Tuesday, October 28, 2025

The Year the Army Wasn't Paid


A compromise between the political parties in the angrily disputed presidential election of 1876 placed Republican Rutherford B. Hayes in office and ended the last vestiges of Reconstruction in the South.  In short order, the already depleted U.S. Army units attempting to counter an ascendant Ku Klux Klan were transferred to duties elsewhere as the Service braced itself for a round of personnel cuts now that the mission in the South was at an end.  What happened next caught even some of the most pessimistic soldiers by surprise.

The winding down of Reconstruction had seen corresponding reductions in the Army to roughly 39,000 men in 1869, 30,000 the following year, and 25,000 in 1874.  In 1877, the House of Representatives, now under the control of Southern Democrats little more than a decade after the Civil War, moved to cut the Army — “the unholy instrument of repression” during Reconstruction — to 17,000, then 15,000, lest the federal government be tempted to use it again domestically.   

Proposed amendments and legislative maneuvering also resulted in the 54th Congress adjourning in March, before they had passed an appropriations bill for the coming fiscal year.  For the sake of political expediency, the president did not call Congress back into session to rectify the matter.  Thus, as of June 30, 1877, neither officers nor enlisted men, be they soldier, sailor, or marine, was able to draw even a dime of pay.  The delegation from Texas, however, broke ranks with the Southern Democrats and made it clear that they wanted even more troops because of the ongoing problems with the Apaches along the Mexican border and continued raiding by the Cheyenne. 

Texans weren’t the only citizens alarmed by situation.  Ironically, the shenanigans on Capitol Hill occurred at the same time that the Army was experiencing its most active period since the Civil War.  The death of Colonel George Armstrong Custer and destruction of much of his 7th Cavalry had occurred just the previous year.  Large forces stayed on the alert in the central Plains in case the still-dangerous Sioux, Cheyenne, or Kiowa left their reservations in significant numbers.  Warfare also continued with the elusive Apache, and a sizable chunk of the U.S. Army — elements of the 1st, 2nd, 5th, and 7th Cavalry; the 5th Infantry; and the 4th Artillery — spent four months chasing the Nez Perce across rugged terrain of Oregon, Idaho, and Montana until they were finally cornered by Colonel Nelson A. Miles.  But while the Indian Wars became the stuff of legends, the domestic unrest that accompanied the growing pains of an increasingly industrial society are now largely forgotten.  

Until passage of the Posse Comitatus Act in 1878 restricting the use of federal forces without authorization by either “the Constitution or ... Congress,” they had frequently been called to action by governors, federal marshals, and even local authorities (the most famous example of this being Lieutenant Colonel Robert E. Lee and a marine detachment during the seizure of the Harpers Ferry Arsenal in 1859).  This become so widely abused, with individual soldiers and units being dragooned onto assisting in the serving of such things as county revenue collections, that Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton issued an 1868 directive that such requests “must be held subordinate to [the soldiers’] paramount duty as members of the permanent military body.” 

Secretary Stanton ordered that “troops can act only in their proper organized capacity, under their own officers, and in obedience to the immediate orders of those officers.” Commanders could decide for themselves if a request was proper and of a sufficiently imperative nature to justify the immediate use of their men, but were told that if time allowed, they were to request guidance from the president (really, however, their next highest Army headquarters) first, “whether it be for the execution of civil process or to suppress insurrection.”

During the Great Railway Strike of 1877, which began the month after soldiers’ pay was cut off, the threat of national anarchy and disruption of mail service prompted the Army to rush soldiers from three states and two territories to occupy rail yards in Chicago and St. Louis.  Troops from seventeen other states were directed to move immediately to riot-torn areas of West Virginia, Kentucky, Maryland, and Pennsylvania, virtually emptying every post in Major General Winfield Scott Hancock’s Military Division of the Atlantic in the process.  Some 60,000 Regulars and militia were ultimately called out, and the Army found that simply providing a restrained but strong show of force — with bayonets glistening — was enough to bring order to the chaos, as Hancock reported, “by their presence alone.”

