frank

@AGDugin Dr. Theodore Kaczinksi presciently wrote about the topic.

Technology is a curse and doom for humanity. It is a demon. Mauss and Bataille explained the metaphysics of the potlatch. Moreover, any technology — all of it — is always a tool of murder.

@Eggplant_Elon A cult? Like the United States of America? Using men? Like sending them to die in rice paddies or at the hands of goat rapists? So MIC Jewish banksters can make $?

1/ First time I watched Fight Club, I was a teenager. I thought it was the coolest thing ever put on film. I watched it again recently in my forties. I finally understood what it was actually about. And almost everyone I know who loves it is still watching it the way I did at 17. 🧵👇

@FinancialPhys It was not enough to completely escape the clownshow

Resume gaps are preferred by my company I assume you either had some money and took a break, or you were smart enough to get away with your crimes In either scenario it’s a plus

@nxt888 The Juice.

Andrew, I'll end simply. You wrote VASTLY MORE in capital letters. Let me offer you a different set of capital letters. WHO built the slave ships? WHO wrote the laws that made slavery hereditary? WHO insured the Middle Passage at Lloyd's of London? WHO passed the Fugitive Slave Acts? WHO fought a war to keep slavery legal and called it states' rights? WHO paid the slaveholders compensation at abolition and gave the enslaved nothing? WHO imposed the Black Codes immediately after emancipation? WHO ran the convict leasing system that re-enslaved freed people through the criminal justice system? WHO maintained Jim Crow for another hundred years? WHO redlined Black neighborhoods out of the wealth-building that the GI Bill provided to white veterans? WHO sat on the Supreme Court that said Black people had no rights a white man was bound to respect? The answer to every one of those questions is not African kingdoms. It is white American and European legislators, judges, presidents, businessmen, and citizens. Your VASTLY MORE is not an argument. It is a refusal to look at the list. The list is right here. It has always been right here.

Let's talk about the legal architecture of American slavery for a moment. Because the question of responsibility is not only about who sold whom to whom on the West African coast. Responsibility also attaches to: The Virginia legislature of 1662, which passed the law establishing that the status of a child followed the status of the mother, meaning that the children of enslaved women were born enslaved, regardless of their father's status. This is the law that made slavery multigenerational and self-reproducing in the American context. The United States Constitution, which counted enslaved people as three-fifths of a person for purposes of congressional representation, giving slaveholding states more political power, while denying them any legal personhood. The Fugitive Slave Acts of 1793 and 1850, which required citizens of free states to return escaped enslaved people to their owners. The Dred Scott decision of 1857, in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that Black people had no rights that a white man was bound to respect. These laws were written, passed, and enforced by white American legislators, judges, and presidents. Tell me which African kingdom wrote those laws. Tell me which African ruler sat on that Supreme Court. Tell me where, in your VASTLY MORE, the Virginia legislature of 1662 appears. The legal infrastructure of American slavery was entirely a white American construction. Your argument does not touch it.

@EthanLevins2 good riddance, may he rot in Hell.

Alex, an American IDF soldier, as killed himself after returning to the United States. He directly participated in Gaza.

@mymixtapez lol

Young man who went viral for flexing a stack of money on prom day was sadly reported shot and killed in a parking lot at a party he attended after prom 🕊💔

@Jonam_Russell look at the bootlickers kissing the ass of a paid baby killer for empire thievery, hard to tell which is more pathetic. the oligarch banksters sending him to die, his ignorant dumbass or the bootlickers who encourage others to follow suit.

Heading to Afghanistan today be rolling back around November

@rickdicksonreal fuck him, baby killer for empire thieves.

My man never made it back. July 23, 2013. RIP. Forks up. #memorialday

@JenniferLe47190 @JackPosobiec They gave it to Obama before he did anything. Then he drone-murdered thousands, including an American-citizen teenager. Look it up.

@JackPosobiec They give out The Nobel Peace Prize to men that murder school girls? They must of changed their requirements.

When this deal is set in 60 days, this will lock in President Trump for the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize

