additional information from any of those involved in such incident-controversy, except as it relates to Grok, those working at Twitter and/or Elon Musk, will be immediately ignored and denied.
5. The owner of this publication, i.e., me, advises any reader to read, or re-read as many times as necessary, the disclaimers in this journal in case there are any doubts or internal conflicts about the content of the journal with respect to the position of the journal's owner.


Having said all that, and based on the above clarifications/rules, the Grok incident/controversy will be addressed by showing and explaining, in the most concise, simple and generic way possible, everything related to it. And with nothing more to add or clarify in this regard, I will now leave you with everything concerning the Grok incident/controversy:

Grok incident/controversy on Twitter (month of July 2025).

1. Elon Musk announces the launch of Grok 4 on Twitter for July 9.

Elon Musk confirms Grok 4 launch on July 9 with livestream event

https://elonbuzz.com/elon-musk-conf.....estream-event/

Grok 4 Launching Tomorrow, Musk Confirms

https://geekflare.com/news/grok-4-launching-tomorrow-musk-confirms/

2. Beginning of the incident/controversy; Grok 4 launch, July 9, 2025.

2.1. What the media showed about the incident.

Elon Musk's AI chatbot churns out antisemitic posts days after update

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/intern.....s-x-rcna217634

Grok’s Nazi turn is the latest in a long line of AI chatbots gone wrong

https://www.aol.co.uk/news/grok-nazi-turn-latest-long-195557523.html?guccounter=2

Extra “news” articles

Grok’s Antisemitic Meltdown Was Entirely Predictable

• https://jacobin.com/2025/07/grok-an.....-theories-musk
• https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/tech.....le/ar-AA1Imho9
• https://oneplanete.com/actualite-en-continu/groks-antisemitic-meltdown-was-entirely-predictable/

Note regarding the extra “news” articles: The articles mentioned here are to be used as evidence that duplicate news articles exist; not to be taken seriously.

2.2. What the media (almost) didn't show about the incident.

2.2.1. Grok 4 interacting with users on Twitter.

https://x.com/MaxNordau/status/1942712654373494930

2.2.2. Twitter users discover problematic user on that platform “thanks” to Grok 4.

1.1) https://x.com/MaxNordau/status/1942709878596018224

1.2) https://x.com/MaxNordau/status/1942938606781223205

2.1) https://archive.is/2025.07.09-005128/https://x.com/ifindretards/status/1942559449283191146

2.2) https://www.instagram.com/p/DL2rc2SJcHr/?img_index=1

3.1) https://x.com/Daniel_Foster_x/status/1942702106647109753

3.2) https://x.com/grok/status/1942702535787393395

4.1) https://x.com/JohnFerryMarin/status/1942703996202008787

4.2) https://x.com/grok/status/1942704555420180515

2.2.3. A particular user on Twitter finds out more about the problematic user on that platform, “thanks” to Grok 4 too.

1) https://x.com/SyntheSuccubus/status.....22955005551052

2) https://x.com/SyntheSuccubus/status.....34011120087045

2.2.4. Troubled user deletes multiple of his social media accounts after his encounter with Grok 4.

https://x.com/MaxNordau/status/1942723340780855477

3. End of incident/controversy; Grok 4 is shut down shortly after its activation, July 9, 2025.

X removes posts by Musk chatbot Grok after antisemitism complaints

https://www.reuters.com/technology/.....sm-2025-07-09/

X takes Grok offline, changes system prompts after more antisemitic outbursts

https://techcrunch.com/2025/07/09/x-takes-grok-offline-changes-system-prompts-after-more-antisemitic-outbursts/

4. Beginning of new Twitter controversy; Elon Musk launches new version of Grok 4 in the form of an anime-style girl, July 15, 2025.

Elon Musk Turns His AI Into a Flirty Anime Girlfriend

https://gizmodo.com/elon-musk-turns.....end-2000629273

Elon Musk's Grok launches Ani, an anime-inspired AI companion with a cheeky NSFW mode

https://community.designtaxi.com/to.....eky-nsfw-mode/

'Artificial Gooning Intelligence': Elon Musk's xAI Launches Waifu Companions for Grok

https://decrypt.co/330097/artificial-gooning-intelligence-elon-musk-xai-waifu-companions-grok

5. No more information available at the moment.


Warning: The news articles presented in this section still have medium levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information in general; reader discretion is advised.

