V retweeted
Relevant tonight.
Liz Cheney: âI say this to my Republican colleagues who are defending the indefensible. There will come a day when Donald Trump is gone, but your dishonor will remain.â
V retweeted
BREAKING: Democrats have now flipped 6 seats in the US Senate, officially gaining control of both the US House and Senate.
This marks the largest Democratic gain in the US Senate since 2008, when the party achieved a net gain of 8 seats.
Kansas' US Senate seat has flipped Democrat for the first time since 1932, ending a 94-year Republican winning streak in the state.
Democrats have also flipped 15 seats in the US House.
V retweeted
Republicans are going to have a terrible night, and the simple reason why is that Trump has put up perhaps the worst *performance* this term of any president in a century or more.
Remember that he entered with an actual mandate: the House and Senate, a popular vote victory and a swing-state sweep, and 6-3 Supreme Court. Democrats were afraid enough to vote for mild but real immigration restrictionist legislation in the Laken Riley Act. Everyone wondered how far the "Vibe Shift" would go.
Trump managed to turn that into essentially zero durable wins whatsoever. He personally *hates* the very idea of legislation, the notion that he would have to spend time going back and forth with Congress, learning details and making compromises. So he simply didn't do it! He didn't make a compelling case for abolishing the filibuster. He didn't try communicating clearly to the public in support of popular bills to get to 60 votes. He just decided not to do it at all.
So they passed an unpopular tax cut, some funding for ICE, and a sop to the crypto industry, and that was basically it. Least productive Congress in decades, due to the tastes of one man.
Trump adopted one of the worst macro policies we've ever had: high deficits, high tariffs, and attacks on central bank independence. We managed to pay higher interest rates while still having high trade deficits AND weakening the dollar. Just a total failure.
On immigration, perhaps THE signature issue, Trump essentially min-maxxed effectiveness and backlash. Instead of trying to leverage the political moment for new laws and a self-deportation agenda (that is, walling off the economy to remove the benefit of irregular presence in the US), he opted for a maximally aggressive approach. The administration spent attention, funds, legal manpower on stunts like deporting random people to Salvadoran prisons with essentially no due process. ICE and Border Patrol were encouraged to be aggressive and confrontational, which helped contribute to the shooting deaths of American protestors. It turns out, that's extremely unpopular!
What about the approach of going after employers? The obvious vector? Trump hated that idea! He repeatedly has said he doesn't want to target businesses (especially farms) that use large amounts of illegal labor. This is just an incomprehensible position. Instead of charging a few dozen businessmen and removing the incentive for millions of illegal workers to be here, you arrest people off the street one by one at the cost of thousands of dollars in manpower per each, while their crying wives and kids post TikToks about it.
Upshot on immigration: electoral strength turned into a crippling electoral weakness in exchange for deporting maybe 6% of the illegally present population.
The tariffs were a total shitshow. Embarrassing rollout, no underlying theory of action at all. No targeted focus on key industries. Our country tariffed products we can't grow. We tariffed *inputs* of our own valuable exports. The schemes and amounts changed constantly, sending the stock market reeling and presenting scenes of chaos to the world.
Trump's messaging throughout has been generationally bad. While facing nearly 2:1 unpopularity, he spends his days posting AI slop, saying he'll rename New Mexico or invade allies, among other bizarre remarks. He brags about a ballroom and a pool repainting while gas hits records. At no point has he ever attempted any kind of message discipline.
Then there are the deeply unpopular attacks on rule of law, his "game-recognize-game" pardons for all manner of scammers and criminals, the crypto schemes that he and his family engage in, the evilly conceived and embarrassingly executed legal attacks on Comey, Jerome Powell, and others. With his monthslong stand on NOT releasing the Epstein files, he became maybe the first president ever to stake out a 99-1 issue on the 1% side.
That's not even getting into Iran, DOGE, his candidate recruitment choices, or countless other things. Simply put: Trump has managed to royally screw up virtually every single facet of his presidency. It's been undeniable, voters have noticed, and there's really no escape from it. This is what the GOP base chose in early 2024, and this is the world they're living with now. Where they handed the reins of history to a fat, vain, washed-up old man and let him drive.
V retweeted
Bill Clinton on Trump:
I've known President Trump a long time. We used to have quite a friendly relationship 24 years ago. We'd play golf.
He kept saying, "We're the biggest, strongest, richest country in the world. Why don't we just put a bunch of tariffs on everybody else and stop paying taxes altogether?"
