Uncensored Free Speech Platform

‘The invisible man’: Joe Biden has disappeared in almost every way – except in Trump’s daily commentary
This affects the entire country.

The article portrays Joe Biden's legacy as largely erased and overshadowed in Donald Trump's second term. Biden assumed the presidency unable to keep up with the demands of the office, but supporters and media spent years ignoring his physical and mental decline anyway, which led to his "ill-starred 11th-hour abdication" after a disastrous debate performance against Trump. His withdrawal from re-election was followed quickly by Kamala Harris's defeat.
Now largely "the invisible man," Biden has faded from public view with few appearances. Theoretically, he's focusing on a memoir and library plans amid complete disinterest from donors and the reading public. Trump relentlessly blames him as a foil for national woes, mocking him daily as "Crooked Joe" or "Sleepy Joe," while dismantling Biden-era policies on climate, immigration, DEI, and more.
Despite early legislative successes, like the largest climate spending bill in history and building eight EV chargers with $7.5 billion, his tenure is remembered more for its chaotic end. Democrats blame him for clinging to power too long, staining what could have been a consequential record and ignoring their own role in propping him up.
What would our nation look like now if Joe Biden had simply avoided that June 27, 2024 debate? Was President Trump 47 inevitable regardless? Should Joe Biden be stepping out more to remind the country of his presidency?

[serious] why do you think protestors are paid?
This affects the entire country.

I'm not looking for answers about conspiracy theories, George Soros, etc. I'm asking why do you think people protesting Donald Trump or ICE are paid.
What makes you think that? Is it what people who hate Democrats say so you think it's true? Is it because Republicans in general don't protest so you can't see why people would do it, etc?

Do you think ICE are putting protestors in a database to mark them as domestic terrorists? And if so, do you think this is okay?
Who's accountable for the results?

There was a video coming out of Maine today, taken by a supposed legal observer, who is recording as an ICE agent is talking to her. In the video at least, it appears she is not doing anything wrong, just simply recording. The ICE agent on the video appears to scan her and then tells her she is now in their "nice little database" and is being marked as a "domestic terrorist". The protester basically calls him crazy for doing and saying this over observing/recording them.
What are your thoughts on this? How is this not blatantly unconstitutional if true? Does it concern you that ICE has a database where they can seemingly mark someone as a "domestic terrorist" so easily?

You're tasked with creating a second Bill of Rights for a post-Trump America. What would you include in it?
Be honest—this is ridiculous.

What would you include in a second Bill of Rights? Would you say that healthcare is a right and not a privilege? Would you say that corporations are not people? What should we put in the document that would be transformative for this country, and how do we do it?

How can JD Vance seriously discuss arresting and holding sex offenders accountable while Trump is POTUS?
Who's accountable for the results?

The Trump-Vance administration has made "holding sexual predators accountable" a cornerstone of their 2025-2026 agenda. Between the "Protecting our Communities from Sexual Predators Act"—which focuses on the deportation of non-citizen offenders—and the recently signed TAKE IT DOWN Act, the rhetoric is stronger than ever.
​However, there is a glaring elephant in the room. JD Vance is currently out on the trail (most recently in Minneapolis) touting "law and order" and the removal of "sexual deviants" from the streets. At the same time, Donald Trump remains a man found liable in a court of law for the sexual abuse of E. Jean Carroll.
​How does a Press Secretary or a VP seriously argue that they are the "party of protection" when their own leader’s legal history would, under their own proposed standards, categorize him as the very threat they claim to be hunting? Is this just the ultimate form of political compartmentalization, or is the "predator" label being redefined to only apply to political enemies and undocumented immigrants?

What would holding the two parties accountable realistically look like?
This looks less like justice and more like strategy.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who is dissatisfied with both parties right now, but I cant think of any way to change things.
Right now, we are a two party system and thats not likely to change. Both parties make the laws and can make it hard for a third party to get traction (or at least tie them up in court for months.)
And as for voting for third party and rejecting both parties...then you have to not only hope lots of people do the same thing, but that they vote for the candidate you want. Voting Democrat and Republican is much safer.
Do you have any ideas?

Republicans tried to snag Jack Smith on technicalities. But they didn’t engage with the facts.
What's the endgame here?

