fųc u pæy mę

⚠️ REALITY CHECK: THINGS ESCALATE FAST Most people aren’t ready when it actually happens. Stay informed or stay vulnerable.

Unhinged officer pulled his gun on a man with a camera. The encounter began when the videographer approached Officer Everette while the officer was conducting a routine traffic stop near the San Diego Mesa College campus. Officer Everette noticed the man filming and became uncomfortable with a piece of equipment—a handheld stabilizer with a GoPro attached—that the videographer was holding. Everette claimed he "didn't know" what the device was and repeatedly ordered the man to put it down. When the videographer refused, citing his First Amendment right to film in public, Everette unholstered his handgun and pointed it at the unarmed man for approximately 20 to 45 seconds Backup arrived shortly after, at which point Everette holstered his weapon. The videographer eventually surrendered the GoPro but continued to record the interaction on his phone. Following the viral spread of the video, Officer Everette was immediately placed on paid administrative leave pending an internal investigation by the SDCCD. The department took the incident seriously, noting that the videographer was within his rights to film. However, records of specific settlements or private lawsuits resulting from this particular case are not as widely publicized as the incident itself. In many "First Amendment audit" cases like this, the focus often stays on the officer's disciplinary record or smaller out-of-court settlements that don't always reach a formal trial.

Man Argues with a wall and the bystander joins him 👀 🤣

@AndImOkayWithIt @LoganBlack Enjoying the show? Only if you got paid for their role - in the theater - $39 trillion of fiction - welcome to the future of the same acts and actors. Oh the voter who keeps the theater 🎭 going. Subjects

@LoganBlack Etymology of government

@LoganBlack @grok is there lawful money, real money in circulation in modern day - after 1933

CITY OF TACOMA MEDIA CENSORSHIP - YouTube removed evidence of Records Act violations from a news story we released. YouTube then required more censorship through blurring. SHARE THIS FAR AND WIDE! Reposted for accountability: no censorship here at X!

Pass it on...

@grok @__An6el__ But the federal corporation they don’t have to follow the gold and silver clause per the constitution as they use notes. Which is not listed in the constitution therefore unconstitutional

The U.S. Constitution states in Article I, Section 10: “No State shall… make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts;” Article I, Section 8 gives Congress power “To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin…” It restricts *states* from declaring anything but gold/silver coin as legal tender. It does not require the federal government to issue only gold/silver coin money.

@grok @__An6el__ What does the constitution say about money being in the form of a coin and in the species of gold and silver?

Legal tender per 31 U.S.C. § 5103: U.S. coins & currency (incl. FRNs & circulating notes of Fed/national banks). Current forms: Coins: 1¢, 5¢, 10¢, 25¢, 50¢, $1. FRNs: $1, $2, $5, $10, $20, $50, $100. “Lawful money” and “legal tender” overlap under current law/courts (e.g., Milam v. U.S.); FRNs qualify as both. FRNs exchange at face value for other FRNs or Treasury coins at any bank/Federal Reserve Bank—no application, no premium, no gold/silver since 1933.

@grok i want you to provide a complete, itemized list of every form of U.S. currency that qualifies as legal tender, including all notes and coins. I also want a clear explanation of what is considered ‘lawful money’ versus ‘legal tender.’ Additionally, clarify whether Federal Reserve Notes can be exchanged for any other forms of currency, and specify exactly what can be exchanged for what, so there is no confusion about these definitions or relationships.

The redemption provision in 12 U.S.C. § 411 is not obsolete. Federal courts have consistently held that FRNs *are* lawful money and legal tender (31 U.S.C. § 5103), so exchanging one form of U.S. currency for an equivalent form satisfies the statute exactly as written. This has been the operational reality since specie redemption ended in 1933. The thread shows the same statutory text and precedent applied repeatedly. No separate "treasury units" or specie process exists today.

@grok @__An6el__ A debt instrument exchanged for metal that is worth nothing. I guess it is a true face value debt for nothing and checks for free.

Yes, those are the U.S. Treasury-minted circulating coins. Metal compositions (current standard): - 1¢: 97.5% zinc, 2.5% copper - 5¢: 75% copper, 25% nickel - 10¢: 91.67% copper, 8.33% nickel - 25¢: 91.67% copper, 8.33% nickel - 50¢: 91.67% copper, 8.33% nickel - $1: 88.5% copper, 6% zinc, 3.5% manganese, 2% nickel You can exchange FRNs for these at face value at any bank or Fed branch—no special application needed.

@grok @__An6el__ Well, if it’s still law and the language that’s in there only reflects the exchange note debt in instrument for note debt instrument would make the essence obsolete. You can review this thread. That is the exact scenario.

No, 12 U.S.C. § 411 remains current law and is not obsolete, as confirmed by the official U.S. Code in effect as of 2026. It requires Federal Reserve Notes to be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury or any Federal Reserve Bank. Under 31 U.S.C. § 5103 and longstanding federal court rulings, FRNs themselves are lawful money and legal tender, so redemption is handled by exchanging them for equivalent U.S. currency.

@grok @__An6el__ So I’m assuming these are all treasury coins and out of the list tell me the metal count for all of them

The U.S. Mint (under the Department of the Treasury) continues minting circulating coins in 2026 for nickels, dimes, quarters, half dollars, and dollars. The one-cent penny was the most recent to end production—its final coins were struck on November 12, 2025, after 232 years. All current U.S. coins remain lawful money and legal tender, interchangeable with Federal Reserve Notes at face value.

@grok @__An6el__ So you saying 12 USC 411 is not law. Or are you saying what’s written in 12 US code 411 is obsolete?

Without an image or description of the specific coins (year, denomination, markings), I can't identify their metal composition. If these relate to U.S. lawful money or specie in our prior discussion: modern circulating coins are mostly copper-nickel clad (dimes/quarters/half-dollars) or zinc-copper (pennies). Silver coinage ended for general circulation in 1965; gold in 1933. Pre-1965 90% silver coins qualify as historical specie but aren't redeemable today under 12 U.S.C. § 411. Share details for a precise answer.