
Edward Hopper The “Martha McKeen” of Wellfleet 1944



This may be the greatest tweet in X history – pic.twitter.com/MGSmN9eHlZ
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) April 20, 2025
There will be a trade deal with China.
via Fox pic.twitter.com/m8IDeLZ7sB
— Daniel Lacalle (@dlacalle_IA) April 20, 2025
Sachs
“China wins a trade war with the U.S.” — Jeffrey Sachs
China produces, while the U.S. consumes on credit.
Trump doesn’t get it because "he never made it to the second day of econ class."
"Our political system is in a state of collapse." pic.twitter.com/XwAGcINHaw
— COMBATE |🇵🇷 (@upholdreality) April 19, 2025
Movie
Just gonna leave this here.pic.twitter.com/zoS4AyiWB8
— Department of Government Efficiency News (@DOGE__news) April 19, 2025
Chamath
Chamath on the Trump Admin Revoking Harvard’s Tax-Exempt Status
“What Harvard did was made it fashionable for other schools to discriminate … It starts to touch the high schools and the middle schools where we live … Whatever it takes, the most severe and extreme measures… pic.twitter.com/M9yMOa9LO7
— Chief Nerd (@TheChiefNerd) April 19, 2025
Chamath: "Nvidia is not doing what's in the best interest of the United States." 🇺🇸🇨🇳
"I think we can all do the math. About 47% of all of NVIDIA's revenue goes to China and Chinese-related countries."
"And I think when you peel back this onion, what you will find is a whole… pic.twitter.com/0wWS1ClB3t
— The All-In Podcast (@theallinpod) April 20, 2025
I will never get tired of watching this pic.twitter.com/BivsvSRs6P
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) April 20, 2025
Japanese designer Haruki Nakamura creates interactive paper toys
— Science girl (@gunsnrosesgirl3) April 20, 2025
Just let that sink in! pic.twitter.com/Mte3sm30K0
— Elon Musk News (@ELonMuskNewssX) April 20, 2025
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) April 20, 2025
80 ships from China to the USA were sent empty. pic.twitter.com/aT8oo7Tzd8
— Johannes Maria (@luo_yuehan) April 20, 2025






An overdue conversation?!
• What It Means To Be White In America (Von Hoffmeister)
To be white in America is to inherit a name shaped by migration, faith, and forgotten histories. It is a lineage carried across oceans, passed through lullabies, and rooted in both cathedrals and cornfields. This identity lingers in quiet rural churches, where the voices of ancestors seem to echo in the trees. For many, “white” becomes a stand-in when older names fade — when “American” feels like a hollow label on a billboard. It is not about shame or dominance. It is about memory, continuity, and being quietly aware of where you come from.
Multiculturalism, as it manifests now, behaves like a solvent. It dissolves the distinct, merges the sacred into sameness, smiles as it rubs out the texture of rooted lives. Within this flood, those who carry European memory find themselves drifting, searching for a foothold. The word “White” is that foothold. It holds meaning through resistance, through memory, through the fierce dignity of cultural continuity. Identity, in this sense, becomes a form of love — love for origins, love for inherited stories, love for those yet to come.
Supremacism speaks in the language of domination. Identity speaks in the language of presence. The White American who awakens to his name does not seek a throne. He seeks a hearth. He seeks a way to stay whole in a world that rewards fragmentation. This is a path of loyalty to one’s kind, never hostility towards others. In the garden of peoples, each flower flourishes with its own fragrance. Ethnopluralism offers an architecture of difference, a choreography of coexistence, where each cultural rhythm retains its beat without drowning the others.
The term “White” in the American lexicon carries a unique frequency. It vibrates with Jefferson’s quill and Bach’s organ, with frontier hymns and Viennese waltzes, with cavalry horns and Celtic chants. To call oneself White in this context is to protect this frequency from dissonance disguised as “inclusion.” It is to declare, without aggression, that the old songs deserve to be sung again. Memory deserves air. Tradition deserves breath. Identity deserves more than footnotes in someone else’s anthology.
European nationalists who peer across the Atlantic may see a racial label where a cultural signal flares. In America, this signal reaches through the noise, calling for cohesion in the absence of nationhood. The immigrant once became American through absorption into a defined mythos. That mythos no longer exists. “White” now fills the vacuum with a new mode of belonging — fused from ancestral fragments, reconstructed into a postmodern tribe bound by shared affinities rather than state-sponsored creeds. This tribe seeks kinship, not conquest.
The word itself — “White” — is undergoing alchemy. Once used carelessly, once wielded cruelly, now reclaimed with care. It becomes a sanctuary word, a quiet defiance against vanishing. It shields neither empire nor empire-building. It cradles only memory. Those who say the word do so with reverence, tracing maps invisible to those who only see skin. Within this word lives the village, the chapel bell, the grandmother’s eyes. To be White, then, is to feel time coiling through your veins, to hold the sacred burden of continuity with both hands.
Identity here acts as a compass, never a cage. It points to something essential, never reductive. Within its frame, new expressions rise — art, ritual, story, space. The future emerges from the past, remixed through intention rather than accident. Each person who reclaims identity becomes a steward. Each community that honors its inheritance becomes a lighthouse. In the haze of cultural disintegration, the glow of remembrance shines stronger than shame. Authentic diversity, when anchored in respect, requires difference. And difference requires selfhood.
To be pro-White is to be pro-identity. To affirm one’s people is to affirm all peoples. The line between celebration and supremacism is one of spirit, not volume. This spirit seeks harmony, not hierarchy. A world without distinct identities offers only the cold hum of managed sameness. A world of living cultures brims with meaning. So let this be said clearly: the affirmation of White identity, grounded in respect, carried with humility, lit by ancestral fire, serves not as a threat — but as a promise. A promise to remain, to remember, to reimagine.

