Thousands of migrants invade Ceuta in Spain.

 

Migrants rush into Ceuta after crossing the border. Fox News/Reuters. 

Thousands of illegal aliens have invaded Ceuta in Spain, causing a major immigration crisis. Fox News. At least 2,000 migrants crossed over the border of Ceuta from Morocco. Ceuta is a Spanish enclave in Africa. Footage shows the illegal aliens bypassing border fences and swimming in from the sea. President Trump criticized Spain's leftist government for the crisis, saying it could lead to destruction. Spain's conservative opposition agreed and said that guaranteeing social services for underage illegal immigrants obviously incentivized the situation. However, Spain's leftist Prime Minster Pedro Sanchez refused to declare an emergency and said that immigration was necessary to deal with low birthrates.

INSANE FOOTAGE: Thousands of migrants continue crossing from Morocco into Spain’s Ceuta enclave, as local officials reportedly urge Madrid to declare a national emergency. pic.twitter.com/dlbbKOjBV1

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) July 30, 2026

 

My Comment:

This is entirely due to Spain's leftist government, who absolutely incentivized this invasion. When you tell people that if you break into the country they can get free stuff, it's like putting a steak in front of a hungry dog. It's no surprise that thousands of people, mostly military aged men, have showed up. 

I also don't buy Spain's argument that these people are needed because of low birth rates. If low birth rates are a problem, and they absolutely are, they should be trying to solve that by getting people together and having kids. I know it's very difficult to increase the birthrates, but Spain hasn't even tried to do so, it's just going with the immigration angle. 

The problem with this is that the quality of people is going to be extremely poor. At the very least, the underage ones are going to be a huge drain of resources until they turn 18, and even beyond that, I see most of these men not working and continuing to drain welfare for many years. And the ones that do work? They are going to mostly be doing so under the table, contributing very little to the tax base. And, most importantly, they will be depressing wages and taking jobs from Spanish civilians. These aren't going to be the upper crust from Morocco, who could potentially contribute, but the lower classes who haven't been able to secure any kinds of ties to their community. 

I feel bad for the Spanish civilians. Their ancestors suffered under Islam for many centuries and a lot of people had to die in order to take back the country from their Muslim overlords. The Reconquista was one of the few examples where Islam was pushed back and our of Europe but it's insane to me the obvious consequence is going to be the same thing. 

I honestly think that conflict in Europe is inevitable. Europe's leftist leadership is all out of ideas and nobody is willing to actually get rid of these people and prevent them from coming. At some point folks are going to get tired of it and with right wing governments unlikely to form (and if they do, they betray the people that put them in power), what other outcome is even possible?  

Tensions between Iran and Ukraine could escalate after Ukraine struck an Iranian ship in the Caspian Sea.

 

Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi. New York Times/AP.

Tensions between Iran and Ukraine have increased after Ukraine struck an Iranian ship in the Caspian Sea. New York Times. Ukraine drones attacked an Iranian freighter and killed a civilian sailor. Iran had vowed to retaliate and considered a strike on an Ukrainian port on the Black Sea. The attack would be a single missile and would be considered symbolic in nature. However, the foreign ministers of both Ukraine and Iran talked and deescalated the situation. Iran and Russia are allies and the Caspian Sea has become a critical route for Iran, and any involvement with Ukraine could complicate both wars. 

My Comment:

For now, it seems that cooler heads are prevailing. From what I understand, the phone call between Iran and Ukraine was promising, and it does seem like Iran has backed down from any retaliation. The hope is that this will be the end of it, and Iran's protests over the strike on their ship will remain diplomatic in nature. 

And I don't really think that any of the parties in either conflict would benefit from an actual war between Iran and Ukraine. Seriously, it poses problems for basically every party to both wars. Iran has barely enough weapons to strike targets at this point, most of their launchers are destroyed and they only have a few weapons left. They also would risk having their last major sea route for trade with Russia cut off entirely, due to Ukrainian strikes. 

Ukraine? It has huge manpower problems of their own and they too are just barely able to keep up pressure on Russia. Having Iran join the war on Russia's side would further stretch their resources and they would have difficulty with their air defenses, which have already largely been depleted. 

Russia? They absolutely don't want their sea route with Iran closed. It's absolutely an important corridor for them, and though they are no longer reliant on Iran for their Shahed drones, having Ukraine possibly closing the sea route would be bad for them. 

And America? They want both wars to end. That gets a lot harder to do if both wars are connected. Indeed, the Iran War almost ended once already and it could happen easily again, but not if Ukraine is party to the war. And given that I don't consider the leadership of Iran or Ukraine to be rational actors, diplomacy might be extremely hard to pull off. 

Given the incentives here, I would expect that diplomacy will prevail. I do fear that the leadership of Iran and Ukraine are both, quite frankly, insane, for continuing wars that they lost a long time ago. But even they have to have some rational actors that would consult against this, right? 

So what would a war between Iran and Ukraine look like? I am guessing it would largely be similar to what the Iran war has devolved in, only without the involvement of US Airpower. Both sides have long range missiles and drones and I can see both sides using them to strike targets. Iran would likely target Ukranian ports while Ukraine would likely continue to target Iranian ships in the Caspian Sea. 

There's a small chance that Iran could deploy ground troops to the front lines in Ukraine, but that seems unlikely. Logistically it would be a nightmare because there would be no likely ground route to transport troops and supplies from Iran to Russia, not to mention troop ships would be vulnerable in the Caspian Sea. Plus, Iranian troops are not a good match for the grinding attritional warfare against Ukraine. 

Regardless, I think that even with the irrational leadership of Ukraine and Iran, that there won't be a real conflict between them. Nobody really benefits and both sides would have serious consequences for doing so. There is still some chance of it happening, but I am glad that there is diplomacy happening. 

Destructive tornado hits Northeast Wisconsin, causing major damage to Appleton, Menasha and Neenah.

 

A destroyed gas station in Menasha Wisconsin. ABC News/AP.

A destructive tornado has hit Northeast Wisconsin, causing major damage to Appleton, Menasha and Neenah. ABC News. The tornado struck southern Appleton before moving through eastern Menasha and Neenah before moving over Lake Winnebago. Many businesses and homes were damaged or destroyed and several injuries were reported. 

Menasha was especially hard hit and was declared a disaster area, along with Neenah and Appleton. WBAY. Menasha was forced to close all vehicle traffic to the city and issued a curfew. Boil warnings for water are in effect and shelters have been set up for victims of the storm. 

The Post Crescent has a gallery showing the damage in the area. 

My Comment:

I don't usual cover local stories but this is one that affected me. I live in Northeast Wisconsin and grew up in he area affected in this storm and I have many friends and family members that were affected by this tornado. Indeed, I've been to that gas station that's destroyed in the picture attached to this post, I've bought minnows there for fishing. Thankfully, everyone I know appears to be safe and sound, but this was still a devastating disaster. 

