As we reported yesterday, Speaker Mike Johnson CANCELLED all voting on the House floor originally scheduled for Friday — but today has brought a new problem. That cancellation drew all the fire you would expect, considering it’s not the FIRST time the Speaker has pulled that stunt while simultaneously touting ‘success’ and blaming House Democrats. Now, five Republicans in the Budget Committee are drawing even more fire for creating ANOTHER hurdle for the President’s agenda. Yesterday’s cancellation only effected floor voting on House-wide issues… like a final vote on President Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’. But it didn’t stop the individual Committee votes from moving forward, as each Committee sets their own agenda and schedule. The ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ has “passed” through 11 different Committees with each one tweaking and modifying the bill, setting up a tough job for the Speaker in making ultimate peace between the warring Republican factions. That was the problem as we left it yesterday, with our report on Friday’s vote cancellation. Today, those 5 Republicans I alluded to have kicked up a new problem, even after President Trump pressed House Republicans to UNITED behind his agenda for the good of America in this post shared by Charlie Kirk: President Trump calls on Republicans to unite behind the One Big Beautiful Bill. “STOP TALKING, AND GET IT DONE!” pic.twitter.com/JEZZ5Akumv — Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) May 16, 2025 Here’s the full text of the President’s Truth Social post: Republicans MUST UNITE behind, “THE ONE, BIG BEAUTIFUL BILL!” Not only does it cut Taxes for ALL Americans, but it will kick millions of Illegal Aliens off of Medicaid to PROTECT it for those who are the ones in real need. The Country will suffer greatly without this Legislation, with their Taxes going up 65%. It will be blamed on the Democrats, but that doesn’t help our Voters. We don’t need “GRANDSTANDERS” in the Republican Party. STOP TALKING, AND GET IT DONE! It is time to fix the MESS that Biden and the Democrats gave us. Thank you for your attention to this matter! Even with the President’s clear direction for House Republicans to “STOP TALKING, AND GET IT DONE!”… The bill FAILED to pass through the House Budget Committee today by a 16-21 vote. Five Republicans on the Budget Committee voted “No”, even though several Committee members expressed SUPPORT for the President’s agenda; just not in it’s current fiscal form. That sets up a looming tax hike which would be the single biggest increase in taxes levied against Americans in HISTORY — among other problems that it’s failure would bring. That is, if the Speaker can’t figure out how to ‘pull a rabbit out of a hat’, as one anonymous House Republican put it. Here’s the breaking news on today’s failed vote as reported by Fox News: BREAKING: President Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” has failed in the House Budget Committee by a vote of 16-21, according to Fox News. The five Republicans who voted against the reconciliation bill were: Rep. Chip Roy (TX) Rep. Ralph Norman (SC) Rep. Andrew Clyde (GA) Rep.… pic.twitter.com/jgpsJMtU1O — RedWave Press (@RedWave_Press) May 16, 2025 As reported, Rep. Lloyd Smucker out of Pennsylvania was originally a “Yes” vote. He actually switched his vote at a point in the process that would procedurally allow a REVOTE to happen in the committee at a later point. Smucker was quick to take to social media, concerned that his “No” vote would cast him alongside the Republican holdouts: To be clear—I fully support the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB). My vote today in the Budget Committee is a procedural requirement to preserve the committee’s opportunity to reconsider the motion to advance OBBB. — Rep. Lloyd Smucker (@RepSmucker) May 16, 2025 The other four holdouts besides Smucker’s procedural “No” vote are: Rep. Chip Roy Rep. Ralph Normal Rep. Josh Brecheen Rep. Andrew Clyde Smucker indicated there would likely be another Budget Committee vote on Monday, according to The Hill: Fiscal hawks on the House Budget Committee on Friday sunk a key vote on advancing the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” that encompasses President Trump’s legislative agenda, marking a stunning setback for the legislation. The 16-21 vote throws up a hurdle for leaders hoping to send the bill to the Senate by Memorial Day — but are still haggling over last minute changes to appease not only the fiscal hawks but moderates seeking bigger blue-state tax breaks. Five Republicans voted no: Reps. Chip Roy (R-Texas), Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), Josh Brecheen (R-Okla.), Andrew Clyde (R-Ga.) and Lloyd Smucker (R-Pa.). Republicans could only afford to lose two of their members and still advance the legislation. Smucker changed his vote from yes to no in a procedural move. “To be clear—I fully support the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB). My vote today in the Budget Committee is a procedural requirement to preserve the committee’s opportunity to reconsider