𝐉𝐔𝐃𝐆𝐄 𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐈𝐊𝐄𝐒 𝐃𝐎𝐖𝐍 𝐓𝐄𝐗𝐀𝐒 𝐋𝐀𝐖 𝐒𝐇𝐈𝐄𝐋𝐃𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐊𝐈𝐃𝐒 𝐅𝐑𝐎𝐌 𝐒𝐄𝐗𝐔𝐀𝐋𝐈𝐙𝐄𝐃... 𝐃𝐑𝐀𝐆 𝐒𝐇𝐎𝐖𝐒 — 𝐓𝐄𝐋𝐋𝐒 𝐏𝐀𝐑𝐄𝐍𝐓𝐒 𝐉𝐔𝐒𝐓 𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐘 𝐇𝐎𝐌𝐄 For the second time in three years, U.S. District Judge David Hittner has struck down a Texas law meant to keep 𝐬𝐞𝐱𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐝𝐫𝐚𝐠 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐬 away from children on public property. His message to anyone who objects: “𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘥𝘰𝘯'𝘵 𝘨𝘰”. Hittner first declared the law unconstitutional back in 2023, before it ever took effect. An appeals court reversed him and sent the case back for another look, letting the law finally go live this past March. Now, on essentially the same reasoning as three years ago, he's blocked it again — this time citing the Supreme Court's 2024 𝘔𝘰𝘰𝘥𝘺 𝘷. 𝘕𝘦𝘵𝘊𝘩𝘰𝘪𝘤𝘦 decision to rule the law both 𝐮𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐛𝐫𝐨𝐚𝐝 and a form of content and viewpoint discrimination. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton isn't accepting the loss quietly. “𝘐 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘮𝘮𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘶𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘵 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘬𝘪𝘥𝘴.” He called the ruling “𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘧𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘭𝘺 𝘧𝘭𝘢𝘸𝘦𝘥” and warned it puts children directly in harm's way. This is the pattern with the judiciary on culture-war fights: a legislature passes a child-protection law, a single federal judge parks it in permanent litigation, and the law that voters wanted enforced sits blocked for years while the appeals grind on. 𝐎𝐧𝐞 𝐣𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐝𝐨𝐧'𝐭 𝐠𝐨. 𝐓𝐞𝐱𝐚𝐬 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐝𝐨𝐧'𝐭 𝐛𝐚𝐜𝐤 𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧.show more

This is raising the pressure on the Senate to... pass the SAVE America Act Obama appointed judge in Boston has blocked President Trump from requiring proof of citizenship and mail-in ballot tracking for the November midterms across two dozen democrat states. The June 2026 Ruling: Judge Indira Talwani issued a preliminary injunction against a March executive order. The order directed the DHS and SSA to build "Confirmed Citizen Lists" and instructed the USPS to only deliver mail-in ballots to individuals on those approved lists. The Legal Reasoning: Judge Talwani ruled the provisions "legally void" for violating the separation of powers. She stated the Constitution does not grant the President specific power over elections, and Congress never authorized the USPS to regulate mail-in ballot delivery. The June 24 Ruling: This followed a decision by Chief Judge Denise Casper, who permanently blocked a separate 2025 order. That order attempted to require documentary proof of citizenship on federal voter registration forms and limit the counting of late mail-in ballots. What Happens Next? The injunctions currently apply to the 23 plaintiff states and Washington, D.C. (including swing states like Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin). Because the Senate has not passed the SAVE Act to codify these citizenship verification rules into federal law, the battle now shifts to the federal appeals courts and potentially the U.S. Supreme Court.show more

What’s the Point of Elections If Judges Can Undo... the Will of the People? Judicial Overreach Is Out of Control‼️ What in the world is happening to this country? We vote — we campaign — we elect leaders to MAKE and ENFORCE policy. And then what? A federal judge, appointed for life, swoops in and releases protesters who stormed a church, defies the Justice Department’s case, and throws out the will of the administration? This isn’t democracy — it’s judicial monarchy disguised in a robe. Two defendants in the Cities Church protest case — Nekima Levy Armstrong and Chauntyll Allen — were arrested by the FBI for allegedly conspiring to violate civil rights by disrupting worship. Homeland Security cited federal law protecting houses of worship from obstruction. Yet a judge decided they pose no flight risk and ordered their release under conditions like surrendering travel documents. Meanwhile prosecutors are outraged and plan appeals. Let that sink in. 🫧We elect representatives and pass laws. 🫧The Justice Department — part of the administration we put in power — brings charges. But a single judge — appointed, unelected, and unaccountable to voters — can override that, undercut enforcement, and basically rewrite policy on the bench. What’s the point of elections if judges are going to act as a super-legislature, immune to public will? This isn’t just a legal disagreement — it’s outrageous judicial activism. Judges were never meant to be political actors with veto power over the executive branch’s enforcement decisions. Yet here we are: 🫧A nationwide immigration enforcement surge is underway — the biggest in decades — because the administration campaigned on it. 🫧Yet courts keep putting restrictions on federal agents’ actions, rolling back enforcement, and now freeing protestors accused of disrupting worship. This undermines the rule of law and excuses law-breaking depending on the politics of the judge. It nullifies democratic choice. And the left wonders why people are boiling over? This is the exact definition of why Americans distrust unelected judges making policy decisions — deciding what they think the law should mean and overriding what the voters decided the law should do. If we’re going to have elections, then the results of those elections, and the decisions made by the elected branches, have to stand — not be continually sabotaged by judges with their own political agendas. Judicial overreach must stop. We deserve a government that respects the will of the people — not one where a single judge can overturn it. Time to stop. Do you agree🤫show more