It's unclear how bad of a tornado this was. It was either an F-2 or an F-3 on the Fujita scale. I am guessing it was an F-3 due to the huge amount of damage done to houses and businesses, though probably not through the whole storm. 

As bad as this tornado was, it could have been worse. The tornado's track moved east once it hit Lake Winnebago, which probably spared lakeshore Neenah from worse damage than it had. The tornado stayed out on the lake and turned into a waterspout, thus sparing the east side of Neenah from damage, aside from Doty Island. 

Tornados aren't uncommon here in the Northeast Wisconsin, but they usually aren't on this scale. The worst tornado I have ever seen was many years ago, also in Neenah, and that was only an F-0, barely a tornado at all. That one was weak, but it was strong enough to rip tiles off of the roof of the house I was renting back then, along with utterly destroying my screen door. And that was an F-0! This storm was a lot bigger and it did a lot of damage. We aren't surprised by tornados here, but one this damaging is extremely rare, and not something I have seen in my lifetime.

I also don't recall a natural disaster in our region where travel was suspended like it is in Menasha. Even during previous tornados or our occasional blizzards in the winter, there is usually some form of travel allowed. But right now there isn't a way to get to Menasha. It's not like there is a good way to get there right now anyways, for me at least, because as of this writing I believe Highway 441 is still closed, due to disabled and damage vehicles clogging up the roadway as well as fuel spills. 

I am thankful that it appears nobody was killed in this disaster. This storm happened around noon, and most people weren't home, which may have saved some lives. Still, folks know what to do when storms hit here so that might have helped things. I am extremely thankful that none of my friends and family were hurt in this disaster. 

Suspect in Berlin pride car ramming attack shot by police after brief escape.

 

A memorial in Berlin after the attack. NPR/AP.

A suspect in the Berlin Pride car ramming attack has been shot and killed by police after initially escaping them. NPR. A 21 year old man named Abdul Ballout was shot as he charged at police with a bladed weapon. Ballout was the main suspect of an attack on a Pride festival's closing party, killing one person and wounding at least 29 people. The attacker rammed a van into the crowd and then got out of his vehicle and slashed people with his machete. The attack was an example of Islamic terrorism. Ballout was born in Germany but had Lebanese heritage.

My Comment:

Ballout was a classic example of a long term terrorist that was somehow out on the streets despite a long criminal and terrorist history. He was posting pro-ISIS content on social media and had traveled to Lebanon in a failed attempt to join ISIS directly. He was imprisoned briefly in Lebanon but was released and came back to Germany where he was arrested and convicted, again, on terrorism charges. He was released on a suspended sentence and was supposed to be attending a deradicalization programs but was not. 

In short, he is the kind of guy that should have been, at best, in prison for a very long time. Instead he was out on the streets and was able to attack a pride parade with the predictable result of a bunch of people getting hurt and one person getting killed. Had either Germany or Lebanon had the realization that a guy that tried to join ISIS in 2025 is not someone that should be free because this is the obvious result. 

So why was he free? I am guessing Lebanon didn't want to keep him for pretty obvious reasons. He wasn't a citizen and it was a lot easier for them to send him back to Germany. But the Germans? They were just being weak on crime and weak on terrorism. Ballout made some comments about giving up terrorism. But obviously, he was lying. 

Having this attack happen at a Pride festival is also telling. Obviously, the motivation is that in Islam, homosexuality and other LGBT behavior and beliefs, are haram, forbidden for good Muslims. This isn't a fringe thing, it's a core belief of Islam. So it's no surprise that Germany is having problems with their LGBT community coming under attack from radical Muslims. 

The police response here was a bit puzzling. The suspect was able to escape after the attack and was on the run for hours. He was shot and killed after being at large for almost a day. You would have thought he would have been caught on scene, but he was not. 

There does seem to be some mitigating factors for the police response though. This attack occurred outside of the festival and was targeting people who had left. The festival itself had good security, but the attacker was unfortunately smart enough to attack outside of those defenses. It also occurred near a large park and the suspect was able to get into after he was done with his attack. In short, it wasn't quite as bad as it seemed. 

Still, it's not surprising that this attack occurred. Even if you ignore the fact that this guy was on Germany's radar and shouldn't have been on the streets in the first place, it does show that the problem with many of these immigrants is their kids. Instead of assimilating to German culture, Ballout stuck with his Islamic beliefs and was radicalized. This is a known phenomenon and it's fairly common for 2nd generation immigrants. 

Military action against al-Qaeda terrorists in Mali is being considered by President Trump

 

Mali. News Nation.

Military action against al-Qaeda aligned terrorists in Mali is being considered by the White House. News Nation. A Washington Post report said that the debate was happening because Mali's JNIM terror group has been having success on the battlefield and could potentially overthrow the government. Russia's Africa Corps, an official formation that folded in former Wagner Group mercenaries into the Russian military, has failed to defeat the terrorists since a coup replaced the pro-American government in 2022. The presence of Russian troops in Mali would complicate things and would likely require deconfliction efforts. JNIM has allied with a local independence group, the FLA, and have had major successes on the battlefield, including killing the Defense Minster. 

My Comment:

I don't know how real these reports are. There is a very strong argument to intervene in Mali. The last thing we need is a new Syria or Afghanistan where al-Qaeda can gather a tax base to fund terror attacks globally. That has absolutely not worked out well in the past, to say the least and not intervening against groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS caused an untold amount of misery. 

But there should be a debate, and it sounds like there is one internally. There is the idea that our forces are already stretched thin due to other military actions this year, most notably Venezuela and Iran. Iran especially has drained our weapons stockpiles and exhausted our troops. Launching another military campaign, even a minor one, might not be the best idea. 

Politically it has risks as well. Folks are pretty tired of the Iran War and the media is already framing this as a new conflict, something that the dove wing of his party is not going to be too impressed with. Pre midterms, joining this conflict will not play that well, even if doing so is necessary from a military sense. 

I do think we would be extremely effective though. Mali's major problem is a lack of intelligence and air support. Most of Russia's forces are deployed in Ukraine, obviously, and the Africa Corps is stretched thin in that area. They have some drones and a few helicopters and SU-24 Fencer attack planes but not what they need to be effective, and Mali has even less in terms of these weapon systems. My first instinct would be that we should end the Ukraine War so Russia could better provide their troops in Mali with the support they need, but that's politically impossible. 

It's unclear how open Mali and Russia would be to working together. Both would obviously benefit from the destruction that the US Military could rain down on these terrorists but Mali's government was pretty anti-America (and anti-French, who used to be handling these terrorists). And, obviously, relations between Russia and the United States remains tragically frosty. 

