In an unprecedented show of bipartisan unity, President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump have joined forces to demand the inclusion of a new frontrunner in their upcoming debate: ‘None of the Above.’ This mysterious candidate, whose popularity has surged in recent polls, seems to resonate deeply with an American public exhausted by traditional political choices.

“We need to give the American people what they want,” Biden announced at a press conference, squinting at his notes. “If they want ‘None of the Above,’ then by golly, ‘None of the Above’ should have a podium right next to mine.”

Trump, never one to be outdone, quickly echoed the sentiment from his Mar-a-Lago resort. “You know, a lot of people are saying ‘None of the Above’ is doing a tremendous job. A fantastic job. Maybe the best job ever done by a candidate,” he declared, adding, “Frankly, some people are saying ‘None of the Above’ is more popular than Sleepy Joe and Crooked Hillary combined.” But also, they say not as good as me. Not as good at all. But okay.

Political analysts are baffled by the rise of ‘None of the Above,’ a candidate who has yet to speak a word, propose a policy, or even make a public appearance. Some speculate that ‘None of the Above’ represents a radical departure from the norm, embodying the ultimate protest vote against a system perceived as broken.

Meanwhile, social media is ablaze with speculation about the enigmatic candidate. Memes featuring an empty suit at a debate podium have gone viral, with captions like, “Finally, a candidate who says what we’re all thinking!” and “The silent majority speaks at last!”

However, not everyone is thrilled about the prospect. The Commission on Presidential Debates has expressed concern about logistical challenges. “It’s hard to put an empty chair on stage and call it a candidate,” an anonymous source admitted. “But if this is what democracy looks like in 2024, who are we to argue?”

As the debate date approaches, both Biden and Trump are preparing for the unprecedented challenge of debating an opponent who literally cannot be rebutted. “I think I can handle ‘None of the Above’,” Biden quipped. “I’ve been dealing with empty promises my whole career.”

Trump, on the other hand, seems confident as ever. “I’ve debated the best, the brightest, and the biggest losers. ‘None of the Above’ is going to be a piece of cake,” he boasted. “And believe me, I know cake.”

Only time will tell how ‘None of the Above’ will perform under the bright lights of the debate stage. But one thing is certain: in a political landscape where anything can happen, the silent candidate might just have the loudest voice of all.

In a courtroom drama that’s giving soap operas a run for their money, the National Enquirer finds itself in the hot seat, and it’s not because of another shocking alien sighting. No, this time it’s because of the Trump hush money trial, and the tabloid’s credibility is taking a nosedive faster than a UFO over Roswell.

David Pecker, the former head honcho of the National Enquirer, took the stand and spilled more beans than a clumsy barista. His testimony about hush money payments to Stormy Daniels, the adult film star with a tale to tell, has put Trump in a bad light and left the Enquirer’s reputation looking dimmer than a UFO sighting in a fog.

“National Enquirer: From Tabloid to Tab-loid” – the transformation is complete. Once revered as the go-to source for Elvis sightings and celebrity diets, the Enquirer now finds itself tangled in a web of payoffs and political intrigue.

“It’s like watching a three-ring circus,” commented one observer, munching on popcorn and flipping through the latest issue. “Except instead of clowns, we’ve got lawyers and instead of acrobats, we’ve got Pecker spilling the beans.”

Pecker’s testimony has exposed the Enquirer’s cozy relationship with Trump, revealing a world where stories were bought, sold, and spun faster than a UFO darting across the night sky. The tabloid’s front-page exclusives now seem about as trustworthy as a conspiracy theory from your crazy uncle.

“I used to believe everything I read in the Enquirer,” admitted a former fan, tearing up old issues. “But now? I’d sooner trust Bigfoot to give me financial advice.”

In the courtroom, the Enquirer’s legal team is scrambling to do damage control, but it’s like trying to patch up a sinking ship with duct tape. With each bombshell revelation, the Enquirer’s credibility sinks lower than a UFO trying to land in a swamp.

“It’s a sad day for journalism,” lamented another spectator, shaking his head. “I used to rely on the Enquirer for my news fix. Now I’ll have to get my fix from… well, anywhere else.”