This is not Hiroshima. This is not Gaza. This... is not Lebanon. This is not Iran. This is Ukraine now… bombed with FAB-3000, a 3-ton bomb. Events that should not be publicized, yet must be highlighted. I remember when I sat alongside President Zelensky's representative during a closed-door diplomatic meeting under the mediation of the Turkish president aimed at encouraging Ukraine to resume the “Istanbul peace talks” with Russia. When we reached a critical juncture, the Ukrainian Deputy Foreign Minister asked a question while I was trying to persuade him to return to negotiations: "What if you were in my shoes—with your land occupied and your people killed every day, while Putin violates international law on a daily basis? Would you continue to fight and support the resistance, turn to negotiations, or surrender?” At that moment, I wanted to give him an answer based on a similar personal experience, not a diplomatic one; for I was thinking of Lebanon, where our people were being killed daily and our land was under occupation. I pointed out that Israel currently occupies and controls 10% of Lebanon (that was the figure at the time; it has since risen to 20%)—the same proportion that Russia occupies and controls of Ukraine. The World condemned Russia, but cannot condemn Israel! Ukraine itself sided with Israel, citing the right to self-defense! The issue was never occupation. It was the identity of the occupier. I mentioned that international law hasn’t failed in Ukraine or in Lebanon or in Gaza and beyond. This’s not the failure of the law. The law stands and its principles remain clear. The failure is our collective will to uphold it. And to put a punishment for those who violate the international law. International law is not optional that you invoke only when it suits you. Double standards in international law—and the weaponization of that law to serve national interests—have led to a situation where international law is no longer respected. War crimes beget war crimes—When the international community failed to bring one state to justice for violating the international law, they knew they can do it again, and another state will inevitably follow suit with impunity. I concluded by stating that I would shift the focus to human security rather than state security; however, negotiating human security requires a ceasefire first. Otherwise, it would be tantamount to surrender, allowing the other to impose its terms and forcing you to concede. International law must be the same for everyone everywhere, and no State above international law. If I criticize your side, you assume I'm on theirs. If I criticize their side, they assume I'm on yours. You are both wrong. My position is guided by principles and upholding the law rather than alignment. I am basically against anything that kills people or destroy the planet we live on. I belong neither to this side nor that; I belong to humanity and Earth.show more

‼️BOMBSHELL: Same Law Firm Harpole Uses AGAINST Candace Employs... Ben Shapiro’s Brother-in-Law & Is OWNED By Trump DOJ Insider! 👀 The rabbit hole just got a lot deeper. If you were wondering why Brian Harpole’s lawsuit against Candace Owens felt like a coordinated strike, the legal "family tree" behind it tells the whole story. 1. The DOJ Connection: Brian Harpole’s lead attorney, Zachary Stoner, works for the Dhillon Law Group. The firm’s founder, Harmeet Dhillon, is currently serving as President Trump’s Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the DOJ. While she is officially on leave from the firm, her influence is everywhere—especially as she advocates for stricter "Anti-Semitism" speech laws that many fear will be used to silence journalists like Candace. 2. The Daily Wire Connection: As Candace revealed tonight, this is the EXACT same law firm that represented The Daily Wire during their brutal, two-year arbitration battle against her. They know her, they’ve fought her before, and they are back for more. 3. The "In-Law" Bombshell: This is where it gets personal. Dhillon Law Group didn't just stop at representing the Daily Wire—they also hired Jacob Roth (Jacob William Roth 🇺🇸). Who is he? An Orthodox Jewish attorney at Dhillon Law specializing in "civil rights." The Shapiro Tie: He is Ben Shapiro’s brother-in-law, married to Ben’s sister, Abby Shapiro (Abby Roth). It looks like a classic ATTACK BY PROXY. Ben Shapiro is her crazy ex-employer who feels more like a Jilted lover and has been relentlessly harassing and stalking her for years—seems to be weaponizing a law firm tied to the highest levels of the DOJ and his own family members to launch a legal offensive against her. This is nothing more than a desperate attempt to chill free speech and shut down her investigation into the Charlie Kirk case and the "Epstein class." They want to use the legal system to do what they couldn’t do in a debate. But they forgot one thing: Discovery works both ways. Do you think this is just a regular lawsuit or is it a coordinated effort by Shapiro and the DOJ to silence Candace Owens on behald of our greatest ally? The receipts are starting to pile up. 🍿show more