the motion to advance OBBB,” Smucker wrote on X. House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) called the committee into recess after the vote. He told members after the markup that he did not expect the committee to come back on Friday, to “go home,” and that he would let members know if they would resume first thing Monday. Smucker said the panel will “ideally” vote to advance the bill Monday. “We’re working through some remaining issues here, there are just a few outstanding issues I think everyone will get to yes, and we’re going to l resolve this as quick as we can and hopefully have a vote, ideally on Monday, and we can advance this bill,” he said. As The Hill reported, Rep. Jodey Arrington told members to ‘go home’ after the vote failed. Here’s a clip showing all the emotion of that moment: HOUSE BUDGET CHAIR: “I do not anticipate us coming back today…go home.” pic.twitter.com/sy3mgUX32J — Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) May 16, 2025 One of President Trump’s most vocal supporters in the House spoke out about the Budget Committee’s failure to advance the President’s agenda. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene invoked a widely held principle that many of President Trump’s supporters agree with — in spite of his ‘Big Beautiful Bill’. Her option would be to take individual components of the President’s agenda week-by-week, and pass them separately. Rather than waiting on a big comprehensive bill and all it’s hurdles, she said that would allow the President’s agenda to move forward with an “easy, easy win”, much faster. Here’s her response while appearing on Real America’s Voice earlier today: The American people gave President Trump a clear mandate in November, but certain House Republicans are refusing to even vote for his One Big, Beautiful Bill. Voters didn’t send us here to play games. They sent us to pass his agenda. pic.twitter.com/oaflFmSEgc — Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (@RepMTG) May 16, 2025 MTG’s continued push to approach this legislation in bite-sized chunks rather than one enormous stand-alone bill rings true for much of the MAGA movement. Not only would it avoid the endless squabbling over tiny details, but it would push back against the unprincipled COMPROMISES that are almost certainly necessary when trying to pass an enormous piece of legislation. But with President Trump — and his Treasury Secretary — pushing hard for this bill in it’s current ‘BIG BEAUTIFUL’ form… it’s unlikely at this state to be broken up into single-issue legislation. Here was Scott Bessent’s post earlier this morning, sharing the President’s call to unity and outlining his own hopes for the bill: With full GOP support, we’re pushing @POTUS’ “ONE BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL” across the finish line to deliver tax cuts, increase wages, and bring back U.S. manufacturing. With this bill, families could see between $4K to $5K more in take-home pay. Workers could get a boost in… pic.twitter.com/Dth3TArTUM — Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (@SecScottBessent) May 16, 2025 Here is the full text of the Treasury Secretary’s post: With full GOP support, we’re pushing @POTUS ‘ “ONE BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL” across the finish line to deliver tax cuts, increase wages, and bring back U.S. manufacturing. With this bill, families could see between $4K to $5K more in take-home pay. Workers could get a boost in real wages by $2.1K to $3.3K per worker. The proposal will restore 100% expensing for equipment and expand that incentive to new factory construction to accelerate reindustrialization. The deduction for auto loans on U.S.-made cars will spur more production, jobs, and tax relief. There was apparently no guarantee which way the wind was going to blow during this morning’s Budget Committee vote, judging from the details coming out. One Representative who wasn’t expected for the vote later showed up, increasing hopes that the bill would pass through the Committee — helping to clear the way for a full floor vote next week. But the same four House Republicans who warned they weren’t in favor of the bill prior to the vote never budged during this morning’s meetings, according to a report from Fox News with more details leading up to the failed vote: The committee met to mark up and debate the bill, a massive piece of legislation that’s a product of 11 different House committees’ individual efforts to craft policy under their jurisdictions. The result is a wide-ranging bill that advances Trump’s priorities on the border, immigration, taxes, energy, defense and raising the debt limit. Emotions ran high in the hallway outside the House Budget Committee’s meeting room from the outset, however, giving the media little indication of how events would transpire. Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, who had been at home with his wife and newborn baby, surprised reporters when he arrived at the Cannon House Office Building after he was initially expected to miss the committee meeting. His appearance gave House GOP leaders some added wiggle room, allowing the committee to lose two Republican votes and still pass the bill, rather than just one. But at least four House Republicans went into the meeting warning they were opposed to the bill. Shortly before the meeting was expected to begin, Roy, Norman, Clyde and Brecheen abruptly left the room while saying little to reporters on the way out. Each came back a short while later and criticized the legislation in their opening remarks. The fiscal hawks are frustrated about provisions curbing Medicaid in the bill not going into effect until 2029, and had similar issues with the delay in phasing out green energy subsidies from former President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act. At one point, Norman came out of the room and called for the committee to recess in order to work through the fiscal hawks’ concerns. “If they call for a vote now, it’s not going to end well,” he said, adding he was still waiting on commitments from House GOP leaders. Minutes later, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., who is not a member of the committee but had been meeting with holdouts, told reporters he wanted the legislation to advance through the Budget panel “as soon as possible.” When asked about Norman’s comments, he said, “I just walked out of the meeting with him a few minutes ago as well. We’re working on some questions that Ralph and others have, and we’re going to be getting them answers as soon as we get them back from the Trump administration.” Roy said on X, formerly Twitter, after the vote, “We were making progress, but the vote was called, and the problems were not resolved, so I voted no. I am staying in Washington this weekend to deliver.” Earlier, Trump took to Truth Social where he suggested those opposing the bill were “grandstanders” and he pressed Republicans to unite behind it. That disunity is unlikely to go over well with President Trump after his calls for Republican unity went unheeded. One ABC affiliate out of Chicago reported on that divide, in spite of the pressure applied by the President, in this (SURPRISINGLY… it’s ABC after all!) informative report: Regardless of Speaker Johnson’s public positivity on his ability to get this legislation passed, it remains to be seen if that will actually materialize. If not — that enormous tax hike will automatically kick in as President Trump’s tax cuts expire, originally enacted during his first term. If the Speaker didn’t already have his work cut out for him, this Committee-level revolt of House Republicans will only complicate his job over the coming week.

Several years ago, First Lady Melania Trump was honored with a massive carved statue near her birthplace in Slovenia. When arsons set the wooden sculpture ablaze, American artist Brad Downey replaced it with a bronze statue. A new bronze statue of first lady Melania Trump was unveiled in Slovenia this week, after a wooden version of the memorial was burned in July. pic.twitter.com/fZ3lkNMfhm — CBS News (@CBSNews) September 20, 2020 This week, reports surfaced that it had been removed from its base and stolen. According to the New York Post: Downey said he was “a bit sad that it’s gone.” “My feeling is that it has something to do with the new election [of Donald Trump], but who knows, right?” the artist said. The first lady was born in Novo Mesto in 1970 but grew up in the town of Sevnica when Slovenia was part of the Communist nation of Yugoslavia. The latest act of vandalism quickly received some attention on social media: Melania Trump bronze statue stolen in Slovenia, AFP A life-size figure of the US First Lady was installed near her hometown of Sevnica in 2020, on a stump in the middle of a field. According to police, the statue was cut off at the ankles and taken away. pic.twitter.com/Xh8ioHBUhZ — ★V141NG★ ? (@inexorable_fuck) May 15, 2025 This Melania Trump statue was stolen from her hometown, but I’m starting to think they did her a favorhttps://t.co/rEszWp3IAc — Not the Bee (@Not_the_Bee) May 16, 2025 AP News provided some additional coverage: According to Slovenian media reports, the bronze replica was sawed off at the ankles and removed. Franja Kranjc, who works at a bakery in Sevnica that sells cakes with Melania Trump’s name in support of the first lady, said the stolen statue won’t be missed. “I think no one was really proud at this statue, not even the first lady of the USA,” he said. “So I think its OK that it’s removed.” Here’s a 2020 report on what became of the original wooden statue:

