Ten years ago today, and just 11 days before the Trump vs Clinton election, Comey sent a letter to Congress stating the FBI was reviewing newly discovered emails regarding Hillary.
I posted the following at the time.
Kirk Fletcher retweeted
Australian CPI growth comes in at 4.4% pa.
Who would have thought that stacking the RBA board with mates, and lowering rates before an election, could have this result?
>be Lula
>get convicted of corruption
>get sentenced to 12 years
>get released by the STF on procedural errors
>never actually acquitted lmao
>beat Jair Bolsonaro in 2022
>Jair gets thrown into jail over an alleged coup attempt
>Congress votes to cut his sentence
>Lula vetoes it
>four years later, face his son
>during a debate, threaten to also lock him up if he loses the election
>election day
>former private lawyer, now STF judge, extends voting by 2 hours nationwide
>request came from Lula's own coalition
>win by 4 million votes in a runoff with no paper trail
>next day, Moraes orders the losing candidate to surrender his passports
>victory speech: "we're going to regulate social media"
>"democracy" lmao
>RIP Brazil
Kirk Fletcher retweeted
Replying to @ChuckieFFS
You absolute midwit. Congrats on repeating the Wikipedia "Nazis were far-right, end of story" summary you absorbed between TikToks.
Yes, the Nazis crushed independent unions, jailed and murdered communists and social democrats, and Hitler liquidated the Strasserite "left" wing of his own party in the Night of the Long Knives. That part is not in dispute. They were not Marxist class-struggle socialists. They hated Bolshevism as a Jewish plot and treated international socialism as the main enemy. Fine.
What your middle-school history class skipped is that they still ran a National *Socialist* state: private property existed only as long as it served the Führer’s racial and war goals, wages and prices were controlled, industry was cartelized under state direction, profit was subordinated to the party, and the economy was planned for autarky and rearmament. That is not free-market capitalism, liberal conservatism, or classical right-wing economics. It is the same family of state-directed, anti-liberal, collectivist economics practiced by every other fascist and "national socialist" regime. The name was not a prank; the 25-point program and the early rhetoric were full of anti-capitalist planks precisely because they were competing with the actual socialists for working-class support.
Your North Korea comparison is the usual gotcha and it is only half-clever. Yes, names can lie. But the NSDAP did not merely call itself socialist while secretly running a Rothschild hedge fund. They nationalized, directed, rationed, and regimented. The difference from Soviet socialism was mainly that the Nazis kept the owners as managers under party orders instead of shooting them all and installing commissars. Both systems produced shortages, secret police, and mass graves; one just had better uniforms and Wagner.
Elon pointing out the obvious—that "National Socialist" is not an ironic branding exercise and that the regime was economically left of any classical liberal or conservative—does not make him a moron. It makes him less obedient to the post-1945 academic consensus that insists every totalitarian who isn’t a full Marxist must be filed under "far-right" so the left never has to share the body count. Money didn’t buy him a brain; it just bought him a platform where he doesn’t have to pretend your selective reading of 1930s Germany is the complete picture.
Keep yelling "far-right fascists" while ignoring the actual economic policies and the party’s own name. It is the historical equivalent of covering your ears and shouting.
Kirk Fletcher retweeted
You have a Lefty Looney, as we do in the UK.
Anthony Albanese.
Replying to @InsideLucysHead
This joke didn't work on me because I had no idea who Andy Burnham was. Name sounded kind of familar.
I had to Google to discover he's your current PM. Not very memorable.
If it's any consolation, I'm sure you don't know who our Aussie PM is.
Kirk Fletcher retweeted
Replying to @InsideLucysHead
This joke didn't work on me because I had no idea who Andy Burnham was. Name sounded kind of familar.
I had to Google to discover he's your current PM. Not very memorable.
If it's any consolation, I'm sure you don't know who our Aussie PM is.
Kirk Fletcher retweeted
The government has set up a place Australians can contact if they want to dob in someone for violent extremism. In the ad, the warning signs are young aussie male voices in the background just saying regular things. Is this a joke? I mean weren't they yelling "Allahu Akbar" at Bondi?
Kirk Fletcher retweeted
Replying to @News24Aust
An Integrity File? On your opponent? At this time of year? In this part of the country? Localised entirely in your kitchen? ... May we see it?
LOL. That's quite a spin.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has sensationally claimed his office's “dirt file” questioning Helen Haines’ character was simply a list of funding requests showing her “integrity”.
news24.com.au/politics/austr…
Kirk Fletcher retweeted
“The Simpsons” was a beloved animated sitcom that ran for ten legendary seasons and concluded in 1999. The show was celebrated for what was widely perceived as a near perfect run that wrapped before it wore out its concept and overstayed its welcome.
Creator Matt Groening and showrunner James L. Brooks famously decided to bring the show to a conclusion after experiencing the negative audience reaction to the season 9 episode “The Principal and the Pauper,” in which it was revealed that the school’s principal was actually an impostor who had stolen the real Seymour Skinner’s identity. Brooks did not want to sully the show’s legacy by doing a bunch of weird episodes as the franchise slid into mediocrity and cultural irrelevance, so the writers and cast decided instead to go out on top and end things on a high note.