There are signs that Mali is at least willing to entertain the idea of allowing air strikes. There have been some examples of intelligence sharing and high level diplomatic meetings. It could be that Mali might be able to work with the United States. 

However, I should note that any participation of the United States in Mali is not a done deal. There is a debate happening and they are in the very early stages. There's arguments being made for and against it, and President Trump and his team might very well conclude that it's not worth it. It's also possible that Mali and Russia will be able to reverse the battlefield problems they are facing without US help. Right now, nothing is for certain, and we will have to wait and see.

Democrat Governor of New Jersey says 6600 non-citizens were registered to vote due to an "error".

 

New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill. Fox News/Getty.

The Democrat Governor of New Jersey, Mikie Sherrill, said that 6600 non-citizens were registered to vote in the state due to an "error". Fox News. In New Jeresey, people who use the DMV are registered to vote. However, 6600 people were registered despite being non-citizens and indicating so on their DMV registration due to a "software error". Around 400 people in this group then voted illegally. The registrations happened before Sherrill took the office between June of 2023 and June of 2024. Republican investigations into the state had shown the issue but this is the first time the Democrat controlled government admitted it. The illegally registered voters are now being removed from the voter rolls. 

My Comment:

I am skeptical that this is the full extent of this problem and that this was a mistake. It's very possible far more people were registered and voted than the Democrat controlled State of New Jersey is willing to admit. 

However, it's extremely hard to prove either way. There hasn't been an external audit to confirm or disprove any allegations of a wider scandal. I am guessing that will be coming as the Feds have already said they are going to look into it. 

And I also don't know if this really was a glitch. It wouldn't be very hard to make the software do this automatically and it could be passed as a bug. I am no expert on this technology but I would believe it's very possible. However, short of someone confessing that they did so, I don't know how you would ever prove this without some serious forensic investigation, and even then, it would be difficult. 

New Jersey obviously has a motive to lie about what happened here. If only 400 people voted illegally due to this issue, then it probably wasn't enough to change the outcome of any elections. But if there were a lot more than it starts to call into question some of these elections.

New Jersey is a blue state, but it's one that has been trending red and though the margins aren't so close, it's very possible that some of the more recent elections, even the one that put Sherrill into power, come into question. It's a huge problem and casts doubt into all recent elections in New Jersey. It also calls into question elections in the future even if all 6600 are purged from the voter rolls. Who is to say there aren't more of them?

Democrats have to be furious about this though. They couldn't keep this quiet and it gives ammo for President Trump and his accusations of voter fraud. At this point his accusations are getting harder and harder to deny. Even if many of the claims end up being false, enough are being proven true that it's obvious that our elections need major reform. 

Arson attack in New York City committed by an anti-ICE activist.

 

Andrew Arrabaca detained by police. Fox News/FNTV.

An arson attack in New York City was committed by an anti-ICE activist. Fox News. Andrew Arrabaca, 43, dumped an accelerant outside 26 Federal Plaza and lit up a firework to start the fire. Arrabaca was armed with a airsoft gun (a pellet gun in some reporting) and several melee weapons. Two or three people were injured, with one civilian being hit by the firework and an officer being injured as he detained Arrabaca. 26 Federal Plaza houses an immigration court along with offices for ICE and the FBI. Anti ICE literature was found on the suspect. The suspect was detained almost immediately and the fire was contained quickly. 

#BREAKING: New footage shows anti-ICE activist set fire outside immigration court in NYC. pic.twitter.com/5QncPG0KMD

— Insider Wire (@InsiderWire) July 20, 2026

My Comment:

The reporting in this case is all over the place. In some reports he was armed with a pellet gun and in others he had an airsoft gun. That's a significant difference because airsoft fires plastic pellets and won't cause much in the way of wounds, while a pellet gun fires metal pellets that could actually cause some damage. Some reports say that he fired and hit some of the victims with his gun, some say he didn't hit anyone, some say that he didn't fire it at all. And there isn't agreement of how many folks got injured. With such shoddy reporting, I had to hedge quite a bit in the summary. 

What is clear is that this attack was a failure. The injuries were minor, and the arson didn't actually set the building on fire. Indeed, where he set the fire seemed to have zero chance of actually starting a fire. Instead of inside of the building, he did it on the sidewalk. The fire was easily contained and the suspect was tackled almost immediately. 

In short, this is another example of a terrorist being very stupid. With the weapons he had, he could have done more damage than he did if he had a brain worth using. He was almost certainly never going to get away with it. Given the lack of sophistication and the almost total lack of planning, I feel comfortable in saying that this was a lone wolf attacker with no ties to a larger organization. 

I also feel pretty comfortable saying that this was a terror attack. This guy had anti-ICE literature and supposedly, a manifesto as well. He targeted a building with an immigration court and ICE offices and I am guessing his goal was to burn it all down. That he failed was due to incompetence, not lack of effort or intent. 

Why this guy was so angry about immigration enforcement is beyond me. He is apparently Hispanic, but I know a lot of Hispanic folks that support ICE and immigration efforts. He was also a former soldier during the GWOT and worked as a mechanic on Patriot missile batteries. My guess is he got radicalized online. Either way though, it's a good thing his attack was a failure. 

The United Kingdom has a new Prime Minster after Kier Starmer's resignation. Andy Burnham takes over, but will anything change?

 

British Prime Minster Andy Burnham. Reuters. 

The United Kingdom has a new Prime Minster after the resignation of Keir Starmer. Reuters. Andy Burnham will take the post and will meet with King Charles. Burnham faces extreme problems including poor economic growth and underperforming utilities. Burnham will also have to deal with forming a cabinet and staving off criticism from Nigel Farage's Reform UK party. However, Burnham has already scrapped one of the more unpopular Starmer policies to force digital ID for employment. 

My Comment:

The Reuters article seemed to ignore the elephant in the room and the biggest problem in the UK today, immigration and the two tier treatment for immigrants versus natives. Though the economy is a huge problem too, immigration is the thing that has neutered the Tories and made Nigel Farage's Reform party a real force, and a party that is likely to win during the UK's next elections in 2029.

To be fair, the UK has clamped down on immigration to some degree. There are less immigrants showing up and it sounds like Burnham will be more open to deportation than Starmer is. But the real problem is how Labour can get rid of the immigrants without losing their far left supporters, and I don't think there's a path for that. Without widescale deportations, Burnham is going to be extremely vulnerable to Reform. 

And I also don't see how he fixes the two tier policing problem the UK has. That's not something you can simply switch off, you have to fight a couple generations worth of indoctrination that puts Muslims above Christians, immigrants above citizens and Brown before White. And I don't know if Burnham even wants to do anything about it either. Burnham is saying the right things about this, but I get the feeling he isn't actually going to do anything. 