Last thing he did. The Pope died this morning.
• Pope Francis Meets JD Vance On Easter, Appeals For Release Of Hostages (JTN)
An ailing Pope Francis, still recovering from a lung infection, met Sunday with Vice President J.D. Vance at the Vatican and made an Easter appeal for the release of hostages in the Hamas-Israel war. “I appeal to the warring parties: call a ceasefire, release the hostages and come to the aid of a starving people that aspires to a future of peace!” Francis said in a prepared Easter message. Hospitalized for more than a month with pneumonia, the 88-year-old Roman Catholic pontiff made several surprise appearances on Easter, including waving to adoring crowds from the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica.
While he did not preside over the traditional Easter mass, he did deliver the “Urbi et Orbi” blessing to the “City [of Rome] and to the World,” a special declaration of reconciliation that only a pope may deliver. Perhaps his highest profile moment came when he met privately with Vance, a 2019 convert to Catholicism who has tangled with the pope over U.S. enforcement of immigration laws. “The meeting, which lasted a few minutes, provided an opportunity to exchange Easter greetings,” the Vatican said in a statement.

Here’s hoping.
• Trump Hopeful For Russia-Ukraine Peace Deal In Coming Days (RT)
US President Donald Trump has expressed hope that Russia and Ukraine could reach a peace agreement within days, suggesting that both nations could instead turn their attention to trade with the United States. The statement follows remarks from Trump and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who hinted that Washington may abandon its mediation efforts unless tangible progress is made. “HOPEFULLY RUSSIA [and] UKRAINE WILL MAKE A DEAL THIS WEEK,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social account on Sunday. “BOTH WILL THEN START TO DO BIG BUSINESS WITH THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, WHICH IS THRIVING, AND MAKE A FORTUNE!” The 30-hour Easter truce declared by Russian President Vladimir Putin expired at midnight on Monday. The Kremlin confirmed there were no plans for an extension, and both sides have accused each other of breaching the agreement.
The Russian Defense Ministry reported around 1,300 violations of the holiday ceasefire, including artillery strikes and drone attacks. Since taking office in January, Trump has repeatedly emphasized his desire to broker an end to the conflict “as soon as possible.” His team has engaged in shuttle diplomacy, including a 30-day moratorium on strikes targeting energy infrastructure last month. However, both Moscow and Kiev later accused each other of violating that deal. According to the New York Post, the United States aims to “make a determination for a full and comprehensive ceasefire” within the coming days. The Friday report cited a senior US official who said the goal was to evaluate where Moscow and Kiev stand on a potential agreement through direct discussions.
Rubio warned that Washington could drop the peace initiative if talks break down. “We need to figure out here, now, within a matter of days, whether this is doable,” he told reporters on Friday. “If it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on.” He described the current proposal as a “broad framework” but declined to provide further details. Trump endorsed Rubio’s remarks, stating that Washington wants to see the conflict resolved and that there is “a good chance of solving the problem.” sMoscow has emphasized that any peace deal must address the “root causes” of the conflict, including NATO’s eastward expansion and Ukraine’s aspirations to join the US-led alliance.
Putin has also demanded that Kiev recognize Russia’s new borders – something Ukrainian leaders have so far rejected. Last month, Putin stated that in order for a viable ceasefire to be achieved, the Western nations must cease arms shipments to Ukraine, and Kiev must withdraw troops from Russian territories. Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Russian UN envoy Vassily Nebenzia called a full ceasefire “simply unrealistic at this stage,” accusing the West of using negotiations as a cover to rearm Ukrainian forces.

What Trump’s peace efforts are up against.
• Russia Will Attack In A ‘Couple Of Years’ – Estonian FM (RT)
NATO still has several years to prepare for a Russian invasion, Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna has said. President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly dismissed claims that Moscow has any aggressive plans towards NATO as “nonsense” that is meant to scare the European population and justify increases in military spending. In his interview with France 24 on Friday, Tsahkna suggested that “we have a couple of years to prepare for the full-scale [Russian] invasion capabilities to be ready” on the bloc’s borders. NATO has this time window because Russia’s military is currently preoccupied with the Ukraine conflict, he said. Like its fellow Baltic States, Estonia has been one of the most vocal backers of Ukraine during the conflict with Russia, calling for the supply of more weapons to Kiev and increased sanctions pressure on Moscow.
Tallinn has provided military assistance worth nearly €500 million, or more than 1.4% of its GDP, to the government of Vladimir Zelensky since February 2022. Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are also reportedly among the six countries that support the push by the UK and France to deploy a Western “reassurance force” to Ukraine once the fighting stops there. “I was defense minister of Estonia in 2016 and 2017, and I saw the other side of our borders, NATO and European Union borders, 120,000 troops ready to go within 48 hours from the Russian side,” he said. However, currently it “is pretty empty [on] the other side of our borders from the Russian side because Russia is in Ukraine,” the foreign minister explained. “But what we see is that Russia is investing heavily to the [military] infrastructure, even [on] a larger scale than they had before,” he said.
According to Tsahkna, Moscow has “a plan to relocate the troops, maybe even [on] the largest scale in the future to the other side of all borders. But we are not talking about [the] Estonian border, we are talking about NATO.” He suggested that “if [Russian President Vladimir] Putin would like to test NATO in our region, I think that the cost for him will be very high” due to the permanent deployment of the bloc’s troops in the Baltic States, increased defense spending by member states in recent years and the inclusion of Finland and Sweden into NATO 2023 and 2024, respectively. US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, who has met with the Russian leader at the Kremlin three times, told American journalist Tucker Carlson in March that Moscow is “100% not” interested in invading NATO countries.