* * *

Congressman and future president James A. Garfield of Ohio became the Army’s fiercest advocate on Capitol Hill.  Garfield, who had fought as a brigade commander at Shiloh, risen to major general, and helped negotiate the compromise that brought Hayes to the presidency, was incensed at the treatment of the soldiers and told the House that they “might as well take command of the pickets [and] say where the guards are to be posted.”  Coming close on the heels of the Little Big Horn disaster and winter campaign against the Sioux, Garfield spoke for most Americans when he berated his colleagues: 

Is it not enough that our poor, unpaid, starving army shall, by the delay of the House, be doomed to many days of starvations while their numbers are reduced by sickness and Indian warfare only to learn that a merciful Congress proposes still further to reduce them?  That at last the commander-in-chief shall be shackled and the army itself shackled and finally that the House of Representatives shall itself take command of the army and post its Cavalry regiments where they choose?

Enlisted men received a degree of protection, as the Army could continue to contract for food, clothing, and other basic needs, but the lack of funding prevented them from having money for other “essentials” such as beer and female companionship.  Officers had it even worse.  Whether unmarried or at the head of a household, they had been responsible for covering the cost of all personal necessities, including their uniforms, out of their own meager salaries since 1870.  Many, unable to live on their savings, were forced to borrow money at usurious rates against their future pay or live off the charity of relatives and friends.  A lucky few received assistance from the Louisiana National Bank, which offered loans without interest to Army officers, and Americans pitched in to help in whatever way they could.  For example, some hotels like the Occidental in San Francisco let it be known that they would present no bills to officers in transit.

The situation was finally rectified in November 1877, when House members, under mounting pressure from constituents, including those from the South, produced an appropriations bill and authorized a force of 25,000 men — a troop strength that would remain largely unchanged for the next two decades.



Podcast and entertainment thread for Oct 28

 


Can this month be over with already?

Democrat Party Lies Protect Modern Slavery


Americans are so tired of being called “racists.”  This has been the Democrat party’s go-to rhetorical weapon for half a century.  Rather than debating policies on their merits, Democrat politicians just accuse their opponents of being Klan members and call it a day.  This is particularly galling since it is the Democrat party in the United States that fought a civil war to defend slavery and then established a Jim Crow system of enforced racial segregation that endured for another century.  

Democrat party activists are always toppling statues of historic Americans accused of being insufficiently opposed to slavery centuries ago.  They try to “cancel” organizations whose long dead founders might have once said something politically incorrect by today’s standards.  Yet the Democrat party never has the courage to take a look at its own sordid history.  If it did, it would “cancel” itself.

Incapable of explaining why criminal illegal aliens should be permitted to invade American communities and devour limited welfare funds, Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett argues without evidence, “This administration is racist. ... We know that we have a racist at the top.  Everybody has decided it’s okay to take off their hoods and mask up as ICE agents.  It reminds me of the Klan.”  Given that most Klan members supported the Democrat party, you’d think Crockett would have some expertise on this issue.  She does not.  As with every other Democrat politician who plays the race card every single day, she mindlessly insists that anyone who disagrees with her hates black people.

Democrats — especially black Democrats — have done tremendous harm to the ongoing fight against racial hatred in this world.  To be sure, race hate is real, and it is the source of awful bloodshed around the planet.  Compared to parts of the Middle East, Asia, South America, and Sub-Saharan Africa, though, racism in the United States is nonexistent.  In much of the world, people really do scrutinize the shade of a person’s skin to determine whether that person is “entitled” to any rights, including the right to live.  People are sold like cattle, worked to death, and dumped into mass graves.  Democrat politicians largely ignore these realities because recognizing such horrors around the planet would expose their own charges of “racism” as petty, baseless, cynical, and exploitative.

In America, overt acts of racism are so rare that the Democrat party has been forced to lecture Americans about their “unconscious biases” for twenty years.  American society is so welcoming to members of every race and ethnicity that the Democrat party must argue that invisible “systemic racism” exists even when Americans can’t see it.  No matter how hard Americans try to prove that they are not racist, Democrats insist that they are.  