As for the Economy, I don't know how he can fix that either. I think if he wanted to, he could open up the North Sea for drilling, which would massively reduce energy costs over the long term, but Labour is unable to act on that issue. Same with ending energy sanctions on Russia, that's not happening either, even though it would greatly help. I also don't think any of their left wing economic theories are ever going to help their economy. 

But the news isn't all bad. They are getting rid of the absolutely draconian digital ID for work. Ostensibly, the digital ID was going to be used to ensure illegal immigrants couldn't get work, but folks thought, correctly, it would be abused by the government to keep their political opponents from work. The proposal was mostly dead under Starmer but it's completely scrapped now and it's good to see some successful pushback against digital tyranny. 

Regardless, I don't think Burnham is going to be successful. There are signs that Labour is starting to get some idea of what is wrong with the UK, but I just don't see them doing enough to reverse course. I do wish him well and I think he can hardly do worse than Kier Starmer... 

DHS finds 278,000 non-citizens registered to vote in four states.

 

A demonstration in favor of the SAVE act. New York Post/Getty.

The Department of Homeland Security has found 278,000 non-citizens registered to vote in four states. New York Post. The majority of these registrations were in California, with 191,000, but New Jersey (35,000), Nevada (16,000) and Pennsylvania (14,500) had many as well. It is unclear how many of those non-citizens actually voted and if they had any impact on any major races. It's a felony for a non-citizen to register to vote, though it's up to the states to confirm if the voter has a right to vote. The revelation was one of many revealed during President Trump's speech tonight on election security. 

My Comment:

I missed President Trump's speech tonight by accident, so I didn't see what he had to say about this, so this post will mostly be about the non-citizen voter issue. Trump also talked about China stealing US election data, major vulnerabilities in voting machines and inaccurate voter rolls. The non-citizen voter issue is the one that had numbers attached to it, as of this writing, so it's a little easier to analyze. 

To be clear, it's not proven that all of these people voted in elections. Some of these numbers may be mistakes, things like naturalized citizens data not getting updated, so I would expect that the numbers are a little bit better than they are. 

That doesn't mean that this is acceptable in any way. Even one illegal vote taints an entire election, and even if you managed to eliminate 90% of these voters as not actually being illegal, you have enough illegal votes to change outcomes of close races. 

Even more concerning is the fact that two of these states, Pennsylvania and Nevada, are swing states that could have entire presidential elections swing based on 10,000 to 15,000 illegal votes. And while New Jersey and California aren't swing states, they still have House districts, senate races and local elections too. And even New Jersey could potentially be a swing state in future elections, given how close Republicans have gotten in the past few elections. 

It's pretty clear that some of these votes could have changed election results in a few races. The margins might not be enough to overturn who won which states in 2020 or 2024, but they absolutely could have flipped congressional districts or even Senate races. 

And we don't know how bad the problem is. It's very possible that more voters are registered illegally in these states, and maybe more will be found. Worse still, this is only 4 states out of 50, who knows how bad this problem is in other states, most notably swing states? Even if the problem isn't much worse in other states, it could mean we have a million illegal voters. That's totally unacceptable. 

I do think that the SAVE act, currently stalled out in the legislative branch, could solve much of these issues. If you have to prove citizenship while registering to vote, which the SAVE act would mandate, it's almost impossible, without a huge effort to get fraudulent documents, to register illegally. It might not entirely eliminate the problem, but it would get rid of most of it. 

Either way, I do think it's pretty clear that folks don't trust our elections. Indeed, the people complaining about Trump pointing out that our election security is garbage, foreign citizens are registered to vote, and that China may have been attempting to influence or interfere with the election, are hugely hypocritical. Indeed, Trump's entire first term was about how he supposedly colluded with Russia to beat Clinton (which was false, but the accusation was made). 

The problem now is that both sides in America are only really going to trust elections when they win (and even then, I still don't trust them). Reform is absolutely necessary to bring back faith in our elections. The things we want are common throughout the rest of the civilized world, and even countries as dysfunctional as India (!!!) are able to get their election results in a day. It's absolutely time for America to step up and fix our elections. 

President Trump endorses Mike Lindell for Minnesota Governor...

 

Mike Lindell (background) behind President Trump. Minnesota Reformer/Getty.

President Trump has endorsed Mike Lindell for Minnesota Governor. Minnesota Reformer. Lindell, the founder of My Pillow, and a personal friend of Trump got the coveted endorsement over legislator Lisa Demuth and Army veteran Kendall Qualls. If Lindell wins he would likely face Senator Amy Klobucher, who has a large polling lead in the state. The move is controversial given the split in endorsements as both Demuth and Qualls has support at the local level. Lindell was leading in primary polling even before the Trump endorsement. 

My Comment:

I feel that this is a "white flag" on Minnesota. I had thought that the GOP had an opportunity to flip the governorship given how colossally bad Tim Walz has been as Governor but the Lindell endorsement seems like the exactly wrong move if that was the goal. Instead, this seems like Trump is just doing a solid for a friend because he knows the state isn't going to flip. 

If Minnesota was in play, I could have seen the Republicans use the same strategy that worked in 2021 in Virginia with Glenn Youngkin. Youngkin was a moderate Republican, so he didn't scare off the left-leaning moderates in Virginia. Youngkin was also able to use a huge political issue that the Democrats had no defense for. In Virginia it was transgender issues, in Minnesota it absolutely could have been corruption. 

Can Lindell do that? Possibly, but he's absolutely not the best choice for it. Lindell absolutely scares the "normies" and is pretty far to the right for Minnesota. Do I think he's right about election security and the 2020 election being crooked? Of course! But are moderates in Minnesota going to agree with him? I doubt it. 

I don't know much about Demuth and Qualls, but you would have to think that they would have been better choices to push the fraud angle and damage the DFL in Minnesota. Indeed, Lisa Demuth looks like the perfect candidate for a left-leaning state like Minnesota and I think she would be a much better candidate than Lindell. Lindell would be the better candidate in a true red state, but this is Minnesota we are talking about. 

To be fair to the DFL/Democrats, Amy Klobucher is a strong candidate. I don't like her, obviously, but she has a national profile and she is just distant enough from Tim Walz that she is probably untouched by his absolutely awful corruption scandals. Beating her would be tough, so it makes sense that Trump is raising the white flag here. 

Still, it's incredibly disappointing to me. I don't think Lindell has a real path to victory in Minnesota. To be fair, both Demuth and Qualls would have a longshot as well, but they would have a better chance than Lindell. It makes me sad as that means that both the Somali fraudsters that fleeced the state and the DFL party that enabled and profited from it, especially Governor Walz, will almost certainly go unpunished at the state level. The only hope now is that the Feds take a very long and close look at Minnesota. 

