And what scientists have found inside.

The tunnel appears to lead towards a superbubble.

On the first Sunday following Donald Trump’s sweeping victory on November 5, CBS’s 60 Minutes featured a somber post-election analysis carried out by Scott Pelley, the former CBS Evening News anchor who previously treated President Biden to two absurd softball interviews. Pelley’s apparent disappointment at the election result was outshone only by his seeming lack of understanding as to what possibly could have led to a second Trump victory. Much of the discussion felt as though it had been plucked out a 2016 election postmortem. Evidently Pelley had only just begun to notice middle class voters abandoning the Democratic party for Trump due to the economy and the border. Pelley’s first interview subject was Roz Werkheiser, a restaurant owner who supported Trump on November 5 for primarily economic reasons: SCOTT PELLEY: You grew up in a Democratic household. ROZ WERKHEISER: Yes. PELLEY: But you just voted for Donald Trump? WERKHEISER: Yes PELLEY: Inflation is down by more than half. Interest rates are falling Mortgage rates are falling Wages are going up. Are you not feeling that?” WERKHEISER: I don’t feel it. No, I don’t feel it. I don’t feel it at all. Everybody I talk to, nobody’s wages went up.       Everyday people understood intuitively that Donald Trump’s victory in 2016 signaled something of a realignment among the working class. Eight years later, a handful of leftwing media people have finally begun to catch on. It’s enticing to blame this near-decade-long lack of understanding on the middling intelligence of many journalists, but that’s a bit too simplistic of an explanation. From the beginning of Trump’s first campaign in 2015, through the end of his first term in 2020, the media’s numerous failed attempts to understand his popularity were hopelessly marred by racialist narratives. If you ask a journalist from 2018 about Trump’s base, they would never mention the working class without first inserting the prefix, “white.” They saw Trump appealing not to a beleaguered working class in aggregate, but rather to a cadre of bitter, closed-minded rubes who happened to share a loosely-defined economic bracket. All of that brings us to the next portion of the 60 Minutes postmortem: Scott Pelley having his mind blown by the news that working-class hispanics turned out for America’s new President-elect. “Democrats would’ve expected to do really well with latino voters,” he remarked to another interviewee, working-class latino man identified as Ronald. He continued: “Donald Trump made a lot of inroads in this election, and I wonder why you think that is.” Pelley was especially fascinated that Ronald actually liked the idea of border security, despite not being white: “Today, Ronald finds some common ground with Trump — even on immigration!” Of course, the piece also included a bout of obligatory head-scratching over why voters had rejected the a wildly unpopular candidate who polled at one percent in 2019 and who did not receive a single vote in the 2024 primaries. When all the votes are counted, Vice President Harris is going to be several million votes short of where Joe Biden was in 2020. Why?… Why would Democrats not turn out in the numbers they had before? Finally, Pelley brought in freshly-ousted Congresswoman Susan Wild (D-PA), who argued that the Democratic party needed to stop focusing so much on unpopular, niche social issues (which she described as “very important”): If you are struggling to pay your rent or feed your kids, you don’t have the privilege of thinking about things like LGBTQ rights… Unfortunately, I think our party needs to figure out that not everybody is just thinking about these very important social issues. Judging by the meltdowns we saw late last week across liberal broadcast, cable, and print news media, it’s hard to see the journalistic class taking to heart any of the lessons Pelley learned in this edition of 60 minutes. Only time will tell.

