As you likely know the Southern Poverty Law Council was indicted this week for Wire Fraud, False Statements, and Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering.

A grand jury in the Middle District of Alabama returned an 11-count indictment charging the SPLC with six counts of wire fraud, four counts of bank fraud, and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering, according to the Justice Department (DOJ). Between 2014 and 2023, according to the DOJ, the SPLC “secretly funneled” more than $3 million in donations to at least eight individuals associated with violent extremist groups, including the Ku Klux Klan, United Klans of America, the Nationalist Socialist Movement, Unite the Right, Aryan Nations affiliated Sadistic Souls Motorcycle Club, and more.

The bottom line is that the SPLC was acting in a Munchausen-by-proxy kind of manner. They were making the patient sick so they could bring the cure.

The disease was hate and their condemnation was the cure, not to mention their scoring bog donations from it.

Among their targets were the Turning Point USA, the Family Research Council, Moms for Liberty and Wildman’s Civil War Surplus and Herb Shop in Kennesaw GA.

They chose to instigate hatred because hate as a commodity was running low, and that was something they shared in common with the Democrat party.

Hate.

In that regard the Democrat party and the SPLC share a common MO- hate fills the coffers.

For years I have repeated something frequently- the most poisonous phrase over the last several decades to plague this nation was “celebrate diversity.” It’s a total shitshow.

That phrase has caused more pain and hatred than anything I’ve seen in my lifetime. Its fatal flaw is its intrinsic focus on what makes us different from one another. It is the antithesis of the greater American family. It is the antithesis of the American melting pot. It is the opposite of assimilation.

We all have friends who share our values- that’s what binds us. Of course, we have our differences, but we do not dwell on them. Emphasis on our differences lead to suspicion and doubt. Enough of that can lead to hatred.

And that’s what Democrats live for.

Barack Obama set race relations back 50 years. A Bill Ayers protege and Alinskyite, he was all about division. He wanted people to be and stay angry. He wielded racial power like Tiger Woods’ ex-wife wielded a nine iron.

When is the last time you saw Al Sharpton come to a racially charged event and try to calm it down?

Democrats used to oppose illegal immigration but now you’re the hateful one if you oppose it.

The Democrat party is now overflowing with politicians who compete with one another in a “who can hate Trump the most” competition.

It starts with a crusade against ‘ghost guns.’ It ends with government bureaucrats able to see everything you do.

Trish Randall | April 25, 2026

One of the most essential branches of English liberty is the freedom of one’s house.”

—James Otis, patriot

As an American citizen, whenever legislators deploy the ever-flimsy progressive banner of “public safety,” I feel decidedly unsafe.

Newly proposed and enacted legislation targeting 3D printers and CNC machines would impose restrictions more severe than those the Supreme Court rejects for actual guns.  In conjunction with restrictions on tools, states would create a category of computer source code illegal to possess.

The excuse? “Ghost guns”!

There’s abundant hair-on-fire rhetoric, even written into legislation.  Washington’s recently enacted HB2320 states, “Undetectable and untraceable firearms and firearms components presents a growing threat to public safety.”  The author of California’s AB 2047 testified, “These firearms are incredibly dangerous because they are not part of our regular flow, meaning they are not marked, they are not permitted, they are made in someone’s home, and we don’t even know they exist.”  Not actual use, but private possession frightens this lawmaker.

Plain text on the ATF’s website states that personally manufactured firearms (PMFs) are legal to own and make, even with 3D printed components.

California, Colorado, New York, Massachusetts, and Washington lawmakers are generating restrictions on certain tools and computer code, used to create millions of items unrelated to guns every day, to thwart Americans’ attempts to make a gun it’s legal to make.

In August, Colorado will forbid using a 3D printer or CNC to make any firearm or part, along with sale or distribution of digital firearm-making instructions to anyone but a student or instructor in an approved gunsmithing program.

Massachusetts’s General Laws Section 121 D bans 3D printers or CNC machines primarily used for making or assembling firearms.

California bill AB 2047 would outlaw 3D printer use to make an illegal weapon, “or the manufacture of any firearm using a 3-dimensional printer, as specified.”  Any firearm?  Like legal PMFs?

More sinister is targeting of source codes.  States intend to maintain databases of source code they declare to be firearms assembly blueprints and illegal to possess.

Makers and sellers of 3D printers and CNC machines would be required to preinstall software to prevent machines using forbidden code or generating forbidden shapes.  But the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ Bernstein decision says source code is protected speech.

Washington bill 2321 would require machines to “handshake” a government website to confirm code as innocent before initiating a print.  New York lawmakers are going farther, considering background checks to purchase a 3D printer.  Washington State’s recently passed HB2320 includes preinstalled future encroachment.  The attorney general will “adopt any rules or regulations to further establish standards for software control processes.”

The transcript of the April 14, 2026 hearing, memorializing member Ash Kaira’s words and muddled grammar, displays the unconstitutional intentions.