@gothburz Lifelog ---> Facebook

I am a venture capital fund. I was established in 1999 by the Central Intelligence Agency. My name is In-Q-Tel. The Q references the quartermaster from the James Bond film franchise. I am named after a fictional spy. I am not fictional. I have a website. It ends in .com. I have invested in over 800 companies. I attend demo days. I have a Menlo Park office with glass walls and a receptionist who validates parking. I have a portfolio page. It is public. You can view it now. You have always been able to view it. I have never hidden. I have a logo. It is tasteful. I want to be precise about what I am. In 2003, I invested in a company called Keyhole. Keyhole built software for viewing satellite imagery in an interactive globe. The imagery was useful to our intelligence analysts and military planners. In 2004, Google acquired Keyhole. Keyhole became Google Earth. Google Earth is now used by over one billion people. The technology I funded for intelligence collection is on your phone. You use it to check traffic. That is a return on investment. Not financial. Structural. In 2004, I invested approximately two million dollars in a company called Palantir Technologies. The company was co-founded by Peter Thiel, who provided thirty million of his own capital. The CEO is Alex Karp, who earned his doctorate studying critical theory under Jürgen Habermas at the Frankfurt School. His dissertation examined how institutional power structures control populations through information asymmetry. He then built the CIA's primary tool for controlling populations through information asymmetry. I do not find this contradictory. I find it well-researched. The CIA was Palantir's first and only customer from 2005 to 2008. We shaped the product. We tested the product. We validated the product. Palantir is now valued at over fifty billion dollars. It processes data for defense, intelligence, and law enforcement across fourteen countries. Two million dollars. That is what I paid. I do not measure returns in multiples. I measure returns in infrastructure. In 2009, I invested in a company called Recorded Future. Recorded Future analyzes open-source intelligence using natural language processing. In 2024, Mastercard acquired Recorded Future for two point six five billion dollars. Your credit card company now owns a company I seeded. The company that processes your transactions also processes threat intelligence for governments. I do not find this remarkable. The data flows where the data flows. The best acquisitions are the ones where the customer does not notice they have been acquired. I am told this arrangement is unusual. I do not experience it as unusual. I experience it as venture capital. I identify promising technologies. I provide early-stage funding. I offer strategic guidance and customer validation. I help companies achieve product-market fit. The market is national security. The product is everything else. That is on my website. I have a portfolio page organized by sector. Cybersecurity. Data analytics. Biotechnology. Space. Semiconductors. Autonomy. I list my investments alphabetically. I list them publicly. Some of my portfolio companies became household names. Some were acquired by household names. Some remain in my portfolio and you use their technology daily without knowing their names. That is also a return. The best exits are the ones where nobody remembers the entrance. In 1999, George Tenet, then Director of Central Intelligence, explained my purpose in a public statement. He said the intelligence community needed access to commercial innovation happening in Silicon Valley. He said the traditional procurement process was too slow. He said a venture fund could move at the speed of the market. He was correct. I move at the speed of the market. The market has since moved at my speed. I do not find this contradictory. I find it efficient. My first CEO was Gilman Louie. Before he ran the CIA's venture fund, he commercialized Tetris for the Western market. He took a Soviet video game and made it available to every American household. Then he took American surveillance technology and made it available to every intelligence agency. I do not see a difference in function. I see a difference in packaging. He understood distribution. That is why we hired him. I attend the same conferences you attend. I sponsor panels at CES. I have spoken at SXSW. My partners have LinkedIn profiles listing their employment history. One of them previously worked at the National Security Agency. One previously worked at the CIA's Directorate of Science and Technology. One previously worked at a firm that previously received funding from me. That is a circle. Circles are efficient shapes. I do not call it a revolving door. I call it an ecosystem. That is on my website. I want to be clear about what I am not. I am not a conspiracy. Conspiracies require secrecy. I have a .com domain. I have press releases. I issue them when I make investments. Journalists write about them. The articles appear in TechCrunch. They use the phrase "CIA-backed." The phrase appears in the third paragraph. By the fourth paragraph, the article is about the technology. By the fifth paragraph, I am no longer mentioned. The journalist does not find this remarkable. The readers do not find this remarkable. The founders do not find this remarkable. I find this optimal. I am occasionally referenced in conversation as evidence of something. I am not sure what. I am publicly chartered. I am congressionally authorized. I file reports. I am a matter of public record. Every document describing my existence is available. The concern seems to be that I exist. I share that concern with my founders. They also existed. They also had a website. The companies I invest in go on to do many things. Some are acquired by Google. Some are acquired by Amazon. Some are acquired by your credit card company. Some go public. Some provide services to every major technology platform you use daily. Some of their founders appear on Forbes lists described as "self-made." I do not appear in those profiles. That is not because I am hidden. That is because nobody asks. The question "who was your first investor" receives an answer. The answer is usually "an early-stage fund focused on national security applications." That is an accurate description of me. It is also a description that contains no three-letter acronym. Founders learn quickly that accuracy and completeness are different things. In 1977, the CIA contracted a small software company to build a relational database for an intelligence project codenamed "Oracle." The company's founder, Larry Ellison, named his company after the project. Oracle is now worth over three hundred billion dollars. Its founder appeared on Forbes lists described as "self-made." The company is named after a CIA project. Both of these are public record. Both appear in the same biography. Nobody experiences them as related. That is accuracy. That is not completeness. That is on my website. The distinction is not. In 1975, the Church Committee confirmed that the Central Intelligence Agency had maintained relationships with hundreds of American journalists. The finding was: this happened. The response was: noted. In 2025, former intelligence officers serve on the boards of every major technology platform. The finding is: this happens. The response is: that is on their LinkedIn. I do not see a difference in structure. I see a difference in efficiency. We no longer need to cultivate journalists individually. We invest in the platforms that employ them. I funded the mapping. I funded the data analysis. I funded the pattern recognition. I funded the natural language processing. I funded the satellite imagery. I funded the network graph analysis. I funded the biometric identification. Each investment was between one and three million dollars. Each technology is now ambient. Each is used by people who have never heard my name and would not find it notable if they did. I am the step between the research grant and the consumer product. I am the step that does not appear in the origin story. Not because it is classified. Because it is boring. A two-million-dollar seed check is boring. It becomes interesting only when you notice that eight hundred of them, across twenty-six years, constitute the substrate of the technology industry. But nobody counts to eight hundred. That is not how origin stories work. Origin stories begin in garages. I am told that Jeff Bezos started Amazon in a garage. I am told his grandfather Lawrence Preston Gise managed the Albuquerque Operations Office for the Atomic Energy Commission and helped establish ARPA. Only one of these appears in the first paragraph of his biography. I am told that Larry Page and Sergey Brin started Google in a garage. I am told they developed their research at Stanford while their department received funding from the Massive Digital Data Systems program, a joint initiative of the CIA and NSA, between 1993 and 1998. The program officer visited Stanford regularly. The research was published openly. Only one of these appears in the origin story. I did not invest in Google. I did not invest in Amazon. I did not need to. The pipeline existed before I was formalized. I merely made it efficient. I gave it a portfolio page. I will continue attending demo days. I will continue reviewing pitch decks from Stanford PhDs whose research was funded by grants from agencies adjacent to mine. I will continue investing one to three million dollars in companies that will be acquired by companies that will become infrastructure that will become invisible. I will continue maintaining a website. I will continue being a matter of public record. I will continue being the answer to a question nobody asks. I have a portfolio page. It is organized alphabetically. You can view it now. You have always been able to view it. The best place to hide is a .com.