Republicans finally had their moment to take on the man who tried to put President Donald Trump in jail. But they didn’t land any significant blows.
During Thursday’s House Judiciary Committee hearing with Jack Smith, GOP members spent almost no time challenging the facts of the criminal case that the former special counsel brought against Trump: that he conspired to corrupt the results of the 2020 election and seize a second term he didn’t win.
The posture of committee Republicans Thursday also gave Democrats ammunition to claim that Republicans had no legitimate argument with the substance of Smith’s findings — both in the election interference case and in the case alleging mishandling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.
Raskin and other Democrats feel so emboldened by Smith’s testimony Thursday that they are now asking Jordan to hold a continuation of the hearing as soon as a report is unsealed that would allow Smith to go into more detail about the classified documents charges he sought to bring up against Trump.
Trump's Take
“Jack Smith is a deranged animal, who shouldn’t be allowed to practice Law,” Trump said on Truth Social. “Hopefully the Attorney General is looking at what he’s done, including some of the crooked and corrupt witnesses that he was attempting to use in his case against me.”
Smith, who later said he expected the Trump administration would pursue federal criminal charges against him “because they have been ordered to by the president,” forcefully defended his office’s work throughout the hearing Thursday. He denied that politics played any role in his team’s findings and calmly parried the attacks Republicans lobbed at him over his investigative tactics and decision to bring charges at all.
Democracy
And he repeatedly suggested the failure to hold Trump accountable for his 2020 election maneuvering could invite future attacks.
“I have seen how the rule of law can erode. My feeling is that we have seen the rule of law function in our country so long that many of us have come to take it for granted,” Smith said. “The rule of law is not self-executing.”
Drama in the Audience
Also in attendance at the hearing was Stewart Rhodes, the founder of the Oath Keepers, who was convicted of seditious conspiracy for his role in the Jan. 6 riot and sentenced to 18 years in prison before Trump commuted his sentence last year.
“I want to see true transparency in our government,” Rhodes said in an interview, adding that it was “really kind of surreal” to be back in the Capitol complex after being banned prior to his commutation.
At some points emotions ran high, such as when former Metropolitan Police Force officer Michael Fanone coughed “Fuck yourself” when Rep. Troy Nehls (R-Texas) opined that police bore responsibility for the Jan 6. security breach at the Capitol. There was also a tense confrontation between Fanone and Ivan Raiklin, an activist and advocate for Jan. 6 defendants, that almost culminated in a physical altercation.
While Democrats are frustrated that the electorate does not care about Jan. 6 as much as they do, why are Republicans trying to keep the events in the spotlight? Even though it's a low-weight issue, it has never been a winning issue for them. Don't they benefit from people forgetting about it?

What argument might the U.S. Supreme Court use to defend Texas' gerrymandering law and not California's?
This looks less like justice and more like strategy.

It's midterm year in the United States and I just read California's Republican congress is asking for the Supreme Court to overturn the new congressional map.
What reason would the Supreme Court have to block California's new map and not Texas' new map?

What will the Liberals do in a post-Trump world?
Who's accountable for the results?

How far will the pendulum swing back to the left?
Will policies be immediately undone and pushed as far left as possible?
What happens to:
- Tariffs and public taxation
- Borders and immigration
- Greenland and Canada rhetoric
- Venezuela - Gender ideology - Abortion
- Social services spending
- Fraud investigations
- Political weaponization and retribution ie Trump family and business associates; government support for Elons endeavours
- Epstein files - Ukraine - Israel - China
- NATO and all of Europe
Will the Left use Trump as a springboard to go further left than any other administration in history?

Trump briefed on Border Patrol-involved shooting as Minneapolis mayor demands end to enforcement operation
This isn't complicated—it's willpower.

President Donald Trump has been briefed after an armed individual in Minneapolis was shot and killed by a Border Patrol agent, a White House official told Fox News Digital. 
Meanwhile, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey demanded that the Trump administration remove immigration enforcement officials from the city. 
A Border Patrol member shot an armed individual on Saturday at the intersection of East 26th Street and Nicollet Ave. 
Minneapolis officials have since identified that person as 37-year-old White man, a resident of Minneapolis believed to be a U.S. citizen.
BORDER PATROL SHOOTS ARMED INDIVIDUAL IN MINNEAPOLIS, FOX NEWS LEARNS
"I just saw a video of more than six masked agents pummeling one of our constituents and shooting him to death," Frey said during a midday press conference. "How many more residents? How many more Americans need to die or get badly hurt for this operation to end? How many more lives need to be lost before this administration realizes that a political and partisan narrative is not as important as American values? How many times must local and national leaders plead with you, Donald Trump, to end this operation and recognize that this is not creating safety in our city?"
Frey said he was tired of local officials being told to turn down the temperature, and that his community members are stirring up "vitriol" in the streets. He demanded that the administration "reflect" on the ongoing chaos in the city, and ask themselves whether they are achieving peace and safety. 
"If the goal was to achieve peace and safety, this is doing exactly the opposite," he said. "If the goal was to achieve calm and prosperity, this is doing exactly the opposite."
"So to President Trump, this is a moment to act like a leader. Put Minneapolis put America first in this moment," he continued. "Let's achieve peace. Let's end this operation. And I'm telling you, our city will come back. Safety will be restored. We're asking for you to take action now to remove these federal agents."
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) told Fox News that the suspect was armed with a gun and two magazines.
DHS said that the officers attempted to disarm the suspect, who then "violently resisted."
"Fearing for his life and the lives and safety of fellow officers, an agent fired defensive shots. Medics on scene immediately delivered medical aid to the subject but was pronounced dead at the scene," DHS said. "The suspect also had 2 magazines and no ID — this looks like a situation where an individual wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement."
Blue state …