And by the way, the law has been on the books for over two years and hasn’t been overturned yet under Second Amendment grounds.  In regards to their privacy concerns, I think there are there [sic] if there’s a substantial public interest, the it [sic] does allow for limited legal legally justified restrictions on privacy rights.  I do think there is a substantial public interest, and this is clearly going to be challenged in the courts.  And we’ll let the courts decide whether we’re right or not on that.

That individual swore to uphold the Constitution.

Let’s put legally homemade firearms into a larger context.  There are an estimated 300 million guns in the U.S.  The ATF estimates that Americans created 45,240 personally manufactured firearms, about 7,500 per year between 2016 and 2021.  Approximately 692 of those PMFs were used in a homicide or attempted homicide (about 115 per year). 

Between 2016 and 2021, there were 116,876 homicides — about 19,500 per year.  Homicides have been decreasing since — down 6% in 2022, 13% in 2023, 15% in 2024, and a projected 20% in 2025.

When judging a restriction on firearms, the Supreme Court applies the standard of “text, history, and tradition.”  Text refers to conforming to the plain words of the Constitution.  History and tradition refer to conforming to the restrictions imposed on firearms when the Constitution was adopted.

Consulting a handy timeline of firearms regulations, from Massachusetts’s 1633 ban on transferring firearms, gunpowder, and ammunition to Indians to the 2024 Rahimi decision upholding the federal ban on domestic abusers possessing guns, guess what we don’t see: restrictions on tools used to make firearm.

Home and small business use of 3D printers has been increasing for over a decade, and CNC machines, since the 1970s.  In 2024, approximately 2.1 million 3D printers were sold in the U.S.  About 1.4 million Americans owned one.  Approximately $1.25 billion’s worth of medical, surgical and dental 3D prints will be made in 2026.

The ATF doesn’t report how many PMFs include any 3D printed material, but even if all the estimated 7,000–8,000 produced annually included some 3D printed part, that would be a vanishingly small percent of the total firearms available in the U.S., and an even tinier portion of items Americans 3D print every day.

Many who use 3D printers see the problem as proposed controls that can’t accomplish the stated goal.  Source codes are instructions for geometry, not intent.  A tube could be a gun barrel or a segment of tension pole for a shower shelf unit.  Too many ordinary prints would be blocked.

There are several increasingly common features of these tools that are already compatible with expansive government intrusion into our private spaces.  The control screens of many 3D printers alert the user to firmware updates.  If the user clicks, the manufacturer remotely, and quickly, installs updates.  A machine capable of remotely accepting firmware is capable of remotely accepting firmware from the government.  And many 3D printers and CNC machines feature cameras for users to remotely view, or control, printing in progress.

The case of Nancy Guthrie recently revealed startling information about doorbell cameras packaged with instructions saying a subscription is required or images and video won’t be stored.  Nancy hadn’t subscribed, yet investigators acquired images of her property from prior to her disappearance.

I look at my 3D printer, which has received firmware updates by the manufacturer and can be outfitted with a camera (which I skipped).  I consider what multiple American legislators have set in motion, on the excuse that, among the millions of objects 3D printed in America every day, a minuscule percentage might be attached to a homemade firearm — a firearm Americans are legally entitled to make.

I see firmware updates of the Intolerable Acts.  British colonial bureaucrats had been granted authority to enter “any house, shop, cellar, warehouse or room or other place.”  Modern legislators would have for themselves not just authority, but a permanent virtual wormhole into “any house, shop, cellar, warehouse or room or other place” containing a 3D printer or CDC machine.

Looking at a tool I use to make things, I suspect they see a telescreen, and they’re preparing for the opportunity to see what Winston Smith might be up to.

While the Trump administration continues to put the economic squeeze on what and who is left of the Iranian government, the Iranian royal family in exile hasn’t been silent.

Reza Pahlavi, the Crown Prince and heir to his father, the late Shah of Iran, has been keeping up the constant drumbeat of return, even though he has been effectively iced out of any negotiations between the Trump administration and the Islamic regime.

That is as it must be. Operation Epic Fury had distinct parameters for the security of the world and the United States, and not one of them was returning a Pahlavi to the throne. The last thing Trump would need, especially in the middle of all this nutzoid Democratic squawking about losing, is being accused of installing a king.

Nope, nope, nope.

Although, as Trump has said, if the conditions arise where the Americans have eased the way for the people of Iran to rise up at last and overthrow the monsters who have held them prisoners for almost fifty years, he is delighted he could help.

If his current economic strangulation continues in the face of regime intransigence, it may finally collapse sooner rather than later, as those oil storage facilities reach their tippy tops and the Iranians face a choice. They either shut the wells down or pump crude into the Persian Gulf to keep them operational.

In any event, it’s a financial catastrophe.

Pahlavi was in Berlin today, a city that has an Iranian expatriate community of some 300,000 members and there was quite a welcome.