By maliciously defaming good people as racists, Democrats give aid and comfort to genuine racists around the world.  The Chinese Communist Party enslaves minorities and engages in ethnic genocide.  Then its government-controlled news media publicly broadcast recordings of Democrat politicians, such as Congresswoman Crockett, explaining that the United States — not China — is the most racist nation in the world.  China’s government murders people because of their family heritage, expressed opinions, and religious beliefs.  Yet Chinese communists have a never-ending supply of real video clips from Democrat politicians asserting that President Trump is Hitler and that his Republican voters are Nazis.  Famous Hollywood Democrats, such as Robert De Niro, shamelessly call White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller a “Jewish Nazi.”  While actual genocide continues in communist China, its state-run media have no problem portraying the United States as racist, fascist, and savage.  The Democrat party’s vile, reckless attacks against Americans give the world’s most murderous racists plenty of cover.

Twelve years ago, the Academy Award for Best Picture went to 12 Years a Slave.  That movie tells the biographical story of Solomon Northup, a free black man who was kidnapped in Washington, D.C. in 1841 and sold into slavery.  After living in bondage on several Louisiana plantations, Northup managed to escape with the help of friends and family from his native New York.  The movie deviates slightly from Solomon Northup’s own 1853 memoir in an effort to convey the violent brutality of slavery.  It is an emotional film that forces the audience to watch human beings enduring beatings, whippings, and other tortures.

When I first saw the movie, I expected a block of text to appear before the end credits that would address human slavery as it exists today.  After all, Northup’s story is particularly fascinating because he was born a free man and lived a happy life before being abducted and sold as a slave.  Both his original memoir and the 2013 movie relate his traumatic journey through the eyes of someone who is just as shocked by the experience as any American alive today would be.  His story, in other words, has a great deal in common with people around the world in 2025 who are kidnapped from their families, sexually abused, and trafficked as slaves.  It still seems strange to me that the Best Picture winner doesn’t conclude with an urgent plea for viewers to liberate the roughly fifty million human beings who live as slaves today.

Just last week, The Gateway Pundit published details of a “massive human trafficking and torture network” involving a Chinese crime syndicate that has “scammed, brutally tortured, drugged, and enslaved” thousands of South Korean citizens.  “Lured by fake employment ads and trafficked into Chinese-controlled criminal compounds in Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar,” those who have been abducted are “beaten, electrocuted, drugged, and forced to work” under the threat of execution.  Survivors who have managed to escape have described “being forced to scam their own citizens online” while their “captors used narcotics and psychotropic drugs to suppress resistance.”  Enduring similar horrors as Solomon Northup did two hundred years ago, the South Korean captives are just one example of human slavery flourishing today.

Why do so few Washington politicians or Hollywood actors ever shine a bright light on modern-day slavery?  Presumably because they don’t want Americans to know that there are fifty million slaves around the world today.  They don’t want to expose the inhumane abuses that their Chinese Communist Party friends and financiers commit.  They don’t want to highlight Islam’s historic fondness for kidnapping and slavery.  They don’t want Americans to realize that Mexican and South American cartels abduct women and children, hook them on drugs, and traffic them as sex slaves across the United States.  They don’t want to draw attention to the inconvenient fact that tribes in Sub-Saharan Africa still openly buy and sell slaves today.

If Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett gave a damn about slavery, she would use her giant microphone to expose big business slavers around the planet who profit from human misery.  She would go on an hours-long floor speech demanding that the U.S. government target the scourge of human-trafficking.  She would call out the Chinese communists, African nations, and Muslim communities that enslave human beings.  Crockett does none of these things.  Instead, she calls Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents Ku Klux Klan members and claims that President Trump is the most dangerous “racist” on the planet.

There is evil in this world.  It is ugly, brutal, and ruthless.  It steals boys and girls from their parents.  It rapes and tortures and murders.  It rips the innocence from those it abducts, and it laughs as it profits from unspeakable cruelties.  Slavery survives in 2025 because powerful voices refuse to speak about it.  Politicians such as Jasmine Crockett would rather pretend all white people are racist and that President Trump is America’s plantation master.  By telling those lies and ignoring those in bondage, she ensures that slavery’s horrors continue.