🇺🇸 THE COURTS SCREW US AGAIN! - Why can't... we just get the courts to go along with preventing mail-in ballot fraud? Let me paint the picture for you. Back in March, Trump signed an executive order on mail voting. Homeland Security would build a list of confirmed citizens eligible to vote in each state, pulled from citizenship and naturalization records. The Postal Service would then deliver ballots only to people on that list. Simple. Verify the citizen, then mail the ballot. And the courts are actually blocking this! A judge in Boston froze it on June 25 after 23 states and DC sued. Saturday the First Circuit backed her two to one, three months out from the midterms! Frustration! But let's look closer at that ruling: The appeals court never decided whether the order is actually legal. Justice argued the suit "came too early" since no agency had finalized any rules, and the panel simply said the states can sue now instead of waiting. That's a fight over timing, not the merits. A damned technicality! And a judge in Washington already went the other way on a similar challenge. This is a split heading for the Supreme Court, not a settled verdict! Once again everyone is punting! France banned mail voting back in 1975 after ballots in Corsica were cast for dead men. Why can't America just get this right? So what now? The judge said Congress never gave the President this power, and she has a point. There's already a bill for that. It's called the SAVE America Act. Once again the courts have failed us on election integrity. Am I looking at this wrong? ⬇️show more

🚨BREAKING: ICE/Border Patrol agents are assaulting U.S. citizens on... public sidewalks in Minneapolis. In the video, agents are walking down a public sidewalk. A man is standing there, doing nothing but existing in public space. He glances back, and an agent uses both hands to shove him off the sidewalk toward the street, then casually walks away. Moments later, another person is standing on the same sidewalk. An agent pushes them into the street, directly in front of a car, and continues across the crosswalk as if nothing happened. Let’s be clear about what this is. This is assault. This is use of force without legal justification. This is reckless endangerment, pushing people into traffic. This is deprivation of civil rights under color of law. This is law enforcement interfering with lawful use of public space without cause, orders, or any articulated threat. These are members of the community, on their own sidewalks, not blocking anyone, not threatening anyone, not committing a crime. ICE agents do not have the authority to clear sidewalks by force, and they absolutely do not have the authority to put civilians in danger because they feel entitled to the space. If any ordinary person shoved strangers into traffic, they’d be arrested on the spot. When federal agents do it, we’re told to look away. So ask yourself this: If armed federal agents can assault U.S. citizens for standing on a sidewalk, what exactly is left of the rule of law?show more