The only thing I can think of that might justify this is the idea that election security is about to be the main issue in 2026. Supposedly, Trump's nationwide address is going to prove foreign interference in the 2020 election. I'm skeptical that there is any level of fraud that would get the Democrats to admit that the 2020 election was a joke at best and outright fraudulent at worst, but if convincing evidence is presented, Lindell would be poised to take advantage of it. Even then, I don't think he's the right fit for this race and that Demuth or Qualls would be the better choice. 

The House passes a bill that would make Daylight Savings Time permanent. But will it become law?

 

The House has passed a bill that would make Daylight Savings Time permanent. NBC News. The Sunshine Protection Act passed overwhelmingly, 308-117, and now heads to the Senate. The bill would end the largely despised time change twice a year. The bill, which is supported by President Trump, faces long odds in the Senate as Senate leadership has expressed concerns over dark mornings in winter if the act were to pass. The yearly time change is fairly universally reviled by Americans, but many disagree if we should stick to standard time or daylight savings time. 

My Comment:

I don't think there has been any issue that has radicalized me more than Daylight Savings Time. The time change always ruins my Novembers and Marches as it usually take the entire month to get back to a normal sleep schedule, and maybe not even then. It's been scientifically proven that the time change leads to a lot of deaths, due to sleep depravation and heart attacks, but nothing ever gets done. 

Indeed, it seems like Congress is constantly teasing us on this issue. Either the House or the Senate passes a bill and then the other house just kills it dead for no reason. It's just absurd that an issue that has widespread support won't get passed and without any good reason. I know deadlock is the common fate of the legislative branch, it was designed that way, but it's absurd 

I don't think that anything will change this time around. Indeed, it doesn't even sound like the Senate version of the bill will make it out of committee. It's the same old annoying arguments, it's too dark in winter, kids will have to deal with the darkness, morning commutes will be dark. My answer to that is then make Standard time constant! And, besides, every criticism is just as true on Standard time because we strangely decided we should all go to work at 7:00 am and open our schools even earlier than that. Maybe that's what should change instead of the time!

There's also the idea that would we could change the clocks half an hour and keep it like that. A nice compromise between the Daylight Savings people and the Standard Time people. Why this idea never seems to get floated or voted on is beyond me too. Instead we are stuck with the status quo. 

Does this bill have any chance at all? Perhaps. President Trump is in support of the bill and he's got a lot of influence on the Senate. And, it's only been 4 years since a similar bill passed in the Senate, it's very possible that folks will see the light, so to speak, and actually fix this issue. 

But my gut says this won't actually happen. I honestly can't picture the legislative branch doing something that would actually help people. They are more focused on mandating digital ID, passing housing bills that don't make housing more affordable but will make it easier for illegal immigrants to get housing in nice neighborhoods an generally making things more miserable. 

The EU Is moving towards digital ID, obstensibly to ban children from social media.

 

Ursula von der Leyen. AP.

Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission President, said that the EU would work to ban children from social media. AP. The change would ban anyone under the age of 13 from social media and would require users to prove their age. Children between the ages of 13 and 18 would also have their access gated. Social media companies would also be forced to phase out "addictive" features, like infinite scrolling. 

My Comment:

This is the EU being tyrannical again. Though I do agree that social media can be harmful for kids and adults, the governments of the world aren't making these bans to prevent that harm. It's an excuse to do what they really want, which is digital ID. 

There is, of course, legitimate concerns about the dangers of social media for kids. I generally think that kids shouldn't be on most social networks. Some of this is due to the dangers of child predators, but that really depends on the website. Some sites, like Reddit, Discord and Kik, are notorious for this but most other social media clamps down on that hard. 

I do think there is also something to be said about short form video and infinite scrolling. I don't think watching brain-rot video for six hours is good for anyone and if I could ban short-form video I would. It really is sad to see folks wasting their lives doing nothing but watching TikTok or Reels. At least with other social media, like X, you are actively participating by making your own posts, but short-form video is entirely passive. It's bad for adults, but I do think that kids should absolutely not be watching it. 

But how do you do this without being tyrannical? I don't think there is a good solution tot his that wouldn't result in worse results than the damages that these websites cause. The best thing I have heard is an opt-out system that would lock the more damaging features behind some kinds of warnings. It would be bypassable for some kids, but it's way better than a digital ID. 

I don't think the EU cares about that, because like I said, they want digital ID. They don't like the idea that folks can have anonymous accounts on places like X because it allows people to speak out against them without fear of retaliation. Indeed, that's a major reason why I have been opposed to any kind of hard age verification for even adult websites because it's obviously not going to stay there and it will eventually be used to ensure that the government knows exactly who is posting what at anytime. Given that President Trump would absolutely not have been elected twice (well three times) without anonymous accounts, it's a clear threat to Americans.

And don't think that this kind of thing is a EU only thing. Many other countries have made these kinds of restrictions and quite a few US states have done similar things. And even the House passed the KIDS act, which is likely to fail because the Senate doesn't think it's strict enough! It's insane to me that any Republican supports this nonsense, given how badly it would be to shoot themselves in the foot, but more Republicans support it than Democrats. It really is a bipartisan issue to cancel anonymity on the internet. 

1 in 3 adults aged 18-34 now live at home with their parents.

 

USA Today/Getty.

25 million young Americans aged 18-34 now live at home with their parents. USA Today. That means 1 in 3 adults in the age range live at home, which is a record number. The number was under 30% for most of the early part of the century but the number has increased after the pandemic. However, the numbers today appear to be based on high costs of housing, including both owning and renting. The numbers suggest that it isn't an employment issue as 7 in 10 people that are living at home are employed. The high prices have raised the average age of first time home buyers to over 40. Another issue is the lack of marriages among this population, as having two incomes makes buying a home more affordable. 

My Comment:

To be fair, the whole idea that folks should kick their kids out of their house at 18 so they can make it on their own is a uniquely American idea and one that wasn't common until last century. In many parts of the world it's expected for children to stay at home until they can afford to leave or they get married, and even many times not then. 

Indeed, part of this might be cultural. Given the massive change in demographics due to immigration, both legal and otherwise, it's not surprising that those folks would do things differently. Indeed, I know a Hispanic man from work who had quite a few arguments with his mother who wanted him to stay at home, despite the fact that he had a decent paying job and could easily afford an apartment. He eventually did move out, but it does show that different cultures have different priorities. 

But there have always been a lot of people that have stayed home for various reasons. Sometimes it's because they just aren't capable of living on their own, sometimes it's because they have a "failure to launch", sometimes it's a temporary thing due to unfortunate circumstances. And many folks just stay home during college as a way to save money, indeed, I did that myself and it was a pretty good deal for the first two years. 