“The fact that the justices have called for arguments in May suggests the urgency and significance of the issue. “It never hears cases in May..”
• The Era of Lawless Leftist Judges is Likely Ending Soon (Margolis)
The U.S. Supreme Court is preparing to weigh in on one of the most significant legal power plays in recent memory: whether individual federal trial judges can continue issuing nationwide injunctions that derail national policy. The high court’s move could mark a turning point in the Trump administration’s effort to rein in what it sees as activist judges stifling the will of the elected government. John Yoo, a law professor at UC Berkeley and former Justice Department official, broke down the issue during an appearance on Fox News, where he explained the gravity of the situation and why the Supreme Court is now stepping in. “This is about who controls all those… and there’s about 675 federal trial judges spread out all over the country,” Yoo said.
“And some of them have been bringing the federal government, bringing President Trump’s agenda to a screeching halt, even though they don’t have anybody, say, who works for the government or any of the illegal aliens or any of the spending in their own courtrooms.” In recent years, liberal activists have filed lawsuits in strategically chosen jurisdictions where they know they’ll find a sympathetic judge. The result? Leftist district judges, with no direct connection to the underlying policy or parties involved, have been able to issue injunctions blocking Trump administration directives nationwide—from immigration enforcement to federal spending priorities. “What’s going on here, I think it’s important to understand, is that the Supreme Court is already signaling that they’re very sympathetic to the Trump administration,” Yoo said. “The Supreme Court scheduled oral argument for May 15th.”
That date raised eyebrows among legal observers, as the Court typically stops hearing arguments by April and shifts to issuing decisions in pending cases. The fact that the justices have called for arguments in May suggests the urgency and significance of the issue. “It never hears cases in May,” Yoo explained. “Usually, they’d be done their business and they’d be sending out opinions by now. They’ve called basically a special session in order to hear President Trump’s claims that there should not be unlimited nationwide injunctions, but that they should be under the control of the Supreme Court.” The specific case revolves around Trump’s executive order targeting birthright citizenship, but Yoo emphasized that the justices may not even reach that policy question. The real issue is the unchecked legal activism that’s allowed district court judges to assume authority over foreign policy, immigration, and federal hiring and spending.
https://twittercom/RichSementa/status/1913695871088161159
“Whether you agree or disagree with President Trump’s order on birthright citizenship,” Yoo said, “they may not even get to the question, because the key thing here is for the Supreme Court to put an end to the 675 trial judges who all think they can run foreign policy, spending and hiring throughout the federal government. ”If the court sides with the Trump administration, it could dramatically reshape how federal power is contested in the courtroom and restore constitutional limits on unelected judges meddling in national affairs.”

Being lectured by Turkey on democracy.
• EU Selectively Condemns Political Persecution – Turkish Foreign Minister (RT)
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan has accused the EU of applying double standards by remaining silent over Moldova’s arrest of Yevgenia Gutsul, the elected governor of the country’s autonomous Gagauzia region, who was arrested on charges related to her 2023 election campaign. Fidan noted that while the bloc has been vocal about the detention of Ekrem Imamoglu, the former mayor of Istanbul and potential rival to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, they have not condemned similar actions in other countries.
“In France, a woman party leader was imprisoned for corruption. Did you criticize it? No. In Romania, a candidate who won the election was tried before the second round and was politically banned. In Moldova, you imprisoned an elected regional head. Did you condemn it? No,” Fidan stated, as reported by Hurriyet on Sunday. Last month, Gagauzia Governor Yevgenia Gutsul was arrested amid an investigation into alleged irregularities during her 2023 election campaign. She condemned the Moldovan government’s actions, asserting that it seeks to undermine the autonomous region’s freedoms in retaliation for its support of opposition figures, including herself.
Gutsul’s arrest has sparked protests in Gagauzia, with supporters claiming political persecution. Moldovan authorities assert that the legal proceedings are part of efforts to uphold the rule of law and combat corruption. The French example Fidan referred to appears to concern Marine Le Pen, a former leader of the right-wing National Rally party (RN) and a three-time presidential candidate. A Paris court sentenced Le Pen to four years in prison for embezzlement last month, with two years suspended, and the other two to be served under a form of house arrest. She also received a five-year ban on holding political office, which effectively disqualifies her from the 2027 presidential race.

The westerners all seem to think it’s all about the west. Like Russia has no life and no culture of its own.
• Experts and Western Media Weigh In On Russia-Initiated Easter Truce (RT)
Multiple pundits and commentators, Western, Russian and those from further afield, have offered their takes on the Easter truce in the Ukraine conflict, which was unilaterally declared by Russian President Vladimir Putin on Saturday. While many Western experts have been quick to express skepticism over the Kremlin’s true motives, others have described the temporary ceasefire as a pivotal step toward a potential broader peace agreement between Moscow and Kiev.
Western experts heap scorn on Putin’s Easter truce Ivor Bennett of Sky News suggested in his piece that the truce “feels like a diplomatic dance,” in which President Putin seemingly makes a concession, though one falling distinctly short of US President Donald Trump’s expectations. “Putin is giving Trump just enough to keep him on side” and secure the continuation of the apparent thaw in relations with the US, while “trying to cast himself as the peacemaker in the eyes of the US president – as the one who gives solutions, not problems,” Bennett wrote. CNN’s International Security Editor Nick Paton Walsh opined that the “sudden rush of this seems designed entirely to placate White House demands for some sign that Russia is willing to stop fighting,” adding that “it will likely feed Trump’s at-times pro-Moscow framing of the conflict.” Walsh concluded by predicting that the Easter truce “is likely to do more damage to the role of diplomacy in the coming months than it does to support it.”
Western pundits see ploy to lure Trump in Putin’s Easter truce Col. Richard Kemp (ret.) of the British Army and Rafael Bardaji, former national security advisor to the Spanish government, stated in an article for The Telegraph that Putin “needs time to rebuild the Russian economy” and does not want to draw President Trump’s ire by rejecting his peace proposals outright. German military expert Carlo Masala told Bild that “a cold-blooded calculation,” lies behind Putin’s Easter truce, with Moscow’s message being primarily intended for the occupant of the US White House. He further suggested that by throwing “Trump another crumb,” Moscow is trying to isolate Vladimir Zelensky and prompt Washington to abandon Kiev, while continuing to mend relations with Russia.
Others think Moscow is serious about peace Speaking to RIA Novosti, former Austrian Foreign Minister Karin Kneissl struck a more positive tone, saying that the “Easter truce is not something that will have decisive importance militarily, but diplomacy and human life often need gestures before it is possible to move on to real measures.” She opined that Putin chose an “opportune” moment to make such a signal, and expressed hope that the temporary ceasefire could pave the way to a comprehensive peace. Argentinian international relations analyst Christian Lamesa told Izvestia that the Kremlin’s initiative “will be received well by Washington, as a genuine and true expression of Vladimir Putin’s will toward creating a lasting peace.”
Russian expert says Easter truce was prepared well in advance In a comment to RIA Novosti, Iranian political scientist and international security expert Professor Ruhollah Modabber hailed the Russian president’s move on two counts: first, the Ester Truce demonstrates that Moscow respects and takes Christian ideals very seriously; second, Putin’s initiative proves that Russia truly wants to achieve peace in the Ukraine conflict. Russian military expert and RT contributor, Col. Mikhail Khodarenok (ret.), told Gazeta.Ru that the “Easter truce was possibly agreed on in advance… with the most direct involvement of the White House.” He claimed that the Russian military had begun making preparations well before it was officially announced. According to Khodarenok, Putin’s initiative is a “goodwill gesture,” illustrating Moscow’s readiness to put an end to the hostilities.
In announcing the truce, which is set to expire at midnight on April 21, Putin said that it would help reveal whether Ukraine is sincerely willing to engage in negotiations to end the conflict. Responding to the temporary ceasefire on social media, Zelensky made a counteroffer, suggesting that the current lull in fighting be extended further. Meanwhile, Russia’s Defense Ministry reported on Sunday that its forces had been targeted by Ukrainian troops with artillery and mortar fire, as well as kamikaze drones more than 1,300 times since the truce took effect.

