Lonny Eachus

NOTICE TO FOLLOWERS: I intend to keep this account active, but I will be moving most of my activity to my premium account: @Mister_E_36. Follow me there, and over time I will be following back the people I already follow here.

@lakeside227 @PNWForestKing @BBMagaMom I am correct.

@eachus @PNWForestKing @BBMagaMom You're insane.

🚨 BREAKING: Washington State Gov. Bob Ferguson just signed a bill BANNING ICE agents from wearing masks on duty, the first state in the country to do it. COWARD POS!

@lakeside227 @PNWForestKing @BBMagaMom Dude, you are wrong. LOOK IT UP.

Wrong. A federal agent's uniform is regulated by their federal dept. The Constitution delegates to the FEDERAL govt the AUTHORITY to make all laws necessary to carry into execution the powers delegated by the Constitution. This is a DIRECT DELEGATION of POWER to the FEDS! Only the federal govt may make laws & regs for their federal agents - including their ATTIRE! That means STATES HAVE NO POWER IN THIS AREA! States are BARRED by the 10thA from regulating anything to do with federal agent attire! Because the Constitution ALREADY gave this power to the federal govt. No state can regulate federal agent attire. PERIOD.

@PNWForestKing @lakeside227 @BBMagaMom Policy does not supersede law.

@eachus @lakeside227 @BBMagaMom like a policy they can wear masks

@lakeside227 @PNWForestKing @BBMagaMom Let me give you an example. Can Federal agents commit murder? Of course not. That's illegal, right? Guess what? That's a State law! Not Federal.

@lakeside227 @PNWForestKing @BBMagaMom Wrong. Federal agents MUST follow State laws, JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE, unless Federal a Federal law directly conflicts with a State law. Face masks are department policy, not law. The State law is supreme in that case. Don't take my word for it. Look it up.

@PNWForestKing @BBMagaMom No, it doesn't. The Supremacy Clause says Federal laws supersede State laws where they directly conflict. Face masks are department policy, not law. State law overrules. Federal agencies MUST obey State laws, just like everyone else, except where the Supremacy Clause kicks in.

@eachus @BBMagaMom Supremacy clause dictates otherwise

@lakeside227 @PNWForestKing @BBMagaMom Wrong. "Federal agencies" do not make laws. States do. Repeat: Federal agents MUST follow State laws, except where the directly contradict Federal LAWS. Not rules. Look it up.

@eachus @PNWForestKing @BBMagaMom This is incorrect. States have zero authority over what federal agents WEAR in the commission of their federal duties. That is set by their federal agency.

@CharlieCoks @B_1Tactical Probably so. If you can line up iron sights... guess what? There's your optic reticle. Right there.

This may be a hot take, but 99% of people making fun of this dot are the same people who probably need it. I said what I said.

@PNWForestKing @BBMagaMom Not true. Feds must obey State laws, except where State and Federal laws directly conflict.

@BBMagaMom They signed a Bill banning STATE, COLNTY, and LOCAL LEO's from wearing masks. No State has the authority to regulate FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT, period.

@moosebro45 It is extremely forgettable.

I forgot about this.

Face recognition is "a dangerous, error-prone, discriminatory technology,” EFF’s Adam Schwartz told @GVWire, and it's “especially inappropriate as a means to screen members of the public seeking to participate in democratic self-government.” gvwire.com/2026/03/17/fir…

🚨BREAKING: Code Pink leftist activists are heading to Cuba to tell people living under communism how terrible Trump and America are. I wish Cuba would keep them.

@Fatal6987 @PoliceThePolic1 @horsyguy The dogs probably COULD smell drugs. But they were indifferent to them. They responded instead to subtle human signals. Which means a fundamental failure in the way they were trained. Likely trainers knew where the drugs were and subtle behaviors gave it away.

@Fatal6987 @PoliceThePolic1 @horsyguy In the only scientific study I know of, drug-sniffing dogs were found to be objectively useless for detecting drugs. Close to zero correlation with the presence of actual drugs. Instead, they found that the dogs were reacting to possibly unintentional cues from handlers. 1/

Not to mention cues by the officer to alert false hits...

This is your monthly reminder that congress gave @PeteButtigieg $2 TRILLION to fix infrastructure and nobody knows where the money all went. That’s 135 nuclear aircraft carriers worth of cash. Poof.

@joeyyochheim I keep Mission brand "carb balance" or zero carb tortillas in the car (they keep well). When I order a burger or grilled chicken to go, I swap the bread or bun (often oiled or buttered) for one of the tortillas. Easily save 100 calories of carbs.

