When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
There seem to be an awful lot of meteors randomly impacting the continental United States, now that Iran has vowed retaliation against the US for its ongoing bombardment of their country.
Last edited by Joe Perez; Mar 25, 2026 at 01:09 PM.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Friday said it is dropping the requirement for diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) sensors...
Earlier this year, EPA sought data on DEF system failures from the manufacturers that account for over 80% of all products used in DEF systems. Thus far, the agency said it has received data from 11 of the 14 manufacturers, and less than a month later, the preliminary findings helped inform this new guidance.
"Failing DEF systems are not an East Coast or West Coast or Heartland issue; it is a nationwide disaster," said EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin. "I have heard from truck drivers, farmers, and many others complaining about DEF and pleading for a fix in all 50 states... Farmers and truckers should not be losing billions of dollars because of repair costs or days lost on the job."
The Diesel Truck Liberation Act, a bill working its way through both the House and Senate, similarly would prohibit federal agencies from requiring manufacturers to install emissions control devices or onboard diagnostic systems and would retroactively protect individuals prosecuted for tampering with such equipment.
The EPA's updated guidance, announced Friday, allows truck manufacturers to bypass sensors that monitor the quality of DEF. Under previous regulations, if these sensors detected poor fluid quality--or if the sensor itself malfunctioned--the vehicle's engine would derate, limiting speed or forcing a full shutdown to ensure emissions compliance.
The EPA clarified that manufacturers are not required to use Urea Quality Sensors (UQS) and are encouraged to use alternative methods, such as nitrogen oxide (NOx) sensors, to meet adjustable parameter regulations.
The American Trucking Associations (ATA) praised the shift, noting that the sensors frequently sidelined otherwise safe, compliant trucks due to reliability issues rather than actual environmental hazards.
"The EPA has significant concerns about ongoing reports of DEF inducements due to the failure of [Urea Quality Sensors] impacting the owners and operators of diesel-powered equipment unnecessarily," EPA's guidance said. "Manufacturers who can improve the robustness of their SCR systems through the use of alternative monitoring technologies, including the use of NOx sensors, are encouraged to make such changes, including on their existing products. EPA staff are prepared to work with manufacturers to evaluate and approve alternate approaches on an expedited basis."
James Madison in Federalist No. 10 speaking almost directly about "No Kings" protests:
"...of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people, commencing demagogues, and ending tyrants."
Hamilton was not describing a foreign enemy. He was describing the domestic danger of leaders who wrap private ambition in the language of popular liberation.
The Founders built the Constitution specifically to channel political energy through deliberative institutions and representative structures rather than street-level mobilization. They understood that mass action divorced from institutional accountability was not democracy. It was the precondition for its destruction.
The men who designed the American constitutional order were not naive about human nature or the nature of political power. They had watched the ancient republics of Greece and Rome collapse. They had lived through the instability of the Articles of Confederation. They understood, with a clarity that few political thinkers before or since have matched, that the greatest threat to self-governance was not foreign invasion but internal faction, specifically the organized manipulation of popular sentiment by private interests pursuing private ends under the banner of the public good.
Elite money does not create authentic civic movements.
When elite money is doing the creating from scratch, what you get is not a movement. What you get is a manufactured crowd. The difference between the March on Washington in 1963 and "No Kings" in 2026 is not a difference of scale or passion. It is a difference of origin.
Career Democratic staffers in Washington decided they wanted the electoral energy of the Tea Party without the organic origin that gave the Tea Party its power. So they built a professional imitation, funded it with institutional money, and called it a grassroots movement.
This is not civic protest. This is a campaign operation executing a midterm electoral strategy under the legal cover of nonprofit civic organizing, funded by dark money networks specifically structured to avoid the disclosure requirements that would apply to direct political expenditure. The march is the product. The November election is the customer. The millions of genuine, frustrated Americans filling the streets are the raw material.
This is precisely the kind of faction Madison warned against in Federalist No. 10, a group "united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community," operating not through the deliberative institutions the Constitution established but through the manufactured appearance of popular will. And it is precisely what Hamilton warned against in Federalist No. 1, the demagogue who begins a career by paying court to the people and ends it somewhere else entirely.
Average American gas prices have increased less than $1 a gallon since Operation Epic Fury began. But yesterday, Euronews reported that average EU gas prices are up an eye-watering 70%-- with no relief in sight. Yesterday, Al Jazeera asked, "Is Europe heading to an energy crisis?" On Thursday, the Guardian reported that hundreds of Australian gas stations have completely run out of fuel. (It's worth noting that Australia enthusiastically cooperated with the UK on helping push the RussiaGate hoax. Just saying.)
Guess which country is best positioned to weather a global energy crisis? Hands down, it is the United States of America. Thanks to President Trump, and to the shale boom, we are now energy independent. Only a tiny fraction of US oil comes through the Strait of Hormuz. We don't need it.
And, since January, we also have oil-rich Venezuela in our pocket.