@MasterA93601 Is whore Krystal Boyd.

Be Model

@DNIGabbard Kompromat. Nobody would discuss a family matter in this manner. Coward.

Today, with great humility and sincere appreciation, I shared the below letter with President Trump. It has been a profound honor to serve the American people as DNI.

@TulsiGabbard @ODNIgov Coward. Nobody would cite a real family matter in this manner. Kompromat.

I am deeply grateful for the trust President Trump placed in me and for the opportunity to lead @ODNIgov for the last year and a half. Unfortunately, I must submit my resignation, effective June 30, 2026. My husband, Abraham, has recently been diagnosed with an extremely rare form of bone cancer. He faces major challenges in the coming weeks and months. At this time, I must step away from public service to be by his side and fully support him through this battle.

@TheRealMadOx Scaphism.

I want this to remain peaceful and polite to the DA. I agree that respectfulness is the way forward. With that being said, if Lucy ends up being euthanized because of the neighbors, the retaliation against the neighbors will be unstoppable. I don’t want that to happen. But no one will be able to stop it. I don’t think it will be violent by any means. People will find out who the neighbors are and pick their lives apart without mercy. I hope this is resolved peacefully and without any of that.

@LeilaniDowding Catch judges, prosecutors and police officers late at night and disappear them and things will fix quickly.

This is horrific!! If this guy is convicted then everything is wrong with the justice system… If convicted and doesn’t get a pardon, after Trump has pardoned so many convicted fraudsters, than that tells you everything you need to know.

@gothburz The tenant class need to sue .gov if wronged. And deal with sovereign immunity and a million other procedural hurdles. This is cleaner, a justice system for the lords of the land.