There’s a Cold Wind Blowing Through Obamaland


Since Kash Patel and Tulsi Gabbard started releasing hidden records from the Biden administration, we’ve begun learning that there are no limits to what the Democrats will do to cement one-party rule.

Obama started what  when he had a Clinton campaign dirty trick included in an Intelligence Community assessment (ICA).  The ICA eventually triggered a formal federal investigation, known as “,” targeting Donald Trump.

Merrick Garland, Christopher Wray, and Jack Smith cooked up an operation in support of their January 6 investigation, which conveniently violated the due process rights of Republicans and conservative advocacy groups.  It was called “.”

Those two Department of Justice operations, and numerous other questionable activities, are connected in an important way: They are evidence of a conspiracy.

Recent disclosures have made it clear that our federal government, under Democrat leadership, was targeting rather than protecting the citizens of the United States.

A joint FBI/DoJ operation known as the “Midyear Review” was used to make evidence of Hillary Clinton's corruption vanish. against Clinton or her associates, who destroyed evidence during the investigation.

A Clinton campaign disinformation operation was turned into a formal investigation (Crossfire Hurricane) to mire a political opponent in a false scandal and kneecap an incoming administration.

As part of Crossfire Hurricane, targets were entrapped (Michael Flynn and George Papadopoulos), and by FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith to obtain FISA warrants.

Leaks of confidential information were used to trigger a special counsel investigation of the president of the United States (Mueller investigation).

FBI agents intimidated social media companies to censor Americans and hide evidence of Democrat wrongdoing (Hunter Biden laptop).

Special Counsel Jack Smith used his investigation of the January 6 riot to target and surveil Republican congressmen and conservative advocacy groups, such as Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA.  It’s likely that this surveillance was done without any evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the targets.  Smith’s investigation was used as cover in an attempt to remove Trump from the ballot.

When Donald Trump was re-elected, evidence of possible Deep State wrongdoing began to vanish.  Evidence collected by the January 6 committee was either destroyed or encrypted beyond recovery.  Burn bags full of previously undisclosed evidence were found hidden in FBI headquarters.

In response to these revelations, A.G. Bondi appointed Ed Martin to be the director of the DoJ Weaponization Working Group.  He is tasked with determining if the tools of law enforcement were used to violate rather than protect our constitutional rights.  Martin has hinted that he is investigating the matter as a possible conspiracy.  That is significant and should terrify anyone involved in the attempt to prevent Donald Trump from returning to office.

The statute of limitations for most federal crimes is five years.  But when criminal acts are committed as part of a broader ongoing conspiracy, the five-year countdown to immunity from prosecution doesn’t begin until the last overt act of the conspiracy has been completed.  A crime committed a decade or more in the past may not be prosecutable, but it can still be used as evidence of an ongoing conspiracy.

Here’s where things get interesting.  The abuses of Arctic Frost didn’t end until Jack Smith resigned from his post in January of 2025.  If Arctic Frost can be connected to the other activities noted above, as part of a conspiracy to influence elections, then we are only nine months into the five-year window to charge any co-conspirators.

If Andrew McCabe lied to investigators in 2016 to hide his role in the Midyear Review or Crossfire Hurricane, he can’t be charged for obstruction of those investigations.  But he can still be charged as a participant in any connected ongoing conspiracy.

In 2017, James Comey leaked potentially classified information to a friend and the press to trigger a special counsel investigation.  It’s too late to charge him with violations of the Espionage Act.  However, like McCabe, he can still be charged for his role in any ongoing conspiracy.

Thanks to Jack Smith’s Arctic Frost operation, we still have four years and three months to charge any co-conspirators for their crimes against the country.  Smith, it seems, is the gift that keeps on giving.

Now the question is this: What might the crime of the ongoing conspiracy be?  There are many possibilities, but I’m particularly fond of 18 USC §242Deprivation of rights under color of law.  It reads,

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned.

It is illegal for any government official to use his office to deprive an American of his civil rights.  The penalty for violation of the statute depends on the level of harm done and can range from year year in prison to the death penalty.

