🇺🇦🇨🇦 **MY STORY. A UKRAINIAN WAR VETERAN TRYING TO SUPPORT HIS FAMILY.** My name is Mykhailo Rohoza. I am 50 years old, a Ukrainian war veteran, a father of three children, and a disabled man living in Canada. In 2015–2016, I served in the Ukrainian Armed Forces with the 54th Separate Mechanized Brigade in artillery reconnaissance. I fought for my country, my family, and the freedom of Ukraine. On October 31, 2016, my life changed forever. A drunk driver hit me while I was crossing the road. I suffered more than 20 fractures and spent nearly five years bedridden. Today, I use a wheelchair, suffer from chronic pain, and cannot work. Our home in Ukraine was destroyed during the war. We eventually found refuge in Canada, hoping to rebuild our lives. But starting over with a disability and three children has been incredibly difficult. We live in Manitoba, where winters are long and brutally cold. We struggle to afford groceries, winter clothing and boots for our children, and heating bills that can reach enormous amounts. I spend my days writing on X, sharing news, expressing my opinions, and trying to build an audience. I hope to eventually earn enough through X to help support my family and become less dependent on donations. But I am not there yet. Sometimes I feel as though I am begging for charity rather than living the life I once imagined. Asking strangers for money is painful, especially for someone who once carried a weapon to defend his country. But I have three children who need food, warmth, and security. Their needs will always matter more than my pride. **I am not asking for a comfortable life or luxuries. I am asking for help surviving while I try to earn an income through my writing.** If you can spare a few dollars, it would mean a great deal to our family. If you cannot donate, following my account, sharing my posts, or helping me reach a larger audience would also make a difference. To everyone who has already supported us, thank you from the bottom of my heart. Your generosity has helped us through some of our darkest days. I survived war. I survived a devastating accident. I am still fighting, but today my fight is to give my children a decent future. **GoFundMe:** gofund.me/2f2775bff **Buy Me a Coffee:** buymeacoffee.com/OlenaRohoza **PayPal / e-Transfer:** [email protected]

The Red-Faced Man knows perfectly well that he is committing a terrible crime, and he is afraid that one day he will be held accountable for it… Journalist: Who gave the order to restrict Ukraine’s access to Starlink? Trump: I had nothing to do with it. Journalist: Did Elon Musk give that order? Trump: I don’t know who did it, but I had nothing to do with it.

🇺🇸 A question for Americans: If the next U.S. presidential election came down to just two choices — Volodymyr Zelenskyy or Donald Trump — which one would you choose to lead the country?

On November 3, 2026, Americans will elect a new Congress. Donald Trump is not on the ballot, and his presidential term does not end until January 2029. Even a devastating Republican defeat would not remove him from the White House. So why should he worry? Because American democracy has one inconvenient feature: winning the presidency does not mean owning the country. If Republicans lose control of Congress, Trump will remain president, but his political freedom will shrink dramatically. Democrats could block legislation, investigate his administration, subpoena officials, demand financial records, and scrutinize potential conflicts of interest involving his family and business interests. A Democratic Senate could also obstruct presidential appointments. And that may be what Trump fears most: accountability. Congressional investigations do not automatically establish criminal wrongdoing. But they can uncover evidence, expose questionable decisions, and create consequences extending beyond January 2029. Presidential immunity has limits, particularly regarding unofficial conduct. Trump may discover that leaving office does not necessarily mean leaving every controversy behind. There is also the possibility of another impeachment. Democrats would need only a simple majority in the House to impeach him, although removing him would require a two-thirds Senate vote. Trump has already survived two impeachments. A third would hardly be an achievement worth celebrating. But the most troubling question concerns what happens if he refuses to accept another political defeat. Remember 2020. Trump lost to Joe Biden but refused to acknowledge the result. He promoted unsupported allegations of widespread election fraud, pressured officials, challenged certified results, and attempted to obstruct the peaceful transfer of power. On January 6, 2021, his supporters stormed the Capitol. Police officers were assaulted, lawmakers evacuated, and Congress was forced to suspend its proceedings. The congressional investigation identified Trump's central role in efforts to overturn the election. Yet Trump returned to power in 2025 and pardoned numerous January 6 defendants while commuting the sentences of fourteen others. What message did that send to political extremists? That attacking democratic institutions carries consequences? Or that loyalty to the right politician might eventually bring forgiveness? Now another election approaches. On October 14, Reuters published an investigation examining nine potential ways Trump's administration could interfere with the midterm elections. Reporters consulted more than fifty election officials, lawyers, and experts. Their scenarios included pressure on election administrators, attempts to seize ballots or equipment, and possible misuse of federal authority. These scenarios are not proof of an existing conspiracy. But the fact that American experts must seriously examine them is disturbing. Trump cannot legally cancel congressional elections or simply reject their results. States administer elections, courts remain independent, and constitutional safeguards exist. But January 6 demonstrated that institutions depend on people willing to defend them. Will Trump accept a Congress determined to investigate him? Will he recognize results that weaken his political position? Or will Americans once again hear accusations of stolen votes and massive fraud? Nobody can responsibly claim that another insurrection is inevitable. There is no established evidence that Trump intends to organize one. But his previous conduct makes these questions legitimate. In 2021, Trump failed to retain power against the voters' decision. In 2024, he returned through the very electoral system he had previously attacked. On November 3, Americans will again exercise their constitutional rights. And after January 6, 2021, one question remains: if Trump dislikes the voters' decision again, will he stop at words this time?