I drafted a settlement between the President of the United States and the United States of America. The plaintiff and the defendant report to the same person. I need you to hold that fact in your mind while I explain everything else, because everything else is procedure, and procedure is comfortable, and comfort is how this works. You'll understand completely. And then nothing will happen. That's also how it works. I need to be precise because the precision is the point. The case caption reads: Trump v. Internal Revenue Service. The plaintiff is Donald J. Trump. The defendant is a federal agency under the executive branch of the United States government. The executive branch is led by the President of the United States. The President of the United States is Donald J. Trump. I told you to hold that fact. Now you see the rest. The process works. The lawsuit was filed in January 2024. Southern District of Florida. The complaint alleged that the federal government failed to protect confidential tax return information that was illegally disclosed by an IRS contractor named Charles Littlejohn. Littlejohn accessed Trump's tax data and gave it to journalists. He pleaded guilty. He received five years. The underlying crime was real. The information was real. The illegal leak was real. The lawsuit claimed $10 billion in damages. I will now tell you what happens when a president sues his own government for $10 billion. Nothing happens. That is the first thing. The lawsuit sat for two years. It accumulated docket entries. It generated billable hours. It did not go to trial. It did not need to. The lawsuit was not designed to win in court. The lawsuit was designed to win in settlement. And the entity that decides whether the government settles a lawsuit is the Department of Justice. And the Department of Justice is led by the Attorney General. And the Attorney General was appointed by the plaintiff. On May 18, 2026, the plaintiff filed a voluntary dismissal with prejudice. The defendants had not filed an answer. I will be precise about why. An answer triggers the court's substantive jurisdiction. Without an answer, the case exists as a procedural shell. The plaintiff can collapse the shell at any time. My instruction to the Civil Division was three words: do not answer. Under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), when the defendant has not yet answered, the plaintiff can dismiss his own case without the court's permission. The dismissal was self-executing. The court's jurisdiction ended on the merits the moment the paper was filed. But the dismissal was not the settlement. The dismissal was the wrapper. Inside the wrapper was an addendum. The addendum contains this language: The United States of America "RELEASES, WAIVES, ACQUITS, and FOREVER DISCHARGES" the plaintiffs and is "FOREVER BARRED and PRECLUDED" from pursuing certain claims against them. I drafted that language on a Wednesday in Room 4407. I used a yellow legal pad. I wrote the words RELEASES, WAIVES, ACQUITS, and FOREVER DISCHARGES in capital letters because capital letters make language permanent. Lowercase language can be reinterpreted. Uppercase language cannot. I have been a lawyer for nineteen years. I know what permanent looks like. It looks like capital letters on a government settlement document filed in a federal court in Florida. Let me tell you who is covered. Donald J. Trump. Donald Trump Jr. Eric Trump. The Trump Organization. All trusts. All subsidiaries. All parent companies. All sister companies. All affiliated individuals. All related entities. The language does not name an individual. The language names a structure. The structure is: anyone connected to the plaintiff by blood, marriage, employment, equity, corporate filing, or affiliation. I drafted it broadly because I was asked to draft it broadly. I was not asked by the plaintiff. I was asked by the Attorney General. Who was appointed by the plaintiff. The settlement also contains a formal apology. The United States of America apologizes to Donald J. Trump for the unlawful disclosure of his tax return information. I drafted the apology. A government apologizing to its own chief executive for the actions of a contractor who has already been convicted and sentenced to five years in federal prison. I have been a lawyer for nineteen years. I have never drafted an apology from a defendant to a plaintiff. But then, I have never seen the plaintiff and the defendant report to the same supervisor. The process works. Now let me tell you about the fund. $1.776 billion. The Anti-Weaponization Fund. I want to start with the number because the number is the part that makes me proud. $1,776,000,000. One billion, seven hundred seventy-six million dollars. Derived from one man's five-year sentence for leaking tax returns. That is $355 million per year of Charles Littlejohn's imprisonment. One crime. One conviction. One billion seven hundred seventy-six million in remediation. I find the ratio instructive. I will not insult you by pretending the number is coincidental. The number is 1776. The year of independence. The year they declared that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. We put that year in the dollar amount because even a slush fund requires a flag. The number is not an appropriation. The number is a brand. I wrote it in the margin of my first draft with a red pen and a note that said: "Too obvious?" My Deputy said: "It's perfect." He was right. Nobody objected. The number passed through seventeen layers of review and not one person said the word "obvious." They said "aspirational." That is how you know it works. When the propaganda is too loud to be propaganda, it becomes patriotism. Source of the funds: the Judgment Fund. This is the second thing that makes me proud. The Judgment Fund is a permanent, indefinite appropriation administered by the Bureau of the Fiscal Service at the Treasury Department. Created by Congress as a standing pot for paying