SG

5 minutes before Trump’s announcement: * $1.5B notional worth of S&P500 (ES) futures are bought in a single clip. * $192M notional of oil futures (CL) sold. More than 4x-6x any other trade size during the market close. Insiders profited from his lies in broad daylight!

🚨NEWS: SENATE MAJORITY LEADER JOHN THUNE spoke to President DONALD TRUMP Sunday and offered to fund DHS -- without ICE. THUNE said he'd fund ICE in a reconciliation package. TRUMP rejected the offer. Said he wants Rs fighting Dems over DHS funding, SAVE Act. Some Senate Rs and WH beginning to diverge as DHS shutdown nears 40 days. punchbowl.news/archive/32326-… @bresreports @LauraEWeiss16 @sn_handler and me

Democrats are holding up DHS funding to push for ICE changes. Dems keep offering to pass standalone TSA funding, but rather than take “yes” for an answer Trump wants to pull ICE off the streets and put them into airports — thus giving Dems the ICE pullback they want!

This is a real post. Is Trump going to start executing Democratic Party leadership like he did with the Iranians? Irresponsible, unhinged, and fucking deranged. Simply indefensible

As a Marine platoon leader in Vietnam, Mueller was shot and later returned to lead his platoon after his recovery. He received a Bronze Star for valor, a Purple Heart, 2 Navy/Marine Commendation medals, Republic of Vietnam Cross of Valor, and numerous other medals.

When Obama sent Iran $400m + $1.3bn in interest in 2016 Trump called it "insane" and he and others spent a decade mocking the idea of "pallets of cash" even though it was Iran's own money, American prisoners were released, courts were likely to require the U.S. payment, and Iran had just agreed to significant and verified reductions and restrictions on its nuclear program for 15+ years. Now Trump is giving Iran up to ten times that amount of revenue--one of the most significant measures of sanctions relief provided to the Islamic Republic since its founding--in exchange for marginal and temporary relief from the big increase in oil prices his actions have caused, without any concessions from Tehran, and even as Iran continues to target the United States, its allies, and world oil supplies. No way to read as anything other than desperate recognition of the situation Trump's own actions have created and the lack of available alternatives for dealing with it.

A president should not put his name on another man's memorial. He should not hang a banner of himself on the Justice Department. And he should not put his face on a coin. This is un-American.

A Trump friend in a custody fight came up with a novel way to try to get his son back: He called ICE and told them his ex-girlfriend was in the country illegally. She has since been deported. @mega2e @ShawnMcCreesh @Haleaziz nytimes.com/2026/03/20/us/…

US military aid to Ukraine since 2022: $66.9 billion.

Constitutional Law 102: The "public interest" does not include retaliating against news outlets because the president doesn't like their reporting. That does violate the First Amendment. The “‘public interest’ standard necessarily invites reference to First Amendment principles.” CBS, Inc. v. Democratic Nat’l Comm., 412 U.S. 94, 122 (1973). The Supreme Court has stressed that “the First Amendment must inform and give shape to the manner in which Congress exercises its regulatory power in this area.” FCC v. League of Women Voters, 468 U.S. 364, 378 (1984). Under the First Amendment, “[g]overnment officials cannot attempt to coerce private parties in order to punish or suppress views that the government disfavors.” NRA v. Vullo, 602 U.S. 175 (2024).

I think 2019 Brendan Carr wouldn’t like the Ministry of Truth that 2026 Brendan Carr has set up.

Ok yeah this is a coordinated media push from Anthropic, the NYT is reporting the Pentagon specifically requested to use Claude to analyze "unclassified, commercial bulk data on Americans, such as geolocation and web browsing data"

There is no defense of the admin’s AI policy. It is literally destroying American AI companies, while exporting AI chips to Chinese AI companies. Incoherent, catastrophic, and unprecedented. Xi’s early 2020s crackdown on the Chinese tech industry wasn’t even this self-defeating.

