Welcome to Woke of the Weak, where I’ll update you about the most woke, progressive, insane, and crazy clips and stories that the left thinks is tolerable and well, point out why exactly they’re nuts. It’s the final week of pride month 2024 (PRAISE GOD), and the left made many attempts to finish out the month strong.  This week, we saw both Spirit Airlines and Alaska Air share just how pro-pride their companies are. Similarly, a pride parade took place at none other than DisneyLand in California - yeah, because kids really need MORE pride propaganda shoved down their throats! One school thought similarly to Disney when it made kindergarteners watch a drag show during school. Speaking of drag queens, it seems that they LOVE children. In one video, a drag queen was dancing around in his thong, saw a child and welcomed her in for a hug.  That's child abuse that will lead to kids having no idea what is reality and what is delusion and could lead them down a path of that same sort of confusion. That same sort of confusion that tells kids that mutilating their perfectly good, God-given bodies is a great idea - or that tells them that men can get periods. Towards the end of the episode we saw a group of queers let out a little cultish-chant. Are trans witches a thing? Finally, we saw a grandpa strut his stuff in a black dress, stockings and high heels. Somebody come get him!

As the Wednesday edition of MSNBC’s Ana Cabrera Reports waited for and then reacted to the day’s Supreme Court opinions, the assorted legal minds assembled to promote multiple conspiracy theories about the Court. One was the idea that the Court is slow-walking former President Donald Trump’s immunity case to help him win the election, while another tried to claim there are no liberals on the Court. Regarding the immunity case, Cabrera asked Law Prof. Leah Litman, “When it comes to cases, though, that could impact the election, like abortion or immunity specifically, should they consider whether they're leaving voters hanging? Do they have the ability to really prioritize or fast track certain things?”     Litman claimed it could and cited two examples: So we know that they absolutely do have that ability and that they've exercised it before. When the Supreme Court agreed to hear the decision out of Colorado, that the Colorado Supreme Court initially ordered Donald Trump off the ballot, finding that the 14th Amendment disqualified him, the Supreme Court acted quite quickly and opted to release a decision within 50-some days of when they agreed to hear the case and they also released the decision before Super Tuesday so that voters could go to the voting booth and know whether one of the candidates was actually disqualified from office.  The second one was, “In Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court acted extremely quickly and issued a decision basically one day after oral argument in this case. So, the Court has acted quickly when an electoral timeline has suggested that acting quickly would be in the nation's best interest.” Those two cases involved actual legal electoral deadlines involving primary election days and Electoral College certification. The immunity case is not connected to the election except for the fact that liberals want it to be because they think additional Trump convictions will benefit them. Nevertheless, Litman declared, “So I do think it's telling that they have apparently declined to do so in the Trump immunity case.” Later, legal analyst, former Obama solicitor general, and self-described “extremist centrist” Neal Katyal was alluding to the Court’s Wednesday ruling that held that states and certain individuals did not have standing to sue the feds over censorship claims when he assessed the Court’s various factions, “Well, in a lot of the politically-charged cases, you know, when I'm there, I tend to think about it as three blocks of the Court. There's the three so-called liberals: Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson.” Denying that liberals are liberals disqualifies you from calling yourself a centrist, but Katyal’s faux centrism was only just beginning to reveal itself, “There's the three much more die hard conservatives, Gorsuch, Alito, and Thomas, as Melissa points out, and then there are the three justices in the middle of the Court, not in the middle of American public opinion, these three are far to the right, I think of mainstream public American opinion, but on the Court, the chief justice, Justice Kavanaugh, and Justice Barrett do play that role.” Apparently Katyal views himself as the definition of the political center, but he was not done pretending the liberal wing of the Court does not exist, “in this case, you see that same lineup happening with the three more moderate conservative justices joining the three so-called liberal justices for that alignment there.” Katyal’s analysis is just an exaggerated form of a typical media problem. The liberal position is defined as moderate, and so anyone who isn’t a liberal must be a wingnut. Throw in some bad analogies courtesy of Litman and you get typical MSNBC legal analysis. Here is a transcript for the June 26 show: MSNBC Ana Cabrera Reports 6/26/2024 10:07 AM ET ANA CABRERA: When it comes to