The @X algorithm just sucks lately. Every post in my feed are the same 2 topics: 50 year mortgage, $2000 tariff dividend.

Scott Bessent is already in damage control, saying the $2,000 dividend Trump promised won't be a check 🤣

The only 2 people I’ve seen who are confident on Trumps IEEPA case are @howardlutnick and @SecScottBessent 🚩

Horrible, but this is also one of the most remarkable plane crash videos I've ever seen. I am fairly certain it's real because you could see it's wing rotate like that from another video.

Just rewatched Crazy, Cryin’, and Amazing music videos from Aerosmith. First I have to say, such great songs and truly iconic videos. But also some really weird choices in there lol.

He is delusional if he thinks things are cheaper.

NORAH O'DONNELL: --they've seen their grocery prices go up, inflation-- PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: No, you're wrong. They went up under Biden. Right now they're going down. Other than beef, which we're working on, which we can solve very quickly. So the beef-- the ranchers have really taken a drubbing over a 30-year period. Because of what I've done, the ranchers have done well.

Do you have to be a fun person to like that new Sora app? I don’t really get it. Why would anyone want to a watch exclusively ai generated videos? Terrible.

It’s impossible to take Trump serious when he is this petty while overseeing the largest economy in the world. I don’t know how anyone can argue that he puts the best interest of the country first when he is going to hammer a ton of American importers over an ad he doesn’t like.

The best short term gift of AI might be the way it will consume all of TikTok with slop. AI videos are just not the same. People will lose interest when majority of feed is AI. It’s already happening and already annoying.

My Apartment in Kyiv where I lived for 1.5 years got hit by a Russian drone last night. It's crazy that Russia is allowed to hit residential homes every night without anyone stopping them. It's just old people, students, and families living in this building. Russia must stop.

“Colossal landslide.” If people will lie about something so easily checked, why believe them about anything else? Trump received 49.8% of the popular vote compared to Harris’s 48.3 %. He won 312 electoral votes. His win was decisive, but hardly a landslide, never mind a colossal one.

The #1 feature of OS 26 for Desktop is Chrome now being able to auto-fill SMS codes

I used to think obviously no one buys such a blatant lie but of course they do. Politicians in this country need to stop making up a fake argument about everything. It’s making people retarded. There is no way Democrats are trying to close the gov’t over a trillion dollars for illegal aliens. It’s like laughably stupid except so many will watch this and believe it.

I am no fan of Comey but the way this has gone down with The President openly and publicly instructing the Justice department to go after certain people because they are "guilty as hell" is a weird look for the United States.

My 5 year old bought lunch for the first time, it was $4.30. I can not remember how much it was when I was a kid, maybe $2.50? Either way: $4.30 seems pretty cheap for meal these days.

If this is true, this is the largest public corruption scandal in the history of the United States and it's not even close. nytimes.com/2025/09/15/us/po…

Classic weekend morning show banter over on Fox and Friends. Celebrity news, recipes, genociding homeless people.

“It is Biden’s and Zelenskyy’s war” is so morally blind and factually wrong. Mr President, Putin is the one who is the invader. And, now this war is on your watch and you’ll be judged in the history books in the decades to come by your actions or lack thereof.

@greg_ip has a terrific piece about the implications of SCOTUS agreeing with Trump’s argument that IEEPA, a 1977 emergency power statute, authorizes taxes/tariffs. In short, a SCOTUS decision in favor of Trump's tariffs would hand a future President a sweeping taxation power. IEEPA nowhere specifically authorizes the President to impose taxes or tariffs. Instead, the government argues that IEEPA’s power to “regulate…any…importation or exportation of…any property” in which a foreigner has “any interest” includes the power to “tax” “importation.” On the government's legal logic, here are some examples of other potential IEEPA taxes: CARBON BORDER TAXES: A future President could declare a national emergency related to climate change as the basis for invoking IEEPA. According to Trump, courts cannot review such Presidential declarations. The President could then use IEEPA’s power to “regulate…importation” to tax imported goods based on embedded carbon content. DOMESTIC ENERGY TAXES: IEEPA’s power to “regulate” does not apply only to “importation or exportation.” It also applies to "transactions" involving "property" in which a foreign owns "any interest." Foreigners own at least a small share of most US energy companies, e.g. because European pension funds hold their stock. A future President could impose taxes on energy sales ("transactions") made by US energy companies--so long as a foreigner owned a single share. INVESTMENT TAXES: IEEPA’s definition of property includes money and financial assets, not just tangible goods. An IEEPA tax could be imposed on inbound and outbound investment flows. DIGITAL SERVICES TAXES: IEEPA's definition of “property” has long included “services." A future President could use his power to “regulate” the "exportation" of "services" to impose a tax on the global turnover of tech platforms. A STOCK TRADING TAX: Foreigners own shares in virtually all US publicly traded companies. IEEPA includes a power to regulate any “transfer” of any “property” in which a foreigner has “any interest.” If “regulate” means “tax,” a future President could use IEEPA to “tax” the “transfer” stock, so long as a foreigner owns a single share. AN “OFFSHORING TAX”: IEEPA has long been used to impose embargoes on US companies operating in countries like Iran. If IEEPA’s power to “regulate” includes the power to “tax," a future President could use IEEPA to tax on US companies that set up operations abroad rather than manufacturing at home. Congress never intended IEEPA to give the President an unbounded taxing power. Nor did the Constitution’s Framers, who were profoundly worried about taxation, intend for the President to have such an authority. But the plain language logic of the government’s arguments in the IEEPA tariff litigation would result in the President having an effectively unbounded taxation power.