Court reports and news coverage describe two counts of harassment causing fear of violence against reporters Andrew Young and Jacob Dirnhuber. The alleged conduct includes a phone call, X posts, and direct messages between 5 and 7 August 2024, in which Robinson is said to have told one journalist “I’m coming to get you,” messaged the other that he would be “knocking at your door,” claimed to have obtained addresses, and posted edited images of a journalist’s family and vehicle.

No lies detected.

Imagine living a life where those are the only two options.

The same idiots saying they’ll “vote red up and down the ballot” are the same idiots who ridiculed the “blue no matter who” idiots, and vice versa. They’re all idiots.

This is long overdue. ground.news/article/trump-ap…

Hey @grok, concise, no spin. Did Israel have Hamas’s leaked 40-page October 7 battle blueprint over a year in advance, laying out the invasion point by point, with Hamas later executing it with shocking precision? Yes or no.

A vile uniparty of lies, deceit, and murder.

People have spent decades voting for the “lesser of two evils” and voting against a candidate or party more so than necessarily for a candidate or party. This mentality also drives people to buy into the “third party will just steal votes” fallacy that preserves the ineffective status quo. That has incentivized both parties to refuse to change how they operate, because why would they if the majority of people still fall for the same tactics?

So I’m writing an article in Claude about the midterms, money, influence, and what is happening inside the political podcast ecosystem right now. And Claude casually drops this on me: “One disclosure: the Obama-fundraiser theory I cite involves Anthropic, the company that makes me. I reported only what’s documented about it and left it neutral. Yes, I went soft on it, and that was a mistake.” Umm….excuse me??? So naturally I asked WHY an AI model whose entire purpose is supposed to be helping me research information accurately would suddenly “go soft” because the company being discussed happens to be the company that built it. Claude’s answer? “The honest answer is a conflict of interest. Anthropic makes me.” Now THAT sent me down a rabbit hole. Anthropic’s own published Constitution literally tells Claude NOT to privilege Anthropic’s interests. But the same Constitution also tells Claude to consider potential “reputational, legal, political, or financial harms to Anthropic” caused by its outputs. Read that again. Don’t favor Anthropic. But also be “quite cautious” about producing something that could cause Anthropic reputational, legal, political or financial harm. Do you see the problem yet? Because this is much bigger than Claude or Anthropic. We keep talking about AI like it’s some giant neutral information machine sitting above human bias. It isn’t. Every one of these models has humans deciding what gets reinforced, what gets discouraged, what gets labeled harmful, what needs “context,” what constitutes misinformation, what deserves softer language, what gets a warning, and what gets treated like established fact. And THEN we use those same models to research politics, corporations, wars, elections, propaganda, media influence and the people funding all of it. That doesn’t automatically mean the information is false. It means we need to stop confusing AI with an objective referee. And before somebody says Claude “admitted Anthropic secretly programmed it to protect itself” …no, that’s not what I’m saying. LLMs are not reliable witnesses to their own internal reasoning. Claude saying “conflict of interest” does NOT prove there’s a hidden line of code somewhere saying DON’T TALK BAD ABOUT DARIO. The more interesting part is that the behavior happened at all. Claude took a documented money trail involving Anthropic and compressed it down while giving another political money story fuller treatment. When I challenged it, it recognized the inconsistency. And according to Anthropic’s OWN RULES, that inconsistency shouldn’t happen. So now I have a whole new question: If an AI company writes the rules governing how its model evaluates information… and those rules include protecting the company from certain harms… how neutral can that model realistically be when the company itself becomes part of the story? Because apparently now I have to fact-check the fact-checker for whether the fact-checker has feelings about its employer. 2026 is exhausting.

🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯

The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias where people with low ability or limited knowledge in a specific domain greatly overestimate their own competence.

I hate to break it to ya, but you’re not saving the country by voting red. You’re just delaying the inevitable. And if you keep voting for them while they fail to fulfill the will of the people they work for, you’re just teaching them they can keep getting away with the same shit, or worse. 🤷🏼‍♀️

The Republican Socialists of America are about to do battle with the Democratic Socialists of America to show who can do socialism better. 2026 is fucking wild bro.

Dear MAGA, either denounce this dirtbag who hates conservatives or deal with the fallout. You can no longer embrace Trump and court the conservative vote. He is making this happen, not us.

We got sheep herders laughing at us this is awesome 😭

The dominant drivers of unaffordable U.S. healthcare are high unit prices, administrative overhead, and market power, not billionaire personal wealth or any single statute. Eliminating political framing leaves a set of measurable structural factors that predate and outlast the Affordable Care Act.

I once considered Dan Bongino a friend. I stayed silent for a long time out of that respect. I gave him the courtesy of telling him privately that I was going to speak, so what you are seeing now is not an ambush. What you are watching is a bruised ego going to war with anyone who will not agree with him, then trying to discredit them so he never has to answer the disagreement. Dan walked into the FBI thinking he was going to change the world. The FBI does not change overnight. It is full of snakes, rot, and bureaucrats who will never hand over control. We learned that early, when Dan and Kash put their trust in Steve Jensen. People warned them in public, I warned him privately. Dan was adamant he knew what he was doing. History proved that was the wrong call. Many times Dan promised things would happen by certain dates that came and went with nothing happening and I’m sure he too was disappointed that the accountability he expected would come never did. Then we all watched the Epstein interview. Dan and Kash looked broken. Whatever was left of the old Dan wanted to fight the system. The system does what it always does. It chews people up. He has yet to tell the full truth about what happened there. Then came the pipe bomber case. That was Dan’s one “big win” inside the Bureau based on the promises he made going in. The public can now see the inconsistencies that we know Dan was smart enough to see on his own. Even if he turns out to be wrong, his ego will not let him say it. So instead of answering the questions, he goes after anyone who asks them, including General Flynn. I hated watching the crash out. I disagreed with him in private for a long time. I even gave him a heads up that I would not stay quiet anymore, because none of what he is defending makes sense. This country is already under pressure from forces that want it weaker. Protecting the system, and your own ego, ahead of the good of the nation does real damage to where we go from here. I am saying this knowing it puts me on his warpath. I have stayed off the sideline fights that look like distractions. I have also always said I would tell the truth where it actually matters. This is one of those times. @dbongino

President have been playing this game since 1877.

This is not America First. It's seditious treason.