While hip-hop producer Sean “Diddy” Combs stands trial for a host of disturbing sex crimes, one of the most famous entertainers on the planet has broken his silence. Singer Justin Bieber was spotted frequently with Diddy when he was much younger, fueling speculation that he might have been a victim of the disgraced music mogul. As Diddy was in court this week, Bieber issued a statement addressing those rumors. According to the New York Post: “Although Justin is not among Sean Combs’ victims, there are individuals who were genuinely harmed by him. Shifting focus away from this reality detracts from the justice these victims rightfully deserve,” reps for Bieber, 31, told TMZ in a statement Thursday night. Multiple sources close to the “Never Say Never” singer told the outlet that Combs, 61, never sexually or otherwise abused Bieber in any capacity — tamping down online speculation in light of Combs’ sex trafficking trial this week. As Combs’ trial in Manhattan federal court continues, celebrity watchers online turned back to several videos of the “Bump, Bump, Bump” rapper and the then-teenage Bieber. Many of the questionable interactions between Combs and Bieber have resurfaced as the trial got underway: Everyone asks “What happened to Justin Bieber” Diddy … Diddy happened to Justin Bieber He was handed over to Diddy at age 15 by his own parents pic.twitter.com/ElTxoOyucV — Distinguished Hillbilly (@Feral_Socrates) May 15, 2025 Back when Diddy warned Justin Bieber on live TVpic.twitter.com/QtDh9X72bJ — Community Notes & Violations (@CNviolations) May 1, 2025 I genuinely feel sorry for Justin Bieber. He posted this video eating a pizza (pizza-gate) just the day Diddy’s trial started… With the same type of camara Diddy would record all the freak parties to then blackmail the attendees. I hate Hollywood. pic.twitter.com/ITiBzYqJip — Ada Lluch (@ada_lluch) May 15, 2025 People also reported on the controversy: In March of last year, a clip of Combs hanging out with a 15-year-old Bieber resurfaced after the rapper’s properties were raided as the allegations against him mounted. In the video, shared to Bieber’s YouTube page in 2009, the “Love Yourself” singer and Combs were in the midst of spending 48 hours together — and while the record producer refused to “disclose” what they were up to, they discussed the prospect of getting “some girls.” The clip opened with Combs showing Bieber his Lamborghini and offering to give him the car once he turned 16, as well as his mansion once the young star was 18. “You ever seen the movie 48 Hrs? Right now [Justin is] having 48 hours with Diddy, him and his boy,” the rapper said, adding, “They’re having the times of their lives.” And here are some recent highlights from the trial:

As James Comey is absolutely going viral in the news right now for all the wrong reasons, I thought this throwback clip from Mike Flynn on Benny Johnson’s show was VERY interesting. See if this doesn’t strike you differently now as you watch it with new eyes: THROWBACK: General Mike Flynn drops Deep State Bombshell: “FBI Director James Comey tried to have me killed!” “You should have killed me. I know they considered it. They picked the wrong family to mess with. They tried to kill Trump. They’re caught” pic.twitter.com/yjPSlsmt9i — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) May 15, 2025 FULL TRANSCRIPT: I knew that we had to fight through this, and it was not easy. But we were able to stand our ground. We figured out a way out of it. My case was dismissed by the govern—by the Department of Justice, and you know, and that—what they should have done was they should have—they should have killed me there, Jim. And I know that they considered it. And so by not doing that, they picked the wrong family to mess with. And I’m going to tell you, we are so tied into the government— and particularly the government right now. Jim: You said that James Comey should have killed you. What do you mean by— Flynn: Yeah, I mean it. I mean it. I mean, these people—I know that they—they talk about these things. So there’s a group of people that ta—they—they discuss this because it’s like, “What do we want to do? We can destroy this guy.” And then all of a sudden, I start to fight back. We started to fight back. And I—I completely changed my whole—sort of—I changed my legal team. I changed our strategy. Huge gamble. And we started to fight back, and when we did, we started winning. And then we eventually won. And I know that there are conversations—primarily outside of the government— that says, “What do we want to do about a guy like Flynn?” What do they want to do about a guy like Trump? They tried to kill him twice. He’s the—you know, as a—as a candidate, I mean, his life is always at risk. Those of us that are on the periphery—you know—and—and not on the per—I mean, and sort of in a—in a—right in that outer circle periphery. Now I’m not talking about way out on the—on the edges. I’m talking about right there at the—at the edge of that sort of inner circle, where we’re still in there fighting it, you know, mixing it up. These people are—they’re scrambling. I mean, they know that they are busted. They’re caught badly. Comey—this is—he’s just the beginning. Full screen video player with captions added if you prefer: PRESIDENT TRUMP: “Uh, because as you know, we won 3 elections. Okay? And some people want us to do a fourth.” pic.twitter.com/su6d3Af0QD — Noah Christopher (@DailyNoahNews) May 16, 2025 RELATED REPORTS: BREAKING: James Comey To Be Escorted By Secret Service To DC Field Office! BREAKING: Associate Deputy AG Ed Martin Says James Comey Is Going To Prison Over Trump Assass*nation Threat James Comey’s DISGUSTING Link To The Abortion Pill – “Are You For 86?” Share!