Busy days ahead.
• Trump Faces Self-Imposed Deadline To Make Scores Of Trade Deals (JTN)
The White House likes to say that it moves at “Trump speed,” but even the dealmaker in chief could face challenges meeting a self-imposed deadline to work out trade deals with at least 75 nations during a 90-day pause on higher tariffs. Trump plans to sign off on each deal personally. He’s also personally talking to top leaders in other countries. On Tuesday, the White House reported the president’s team was reviewing 15 trade proposals. On Wednesday, Trump reported “big progress” on talks with Japan. The president met with Italy Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni on Thursday at the White House. The same day, Trump described a call with Mexico President Claudia Sheinbaum as “very productive.”
On Friday, Trump talked with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, the leader of a nation that maintains a special relationship with the U.S. and a more even trade balance with the U.S. than other countries. Starmer underscored his “commitment to free and open trade and the importance of protecting the national interest” during the call, a Downing Street spokesperson said. In March, Trump announced a 25% tariff on foreign vehicles and auto parts. That also affects the UK. British car makers sell luxury vehicles to the U.S. In 2024, the UK shipped more than 1 million British vehicles worth about $9.79 billion to the U.S. Jaguar Land Rover halted shipments to the U.S. for a month as it studies ways to mitigate the costs of the tariffs.
The White House reported that more than 75 nations reached out to Trump and his trade team after Trump implemented a wave of what he called reciprocal tariffs on April 2 – Trump’s self-proclaimed “Liberation Day” for U.S. trade. On April 9, Trump announced a 90-day pause on those higher tariffs while keeping a baseline 10% tariff and a 145% tariff on imports from China. Trump has made some exemptions to that tariff on imports from China by excluding smartphones, computers and other electronics. A tariff is a tax on imported goods. The importer pays the tax and can either absorb the loss or pass the tax on to consumers in the form of higher prices.
Trump has promised that tariffs will help increase federal revenue, restore manufacturing jobs lost to lower-wage countries in decades past, and shift the tax burden away from U.S. families. Some nations, including China, have responded with retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods. Others have signaled they are eager to make a deal with the Trump administration. Trump has not yet announced any trade deals. Trump paused the higher tariffs for 90 days, giving his administration limited time to make deals with 75 nations the White House reported reached out seeking trade negotiations. Trump said after the 90-day pause, the higher reciprocal tariffs could come back into play, something most nations and business groups want to avoid.

“You’ve got 82% of Republicans with an unfavorable opinion of China — and 77% of Americans overall.”
• It’s World War III… and the Democrats Are Siding With China (Pinsker)
“Liberation Day” was on April 2. Hasn’t even been three weeks yet. As far as Trade Wars go, this one is still in diapers. So today, on Easter Sunday, let’s (carefully) vacate our bunkers and survey the dreadful damage: Hmm… Disruption has been minimal. You can still buy all the iPhones you want. Sure, the ambiguity over tariffs sucks for globally-sourced products, but most Americans understand Trump’s thought process. It’s threefold:
• China is a communist dictatorship that’s ruthlessly dishonest, absolutely untrustworthy, and has become our #1 global rival. Seems kind of stupid to perpetually send our money to our #1 global rival.
• One of the lessons of the COVID pandemic was the importance of nationalizing critical supply chains, so we’re no longer dependent on foreign rivals for medicine, food, and technology.
• Cheap (crappy) mass-produced Chinese goods are great, but American jobs are even better. And with millions of young people stuck in stagnant, low-paying jobs — unable to ever afford a house of their own — we needed to flip our priorities.Which is why Trump is playing brinksmanship and renegotiating trade deals. You can agree or disagree with his methodology, but the problems he’s attempting to fix are painfully authentic. Ignore them at your own peril. (Kamala Harris ignored ‘em, and it cost her the election.) Yet the Democrats are already waiving the white flag, bowing before the country that is, quite literally, a red flag. Again: it’s only been 18 days! Mark Twain popularized the expression in 1907, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” And, to be fair, poll numbers are statistics. So for consistency’s sake, we’ll use the exact same numerical thresholds as our pals in the mainstream media. Two days ago, we noted a new media theme about Trump’s “tanking” numbers on immigration. And there were a lot of stories:
• The Independent: Trump’s approval rating on immigration has tanked in recent weeks as more controversial deportations are revealed
• Newsweek: Donald Trump’s Approval Rating Over Immigration Is Tumbling
• Slate: Trump polling: Perhaps sending people to Salvadoran gulags is not exactly what voters had in mind.
• The Independent (Part II): Amid the Kilmar Abrego Garcia controversy, Trump is losing ground on immigration
• Splinter: Trump’s Immigration Policies Are Not Popular
• The American Prospect: The Anti-Immigration Majority Is a Mirage
• MSN: Trump’s economic and immigration policies face growing dissentWell, garsh! That all sounds crappy. So we dug deeper and reviewed the poll that the media described as “tanking,” “tumbling,” “losing,” and a “mirage”: “Tanked,” eh? Well, let’s look under the hood, shall we: Last week 57% of Americans supported Trump’s immigration policies. This week it “tanked” to 54%. Three points! The poll’s margin of error is 3.5, by the way. You don’t need to be a math major to recognize a big, fat, juicy Nothing Burger when you see one. According to the standard set by the mainstream media, a three-point drop — in an opinion poll with a 3.5 margin of error! — constitutes “tanking,” “tumbling,” “losing,” and a “mirage.” Fine. Recently, the Pew Research Center released a new poll on Americans perceptions of China. And what did they discover?
For the first time in five years, the share of Americans with an unfavorable opinion of China has fallen from the year before – albeit slightly, from 81% in 2024 to 77% in 2025. Well, that’s a four-point drop. (Even bigger than Trump’s “tanking” three-point drop.) Hmm. Let’s dig a little deeper: Views of China tend to vary by party. While majorities of adults in both parties have an unfavorable opinion of China, Republicans and Republican-leaning independents are significantly more likely than Democrats and Democratic leaners to hold this view (82% vs. 72%). So the real story is a 10-point divide between the parties on China. Keep an eye on this gap, because the Democrats’ knee-jerk impulse to oppose everything Trump supports — and support everything Trump opposes — will push them closer to China. They’ll sympathize with the Chi-Coms. They’ll editorialize on behalf of China. They’ll include Xi within the Great Liberal Wall of Resistance.
And they’ll likely pluck away a few libertarian-leaning, Ayn Rand-loving conservatives, too. One of the unexpected results of the poll was a 16-point drop amongst Republicans who had a “very unfavorable” view of China. Still, this issue is a yuuuuge net winner for the GOP. You’ve got 82% of Republicans with an unfavorable opinion of China — and 77% of Americans overall. Even after 18 days of hyperbolic, venomous headlines, more than seven out of 10 DEMOCRATS rightly recognize China as a bad actor! But that 10-point gap is a doozy. So far in this Trade War, there’s been a curious absence of nationalism. That’s a PR mistake. Beginning on Monday, it would be wise for Team MAGA to reframe the issue from fairness to patriotism — because the fairness argument has already been successfully seeded. We’re at 77%! There’s already a consensus. What’s missing is a patriotic call to arms, where the country understands that we’re sacrificing together so we can win together. We need a national buy-in on the mission. That’s what’s missing. And it’s not too late.

