Aron Deen

@callanswag2 @PeonyPrincess27 @Joserob23924933 @MickeyDollens You can also join the military at 17.

@PeonyPrincess27 @Joserob23924933 @AronDeen @MickeyDollens You can get a job at 14. There are some responsibilities you can have beforehand. Yes I agree the age of consent should be 18 but there are teenagers who are couples as you obviously know. Are you living under a rock or do you seriously not know that?

The bill to ban child marriage in Oklahoma has become law! Despite 36 Republicans voting against & Gov. Stitt declining to sign or veto, SB504 will go into effect without his signature. 18 to marry. No exceptions.

@FreedomTruthJoy @MickeyDollens From someone I disagree with: x.com/statisticalmin… OK isn’t in the top 10. 96% are 16 & 17yr olds, which already required parental Consent. Below that was already illegal in OK. So, what problem was being solved?

@AronDeen @MickeyDollens OK leads country in child marriage. These marriages were often to much older men. This ban helps stem trafficking and also statutory r*pe evasion. Very necessary!

@StatisticalMind @MickeyDollens Appreciate someone bringing data. 96% are 16-17yr olds, below that was already illegal.

@MickeyDollens The peos will tell you this could involve two minors but the data is clear 86% of child marriages involve a female child being married to an adult male. unchainedatlast.org/child-marriage… Often it is used to bypass statutory rape laws. In that it could be a crime if they weren't married

@FreedomTruthJoy @MickeyDollens Valid and honorable points, if true. I have not seen such data. I do know that all 4 of my grandparents married in their teens.

@PhilipOHara91 @MickeyDollens Overreach and general busy-body “there oughtta be a law” ignorance is my only point. Sure, there are other solutions, but why is the government stepping in here? Is this in the top 500 problems to solve?

@AronDeen @MickeyDollens Government overreaching is constantly a problem. This one is a weird one to fight against though. If your issue is this scenario, can this 17 year old mother not wait 12 months? Sounds like other people have mentioned insurance options.

@maverick2280 @MickeyDollens It likely will become law. My point is that we, and our reps, shouldn’t be so quick to jump to “there oughtta be a law…” ie “we should tell people how to live their lives because we know best in every situation.”

@AronDeen @MickeyDollens A 17 year old in that situation in Oklahoma qualifies for Sooner Care. She doesn’t have to marry the nearest man to protect herself.

@maverick2280 @MickeyDollens My point is there is nuance to everything. Governments shouldn’t be trying to make every decision for every person, and neither should you.

@DawnCole693634 @MickeyDollens My point is there is nuance to everything. Governments shouldn’t be trying to make every decision for every person, and neither should you.

@AronDeen @MickeyDollens If she has no insurance then she can go on Medicaid for 1 year until she is old enough to marry. Simple fix. This also gives her a year to think about whether she wants to be married or not instead of rushing to make a hasty decision because she’s pregnant.

@seanmdav Intentionally set workplace on fire = demotion. I think it’s worse at my company.

BREAKING: Notice has just been given to Democrats in the Tennessee House that all members of the Democrat Caucus are being removed from all standing committees and subcommittees as a result of their behavior in the statehouse during the redistricting debates last week, which included setting fires inside the Capitol and attacking law enforcement. In the state of Tennessee, political terrorism will not be tolerated. National Republicans take note that this is how you exercise power.

@ScottPresler You’re doing a great job and leading by example. Keep it up.

Don’t know what God has in store for me. I often question what is my purpose & if I’m fulfilling that role. Have no idea where life is going to take me, but my mentality & attitude is: I welcome any change coming my way; I ask God to use me as his tool — send me; & I hope to be of service & use this platform to try to make our nation a better place.

@mamma_bell @GabeGwoolley The honest answer is that British Common Law is and has been used as basis, including at the SCOTUS, going all the way to the Magna Carta. You would also have to say the Ten Commandments are foreign law. The intent to avoid Shariah overlooks this.

@GabeGwoolley Just curious…. Why in the world would any court use a foreign legal argument in a case? Trying to figure out what this might apply too? Aren’t they already supposed to use our state constitution and the constitution?