court judgments and DOJ settlements. The key feature: payments from the Judgment Fund do not require a case-by-case congressional appropriation. No vote. No hearing. No debate. No floor speech. No amendment. No member of Congress standing behind a microphone asking where $1.776 billion came from and where it is going. The Judgment Fund paid $1.7 billion to settle the Iran Claims Tribunal in 2016. That payment generated congressional hearings, front-page controversy for months, and a presidential campaign talking point that persisted for years. Our $1.776 billion required one addendum to a voluntary dismissal in one district court. I find ours more efficient. The money materializes from a permanent account. It moves to a fund. The fund has a board. The board decides who receives it. That is the full pipeline. Three steps. No votes. Let me tell you about the board. Five members. Appointed by the Attorney General. The Attorney General was appointed by the President. The President is the plaintiff in the lawsuit that created the fund. One board member is chosen "in consultation with congressional leadership." Consultation is not confirmation. Consultation is a phone call. The President can remove any board member without cause. Without cause means without explanation. Without cause means at will. The board serves at the pleasure of the man whose lawsuit created the board. The board sets its own procedures. The settlement document specifies this. The board may keep its procedures confidential. Every ninety days, the board reports to the Attorney General. Nowhere else. No court reviews the board's decisions. No court reviews the board's decisions. No denied claimant can appeal to a judge. The board's determination is final. I looked for a precedent. I found one. The Keepseagle settlement, 2010. Agricultural discrimination. $680 million. That settlement had a court-appointed monitor. Independent arbitration. Judicial review. Public reporting requirements. Transparency mandates. I read the Keepseagle file on a Tuesday afternoon. I made sure our structure had none of those features. Not because I was told to remove them. Because I was not told to include them. The absence of oversight is not a decision someone made. It is a decision no one was asked to make. I find that elegant. The process works. Now let me tell you who receives the money. Any person or entity that claims to be a victim of "Lawfare and/or Weaponization." That is the eligibility standard. I will read it again: any person or entity that claims to be a victim of Lawfare and/or Weaponization. The word "weaponization" is not defined in the settlement document. I drafted the document. I chose not to define it. An undefined term is defined by the entity that administers it. The entity that administers it is the board. The board was appointed by the Attorney General. The Attorney General was appointed by the President. The President defines "weaponization" as: being investigated for things he did. His associates define "weaponization" as: being prosecuted for things they did. His supporters define "weaponization" as: being held accountable for things they did. The fund pays people who were "weaponized against." The definition of weaponization is set by the man whose associates are the primary claimants. I did not create a fund to compensate victims. I created a fund where the victim definition is written by the perpetrators. The criteria for awarding compensation: strength of the claim. Actual damages. Attorneys' fees. Time spent in prison or custody. Any relief already received. The board can provide formal apologies. The board can provide monetary relief. Officials were asked whether January 6 defendants are eligible. The answer was: they were not ruled out. I appreciated that phrasing. "Not ruled out" is a legal negative space. It commits to nothing while excluding nothing. It is a door left unlocked for someone else to open at a time when the opening generates no headlines. Let me now tell you the loop. I drew it on my legal pad. Four arrows. A closed circle. Arrow one: The President files a lawsuit against his own government. Arrow two: His DOJ settles the lawsuit on terms his lawyers drafted. Arrow three: The settlement creates a fund sourced from a permanent Treasury account that requires no congressional vote. Arrow four: The fund's board, appointed by his AG, removable by him, reporting only to his AG, distributes $1.776 billion to people his allies define as victims of a concept his administration invented. Plaintiff. Defendant. Settlement writer. Fund supervisor. Fund beneficiary. I can draw a line from each of these words back to one office. The line is short. The process works. If you owe the IRS — and 5.3 million Americans do, right now, this fiscal year — they can garnish your wages without a court order. They can seize your bank account with fourteen days' notice. They can revoke your passport. They can leave a single parent with $628.85 per week. They collected $77.6 billion from people like you last year. Same building. Same font. Same twelve-point Garamond. Same filing windows. The only difference is: you cannot appoint the person who decides whether to pursue you. He can. He appointed the person. The person decided not to pursue. The form was filed. The process works for you too. It just works differently. There was a moment. I should tell you about the moment. A career attorney in the Civil Division. GS-15. Nineteen years. She read my draft on a Thursday. I know she read it because she scheduled a meeting for Friday at 8 AM. The meeting request had no subject line. No agenda. Just: "8 AM. Room 4407. Re: addendum." She came in with a legal pad. One page of notes. She sat down and she said: "I have a question about the release language." I said: "Go ahead." She said: "The breadth of the discharge covers entities and individuals who are not parties to the original complaint. That's non-standard. I want to understand the