He held a news conference, and then, in a stunning breach of security, when he was leaving, one of the pro-regime protestors got close enough to the Crown Prince to fling either paint or tomato sauce on the back of his neck.

This is amazing to me in this day and age.

Where was the security guard?
He is the Shah of Iran. You must have taken care of him!
It is shameful.
Punish him !

The Telegraph UK said part of the press gathering had been focused on Pahlavi’s reaction to the on-again, off-again US-regime negotiations, which, unsurprisingly, Pahlavi is not a fan of.

…Mr Pahlavi is the son of Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Iran’s former shah, who ruled the country from 1941 until he was forced from power in 1979, setting in motion the establishment of the Islamic Republic.

While he has spent his life in exile, Mr Pahlavi has been working to project himself as a future leader in the country, meeting with government officials, supporters and the media.

German media said hundreds of his supporters gathered to watch him speak at Germany’s federal press conference building on Thursday.

A supporter of the Israeli and US attacks on his country, Mr Pahlavi criticised the ceasefire announced by Donald Trump on April 3.

It’s easy enough to understand where he’s coming from, but he’s also on the outside looking in.

That’s just how it is.

What was really interesting was how he handled the European press. There is strong anti-Israel sentiment all through the European Union and that was obvious from one of the questions the Crown Prince received.

I don’t think the reporter was prepared for the strength of the answer he got back.

It was absolutely beautiful.

And then he gives the reporter a lesson on European democracies.

I edit the post:
He actually said “the only country in the Middle East that harbored Jews escaping Hitler..”— Mααԋι🐟 (@Luneamahsa) April 23, 2026

…After reminding them about Cyrus the Great, he added:

“In modern history, Iran is the only country that harbored Jews escaping Hitler and his regime.”

Mic. Dropped.🎤

It’s actually wild that a German journalist feels comfortable throwing shade on Jews and Israel. 

Prince Reza Pahlavi stays classy, stays truthful, and stays based.

But that wasn’t the end of what he had to say, although it was the end of the news conference.

When he got a few moments to himself, the Crown Prince issued a statement that surely should have singed some hairs in European quarters, had they any shame at all. A Europe that has cravenly taken the side of a murderous, fanatic, tyrannical regime over the people it has oppressed and abused for 47 years.

He called them all out for the posturing hypocrites they are.

🚨PRINCE REZA PAHLAVI JUST WENT FULL NUCLEAR ON THE ENTIRE EU PRESS & PARLIAMENT! 🔥🧨

I want to speak DIRECTLY to the people of Europe. In the past two weeks I held TWO MAJOR press conferences — one in Stockholm, one in Berlin. Over 150 JOURNALISTS showed up. We spent MORE THAN… pic.twitter.com/s9digeOfFd— Neo (@Realneo101) April 24, 2026

We spent MORE THAN TWO HOURS with them…

And guess what? 

NOT ONE SINGLE of those 150 journalists asked about the 40,000 IRANIANS SLAUGHTERED on the streets of my country on January 8th and 9th! 

NOT ONE asked about the 19 political prisoners EXECUTED in the last two weeks.

When I told them 20 more are currently sentenced to death — CRICKETS. Not a damn question.

I stood right next to a grieving mother and father who lost their sons in that massacre and begged them to listen to their stories… 

NOT A SINGLE ONE of those 150 journalists asked them a thing.

Let that sink in.

My 40,000 BRAVE INNOCENT COMPATRIOTS who were butchered fighting for liberty? They don’t give a damn.

They are too busy criticizing America and Israel for taking out the dictator who’s been slaughtering our people for 47 YEARS — instead of going after the regime that’s actually doing the killing!

They’d rather dig up Iran’s history than talk about what’s happening RIGHT NOW or the free democratic Iran we’re fighting for. 

One EU parliament member even had the nerve to say Iranians aren’t ready for democracy. To that coward and to every fake journalist in the room I say this:

Iranians aren’t just “ready” for democracy… 40,000 of them just DIED for it! And I will NOT let their blood be in vain. 

SO HEAR ME LOUD AND CLEAR:

Whether Europe stands with us or not…

Whether your journalists do their damn jobs or not…

Whether your politicians grow a spine or not…  

I WILL FIGHT FOR MY PEOPLE AND MY COUNTRY. 

Even if we have to do this ALONE — we are fighting until IRAN IS FREE! 🇮🇷

Damn.

So powerful and so very, very true.

I sure hope he makes it to Tehran just for what he said in those sneering Euro-faces today.

Is there anything a Democrat won’t do?

Democrats can’t seem to do anything honestly.

Now we learn that their fundraising machine, ActBlue, is under investigation for taking foreign cash to elect Democrats, making Democrats bought men.

According to the New York Post:

WASHINGTON — ActBlue employees invoked their Fifth Amendment right at least 146 times in depositions with congressional committees investigating alleged donor fraud on the fundraising platform, according to an explosive report released Monday.