‘sundance’ on that midnight order.
“Any illegal alien who happens to also be a gang member, or illegal alien who would ‘smartly’ now claim to be a gang member, is ultimately the beneficiary of a Supreme Court order..”
• SCOTUS Orders Trump to Stop Deporting Illegal Alien Gang Members (CTH)
At 1:00am on Saturday, the Supreme Court of the USA issued an injunction blocking President Trump from deporting illegal aliens identified under the Alien Enemies Act. It was/is a bizarre order considering the lower court had not even ruled on the matter; worse yet, the Supreme Court created an imaginary “class” of aliens. Any illegal alien who happens to also be a gang member, or illegal alien who would ‘smartly’ now claim to be a gang member, is ultimately the beneficiary of a Supreme Court order blocking their removal or deportation. That’s how judicially insane this injunction is.
As outlined in the original injunction order, Justice Alito issued a blistering dissent, calling out seven of the justices who affirmed the order. An incredulous Alito concludes with the following paragraph:
Justice Alito’s dissent is wild.
Essentially, Alito calls out the other Justices for political weaponization, procedural misconduct, and abusing their positions to obstruct the Trump administration.
We have a rogue judiciary obstructing the will of The People. pic.twitter.com/FhVfGtDSXn
— Clandestine (@WarClandestine) April 20, 2025
The Trump administration has already filed a response, hitting on several of the key legal contradictions that are outlined by Alito in his dissent. The bottom line appears to be the ACLU ran to the Supreme Court less than an hour after filing a responsive motion with the court of jurisdiction, solely on the false premise that some illegal alien member within the removal order process of deportation, might be removed. The Supreme Court bought the argument, created an entire class of deportees under the auspices of gang membership, and blocked President Trump from deporting anyone who might be a gang member, while the illegal aliens argue about their non-gang status.
Madness; all of it.

“.. literally in the middle of the night, the Court issued unprecedented and legally questionable relief without giving the lower courts a chance to rule..”
“..with dubious factual support for its order, and without providing any explanation for its order..”
“The justices acted even though “it is not clear the Court had jurisdiction..” or authority to hear the case, he wrote.”
• Alito: SCOTUS Block Of Venezuelan Gang Deportations “Legally Questionable” (ET)
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito filed a strongly worded dissent from the court’s order issued early April 19 that temporarily blocked the Trump administration from deporting alleged members of the Venezuelan criminal gang Tren de Aragua. The dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, was posted on the court’s website early on April 20. “In sum, literally in the middle of the night, the Court issued unprecedented and legally questionable relief without giving the lower courts a chance to rule, without hearing from the opposing party, within eight hours of receiving the application, with dubious factual support for its order, and without providing any explanation for its order,” Alito wrote. “I refused to join the Court’s order because we had no good reason to think that, under the circumstances, issuing an order at midnight was necessary or appropriate.”
“Both the Executive and the Judiciary have an obligation to follow the law. The Executive must proceed under the terms of our order in Trump v. J.G.G., and this Court should follow established procedures,” Alito wrote. The justices acted even though “it is not clear the Court had jurisdiction,” or authority to hear the case, he wrote. “The papers before us, while alleging that the applicants were in imminent danger of removal, provided little concrete support for that allegation,” Alito wrote. In Trump v. J.G.G., the Supreme Court on April 7 granted the president’s request to pause a federal district judge’s orders preventing his administration from using the Alien Enemies Act to deport suspected members of Tren de Aragua but determined that detainees must be given an opportunity to challenge their removal.
The unsigned one-page administrative stay issued early April 19 to which Alito referred directed the federal government “not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this Court.” An administrative stay gives the justices more time to consider the emergency request to block the deportations. That order did not provide an explanation of why the court acted. The order was issued after the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed an emergency request on behalf of two Venezuelan nationals late on April 18, asking the Supreme Court to immediately block their deportation. The emergency application in A.A.R.P. and W.M.M. v. Trump challenges President Donald Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport illegal immigrants who are alleged or confirmed criminal gang members. A.A.R.P. and W.M.M. are the initials of two of the detained men.
The ACLU also sought a temporary restraining order from the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, as well as a stay of removal order from the Fifth Circuit, according to the application. On March 14, Trump signed Proclamation 10903, in which he officially declared that Tren de Aragua, a designated foreign terrorist organization, “is perpetrating, attempting, and threatening an invasion or predatory incursion against the territory of the United States.” The group is using mass illegal immigration to the United States to harm U.S. citizens, undermine public safety, and support the goal of the Venezuelan socialist regime with which it is associated to destabilize “democratic nations in the Americas, including the United States,” the proclamation said. The president invoked the Alien Enemies Act to authorize the “immediate apprehension, detention, and removal” of members of the group who are Venezuelan citizens 14 years of age or older and who are not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents of the United States.
The application said the ACLU’s clients are challenging the Trump administration’s use of the federal statute to deport them. The clients “are in imminent and ongoing jeopardy of being removed from the United States without notice or an opportunity to be heard, in direct contravention of this Court’s order in Trump v. J.G.G.” “Many individuals have already been loaded on to buses, presumably headed to the airport,” and are at risk of being sent to a prison in El Salvador, according to the April 18 application. On March 15, the Trump administration used the Alien Enemies Act to deport at least 137 Venezuelans to El Salvador, where they are now incarcerated “possibly for the rest of their lives” at the Salvadoran Terrorism Confinement Center, which is “one of the most notorious prisons in the world,” the application said. The application alleged that many of those deported since March 15 were not members of Tren de Aragua.
“Such false accusations are particularly devastating given the present Applicants’ strong claims for relief under our immigration laws,” the application said. The application came one day after U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix of the Northern District of Texas denied the ACLU clients’ request for a temporary restraining order halting removal efforts.Hendrix rejected the ACLU’s claim that its clients were “at imminent risk of summary removal” because the government denied the allegation. Late on April 19, Solicitor General D. John Sauer urged the Supreme Court to deny the application. “At a minimum, if the Court keeps its administrative stay in place, the government respectfully requests that the Court clarify that it is administratively staying removals only under the [Alien Enemies Act], and that its order does not preclude removal pursuant to any other immigration authorities,” Sauer wrote.