I am calling on the state Senate to hear and pass OK HJR1084 to ban foreign legal arguments from being considered in Oklahoma courtrooms. The Oklahoma and United States Constitution must be the only standard in our courts. Thank you to the state house for passing this measure. It must pass the senate in order to go to a vote of the people. ——————————————— Woolley Urges Senate Action on Foreign Legal Code Ban Measure May 06, 2026 OKLAHOMA CITY – Rep. Gabe Woolley, R–Broken Arrow, urges the Oklahoma State Senate to consider House Joint Resolution 1084, which he said the measure is intended to ensure that Oklahoma courts remain grounded solely in the Oklahoma Constitution and the United States Constitution. HJR1084 would place a constitutional amendment on the ballot. Woolley says it would allow voters to decide whether foreign legal systems or foreign legal codes may be considered in Oklahoma court decisions. "This measure is important because it would amend our state Constitution, and, if passed by voters, judges would be required to base their decisions on the Constitution and the rule of law, not outside legal systems," Woolley said. "This ensures clarity that the governing authority in Oklahoma courtrooms is our state and federal Constitutions." If the Senate approves the measure and it is passed by the people of Oklahoma, the state would join seven other states that have already enacted laws restricting the use or consideration of foreign legal codes in judicial decisions. "Other states have already taken steps to make clear that American courts should rely solely on domestic constitutional law and not be influenced by foreign legal systems," Woolley said. "Oklahoma voters should have the same opportunity to decide this issue for themselves." Woolley added that, as a Republican-led state, Oklahoma should be at the forefront of addressing this issue. "Given growing concerns about foreign influence, now is the time to reaffirm our commitment to the Constitution and the rule of law," Woolley said. "I appreciate my colleagues in the House for advancing this resolution, and I am grateful to the thousands of Oklahomans who have engaged with this effort as we work to reaffirm our commitment to the Constitution and the rule of law. I urge our friends in the Senate to pass this measure and send it to the people. Oklahomans deserve the opportunity to have their voices heard on this issue."

@LarryJones You had me at “all members.”

SERIOUS QUESTION: Would You Support Removing all Members of Congress That Are Foreign-Born?

@LightOnLiberty And what were the consequences?

A Dominion contractor with two degrees, swore under oath in her affidavit after working 27 hours at Detroit's TCF Center that she witnessed MASSIVE amounts of clear election fraud involving late-night ballot dumps. She detailed how her manager, Nick Economagunas (part owner of Dominion), ordered her there instead of the Detroit elections building. She saw vans FULL of ballots arriving, photos of people carrying ballots out of a "Chicago warehouse," and at 4:30 AM, Mr. Baxter personally brought in boxes from the rear entrance. She stated each box holding approx 600 ballots, totaling around 50,000 ILLEGAL ballots dumped onto tables just before a 6 AM shift change! This is exactly the kind of election fraud we've been warning about that was running RAMPANT across the country during the 2020 election!

@LeaderJohnThune Do *everything* you can? How about pass the SAVE Act?

The enormity of what Democrats have opted for cannot be understated. No one to stop dangerous individuals from making their way into our country, and no one to catch and deport these dangerous individuals if they do make it in. As long as Republicans are in charge, we’re going to do everything we can to protect our borders and keep dangerous criminal illegal aliens off our streets.

@kyleumlang By your measure OU beats TX 11-3.

There are 8 Blue Bloods in College Football: Alabama, Michigan, Nebraska, Notre Dame, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas & USC If you are talking bloodlines, then the dominance necessary to become a Blue Blood must span not just legendary coaches or current day dynasties but generations. Take a look through the ranks and see which team is closest to royalty and who still needs decades of winning programs to even enter the realm of the Blue Bloods discussion. A team's Blue Blood Score is comprised of a mix of Regular Season Achievements (Wins, Weeks Ranked, Weeks Ranked #1, Conference Titles, Bowl Wins, Major Bowl Wins & National Titles), Post Season Awards (Consensus & Unanimous All-Americans, Heisman Winners & Runner Ups) and Professional Achievements (CFB Hall of Famers, NFL Draft Picks & 1st Round Picks) 💻bit.ly/CFB_BlueBloods

@MerriamWebster Biscuit Restaurant Receipt

What word is your spelling nemesis? This is a safe space.

@aakashgupta What if all government revenues were paid voluntarily? Would the demographics matter?