So a lot has been said about Hearts players... being assaulted without any evidence to back it up. Edited footage of the attached video, shows a Celtic fan pushing a Hearts player - I can't distinguish who but others will be able to - however, the edited footage does not tell the full story or context suiting the agendas of those posting it up. The attached video shows the full interaction between the Hearts player and Celtic fan - and here is my take on it along with references to Scots Law after speaking to an acquaintance within the field. The Celtic fan, like others on the pitch, can be charged with Breach of the Peace for simply entering the field of play and the Celtic fan in question will almost certainly face such a charge. However, here is where it gets sticky. He is not breaking the law by simply goading or laughing at the Hearts player and videoing it. Under Scots Law, if someone knocks your phone out of your hand and then proceeds to stamp on it repeatedly - as the Hearts player did - then they can be charged with criminal damage (vandalism under the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995). Under section 52 of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995, vandalism is committed when someone “wilfully or recklessly” destroys or damages property belonging to another “without reasonable excuse.” A mobile phone clearly falls within “property belonging to another,” and repeatedly stamping on it generally satisfies the “without reasonable excuse” and “wilful or reckless” requirements. It doesn’t matter if the incident happens on public/private property or in this case on a football pitch. The person who stomps on the phone is still potentially facing a charge for vandalism, even if the Celtic fan seen here is committing a breach of the peace by entering the field of play. The breach of the peace charge would be dealt with separately, it doesn’t erase the Hearts player's criminal responsibility for trying to destroy the fan's property. The Celtic fan is then seen pushing the footballer away in order to stop them from destroying their phone/property and attempts to recover it before stewards pounce on him, that push may amount to lawful self-defence or defence of property if it's proportionate and immediate, which in this case seems to be the case. Under Scots law, force is allowed if there’s an imminent threat, that the force is necessary, and it’s not excessive. A brief, measured push to create distance or break contact is usually treated as reasonable, not criminal assault. The Hearts player fell into this category when he initially swatted the phone out of the fan's hand and so too did the fan by pushing the Hearts player away in an attempt to retrieve his property. But as soon as the Hearts player started stamping on the phone that is deemed excessive force. Legally, the fan's breach of the peace [invasion of the pitch and goading] doesn’t give the Hearts player a licence to destroy the fan's property; and the fan's efforts to protect his own property can be deemed lawful, as long as the force used is proportionate and immediate. And yet, given the nature of the pitch invasion and the media coverage of it - the Hearts player could ultimately dodge any charge not because he is not guilty of committing a crime, but because the COPFS apply the 'public interest' test - even if evidence exists, they may conclude that prosecution is not in the public interest because of factors such as: 1. The relatively low value of the phone vs wider consequences (a star player, media circus, club reputation) 2. The player’s status and the likely impact on the sport or club 3. Whether alternative measures (internal club sanctions, fines, apologies, civil settlement) are seen as “sufficient.” Prosecutors are not obliged to prosecute every technically guilty act. As for the fan, as mentioned earlier, his entry onto the pitch is deemed a Breach of the Peace and he would be charged, fined, and issued with a football banning order - with Celtic also potentially banning him for x number of years. Ps/ Much of this was told to me verbatim and I have put it into my own words as much as I can. I am not an expert in Scots Law, I do not profess to be, the above is as told to me by someone in Criminal Law. #celticfc #spflshow more

Buckle up friends. This is going to get VERY... ugly. Jack Smith has managed to do what no prosecutor before him has. Trump is now trapped in a court proceeding with limited options to delay, and a judge who has already proved to him that ‘presidents are not kings’. The victim card will hold no sway and if he steps out of line on the conditions of bail, I am confident she WILL hold him to account, so he should tread very carefully. The indictment is a masterful submission which leave’s his defense with a significant challenge. It has legal booby traps around every corner. There is no question, Trump has his back against the wall and his lawyers will have to bring their A game. While the above is a massive win for the rule of law, it presents a clear and present danger that Trump and his surrogates will incite his supporters to intimidate court staff, DOJ staff and witnesses. They ARE prepared to burn down the house to protect him. It may well lead to violence on the streets and for Republican lawmakers to attempt to paralyze government and take the DOJ hostage. This is NOT fear-mongering this is a real possibility. #DemsAct #DemVoice1 #wtpBLUE #ONEV1 #FAM46show more

The Hug of a Hyena: A Warning to the... Kinshasa Opposition ​Before the tragedy, there is a warm embrace; after it, nothing but crushed bones. ​There is an old, cautionary fable about a man who carried a hyena on his back wherever he went. ​Seeing this, a passerby stopped him and warned, "My friend, put that beast down. One day, that hyena will make you its lunch." The man ignored the advice and kept walking. ​A second man approached him with the exact same warning. Again, the man brushed it off, confident in his bond with the predator. ​Eventually, curiosity got the better of the man. He turned to the beast on his back and said, "Hey, my friend, people keep telling me that you are going to eat me. Is it true?" ​The hyena, at least, was brutally honest. It whispered into his ear: "You should always fear a threat that two or three men have already warned you about." ​Before the man could even process the words, it was too late. The hyena gave him no time to think, snapping its jaws shut. ​This fable perfectly illustrates the fatal mistake of forming an alliance with Félix Tshisekedi. He is political death on legs. ​It is tragic to watch the opposition in Kinshasa place their faith in a man who is ready to sell out the entire country, and himself along with it, just to retain the presidency. Having tasted the luxury of flying across the world millions of times, he has absolutely no intention of ever going back to a normal life. ​The political diagnosis is clear: the only cure for the nation is his absolute removal from that office. And for many, the only viable path left to achieve that is through the AFC-M23, for DRC to be at Peace.show more