Why not all of it?
• Ukrainian Envoy Asks For 30% Of Germany’s Military Equipment (RT)
Germany should donate 30% of its available armored vehicles and military aircraft to Kiev, according to Andrey Melnik, Ukraine’s envoy to the UN. His appeal comes as the EU nations seek ways to boost support amid uncertainty over whether US President Donald Trump will continue to back Ukraine. Melnik, who served as ambassador to Berlin from 2015 to 2022, addressed his plea in an open letter to Chancellor-designate Friedrich Merz, published in Welt am Sonntag on Saturday. “It is in your hands, as peacemakers, to stop this damn war by the end of 2025,” he wrote. The diplomat outlined a series of steps he believes Merz must take to “cut the Gordian knot and force [Russian President Vladimir] Putin to make peace.”
According to Melnik, Germany should donate 30% of its Bundeswehr stock of armored vehicles and aircraft to Kiev, including around 45 Eurofighter Typhoon and 30 Tornado fighter jets, 100 Leopard 2 main battle tanks, and 115 Puma and 130 Marder infantry fighting vehicles. He also called on Berlin to defy “the expected resistance” from the Social Democrats (SPD) and send 150 Taurus cruise missiles. The SPD has opposed the missile deliveries, citing concerns about further escalation with Russia. The Social Democrats and Merz’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) are currently engaged in coalition talks.
Melnik urged Germany to commit 0.5% of its GDP, or €21.5 billion ($24.5 billion) annually, toward military aid to Ukraine through 2029. “These funds should be invested in the production of state-of-the-art weapons in both Germany and Ukraine,” he wrote. He also called for the 0.5% benchmark to be adopted across the EU as a “huge warning signal” to Russia. Merz recently expressed an openness to delivering Taurus missiles, prompting criticism from SPD leader Matthias Miersch and Defense Minister Boris Pistorius. Meanwhile, Russian Ambassador to Germany Sergey Nechayev warned that such shipments would “bring no changes to the battlefield” but would further implicate Germany in the conflict.

Ugly.
• Hegseth Shares Data on Yemen Strikes in Yet Another Chat (Sp.)
In March, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth sent data on upcoming strikes on Yemen in a closed group chat on the Signal messenger, the participants were not only people from his professional circle, but also his wife, as well as his brother and lawyer, the New York Times reported, citing sources. According to the publication, the Pentagon chief sent the flight schedule of the F/A-18 Hornets that attacked Shia military-political movement Ansar Allah (Houthis) in Yemen from his personal phone to a chat called “Defense | Team Huddle” — he published the same information in another chat with officials of the US administration.
The publication notes that Hegseth’s wife Jennifer, a former Fox News producer, is not an employee of the US Department of Defense. However, she was previously criticized for accompanying her husband to secret meetings with foreign leaders. At the same time, Hegseth’s brother and lawyer work at the Pentagon, but, as the newspaper said, it is unclear why they needed information about the upcoming strikes on Yemen. The newspaper notes that Hegseth was the group chat’s creator. In addition to his wife, it included about a dozen people from his personal and professional circle. Earlier, the Office of the Inspector General of the US Department of Defense launched an investigation into the use of the Signal messenger by the US Secretary of Defense after the scandal surrounding the leak of discussions between officials of the US administration about strikes in Yemen.
On March 24, the editor-in-chief of the Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg, said that on March 11, he had received a request in the Signal messenger and had got into a chat where the US authorities were discussing strikes against the Houthis ruling in northern Yemen. According to Goldberg, accounts under the names of Hegseth, US Vice President J.D. Vance, White House National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and other officials were in the chat, what many of them subsequently confirmed, insisting that they did not exchange classified information in the messenger. Goldberg presented screenshots of the correspondence, in which the Pentagon chief, several hours before the start of the operation, reports on the types of aircraft and targets, which, according to the journalist, could threaten servicemen if leaked. Goldberg accused officials of serious violation of security rules. It was also noted that the chat was set to automatically delete messages, which violated the requirements for storing official information.