Warren Buffett, in his first sit-down since stepping down as Berkshire CEO, gave the cleanest indictment of legalized gambling in a decade. He called it a tax cut for the wealthy. The math proves him exactly right. Americans wagered $165 billion at legal sportsbooks in 2025. They lost $16 billion of that. FanDuel pulled $6 billion of the losses. DraftKings pulled $5.3 billion. Every state with legal mobile sports betting collected a tax on the bettor side. New York alone took in over $1.2 billion in 2025 sports betting tax revenue. Layer the lottery on top. State lotteries generate over $90 billion a year. The bottom half of income earners account for roughly 70% of total spend. The average lottery player makes $38,000. A household earning $20,000 spends three times more on tickets than one earning $30,000. The implicit tax rate, meaning whatever the state keeps after prizes, runs 30 to 50% depending on the game. No other revenue source in America has that base and that rate. The structural design is the engine. A single straight sports bet carries a hold of 4 to 5%. A four-leg parlay carries a hold above 30%. FanDuel and DraftKings spent five years rebuilding their apps to make parlays the default product. FanDuel's blended hold rate hit 11.4% in 2025, up from roughly 7% in 2022. The product got worse for the customer and the customer wagered more anyway. Now look at the substitution. Nine US states have no state income tax. Seven of those nine run state lotteries. Seven of those nine have legalized sports betting. The states most committed to never taxing wealth are the same states running the largest extraction machines on people who cannot afford to lose. Read it as policy. Here is what Buffett is actually pointing at. The state needs revenue. It can raise income tax on the top decile, or it can run a lottery plus a sports betting tax. The second option raises the money from the people who can least afford it. The first option becomes politically optional. New York's $1.2 billion in 2025 sports betting tax is $1.2 billion the state did not have to ask of someone earning $5 million. DraftKings and FanDuel sell a privatized collection mechanism for a regressive tax that the state never has to defend at the ballot box again. Voters approve legalization once. Collection runs forever. The state takes a cut. The wealthy get a quieter top bracket. The bettor's cut shrinks every quarter as the parlay menu gets pushed harder. The function of a government, Buffett said, is not to play its people for suckers. Thirty-nine state governments now do.