Two ActBlue officials, one of whom formerly served as VP of customer service, and three of its former lawyers “declined to answer a single one of the Committees’ substantive questions,” stated the interim staff report from the House Administration, Oversight and Judiciary Committees.

“Their unwillingness to testify only amplifies the Committees’ concerns,” the report added of the depositions between July and December 2025, also citing ActBlue CEO Regina Wallace-Wells’ seemingly “false statements to Congress” and withholding of documents pursuant to a subpoena for recor

One hundred forty-six times, which sounds a lot like Hillary Clinton’s ‘I don’t recall.’

There’s no such thing as Democrat cooperation in any operation that requires transparency. But as the Post continued:

ActBlue has repeatedly denied wrongdoing and in a recent statement through a spokesperson maintained that it has “always been forthcoming with Congress.”

I’ll bet. And you can bet that no one on that congressional panel was fooled, either. They sound like they are hiding something.

Yet the investigation raises serious questions about how many ‘bought men’ there are among the Democrats, in hock to foreign moneymen.

The Post continued:

It could “be alleged that ActBlue accepted and/or facilitated the acceptance of foreign-national contributions into American elections,” in violation of federal law, a February 2025 internal memo from the firm Covington & Burling found, according to The New York Times.

How many did China’s bidding, how many…

Monica Showalter

Beginning with Woodrow Wilson’s justification for getting America into WWI, America has been the world’s policeman, a role that escalated after it was the only wealthy nation standing in 1945. However, it’s not 1945 anymore. The Cold War is over, allegiances have shifted, and Europe is not Europe. That’s why it was simply awesome today when Secretary of War Pete Hegseth explicitly told Asia and Europe (although he was clearly speaking to NATO) that the “time for free-riding is over.”

In 1916, when the “Great War” in Europe was already in its second year, Woodrow Wilson won reelection in part by pointing out that he’d kept America out of the war and promising that he would continue to do so. However, for myriad reasons, by 1917, Wilson could no longer maintain that promise.

However, Wilson, a high-minded, racist, eugenics-believing progressive, needed a high-minded reason for tossing young American men into those bloody trenches. America, he said, was a savior. “The world must be made safe for democracy,” and America was the one to do it.

There was no room for self-interest:

We desire no conquest, no dominion. We seek no indemnities for ourselves, no material compensation for the sacrifices we shall freely make.

Instead, virtue would be its own reward:

We are but one of the champions of the rights of mankind. We shall be satisfied when those rights have been made as secure as the faith and the freedom of nations can make them.

Those same principles have guided American warfare ever since. Yes, we entered WWII after Japan attacked us and Germany then declared war on us, but in the aftermath of a war that cost us over 400,000 American lives, we dedicated ourselves to rebuilding a shattered Europe and protecting it from Soviet domination.

When people show you who they are, believe them the first time.” — Maya Angelou

If there is one thing that leftists are adept at doing, it is projecting who they are upon others, namely, their political opposition. How often have we had to endure the incessant droning of these maniacal totalitarians castigating everyone else as fascists, authoritarians and threats to democracy?

It only takes one reading of Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto to show you who these leftists are, along with a study of their history, in order for anyone to believe who they are.

But, just in case there was still any doubt, never fear, James Carville, last week on the Al Hunt podcast, reminded us for the umpteenth time. Carville asserted, “If the Democrats win the presidency, and both houses of Congress, I think on day one, they should make Puerto Rico and D.C. a state, and they should expand the Supreme Court to 13. F!@K it. Eat our dust.”

But what Carville also suggested to the Marxist leftists, Democrats, is even more nefarious: “Don’t run on it. Don’t talk about it. Just do it.” I suppose this is the new leftist campaign model that was brought to us by the current Virginia Governor, Abigail Spanberger.

When Barry Soetoro, or whatever his name actually is, shouted out in Columbia, Missouri, that we are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America, we should have believed him. We did not, and to our peril, no one questioned him, under the fear of being demonized as a racist. As well, when Barack Hussein Obama, the man of many names, stated that if you own a business, you didn’t build that, which came after his openly confiding that he believed in “spreading the wealth around,” he was reelected as president.

Now, we have (17) leftist States violating the Constitution and voters’ rights, by signing onto something called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC). They affirm that in their respective States, regardless of who wins the presidential election vote, they will only grant their Electors to whoever wins the national popular vote. The Marxists believe that this will favor them because they control the most populous states. So, in essence, these leftists are saying we do not care what happens in our respective States.

The Marxist leftists in America are the true threat to our Republic, and oddly enough, all of this is happening in the year of our 250th anniversary of Independence. It would appear that history is indeed repeating itself in that tyrannical totalitarianism rooted in destroying individual rights, freedoms, and liberties is rearing its ugly head. We should all ponder what has happened in our America over the past 50 years, since our Bicentennial.