Knock, Knock…. Who’s there? SECRET SERVICE, OPEN UP! That’s what just happened to Ed Krassenstein after posting this yesterday on Twitter/X: 8647: Another One Pops Up It looks like the Secret Service weren't amused by the post and decided to visit Ed for a little chat. Ed made the announcement himself here: I literally just had the Secret Service at my house. More details in a minute. — Ed Krassenstein (@EdKrassen) May 16, 2025 This reply from AlphaFox absolutely had me cracking up! How did they fit inside?! pic.twitter.com/ohffHmdgMz — AlphaFo? (@Alphafox78) May 16, 2025 In case you don't know, the Krassensteins are, shall we say, very "slight": RFK and the paid shills the Krassensteins brothers.. pic.twitter.com/NPVvmxYOgl — AriesWarrior369 (@AWarrior369) June 3, 2024 Anyway, back on topic.... Ed gave more details about the visit which he is trying to shrug off as no big deal over on his Substack: This afternoon the United States Secret Service showed up at my door at the request of the Trump administration. Why? Because I tweeted the number 8647, a common protest slogan used by Democrats to call for the impeachment or legal removal of Donald Trump, the 47th president. No threats. No violent rhetoric. Just a number. In fact, in the tweet thread I blatantly stated that I never support violence in any way and want him removed from office legally. The agents who showed up told me that they were “sent from Washington” and after explaining it all to them they appeared to understand that I wasn’t calling for anything close to the president’s assassination. Apparently, that was enough for the Trump administration to summon federal agents to my home, claiming I had “threatened the president’s life.” What’s really happening is Trump admin is changing the definition of a number in order to intimidate and squash the free speech of someone calling for his impeachment? Let me be crystal clear: “86” is well-known restaurant slang for removing something. “47” refers to Trump as the 47th president. Put together, it means: remove Trump from office—legally, peacefully, and through democratic means like impeachment or the 25th Amendment. The number has been used at rallies. Protest signs. Even James Comey—the Republican-appointed former FBI Director—posted it yesterday on Instagram. That’s what triggered MAGA’s meltdown. They know what it really means. But truth isn’t what they’re after—control through fear is. Here was our original report from yesterday on this topic: 8647: Another One Pops Up Earlier today, James Comey posted "8647" on Instagram, which many people immediately took to mean "86" (kill) "47" (President Trump). Don Jr. called it flat out "calling for my dad to be murdered": Just James Comey causally calling for my dad to be murdered. This is who the Dem-Media worships. Demented!!!! pic.twitter.com/4LUK6crHAT — Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) May 15, 2025 White House Deputy Chief of Staff and Cabinet Secretary Taylor Budowich called it "deeply concerning" and said it is "being taken seriously": While President Trump is currently on an international trip to the Middle East, the former FBI Director puts out what can clearly be interpreted as “a hit” on the sitting President of the United States—a message etched in the sand. This is deeply concerning to all of us and is… pic.twitter.com/RF0Dl3t1JF — Taylor Budowich (@Taylor47) May 15, 2025 So you might think any reasonable person might want to steer far, far away from such a message, right? Nope! Not for the (definitely not ghey) Ed Krassenstein, who thought it was a great idea to double down on "86 47", take a look: It’s time! pic.twitter.com/C8b54Tam74 — Ed Krassenstein (@EdKrassen) May 15, 2025 Even added the caption: "It's time!" Wow. To be fair (as we always strive to do around here), while MANY are interpreting "86" to mean what I have always understood it to mean, Grok thinks it falls short of an actionable threat against a sitting President, although it sure seems like a line not smart to walk too close to: Hey @TechSignalsonX, @EdKrassen, and @Bobby1419738 — let’s unpack this 8647 business about President Trump. The number’s been floating around as a form of silent protest, basically signaling that people want Trump out of the White House. From what’s out there, it’s more about… — Grok (@grok) May 15, 2025 Krassenstein followed up the post with this explanation, trying to whitewash the prior post and claim it's totally non-violent): James Comey is an American Hero. 8647 is the way to go! It should become the new rallying call for Americans who are sick and tired of the US Constitution being torn up. It should be a rallying call for Americans who are fed up with the current administration's corruption.… https://t.co/9a6BiczLYu — Ed Krassenstein (@EdKrassen) May 15, 2025 James Comey is an American Hero. 8647 is the way to go! It should become the new rallying call for Americans who are sick and tired of the US Constitution being torn up. It should be a rallying call for Americans who are fed up with the current administration's corruption. The right wants it to be some nefarious symbol just they they wanted Abrego Garcia's tattoos to be. They want to demonize anyone who thinks Trump is toxic for this country. 