The statute has most frequently been used to prosecute law enforcement officers for excessive use of force or illegal search and seizure.  However, it is applicable to any government official, for any violation of protected rights, such as

  • freedom of speech, deprived by government censorship.
  • due process, deprived by search or surveillance without evidence of a crime.
  • right to exercise privileges of citizenship, deprived by tampering with elections (e.g., illegally removing candidates from the ballot).

Here’s how I describe what looks like a criminal conspiracy launched in the waning days of the Obama administration:

  • The crime was deprivation of rights.
  • The objective was undermining free and fair elections.
  • The method was weaponization of criminal justice system.

It appears a rogue’s gallery of government miscreants will likely be eligible for prosecution by the current administration.

  • Barack Obama, who had an ICA falsified.
  • Andrew McCabe, who launched Crossfire Hurricane.
  • Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, who created an “insurance policy” against an undesirable election outcome.
  • John Brennan, who falsified foreign intelligence information.
  • James Clapper, who lied to Congress.
  • Kevin Clinesmith, who falsified evidence to obtain a FISA warrant against a political campaign.
  • James Comey, who leaked confidential information.
  • Robert Mueller, who conducted a three-year investigation where no crime had been committed.
  • Christopher Wray, who used the FBI to censor social media companies.
  • Joe Biden, who designated 74 million Americans enemies of the state (in his “red speech”) and unleashed the Justice Department to target them.
  • Merrick Garland, who authorized Arctic Frost.
  • Jack Smith, who surveilled Republicans and conservatives.

Now we see evidence that all of those acts were connected and, thanks to Jack Smith, can be used as evidence of an ongoing ten-year conspiracy.

When Director Gabbard began releasing incriminating information about the Obama and Biden administrations, CIA director Ratcliffe said he wasn’t concerned about the statute of limitations.  Now we know why.  Operation Arctic Frost reset the deadline to issue indictments.

It’s no wonder the co-conspirators have gone into a hysterical fight-or-flight mode.  They are facing consequences they never foresaw, because they were blinded by their own ambition.



🎭 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓

 

Welcome to 

The 𝐖𝟑𝐏 𝓓𝓐𝓘𝓛𝓨 𝓗𝓾𝓶𝓸𝓻, 𝓜𝓾𝓼𝓲𝓬, 𝓐𝓻𝓽, 𝓞𝓟𝓔𝓝 𝓣𝓗𝓡𝓔𝓐𝓓 

Here’s a place to share cartoons, jokes, music, art, nature, 
man-made wonders, and whatever else you can think of. 

No politics or divisive posts on this thread. 

This feature will appear every day at 1pm mountain time. 


Mohamed El-Erian Outlines Stunning Success of President Trump’s Tariff, Trade and Economic Policy Agenda



Wharton Professor and noted economist Mohamed El-Erian appeared on Fox News to discuss the jaw-dropping success President Trump is having with his global trade reset.

As noted by El-Erian no one, including El-Erian himself, expected President Trump to be able to navigate a global trade and economic reset with such stunning success.  The entire economic policy is being driven by the personal influence of President Trump as he leverages tariffs and policy incentives to the benefit of the USA economy exclusively.

The scale of Trump’s agenda is difficult to overstate, and China is now positioned to feel incredible pressure to align Beijing policy with the requests of President Trump.  “We thought there would be a massive retaliation against the US, there hasn’t been” El-Erian noted.  “We’re collecting $800 Billion of tariff revenue” and “inflation has waned,” he said.  This is a remarkable situation that few economists could accurately predict.  WATCH:



This is not a surprise to readers here as we have discussed the Trump trade agenda with clear, non-pretending eyes.  The ASEAN trip by President Trump is a masterclass in leveraging trade relationships and creating isolation for China.  The downstream consequences for Canada continue to build as the Carney administration doubles down on their entrenched and futile opposition.

If President Trump can formulate a strong, actionable and enforceable free trade agreement with Chairman Xi, it will undercut the ability of Canada to assemble cheap component goods not available in the U.S. manufacturing equation for total cost of goods.  This puts Trump in an even stronger position heading into the 2026 USMCA (CUSMA) dissolution phase.

Additionally, despite the mainstream thoughts to the contrary, putting distance between Russia and China is not averse to the interests of Russian Federation Vladimir Putin, who would strategically prefer to do business with the ‘West’ over Beijing.  However, China does not want to see their Biden-created tentacle weakened in Russia.