However, because of its centrality in 90s pop culture, a long-running Internet joke is to pretend “The Simpsons” is still on the air, a premise that gets more absurd and deranged with each passing year. If this show were still producing new episodes, it would be in its 38th season now, and most of the voice cast would be in their 80s.
The joke is to imagine how distorted this charming show would have become if it had been stretched out to more than 800 episodes. Comedy posters on “weird Twitter” used to try to top each other by making up terrible ideas for what modern episodes of the show might be like.
For example, a viral 2012 tweet imagined an episode where Lady Gaga helps Lisa Simpson with her self esteem. In 2019, popular shitposter Megan Amram originated the premise of Bart Simpson becoming a men’s rights activist to protest a gender-swapped reboot of “Itchy and Scratchy.”
But perhaps the most elaborate Internet “Simpsons” joke was a 2017 YouTube mockumentary “The Problem With Apu,” in which the comedian Hari Kondabolu ironically pretended to be offended by the charming and innocuous convenience store owner character Apu.
Everyone thought this was hilarious, especially since the show had been off the air for nearly two decades when the mockumentary was released. So, Twitter ran with the joke by pretending to “cancel” Apu, and the viral gag memorably resulted in the character’s voice actor, Hank Azaria, recognizing the meme by promising never to perform the character again, which everybody thought was really funny since Azaria had been retired for years.
Now, nearly a decade later, fans are pretending that the show — which has now been off the air longer than most people tweeting about it have been alive— has brought back the “cancelled” character with a new racially-appropriate voice actor.
I actually don’t think this is that funny, and I kind of think the gag of pretending “The Simpsons” is still airing new episodes has overstayed its welcome, a mistake the actual show “The Simpsons” would never have made.
If you haven’t seen this 1990s classic, which — and I cannot emphasize this enough — ended after 10 seasons in 1999, you can watch all the episodes on Disney+ (except the one with Michael Jackson that got pulled from streaming).
Kirk Fletcher retweeted
When I was a kid my dad showed me super-8 films of the Apollo launches. That's what got me hooked on space.
Elon's point is bigger than birth rates. People decide on a family based on a gut feel about the next 30 years. If every headline says the future is collapse, why sign up?
Australia's fertility rate is now under 1.5, well below the 2.1 needed to replace ourselves. Money matters, housing matters… but so does whether the future looks like something you'd WANT to show your kids.
Boosters caught by chopsticks, robots, AI doctors… that's what kids get to watch now.
Yep.
And his family have been friends with Haines for years. Whole thing seems weird.
Replying to @SandraEckersley
One minute: Pauline Hanson and her One Nation hoons created the culture of hate. Next minute, once it’s clear he’s a long-time climate activist who once praised Haines for taking climate change seriously and backed independents against the LNP: “just a middle-aged white rural man, a demographic all too easily radicalised.” When the facts don’t fit the preferred villain, just pivot to “all men are violent.” The groups you carefully excluded stay pure forever.
You realise your constant flip-flopping until you find a narrative to somehow prove you’re some kind of social justice warrior reads to most as just pathetic, don’t you?
Kirk Fletcher retweeted
“Women talk a lot about how scared of male violence they are, but from their behavior it's clear they never actually consider it a possibility”
When I was eighteen I was out for the night with my bf and some friends, we were barhopping in Kings Cross. I was tipsy & occasionally lippy & obnoxious towards strangers (who were asking for it!).
My bf quietly & discreetly at one point during the night said “babe, I love you, but fuck sometimes I worry that you’re writing cheques I won’t be able to cash, if it comes to and I’m on my own”. I was like “wtf are you talking about?”
He literally had to explain to me that if I was being a fuckwit starting trouble, he’d obviously have to defend me if anything went down, and if I’m being a massive smart ass and it’s just like him & me & my best girlfriend, then he’s going to be in a fight on his own. All because I was being an antagonistic smart ass to some strangers who couldn’t take a joke.
The idea that I needed to be able to back up my words with violence if it came to it, was something that had literally never occurred to me. Ever.
It was a total revelation. Suddenly i realised talk wasn’t “cheap” in this context, it was expensive. The idea that I could effectively get him beaten up, or put him in real danger, by being a precocious little shit arguing with idiots because I could, was horrifying.
From then on I was extremely reluctant to ever argue with strangers or act like a smart ass unnecessarily, because I was suddenly keenly aware that the guys we were with could potentially be expected to pay with their lives for any poorly received flippant comments we made.
It really was totally novel to me. This isn’t how women see the world, at all.
Ideally, he wouldn't have reacted like this
But any guy is aware that when you shove another man, getting lightly swatted (or more) is 100% on the table, so they won't do it unless they're being intentionally aggressive
Women talk a lot about how scared of male violence they are, but from their behavior it's clear they never actually consider it a possibility
We don't live in the 60s. You're shoving a steroid user on an athletic scholarship in the middle of a football game. You have to understand that this inherently comes with a degree of danger

