With that being said, much of this really is due to the greatly expensive real estate prices. Prices for housing have skyrocketed. My rent price has gone up every year I have lived there to the point where it's more than double than my first apartment. 

And buying a house? Forget about it. I know I have beaten this horse to death on here, but I have a huge amount of money saved up and live in a cheaper part of the country and I can't get a mortgage that is less than my current, heat and water included, rent, even ignoring things like the higher costs for insurance, utilities and HOA fees. You can buy a crack house or a teardown, but who can afford to pay 30,000 to 50,000 for repairs on top of the cost of the house? 

They also made a good point about marriage. Dating is fundamentally broken in this country right now, and to detail that would take an entire post by itself. Why isn't relevant to this post, but it is true that young men and woman aren't getting together and that means they can't pool their resources to buy a house. 

Of course, I will say that these two things feed on each other. It's hard to form relationships when you still live at home with your parents. Some of it is due to a lack of privacy, and the idea that if you are living at home you aren't datable, but even if you can overcome that, it's difficult. 

So what is the solution to this? Get those housing prices down. And how do we do that? We deport illegal immigrants. Joe Biden let in around 30 million people and there is zero reason for any of those people to be here. Indeed, in places where there was major deportation operations, rent prices did indeed went down. 

Some have argued that the problem is supply based. They want more housing. But the problem is that a lot of new houses are being built, they are just expensive McMansions that nobody but baby boomers can afford. Starter homes are 100 years old now and the supply isn't anywhere near the demand, but builders won't build them, both because they aren't that profitable, and because folks don't want to live next to starter homes, largely due to the immigration and crime issues. 

If there is any good news is that this is a problem with an expiration date, assuming that we don't get another Democrat in office to let in another 30 million immigrants. The older generations, the last remaining Greatest Generation, the Silents and, especially, the Baby Boomers are already in the process of dying off. Given how large a cohort the Boomers are, once they are gone there is going to be glut of real estate available, and that means real estate prices will collapse. 

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham shockingly dies of a sudden illness.

 

Senator Lindsey Graham. NBC News/AFP/Getty.

Senator Lindsey Graham died suddenly after a sudden illness, sending shockwaves through the political world. NBC News. Graham, 71, died after paramedics arrived at his Capital Hill home, after reports of a man having a cardiac arrest. Graham was not ill before the incident and was scheduled to appear on "Meet the Press" today. Graham was a major Republican figure and a major ally to President Donald Trump, who mourned his death on Truth Social. Graham was running for a sixth term, and had already won his primary race. Republican South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster will appoint someone to fill out the rest of Graham's term and a supplemental election will be held to replace him for the 2028 election. Graham was a very powerful senator and was part of the hawkish wing of the Republican Party. 

My Comment:

This is very shocking news as there was no indication that Graham was even unhealthy. Like the NBC article said, he was supposed to be on "Meet the Press" this morning, but instead he has passed on. Though at his age, a sudden death isn't totally unexpected, it is shocking that it happened like this. Indeed, Graham had just retuned from a trip to Ukraine, and, in retrospect, it's probably fortunate that it didn't happen there. Perhaps it was the stress of travel?

As for the man himself, I have complicated feelings about him. In many ways, Graham was the Republican I disagreed with most on foreign policy. He always seemed to hate Russia, and always came off as someone who was stuck in the cold war. He always had a neocon's view of foreign policy, and as far as I was concerned that view died on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan. 

Indeed, I have often blamed the beliefs of people like Graham for the fact that our relationship with Russia is so bad. It never had to be that way, after the fall of Communism, we absolutely should have allied with Russia, not Europe, and it was people like Graham that prevented that from happening. I could forgive some of the warmongering against Iran, after all, unlike Russia, they never gave up the stupid ideology that ruined their country, but I could never forgive or even understand the idea that Russia should be our enemy. 

But I also understand that Graham was a loyal soldier, both literally and figuratively. He was a retired Colonel in the Air Force and that deserves some respect. But it was his loyalty to Trump that ended up somewhat winning me over on Graham. Like I said, I hated his Russia policy, but I do have to respect the work he put in to help get Republican priorities passed.

Indeed, Graham was a critical ally and did a lot to help Trump. He was critical in getting a lot of the legislation passed that I liked in Trump's 1st and 2nd term. He absolutely wasn't always like this, I remember just how deranged he sounded during the 2016's cycle's debates, but he saw which way the winds were blowing and he decided to get on board with MAGA. You can call that political opportunism or pragmatism, but I do think that it's worth it to forgive people that show they have changed, and I think Graham actually did. So I think it's pretty appropriate to forgive Graham for the things I disagree with and morn the fact that he's gone. 

I also think that Graham was a useful asset for the Republicans, and, much like Charlie Kirk, not one that is easy to replace. He was a good fundraiser and acted as a decent bridge between the MAGA upstarts and the old guard Republicans. He was also halfway decent in media appearances, which is a criminally undervalued skill. Like Kirk, I fear that we won't really realize how much of an impact Graham had until he's been gone for awhile.

Graham was an extremely powerful Senator and was the head of the Budget Committee, and with his death, it seems as though we will be getting some fresh blood there. We will also see some changes with the Judiciary Committee, where he was powerful as well. With Graham dead and John Cornyn voted out, it's likely that Mike Lee will be the senior GOP senator on that committee, which may tilt it in a more libertarian direction. 

The death also brings up the fact that Graham wasn't the only Republican senator facing major health issues. 81 year old Mitch McConnell appears to be on his way out as well, given his current stay in the hospital. Indeed, when I saw the news this morning about Graham I had assumed it was a typo and that it was McConnell that died instead. 

Either way, it does seem that the Boomer and Silent generations hold on power in the Senate is slipping. I mentioned Mike Lee previously, and it's important to note that he's Gen X, and I think we are going to start seeing more folks in the Senate of that generation, compared to the large number of Baby Boomers that are there now. This is probably a good thing as the biggest criticism I have of the current Republican Party, even more so than the Russia issue, is that the party is completely out of touch with Millennials and Zoomers. Though it was tragic that this was the way it had to happen. 

A village in Mexico was left to fend for themselves as the country focused on the World Cup.

 

A local citizen vigilante group in Guajes de Ayala, Mexico. AP.

A village in Mexico was left to fend for themselves from a cartel group as the country focused on the World Cup. AP. The area, Guajes de Ayala, has been under siege from the La Nueva Familia Michoacana cartel. The village, located in Guerro state begged for help from the government as a battle erupted between the Cartel and local anti-Cartel vigilantes. The battle involved heavily armed fighters from both sides and was notable for the extensive use of drones. Mexico denied that there was a battle happening and said they would send troops to investigate. Over 100,000 troops and police were redeployed to World Cup sites for security for the event, which ended it's leg in Mexico on Sunday.