🇺🇸 DALLAS IS ABOUT TO BECOME THE CAPITAL OF... THE AMERICA FIRST MOVEMENT! For the first time in party history, Republicans are holding a midterm convention. Not a debate stage. Not a press conference. A full blown convention, September 9th and 10th, right in the heart of Dallas. The Democrats aren't ready for this! Trump called it exactly what it is. "It has never been done before, and will be a truly Historic Event." Think about that for a second. Presidential conventions happen every four years like clockwork. Midterm conventions do not happen at all, because most parties do not have anything worth celebrating in the off year. The GOP just decided they do. RNC Chairman Joe Gruters is already calling it Trumpapalooza. That is not a typo. That is the energy level we are talking about. This is not just a rally. It is a two day showcase of the Great American Comeback. No tax on tips. No tax on overtime. Falling oil prices while the administration denuclearizes Iran. A border that finally has a lock on the door. Trump is not asking Republicans to imagine the wins. He is putting them on a stage in Texas and pointing at them. And Texas is not a random choice. It is the epicenter of this year's fight for Congress, with Ken Paxton battling for Senate and multiple House seats hanging in the balance. Dallas Mayor Eric Johnson called it exactly right, an event that will "energize our party, strengthen the conservative movement, and help build momentum." Now look across the aisle. Democrats floated the idea of their own midterm gathering. Then they quietly shelved it. No unifying message. No standout headliner. No comeback story to tell voters, because they do not have one. That is the difference in one sentence. Republicans are throwing a party because they have something to celebrate. Democrats are staying home because they do not. Midterms usually punish the party in power. Trump just decided to rewrite that rule in Texas, in front of the cameras, with the whole country watching. Buckle up. Trumpapalooza is coming, and the other side has nothing on the calendar to answer it with.show more

Winston had been returned to the shelter three times... before the Abbotts came for him. He was an old shar-pei, all wrinkles and gray whiskers, about 11 years old. Every family that took him home brought him back within a month. He was too old, too slow, and too set in his ways for most people. One family even said he was depressing to have around. By the time the Abbotts saw his photo online, the shelter staff had almost given up hope that anyone would choose him. Ray and Carol Abbott were in their late 60s and had just lost their own dog after 14 years together. Friends told them to get a puppy. Something young. Something with plenty of years ahead. Instead, they drove an hour to meet the old shar-pei nobody wanted. Carol says she knew the moment she saw him sitting quietly in the back of his kennel. That first night, Winston couldn't settle. He kept getting up to make sure Ray and Carol were still there. He'd walk to the bedroom, look at them sleeping, lie back down, then twenty minutes later he'd do it all again, as if he was waiting for someone to tell him it was over. Finally, Carol patted the foot of the bed. "Come on up, Winston. You're home now." He stood there for a long moment, almost like he couldn't believe she was talking to him. Then he climbed up slowly, turned around twice, and eased himself down against Ray's legs with a long groan that sounded more like relief than exhaustion. For the first time in months, Winston slept through the entire night. The Abbotts say he isn't going anywhere this time. And after being returned three times, Winston finally seems to believe them. Have you ever seen a dog realize it was finally home?show more

💩 SOMEBODY EXPLAIN JOHN ROBERTS TO US. BECAUSE WE... CANNOT FIGURE HIM OUT! George W. Bush nominated John Roberts to the Supreme Court in 2005. He was confirmed 78 to 22. Republicans were thrilled. Conservatives had high hopes. He was supposed to be one of us. That was twenty one years ago. Let us look at what we got. Roberts was the deciding vote that saved Obamacare. Twice. In 2012 he rewrote the individual mandate as a tax to make it constitutional when it clearly was not. In 2015 he twisted the plain language of the statute to save it again when the text of the law was clearly on our side. The left was as shocked as we were that he saved it. And then he did it again. He sided with the liberals to strike down Louisiana's abortion clinic regulations in 2020, regulations nearly identical to ones he had previously voted to uphold. He joined the liberals to protect DACA, shielding Obama's unconstitutional amnesty program from being unwound by a Republican president. Today he joined Barrett and the three liberal justices to rule that mail in ballots do not need to be received by Election Day. On an election integrity case, with a Republican president in the White House fighting for the outcome, Roberts went the other way. This is not a one time thing. This is not a coincidence. This is a pattern spanning two decades. Roberts has voted with the liberal bloc on healthcare, immigration, abortion, and now election integrity. The cases that matter most to this movement are the cases where Roberts most often finds a reason to walk across the aisle. His defenders say he is protecting the institutional integrity of the Court. That he is playing a long game. That he is keeping the Court from appearing too political. Here is the problem with that argument. The left does not worry about appearing too political. They never have. They fight for every inch and they do not apologize for it. While Roberts is busy protecting the reputation of an institution, the institution keeps handing defeats to the people who believed in it. We are not asking for a rubber stamp. We are asking for a justice who applies the Constitution as written without one eye permanently fixed on what the New York Times editorial board is going to say the next morning. Alito does that. Thomas does that. Gorsuch does that. Roberts has given us twenty one years of carefully crafted, institutionally minded, reputation protecting decisions that keep landing on the wrong side of the most important fights of our time. George W. Bush picked him. Make of that what you will.show more