Runners-up for well-positioned countries include China (which has squirreled away a vast petroleum stockpile), Russia (which NATO's neocons sneeringly dismissed as the "gas station with nukes"), and a short list of smaller oil-exporting countries like Mexico, Norway, Brazil, and --believe it or not-- Canada.
Remember, for something like 400 years, London has controlled insurance availability to the Strait. But after Trump launched the Iranian operation, they had a TDS-fueled temper tantrum and peaced out. To teach Trump a lesson.
But London's departure from Hormuz insurance leaves only the US. Which means the US decides (a) who gets an escort and (b) who gets insured. And by logical extension, who gets the oil.
Can you see it yet? If the US is the only country providing either escorts or insurance, guess who actually controls the Strait of Hormuz? Correct, we do. As our chief executive, President Trump does. He will soon hold both de facto (US Navy escorts) and de jure (US insurance) control.
California is about to shut down several of its last major oil refineries, and while politicians celebrate a "green victory," the rest of America is about to pay a devastating price. As the nation's largest refining hub collapses, nationwide fuel shortages, exploding gasoline and diesel prices, crippled supply chains for food, medicine, trucking, and aviation are inevitable.
This is no longer a California story -- it is rapidly becoming a full-blown national energy and economic emergency that will raise the cost of living for every American family and threaten the stability of the entire U.S. economy.
During the Biden administration, the CIA--the actual Central Intelligence Agency--labeled white stay-at-home moms like me national security threats. Violent extremists in training. For choosing to raise our kids, build our homes, and pass on the values that matter to us and to this nation. The same nation that was founded on the values of Western Civilization. The same nation that overwhelmingly shared these values until about 60 years ago when they started whittling down. I mean, who wants to be that successful, right? We had to change something for sure. I wish it was some bad joke. It is not.
On October 6, 2021, they released the assessment titled "Women Advancing White Racially and Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremist Radicalization and Recruitment." Sounds official, right? Like tracking bomb-makers. Nope. The target was white traditional mothers. Not motherhood in general--just us. White women who see motherhood as our highest calling. White women who want intact families, less daycare, and more time teaching kids right from wrong at the kitchen table. They claimed celebrating stay-at-home motherhood and teaching kids about their Western European heritage was how "white REMVE" groups recruited. Their words.
Apparently nothing screams "extremist pipeline" like a white mom baking bread and reading her kids true American history, true Roman history, true Greek history, true British or Scottish or even Irish history. Why, they weren't even telling them to be ashamed of their skin color!
Why moms? We're the ones holding the line. We say no to the school nonsense. We teach family first, faith, history, heritage. That terrifies the people who want to remake the next generation in their image. Don't they all look so very happy and stable? Yeah, right. So they give us the extremist label.
Regular, everyday white mothers. Not radicals. And the CIA decided we were the problem--not border chaos, not fentanyl killing teens, not failing cities. Nope. Moms.
It fed straight into Susan Rice's White House domestic-terrorism strategy and the FBI's new priorities. How can that be? We are constantly told only Trump weaponizes the government.
Normal family life--marriage, babies, and refusing to teach shame or believe that present humans are responsible for the sins of their ancestors--becomes a "pipeline to danger." The hypocrisy is grotesque. Democrats preach "women's rights" and "empowering families" while working overtime to weaken the traditional family so the state can step in and take control. Nothing screams "progress" like racially targeting white women who actually show up for their kids and calling them a threat, right?
The people sworn to protect us used the full weight of the intelligence community to paint white mothers as the enemy--while pretending to champion women. Sure, they champion women who make the state their mommy and daddy. Those people can be told what to do and when to do it and how high to jump to get it.
The real threat is the twisted mindset that needed to racially target us in the first place.
p.s. One doesn't need to be pro-Trump or MAGA or even Conservative to know that the people who keep trying to tear this country down and rebuild some weird and insane redistribution network are serious about their goals.
USAID money was funneled to an organization that created fake Ukraine and Russiagate evidence against Donald Trump
The CIA then worked with the agency to use that evidence in the impeachments against Donald Trump to remove him as President
Literally treason
“New reporting reveals that USAID and a CIA analyst were behind a project that later led to one of Trump's impeachments independent journalist
— USAID effectively created this organization called the Organized Crime and Corruption Research Project Reporting Project — We also know that it did the foundational research that was essential to bringing the impeachment case against Trump in December of 2019. It was what the CIA whistleblower relied upon in his initial complaint in lDecember of 2019
So those are the facts
— So this is basically a situation where the CIA person in the White House who've been left over by Obama writes a a complaint describing alleged violation of the law. This was then picked up in the house, impeached Trump, the Senate of course declined to hear it. But I think what's so interesting here is that this is an organization that's behind it that's funded by USAID that would not exist without USAID in what I think you have to consider to be domestic politics, which is absolutely forbidden.
— So this looks like regime change tactics that the CIA and USAID had done abroad being brought back home against Donald Trump”
0