“Americans’ constitutional rights are nowhere near as endangered by enforcing immigration law as they are by the lawlessness that open borders and weak leadership encourage.”
• Van Hollen Tries to Rewrite Script of His El Salvador Stunt (Margolis)
Last week, Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) scrambled to contain the fallout from his tone-deaf El Salvador stunt that quickly turned into a political fiasco. The Maryland Democrat, who initially grandstanded about his efforts to “rescue” a deported MS-13 gang member, is now in full damage control mode—desperately trying to rewrite the narrative of a trip that backfired spectacularly. Van Hollen even hit the Sunday talk shows to contain the fallout. Curiously insisting to Jonathan Karl of ABC News’s “This Week” that he’s not defending Kilmar Abrego Garcia, but that he’s defending “the rule of law.” Host Jonathan Karl pressed Van Hollen on “some pretty serious allegations of abuse” made by Abrego Garcia’s wife in court—allegations that President Trump has recently brought to national attention.
“Obviously, everybody in this country, even those undocumented immigrants, have rights. But are you concerned about standing so forcefully with somebody that has, you know, at least a questionable record?” Karl asked. Van Hollen insisted his advocacy wasn’t about the man himself, but about legal principle. “I am not defending the man. I’m defending the rights of this man to due process,” he claimed. “And the Trump administration has admitted in court that he was wrongfully detained and wrongfully deported.” Abrego Garcia’s case is anything but an example of a rushed or unjust deportation. In fact, the timeline of events makes clear that Garcia received extensive due process over the course of several years. His encounters with law enforcement began well before his deportation, including multiple arrests tied to suspected gang activity.
His immigration status was reviewed in formal proceedings before multiple judges. Notably, two separate immigration judges independently determined that Garcia was a member of the violent MS-13 gang—a finding that was never overturned or disputed in subsequent legal filings. Garcia was represented by legal counsel throughout, and he took full advantage of the appeals process. Several of his appeals were reviewed by higher courts and ultimately rejected. Adding to the legal weight against him, Garcia’s wife sought a protective order through a U.S. court. The judge in that case found that Garcia had committed acts of domestic abuse, further strengthening the government’s case for removal.
Taken together, these facts dismantle the narrative that Garcia was denied fair treatment. His deportation came only after a lengthy legal process, multiple court rulings, and ample opportunity to challenge the government’s case—proving that due process was not only afforded, but exhausted. Van Hollen’s defense of his misguided field trip to El Salvador boils down to hollow talking points about constitutional rights. He dramatically claims, “If we take [those rights] away from him, we jeopardize them for everybody.” Really, Senator? Because last I checked, Americans’ constitutional rights are nowhere near as endangered by enforcing immigration law as they are by the lawlessness that open borders and weak leadership encourage.
Meanwhile, Democrats such as Van Hollen keep sending a clear message to criminals and illegal immigrants worldwide: America’s laws are optional, especially if you can find a soft-hearted (or soft-headed) liberal to champion your cause. How many innocent Americans have to suffer due to gang violence fueled by people such as Abrego Garcia before someone such as Van Hollen admits this open-borders sympathy act only hurts the country? And let’s talk about priorities. While Van Hollen grandstands about “due process” in a Salvadoran prison, how about the rights of American families devastated by MS-13’s reign of terror? How about standing up for law-abiding citizens who expect safety in their communities? Instead, Van Hollen wants us to sympathize with a gang member who had no business in this country in the first place.

“He didn’t care when border patrol agents were being overrun, when families were being destroyed, when fentanyl was pouring into this country. But now he wants to talk about due process for someone with MS-13 ties?”
• Tom Homan Destroys Van Hollen for Prioritizing MS-13 Member (Margolis)
During a hard-hitting segment on ABC’s “This Week,” border czar Tom Homan tore into Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) for prioritizing a suspected MS-13 gang member over the countless American victims of illegal immigration. Homan’s comments came in response to Van Hollen’s trip to El Salvador, where the senator met with Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an alleged MS-13 member, wife-beater, and human trafficker recently deported by the Trump administration. “What bothers me more than that is a U.S. senator traveled to El Salvador on taxpayer dime to meet with a MS-13 gang member, public safety threat, terrorist,” Homan said. “And in the meantime, the day before he traveled, an illegal alien was arrested for murder, released to the streets rather than honoring an ICE detainer in his very own state.”
Homan didn’t stop there. He slammed Van Hollen for turning a blind eye to the border crisis throughout Joe Biden’s presidency. “What concerns me is Van Hollen never went to the border the last four years under Joe Biden,” he said, “when you had a 600% increase in sex trafficking in women and children. You have a record number of known suspected terrorists crossing that border. You had a quarter million Americans die from fentanyl overdoses because of the open border.” He continued, “You got over 4,000 illegal aliens [who] died making that journey, which is an historic record. What shocks me is he’s remained silent on the travesty that happened on our southern border.” Homan emphasized the staggering human cost of lax immigration enforcement, something Van Hollen appears uninterested in addressing.
“Many people died. Thousands of people died,” he said. “I’ve met with hundreds of angel moms and dads who buried their children that were murdered by an illegal alien—how many angel moms and dads has he met in, in the state of, uh, state of Maryland? That’s what concerns me.” According to Homan, this isn’t just about one deportation—it’s about a complete failure to acknowledge the real-world impact of Democratic immigration policies. “He’s more concerned about getting a photo op with a gang member,” Homan said, “than he is about the thousands of Americans who have been killed, raped, or trafficked because the border was left wide open for four years.”
Homan concluded with a damning indictment of Van Hollen’s priorities: “He didn’t care when border patrol agents were being overrun, when families were being destroyed, when fentanyl was pouring into this country. But now he wants to talk about due process for someone with MS-13 ties?” President Trump is back in the White House and his administration is wasting no time restoring law and order at the border. The days of open-border appeasement, of politicians bending over backwards for criminals while turning their backs on American families, are coming to an end. The public is fed up with leaders such as Van Hollen, who sympathize with gang members while ignoring the blood-stained consequences at home.