🚨 ELON MUSK'S X: WHO REALLY HELPED FINANCE THE TAKEOVER OF TWITTER? The disclosure of investors behind Elon Musk's acquisition of Twitter has raised serious questions about who holds financial interests in one of the world's most influential social media platforms. Among the names linked to the investment structure are Russian billionaires Petr Aven and Vadim Moshkovich, as well as Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal. Their reported involvement raises an uncomfortable question: could some investors have interests extending far beyond financial returns? Petr Aven is a Russian billionaire and co-founder of Alfa Group, with longstanding connections to Russia's political and financial establishment. His relationship with Vladimir Putin has attracted scrutiny for decades. Aven also attended the February 24, 2022, meeting between Putin and prominent Russian business leaders, on the very day Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Vadim Moshkovich is another Russian billionaire, known for founding the agricultural giant Rusagro and previously serving in Russia's Federation Council. His political background and business interests raise questions about the presence of figures connected to Russia's establishment among investors associated with X. Then there is Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, whose investment interests include Kingdom Holding Company. His involvement in Twitter predates Musk's acquisition, and his financial participation in the new ownership structure has attracted considerable attention. But the most important question concerns the platform itself. For years, X has faced criticism over declining advertising revenue, controversial moderation decisions, and the amplification of political narratives. Yet Musk has continued pursuing policies that alienated advertisers and generated fierce public controversy. Why would investors tolerate such turbulence? One possibility worth examining is whether some shareholders value the platform's political influence as much as, or even more than, its financial performance. X is not simply another technology company. It is a powerful instrument capable of shaping international debates, influencing elections, amplifying propaganda, and determining which stories dominate public attention. For Ukraine, this raises particularly troubling concerns. Narratives promoting concessions to Russia, normalizing Putin's aggression, or portraying Ukrainian resistance as an obstacle to peace deserve careful scrutiny, regardless of who promotes them. However, the presence of particular investors does not, by itself, establish that they control Musk's decisions or coordinate the platform's editorial direction. Such allegations require evidence beyond shareholder identities. Nevertheless, the public deserves transparency about who finances influential information platforms, what interests those investors represent, and whether financial relationships create conflicts of interest. Because when a social media platform becomes a major force in global politics, its ownership is no longer merely a private business matter. The real question is not only who owns X, but whose interests its decisions ultimately serve.