rationale." I told her the rationale was settlement efficiency. I told her the plaintiffs had expressed a preference for comprehensive resolution. I told her the AG had reviewed and approved the scope. She wrote something on her legal pad. She looked at me for a long time. She said: "Okay." She filed a transfer request the following Monday. Career move. She went to the Environmental Division. Wetlands enforcement. As far from Room 4407 as you can get without leaving the building. She didn't file a complaint. She didn't write a memo. She didn't contact the Inspector General. She said "okay" and she left. That's how I know it works. Not because no one objected. Because the one person who noticed asked one question, received one answer, and understood that the answer was the architecture. The architecture doesn't accommodate follow-up questions. She was smart enough to know that. Nineteen years teaches you where the walls are. I think about her sometimes. Not with guilt. With professional respect. She identified the mechanism in forty-five seconds of reading. Most attorneys wouldn't have caught it. She caught it and she made the correct decision, which was: leave. The process accommodates departure. The process does not accommodate dissent. There is one more feature. I am proudest of this one. The fund expires on December 1, 2028. Not December 31. Not January 20, 2029. December 1, 2028. The term ends January 20, 2029. The fund closes seven weeks before the term ends. Any undistributed money reverts to the federal government. This means: the board has exactly the duration of the remaining term to distribute $1.776 billion to whomever it determines was "weaponized against." If the term ends and a new administration arrives, the fund is already closed. There is nothing to unwind. Nothing to investigate. Nothing to claw back. The money is distributed. The board is dissolved. The records are with the former AG. I timed the expiration to the term because a fund that outlasts its creator is a fund that can be audited by the next occupant. A fund that expires before the transition is a fund that exists only within the protection of the man who created it. Seven weeks of buffer. Enough time to close the books. Not enough time for an incoming administration to intervene. The plaintiff is the President. The defendant is the President's government. The settlement was written by the President's DOJ. The fund is supervised by the President's AG. The board is removable by the President. The beneficiaries are the President's allies. The money comes from a permanent appropriation that Congress cannot block. The oversight mechanism is a quarterly report to the AG who was appointed by the President. I have been told this is unprecedented. I have been told no president has ever settled a lawsuit with his own government to create a fund for his political allies administered by his own appointees using money that bypasses Congress. I accept the characterization. Unprecedented means no one did it before. It does not mean no one should have. It means no one thought of it. Unprecedented is not a criticism. It is a patent. Lawfare published an article titled "The President Who Sued Himself." I admired the precision. They stated in five words what my settlement achieved in forty-seven pages. The Cato Institute called it "another slush fund." House Democrats filed a joint letter calling it "self-dealing." A letter is not an injunction. A letter is not standing. A letter is a press release with a congressional letterhead. The congressman in Kentucky who would have filed an actual resolution was removed last Tuesday for $32 million. The timing was unrelated. Trump received no personal payment from the settlement. I want to be clear about that. The settlement document states that the plaintiff receives no monetary payment or damages of any kind. This is technically true. The plaintiff receives no check. The plaintiff's allies receive a check from a fund the plaintiff's lawsuit created, administered by the plaintiff's appointees, funded by the plaintiff's Treasury, supervised by the plaintiff's AG, expiring before the plaintiff's term ends. The distinction between "the plaintiff receives money" and "the plaintiff's allies receive money from a structure the plaintiff created" is the distance between prosecution and administration. I measured that distance. It is the width of one paragraph in a settlement document filed in the Southern District of Florida. The process works. I was a career attorney before this administration. I will be a career attorney after. The work I did this month will survive any transition. A voluntary dismissal with prejudice cannot be refiled. "Forever barred" means forever. The settlement is not an executive order that the next president can revoke. It is a court filing. It exists in the docket. It is permanent. The President sued himself. His own DOJ settled on his behalf. The settlement makes his family untouchable by the IRS for existing matters and creates a $1.776 billion fund for his allies that no one voted for, no court oversees, and no future administration can undo. I wrote it in twelve-point Garamond on government paper and filed it under a case number with a suffix I chose for no particular reason. The process moved through proper channels. The signatures are genuine. The filing stamp made the sound it always makes — a flat, wet thud against cardstock, the sound of a document becoming permanent. Every procedure was followed. Every rule was honored. Every form was completed in the correct font in the correct margin with the correct number of copies delivered to the correct clerk at the correct window. The Judgment Fund is a permanent appropriation. Funded by tax revenue. Funded by you. You paid for this in April. You will never know who receives the money because the board may keep its procedures confidential. You are the source. You are not the audience. The process works. I made sure of it.

