The Intermittent Missive – Antifa, Democrats, and Islamic Takeovers, OH MY
Portland Antifa Operatives Planning Coordinated Action to Take Down Federal Aircraft
https://www.westernjournal.
Dominion Voting Bought Out, Renamed in Effort to Restore Trust to Vulnerable Electronic Voting Systems
https://www.westernjournal.
will that restore any faith the public lost after 2020? – does this really change anything?
Melania Trumpâs âMELANIAâ Documentary from Amazon MGM Studios Set for January 30 Release
https://americanjournaldaily.
Florida Woman Disarms Hostage-Holding Suspect Thanks to Gun of Her Own
https://bearingarms.com/
Democrat Party Set TO PARTY at Luxury Spa After Voting to Shutdown the Govt. 8 TIMES
https://twitchy.com/samj/2025/
Islamic takeover of Texas? They donât want you to see this
https://www.theblaze.com/
MEMO TO TRUMP: DONâT STOP – Is the NYT on my side?
https://anncoulter.substack.
How do you say Schadenfreude in Mexicano?
https://miguelgg.substack.com/
more here –Â https://bayourenaissanceman.
apparent original article –Â https://ace.mu.nu/archives/
OK, make up your mind. – Is it about all rights or only some of them?
https://miguelgg.substack.com/
Hell if anything, what they stand for is reason enough why you should have guns and a lot of loaded magazines.
I need to be callous here.
https://miguelgg.substack.com/
And that explains cats
https://miguelgg.substack.com/
embedded video – 00:00:09 – Even the Missus who is a Feline Fan found the video both funny and explanatory.
Neighbor Glows
https://areaocho.com/neighbor-
Top immigration official warns naturalization fraudsters could be stripped of citizenship
https://justthenews.com/
How Systems Collapse
https://gellerreport.com/2025/
âWhen merit is replaced with ideology, fires rage unchecked, killers walk free, and fragile systems collapseâleaving lives and cities in ruin.â
HAMAS DOCUMENT REVEALS WAR PLAN FOR 10/7: Meticulous Planning of Wholesale Slaughter, Mass Rape, Mutilation, Crush Heads, Burn Neighborhoods
https://gellerreport.com/2025/
Newly Empowered Hamas Conducting Mass Executions As it Re-Seizes Power in Gaza
https://gellerreport.com/2025/
Zohran Mamdani Took Thousands in Illegal Foreign Donations
https://gellerreport.com/2025/
How to Attend a âNo Kingsâ Rally Saturday
https://townhall.com/
(Don’t Do: stupid sh*t, with stupid people, in stupid places, at stupid times. – just saying – jlr)
RE-post of a past post
Bedlam, Pending
https://www.zerohedge.com/
Welcome to the TDS Zone
Unbelievable: Antony Blinken Gives Biden Credit for Gaza Deal, and It Gets Worse From There
https://redstate.com/bonchie/
The Weekly Feast – Brisket
I have a number of Jewish friends, and I hear about brisket all the time. There was the running joke about Howard’s mother’s brisket in The Big Bang Theory. Brisket is one of those cuts of meat that is just scrumptious, if cooked right. So how do you cook it? It depends a lot on the cut you’re using. I’m going for slow cooked brisket at this point in my cooking career, because I love the convenience of the slow cooker (though I did cook this one in the oven). It’s a bit pricey (our 3lb brisket cost about $21), but it’s totally worth it. Also, it makes your whole house smell like heaven.
Ingredients:
- 3 lbs untrimmed flat-cut beef brisket
- 1/2 tbsp salt, plus more to taste
- 1 tsp freshly ground black pepper, plus more to taste
- 3 tbsp oil (olive or vegetable)
- 2 medium yellow onions, sliced
- 4 celery stalks, cut into 2-inch pieces, leaves coarsely chopped
- 6 garlic cloves, smashed
- 2 cups red wine (such as Merlot or Pinot Noir)
- 28 oz canned crushed tomatoes
- 1/4 cup ketchup
- 2 tbsp brown sugar
- 1 tsp dried thyme OR several sprigs of fresh thyme
- 3 bay leaves
- 4 medium carrots, halved lengthwise and cut on a bias into 2-inch pieces
Preheat the oven to 325°F.