IS THUNE THE PROBLEM OR IS THE RINO SENATE... THE REAL DISEASE?! Trump has demanded it publicly, more than once. Terminate the filibuster. Pass the SAVE America Act. Get voter ID and citizenship verification into law before Democrats can steal another election. Thune's answer has been the same every time. The math isn't there. Funny how the math is never there for anything MAGA wants, yet somehow the math always works out for judges Bush and Clinton got confirmed by voice vote decades ago. Here's the truth nobody in Washington wants to say out loud. Thune isn't an accident. He's a McConnell protege who climbed to power the same way McConnell always operated, by protecting the institution instead of the movement that built the majority. Cornyn was cut from the same cloth. Same instincts. Same reflex to play defense for the swamp instead of offense for the country. Texas voters saw it and ended his career. Paxton beat him by more than twenty points. But here's the uncomfortable question. If we replace Thune tomorrow, who takes his place? A 53 seat majority still needs 60 votes for most legislation. If the next senators in line are cut from the same establishment cloth as Thune and Cornyn, we haven't fixed anything. We've just changed the face on the podium. The real fight isn't one man. It's a Senate culture that treats the filibuster like sacred scripture while the country burns. Until primary voters send true America First fighters to Washington in bulk, not just one or two at a time, the swamp will keep finding a new Thune every single time. Draining the swamp was never a one man job. It's a decade long war, and the RINOs are counting on us getting tired first.show more

A 92 year old veteran came to court believing... he was about to lose the only home he had left. Walter Reed had served his country decades ago during the Vietnam War. Now he lived alone in the same small house he had owned for most of his life. His wife had passed away years earlier, and no children were around to help him. Time hadn't been kind to the house. The porch had started to fall apart, paint peeled from the walls, and rain slowly made its way through the roof. City inspectors had written several code violations, and the fines had grown into an amount Walter couldn't afford. That morning he arrived in court in a wheelchair. His hands rested on his knees while he listened quietly as the city attorney read the list of problems aloud. Each sentence sounded heavier than the one before it. The attorney explained that the fines were now thousands of dollars. If the money wasn't paid, the city could condemn the house. The place Walter had lived in for decades might soon be taken away. The judge, a 63 year old man known for strict rulings, began to speak. "Mr. Reed, the city is requesting..." He stopped. Walter had lowered his head into his hands. His shoulders started shaking as quiet tears tell into his palms. The entire courtroom slowly went silent. For a moment the judge simply looked at him. The expression on his face softened as he studied the elderly veteran sitting alone in his wheelchair. "We will take a 20 minute recess." The gavel came down and people began whispering softly while the judge stepped away. When the judge returned, something in the courtroom felt different. No one knew what he had done during those 20 minutes. Instead of looking at the attorneys, the judge looked directly at Walter. "Mr. Reed," he said gently. "During the recess I made a few phone calls." The courtroom grew quiet again. "I spoke with the director of our local veterans organization and with the county veterans assistance fund." Walter slowly lifted his head. "All of the fines in this case are dismissed." For a moment Walter didn't react. His face showed pure disbelief, as if the words hadn't fully reached him yet. The judge continued speaking. "A local contractors union has also agreed to repair your home free of charge. They will begin the work next week." This time Walter understood. The tears that followed weren't from fear anymore. His shoulders shook again, but now the emotion came from relief he hadn't expected to feel. The judge then did something that surprised everyone in the room. He stepped down from the bench, walked across the courtroom floor, and stopped beside the wheelchair. He gently wrapped his arms around the old veteran. Walter held onto the judge's robe as if he were afraid the moment might disappear. "I thought nobody would ever listen to me again," he whispered. "They told me to forget it, like it never happened. I've been carrying it for 50 years." The judge kept his arm around him and answered quietly. "I'm listening now. You should not have had to carry that alone." Walter looked up through tears. "You don't have to anymore." People in the courtroom later said they had never witnessed a moment like that inside a courtroom before. For Walter, the place where he expected to lose everything became the place where someone finally decided to stand beside him.show more