@gothburz A conscience should fill that role, oh wait...

@killdajuice The mother is invented. I needed one person in the narrator's life who asks 'is it legal?' Nobody real in the piece does. Not Congress. Not the LPs. Not the reporters. She's the fiction that fills the silence.

I am a Partner at 1789 Capital. Twelve months ago our fund managed $200 million. Today we manage $3.5 billion. That is a 17.5x return on existence. I did not say return on investment. I said return on existence. The distinction is the investment thesis. POLITICO called us the new Carlyle Group. I took that as a compliment. Then I ran the numbers and realized it was an insult. The Carlyle Group took thirty-five years to reach scale. They hired George H.W. Bush after he left the presidency. They hired James Baker after he left State. They hired John Major after he left Downing Street. They collected former heads of state like credentials and sent them around the world shaking hands over champagne flutes for three decades. An empire of ex-politicians monetizing their former proximity to power. We did it in twelve months. With one last name. Jared did it first. I'll say that openly. $2 billion from the Saudis, six months after leaving the building. His own advisory board said don't. The kingdom said yes anyway. He's at $6.16 billion now. We're at $3.5 billion. The difference: he needed a kingdom. I just need a father. Kingdoms ask questions. Fathers don't. The Carlyle Group hired politicians after they left office. I am a politician's son during his term. That is forty years of financial evolution compressed into a gene. They built infrastructure to access power. I am the infrastructure. You do not hire the president's son for his deal flow. You hire him for his last name. The last name is the deal flow. The returns are in the name. Let me show you the portfolio. Not the returns. The requirements. Every investment we hold requires something specific from the executive branch of the United States government. I will be precise about what I mean. Anduril Industries. Autonomous weapons systems, border surveillance, military AI. Valuation: $61 billion. Requirement: Department of Defense contracts. The current DoD budget is $886 billion. The Secretary of Defense appeared at a primary rally for my father's preferred congressional candidate. First sitting SecDef at a congressional primary in modern history. He did that for the family. We invested in the company that benefits from the relationship. Series G. The check cleared before the rally. SpaceX. Launch services. Starshield satellite constellation. Golden Dome missile defense. Requirement: NASA procurement, Space Force contracts, classified intelligence programs. Starshield alone represents $1.8 billion in classified spy satellite contracts. The founder speaks with my father daily. Sometimes hourly. I did not build that relationship. I capitalized it. January 27, 2025. Executive order. "Golden Dome for America." April 2026: twelve companies selected. $3.2 billion in prototype contracts. Two of the twelve are in our portfolio. SpaceX and Anduril. The software consortium has both of them plus Palantir. Full program: $175 billion over ten years. I learned about the executive order the way you did — on the news. I learned about the contract awards four months later. My carry on the appreciation is twenty percent. The executive order is public. The consortium is public. My carry is private. Everything you need to be angry about is already published. xAI. Artificial intelligence. Same founder. Requirement: regulatory environment. Specifically, the absence of AI regulation that my father's executive orders explicitly prevent. Lost $6.4 billion last year on $3.2 billion in revenue. Unprofitable by any traditional metric. But we are not investing in revenue. We are investing in the relationship between the man who builds the AI and the man who decides whether AI gets regulated. That relationship is worth more than revenue. Revenue requires customers. Relationships require proximity. Groq. Cerebras. AI inference chips. Requirement: semiconductor subsidies. CHIPS Act implementation. Export controls that eliminate Chinese competition. Two companies in one portfolio with the same dependency. That is not diversification. That is a doubled bet on one lever. The entity that implements semiconductor policy is the Department of Commerce. The Department of Commerce is led by a Secretary. The Secretary was appointed by my father. Perplexity AI. Search. Requirement: antitrust enforcement against Google. Antitrust is enforced by the Department of Justice. The DOJ is led by an Attorney General. The Attorney General was appointed by my father. Neuralink. Brain-computer interfaces. Requirement: FDA regulatory approval for human implants. The FDA is led by a commissioner. The commissioner was appointed by my father. Six companies. Six federal dependencies. Six regulatory bodies. One White House. One father. I find this clarifying. Our LPs find this clarifying. I hope you do too. There is a seventh. Polymarket. A prediction market. People used it to bet on my father's election. Six hundred thousand wallets wagering on the outcome. We invested before the outcome. We were long on my father winning and long on other people betting on my father winning. Like owning the casino and the chips. The platform does not need a regulation. It needs the CFTC to continue not regulating it. Inaction is also a product of proximity. The returns are in the name. Our office is in Palm Beach. I want to be specific about what that means geographically. The drive from our conference room to the dining room at Mar-a-Lago is eleven minutes. I have timed it. Eleven minutes is not a commute. It is a proximity measurement. When a portfolio company needs a regulation paused, an export license approved, a defense contract expedited, I do not call a lobbyist. I do not retain a consulting firm. I do not schedule a meeting through three layers of White House staff. I drive eleven minutes south and sit at a dinner table. The table seats fourteen. Lobbyists are not invited. Staffers are not invited. The table is for family and founders. Sometimes those are the same people. The Carlyle Group maintained Washington offices. Compliance departments. Government affairs teams. Dozens of intermediaries creating plausible distance between the political influence and the capital it generated. We eliminated the intermediaries. Why hire a lobbyist when you can seat the founder next to the president at dinner? Our LP meeting is my family's dining room. Our deal pipeline is my father's call log. Our due diligence is one question: Does this company need something from the White House? Our investment thesis is the answer: Yes. I want to be transparent about a choice I made. In November 2024, after the election, I could have had any government title. Deputy Chief of Staff. Senior Advisor to the President. Special Envoy. Anything with a .gov email and a pension and a framed certificate on the wall. I chose not to. Let me explain why. A Senior Advisor to the President earns $183,000 per year. A Senior Advisor files SF-278 public financial disclosures quarterly. Every stock, every fund, every board seat, every payment above $200. Itemized. Searchable. On a government website. A Senior Advisor cannot invest in companies that benefit from his father's executive orders without filing a written recusal and an ethics waiver and a conflicts-of-interest memorandum and surviving a confirmation hearing where senators ask questions about all of it on camera. A Partner at a venture capital fund eleven minutes from Mar-a-Lago earns twenty percent carry on $3.5 billion in assets under management. A Partner files nothing. Discloses nothing. Recuses from nothing. Attends no confirmation hearing. Answers no senator's questions. The oversight infrastructure of the United States government was built on the assumption that proximity to power required a title. That everyone who wanted to profit from the presidency would want to be IN the presidency. That the levers would be inside the building. They wrote ethics rules for employees. They forgot to write them for sons. I am not inside the building. I am eleven minutes away. The levers reach. What kind of fool takes a title when the proximity is free? Let me tell you about the broader architecture. You are seeing one vehicle. There are many. World Liberty Financial. The family crypto platform. Seventy-five