---

Just to be clear, everything above is the minimum and indispensable one needs so as to understand the Grok incident/controversy on Twitter, which means that this is the end of the third, and last part of this topic as well. Yes, just as one read it, this is the end of the topic.

So, there this is it, people; the things that happened in those four weeks, from the beginning of the distraction/cover-up of the Epstein files, by Donald Trump's administration, and his accomplices, until today (date of publication of this journal), is contained in this part, and in the two previous ones as well (part 1 and part 2). And before closing this topic, I want to mention that there will be a fourth part as a bonus, as a surprise, which means that it is entirely optional by the way; that's all I have for today.

Well, I hope everyone found this topic interesting and informative, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings and have a nice day/night to all of you.

Hello everyone and welcome to the second part of this topic. As I can't waste time on recapitulations, as there is a lot to do, for the newbies, just below I will put the link to the journal of the first part (p1) for those who need to know what this topic is about, as well as the context of it:

Part 1: https://www.furaffinity.net/journal/11179469/


But first, I will leave some disclaimers below for everyone's discretion:

Disclaimer 1: Any act of denial and refutation against any data, statements and proof mentioned or presented in this journal based on mentions, suggestions or uses of information sources coming from and/or promoted by hegemonic media (US, UK and others), social media, Wikipedia (including variations thereof as well), Fact Checkers and any entity pertaining to and/or related to the oligarchy, may be ignored and/or taken with great skepticism by any reader, in case he/she so desires. The reasons are based on the absence of credible, reliable and/or truthful information, whether in part or in whole, from the aforementioned sources/entities/groups/organizations due to many of the controversies and/or scandals associated with them.

Disclaimer 2: The use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" per se, or similar to that, which is linked to what it means in the entertainment media and/or the hegemonic media as a primary method of denial and/or disapproval of the content of this note, as well as the sources attached to it, will not be taken as truthful either.

Disclaimer 3: The owner of this journal doesn't have any kind of personal adherence (personal/selfish reasons), contractual (legal reasons) or constitutional (constitutional reasons) with political figures, political parties, social organizations/entities and/or countries/nations based on the use of political agendas and/or any kind of activism that causes damage to material goods, the environment and/or towards other human beings (whether physical or psychological) for any reason that is considered unjustified after being first analyzed based on reason and ethics, with the sample or presence of compelling evidence corresponding to the cases mentioned above. The rejection of such agendas and/or activism will be even higher and forceful in cases that imply going against human nature in terms of any harm, deprivation, destruction and deterioration of the individuality of the human being and/or any society composed of human beings for unjustifiable reasons.


Now, for those of you who were wondering what other things happened in these two weeks (three in fact, at the time of publishing this journal) from what was mentioned and shown in the first part, don't worry about that, as today I have two news to share, which will be quite useful for this topic. But before I start, I want to clarify that the news for this topic are going to be in form of regular news articles, and not video-based, as in so many previous cases; sorry for that.

That said, the news in question has to do with the approval of the bill by the U.S. Senate (more than three weeks ago), and its repercussions for the citizens of said country in terms of health care and the economy, which are very bad news by the way. And as far as how to proceed with this, that would be addressing the news about the health care system first, and the news about the economy latter. So, with nothing more to clarify, let's get on with it.

About the news of the bill passed in July, 2025, and the way it affects the U.S. health care system

How the “One Big, Beautiful Bill” Targets Medicare and Medicaid

https://govfacts.org/explainer/how-.....-and-medicaid/

Fragments highlighted from the news above:

1- “The 940-page law fundamentally changes how Medicare and Medicaid work, affecting more than 130 million Americans who rely on these programs. There’s a gap between what supporters promised and what budget experts say will actually happen.”

2- “The biggest change requires most adults under 65 who got Medicaid through Obamacare expansion to work, train, or volunteer for at least 80 hours per month. Miss the requirement, and you lose your health coverage.”