cases, though, that could impact the election, like abortion or immunity specifically, should they consider whether they're leaving voters hanging? Do they have the ability to really prioritize or fast track certain things? LEAH LITMAN: So we know that they absolutely do have that ability and that they've exercised it before. When the Supreme Court agreed to hear the decision out of Colorado, that the Colorado Supreme Court initially ordered Donald Trump off the ballot, finding that the 14th Amendment disqualified him, the Supreme Court acted quite quickly and opted to release a decision within 50-some days of when they agreed to hear the case and they also released the decision before Super Tuesday so that voters could go to the voting booth and know whether one of the candidates was actually disqualified from office.  We know years ago in Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court acted extremely quickly and issued a decision basically one day after oral argument in this case. So, the Court has acted quickly when an electoral timeline has suggested that acting quickly would be in the nation's best interest. So I do think it's telling that they have apparently declined to do so in the Trump immunity case. … NEAL KATYAL: Well, in a lot of the politically-charged cases, you know, when I'm there, I tend to think about it as three blocks of the Court. There's the three so-called liberals: Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson, there's the three much more die hard conservatives, Gorsuch, Alito, and Thomas, as Melissa points out, and then there are the three justices in the middle of the Court, not in the middle of American public opinion, these three are far to the right, I think of mainstream public American opinion, but on the Court, the chief justice, Justice Kavanaugh, and Justice Barrett do play that role and I think Melissa’s absolutely right, as usual, she is, to point out that, you know, in this case, you see that same lineup happening with the three more moderate conservative justices joining the three so-called liberal justices for that alignment there. I don't know that it necessarily tells us much about where the immunity case is going or any other case. These are pretty stable blocks across one case to another. It wouldn't surprise me if we saw something like that in the immunity case, but, you know, I think as Melissa says, it's just a tiny tea leaf of what might be to come.

It’s a bad day for free speech. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that the government may continue to pressure Big Tech companies to censor speech it disapproves of, and dissenting Justice Samuel Alito tore the outrageous decision apart. The Court ruled 6-3 — with Justice Amy Coney Barrett authoring the Opinion — that the complainants lacked standing to file an “injunction against any defendant” because they failed to demonstrate “particularized” harm. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined in the majority’s ridiculous position. The Court’s explicit gaslighting as to the Big Tech companies’ independent reasons for censoring content was particularly galling. “And while the record reflects the Government defendants played a role in at least some of the platforms’ moderation choices, the evidence indicates that the platforms had independent incentives to moderate content and often exercised their own judgment,” Barrett wrote on behalf of the majority. The absurd implication here is that yes, the government was strong-arming the platforms, but it was ultimately the tech companies’ decision.  Alito went straight to the point in his dissent, joined by Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas: “For months, high-ranking Government officials placed unrelenting pressure on Facebook to suppress Americans’ free speech. Because the Court unjustifiably refuses to address this serious threat to the First Amendment, I respectfully dissent.”  Alito, writing for the minority, further rebuked that what the government did in colluding with Big Tech to censor Americans “was blatantly unconstitutional, and the country may come to regret the Court’s failure to say so.” In shirking its duty to properly tackle the un-American onslaught against free speech brought before the Court, Alito said the majority “permits the successful campaign of coercion in this case to stand as an attractive model for future officials who want to control what the people say, hear, and think.”  Alito blasted the Court for treating the government’s incessant communications as simply “benign.” Effectively, Alito said the Court spun that the government “merely ‘asked the platforms for information’ and then ‘publicly and privately criticized the platforms for what the officials perceived as a … failure to live up to the platforms’ commitments.” But, as Alito correctly pointed out, “This characterization is not true to what happened.”  As recounted by Alito, government officials “browbeat” Facebook “for months and made it clear that if it did not do more to combat what they saw as misinformation, it might be called to account for its shortcomings.” The totality of the evidence “— constant haranguing, dozens of demands for compliance, and references to potential consequences— evince ‘a scheme of state censorship,’” Alito asserted.  