A very good morning. Welcome to The Council Benji... This marks the third Skull in a little run. The first went to a fund I've never met. The second: through Eli Scheinman to a new collector/foundation who has been quietly entering the space in a very significant way across a number of collections whom I’ve never spoken to. Their new entrance enabled a wedding and start of a new married life for Conviction. In my very first conversation with him, we spoke about curses and commitments to the people we love. Since meeting got to talk through each step on that path, from letting go, what is imbued in the ring and ceremony of it all, a proposal, and on the way to the most important of the steps in pursuit of a blessed life. It is easy to get a little cynical on the over-leveraged exit stories that spring up from time to time, so it is a treat to watch one go towards a celebration that’s been building up in his life since the Skull was first acquired. And now: this. The third Skull and the first I can really write about as a shared story across both source and destination. An exit and an entrance. The exit: The Skulls of Luci were awarded as gifts 4 years ago. But before I'd minted Birth of Luci or painted the other 49, the first person in this space I showed the sketch of The Blueprint Skull to was actually Casey💎, when he was working at SuperRare . Casey was the very first person who onboarded me to NFTs, helping me navigate the early days of whatever it meant to even mint something. I explained the idea of gifting one to each person who bid in my first auctions. Though most of the Skulls went to the bidders, Casey's didn't. He didn't ask for one. I didn't tell him I'd give him one. But he helped me take my first steps here, and it's hard to imagine any of this making sense, or unfolding the way it has, without him. Since then, we've broken bread across continents, seen quite a lot of chortling margarita consumption, watched the rise and fall of a lot around us, weathered inter-Council dramas. He brought Laura El into The Monument Game, played as a Player, wore a Mask. Most of the vibe that started all of this, the wild west of it, feels faded in the broader space at times. But every Skull has a story and a person who helped us get here. Casey will always be the one who was there before any metric muddled the reason to care. The entrance: Last fall, Benji came over for a studio visit. We walked through Luci, the works, structure, and dream, as anyone who visits does. But we mostly talked about being a father and having a father. We discussed the very idea of "collection" stripped of accumulation, value, or signal, located more in the act or ceremony of it. What it was to grow up with a curious father who studied the edges of each thing he saw to know the next layer beneath why anyone might look or ignore it. That to pass this on is to pass on questioning, more than it is to pass on any kind of answer. The process of collecting can be perceived as an individual act of hoarding. For some it is maybe. But at its best, it's a way to bind through shared questioning, to bond in cooperation and competition with friends and family, it is the swapped story and meme of it all, and each object gathered along the way carries some shared memory that can, often does, and with intent: should; drift out of the object entirely. All in the psalm, always has been. The studio visit came and went. Soon after, a package arrived in the mail with two of the softest stuffed animals added to my daughter's own collection, now among her favorites. The Skull is a bonus to that, in the scheme of shared memory. For Rachel and I, while we are heads down making a body of work that unsettles us and excites us but demands unknown time to accomplish, it means a great deal to have this kind of support from long term people in the quiet process of making work we want to leave behind ourselves. Enormously grateful to Casey for the many years of support and friendship, to Benny for being a true patron, and to Benji for entering the arena for what I'm working on next. Welcome.show more

The court left three dead children in a hung... jury and called it part of the process. That is not justice. That is cowardice. The jury refused to do the one thing that would have been appropriate and find Lindsay Clancy guilty. Patrick Clancy was in Midtown again, sunglasses on, walking like any other Sunday. Two days earlier a Massachusetts jury could not decide whether his ex-wife murdered Cora, Dawson, and Callan. Eleven jurors were ready to end it. We do not know for certain which way they were leaning, but most people think they wanted to acquit. One was the holdout. The prosecutor is expected to try the case again. So the man who already took the stand and described coming home to what his wife did to his kids now lives with the chance he will have to say it all a second time. The sidewalk photos of Patrick are not a victory lap. They are what life looks like when the system cannot finish the job and the cameras still follow the father instead of the verdict. Notice how little the press does to mourn the children. It is easier to drum up drama about a man walking on a sidewalk. A mistrial does not bring Patrick’s children back. Nothing does. Not even a guilty verdict heals those wounds. But a conviction would at least show there is accountability. A life sentence would tell other parents that Lindsay’s kind of act is not a loophole. Patrick now walks with the mistrial on him. It does not settle the facts. It postpones the pain and asks the surviving parent to keep taking the cameras as he moves through public. The kids are still gone. The case is still open. That is the story. Not that a man went for a walk.show more