Season the brisket with most of the salt and pepper. Heat the oil in a large dutch oven over medium-high heat. Brown the brisket, turning occasionally, until browned on all sides, 10 to 12 minutes. Transfer to a plate.
Place the onions, celery, and garlic in the pot, tossing it in the residual fat. Season with the remaining salt and pepper. Cook, stirring occasionally, until the onions are soft and translucent, about 5 minutes.
Add the wine, tomatoes, ketchup, brown sugar, thyme, and bay leaves, and stir to combine. Nestle the brisket down into the liquid, fat side up. You may need to move some of the onion mix to get it low enough. Most of the brisket should be covered with liquid, but it’s okay if the fat is out. Cover the pot and cook in the oven until the meat is fork-tender, about 3 hours.
Uncover the pot and add the carrots around the brisket. Cook, uncovered, until the carrots are tender (not soft) and the top of brisket is browned and crisp, 35 to 45 minutes.
Remove the brisket from the pot and let it rest while you make the sauce. Use a spoon to skim fat from the surface of the braising liquid and discard. Heat over medium-high heat and cook until the liquid is thickened to a sauce-like consistency, 5 to 10 minutes. Remove the thyme sprigs and bay leaves. Taste and season with salt and pepper as needed. When the sauce is mostly ready, cut up the brisket by slicing it against the grain. Place the sliced brisket on a deep serving platter. Pour the sauce over the brisket and serve!
For sides, you need to keep in mind that Jewish folk don’t mix dairy and meat. If you don’t care, feel free to go with whatever sides you like, but if you want to enjoy the full Jewish brisket experience, try some baked sweet potato drizzled with olive oil, a cabbage and apple slaw for a tart finish, or some hot cornbread.
Wolford v. Lopez, the assumed schedule
Wolford is in an interlocutory state. They are appealing a preliminary injunction.
The purpose of the trial court is to gather evidence, hear legal arguments, and then decide based on evidence and the legal standing.
What the Supreme Court has said is that Second Amendment challenges do not need evidence. They are legal decisions, decided by the courts.
The law says “x”. The challenger says the plain text of the Second Amendment covers the conduct regulated by the law. The burden shifts to the state to show that the current law is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearms regulation.
There is no evidence to present. The court decides if the plain text covers the conduct. The court decides if the government has proven a history of firearms regulation that matches the current law. If the state fails to meet its burden, then the law is ruled unconstitional.
If the state wishes to bring in expert testimony regarding this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation, that expert must be a lawyer. Not only must they be a lawyer, they must be part of the case.
Friends of the court can express their opinion, but the only place those opinions have any weight is if they are legal arguments regarding regulations from the time of the founding or somehow relevant to finding that the conduct is not covered by the Second Amendment.
At this point, everybody in Wolford has agreed the plain text of the Second Amendment is implicated. The state can present their arguments to the Supreme Court just as easily as to the trial court. There is no value the trial court will add to the analysis the Supreme Court will do.
Which leads us to, when will we hear back from the Supreme Court?
Cert was granted on October 3, 2025. Per rule 25 of the Supreme Court, the Petitioner (Plaintiff) must have their briefing in within 45 days. November 17, 2025. It is unlikely that this date will be pushed. Amici briefs supporting the Petitioner are due 7 days after.
The Respondent’s (defendant’s) brief is due 30 days after that, on December 17th. Again, Amici briefs the Respondent or neither are due 7 days after.
The Petitioner gets to reply to the Respondent’s brief. That is due 30 days after the respondent dockets their brief, putting us at January 10, 2026.
If everything goes as scheduled, oral arguments will be heard in February, with the opinion issuing in May.
I expect we will see at least one other Second Amendment case this term. If the Court is looking at Wolford to address sensitive places, then there will be no other sensitive places challenges heard.
