Misery, suffering or despair, you can only pick one!

Anti-Police Democrat Attacks NYPD at Anti-ICE Protest – Then Goes on CNN and Plays Victim
October 10, 2026

□ [“Trump Announces Major Diesel Agreement with Russia After Latest Phone Call with Putin"]

Now we're up to something that doesn't look good on any side.  I don't get why we'd need or want Russian oil when we already have other sources.  I'd rather they not ship it over the Arctic so that leaves the Pacific or Europe.  The Pacific might be the least-bad of the options but Europe still needs oil.  If we're cutting them off, that means Europe is in a much much worse situation than we expected, to the point where Russia invading might be the best option there.

Then there's Russia's side of it, they already have plenty of customers, especially China.  They could suck up to Trump for a couple years but I don't see any large benefits from that which they couldn't get elsewhere.  It seems like a big deal with no real upside to anyone except maybe the investors in the oil companies.  Now Ukraine has reportedly bombed an oil terminal in the Black Sea which was part of the deal.

It's a legitimate target but it doesn't do anything to stop the invaders or help Ukraine which is the point of fighting a war.  They also hit the terminal in July when the deal was presumably being negotiated.  Then there's the fact that we have to assume all this is true.  Any part of it could be fiction and there are reasons it could be a lie from Russia, Ukraine, Trump or any other party.  Trump's already attacked Zelensky for this and says Ukraine needs a new president.  Which they do but he's not giving up power so there you go.

Maybe the deal is a sham to sucker Zelensky into this somehow.  That's the closest I can get to a relevant point to any of this and it still only leads vague speculation.  Russia works with Trump against China, Ukraine can't get any help from Europe, ok, so what?  I've been going through my coverage of the war for the last four years and it's clearly a center-point of the globalist agenda but even that is still unclear as far as what they're doing or why.  They funneled a lot of foreign aid money for this war but we don't know who got it and Trump making an oil deal with Russia won't improve the situation.

Maricopa County Employees Using Flash Drives on Certified Election Equipment Before Election Day
October 10, 2026

□ [“Pope Leo XIV Declares Death Penalty 'Inadmissible' as US Prepares to Execute Fort Hood Jihadist"]

In case you needed another reason to support the death penalty.  I mostly support it but there are valid reasons to disagree and even more reasons to assume it's being used improperly.  My main point is that it must be immediate, no torture.  If you're dead in five seconds, the pain isn't much of a problem.  If it takes a minute or two, or longer, that's wrong and any government that pushes it should be overthrown.  It's not about the criminal being punished, it's about the state doing the punishing.

Nidal Malik Hasan was one of those Muslims who went bonkers for Obama, killing 13 soldiers and wounding 32 others at Fort Hood in November 2009.  This is one of those things where I wouldn't even see the death penalty as an option, why wasn't he just shot on sight?  'You did this?  You're dead.'  BANG  It's a f*cking military base and the war was still very-ongoing under Obama.

The execution is going to be broadcast live on December 3.  Here's your chance to actually watch someone die.  No idea if I'll watch it live but I'm sure I'll see the footage soon after.  The point being made is that this will happen to you if you do things like this.  It's supposed to be unsettling so that's understandable.  The US doesn't do things like this so the novelty is making it a bigger deal than it should be, that's probably my main problem here.  If it happened at least a few times a year, more murderers being executed, this wouldn't be that big of a deal.  The fundamental argument against the government ordering your death will never go away and it never should.

Nine People Killed in Shooting in Erie, Pennsylvania – Shooter Among Dead
October 10, 2026

□ [“Trump Files Supreme Court Petition to Revive RICO Lawsuit Against Hillary Clinton, James Comey, Russia Hoax Cabal"]

You know you're getting old when you realize how long it's been since you've given any thought to stuff you used to pay close attention to.  It's been ten years since the Russia hoax.  A suit like this was always a problem because it looks like political retaliation, there's just no way it can't look like that.  There's also the statute of limitations - and why the f*ck do they have things like that on cases like this? - but Trump has about the best argument imaginable, he was busy serving as POTUS to file it earlier.  But that hasn't worked in lower courts which is why he's asking the SCOTUS.

I assume they'll reject it just because they can.  They've agreed with Trump more than I'd expected with the usual 6-3 verdicts but they can always find an exception so here it is.  Then we'll have to relive that flood of material we'd all forgotten about.  In theory it's possible that the last decade of revelations have changed things and a lot more people are willing to look into this.  But it's also possible monkeys might fly out of my butt.

Even if by some miracle the SCOTUS actually agrees to hear this, nothing's going to happen.  There's a convenient list of all the horrific things of the last decade that's been investigated and not a single person gets punished for.  Hunter Biden's laptop, Dr. Fauci making bioweapons with China, Hillary's insecure private server, the Epstein files, just to name a few.  Despite everything else he's done, Trump will always be considered a failure in some ways simply for promising all these revelations.  We're halfway through his second term and still haven't gotten any of that.  But the SCOTUS will reject this hearing anyway so never mind.

ABC News Spreads Lies About Trump’s Sons — Quietly Deletes Hit Piece Without Retraction or Apology
October 10, 2026

□ [“Nobel Peace Prize Goes to Former UN Human Rights Chief Who Hates Israel"]

I hadn't even noticed, I thought it would be a few more months before the announcement.  I guess I really thought they'd just go for the obvious and give it to Trump but apparently not.  This South African seems to self-identify is female but could pick any gender and no one would notice a difference.  I haven't even seen an announcement of the prize, only complaints about it - I'm taking the above news headline from an article about the complaints - so I have no clue what... she... is getting one.

Her wikipedia page says she's been part of the UN for over thirty years and her accomplishments include the claim that rape is genocide, which it's not, and to blame the media.  She did both of these regarding Rwanda in the 90s.  She's spent the last decade or so attacking Israel and the Nobel citation mentions actually no achievements in the last year.  It does point out that wars and conflicts are increasing and international law is being attacked so that's all the justification this "peace prize" needs.

That's not really a reason for a Nobel prize.  This is going to make Obama and Arafat's awards look like a good idea by comparison.  It's all about pushing globalism and the hatred of Jews, which is always linked for some reason but it just lowers the standards so much that it's all laughable.  I don't remember the details, probably anti-Israel, but the year after giving Obama the award, the committee made a point of realizing that they needed to find someone who actually did something to earn the prize.  They're not going to do that this time.  The Nobel is now effectively irrelevant permanently, all because Trump wanted one.  If peace means giving Trump an award, you'd rather have war.  So here you go.

Man Mauled to Death by Tiger After Jumping Into Enclosure at UK Zoo
October 10, 2026