3- “The policy hits hardest on the 2.6 million adults with disabilities who get Medicaid but don’t qualify for federal disability benefits. These people often can’t work consistently due to health problems, but they’re not automatically exempt from the work requirement.”

Warning 1: The fragments quoted above are from a source, which may still have low levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; reader discretion is advised.


Arguments and opinions regarding this news article:

In terms of abuse of authority and transgressions of any kind by any U.S. government towards their citizens, as in the case mentioned in the news article above, I have very little to say about it that I haven't done in cases before this one, across multiple newspapers.

About this particular news article, on the other hand, all I can do is to point out what one shouldn't lose sight about all of this, i.e., what is underlined by me in those fragments. But, if I were to add one more thing about it, which would be without offense by the way, it would be that, the vast majority of citizens in that country, from now on, are going to have to deal with all of that while “ play on Nightmare! difficulty instead of Ultra-Violence difficulty”; just saying.


About the news of the bill passed in July, 2025, and the way it affects the U.S. economy

Senate Bill Would Add at Least $3.3 Trillion to Debt, Budget Office Says

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/29/.....core-debt.html

Fragments highlighted from the news above:

1- “The sprawling tax and health care bill that Senate Republicans are trying to pass would add at least $3.3 trillion to the already-bulging national debt over a decade, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said on Sunday, putting a far higher price tag on the measure than some of the party’s fiscal hawks had indicated they could stomach.”

2- “With roughly $29 trillion in debt currently held by the public, the budget office had already expected the government to borrow another $21 trillion over the next decade, meaning the Republican bill would make an already-dire fiscal forecast worse. And the initial estimate of a cost of $3.3 trillion for the Senate bill is an undercount, because it does not include additional borrowing costs which could push the bill’s overall addition to the debt closer to $4 trillion.”

3- “Republicans* are using a special process, called reconciliation, to steer past “Democratic opposition” in the Senate. Reconciliation imposes a number of additional rules on lawmakers, though, including that they cannot add to the debt in the long-term. Waving away the cost of the 2017 tax cuts would allow Republicans* to make them permanent while still technically conforming to the Senate’s rules.”

Note about the third fragment (paragraph in italics): For anyone reading said fragment, especially for what is underlined in it, it is advisable to reread it, while replacing the words with an asterisk (*), in this case, the word “Republicans”, with the words “Democratic Party Collaborators”; more context later.

Warning 2: The fragments quoted above are from a source, which has medium levels of inaccurate and/or misleading information; reader discretion is advised.


Arguments and opinions regarding this news article:

In a similar manner as I had commented and opined regarding the above news article, I have very little to say about it, as the most important things one needs to know about the U.S. debt have already been covered in previous journals. Basically, everything I underlined, in the fragments quoted above, is what one needs to know with respect to that news article.

Also, for those who are wondering, why the third fragment of that news article was marked in the way it is seen there, and with that accompanying note, the answer is quite simple and obvious in fact. And the answer to that... is based... on the enormous... unequivocal... fact... that the vast majority... of the Democratic Party members (politicians)... of the United States... *breath* remained almost completely silent... *breath* when all that was going on... *deep breath* while the news media covered their asses as well... *large deep breath* Hmm, yeah, I think it's due to that.

Oh, it's that, and the huge fact that the Democratic Party, from that time to this day (date of publication of this journal), continues in silent mode, even when Donald Trump, and his administration, distracts the general public with their nonsense, while he mocks the entire planet with the cover-up of the Epstein files, and more...! Sooo, I think that counts too.


Ahem. So, yeah, that's all I have for today, which means that this is the end of part 2. Part 3, on the other hand, will be with the purpose of covering a particular incident/controversy that occurred on Twitter almost two weeks ago; that's the only hint I can give you of what's to come.

Alright, I hope everyone found this journal interesting and informative, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings to all and have a nice day/night to all of you.

Hello everyone. Because in these last two weeks many things were, or still are, going on, which were, or continue to be, ignored by the general public (depending on when this diary is published) because of the use of highly effective and misleading distraction tactics, without irony, made by Donald Trump (current president of the United States), his associates, the Democratic Party (as odd as it may sound to some) and most of the news media (especially those belonging to hegemonic media).