That leaves a case dealing on what “arms” means. When that case is heard, they will address the proper usage of the “in common use for lawful purposes” shortcut to a Second Amendment win.
Win the War, Not Just a Battle
Winning the Battle
There are too many historical situations where a combatant won a battle, but it cost them the war. Little Big Horn comes to mind, though I don’t know enough to say if it is a true or good example.
The cost of winning might come with excessive loss of resources. A Pyrrhic victory.
The anti-gun people understand this. They are sometimes willing to lose a battle to maintain battlefield dominance. In N.Y.S.R. & P.A. v. New York City the city and state fought tooth and nail. They didn’t stop fighting. We lost in the district court. We lost in the Circuit Court. We appealed to the Supreme Court, and we were granted cert.
The anti-gunners looked at this and proceeded to remove the challenged regulations for New York City gun owners. The state of New York passed a law saying that New York City could never do it again. The state then told the Supreme Court the case was moot. The case was never heard. It died.
We “won” the battle; the anti-gunners won that war.
Rahimi
The anti-gun Biden administration saw a slate of cases moving towards the Supreme Court challenging §922(g)(8), Domestic Violence Restraining Order in Possession. The best case for us was the Range case. The worst for us was the Rahimi case.
Range was a case about a man who failed to claim income from his lawn care side hustle while he was receiving aid from the state. He was charged with defrauding the government. This was a felony. He pleaded guilty. He served no time. He was told to go forth and sin no more. And he kept his nose clean.
As a convicted felon, he is prohibited from possessing firearms. He went to court to get his rights back. His case would have been a wonderful opportunity to show that non-violent felons, under the 1968 GCA, cannot be prohibited from possessing firearms.
Rahimi, on the other hand, was a violent criminal. Witnesses saw him slam his girlfriend’s head into the car. He fired his gun at witnesses. He was arrested and was in prison for multiple felonies as well as being subject to a DVR while in possession.
After Bruen was decided, the Fifth Circuit court pulled the Rahimi case back after issuing their opinion. In their second opinion, they applied Bruen faithfully and declared §922(g)(8) unconstitutional.
Merrick Garland pushed Rahimi to the front of the line, and it was heard by the Supreme Court, which issued their opinion. Rahimi is a bad man. He needs to be in prison. He is precisely the sort of person that should not have access to arms.
This means that there are bad facts. Bad facts make for bad law. In this case we ended up with an opinion that was more easily twisted by inferior courts.
Garland v. Bondi
When Rahimi was requesting cert, the Garland-controlled DOJ pushed the Supreme Court to take the case. When the DOJ asks the Court to take a case, they are more likely to take the case requested by the DOJ than other similar cases. We did not want this to happen. Yes, we wanted the Court to hear a 2A case. This was not the one we wanted in front of the Supreme Court.
We are now looking at Rush v. USA. This is another case with bad facts. Mr. Rush is not a good man. He was doing bad things, and FO was applied to him.
He had his license revoked. He drove to his court hearing. He drove away after the court hearing. The cops stopped him to ask what he was doing driving on a revoked license. During the stop they smelled and observed pot. He was arrested. While searching his car, they found an SBR.
We don’t need to go into what he had done to be in court in the first place; needless to say, not a good fact pattern.
We do not want Rush in front of the Supreme Court. In the best of worlds, we are only going to get a lackluster result. In addition, there are other vehicles in the works attacking SBR, Silencers, and SBS remaining inside the NFA.
Damning With Faint Praise
My father explained this to me in terms of how a superior officer might praise a lower ranking member with faint praise. He said nothing that can be challenged, but everybody reading the report will know what is not said.
A pitcher might be praised for how far he can spit his tobacco juice. This likely implies he’s not a good pitcher.
The DOJ must make a good faith effort to explain why cert should be denied. It has to be grounded in legal reasoning. And they do that.