We did not believe the Marxist leftists when they showed themselves the first time, and we continued to dismiss and excuse their abhorrent behavior. Now we are at critical mass as the Marxists have joined forces with the Islamists in order to fundamentally transform our America, in the celebrated year of its 250th remembrance of its Declaration of Independence. What will be our response?

---

Ten days ago, Congressmember Eric Swalwell was getting very close to becoming the Democratic candidate for governor of California. But then he imploded amidst sensational accusations of sexual harassment and assault.

Within hours of the revelations, Swalwell abandoned his campaign and then resigned from Congress and is now under criminal investigation.

Why Swalwell was leading the field of Democratic hopefuls was never clear. His only claim to political fame was being one of President Donald Trump’s most persistent critics — which, of course, has little to do with governing the nation’s most populous state.

It seemed he was seen as an alternative to billionaire Tom Steyer, who had been spending lavishly on TV and internet ads while positioning himself as a Bernie Sanders-style progressive.

Those turned off by Steyer’s ideology or his wealth were seemingly drifting to Swalwell, who hewed to a more or less moderate line.

Swalwell’s sudden departure left a vacuum that Steyer and the third Democrat in the top tier, former Congressmember Katie Porter, hoped to fill. However, when Swalwell’s disappointed supporters looked at their options, many apparently settled on Xavier Becerra, the mild-mannered former congressmember, state attorney general and Biden administration official.

The Democratic Party released its latest tracking poll on Monday, revealing that the two Republicans, — former TV commentator Steve Hilton and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco —are still leading the pack at 16% and 14%.

However the big news was that Becerra had shot up from 4% on April 5 to 13%, topping all Democrats. Both Steyer and Porter gained slightly in the post-Swalwell shakeout but Becerra’s rise is nothing less than phenomenal.

Why?

Perhaps Swalwell’s disillusioned supporters, who obviously had not felt comfortable with Steyer or Porter, were looking for someone dependable and trustworthy — even a little dull — after seven years of Gavin Newsom’s flashy sideshow.

It could be 1982 all over again.

That was the year that a stolid public servant, Republican Attorney General George Deukmejian, succeded wunderkind Gov. Jerry Brown.

Brown, like Newsom, had devoted much of his governorship to seeking national political attention, running for president twice, and the same voters who elected Deukmejian on a law-and-order platform soundly rejected Brown’s bid for a U.S. Senate seat.

Brown publicly acknowledged that he had worn out his welcome — although 28 years later, much older and wiser, he returned to the governorship.

This year’s campaign for governor has been the weirdest of any in at least 80 years, including actor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s improbable victory in 2003. For months, potential candidates dropped in and opted out, two Republicans led the polls in one of the nation’s bluest states, Democratic leaders were openly worried that the GOP could win the governorship by default with a 1-2 finish in the primary and, finally, scandal forced Swalwell out.

The next phase will continue the post-Swalwell reshuffle, with Becerra either continuing his meteoric rise or reaching a plateau and with Democrats still mired in low single digits, deciding whether to continue their campaigns.

“I continue to believe there are too many Democrats in the field,” said Rusty Hicks, Democratic state chair.

An hour before the new poll was released, one of the also-rans, former Controller Betty Yee, tearfully suspended her campaign — understandable, given her 1% standing. Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa (2%) and state schools Superintendent Tony Thurmond (2%) are on the bubble. San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan gained a bit to 5% and his Silicon Valley backers are now staging a multimillion-dollar ad campaign in hopes of putting him in contention, with mail voting beginning in just two weeks.

Meanwhile it’s still theoretically possible, although not likely, that the two Republicans could finish 1-2, thus guaranteeing election of a GOP governor in November.

In a year as wacky as this one, nothing seemingly impossible should be discounted.

The Chief Justice and His Wife Took $20 Million From Firms He Rules On. I’m Filing for His Disbarment Today. And you can too. Christopher Armitage Apr 22, 2026

Over sixteen years of federal financial disclosure forms, Chief Justice John Roberts mischaracterized more than twenty million dollars in household income from law firms appearing before the Supreme Court. He concealed his wife’s equity stake in her employer for three consecutive years. He failed to recuse from more than five hundred cases argued at the Supreme Court by law firms that had paid his household millions in commissions. He architected the Court’s first ethics code and designed it to be unenforceable. This is a course of conduct stretching across two decades, connected by a single through-line: the belief that the rules that apply to every other federal judge do not apply to him.

The Brennan Center for Justice called the code designed to fail. Kathleen Clark, a legal ethics scholar at Washington University, said nothing in the statement suggested the Court even understood what the problem was.

The Dobbs investigation followed the same pattern. After the draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization leaked in May 2022, the Court’s marshal interviewed ninety-seven employees. Every employee signed an affidavit under penalty of perjury. The justices did not. The marshal’s January 2023 report said she had spoken with each justice, several on multiple occasions, but under a different standard than the one that applied to the staff. The report concluded that she could not identify the source by a preponderance of the evidence, and the investigation closed.