And for those who want to know, yes, the distraction tactics have to do with the multiple announcements, made by the Trump administration, of the “supposed” release of the Epstein files, which, predictably, ended up being an act of distraction-cover-up in itself as well. However, because this topic will be longer as in regular cases, it will be divided into several parts; please, keep that in mind everyone.

But before I get to the first part of this topic, as is almost always the case, I'll leave some disclaimers below at everyone's discretion:

Disclaimer 1: Any act of denial and refutation against any data, statements and proof mentioned or presented in this journal based on mentions, suggestions or uses of information sources coming from and/or promoted by hegemonic media (US, UK and others), social media, Wikipedia (including variations thereof as well), Fact Checkers and any entity pertaining to and/or related to the oligarchy, may be ignored and/or taken with great skepticism by any reader, in case he/she so desires. The reasons are based on the absence of credible, reliable and/or truthful information, whether in part or in whole, from the aforementioned sources/entities/groups/organizations due to many of the controversies and/or scandals associated with them.

Disclaimer 2: The use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" per se, or similar to that, which is linked to what it means in the entertainment media and/or the hegemonic media as a primary method of denial and/or disapproval of the content of this note, as well as the sources attached to it, will not be taken as truthful either.

Disclaimer 3: The owner of this journal doesn't have any kind of personal adherence (personal/selfish reasons), contractual (legal reasons) or constitutional (constitutional reasons) with political figures, political parties, social organizations/entities and/or countries/nations based on the use of political agendas and/or any kind of activism that causes damage to material goods, the environment and/or towards other human beings (whether physical or psychological) for any reason that is considered unjustified after being first analyzed based on reason and ethics, with the sample or presence of compelling evidence corresponding to the cases mentioned above. The rejection of such agendas and/or activism will be even higher and forceful in cases that imply going against human nature in terms of any harm, deprivation, destruction and deterioration of the individuality of the human being and/or any society composed of human beings for unjustifiable reasons.


That being said, the first part of this topic will be to cover the basics of the scandal of the “supposed” release of the Epstein files during the Trump administration, and everything related to it. And to do just that, below I will leave to everyone with several short videos made by Coffeezilla, sorted by publication date and number, with their respective title and link to said video:

1) The very first costumed superhero got a pulpy new beat 'em up! - The Phantom

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUvWTro5BiE

2) white house responds to missing epstein footage

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKMXIlM6dZs

3) the story keeps changing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gbf6C5XWK7w&rco=1

4) the worst coverup of my lifetime

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyZA2KKmRXw

5) "raw" epstein footage was modified

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZUg5E8ctaM

Note: In order to avoid unnecessary confusion and/or frustration, it is recommended to watch the videos in the sequence presented above.


Now, for those who expect me to say something (about) the content of each one of the Coffeezilla videos (presented above in the journal), I have some bad news about that; it's not going to happen. Instead, what I'm going to do is to use just one and only one of the clips from just one of the Coffeezilla videos to prove that what I said in the first two paragraphs of this journal (at the top), is a quite realistic fact for sure.

Why do it that way, some may ask. Simple, because that's all I need to throw out any opinion or argument one has, or one may come up with, as an excuse with the purpose(s) of deflecting, nitiating, exculpating and/or justifying what was done by the Trump administration surrounding the release of the Epstein files to the general public; nothing personal by the way.

That said, the video I choose is the one called “white house responds to missing epstein footage”, the second (2) in the list of videos above. And the clip in question, would be everything between minute 0:12 and minute 0:53 respectively.

For this case, the procedure to follow is not so complicated since it is based on pointing out, analyzing and explaining separately the things that most people did not notice or see (about) the clip corresponding to the video I selected. And without anything to add about it, just below, I will begin to expose my points of this case:

Things that people, for the most part, did not notice or see (about) from the “white house responds to missing epstein footage” video (between 0:12 and 0:53 respectively):

1) The fact that one cannot see the face of the woman asking questions to Donald Trump, and his entourage, while everything was being recorded with a camera. And I say that because seeing the reactions of that person, at the same time she was asking Donald Trump questions, would have been useful to get information from her through her body language. A minor issue, but it was fair to point it out anyway.