My Comment:

The Mexican Drug War continues, mostly unnoticed by national media. This story though was fairly significant for a couple of reasons. These kinds of battles are fairly frequent but it's the World Cup angle that is getting the attention in this case. 

And I do think that this is a major reason why this battle happened. With 100,000 troops and police deployed for security that means that there wasn't a response force to do anything about this attack. The battle could have been prevented or mitigated if the military had responded, but they didn't and I think the people in this region do have a right to be angry about it. 

It's also pretty important to note that the battle was between the La Nueva Familia Michoacana Cartel and civilians. This wasn't one cartel fighting another, and it wasn't the government fighting the cartels, it was normal folks taking up arms to defend their homes from the Cartel. 

However, it's important to note that some of these vigilante groups end up being proxies for other Cartels. At the very least, I would be surprised if these fighters weren't at least armed by other Cartels that are rivals to La Nueva Familia. I don't think that this group is a true proxy, but there is always a chance that they could fall into service to the Cartels. 

The other notable thing is that both sides in the conflict are using drone warfare, and not just for reconnaissance. These drones are off-the-shelf drones, mostly of Chinese origin, and have been modified to drop IED's, bombs and grenades. 

To clarify, these aren't the dreaded FPV drones that are causing so much carnage on both sides of the Ukraine conflict or the high powered and high tech military drones that America has used for the past 20 years. Instead these are home made jobs, made with off the shelf drones and 3d printed parts. It's low tech, to be sure, but it honestly reminds me of how ISIS used drones during the Syrian Civil War. 

Regardless, it shows how much warfare has changed. If a Mexican Cartel and a Mexican group of civilian vigilantes can get their hands on offensive drones, almost anyone can. This does not bode well for the United States as it's very possible that we could see a major terror attack utilizing drones at some point. Indeed, I am surprised it hasn't happened already. 

As for the Drug War itself, it's clear that nothing much has changed. I don't see any real chance that these Cartels will be defeated by the Government, especially given my low opinion of Claudia Sheinbaum's government. Supposedly violence is going down in Mexico but I also don't believe that her government has the stones to deal with the Cartels properly. But I do think this incident should be considered an embarrassment for her government.   

"Trump Accounts" that provide IRA style accounts for children, go live.

 

CNN/Getty.

The "Trump Accounts" effort has gone live, giving parents the chance to create Investment Retirement Accounts for their children. CNN. The accounts are available for all children under the age of 18. However, the government has decided to give $1000 for infants born between January 1st 2025 and December 31st 2028. In addition to the government money, parents, relatives and friends can contribute to the accounts, along with employers. Private citizens have also given money to the fund to allow even more seed money to certain low or mid income families. Charitable and Government contributions are unlimited, but only $5000 a year can be contributed by others. Returns for the accounts will depend on how the stock market does. Once the child becomes 18, the accounts are treated as IRA accounts, with the appropriate penalties and taxes. However, if the holder of the account uses the money for college, buying a home, birthing or adopting a child, emergency expenses and even medical bills. If no contributions are made beyond the $1000 in government an infant could expect to see $3000 to $5500 depending on the stock market. 

My Comment:

I don't often use CNN as a source, but this was a good summary of how the Trump accounts work. Credit where credit is due. It's a good resource and if you want to know more about how to sign up for these accounts you should take a look. 

I think that these accounts are a good idea and you would have to be crazy to not do this if you have an infant born during the eligibility period. Even if the only money you contribute is the government issued $1000, you would give that child at least a little seed money to start their lives off. I know I would have been happy to have $3000 to $5500 to my name when I graduated high school. 

And there's a good chance that even if you don't contribute any money, you could get more money from the rich donors that are contributing to the fund. If you make too much money you might not get any from the philanthropists, but chances are you would get some money out of it. And any money you would get for your kids would be totally free. 

Plus, you and your friends and family could contribute as well. Employers could as well as an easy benefit they could offer, though I don't know how any contributions have been set up yet. If you were somehow able to max out the contributions at $5000 a year, your kid could end up with as much as $230,000, assuming a 10% return. That might be optimistic but that much money would pay for college or set up a real path to wealth for a child if they just keep that money in their IRA.

Do these accounts make sense for any other kids? Possibly. There are other kids IRA accounts they could use that could avoid some of the penalties or get higher returns. But I think the possibility of the rich donors giving a boost to these accounts is an obvious advantage if you aren't wealthy. If you are wealthy, the other options might be better, but the best solution might be a combination of both. 

I do fear that there are going to be a lot of liberal parents that aren't going to take advantage of these accounts. Part of me thinks this is funny because it's a stupid reason to not take free money. But I do wish that these folks could decide to do what is best for their kids and ignore the fact that President Trump likes to name things after himself. 

Maine Senate Candidate Graham Platner accused of sexual assault, may drop out of race.

 

Graham Platner. Politico.

Main Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner has been accused of rape and may drop out of the race. Politico. Platner was accused of rape by 41 year old Maine resident Jenny Raciot, who had previously accused him of reckless and disturbing behavior, but was uncomfortable with making the accusation. However, she decided to come forward after a New York Times report led to Democrats claiming another accuser, Lyndsey Fifield, was only doing it for political reasons. However, Raciot agrees with Platner politically. 

Raciot said that she had met Platner via the dating site Bumble, and had a consensual relationship with him. However, in 2021, Platner had walked into her house after being told not to come over. He was blackout drunk and raped her despite her saying no. After confirming she hadn't been impregnated due to the attack, she cut off all contact with him. Her story was backed up by statements from her therapists and a male acquaintance who she talked to about the assault. She also produced text messages with a female friend warning her off from contact with Platner due to him being "consensually careless" and that he "doesn't listen to you while drunk". Platner has denied accusations but has said he will pause to evaluate his campaign. 

My Comment:

These accusations seem pretty credible to me. The fact that Raciot was willing to go on the record for this and the fact that she had at least three people that would back up her story who knew about it before Platner was politically relevant means a lot. She also produced some text messages that support her story as well. It's probably not enough to convict Platner in a court of law, but it probably is enough to convict him in public opinion. 

Keep in mind that Platner had serious issues with his behavior. He had a Nazi tattoo, the Totenkopf, and his excuses for it were a joke. He also had a Reddit account where ha acted like an idiot. But he also cheated on his wife and had an account on Kik. 

Kik is, quite frankly, a very bad website. It's known to be a place with little moderation and predators use to not only share illegal content involving children, they also use it to groom and target children. The fact that Platner had an account there was a huge red flag for me and I even said back then that he would eventually be revealed as a sex pest. 

What Platner was accused of is very serious. It wasn't just a rape, he also broke into her house without her permission. This isn't just some sex that was regretted, it was an attack, and it's why I think this case may be legit. And I would not be surprised if more accusations come out. 