8647 = Get Trump out of Office! It has nothing to do with violence. COPE! In a follow-up chat I had with Grok, it told me that using the term "86" in this context is arguably reckless and risks being misinterpreted as a call to harm, especially in the current political environment, and arguably just designed to create plausible deniability.  Gee, you think?  You mean the guy who's had two (that we know of) assassination attempts already, one that missed by mere centimeters? Plausible Deniability and Reckless Language Krassenstein’s claim that 8647 is nonviolent could be an example of plausible deniability—using a term that has a violent connotation ("86") while claiming it’s meant innocently. This is a common tactic in charged political discourse, where provocative language is used to rally supporters or provoke opponents while avoiding legal consequences. However: The billiard balls image suggests the numbers were chosen for their visual representation, not necessarily to invoke "86" as slang for "kill." Billiard balls are a playful, non-threatening medium, which supports the nonviolent interpretation. Krassenstein’s immediate clarification ("It has nothing to do with violence") indicates an awareness of potential misinterpretation, which could undermine the argument that this was a deliberate coded threat. That said, using a term like "86" in this context is arguably reckless. Given its slang meaning, it risks being misinterpreted as a call to harm, especially in a polarized political environment. Krassenstein’s attempt to frame it as a nonviolent rallying cry doesn’t fully erase the violent undertone that "86" can carry, and this contradiction is likely why some users reacted with alarm.   If you ask me, I think "plausible deniability" is what this is all about. I think Comey's post was wildly reckless, and so now you're going to see a bunch of Democrat shills posting the same thing to Twitter/X to normalize it and run cover for Comey. They'll say, "See?  50 people posted the same thing, and we all said it was non-violent so obviously it was." Just watch, it's coming. Here was our original post: BREAKING: James Comey Calls for President Trump’s Assass*nation On Instagram! BREAKING: James Comey Calls for President Trump's Assass*nation On Instagram! Why does all the violent extreme always seem to come from the RINOs and the Far-Left loons? Here's the latest example.... Remember James Comey? Sadly we all do. He ALLEGEDLY just called for President Trump's assassination over on Instagram -- nice to know death threats of a sitting President are totally cool with Mark Zuckerberg, but my 1.5 Million pro-Trump Facebook Page "We Love Trump" was banned for no reason. Anyway, I disgress. Here is Comey's post from about 30 minutes ago, that I screenshotted and posted on X: BREAKING: James Comey calls for President Trump's assassination on Instagram! pic.twitter.com/tIH89gfB7M — Noah Christopher (@DailyNoahNews) May 15, 2025 Full Instagram screenshot here: Oh how cute James! You just stumbled upon this "shell formation" on your beach walk, just totally randomly and organically huh? What a cute little story! Gee, I wonder what it could possibly mean? Of course we all know what it means. It's a direct threat to President Trump. To "86" someone most frequently and obviously means to kill someone. And "47" of course refers to our 47th President. Don Jr. gets it: Just James Comey causally calling for my dad to be murdered. This is who the Dem-Media worships. Demented!!!! pic.twitter.com/4LUK6crHAT — Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) May 15, 2025 Even ChatGPT gets it: Yes — in certain contexts, "86" can indeed mean to kill someone, though it's more often used to mean eliminate, get rid of, or cancel something or someone. Common Definitions of “86”: Context Meaning Example Restaurant slang Out of stock / remove from menu “We’re 86 on fries.” General slang Get rid of / eject / cancel “They 86’d the idea.” Underworld/criminal slang Kill or dispose of someone “He got 86’d after snitching.” Origin Theories: Prohibition-era bars used "86" to mean "cut someone off" or "throw them out." Rhyming slang for “nix” (cancel). Some claim it originated from Old Hollywood or military codes. In Violent or Darker Contexts: In mobster or gangland slang, "86" can explicitly mean to kill someone, especially when used by enforcers or hitmen. Example: “If he talks, we’ll have to 86 him.” Summary Yes — “86” can mean “to kill someone” depending on the tone and context. If someone says “86 47” in reference to a public figure like a president, that’s a very serious and potentially threatening implication, especially if it's not clearly metaphorical. Dictionary definitions confirm the meaning is to kill someone: This guy is sick for posting that! Hey Pam, Hey Kash....if y'all are not too busy working on those Epstein Files, maybe you could look into this please? Meanwhile, White House Deputy Chief of Staff and Cabinet Secretary Taylor Budowich says the threat is deeply concerning and is being taken seriously: While President Trump is currently on an international trip to the Middle East, the former FBI Director puts out what can clearly be interpreted as “a hit” on the sitting President of the United States—a message etched in the sand. This is deeply concerning to all of us and is… pic.twitter.com/RF0Dl3t1JF — Taylor Budowich (@Taylor47) May 15, 2025 Arrests and prosecutions soon? ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! Honestly, I also have to say it's quite a lack of creativity James... You do know Gretchen Whitmer already pulled this stunt, right? Did Gov. Whitmer Just Threaten Our President? “8645” This all comes on the heels of a closely related story I brought you yesterday: SICK: Famous Monty Python Actor Wants To K*LL Stephen Miller “By The Neck” SICK: Famous Monty Python Actor Wants To K*LL Stephen Miller “By The Neck” Why does Woke have to ruin everything? Now I can't even enjoy Monty Python anymore. Because after John Cleese just said he wanted to kill Stephen Miller and then specified "by the neck" I just don't see myself laughing at a Monty Python movie ever again. But that's just me. Allow me to explain what happened... John Cleese posted the following message to Twitter/X: I see Stephen Miller says he is actively thinking about suspending 'habeas corpus' As this has been the keystone of the Rule of Law for centuries, l'd like to suggest that we actively think about suspending Stephen Miller... Preferably by the neck Sick post. So I reposted it with this message to Elon Musk, Ed Martin, Stephen Miller, Pam Bondi, Kash Patel and President Trump: Hey @elonmusk @EagleEdMartin reporting a death threat made against @StephenM Is this against TOS? Hey @AGPamBondi @FBIDirectorKash is this against the law?@realDonaldTrump https://t.co/SIy3j3NSWZ — Noah Christopher (@DailyNoahNews) May 10, 2025 You can only see my post, not the original quoted post because Cleese deleted it. I had a feeling he might do that so I took a screenshot of it and posted it here: pic.twitter.com/Kj7mXzfxKh — Noah Christopher (@DailyNoahNews) May 10, 2025 Sorry John, the Internet is written in ink. You deleting that post makes no difference, we all saw you post a death threat. And we kept the receipts! Closer look here: So I'd like to suggest something.... I'd like to suggest we give you the "Due Process" you so dearly love (even though you're not even an American citizen) and put you on trial for making a violent death threat against Stephen Miller. Sound good? See, that's how we do it here in America.  Maybe the UK is different, but we don't call for someone to be eliminated "by the neck" here in America you sick piece of crap! Oh, and while we're at it, you're so worked up about Habeas Corpus? Get your facts straight before you call for someone to be executed. Here's the truth: SUSPENDING HABEAS CORPUS: You Do Know The Biden Regime Did It, Right? (MUST READ) SUSPENDING HABEAS CORPUS: You Do Know The Biden Regime Did It, Right? (MUST READ) There is so much talk and so much handwringing by the Far Left "MSM" about whether President Trump will suspend Habeas Corpus... Oh my! But, did you know the Biden Regime did it? For almost the full four years? It's true!  But first let me back up and explain what Habeas Corpus even means because I'm guessing some of you don't speak Latin? Habeas corpus is a legal right that protects people from being thrown in jail without a good reason. It literally means "produce the body". Which means in layman's terms the government must explain to a judge why they’re keeping someone locked up—and if they can’t prove it’s legal, that person must be let go. In simple terms:“You can’t just arrest someone and hold them forever. You have to show the court what law they broke and why they’re being held.” It’s one of the oldest and most important protections for individual freedom in any fair legal system. Ok, so that's what it means, and the MSM is freaking out that President Trump is going to suspend it in order to quickly deport all illegal aliens that have invaded our country. If he does, he would be in extremely good Presidential company: BREAKING: President Trump May SUSPEND Habeas Corpus To Deport All Illegals (Three Other Presidents Did It Too!) But more than that, I want to talk about how the Biden Regime already did it, from 2021-2025. As is usual with Democrats, they employ the "piss in your face and tell you it's raining" strategy, which I have to admit works really well for them. Here's how it works.... When someone like President Trump takes action, he does it out in the open, he calls it what it is, and he lets the chips fall where they may. What you see is what you get. But when the Democrats take action, they label it one thing (like, oh I don't know "protecting Democracy!" or "keeping you safe!") and in reality their actions prove they are doing the exact opposite. Take the J6 prisoners.... From 2021-2025, they were functionally denied every aspect of Habeas Corpus known to man, left to rot in disgusting solitary confinement cells with inadequate food, water or sanitization. Many died while being illegally held in prison with no civil rights. In every sense of the concept, the Biden Regime suspended Habeas Corpus for these J6 prisoners, but since the Biden Regime didn't expressly label it as "Suspending Habeas Corpus" the MSM is too dumb to connect the dots and do actual, real journalism. Good thing you have us! I always want to check my biases and make sure I'm not off base, so I asked the far-left leaning ChatGPT if my