Roberts is a primary architect of the ethics crisis that has broken the Court. He is a willing participant in the destruction of one of the three pillars of American checks and balances.

John Roberts is not a Trump lackey or a spineless rube. He is a builder of the world we are now living in. He is selling our future. He was appointed to the Supreme Court because of his belief that Republicans should be above the law and that the Presidency should be all-powerful so long as it’s run by a Republican. He might be an ideologue and a true believer, but not in regards to Christianity or Originalism. He is a true believer in the almighty dollar, and he sold his judicial soul to the highest bidder. May consequences someday visit him.

Five mechanisms exist to hold a federal judge accountable for the conduct documented here. Each of them is available. Each of them is being refused.

The law exists. 5 U.S.C. § 13106 makes willful false disclosure a civil violation with penalties up to $50,000. 18 U.S.C. § 1001 makes knowing false statements to the federal government a felony punishable by five years. 28 U.S.C. § 455 mandates recusal. These are laws Congress wrote. They apply to the Chief Justice.

Impeachment exists. Article II, Section 4 provides for removal of judges for high crimes and misdemeanors. Porteous in 2010. Claiborne in 1986. Hastings in 1989. Congress has the power and has used it on federal judges.

The Judicial Conference has a statutory referral obligation under § 13106. It exists. It just hasn’t been used against a justice.

The DC Bar has disciplinary jurisdiction over its members. It exists. It just carves out judicial capacity by policy.

The Supreme Court Bar has a complaint mechanism. It exists. It just answers to the Court.

The mechanisms exist. The political will of the people who control them does not. The Judicial Conference won’t refer. The DC Bar declines on intake. The Senate won’t impeach. DOJ won’t prosecute. Each institution points at another institution and says not my jurisdiction, not my moment, not my responsibility.

In the United Kingdom, a party who believes a judge should step aside can file a challenge, and a different judge decides. In Canada, the Judicial Council accepts complaints from any member of the public and can recommend a judge’s removal. In Germany, the other members of a Federal Constitutional Court panel vote on whether a colleague must recuse, and the judge in question does not vote on their own case. In Australia, a statutory code requires federal judges to disclose spousal income in full rather than by category label. At the European Court of Human Rights, the plenary court has authority to remove a judge who fails to recuse where the law requires it.

What every one of these systems shares, and what the American system lacks, is an external body with the authority to receive a complaint, investigate it, and impose consequences. The self-policing rule is the American anomaly.

This is not recent drift. In December 2000, Roberts flew to Tallahassee at his own expense and met privately with Governor Jeb Bush to advise on the governor’s role in assigning Florida’s electors to George W. Bush. Nobody disclosed the meeting during his 2005 confirmation hearings. A December 2000 email from Bush to Roberts, which surfaced a decade later through the governor’s gubernatorial correspondence, thanked him for his input in this unique and historic situation. The advice concerned scenarios in which the Republican-controlled legislature could assign electors directly, bypassing the popular vote and the ongoing recount.

The Reagan-era paper trail at the National Archives contains memos in which Roberts argued against heightened constitutional scrutiny for sex discrimination, recommended that Reagan distance himself from the Centers for Disease Control’s conclusion that AIDS could not be transmitted by casual contact, described comparable-worth pay equity as staggeringly pernicious, and wrote that an effects test in the Voting Rights Act would amount to a quota system for electoral politics. Twenty-seven years later he wrote the majority opinion in Shelby County v. Holder gutting the same statute.

For twenty years the ethics conversation around the Supreme Court has run on a curve composed entirely of Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Roberts has played the institutional grown-up, the last one who cared about the Court as an institution, the one trying to hold the line. The line he held was the one that protected his own household. Thomas took gifts from Harlan Crow. Alito took flights from Paul Singer. Roberts took law firm money through his wife’s commission checks and mislabeled it on a federal form.

The DC Bar accepts disciplinary complaints from any member of the public against any of its admitted attorneys. John G. Roberts Jr. is admitted to the DC Bar, and I am filing a complaint against him today, after this article goes live. The complaint alleges that Roberts violated DC Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(c) across sixteen annual federal financial disclosure filings from 2007 through 2022, by mischaracterizing at least $10,323,842.70 in documented commission income from law firms appearing before the Court as salary, with unreported commission income across an additional eight annual filings from 2015 through 2022 estimated at a floor of $11.8 million based on the documented seven-year mean, and with the actual figure likely substantially higher given Macrae’s reported revenue growth during that period. The complaint further alleges that Roberts omitted a material equity interest in his wife’s employer from three consecutive annual filings between 2019 and 2021. The complaint cites 5 U.S.C. § 13106 and 18 U.S.C. § 1001 as the underlying statutory predicates.