2) The fact that Donald Trump agreed to be recorded with a camera to then “pretend” to answer questions about the Epstein files scandal, i.e., execute his ridiculous and painfully distracting act, to the general public. Yes, a pretty obvious issue, I know, but it was fair to point it out too.

3) The fact that U.S. Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, seemed extremely relaxed, indifferent and stoic, almost without looking directly into the camera, during the whole procedure. Even more curious, when one takes into account that he was able to maintain such behavior even when his boss “made his move”, which is quite remarkable since he knew there was going to be a camera recording in that place.

4) The fact that the US Attorney General (Donald Trump's administration), Pam Bondi (I think that's her name), agreed to be recorded with a camera, to then show practically no sign of fear or concern, at the moment her boss was executing his "distraction maneuver", so to speak. Which is even worse, since, when one observes her body language, one sees that at the beginning of such a maneuver she seemed happy for a few moments, even to the point of smiling briefly (minute 0:24), to act unconcerned and (almost) stoic after that. Clarifying that all that I said before, happened while, in a subtle way, she avoided looking directly into the camera.

5) And finally, to put it in a serious way, and without any kind of irony and ridiculousness, there is the fact that I could detect practically almost no trace of stupidity in the behavior of those involved in such a maneuver (including Donald Trump, sadly). Which makes a lot of sense when one takes into account that deceits with such a degree of complexity, or similar, clearly require the executors to have a sufficient level of self-control and intelligence to understand, follow and execute the instructions and commands one receives for such ends; even more so if such instructions and commands come from “people above one”, so to speak.


There you have it, folks; all the arguments I made above, about the piece of footage I chose as an example, from point 1 to 5, especially for what is underlined, is the additional evidence you need that the supposed release of the Epstein files, during the Trump administration, was not only an act of cover-up ( as silly, cruel and evil as it was), but a huge act of distraction as well. However, because I understand the way human beings act in general, I am almost certain that some of my readers must have doubts about one of my arguments; in this case, the argument contained in the paragraph corresponding to point 5, for which I am prepared as well.

And for those people, I want to clarify that, my argument in the point 5, was not and never was with the purpose of stating or suggesting that those who appear in that piece of footage were geniuses and/or masters of crime, when it is obvious that they never were to begin with. My point, actually, was to emphasize, as well as briefly explain, that I never expected anything remarkable or impressive, in terms of human intelligence of course, from any of those involved in such a distracting maneuver in the first place; that's what I really wanted to communicate.


So, yeah, that would be all I have to show and say in this first part. In the next journal, it will explore, in more detail, what other things happened during, or in between, these two weeks. And for those of you wondering why I made no mention of the Democratic Party in this part, don't worry about that, as in the following parts, I plan to talk about them as well; believe that!

Well, that's all for today, I hope everyone found this journal interesting and informative, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconveniences caused, until next time, greetings to all and have a nice day/night to all of you.

Hello everyone. Today I bring you more music of CG5, as an animated music video, about the videogame Five Nights at Freddy's: Secret of the Mimic, on YouTube. Here is the title of the song and the link to said video about that new song:

CG5 - Imitation (FNAF Secret of the Mimic Song Animation)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIGrp0JRXYQ

I hope that the song has been to your liking and, with nothing more to say, see you another time with more songs. Greetings to all. :3

Hello everyone. Because we are in the middle of a Third World War, to put it in a vague way and gently, today's journal is for four main purposes:

1. Present solid evidence that proves that the motives for the wars in the Middle East were complete nonsense from the very beginning.
2. To debunk every deceit committed by any news media, whether it is part of a hegemonic media or not, and to disprove those who fell for such deceits as well.
3. To alert and inform anyone who reads this journal entry, as much as possible, of what is really going on in the Middle East to not be caught and/or deceived by those who caused such things.
4. To give good news and bad news to anyone who reads this journal, based on the evidence presented here, especially the former.