If President Trump tries to take control of the midterm elections by executive order, he'll be defying the Constitution in an attempt to trample the authority of Congress and the states and the rights of voters. The time to draw a line is now, says Cato Senior Fellow Walter Olson. ow.ly/qoqn50Yn5JH

Just a reminder, Anthropic's top rules against military usage are only: - Claude cannot be used to spy on citizens - Claude cannot be used to automate kill decisions So Hegseth thinks these rules are unacceptable...

Anthropic's conditions -- AI can't kill humans without a man in the loop, and no mass surveillance of Americans -- are 100% consistent with our military's values and pre-existing rules, and with the views of most people across partisan lines. Where the hell is Congress here?

Via @Axios Scoop: Hegseth to meet Anthropic CEO and issue ultimatum as Pentagon threatens banishment. BUT “Claude is the only AI model available in the military's classified systems, and the most capable model for sensitive defense and intelligence work. The Pentagon doesn't want to lose access to Claude, but is furious with Anthropic for refusing to lift its safeguards entirely. Anthropic is willing to loosen its existing usage restrictions, but wants to wall off two areas: the mass surveillance of Americans, and the development of weapons that fire without human involvement. … It would be a massive task to offboard Anthropic, which is deeply entrenched, and replace it with another AI lab that currently has inferior capabilities.” axios.com/2026/02/23/heg…

Chairman Carr's argument rests on an outdated premise, if it was ever even valid in the first place. The equal time rule hinges on the "scarcity rationale" developed in broadcasting's formative years, when a handful of networks dominated a more limited media environment. That world is gone. Today the alternatives — cable, satellite, streaming, podcasts, YouTube channels, social media feeds, etc. — are effectively limitless. The idea that any late-night TV host is "deciding" elections is not serious. Voters have access to an overwhelming abundance of information and are free to choose what to watch, hear, and believe. As a result, the equal time rule is on extremely shaky constitutional footing today. The old assumptions that purportedly justify it have evaporated. And the Supreme Court has emphasized that the First Amendment must "inform and give shape" to the FCC's exercise of authority. The commission and Carr himself (before becoming chairman) have said the agency doesn't have a roving mandate to police speech in the name of the "public interest." And courts have made clear that government officials cannot coerce private speakers to alter how they exercise their First Amendment rights. All of this is why the FCC abandoned the related fairness doctrine in the 1980s, when it became clear the rule was ripe for abuse and in deep tension with the First Amendment. History proved the point. The Kennedy administration notoriously used the fairness doctrine, ostensibly designed to promote balanced coverage, to coordinate complaints and investigations targeting conservative talk radio. The result was not more speech and more balance, but weaponization of government power and self-censorship. Chairman Carr is using the same playbook. He just changed a longstanding interpretation of the equal time rule's news exemption to turn the screws on late-night and daytime TV shows that lean left. This decision follows on the heels of other actions by the FCC that make the motive even more transparent. Carr began his tenure by reinstating previously dismissed complaints about editorial decisions (except one against a FOX station). He opened a baseless investigation into a 60 Minutes interview while simultaneously slow-walking a merger involving CBS's parent company Paramount as the president was suing Paramount over the same interview. He has tried to act as the arbiter of truth by publicly threatening other misinformation— excuse me, "news distortion" investigations (again, never aimed at conservative broadcasters). He pressured ABC into taking a late-night comedian off the air for a monologue comment, warning the network, "we could do this the easy way or the hard way." And now this reinterpretation of the equal time rule, already being used to investigate The View. Carr's defense of the rule might carry a little more weight if the FCC were not repeatedly singling out media whose coverage or commentary displeases the president, often in circumstances where there is no credible violation of any rule. This pattern shows exactly why the commission's content regulations need to go. They are a loaded gun waiting to be used by any administration against speech it doesn't like. And they're on a collision course with the First Amendment. The FCC chairman's loyalty is supposed to be to the Constitution, not to the occupant of the White House.

For anyone putting loyalty to a person above loyalty to the Constitution, Justice Gorsuch’s remarks should be required reading. His words are a reminder that our highest duty is to the rule of law and the founding principles that define America.