Their motion is darn weak. They rely on regulations from the 19th century. The whitewash Miller‘s findings. In short, it half hearted. But they use it as a method to say:
Some of the questions that petitioner raises may well warrant review in an appropriate case. See Snope v. Brown, 145 S. Ct. 1534, 1534 (2025) (statement of Kavanaugh, J.); id. at 1538-1539 (Thomas, J., dissenting). But this case would be a poor vehicle for addressing those issues. Regardless of how the Court resolves the questions petitioner seeks to litigate, petitionerâs facial challenge to the NFA would fail for the reasons discussed above. See pp. 4-5, supra. This Court does not sit to âdecide abstract questions of law * * * which, if decided either way, affect no rightâ of the parties. Supervisors v. Stanley, 105 U.S. 305, 311 (1882). Other types of casesâfor instance, cases involving state laws banning AR-15 rifles, see Snope, 145 S. Ct. at 1534 (statement of Kavanaugh, J.)âwould provide better vehicles for clarifying the appropriate framework for discerning what types of arms the Second Amendment protects.
— Rush v. USA, DOJ Response, SCOTUS 24-1259
— Rush v. USA, DOJ Response, SCOTUS 24-1259
This is on point. It is a statement that the DOJ wants the Supreme Court to hear a 2A case, just not this one.
Final Note
As we have discussed, a circuit split is useful for getting the Supreme Court to grant cert. Getting a circuit split on anti-gun laws is very difficult because anti-gun states passing infringements exist within anti-gun inferior courts. The Ninth Circuit is many to zero in favor of California infringements.
The Seventh is nearly as bad. So are the Second, Fourth, Third, and First circuits. Well, sort of.
The Third Circuit, as of Friday, was 7-6 Republican appointees. In an upcoming en banc hearing, they will be 8-6. The problem is that if one of those Republican appointed judges flips to the side of infringement, we will lose in the Third Circuit, again.
On Friday, the Senate confirmed Professor Jennifer Lee Mascott to the Third Circuit. If President Trump signs the confirmation, and she is sworn in by a Supreme Court Justice by the morning of the 15th, she will sit and hear Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs v. Platkin (consolidated with Firearms Policy Coalition v. Platkin, Docket Nos. 24-2002 and 24-2003).
With Judge Mascott on the Third Circuit for this hearing, there will be a 10-6 balance. Even if we were to lose one judge to the dark side, we still win the case.
If we win in the Third Circuit, we will have the circuit split on “Assault Weapons” bans.
Conclusion
All is not as it seems on the surface. You have to look beyond what we are seeing and look to the future. Pam Bondi and Trump are good for the Second Amendment. If it looks like they are not, wait a minute. Take a deep breath and figure out what else is going on.
Reese v. Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms & Explosives, Update
Yeah, it really was the judge being a clown. The state did not ask for membership lists.
On Friday the parties, the state, and the plaintiffs filed a joint motion to amend the final judgement.
- The Courtâs Judgment compels Plaintiffs to disclose their membership as of November 6, 2020, to the Government by October 28, 2025.
- The Government, as a general policy, does not compel disclosure of the identity of members of private organizations, and the Government did not seek to do so here.
- Plaintiffs assert that the Judgmentâs order compelling them to disclose their membership violates the First Amendment and would subject them to irreparable harm. See, e.g. Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta, 594 U.S. 595, 606 (2021).
- To be clear, Plaintiffs do not concede that altering the Judgment in this way would make its scope appropriate, and Plaintiffs retain their right to challenge all aspects of the Judgment on appeal. However, in the absence of the proposed amendment, Plaintiffs face an imminent deadline compelling the disclosure of their membership information.
- To avoid the need for Plaintiffs to file an emergency motion to stay the disclosure deadline, the Parties respectfully request that the Court act on this motion by October 14, 2025.
Short translation, the state is still attempting to make a facial challenge judgement into an as-applied judgement, but even the government understands that demanding membership lists is verboten.