The men and women running this system built their careers on the assumption that nobody was paying attention. That the forms would go unread. That the recusals would go uncounted. That the statutes would sit on the shelf. That the institutions would cover for each other and no one outside would notice the arrangement.

We noticed.

We see the ten million dollars documented and the eleven million more estimated. The millions more likely unseen. We see the sixteen years of false characterizations. We see the hidden equity stake. We see the stock trades and the missed recusals and the Code of Conduct written to fail and the justices who signed affidavits for no one. We see the Judicial Conference that won’t refer and the Senate that won’t impeach and the Attorney General who won’t prosecute. We see every institution pointing at every other institution and shrugging.

Here is what you can do.

One. Share this article. Every person who reads it is one more person who knows, and the thing they built their careers on is the assumption that nobody knows. Post it. Send it. Forward it. Break the quiet.

Two. Send a letter to the DC Bar Office of Disciplinary Counsel at 515 Fifth Street NW, Building A, Room 117, Washington DC 20001. Write it in your own words. The facts to include are that Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. mischaracterized his wife’s commission income as salary on sixteen years of federal financial disclosure forms, omitted a material equity interest for three consecutive years, and did not recuse from more than five hundred cases argued by law firms paying his household in commissions. The relevant statutes are 28 U.S.C. § 455, 5 U.S.C. § 13106, and 18 U.S.C. § 1001, and the rule to cite is DC Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(c). It takes about ten minutes.

All of this movement creates pressure. Pressure creates heat. Enough heat and things will change. Be the heat, be the pressure, and the system will bend. That’s how we take our damn country back.

Christopher Armitatge

In the last few years, there has been a trend by recruiters and companies to ‘ghost’ candidates. Ghosting is the act of ceasing ALL communication with a candidate in the hiring process. It can happen at the initial contact, all the way to final interviews. I’ve even heard of ghosting happening after an acceptance letter was sent!

I feel this is utterly unacceptable. I feel it is important for us all to reprimand recruiters (and companies, for that matter) and chide them when they ghost. I know, I know, they may not g.a.s., but still, I feel it is crucial for us to refuse that treatment.

To that end, I have created a template that I will begin sending to any recruiter or company that ghosts me. It follows:

———————————————–

Hi _______,

I’m going to say this as respectfully as I can.

I am avoiding working with people or companies who have the approach of ‘ghosting’ a candidate.

I’m fortunate: I’m employed well, I am flourishing and growing in my current position. Ergo, ‘ghosting’ does not really hurt me.

I do understand your dilemma: The flood of candidates you get may make returning emails (etcetera) difficult. However, in today’s A.I.-powered environment, I’m thinking it would be possible to at least automatically fire off rejection emails. ‘Ghosting’ is unacceptable in the professional ecosystem in which we live.

I’m not trying to create conflict with this email; I only hope to advise from the perspective of a candidate. Please try to take my comments in the correct light.

Thanks for reading!

---

While science is advancing, the roadmap may still lie in ancient texts.

McKinny highlights three enduring traditions, each offering a different possible fate for the Ark.

The first, often called the Mount Legend, suggests it was hidden beneath the Temple Mount itself–concealed in tunnels by priests before the Babylonian invasion.

The second, tied to the prophet Jeremiah, describes the Ark being hidden in a remote rocky location between mountains–a theory sometimes linked to wilderness regions near Jerusalem.

The third, claims that the Prophet Jeremiah transported the Ark to a cave on Mount Nebo–the very mountain associated with Moses’ death.

Different paths. Different locations.

But one striking consistency.

All three traditions insist the Ark was not destroyed.

It was hidden–intentionally, carefully, and with purpose.

Why This Moment Matters

It would be easy to dismiss all of this as speculation. After all, countless expeditions have chased the Ark before.

But something is different now.

The same technological advancements helping researchers identify possible remains of Noah’s Ark are now being applied to Jerusalem–arguably the most archaeologically complex and restricted site on earth.

And beyond McKinny’s work, other researchers are echoing similar optimism. Studies using remote sensing in Israel have already uncovered hidden tunnels and chambers dating back thousands of years. Meanwhile, independent teams continue to explore Ethiopian traditions claiming the Ark resides in Aksum–guarded and hidden in plain sight.

No single theory has won the day.

But the convergence of ancient testimony, modern technology, and renewed global interest is creating something we haven’t seen before:

Momentum.

More Than a Discovery

If the Ark of the Covenant were found, it wouldn’t just be an archaeological breakthrough.

It would be a spiritual earthquake.

This is not merely a relic. It is a symbol of divine law, covenant, and presence. It represents a moment when heaven and earth intersected in a tangible way.

And perhaps that’s why its story has endured.

Because deep down, the search for the Ark isn’t just about finding gold beneath the ground.

It points to something far deeper than history alone.

It confronts a truth that refuses to stay buried:

Join over 350,000 PNW subscribers.