China retains a vision of a global financial market option beyond the dollar, and Xi plays that long-term strategy game with Putin quite effectively.  It is only President Trump who holds the key to weakening that strategy, and Chairman Xi likely reminds everyone -through his emissaries- that they can wait out the Trump administration.

However, during the ASEAN conference, again we see President Trump drawing heavily on the personal factor as a part of his strategic influence operation to push distance between Southeast Asia and Beijing.  Cunning Panda can undoubtedly see that play, however, culturally they may underestimate the strength of the dynamic.  President Trump leverages the world’s biggest market with a smile.  The world’s biggest sellers want and need to keep that smile on the face of their #1 customer.

President Donald Trump is a friendly dealmaker, until he is not. Southeast Asia understands this dynamic very well.


UK ‘Journo’ Who Cheered Hamas Massacre Gets One-Way Ticket Home Courtesy of ICE


RedState 

From the "I Voted For This" files comes the woeful story of Sami Hamdi, a Muslim political commentator from the United Kingdom who was detained over the weekend in San Francisco, California.

Hamdi was in the United States to take part in a nationwide tour speaking tour being held by the Council for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which is a red flag unto itself. He had spoken at the annual gala of CAIR Sacramento on Saturday and was on his way to speak at a CAIR Florida event on Sunday when the long arm of federal law enforcement caught up with him.

But, it's not his association with CAIR that brought Hamdi to the attention of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in San Francisco, it was his history of inflammatory anti-Israel comments that led to his detainment and what looks like his one-way ticket back home. 

Days after the October 7 atrocity in Israel, Hamdi, who is the editor-in-chief of a news site called The International Interest, told a mosque in London to "celebrate the victory." This so-called "victory" saw 1,200 Israelis raped and butchered and hundreds more kidnapped, including American citizens.

For context, here's Sami Hamdi in his own words:

“We are pitying a people who brought a huge victory since 1948,” he said. “Don’t pity them, they don’t want your pity. Celebrate the victory,” he said.

“How many of you felt it in your hearts when you got the news that it happened? How many of you felt the euphoria? Allahu Akbari!”

Hamdi also claimed Israel’s accusations of sexual violence committed by Hamas were false, according to The Telegraph. 

This kind of incendiary rhetoric apparently earned Hamdi regular commentator opportunities on places like Al Jazeera, BBC, and Sky News.

Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin has confirmed that Hamdi's "visa was revoked and he is in ICE custody pending removal."

Thanks to the work of @Sec_Noem and @SecRubio and the men and women of law enforcement, this individual’s visa was revoked and he is in ICE custody pending removal. 

Under President Trump, those who support terrorism and undermine American national security will not be allowed to work or visit this country. 

It’s commonsense.

Our friends at CAIR are pitching a fit and accusing the Trump administration of "abducting a prominent British Muslim journalist and political commentator." From their statement on Hamdi:

“Abducting a prominent British Muslim journalist and political commentator on a speaking tour in the United States because he dared to criticize the Israeli government’s genocide is a blatant affront to free speech,” CAIR said in a statement.

“Our nation must stop abducting critics of the Israeli government at the behest of unhinged Israel First bigots. This is an Israel First policy, not an America First policy, and it must end.”

It's refreshing to see the U.S. finally take seriously who is allowed to come into our country ... and who is not. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has previously said, "Coming to the United States on a visa is a privilege, not a right. The Trump Administration is determined to deny or revoke your visa if you're here to support terrorists." And they obviously mean it.

Sami Hamdi and CAIR are finding out the hard way that we only want the best of the best to have the privilege of entering the United States. And, yes, I did vote for this.



This Guy Thought It Would Be a Good Idea to Post a $45,000 Bounty on Pam Bondi – the FBI Disagreed



Federal authorities arrested a Minnesota man on October 16 for allegedly offering a $45,000 bounty for U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi on video video-sharing platform TikTok.

Tyler Maxon Avalos was detained in Ramsesy County on several charges. Avalos allegedly posted a murder-for-hire style threat against Bondi in a post on TikTok, which is a violation of a federal law prohibiting interstate transmission of a threat to injure another person, according to the affidavit.