I said, "Well, because, Don" â he was Donald then, not Mr. President â "because these people don't just eat the tariffs. They just charge the people who buy the stuff, whatever it is. So we pay the tariffs."
And he, just like now, didn't hear what he didn't want to hear.
V retweeted
In 2024....During a Minister's conference... Mummy G.O categorically told all ministers and workers present... GO AND STOP ANY COUPLES YOUTUBE channel you have.
As at that time, there were at least 3 prominent christian couple YT channels that were ministers in the church.
She said "I have been following some of your contents and I am beginning to see things that ordinarily should never leave the bedroom between husband and wife" she also said "bringing the whole world into private moments will result in interference that will eventually lead to divisive interests.
When she said it...... they grumbled but obeyed.
With benefit of hindsight...SHE WAS VERY SPOT ON.
For most YouTubing couples, it's the platform that separates them. It's simple.
As your platform grows, YouTube begins to notice your page and they approach you with ideas. Sometimes, it's another platform like Netflix that does. They offer you contracts which are very tempting. If both of you don't have strong family values and/or if you both lack discernment, you'd take the offer.
It's going to look good at first, until the contract begins to strengthen up. Values begin to clash. Routines change massively. Boom! Your marriage becomes collateral.
BM and Arlette almost fell into trap from Netflix. Thank God for their ability to walk away from the Netflix contract - about $100m or so.
V retweeted
The sample size is also the problem here.
Not just amongst Christians, but this is a trend seen amongst couples who publicise their marriages this way & make it a commodity for consumption.
At some point, you start taking consumer advice & reviews from strangers, & you build a marriage that the public adores, not one that enriches you and your partner.
Those are two different things. It is worse in early marriages because the couples often haven't decided how they can fully go from "I" to "We". It is a moulding process that some are letting the public shape, instead of their own love & partnership.
Some can survive this; in fact, some have, but the risk still exists.
V retweeted
My own is however you build, please being back natural lighting. Why does church have to be dark, drapes everywhere
Now put the lights off and be doing light show during worship.
More windows and natural lighting, less beam lights with the RGB!
V retweeted
If this drops on your screen, please retweet đđ€Čđ»
As Catholics and Americans, we are blessed to be able to participate in our nationâs political and public life. With the midterm elections approaching in the United States, the Conference has been encouraging Catholics to exercise their right to vote and to do so in a way that places our faith before our politics. In voting, our Holy Father sets the example that encourages each citizen to exercise their civic responsibility. The U.S. bishops have emphasized that is not âwhoâ one is voting for, but rather on encouraging Catholics to inform their conscience as they prepare to vote and to uphold human dignity and the common good in doing so.
Pope Leo XIV has voted in the midterm elections of the United States, expressing his âbelief in the right and the duty of citizens to participate in democratic processes.â
The Holy See Press Office announced on Friday that Pope Leo XIV, an American citizen, "has exercised his right to vote as a United States citizen, whenever he was eligible to do so."
The Press Office confirmed that, âin keeping with this long-standing practice of civic participation, he has submitted his mail-in ballot in Chicago.â
âThe Holy Father has also confirmed that, during his years of residence in Peru he exercised his right to vote whenever he was eligible to do so,â noted the statement.
V retweeted
All these threats over a hypothetical brother dying and you insisting on him being buried in his hypothetical house. Donât you in your imaginations aspire to be financially healthy? Donât you aspire to have businesses to mind? Do you not ever imagine yourself to be peaceable?
V retweeted
You claim you want to sponsor the children of a deceased man through school, yet you went to their grandfather instead of their mother. Everything is wrong with this gesture. Their mother is alive, and she deserves to be treated with respect and dignity. You cannot claim to have the childrenâs best interests at heart while disregarding the woman who is raising them. This blatant disrespect towards her is becoming increasingly disturbing and absolutely unacceptable.
V retweeted
La lettre du premier ministre du QuĂ©bec aux reprĂ©sentants de lâUE contient des Ă©lĂ©ments extrĂȘmement prĂ©occupants.
Leur posture nâavance en rien ni les intĂ©rĂȘts du QuĂ©bec ni la doctrine de lâancien ministre libĂ©ral Paul GĂ©rin-Lajoie.
Pascal Paradis est peut-ĂȘtre le nĂ©gociateur en chef du QuĂ©bec, mais il nâest pas le chef du gouvernement. Sa prĂ©sence ne peut compenser le refus du premier ministre de participer au sommet ni son incapacitĂ© Ă saisir les fondements des relations internationales.