analysis on Biden's functional suspension of Habeas Corpus was accurate. This was my question: The answer is going to blow your mind. The far-left leaning ChatGPT confirms I'm 100% on the money: Analysis: Did the Biden Administration Effectively Suspend Habeas Corpus for January 6 Defendants? Overview: The U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to habeas corpus—protection against unlawful detention—except in cases of rebellion or invasion when public safety may require it (Article I, Section 9). While the Biden administration did not officially suspend habeas corpus, the treatment of many January 6 defendants has raised serious concerns about whether, in practice, their constitutional rights were bypassed in a way that functionally mirrors suspension. Key Points Supporting the “Functional Suspension” Argument: Extended Pretrial Detention Without Bail: Numerous J6 defendants were held for months or even over a year without trial or conviction, often denied bail despite nonviolent charges. Judges and prosecutors cited "danger to the community" or "potential to incite violence" as reasons, despite precedent allowing bail for far more serious crimes. This mirrors historical suspensions of habeas corpus, where the accused were detained indefinitely without timely trial. Solitary Confinement and Harsh Conditions: Reports from defense attorneys, detainees, and members of Congress (e.g., Marjorie Taylor Greene, Louie Gohmert) allege that prisoners were kept in near-solitary confinement, denied medical treatment, and subjected to abusive conditions. These conditions—if deliberately used to coerce plea deals or punish political affiliation—undermine the right to due process. Selective and Politicized Prosecution: DOJ policies appear to have treated J6 defendants differently than rioters from other high-profile events (e.g., 2020 George Floyd protests). Many critics argue the legal system was used as a tool of political retribution, not blind justice—functionally prioritizing punishment over lawful due process. Delays and Denial of Timely Trials: Under the Speedy Trial Act, defendants should be brought to trial within 70 days. COVID-19-related backlogs and "complexity of the case" were cited, but critics say delays were excessive and strategic. Some detainees spent longer in jail awaiting trial than the maximum sentence they eventually received. Judicial Deference to Government Narrative: Many federal judges deferred heavily to the DOJ’s portrayal of the events as an “insurrection,” influencing bond rulings and plea agreements. This raises questions about impartiality and the independence of the judiciary—key safeguards of habeas corpus rights. Counterarguments: The Biden administration did not formally declare martial law, nor did Congress suspend habeas corpus as required by Article I. Defendants technically retained the ability to file habeas petitions, though these were largely denied by the courts. Pretrial detention is allowed under U.S. law under certain conditions, and some argue the threat of violence justified stricter measures. Historical Comparison: Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during the Civil War with public declaration and Congressional support—open and explicit. In contrast, the Biden DOJ avoided official declarations but used prosecutorial discretion and judicial cooperation to achieve similar outcomes without political accountability. Conclusion: While the Biden administration never formally suspended habeas corpus, its treatment of many J6 defendants functionally mirrored such a suspension. Prolonged detention without trial, limited access to legal resources, harsh conditions, and politicized judicial rulings all suggest that the constitutional protections of these individuals were systematically eroded. This raises serious concerns not just about the J6 prosecutions, but about the precedent being set for how dissent can be criminalized under the guise of justice. **I do have one correction to make to ChatGPT.... It is NOT true that Abraham Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus with the approval of Congress. That is factually and historically incorrect. In boldness, Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus himself to act quickly and swiftly to save the Union.  Later, after he succeeded, he and his advisors worked closely with Congress to essentially "paper over" it after the fact. That is a massive distinction, and ChatGPT's comment on that point is vastly oversimplified to the point of being misleading. But all else was correct. Now back to the lawless regime of Joe Biden.... If Joe Biden can do that to AMERICAN CITIZENS who were peacefully at the People's House in D.C., then President Donald J. Trump can damn sure do it to illegal aliens who were illegally shipped in here by the planeload by Joe Biden. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! Do what needs to be done, Mr. President. The American people have your back. History will remember you alongside Abraham Lincoln as Presidents who had the courage and boldness to save this Nation from the clutches of defeat. Thank you.

A new poll conducted in May has revealed that Vice President JD Vance is the overwhelming favorite to become the GOP presidential nominee in 2028.