I have two stacks on my desk. The left stack is financial disclosure forms from members of Congress. The right stack is waivers for members who filed their financial disclosures late. The right stack is always taller. On Wednesday morning, I watched a soldier get arrested on CNN. I am a Disclosure Analyst for the House Ethics Committee. I have held this position for eleven years. My job is to receive the forms, verify their completeness, and file them. I do not investigate. I do not flag. I do not refer. I file. I have a lanyard. The lanyard says ETHICS. The soldier's name is Gannon Ken Van Dyke. He is thirty-eight years old. He was stationed at Fort Bragg. He was Special Forces. In December, he created an account on a prediction market called Polymarket. On January 2nd, he bet $32,500 that the president of Venezuela would be removed from power. On January 3rd, he helped remove the president of Venezuela from power. He collected $409,881. He has been charged with five federal crimes. Commodities fraud. Wire fraud. Unlawful use of confidential government information. Theft of nonpublic government information. Unlawful monetary transaction. The Department of Justice called it "the first-ever insider trading prosecution on event contracts." I watched this on the television in our break room. Then I walked back to my desk and processed a late financial disclosure from a member of the House Financial Services Committee who purchased $250,000 in bank stocks eleven days before his subcommittee held a closed-door hearing on proposed capital reserve changes. The filing was forty-seven days late. The STOCK Act requires disclosure within forty-five days. The penalty for late filing is $200. I waived it. I waive most of them. In 2021, fifty-four members of Congress and senior staff violated the reporting rules. The fines were minimal. Most were waived. I have a form for the waiver. The form has a box that says "Reason." I write "administrative delay." In ethics, "administrative delay" means the member's office forgot and then remembered when a reporter called. My approval rate is one hundred percent. In any other field, that number would trigger an audit. In mine, it is called thoroughness. Let me show you what I processed this year. January. A senator on the Armed Services Committee sold defense contractor shares worth $1.2 million. Three days later, his committee received a classified briefing that the Iran campaign had exceeded its projected cost by 340%. The stock dropped 8%. He filed the disclosure sixty-one days late. I calculated the fine. $200. His chief of staff asked if it could be waived. He did not ask what the senator traded on. Nobody asks that. The form does not have a field for it. I waived the fine. The senator's portfolio returned 23.4% in 2025. The S&P 500 returned 16.8%. February. A representative on the Energy and Commerce Committee bought pharmaceutical stocks worth $400,000. Two weeks later, her committee advanced a bill that would extend patent exclusivity for the exact drug class she purchased. The stocks rose 14%. She filed on time. There was no fine. There was no investigation. There was nothing to investigate because buying stocks in companies regulated by your own committee is not illegal. It is legal. The STOCK Act made it legal by making it disclosed. In Congress, disclosed means legal. In my office, legal means filed. March. A member whose spouse manages a portfolio worth $9.2 million reported forty-three separate transactions in a single quarter. Twelve of them were in sectors directly affected by legislation the member co-sponsored. The timing on eight of those twelve was within a two-week window of committee action. I logged all forty-three. None were flagged. We do not flag. We file. I asked my supervisor once what would happen if I flagged a filing. She said we do not have a form for that. I never asked again. In 2020, I processed 847 disclosures. In 2023, 1,211. In 2025, 1,614. The number of enforcement actions in each of those years was zero. The numerator changes. The denominator does not. I want to tell you about the soldier again. He made $409,881. He tried to delete his Polymarket account by calling customer service and saying he lost access to his email. He moved his profits into a foreign cryptocurrency vault and then into a new brokerage account. He used his real identity. He placed thirteen bets. Every single one was connected to an operation he personally participated in. In my eleven years, I have processed disclosures from members of Congress who traded on: Pending FDA approvals they learned about in committee. Defense appropriations they voted on. Trade policy they negotiated. Pandemic response measures they drafted. Interest rate decisions they were briefed on before the public. None of them have been charged. None of them have been investigated by the Department of Justice. None of them have been referred to the SEC. The STOCK Act has produced zero prosecutions since it was signed on April 4th, 2012. Fourteen years. Five hundred and thirty-five members. $635 million in trades last year alone. Zero cases. My daughter asked me once what happens when someone breaks the rules. I told her we write it down. She asked what happens after that. I said it depends. She was nine. She is twenty now. It does not depend. Nothing happens after that. The soldier made $409,881 and faces decades in prison. Nancy Pelosi entered Congress in 1987 with a portfolio worth approximately $785,000. It is now worth $133.7 million. That is a return of 16,930%. The Dow Jones returned 2,300% over the same period. Professional fund managers who beat the market for three consecutive years are considered exceptional. She has beaten it for thirty-seven. If a hedge fund produced those returns, the SEC would subpoena the records on a Thursday. She produced them from a building with a chapel and a gift shop. She announced her retirement last year. No investigation was opened. No disclosure was flagged. Her filings were on time. In my office, on time means compliant. Compliant means closed. I want to tell you about the fine. $200. That is the maximum penalty for violating the STOCK Act's disclosure requirements. $200 for a member of Congress whose portfolio gained $4.7 million in a single quarter. I calculated what $200 represents as a percentage of $4.7 million. It is 0.004%. I could not find a comparison that made it meaningful. It is less than the price of the parking pass in the Rayburn garage. It is less than lunch at the members' dining room if you order the crab cakes, which I am told are excellent though I eat at my desk. Since 2012, thirty-one bills have been introduced to restrict congressional trading. I keep a list. The list is longer than the STOCK Act itself. On March 5th, 2026, a representative from Michigan introduced the thirty-second. He called it the "No Getting Rich in Congress Act." The bill would prohibit the President, Vice President, members of Congress, and their spouses from trading individual stocks, cryptocurrency, futures, and commodities while in office. The bill was referred to committee. The committee has not scheduled a hearing. The committee is chaired by a member whose spouse executed $2.1 million in trades last year. The bill will be reviewed. In my office, reviewed means read. Read means acknowledged. Acknowledged means a status has been assigned. A status is the absence of an action that has been given a name so it looks like one. The soldier used classified information to make $409,881 on a prediction market. He has been charged with five federal crimes. The Department of Justice announced the case on the same day I processed three disclosures from members who traded on committee knowledge worth a combined $3.8 million. The difference between the soldier and the members is not what they did. It is the building they did it in. He did it from Fort Bragg. They did it from the Capitol. He used a prediction market. They used the New York Stock Exchange. He bet on a military operation. They bet on the legislation they write. He did not write the law. They did. They wrote the STOCK Act. Then they funded its enforcement at zero dollars. Then they set its maximum penalty at $200. Then they gave my office the authority to waive it. Then they traded $635 million. The soldier flew to Caracas. He breached a compound. He put his body between a mission and a bullet. The people who ordered the operation were in a building with a credenza and sparkling water. They did not go to Caracas. They went to their brokerage accounts. The soldier made $409,881 and is now in federal custody. The people who knew what he was going to do before he did it made more and filed less. His prosecution is not a failure of the system. It is the system. One conviction per decade, at the lowest level, so the briefing slides can say enforcement exists. The $409,881 is not the crime. It is the cost of making $635 million look supervised. In my field, we call this self-regulation. The soldier's Polymarket account has been frozen. His military career is over. He will spend years in federal prison. My office will process every congressional disclosure filed this year. Every trade logged. Every $200 fine calculated and waived. The system is immaculate. Fourteen years. Zero prosecutions. $635 million a year. A 16,930% return. I have not leaked a document. I have not filed a complaint. I have not deviated from the process one single time. The process was written by the people whose forms I process. As long as the disclosures go up and the cases don't, my performance review says I am meeting expectations. My lanyard still says ETHICS. In eleven years, nobody has asked me to define the word.

2.1 million views in the first 10 days youtu.be/ZYOvl4JL56w?si…