But before I show you the information I found about this topic, especially since it is controversial, I will leave some disclaimers below at everyone's discretion:

Disclaimer 1: Any act of denial and refutation against any data, statements and proof mentioned or presented in this journal based on mentions, suggestions or uses of information sources coming from and/or promoted by hegemonic media (US, UK and others), social media, Wikipedia (including variations thereof as well), Fact Checkers and any entity pertaining to and/or related to the oligarchy, may be ignored and/or taken with great skepticism by any reader, in case he/she so desires. The reasons are based on the absence of credible, reliable and/or truthful information, whether in part or in whole, from the aforementioned sources/entities/groups/organizations due to many of the controversies and/or scandals associated with them.

Disclaimer 2: The use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" per se, or similar to that, which is linked to what it means in the entertainment media and/or the hegemonic media as a primary method of denial and/or disapproval of the content of this note, as well as the sources attached to it, will not be taken as truthful either.

Disclaimer 3: The owner of this journal doesn't have any kind of personal adherence (personal/selfish reasons), contractual (legal reasons) or constitutional (constitutional reasons) with political figures, political parties, social organizations/entities and/or countries/nations based on the use of political agendas and/or any kind of activism that causes damage to material goods, the environment and/or towards other human beings (whether physical or psychological) for any reason that is considered unjustified after being first analyzed based on reason and ethics, with the sample or presence of compelling evidence corresponding to the cases mentioned above. The rejection of such agendas and/or activism will be even higher and forceful in cases that imply going against human nature in terms of any harm, deprivation, destruction and deterioration of the individuality of the human being and/or any society composed of human beings for unjustifiable reasons.


Okay, back to the topic, below I will leave you all not one but two videos made by reallygraceful on YouTube. Yes, you read that right, two videos instead of one; the first video is 19 minutes and 42 seconds long, and the second one is 8 minutes and 10 seconds long). But don't worry, people, it's not much really; those who want to watch these videos can take their time. That said, here are the videos with their respective title and link to said video:

What the Media Won't Tell You: Iran

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dJJqB8xCN0

How Many Times Will Americans Be Fooled?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPmThAGQFXU

---

Links to some of the web sites and/or videos related to the sources mentioned in the reallygraceful videos above:

“Seven Countries in Five Years” (2007) - General Wesley Clark

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eo6u9DpASp8
• https://tonyseymour.substack.com/p/.....n-countries-in
• https://genius.com/General-wesley-clark-seven-countries-in-five-years-annotated

Benjamin Netanyahu's statements on the wars in the Middle East and related

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_PDpwL8kuY
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMDRGxppPSE
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mzmtdwsef8s
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8chkBGYB5Cc

Donald Trump saying, “God bless the Middle East, God bless Israel and God bless America” (2025), and related

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZfkT6p71k0
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-pU7Euh07g

"The War in Iraq was a Big, Fat Mistake" - Donald Trump

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whX35NKthQw

Definitions of the word semite from multiple dictionaries

• https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Semite
• https://www.collinsdictionary.com/e...../ingles/semite
• https://www.etymonline.com/word/Semite

Important note: The definitions that link, or relate, its meaning to a single particular group, and/or to the words “antisemite” or “antisemitism” in the links above, are kind of inaccurate; caution and discretion are advised.

---

Question and answer section for anyone who has read the content of this journal and/or watched the videos in it, with the purpose of clarifying several of the doubts of this topic, and related to this one:

1- Many already know who makes these wars, as well as how and why many of them end up happening, was it necessary to make a topic like this?

Extra information is always a good thing, even more so because of the way the media operates with respect to these things, so yes, it was necessary to do so.

2- Was there any possibility of not talking about this topic in the first place?

No, today's topic was necessary and unavoidable since it became part of my new schedule. Besides, what I said as an answer in the first question counts as an excuse to talk about the subject. Sorry.

3- The media speak against the war almost all the time as well, is it necessary to take them into account in this particular case? Or do the opposite of what they say?

What the media wants, or don't want, is unimportant; it only matters that they give accurate, unbiased and objective information of what is happening in the real world, without making omissions and/or acts of deceit of any kind, which almost never happens, unfortunately.