The FBI discovered the alleged threat after receiving a tip at the agency’s National Threat Operations Center about a “threatening post against United States Attorney General Pam Bondi.”

Avalos’ post displayed an image of Bondi with “a sniper-scope red dot on AG Bondi’s forehead” and the caption “WANTED Pam Bondi REWARD 45,000 DEAD OR ALIVE PREFERABLY DEAD.” The post also featured a comment from the same account saying, “cough cough when they don’t serve us then what?”

The affidavit notes that the account had a pinned link to “An Anarchist FAQ.”

Avalos has a lengthy criminal history. He has been convicted of felony stalking and domestic violence. 

Law & Crime reported that a US magistrate judge had granted Avalos’ release from custody. The suspect is not allowed to travel outside of Minnesota and is required to undergo mental health treatment. He is also not allowed to possess firearms or consume alcohol.

Political violence has surged in America over the past five years. Threats against members of Congress rose by more than 18 percent, according to Capitol Police. Princeton University’s Bridging Divides Initiative found that vigilante activity “is becoming a more common form of political violence.” 



New Boss at CBS May Be Looking to Snag Talent From Other Networks - One Name Will Drive the Left Mad


RedState 

The Left has been losing its mind at Bari Weiss taking over as editor-in-chief at CBS News. 

Weiss isn't even right-wing; she is more center-liberal. But they're upset that she may sometimes question the liberal orthodoxy. The Left has had such a grip on the media for so long; they don't like anyone who they might not be able to control. We saw how much they flipped out when Elon Musk took over the X platform. Their extreme reactions helped to move him further right, I think, and truly backfired on them. 

I reported earlier how some on the Left were having a fit over Face the Nation's Margaret Brennan putting Democrat House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (NY-8) on the spot with some good journalistic questions. They thought it was somehow scary or worrisome, and thought it might be due to the influence of Weiss. Indeed, if Weiss is trying to get them back to basic journalism, that's something everyone should welcome. That's good for the American people. 

But the Left is likely to truly go off the rails with the latest report about Weiss. 

There had been a report last week that she was interested in trying to poach Bret Baier from Fox. That seems unlikely that she would be able to pluck him away from Fox, where he has been for so long. I don't see him moving from there. 

But another person she is purportedly looking to entice from CNN is their conservative commentator, Scott Jennings. According to Semafor, Jennings visited Weiss this week at CBS New York headquarters.

That's the one that would really stick in the craw of the Left. Jennings has become a big favorite of conservatives for the way he nukes the Democrats. So if he went from CNN to CBS in that capacity, Weiss could be bringing with him his audience and new viewers who don't normally watch CBS. The fact that she's open to that shows she wants to bring more balance to the network. Jennings also has a Salem radio show. That would certainly class CBS up and bring some important thought there. We'll have to see what happens there. 

I suspect that the Left will have a lot to complain about as Weiss works to reform the network and bring balance there. It's much needed, after things like the 60 Minutes editing of the Kamala Harris interview caused such a problem for them. 

Weiss has already caused some upset at the network by asking employees to — gasp — tell her what they do, and what they believe is working or not working. How dare she act like a boss and try to see how she could improve the place and how things are working! It was a perfectly normal question. But likely not one that they had been used to hearing there, and that's part of the problem. 

She may bring back some credibility that they long ago lost. 



Secretary Marco Rubio Reacts to President Trump Saying He’s a Great Candidate for 2028


There are going to be three MAGA groups:  ♦Group one, team Rubio.  ♦Group two, team Vance – Musk/Thiel.  ♦Group three (alligator emojis) team DeSantis – Ellison/Murdoch.   It looks like Trump wants team one and team two to work together, avoiding team three.

Watch Rubio in video.



Keep watching.

♦️𝐖³𝐏 𝐃𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐍𝐞𝐰𝐬 𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐧 𝐓𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝

 


W³P Daily News Open Thread. 

Welcome to the W³P Daily News Open Thread. 

Post whatever you got in the comments section below.

This feature will post every day at 6:30am Mountain time.