TAKE A BREATH. TODAY WAS ROUGH. HERE IS WHAT... IS STILL COMING. I know. It was a bad day. Barrett and Roberts handed the left a win on mail-in ballots that stings, and it is going to sting for a while. We are not going to pretend otherwise. But before you check out for the night, you need to know what is still coming, because some of the biggest decisions of this entire term have not dropped yet. And some of them could be very good for our side. Here is where things stand. Today the Court decided two major cases. On mail-in ballots, Barrett wrote the majority and sided with the liberals. Ballots postmarked by Election Day can be received days later and still count. Roberts went with her. Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, and mostly Kavanaugh dissented. It was a gut punch and we covered it in detail earlier. The other big decision today was actually a win. The Court upheld Trump's authority to fire Rebecca Slaughter from the Federal Trade Commission. Trump called it one of the most important presidential power decisions ever handed down. He is not wrong. That one matters for executive authority in ways that will echo for years. Now here is what is still coming. BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP. This is the big one. Trump signed an executive order on day one of his second term ending automatic citizenship for children born to illegal immigrants and temporary visa holders. Every lower court blocked it as unconstitutional. The Supreme Court is the last stop. Conservative justices showed skepticism toward the administration's position during oral arguments, so do not expect a clean sweep, but this ruling is going to reshape immigration policy no matter how it lands. TRANSGENDER ATHLETES. The Court is set to rule on the Idaho and West Virginia bans on biological males competing in women's sports. The conservative justices appeared ready to uphold those bans during arguments. This could be a significant win that enshrines once and for all that Title IX does not require schools to allow biological males to compete against women. There is also a case on presidential firing power at the Federal Reserve involving Governor Lisa Cook, and a geofence warrant case involving Fourth Amendment privacy rights. The Court has not announced the final day of the term. It could be later this week or it could slip into early July. Here is the bottom line. Today hurt. The mail-in ballot ruling is a real setback and we are going to fight it through Congress. But this term is not over. The decisions still coming have the potential to deliver wins on the issues that matter most to this movement, the border, women's sports, and the limits of government power. Stay in the fight. Tomorrow is another day and the Court is not done yet.show more

$OnlyMarms Update for the end of Day 2 🦫... The receipts just keep stacking up. Since yesterday... 📺 The token has now been mentioned LIVE on television for the second time, this time on NBC. ( 🎙️ The story has now reached radio, with its first major interview airing on Radio-Canada. ( 🌐 The M.A.D. Lab has created an official OnlyMarms page on its website, documenting the community initiative and bringing everything together in one place. ( 📰 And more media outlets continue picking up the story by the hour - from major newspapers to university publications and international outlets. Take a step back for a second. $OnlyMarms sends a message and sets a statement: Meme coins can do good, and Meme coins can have real-world impact. It is the first time in a while, that we see positive media reports on a meme coin. This isn't a a simple meme that we have invented, it is actually a real world problem that we got to turn into a Crypto narrative to help the M.A.D Lab with fundraising, and awareness. The Pump.fun community, together against a real-world problem. A wildlife research lab founded in 1962 lost critical government funding after more than 60 years of continuous research. The community built around that mission. Now, every TV appearance, every radio interview, every news article, and every official update from the lab brings more attention - not just to the token, but to the research itself and the main issue: get the Lab their funding back. This is what makes OnlyMarms different. The narrative doesn't depend on price action, this is bigger than that. It evolves every time the world learns about the story. For the first time in a while, we have a narrative that I think can send a message and set a statement: Meme coins can do good, and Meme coins can have real-world impact. It is the first time in a while, that we see positive media reports on a meme coin. 🦫 Official M.A.D. Lab OnlyMarms page: 🌍 Community Website: Community Chat for raids and bagworking: Official Linktree: CA: HBrfYZgeLKdSvBBGnGkvAK4563pq8oBGpgNFAaespump Also we set up an official account where more marmot content will be posted: OnlyMarmsshow more

Supreme Court Again Rejects Trump Appeal in $5 Million... E. Jean Carroll Case The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined for a second time to hear President Donald Trump’s appeal of the $5 million civil verdict in favor of E. Jean Carroll. A jury previously found him liable for sexual abuse and defamation, though it did not find that he raped her as she had alleged. The case centered on Trump’s 2022 statements in which he called Carroll’s claim a “hoax” and a “con job.” Carroll has since collected nearly $5.63 million, including interest. A separate $83.3 million defamation verdict against Trump remains under possible Supreme Court review. The case itself was enabled by a law change that many say was done specifically so Trump could be sued in this civil matter. Many also feel the outcome and penalty was excessive given the lack of evidence. But in civil matters such as this case the standards are much lower. Regardless, this is yet another blow to Trump’s attempt to reclaim his innocence in this matter where there was never any real evidence of wrongdoing provided.show more