As for Platner, I think his political career is over. He was already on life support in his race against Republican Susan Collins. Though Platner had been leading in the polls, he was falling behind in some of the newer ones and keep in mind that Collins very consistently blows out her polls and wins. He was, in my view, very likely to lose regardless. 

But now? I fully expect him to drop out before the end of the week. There is a ticking clock, of course, as long as he is out by July 12th, he can be replaced, and I think that is the most likely outcome. A major sex scandal like this one, especially when the accusation seems credible, is not something you come back from when you are already in jeopardy. 

When that happens, and I think it's a matter of when, not if, he can be replaced, though who will do so is an open question. Some people are convinced that Governor Janet Mills, who dropped out before Platner won the primary, could be the candidate, but right now it's up in the air. Whoever it is is going to be in a major hole even ignoring the strength Collins has as a candidate, given this scandal and the fact that Platner's large war chest cannot be transferred to whoever the candidate is. 

I do think it's kind of BS that Platner can be replaced after the primary. The Democratic electorate in Maine knew that Platner was a toxic candidate and they voted for him over Mills by a huge margin. The red flags were there the whole time, but they ignored it. They should have to live with that decision, though that's not how it works. 

But now? Almost everyone is pulling their endorsements and Platner has almost no defenders, other than Cenk Uyger, who somehow believes this is all about Israel. It's obviously not, people are genuinely outraged by these accusations and at worst I see this as rational pragmatism by the Democrats. They absolutely should have known better...

ICE arrested 10,000 illegal immigrants in five days to close out June, in a major increase.

 

An ICE badge. AP.

ICE closed out June with 10,000 arrests of illegal immigrants in five days to close out June, a major increase. AP. The five day average was 2000 arrests a day, which is higher than any time in President Trump's first term. The closest was in December of last year when they were averaging 1293 a day. The spike in arrests may be due to a change in ICE tactics. Instead of high profile raids on blue cities like Minneapolis, ICE has focused on arrests nationwide. The new path, steered by new Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, has focused on being more efficient while also being less visible. 

My Comment:

ICE efforts have largely fallen out of the news, but it seems as though the efforts to deport illegal aliens have been redoubled, not abandoned. Indeed, these numbers, which have been confirmed by multiple news outlets, shows that the new tactics are working extremely well. 

What are these new tactics? Instead of high profile raids on blue cities that weren't cooperating with ICE, ICE has been focusing on going after convicted criminals. Many of those folks are picked up during routine police work and handed over to ICE by cooperating agencies. Around 70% of the illegals picked up are convicted criminals, and the 30% that aren't are largely getting swept up at the same time as the criminals. 

This is a massive sea change from the major high profile raids we had during the start of the year. Those raids were somewhat effective in removing illegal aliens, but the optics were not good. Antifa and other protest movements attempted to shut it down and there was violence caused by them that ICE was blamed for (even when it was Customs and Border Patrol that were the shooters in once of the cases). Though I have zero sympathy for the people caught up in the raids and actually despise the protesters and rioters, even I have to admit that the high profile raids were causing more issues then they were solving. 

At the time I didn't know if there was a better way, but it seems clear that Mullin's less visible actions are more effective now. If we can increase the number of people deported while at the same time cutting off the left's energy going into the midterms, than I am all for it. 

Not all of this is due to tactics. ICE underwent a major increase in hiring of personnel and many of those folks are now out of training and are on the job now. Obviously, with more ICE agents on the streets then more folks are going to get arrested and deported. 

There is an obvious downside for the lower profile deportation efforts. It means that many MAGA supporters aren't aware of what is being accomplished, unlike the major high profile raids earlier in the year. Indeed, I have seen some people on social media saying that the Trump administration "caved" on deportation. 

It's a double edged sword as the high profile raids were working as a rallying cry for the left, but also as one for the right. The optics were bad but at least they were optics. Now, a lot of folks on both sides think nothing is happening at all, when instead we are getting even more effective at removing illegal aliens. 

DOJ launches lawsuits against California and Virginia for unconstitutional gun laws.

 

Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger and a gun shop. Fox News/Getty.

The Department of Justice has launched two lawsuits against California and Virginia for unconstitutional gun laws. Fox News. California passed the Unsafe Handgun Act to ban Glock pistols, an extremely popular brand of firearms. Virginia passed Senate Bill 749 that made it a misdemeanor to possess, manufacture or sell a so-called "assault weapon". Both laws came into effect recently and could be overturned by the Supreme Court, which granted certiorari to two other similar cases from Chicago and Connecticut 

My Comment:

More good news for the gun rights community. Both of these laws are plainly unconstitutional and do not reach the standards set by NYSRPA v Bruen and DC vs Heller. These are firearms in common use, AR-15's are the most popular rifles in the country while Glocks are among the most popular handguns and there isn't a historical precedence for banning these weapons under the Bruen test. 

The Glock law in California is probably the more impactful and dangerous one. The ban isn't because the Glocks are dangerous due to malfunctions or because they are a threat, it's because they can be modified to fire in full auto. Glock "switches" are commonly used to do so by criminals, but almost all semi-auto firearms can be modified this way. Indeed, all you need to do so with a lot of AR-15's is a small piece of metal, called a full auto sear. 

The same argument could be used to ban most firearms. Short barrel shotguns and rifles are illegal federally but the argument for the California law would apply here too. Because you can easily use a hacksaw to saw off a barrel on a shotgun or rifle, they could be banned as well. It doesn't matter in either case that would be committing a serious felony by modifying your weapon this way. Simply being modifiable can't be the standard because almost all firearms can be modified in some way. Of course, I don't think full auto or short barreled weapons should be illegal in the first place, but that's neither here nor there. 

I'd also argue that a modified Glock with a Glock switch is actually dramatically less dangerous than a normal Glock. Full auto is for suppression and isn't useful for much else. A full auto pistol, especially one that isn't designed to be one, is hard to control and the vast majority of bullets will not hit there targets. A semi skilled shooter with a semi-auto handgun will always beat out a guy spraying and praying with a Glock switch. 

Regardless, it's clear what the play is here by the DOJ. The general prediction is that SCOTUS will rule in favor or removing these bans and once that happens next year it will be useful to have these cases spun up already. The laws will be overturned a lot quicker that way and I am guessing that is the whole point of these lawsuits. It's even possible that the DOJ will be able to get an injunction to prevent these laws from being enforced. 

It's a pretty good time to be a gun rights supporter. It seems like we are absolutely heading towards a world where gun rights is a settled questions and things like assault weapon bans will be nothing but a memory. A lot can happen, of course, but it really does seem like victory is at hand. For gun control advocates, I would say they are quickly approaching irrelevance.