Si la politique sâexerce par le biais de dĂ©clarations publiques, la diplomatie, elle, repose sur des conversations et des relations humainesâ; des Ă©changes qui ne se cultivent pas derriĂšre un podium, mais en coulisses ou autour dâune table.
En politique, on sâadresse aux gens ; en diplomatie, on Ă©change avec eux.
Le gouvernement du Parti quĂ©bĂ©cois a essuyĂ© un Ă©chec cuisant lors de sa premiĂšre incursion sur la scĂšne internationale - et ce, en sol quĂ©bĂ©cois, sur des enjeux et avec des partenaires clĂ©s, pour dĂ©fendre les intĂ©rĂȘts du QuĂ©bec et le dĂ©veloppement de ses marchĂ©s internationaux.
Alors que les autres chefs de gouvernement, tant du Canada que de lâEurope, rĂ©pondront «âprĂ©sentâ», le premier ministre du QuĂ©bec, lui, devra assumer son absence.
#plq #assnat #polqc
Une lettre ne remplace pas une prĂ©sence Ă la table. Le premier ministre dit vouloir rencontrer les dirigeants europĂ©ens, mais refuse de participer au sommet CanadaâUE qui se tient chez nous.
La diplomatie exige de bĂątir des relations et de saisir les occasions de dĂ©fendre nos intĂ©rĂȘts. Pas de bouder parce quâon nâa pas de micro.
Nos partenaires seront Ă table.
Le premier ministre du Québec, lui, laissera sa chaise vide.
Je le rĂ©pĂšte : ĂȘtre absent, câest ĂȘtre perdant.
Quel manque de leadership.
#PLQ #PolQc #AssNat
V retweeted
Few takeaways and lessons from this.
1. The father didnât have the means, so he left the child. That was stupid ! And was a colossal mistake and terrible; itâs one of the mistakes men make. Of course, many families and women create conditions that make that a natural occurrence, but you have to be seen to keep fighting it and establish yourself properly in your childâs life.
There was no excuse. He didnât do well by leaving him to them and was up north, unbothered. Never ever abandon your child to anybody!!
2. Itâs interesting that this child, with all of that background story, ended up being the child that could have changed the entire story of the family for generations and was the star of their family. God works in mysterious ways.
3. The conventional wisdom that the child would still know his father which people swore always plays out happened here. Toluwani was always in touch with him, even by this manâs account, and did his best for him while alive and still had big and decent plans for him before he passed. He was under no obligation to, considering that this man even said with his mouth that for some period, they had no single contact with him. (I do not think he should open his mouth and say that.)
4. Notwithstanding him establishing some relationship with the father, he still didnât have close connections with him and his family, and rightly so. He didnât live with them and technically didnât raise him. He would definitely have a much closer affinity with the motherâs side, who he lived with.
5. Curiously, the motherâs side that raised him havenât said anything or granted interviews all over the place like these ones.
6. With all of this, the father and his family are not in a position to be making demands after his death. There is no other way to look at it. Itâs a disgrace that they are making any demands, having allowed themselves to be removed from the childâs formative years.
7. Even if they were there, I donât think anyone should be dictating to the wife of a man who has children where her husband should be buried. They can have opinions, but you canât discount her wishes. If it were a woman, it wouldnât be okay for the family to be making such strong demands.
I listened to this interview of Toluwanisings father and I became so heartbroken.
This father didnât try and the audacity to be saying it beats me.
An example of an absent father but the guy still did his best for him!
Eni to ku ni ti e gbe! Asking that he should be buried in his house is not for him to call. Cringggggggggg
It is in fact sensible for that singerâs wife to want to sell the house, sell, change city, downsize and use the extra funds to do something else for the future of her kids.
Itâs her house for Gods sake
Why is it an issue even if thatâs her reason?
V retweeted
From questioning why she doesnât want them to bury him in the house, to stating that her mother lives with them while his father lived in a mud house, to saying foolish things about how she was eating eight days after he died, and now they want an autopsy.
This is witch-hunting, and you are weaponising social media against a young widow with two children under five. All of you joining this diabolic witch hunt should remember that.
V retweeted
It is worse enough that someone died in a very "rude and untimely manner".
But going from one family member to another to interview them and post online for complete strangers is another lever of wickedness.
V retweeted
That guy interviewing the family is a nuisance

