As the trial drags on, the National Enquirer finds itself on trial by public opinion, and the verdict isn’t looking good. Pecker’s testimony has put the Enquirer in a tight spot, leaving its credibility in tatters faster than you can say “alien abduction.” And as the dust settles, one thing is clear: the Enquirer’s days as a trusted news source are about as over as Elvis sightings in Vegas.

Idaho Governor Brad Little has recently noted that due to his success in restricting all rights from anyone NOT a white male, that he managed to shave 200 years off the state.

“Look how young our state looks. And as you know, we in Idaho like them young.”

In a speech given to a large group of white men, Little said this:

“Behold the wondrous state of Idaho, where the clocks seem to have wound themselves back to the year 1824. No, you haven’t stumbled upon a secret DeLorean or a wormhole in the space-time continuum. This is simply Idaho, a land where modernity takes a backseat, and women’s rights are as rare as a UFO sighting in the Gem State.

Picture this: you wake up in your quaint Idahoan abode, ready to face the day in your bonnet and petticoats, only to realize that your rights as a woman have vanished quicker than a pioneer’s covered wagon disappearing into the sunset.

Yes, my friends, welcome to a place where the laws seem to be written by folks who think the suffragette movement is just a myth perpetuated by future history textbooks. Idaho, where the women’s rights movement didn’t just hit a roadblock, it took a sharp detour off a cliff.

In this whimsical land of potatoes and patriarchy, it’s as if the calendar stopped dead in its tracks over a century ago. You half-expect to see people bartering with pelts and trading beads for goods. But no, instead you witness a legislative session where women’s rights are on the chopping block faster than you can say “manifest destiny.”

Let’s talk about voting rights, shall we? While the rest of the nation is busy discussing the nuances of democracy in the 21st century, Idaho has seemingly transported itself to an era where women’s voices were as muffled as a stagecoach on a dusty trail. In this delightful throwback, the powers-that-be decided that maybe, just maybe, women shouldn’t have too much say in who gets to steer the ship of state.

And don’t even get me started on reproductive rights. While the rest of the country is embroiled in debates about bodily autonomy and reproductive health, Idaho has seemingly decided that it’s high time to dust off those archaic laws from the 19th century. Because, you know, who needs progress when you can have moral indignation and outdated morality instead?

But fear not, intrepid time-travelers! Despite the amusing (or infuriating) resemblance to a history textbook come to life, there’s hope yet for the fairer sex in the land of potatoes. After all, even the most stubborn of time loops eventually come to an end.

In the meantime, let’s embrace the absurdity of it all. Living in Idaho is like living in the year 1824, where women’s rights are as elusive as a sasquatch sighting in the Sawtooth Mountains. So, grab your bonnets and your sense of humor, fellow travelers, for the journey promises to be as bewildering as it is bizarre. Welcome to Idaho, where progress takes a backseat and the past is alive and kicking – whether you like it or not.”

Trump’s lawyers are looking for more details on his devastating loss Friday in a New York fraud case that threatens the empire. Not only is the Ex-President forced to pay $355 in fines, but he is also ineligible do business in the State of New York for the next 3 years.

Lawyers are looking for a response to the question “What about more fraud?”

Trump has admitted that most of what he has done in NYC could never be categorized as business. Business, he suggested, is too sticky when you consider things like ethics and profits. So why go that route when fraud is so much better?

Until a ruling is heard, Trump will have to hand over the keys to his hotels, office buildings, and drive-thru classified documents outlets.

“Sometimes you have to take a giant Trump”

Former President Donald Trump addressed the rumors swirling around his extravagant taste in toilets. With a characteristic blend of bravado and bluntness, Trump tackled head-on the speculation that his lavatories were merely gilded props for show.

“Let me tell you folks, these solid gold toilets were not a vanity project,” Trump declared, his signature mane slightly ruffled, perhaps from the weight of the topic at hand. “They were a necessity!”