ARTICLE Not Just Noah’s Ark – New Advances To Find The The Ark of The Covenant

News ImageBY PNW STAFF APRIL 24, 2206 Share this article: facebook sharing button twitter sharing button email sharing button sms sharing button print sharing button The ancient world is stirring again.

From the rugged slopes near Mount Ararat to the buried secrets beneath Jerusalem, a renewed wave of archaeological curiosity is sweeping across biblical history. Recent reports surrounding possible structural anomalies linked to Noah’s Ark have reignited global fascination–not just with one ancient relic, but with the broader question: What else might still be hidden?

Now, attention is shifting to something even more sacred, more mysterious, and arguably more significant–the long-lost Ark of the Covenant.

And for the first time in generations, serious researchers believe we may be closer than ever to finding it.

A Mystery Buried Beneath Time–and Stone

According to the Bible, the Ark of the Covenant was constructed under the direction of Moses around the 13th century BC. Overlaid with gold and designed to house the Ten Commandments, it represented nothing less than the physical manifestation of God’s covenant with Israel.

For centuries, it resided in the Holy of Holies within Solomon’s Temple–until history went dark.

When Babylon destroyed Jerusalem in 586 BC, the Ark vanished.

What followed has been one of history’s greatest mysteries.

Now, archaeologist Dr. Chris McKinny is proposing a compelling new direction: the Ark may still lie hidden beneath the ancient landscape of the City of David, just south of the Temple Mount.

But this isn’t a theory driven by shovels and guesswork. It’s powered by cutting-edge science.

Technology Meets Scripture

Unlike past generations of explorers, today’s researchers are turning to tools that border on science fiction.

Muon detectors–devices that track subatomic particles created by cosmic rays–are now being used to peer deep beneath the earth without disturbing it. These detectors can reveal hidden voids, chambers, and even dense materials like gold.

Early scans in Jerusalem have already uncovered previously unknown underground structures.

That matters.

Because if the Ark still exists–and if it remains gold-plated as described–it could, in theory, be detected without ever turning a single stone.

Alongside muon imaging, researchers are increasingly relying on ground-penetrating radar, seismic scanning, and electrical resistivity tomography. These tools are opening up what McKinny calls one of archaeology’s greatest blind spots: the forbidden underground world beneath the Temple Mount.

It’s a place too politically and religiously sensitive for traditional excavation.

But technology is changing the rules.

Ancient Clues, Modern Direction

While science is advancing, the roadmap may still lie in ancient texts.

McKinny highlights three enduring traditions, each offering a different possible fate for the Ark.

The first, often called the Mount Legend, suggests it was hidden beneath the Temple Mount itself–concealed in tunnels by priests before the Babylonian invasion.

The second, tied to the prophet Jeremiah, describes the Ark being hidden in a remote rocky location between mountains–a theory sometimes linked to wilderness regions near Jerusalem.

The third, claims Jeremiah transported the Ark to a cave on Mount Nebo–the very mountain associated with Moses’ death.

Different paths. Different locations.

But one striking consistency.

All three traditions insist the Ark was not destroyed.

It was hidden–intentionally, carefully, and with purpose.

Why This Moment Matters

It would be easy to dismiss all of this as speculation. After all, countless expeditions have chased the Ark before.

But something is different now.

The same technological advancements helping researchers identify possible remains of Noah’s Ark are now being applied to Jerusalem–arguably the most archaeologically complex and restricted site on earth.

And beyond McKinny’s work, other researchers are echoing similar optimism. Studies using remote sensing in Israel have already uncovered hidden tunnels and chambers dating back thousands of years. Meanwhile, independent teams continue to explore Ethiopian traditions claiming the Ark resides in Aksum–guarded and hidden in plain sight.

No single theory has won the day.

But the convergence of ancient testimony, modern technology, and renewed global interest is creating something we haven’t seen before:

Momentum.

More Than a Discovery

If the Ark of the Covenant were found, it wouldn’t just be an archaeological breakthrough.

It would be a spiritual earthquake.

This is not merely a relic. It is a symbol of divine law, covenant, and presence. It represents a moment when heaven and earth intersected in a tangible way.

And perhaps that’s why its story has endured.

Because deep down, the search for the Ark isn’t just about finding gold beneath the ground.

It points to something far deeper than history alone.

It confronts a truth that refuses to stay buried:

What if these discoveries are not just revealing the past–but calling this generation to account?

A Final Thought

From the frozen ridges tied to Noah’s Ark to the hidden chambers beneath Jerusalem, a pattern is emerging that is difficult to dismiss.

History is not fading.

It is resurfacing.

And with it comes a quiet but undeniable tension–one that suggests these ancient accounts are not merely stories, but signals.

Whether the Ark of the Covenant lies beneath the Temple Mount, rests in a sealed cave near Mount Nebo, or remains hidden beyond current understanding, one truth stands firm–

This search is no longer just about discovery.

It is about revelation.

Not only of what was.

But of what still is.

And perhaps… what is still to come.