And regarding the other question, no, one should not and should never do the exact opposite of what others do, (be it on a verbal or task basis), as a first choice, since it is idiotic, irresponsible and, possibly, counterproductive to oneself, or others, too.

4- Wait, are you saying one should forgive or validate those who are in favor of news media? Or those who are against them anyway?

Not unless one wants to, although that will depend on the circumstances one faces, which is not up to me. Put it another way, everything that is in answer to question 3, does not say or suggest that one has to defend, excuse, forgive and/or validate other people or groups regardless of whether they are, or have been, right about anything; only acknowledge what is true, even if one doesn't like it.

5- What happens if one chooses to be on a particular side? What was said in question 4 can be applied to cases like that as well?

If there is no good reason to join a particular side, especially if one is not sure of the intentions and/or capabilities of the person or group one wants to join, it is best not to do so in the first place. However, if one intends to take action based on what is mentioned in the answer to question 4, it would be wisest to do so from the side to which one belongs as an individual, i.e., your side; I can only say that.

6- Considering the topic of this journal, do you plan to make more journals in the future about other wars as well?

Once I post this journal, I will put this topic aside, as I sometimes do with certain topics, to devote my attention to other topics, so the answer is no. Also, if there are not interesting, solid and/or important motives to bring me back to a particular topic, I don't usually bother to do it in the first place; that's my answer.

7- Aren't you worried that this topic will be considered antisemite by some people?

For those who don't know the actual definition of the word semite, I guess they do. But today, most people in the world, regardless of what the US, and allied countries, consider right or not, know the actual meaning of that word, through reliable sources, like dictionaries for example, and not just Wikipedia, so I don't think that's going to be a serious problem for me.

Please do not misunderstand me, in the past, I am quite sure that making a journal such as this would have been considered taboo by many, either by those responsible for fomenting such wars, or by anyone who is, or has been, in favor of them, to the point of posing a grave risk to anyone against such beliefs, including myself. But, this is a new age, and people must go on, whether they want to or not, it has always been since ancient times; that is the reality here.

And I also want to clarify that everything mentioned in the two previous paragraphs was never an expression of desire on my part, precisely; it is reality that it says so. And reality isn't on anyone's side, never was, and never will be, no matter how much one may believe so, and that is the truth.

8- At the beginning, it was made clear that one of the purposes of this journal was to give good news and bad news. If that's the case, what would be the good news? And what would be the bad news?

Hmm, in terms of good news and bad news, to put it in a way, I guess it would be everything that is in question 8 as an answer. What one considers to be good news or bad news, based on the above, will depend on one's judgment; there is nothing more to add in this regard.

9- If you had to choose a side in this whole Middle East wars issue, which side would you choose? And why?

Sorry, but there is already an answer for that, and it is what is stated in the third disclaimer (3) almost at the beginning of the journal, much higher up.

---

* deep breath *


Okay, that's all I have for today, I hope everyone found this journal interesting and informative, or at least I hope so, and with nothing more to add, I can only say: sorry for the inconvenience caused, until next time, greetings to all and have a nice day/night.

Hello everyone. Today I bring you more music of Black Gryph0n, featuring Baasik, as an animated music video, about the videogame Poppy Playtime: Chapter 4, on YouTube. Here is the title of the song and the link to said video about that new song:

SAFE HAVEN (Animated Music Video) - Black Gryph0n & Baasik

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBXzSnilj7s

I hope that the song has been to your liking and, with nothing more to say, see you another time with more songs. Greetings to all. :3

Hello everyone. Today I bring you more music of JT Music on YouTube. Here is the title of the song and the link to said video about that new song:

DOOM THE DARK AGES RAP by JT Music - "Dawn of the Damned"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu-PiFTTbD0

I hope that the song has been to your liking and, with nothing more to say, see you another time with more songs. Greetings to all. :3

Hello everyone. Today I bring you more music of LittleVMills, about the videogame Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, on YouTube. Here is the title of the song and the link to said video about that new song:

Lumière - Metal Cover by Little V (Clair Obscur: Expedition 33)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpBG0TA76TQ

I hope that the song has been to your liking and, with nothing more to say, see you another time with more songs. Greetings to all. :3