Oh, of course. Next week: women.
• MSNBC Suggests Trump Plans to Deport African-Americans (Bartee)
The latest racial-tinged conspiracy theory that the TDS-addled corporate state media is running with is that the Trump administration is developing plans to deport African-Americans, otherwise known as “people of color.” Let the brutal ogre and former Kamala Harris press ops goon who has rebranded herself as a journalist, Symone Sanders, explain:
“We’ve been talking about this all week, but Janai Nelson of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, she penned an op-ed in The Nation this week. And her op-ed talked about that we think democracies are — the way they die is dramatically, through these wars, and blood is shed, and it’s cinematic in a sense. But really, the realistic way in which democracies die, is it is dismantled brick by brick, piece by piece. And she says that what we are seeing now with the lawlessness from this administration are really the canaries in the coal mine gasping for air. I’m paraphrasing here. But to me, that is why Kilmar Abrego-Garcia’s specific case, the case of the gentleman who’s a make-up artist out of California who was also sent to that prison, that’s what the more — the 75% of the folks who have been sent, the men who have been sent there that don’t have criminal records — that is why this is so important. If they can do it to them, if they can snatch students off the street without any pushback or recourse, they will do it to any of us. To be very clear, it’s going to be the people of color, and vulnerable communities that are next in line.”
MSNBC continues blatant fear-mongering.
The host claims Trump will target "people of color" next due to their support for Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
This is moronic, yet some MSNBC viewers believe it.
Illegal alien = deport.
"People of color" = American = no deport.It's that… pic.twitter.com/CUa8OchKTA
— Media Lies (@MediasLies) April 19, 2025
Diverse Congressman Rep. Glenn Ivey (D-Md.) goes on to concur with Sanders’ apocalyptic warning, adding that “that’s certainly part of why the African-American community is so behind” trying to bring the “Maryland father”/alleged MS-13 gang member back to the United States, clearly insinuating that the Trump administration is going to specifically target blacks in its next roundup. Absolutely at no point did Trump, obviously, declare his intention to begin deporting minorities on racial grounds. What he did say — and, for the record, I don’t agree with trying to deport American citizens convicted of crimes — is that he would look into deporting “homegrown” criminals here, the meaning of which is not entirely clear. “The homegrowns are next, the homegrowns. You’ve got to build about five more places,” he told El Salvador president Nayib Bukele last week in reference to the prisons that currently house deported illegal aliens.
Later, during the same meeting, Trump clarified that these are not established plans, but that he instructed Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate whether doing so would be legal: “I’d like to go a step further, I mean, I say, I said it to Pam: “I don’t know what the laws are,” we always have to obey the laws, but we also have homegrown criminals that push people into subways, that hit elderly ladies on the back of the head with a baseball bat when they’re not looking, that are absolute monsters. I’d like to include them in the group of people to get them out of the country, but you’d have to be looking at the laws on that.”

Go away!
• Democrats Issue Warning To Biden – The Hill (RT)
Democrats are expressing frustration over former US President Joe Biden’s re-emergence in the public spotlight, arguing that his presence is complicating efforts to regroup after the party’s defeat in the 2024 presidential and congressional elections, according to The Hill’s sources. Biden made his first public appearance in months on April 15, delivering a speech sharply criticizing recent White House policy decisions. Biden claimed that US President Donald Trump has inflicted a “breathtaking” amount of damage on federal programs through extensive cuts, and went on to demean the Republican’s supporters and argue that America has “never been this divided.”
Many in the party believe the octogenarian’s return is ill-timed and risks distracting from the Democratic Party’s attempts to rebuild. Former press secretary to First Lady Jill Biden Michael LaRosa argued that Biden’s speech was a “lovely gift for the White House, President Trump and conservative media,” especially in light of the new tariff policies, when the administration is under “heavy scrutiny.” “If they had advisers who had their hand on the pulse of the Democratic Party or national politics, they would have understood the intense level of anger or indifference to them that remains inside our party and isn’t going away anytime soon,” LaRosa added.
Strategists close to the Democratic leadership have expressed concern that it’s an inopportune time for Biden to appear, especially as polling indicates that Americans are increasingly blaming Trump for his handling of the economy.Biden’s recent remarks have also drawn criticism from conservatives, who alleged that the Democratic Party and the former president’s policies were among the main factors contributing to divisions in American society. According to polling cited by The Hill earlier this year, only 39% of Americans approved of Biden’s presidency from 2021 to 2025, while 57% rated his performance negatively. In some surveys, he was described as one of the least popular living US presidents.

They support free trade because Trump does not.
“Negative partisanship is a helluva drug..”
• US Liberals Changing Their Minds About Free Trade (RT)
Support for free trade among American liberals has more than doubled since Donald Trump won his second term as US president in November, a study has suggested. During the election campaign, Trump accused America’s trade partners of ripping off the country and vowed to impose harsh duties on them. On April 2, he made good on his threat, announcing new “reciprocal” tariffs on nearly 90 countries, saying that it would raise revenues and boost the number of jobs in the US. After global markets reacted by dropping sharply, the president put most of the tariffs on hold for 90 days, reducing them to a baseline rate of 10%. However, the pause does not apply to China, whose exports to the US are now subject to tariffs of up to 145% amid an ongoing tit-for-tat trade war.
A poll by Polarization Research Lab, first published by the Financial Times and actively shared by social media users on Friday, has suggested that “American attitudes towards free trade have rapidly polarized” over the past several months. In early 2024, there was some 20% support for unrestricted exports and imports among both liberals and conservatives, the study said. However, the divide on the issue between the groups, which appeared in the run up to the election, has increased dramatically since Trump’s victory, it said. According to the poll, more than 40% of leftists surveyed now say that they “strongly approve” of free trade. The Democrats, whom liberals tend to support, had earlier blasted Trump’s tariff policies as being “dangerous” and a “corrupt scheme to enrich administration officials and those loyal to them.”
Meanwhile, the number of conservatives who support free trade has decreased, albeit not as sharply, with some 13% of them still favoring it, the study suggested. Some of the commentators online said that the results of the poll suggested that the supporters of both Democrats and Republicans tend to simply back the stance of their party on various issues, without actually looking into them. “Negative partisanship is a helluva drug,” chief data reporter at the Financial Times John Burn-Murdoch wrote on X about the findings of the survey. The director of Polarization Research Lab, Sean Westwood, disagreed with the notion, arguing that “this is not an irrational flip by Liberals in response to Conservatives – Liberals are witnessing a stock market crash and an economic retraction. It could very well be reasoned.”




Spike
Prof. Dr. Arne Burkhardt, a German pathologist, presents an unsettling slide show revealing that in vaccinated males, the spike protein from the COVID vaccine has entirely replaced their sperm. pic.twitter.com/bqDT8ETaov
— Dr David Cartland BMedSci MBChB MRCGP (2014) (@CartlandDavid) April 20, 2025

Lymphocytes
The most powerful cancer-killing cell is often the one oncologists overlook👇🏽 pic.twitter.com/ObmQOuWC51
— Fred’s Farm | Herbs (@FredsFarm247) April 20, 2025

Birds
So raven is like sky puppy, like owl is a sky cat? pic.twitter.com/MqVb9aZ8Kg
— Nature is Amazing ☘️ (@AMAZlNGNATURE) April 20, 2025

Harbor
The waters of this Harbor are so deep that even larger creatures can appear. pic.twitter.com/6HoIKaTYcv
— Nature is Amazing ☘️ (@AMAZlNGNATURE) April 19, 2025


Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.