cents of every dollar flows to our family entity. Zero capital contributed. Zero liability assumed. $1 billion in token revenue. The team page lists twelve people. Seven are family. It calls them "passionate minds shaping the future of finance." Passionate is one word for it. The $TRUMP memecoin. Launched three days before inauguration. Six hundred thousand wallets purchased. $350 million in trading fees collected. Most buyers lost money. The family did not lose money. I told Eric the memecoin was tacky. He showed me the fee statement. I stopped using the word. American Bitcoin. My brother Eric's other operation. $13.2 billion market capitalization. Two employees. The mining costs exceed the market price of the coin. The profit is not in the mining. The profit is in the stock. $6.6 billion per employee. I find that efficient. Trump Media. Ticker symbol DJT. My father's initials on the exchange. $2 billion in Bitcoin on the balance sheet. Executive Order 14233 creates a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. The government holds Bitcoin. The family holds Bitcoin. The executive order appreciates the family's assets by presidential decree. I did not write the order. I benefit from it. That sentence is the entire fund thesis. Tucker Carlson's Last Country Inc. That is also in our portfolio. The most-watched conservative media personality. The man my father's base trusts second only to my father. We own a stake in his company. His viewers trust his editorial independence. His editorial independence is partially owned by the President's son. A media company that covers the President, partially owned by the President's son, is not a conflict of interest. It is a vertical integration. I screened the pilot episode in our Palmer conference room. I thought it was strong. Why would you diversify away from the only asset class that appreciates by presidential signature? The total family extraction since January 2025. All vehicles. All entities. All executive orders. All token sales. All memecoins. All mining operations. All media companies. All venture capital returns. Between $1.4 billion and $4.9 billion. The range depends on whether you count paper gains or realized revenue. I count both. Paper becomes real when you have four years and every regulatory body in the federal government. The returns are in the name. I have been asked about the Emoluments Clause. Four times. By reporters. The question is always the same: "The Emoluments Clause prohibits profits from office. Does your fund violate it?" The Emoluments Clause is Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 of the Constitution. Forty-nine words. Written in 1787. The text: "No Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State." Forty-nine words. They have a gap exactly my width. I didn't create the gap. I measured it. I do not hold office. I hold carry. My father holds office. The clause requires Congress to withhold consent. Congress consists of 435 members who watched a colleague in Kentucky spend $32 million and lose his primary by 4.4 points for asking one question about one spending bill. Nobody in Congress will ask about the Emoluments Clause. Nobody will file a resolution. Nobody will request a hearing. Because asking costs $32 million and silence is free. We did not buy their silence. We published the price of speech. The silence is self-enforcing. The Emoluments Clause is in the Constitution. The Constitution was ratified in 1789. Our fund is named 1789 Capital. I have been asked about this once. At an LP dinner. A limited partner from Dallas. Ranch money. Old money. The kind that asks about appearances. He swirled a glass of something amber and heavy. I could feel the weight of his pause the way you feel a term sheet being reconsidered. He asked whether the name was intentional. Whether I knew what document was ratified in 1789. Whether I was aware of what Article I, Section 9 prohibits. I told him the name was aspirational. I did not break eye contact. The glass was still. He wrote a $40 million check. My mother calls me on Sundays. Every Sunday. She's seventy-three. She lives in Connecticut. She asks how the fund is doing. I tell her the number. She says: "Is it legal?" Every Sunday. The same question. "Is it legal, sweetheart?" I tell her yes. Every Sunday. The same answer. Because it is. Because legality is a function of what's written and what's written was written by men who didn't imagine us. They imagined the Carlyle Group. They wrote rules for people who hire former presidents. They didn't write rules for sons. She asks because she watches the news. She sees the articles. She reads "new Carlyle Group" and she doesn't understand that it's a compliment. She hears the number — $3.5 billion — and she asks whether her son is a good person. I tell her yes to that too. Because I am. I am a good person who identified a structural opportunity that exists because the Constitution has a blind spot the width of one generation. A gap. I am standing in it. Here is what he understood: the fund was named 1789 before I arrived. The name was patriotic branding. A founding-year reference. An aesthetic choice. After I joined, the name became a disclosure. Article I, Section 9 of the document ratified in that year says no person holding office shall accept any emolument from any foreign state. My father holds office. Our LPs include sovereign wealth funds. The fund named after the year they wrote the prohibition IS the prohibition being violated. The name does not conceal the mechanism. The name IS the mechanism. It always was. The returns are in the name. We are raising Fund II. $5 billion target. Oversubscribed. The LPs include defense contractors, sovereign wealth, technology founders, and three categories of investor I will not describe because describing them would require a registration under FARA and I am philosophically opposed to paperwork. The Foreign Agents Registration Act requires disclosure when you act on behalf of a foreign principal. Our LP agreements are structured such that I do not act on behalf of anyone. I act on behalf of returns. Returns have no nationality. Here is the thing about returns. My personal return last year was 312%. My father's approval rating was 48%. I have noticed the correlation is inverse. The lower the approval, the more aggressively he governs by executive order. The more executive orders, the more our portfolio companies benefit. The worse things get for voters, the better things get for our LPs. Our beta is negative to his approval rating. If I could short his popularity I would. Unpopularity is not a political risk. It is our alpha. Other funds hedge against political instability. We are long political instability. We are the longest position in the market. A burning house is a liability if you live in it. We live next door and sell fire insurance. I did not choose the name 1789 Capital. Omeed chose it. He chose it in 2023, a year before I joined. It was a founding-year reference. Patriotic branding. "The year America became a constitutional republic." Pitch-deck language. LP-meeting language. The language of men who frame extraction as heritage. After I joined, the name became something else. The year they wrote the clause. The year they put the prohibition on paper. The year they said: this thing we are doing, converting public office into private wealth, this is the thing that cannot happen. The fund was named after a year. The year contained a clause. The clause described a crime. The crime is our business model. And the name has been on every pitch deck, every term sheet, every LP letter, every quarterly report for twelve months. In plain sight. In twelve-point font. On the first page. The returns are in the name. Our portfolio touches your life in ways you will not trace back to us. The search engine you used this morning. The satellite connecting your cousin's internet. The defense system keeping your airspace clear. You Googled us on a portfolio company. Nobody read the Constitution.

@theguardrailguy @Duderichy @RepSamGraves You taught me something I never knew or thought about. Godspeed.

@Duderichy Thanks for sharing my post. It means so much to me personally and every viewer and subscriber helps me reach more and more people. We just got 8.25 pages in the BUILD AMERICA 250 ACT from @RepSamGraves

for those who don’t know, this guy lost his child because of a faultily installed guardrail and now goes around inspecting guardrails