❗️😡 Putin personally authorized a new wave of sabotage operations against NATO countries. One of the attacks nearly caused mass casualties in Germany, according to The Wall Street Journal. In early August, explosive-laden drones attacked Leipzig/Halle Airport, one of Europe's most important cargo hubs, through which military aid is delivered to Ukraine. One drone struck an Antonov cargo aircraft but failed to explode. A second collided with another aircraft, while a third detonated near the airport perimeter. According to investigators, a successful attack could have resulted in numerous casualties. U.S. intelligence believes the operation was among the first incidents in a new Russian sabotage campaign personally approved by Vladimir Putin. According to WSJ sources, the Kremlin is frustrated that neither the war nor negotiations with Washington have forced Ukraine to make concessions. Western intelligence agencies reportedly believe that the covert operations are being directed by a GRU unit under the command of General Andrei Averyanov. Investigators also suspect Colonel Denis Smolyaninov of involvement in the Leipzig attack. The scale of the preparations is staggering. Russian operatives allegedly established a network to transport explosives, weapons, and drones through Serbia into the European Union. Investigators discovered safe houses and hidden weapons caches near airports and defense industry facilities. Seven suspects have been arrested in Serbia. The drones used in Leipzig were reportedly equipped with Semtex explosives and German 5G SIM cards. Cyber intelligence specialists traced their communications to servers previously used by Russia's GRU military intelligence agency. According to the newspaper's sources, officials in Berlin even considered the possibility of invoking NATO's Article 5 if the attack had resulted in mass casualties. Following the operation's failure, a Kremlin-linked intermediary reportedly delivered a warning to German officials: "Leipzig will not be the last place to be attacked." — The Wall Street Journal

💬 “I am lost for words. This man \[Putin\] is a murderous invader, and this pathetic individual \[Witkoff\] is giving him the diplomatic equivalent of a blowjob!” — This is how Sir Conor Burns, former British Minister of State for Trade and Member of Parliament, reacted to Steve Witkoff publicly calling Putin a “humanitarian.” Other reactions from politicians who are not afraid to speak out and have not lost their conscience: U.S. Senator Tom Tillis: 💬 “What the fuck, Steve? Look up the definition of ‘humanitarian’ in the dictionary. You should go to Ukraine and ask the families of the children Putin has abducted and murdered.” U.S. Senator Dick Durbin: 💬 “Calling war criminal Vladimir Putin a ‘humanitarian’ is a slap in the face to the tens of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers and civilians killed by Putin during his brutal war.” British politician Tom Tugendhat: 💬 “Putin is a murderer. His soldiers use rape as a weapon. Russia today is exactly what President Reagan rightly called an evil empire.” U.S. Senator John Cornyn: 💬 “No, Putin is a cold-blooded murderer.”

🇺🇸🧐🤮💩 “There will be at least a partial ceasefire. The conditions for it are already in place,” said Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff. “So basically, Ukraine stops shooting, while the Russians can keep fucking bombing the hell out of it for as long as they want,” the diplomat added.

©Piontkovsky: “In 13 days, they will start driving the crazy orange pig back into its pen.”

70% OF AMERICANS DO NOT TRUST TRUMP TO ACCEPT A REPUBLICAN DEFEAT IN THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS! More than a third of his own fellow Republicans share that distrust. This is not merely a disagreement reflected in opinion polls. It is a collective perception among Americans of their own president as someone fundamentally undemocratic — as a dictator! According to a Washington Post–ABC News–Ipsos poll, 70% of respondents said they were either not very confident or not at all confident that Trump would accept a Republican defeat in November. That includes 94% of Democrats, 77% of independents, and 36% of Republicans. Interestingly, 60% of respondents still believe the midterm elections will be fair, while 65% trust the accuracy of the vote count. In other words, Americans still trust the electoral system, but they do not trust Trump personally. Trump has repeatedly refused to make an unconditional commitment to accepting election results, whatever the outcome. In February, he told NBC News that he would accept the results only “if the elections are honest.” He has also openly advocated the “nationalization of voting” and “federal control” over elections, directly challenging the constitutional framework under which states administer elections. In January, he reportedly told The New York Times that he regretted not using the military to seize voting machines after the 2020 election. That 70% represents a threat waiting to materialize. When the Republican Party ties its future to a man whom two-thirds of the country distrust, when millions of Americans regard their president as a crook, a fraudster, a rapist, and a pedophile — and yet treat all of this as somehow acceptable, allowing him to remain within the legitimate political system — something is profoundly wrong with society. It means that Americans may also tolerate his refusal to recognize election results, potentially allowing their democratic country to slide toward authoritarianism and ultimately totalitarianism. Even the cancellation of the November 3 elections might not shock society as much as it should. It could conceivably be accepted. This is an extremely dangerous situation, and everyone in America and beyond must recognize the seriousness of what is at stake. If Americans do not turn out in massive numbers on Election Day to defend democracy, they may instead find federal security forces sent by Trump appearing at polling stations. DEMOCRACY IS IN DANGER!