A Democratic National Committee official skewered the Harris campaign, proclaiming it to be a "$1 billion disaster." President-elect Donald Trump trolled the Democrats' lavish spending on the failed campaign. Lindy Li — who sits on the Democratic National Committee's finance committee — slammed the Harris campaign for allegedly misleading Democratic donors about Kamala's chances of winning the 2024 presidential election. 'I think that was a big f*** you to the party.'Li told “Fox & Friends” on Saturday, “The truth is, this is just an epic disaster — this is a $1 billion disaster. They’re $20 million or $18 million in debt. It’s incredible, and I raised millions of that."Campaign filings show that the Harris-Walz campaign took in at least $1 billion, plus an additional $600 million from other aligned groups. Citing sources, Politico's Christopher Cadelago reported that Kamala's campaign ended with at least $20 million in debt.Li then blasted Harris campaign chairwoman Jen O’Malley Dillon and accused her of misleading Democratic donors into wasting millions of dollars.“I have friends I have to be accountable and explain things to because I told them it was a margin-of-error race," Li stated. "I was promised, Jen O’Malley Dillon promised all of us that Harris would win. She even put videos out saying Harris would win. I believed her, my donors believed her, and so they wrote massive checks. I feel like a lot of us were misled.”Li noted that even on Election Night, people within the campaign assured her that Vice President Kamala Harris would win. Li — a now-former campaign surrogate for Harris — said, "I looked somebody in the eye, and said, 'Are we gonna do this? Are we gonna pull this off?' She told me, 'Yes.'"Another Harris campaign member told Li that the election was in the bag for Kamala because "we're gonna win Iowa." Li recalled thinking, "I was like, 'What?'" Li said the relationship was "terrible" between high-profile supporters of President Joe Biden and Harris even "before the campaign.""There was backstabbing, they wanted to hand her the least favorable agenda," Li stated. "She was stuck with immigration, civil rights." "There was backstabbing by the press, they were leaking all the time," Li continued. "The White House was leaking like a sieve when it came to Kamala Harris." Li said if Democrats truly felt like Trump was an "existential threat" then they should have had a primary to get the best candidate instead of "coronating" Harris. “I actually think President Biden, the whole endorsing her 30 minutes after he dropped out, I think that was a big f*** you to the party," Li said. "‘If you don’t want me, here’s somebody you may not like, deal with it.'”Li admitted that Harris had a lot of staff turnover. As Blaze News reported, the Harris team spent millions on celebrity and influencer endorsements as well as high costs related to "event production."Meanwhile, Trump also lampooned the Harris campaign for spending a record amount of money and having nothing to show for it. "I am very surprised that the Democrats, who fought a hard and valiant fight in the 2020 presidential election, raising a record amount of money, didn’t have lots of $’s left over," Trump declared on the X social media platform. "Now they are being squeezed by vendors and others."Trump stated on Saturday, "Whatever we can do to help them during this difficult period, I would strongly recommend we, as a party and for the sake of desperately needed UNITY, do. We have a lot of money left over in that our biggest asset in the campaign was 'earned media,' and that doesn’t cost very much. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"According to campaign finance filings, Trump raised just over $1 billion in donations from his campaign committee and other groups. Following the election, the Trump campaign has roughly $125 million cash on hand. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Blaze Media investigative reporter Steve Baker filed a late motion in U.S. District Court to delay all proceedings in his looming Jan. 6 criminal trial, citing the Department of Justice pausing its prosecution of President-elect Donald J. Trump. The lead defense attorney for Baker, scheduled to go to trial on Nov. 12, asked U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper “to vacate all dates and hearings in this case in the interests of justice, and to set a status conference in this matter for the week of February 2, 2025.” William Shipley cited the DOJ’s motion to pause the criminal case against the president-elect in light of the Nov. 5 election “to afford the government time to assess this unprecedented circumstance and determine the appropriate course going forward consistent with Department of Justice policy.” 'The "people" on behalf of whom the government purports to speak made themselves heard clearly on November 5.' “The unique circumstances now before this Court — a president-elect having pledged to reverse the decision-making of the predecessor administration after having made the issue a part of his campaign promises — and the Department of Justice now making a representation on the record in another case that the election outcome is a change in circumstances warranting a delay, justifies defendant Baker making this motion,” Shipley wrote in a motion filed late on Nov. 10. Baker, 64, of Raleigh, North Carolina, is charged with four trespass-related misdemeanor counts for being at the Capitol on Jan. 6. He was in Washington to document the historic protests and provide coverage for the readers of his blog, the Pragmatic Constitutionalist. Now a Blaze Media writer, Baker was arrested in Dallas on March 1 and perp-walked in front of media at the FBI offices. Baker had planned a selective-prosecution defense, noting that no left-of-center media reporters and podcasters were prosecuted for covering the Jan. 6 protests and riots. Armed with a list of more than 75 journalists who were not charged, Baker sought discovery from the government explaining the apparent political tilt in its prosecutions. Blaze Media investigative reporter Steve Baker is perp-walked before the media at the FBI offices in Dallas on March 1, 2024.Photos by Blaze Media “To deny this motion, in the face of the Justice Department’s official position, would run contrary to the interests of justice and likely subject the defendant to criminal convictions for no purpose other than expediency,” Shipley wrote. Baker said the list itself weighs heavily in favor of his selective-prosecution strategy. “The most important legal argument that we’re bringing is this: Somewhere in the vicinity of 80 journalists of all types — credentialed employees of mainstream news organizations from the New York Times to the L.A. Times to French media to British television — went through broken windows and broken doors that day without permission,” Baker said Oct. 29. “Included in that bunch were freelancers, independents, bloggers, podcasters, and social media influencers without credentials.” Trump’s sweeping election victory with 312 Electoral College votes and a popular vote margin of 3.6 million votes creates a new reality that the courts should not ignore, Shipley argued. Blaze Media journalist Steve Baker captured iconic video footage on the West Plaza of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.Steve Baker/Blaze Media “Before the government makes the claim that the ‘people’ have an interest in the administration of justice as reflected in the Speedy Trial Act, defendant Baker would point out that the ‘people’ on behalf of whom the government purports to speak,” Shipley wrote, “made themselves heard clearly on November 5, and that should mean something to the Department of Justice without regard to what administration is now in charge.” In a nine-page opinion issued Oct. 25, Cooper refused Baker’s motion to dismiss the charges. He previously denied Baker’s motion to retain his right to carry a firearm after threats were made against his safety. Baker appealed the issue, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled against him. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

14 years is a long time to wait for anything, but it’s a particularly long time to wait for the next chapter of one of the greatest FPS games ever made. The appetite for Valve to resurrect the scrapped Half-Life 2 Episode 3, or make a full Half-Life 3, so that Gordon Freeman’s story can continue is ravenous. The fact that several years ago the series’ chief writer, Marc Laidlaw, seemingly revealed a synopsis of what Half Life’s next story beat may have been only rubs salt into the wound. However, a team of Freeman fanatics is taking matters into their own hands with Project Borealis, an Unreal Engine 5 interpretation of what Half-Life 3 could’ve been. Now, you can get a taste of what this team is building with an all new prologue. Continue reading Project Borealis, the closest thing you’ll get to Half Life 3, now has a demo MORE FROM PCGAMESN: What happened to Half-Life 3?, Best FPS games, Best upcoming PC games

Elon Zapped Votes From Space! REEE! Thread of Lefty Conspiracy Theories About How Trump Won Is HILARIOUS

Conservative's Message for Democrat Lawfare Goons Quaking in Their $1500 Shoes About Trump's DOJ is FIRE

Katie Porter's Parenting Called Out After Bizarre Story She Told About Daughter's Reaction to Trump's Win

Veterans Day Remembrance