The former commander-in-chief explained that, contrary to popular belief, his penchant for gold-plated fixtures wasn’t just about flaunting wealth. “Listen, when you’re dealing with the kind of diarrhea I have, you need something sturdy,” he asserted, waving his hand for emphasis. “Regular toilets? They just can’t handle the pressure, believe me.”

As journalists exchanged perplexed glances, Trump delved into the logistical challenges of his unique predicament. “I’m talking about a level of digestive disruption that would make even the strongest porcelain crack,” he elaborated, his voice lowering to a conspiratorial whisper. “These toilets? They’re like Fort Knox for my, uh, personal affairs.”

Despite the levity of the moment, Trump’s candid revelation shed light on a lesser-known aspect of life in the upper echelons of society. Behind the glitz and glamour, even the most powerful figures grapple with the mundane realities of bodily functions.

As the press conference drew to a close, Trump left the podium with a final parting shot. “So next time you see those shiny toilets, just remember: it’s not about luxury, it’s about survival,” he declared, a twinkle in his eye. “And let me tell you, folks, nobody survives like Trump!”

With that, the former president exited the stage, leaving the audience with a curious mix of bemusement and bewilderment. Whatever one’s political persuasion, one thing was certain: the saga of Trump’s golden toilets had added yet another chapter to the annals of American political history.

Supporters of former President Donald Trump are finding themselves in an unexpected financial pickle after Trump’s loss in a defamation case filed by writer E. Jean Carroll. The court’s ruling, to the tune of a staggering 83 million dollars, has left many Trump loyalists scratching their heads and their wallets.

The case stems from Carroll’s accusation that Trump sexually assaulted her in the 1990s, a claim vehemently denied by the former president with his signature bluster and bravado. However, Carroll stood her ground, ultimately filing a defamation lawsuit against Trump for his remarks dismissing her allegations as “fictional.”

While Trump himself might not be reaching into his pockets just yet (after all, it’s become somewhat of a trend for him to rely on legal maneuvers), the court’s decision has sent shockwaves through his devoted base. Suddenly, the MAGA hats aren’t feeling quite as magical, and the “Trump Train” is experiencing some financial turbulence.

One supporter, who wished to remain anonymous for fear of facing further ridicule, lamented, “I thought sticking with Trump would make me rich, not make me broke! I didn’t sign up for this kind of financial responsibility.” Another added, “I guess I’ll have to start a GoFundMe to pay my share. Maybe Trump will pitch in?”

The irony of the situation is not lost on observers. After all, Trump’s promise to “Make America Great Again” seems to have taken an unexpected detour into “Make America Pay Again.” It’s a classic case of the emperor’s new clothes, only this time, his loyal followers are the ones left exposed.

In typical Trumpian fashion, some die-hard supporters are doubling down on their allegiance, insisting that the court’s decision is part of a vast conspiracy to undermine their chosen leader. One particularly optimistic individual even suggested that they could crowdfund the entire sum and use it as a badge of honor, proudly proclaiming, “We’re not just deplorable, we’re financially challenged deplorables!”

As for E. Jean Carroll, she’s likely enjoying the sweet taste of vindication along with the prospect of a hefty payout. While Trump may have escaped accountability in the court of public opinion, the legal system has spoken, and it’s speaking in dollar signs.

So, as Trump supporters sift through their bank statements and ponder the cost of unwavering loyalty, one thing is clear: when it comes to the price of defending their chosen leader, it seems the bill has finally come due.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis suspended his Republican presidential campaign on Sunday, ending his 2024 White House bid just before the New Hampshire primary while endorsing his bitter rival Donald Trump.

Many have taken to the streets to protest his early exit. Demanding he goes to full term with his campaign.

The Political Run debate in America is often framed as a legal binary, with “pro-campaign” people on one side, seeking to restrict the candidate’s availability, and “pro-choice” people on the other, opposing government restrictions on collecting votes. 

DeSantis explained that going any further would only cause him harm. “The pain and suffering I have gone through wearing these 4-inch lifts will riddle me with long-term effects.”

A spokesman for DeSantis spoke to those angered that it’s “His Campaign, His Choice”. Others say it shouldn’t be his decision as millions of others feel they should have a complete say in how everyone around them lives their lives.