The Intermittent Missive – So Much News
October 9, 2025:
Media Smears Stay-At-Home Moms as Nazis
https://amac.us/newsline/
As birth rates continue to plummet and fewer young people are getting married, the liberal media is doing everything it can to accelerate those alarming trends by smearing women who embrace traditional family life as complicit pawns in an imagined fascist takeover of America. The Guardianâs Adrienne Matei, who claimed in a recent article that so-called âtradwivesâ are echoing Nazi propaganda and doing the bidding of President Donald Trumpâs supposedly authoritarian regime.
50% of Americans Considering Buying Guns Out of Mass Shooting Concerns
https://bearingarms.com/
(the devil is in the details – look at the sample size – jlr)
Nancy Pelosi has unbelievable response to Democrat candidate who issued death wish against Republican
https://www.theblaze.com/news/
Nationwide: Muslims and Leftists Stage Violent Riots Celebrating the Mass Slaughter of Jews on October 7th, Police Hospitalized
https://gellerreport.com/2025/
After what weâve seen these past two years, perhaps itâs not a huge surprise. But decent Americans ought to be deeply disturbed ⊠and worried.
LOTS of videos
Nick Freitas
https://www.facebook.com/reel/
https://www.facebook.com/reel/
Prepping – Logic, Part 2
Sorry this one took a couple of weeks. It’s been busy here. Things are starting to settle down, though. Of course, that also means it’s almost National Novel Writing Month, and I’m going to be writing a flurry of words (50,000+ in 30 days), but I’m not going to think about that for a bit. LOL… We left off Heinlein’s list about here:
Take orders. You need to be able to take orders because no matter how “high up” you are on any particular totem pole, at some point you’re going to run into someone who’s higher than you. This is because we’re not ever going to be experts at everything. We each spend time with people who are better at something than we are, and when those people are in charge, you must be able to do what you’re told. But as any American soldier will tell you, it isn’t that simple (even though it sort of is). Per the Uniform Code of Military Justice, soldiers are only required to obey LAWFUL orders. Our soldiers are given more latitude as to what’s lawful and what’s not, while still being held to an extremely high standard (and getting higher, thanks Pete!). All of our soldiers are expected to be thinking people. Blind adherence is not useful. But the ability to continue to take orders, even when things are tough, even when you’re shitting your pants, even when you’re scared, is absolutely necessary. That’s also true of those of us NOT soldiers, though perhaps to a slightly lower level. As non-combatants, even if we end up as guerrilla fighters, we just need to be able to follow orders at a competent level. You need to recognize when someone knows more than you do, and be able to take a back-seat for a bit.
Give orders. There will be a moment when YOU are the expert, the leader, the person in charge. It might be on purpose, and it might be by accident, but regardless, you must be prepared to give orders. More than that, you may have to give orders that you know damn well will end up with someone hurt (physically or emotionally), or worse, dead. You need to be prepared for whatever outcome happens when you give those orders. You have to be ready to give them decisively, with authority, and with strength of belief.
Cooperate. That’s a tough one, hm? Yes, you might have to cooperate with people who don’t share your world view. You might have to work with liberals and Democrats. But it CAN be done. And you must know both how to, and when to. Sometimes, it’s just going to be an easy choice. Groups often have better survivability options than singletons. It’s a skill we’re horribly underdeveloped in, in my very strong opinion. When was the last time you reached out to someone you disagree with, to cooperate? Maybe it’s time. Practice, because it’s important. And just in case someone wants to leap to conclusions, no, this doesn’t mean you have to “give in and open the government” or anything like that. I’m talking small scale here. Neighbors. Friends of friends. Local government maybe.
Friday Feedback
They Can’t All Be Lieing?
My new car audio console uses Android Auto. It will provide a choice of podcasts to listen to. It can also play music, which I prefer, but today I pushed the button for news.
Two minutes of advertisements, one minute of news from Fox. Two minutes of advertisements, five minutes of news from some unknown source. Two minutes of advertisements, ten minutes of news from Routers.
In those ten minutes I did not detect a single lie. What I did hear was a narrative created by what wasn’t said and what was reported.
The story was about Trump calling for J.B. Pritzker and Brandon Johnson to be put in jail. They choose to leave off why he wanted them to be put in jail. They left it hanging as if it was for personal reasons. They then added another truthful fact. Neither man has been charged with any criminal act.