Eating out doesn't ruin your progress. Ordering without a strategy does. Here's exactly how to order at restaurants without blowing your deficit: THE CORE PRINCIPLE: When eating out, you want to maximize protein while minimizing calories. Everything else is secondary. Restaurant food typically has 20-30% more calories than you estimate due to added oils, butter, and larger portions. Account for that in your tracking. FAST CASUAL CHAINS: Order strategy: • Double protein (chicken, steak, fish) • Bowl format (skip the tortilla/bread) • Light on rice/beans • Load up on vegetables • Sauce on the side Examples: • Chipotle: Double chicken bowl, light rice, fajita veggies, salsa • Cava: Double protein base, extra vegetables, tzatziki • Sweetgreen: Double protein on greens, light dressing SIT-DOWN RESTAURANTS: Order strategy: • Grilled protein (8-12oz) • Steamed or roasted vegetables • Ask for sauces on the side • Skip the bread basket • Add a side salad instead of fries The waiter doesn't care if you customize. Ask for what you need. BUSINESS DINNERS: You don't have to "save room" for dessert. • Order a protein-heavy entree. • Add vegetables. • Manage alcohol (1-2 drinks max). Your clients won't notice or care that you skipped the bread and dessert. FAST FOOD: • Grilled > Fried • Protein style burgers work • Salads without dressing • Grilled chicken sandwiches (no mayo) It's not ideal, but it's not going to derail you if you choose strategically. THE REALITY: If you work 60 hours per week and travel 20 days per month, you can't meal prep every meal. That's not sustainable. Fat loss doesn't require eating out of tupperware 7 days a week. It requires knowing how to make smart choices when life happens. BANK CALORIES FOR BIG MEALS: If you know you have a business dinner tonight, eat lighter earlier in the day. Save 500-700 calories for dinner. Prioritize protein at that meal. You stay in your deficit while still enjoying the meal. THE BOTTOM LINE: When it comes to weight loss, your body cares less about the quality of what you're eating and more about the quantity. Food quality matters for health. Food quantity matters for weight loss. Get your calories and protein right first. Everything else is optimization. If you can't stay lean while eating out, you don't have a sustainable plan. You have a routine that only works in perfect conditions. After working with 1,200+ clients who've lost 10,000+ pounds combined: The ones who keep it off long-term build flexibility into their system from day one.

Chuck Norris had an impressive 183-10-2 fighting record and became a six-time world champion in full-contact bare-knuckle karate. In addition, he defeated heavyweight kickboxing champion Joe Lewis three times consecutively and took part in a brutal hour-and-a-half sparring session with the undefeated legend Bill ‘Superfoot’ Wallace. According to Wallace, they fought to a near stalemate and absolutely destroyed each other. Chuck received training in kickboxing and boxing from Benny ‘The Jet’ Urquidez, while also dedicating 20 years to Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu under the Gracies and Machados. He even succeeded in submitting Carlos Machado several times. Weighing just 180 pounds, he could bench press 315 pounds and had an incredibly powerful grip that almost no one could escape. Even Jean-Claude Van Damme once said he would never step into the ring against Chuck Norris, despite being a kickboxing world champion himself. Chuck earned a 10th degree black belt in Chun Kuk Do, a 9th degree in Tang Soo Do, an 8th degree in Taekwondo, a 5th degree in Karate, a 3rd degree in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, and a black belt in Judo. Rip legend…

@StraightLineUSA I would change that to "diagnosed physical injury" because injuries are not always external.

My most radical opinion is that we need to end all VA benefits unless you can show me a missing limb or other external injury as a result of combat. The VA paid for this blue haired They/Them to get an art degree because her parents were in the military and the bearded faggot next to her "served in the navy" for two years and even his girlfriend says he spent the entire time in school. He now receives 2000 dollars per month in "disability" because he has "anxiety and depression" the entire thing needs to be scrapped.

@NikolovScience @ryankatzrosene

The situation with the official CO2 record (a.k.a. the "Keeling curve") is much more complex than presented by Prof. Rahmstorf. We will be submitting a separate paper on this topic next year, but the scoop of it is as follows: - The assumption that half of the annual human carbon emissions (actually ~46%) are taken up by ecosystems (land & ocean) and the rest stays in the atmosphere for hundreds of years (basically forever) is unphysical and deeply flawed. It's based on computer models, while C14 measurements indicate that the average residence time of a CO2 molecule in the atmosphere is only about 5 years. This implies that the Keeling CO2 curve (if correct!) only contains a small fraction of anthropogenic (industrial) CO2, i.e. less than 14% at present. There are numerous published papers discussing this topic! - We have uncovered strong numerical evidence that the Keeling CO2 curve is most likely a result of a model simulation rather than real measurements! In other words, it's fake! The proof is in the fact that this curve (when analyzed in terms of mean annual CO2 values) is fully reproducible (with R^2 = 1.000) by a very simple, and highly unrealistic model, which does not consider any temperature dependency of the CO2 fluxes and totally ignores fluxes from and into natural ecosystems (see attached graph). The model only considers human carbon emissions assuming that about 54% of annual industrial emissions stays in the atmosphere forever. Basically, the model indefinitely accumulates a fraction of the annual human carbon emissions in the atmosphere, thus creating a never-ending parabolic increase of atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Even when human emissions drop as it happened during the COVID years, the Keeling CO2 curve keeps rising, because available emissions (no matter how small) are simply added to the existing atmospheric CO2 pool. To my knowledge, no real measurements of any environmental parameter have ever produced such a clean and monotonically increasing curve unaffected by temperature/climate variations for over over 60 years as the Keeling CO2 record. Hence, there is something profoundly wrong with this record! It's particularly interesting that this simple & highly unrealistic model, which so accurately reproduces the annual CO2 values of the Keeling curve since 1959, was first proposed in 1975 by William Broecker in a paper titled "Climatic Change: Are We on the Brink of a Pronounced Global Warming?" that was published in Science: inters.org/files/broecker… Pay attention to Broecker's modeled future CO2 concentrations shown in his Table 1. You cannot make this up! The climate mafia has apparently adopted Broecker's 1975 model to generate the "Keeling curve" and sell it to the World as a result of actual measurements... This might be the biggest climate-science FRAUD of all!

There is indeed a weird obsession among many climate skeptics about “oceans degassing CO2”. It’s because it offers them an alternative explanation to rising atmospheric CO2 to human emissions. Yet as Stefan notes here, it’s baloney. Oceans are a net SINK of CO2, and the size of that sink has been growing for decades.

@LibertyCappy The legend and his friend, the legend.