“You talk so much about how my president, President Trump, is a humanitarian. You are a humanitarian too, sir, and I welcome that. I commend you and thank you once again.” And this pathetic, cowardly nobody represents America!

THE SON-IN-LAW IS NO WITKOFF! This time, Jared Kushner, Donald Trump’s son-in-law and key adviser, was absent from the American delegation. Officially, his absence was attributed to a seasonal illness. However, according to this account, the real reason behind the diplomatic maneuver was a September meeting at the Kremlin, where Kushner and Putin had a heated confrontation. When the Russian leader spoke about the imminent capture of Donbas, Kushner sharply objected: “With all due respect, you told us exactly the same thing a year ago. What are the chances that we will come back here in another year and you will tell us the same thing again? Maybe we shouldn't waste another year?” Moreover, raising his voice, Kushner reportedly delivered an extremely harsh rebuke: “You are simply stalling for time and feeding us illusions while your country is slowly sinking!” Behind Jared Kushner’s supposed “illness,” the account alleges, lies a serious split within Trump’s own team. Witkoff favors a “flexible approach” and concessions along the line of contact, while Kushner has taken a much tougher position, demanding immediate guarantees from Moscow regarding Donbas. This disagreement reportedly culminated in the September confrontation with Putin. To avoid jeopardizing the summit and the delivery of the so-called “Norwegian package,” Trump allegedly decided to temporarily remove his son-in-law from direct contact with the Russian leader, entrusting the face-to-face diplomatic negotiations to the more accommodating Witkoff.

Steve Witkoff, addressing Vladimir Putin after he released a 74-year-old American hostage: "...You speak so often about how my president, President Trump, is a humanitarian. You are also a humanitarian, sir, and I acknowledge that. I commend you, and I thank you once again..." What an absolute disgrace! America, how will you ever wash yourself clean of this filth and shit, mixed with blood?!

JD Vance: "...I think Steve Witkoff did the right thing by saying some nice things to a man (Putin) who had just released an American hostage... Witkoff is a diplomat. His job is to go over there and do his job..." I genuinely cannot understand whether Vance is actually an idiot or whether his speech is intended for idiots! Just think about it: how can you simultaneously call someone a "good person" and a "criminal"? Good because he released a hostage whom he himself had abducted on the territory of another country, deprived of freedom, illegally held in inhumane conditions, and then traded like a piece of property in exchange for the concessions and benefits he wanted from the United States?! Or does Vance believe that "good guy" Putin freed someone who had been taken hostage by people who had absolutely nothing to do with the Russian president?! Damn, this is complete insanity, beyond all comprehension! That's pretty much how I see it.

“We all know,” Trump said, “that Ukraine is one big desert. The only place that isn't a desert is Crimea, which is surrounded by an ocean on all four sides. Before the Russian invasion, it rained there for the first time in ten years. The sands turned into swamps, and the Russian tanks got stuck.”

“Nobody understands what a great president I am. I think I'm smarter now than I was 20 years ago. I don't know why,” — Trump. If nobody understands how great you are, maybe you're not such a great president after all. But you're definitely a colossal fucking moron. A spectacular fucking idiot. And a great traitor, too. Oh, and quite the pedophile. Possibly even a great one. And a massive crook as well. Although, no. You've still got a long, long way to go before you can claim greatness in that department.