The narrative was that Trump is threatening his political opponents with jail time, even though they have not done anything wrong.
Not All Power Supplies Are Equal
One of the nodes in my Ceph cluster died, taking three OSDs with it. Two of the drives were moved to a different node, and the cluster rebalanced.
Because I’m cheap, I didn’t toss the dead node. Instead I stripped it out of its case, saved the case fan, power supply, and the motherboard, still with its memory and NVMe card.
Saving this board turned out to be useful. When I found that the CPU that I had purchased for the replacement node didn’t have integrated graphics, leaving the new node totally headless, I was able to use that old board to install an OS to the NVMe card and then move it to the new node.
When I put the NIC into the new node and buttoned it all up, I thought it would be fine. When I attempted to power it up, it failed to start.
Pulling the NIC out allowed it to boot.
I tossed the “bad” NIC. Went back to check things out and to move forward with the new node. Installing another NIC caused the same failure.
Back to that singleton motherboard with a desktop power supply powering it. No problem running with any of the NICs. As an aside, did you know you can hotwire a computer? I was accused of hot-wiring a computer the other day because I used a jumper to emulate the power switch on the case.
Overall, it turned out that the power supply wasn’t supplying good power. I replaced it with a new power supply, and that headless node is busy rebalancing the Ceph cluster. And I found that I really like modular power supplies. The ability to choose which cables you want makes the wiring so much easier and cleaner.
Do You Feel The Need For Screwing?
I have a manual ratcheting screwdriver that I really like. It is a Stanley FatMax with an integrated bit holder and good ergonomics. It was my go to when I needed to drive screws.
If I need to drive many screws, I use my cordless drill. The problem with that is that it is a pain switching between drill bits and driver bits. It is also bulky and a bit heavy. Finally, it doesn’t always have a light touch.
One of the YouTube videos I was watching had a powered screwdriver. I decided to try one. I purchased the SKIL one from Amazon for around $30.
This was well worth the dollars just for the Ceph node build. The process of building out that node required me handling 30 some screws. Most were removed and reinstalled multiple times.
The amount of time and wrist ache this one tool saved me was worth it. I have a couple of other tasks coming up and this tool will be in my pocket for the job.
It’s In An Interlocutory State?
When they say that nobody knows what the Supreme Court will do, they are not joking. There are people with much more experience than I who have spent a lifetime trying to predict what the Supreme Court will do. They get it right about 50% of the time (Joke).
There are some things we do know. Having a circuit split on a question increases the likelihood of a case being heard. Its being a novel question also increases the likelihood. The Court doesn’t like to relitigate the same question. Having many cases with the same question will also increase the likelihood.
Other things we know are that cases that are repeats don’t get heard, or they might just get a GVR. And cases that are in an interlocutory state are not heard. The Court does not want to hear cases until the case has been fully litigated in the inferior courts.
Wolford v. Lopez was granted cert, even though it is in an interlocutory state.
The Court has also agreed to hear Trump v. Cook, 25A312 (SCOTUS), which is also in an interlocutory state.
Things, they are a-changing.
Cloud Init
This is a game changer for me, if I can get it all to work. The ability to put a thumb drive into a new node, power it on, and end up with a full install with no action on my part is wonderful!
I’m looking at setting up a server to do the full configuration from a network fetch instead of from the NoCloud datasource.
He Deployed the National Guard!
I worry about government overreach. Having the president deploy the National Guard to cities to perform police functions worries me.
What will the Democrats do when they are back in power? Will I see troops in my small town demanding to see my papers?
Then I remember the beautiful images of our troops guarding a chain-link fence surrounding buildings in D.C. and go, yeah, already done that.
Keep your head on a swivel, watch your six, stay strapped.
Question of the week?
When you take a long, hard, honest look at what the current administration is doing, the powers they are flexing, which of those powers do you think will be used against us when the Democrats next take power?
Just examine J6 vs BLM mobs in the same time frame to see what I’m talking about.