But that wasn’t all.  Alito took the Court to task for defending the government’s position that Biden and his officials were just using the bully pulpit “‘to speak out on such matters of pressing public concern.’” Alito called out this blatantly false, bastardization of the facts, writing: On the contrary, they were engaged in a covert scheme of censorship that came to light only after the plaintiffs demanded their emails in discovery and a congressional Committee obtained them by subpoena. If these communications represented the exercise of the bully pulpit, then everything that top federal officials say behind closed doors to any private citizen must also represent the exercise of the President’s bully pulpit. That stretches the concept beyond the breaking point. Alito concluded, “In any event, the Government is hard-pressed to find any prior example of the use of the bully pulpit to threaten censorship of private speech.” It’s clear the Court in its atrocious ruling completely upended the historical understanding of the First Amendment by permitting the Biden administration’s dystopian censorship enterprise to continue with impunity. Americans should be outraged. The complainants in the case relied on original MRC Free Speech America research documenting evidence of Big Tech censoring to protect Biden to bolster their initial lawsuit.  Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency, clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

A Norfolk Southern freight train with 141 loaded cars, nine empty cars, and three locomotives was making its way through Ohio the evening of Feb. 3, 2023, when disaster struck. Thirty-eight cars, 11 of which contained hazardous materials — including vinyl chloride, benzene residue, hydrogen chloride, ethylene glycol monobutyl ether, ethylhexyl acrylate, and isobutylene — went off the tracks in the town of East Palestine. The worst, however, had yet to come. The flames that apparently first showed beneath the train soon transformed part of the pile of derailed cars into an inferno. 'We basically nuked a town with chemicals.' Days into the fires, Norfolk Southern emergency crews, under the supervision of purported experts and first responders, started their own blaze. Citing the need to avoid a "catastrophic tanker failure," the railway conducted a vent and burn of five tanks of vinyl chloride, darkening the sky above East Palestine with what the National Transportation Safety Board called a toxic "mushroom cloud." Silverio Caggiano, a hazardous materials specialist, told WKBN, "We basically nuked a town with chemicals so we could get a railroad open." Local creatures died off in the thousands. Nearby water was poisoned. Residents had to flee their homes. Apparently it was all for nothing. The NTSB announced Tuesday that the decision by the local incident commander on Feb. 6 to execute the controlled burn "was based on incomplete and misleading information provided by Norfolk Southern officials and contractors. The vent and burn was not necessary to prevent a tank car failure." While the Federal Railroad Administration maintains that a vent and burn procedure should be the last resort, the NTSB indicated the railway "rejected three other removal methods and began planning for a vent and burn shortly after the derailment." According to an abstract for the NTSB's final report, the "observed downward temperature trend in tank car OCPX80370 indicates that polymerization was not occurring within the tank car, contrary to the representation by Norfolk Southern Railway and its contractors." Polymerization similarly did not occur in the tank cars containing vinyl chloride monomer — which "remained in a stabilized environment until the vent and burn" — meaning their alarmist defense of blowing up the trains was unfounded. The safety board claimed the railway withheld information from Oxy Vinyls, the company that made the vinyl chloride, as well as information indicating the tank cars were cooling after the derailment, reported the Associated Press. Jennifer Homendy, the chair of the NTSB, indicated that investigators were told by a Norfolk Southern contractor that it did not keep records of temperature changes on the tank cars containing vinyl chloride. 'We found through text messages through one of their employees, who provided that information in later interviews, that they did keep those records," said the NTSB chair. "It took about two months before the team received those texts and the emails." Temperature readings were highly relevant when making the decision to execute a controlled burn. In a statement Tuesday, Norfolk Southern once again defended its decision, claiming it carefully considered all alternatives. It also alleged that it and its contractors "received conflicting information from Oxy Vinyls' personnel as to whether polymerization was or could be occurring. And Oxy Vinyls' safety data sheet was clear that polymerization was possible in the circumstances observed at the derailment." Contrary to the railroad's suggestion, Oxy Vinyls experts reportedly testified at previous NTSB hearings that they were certain at the time that polymerization wasn't happening. At the NTSB's hearing Tuesday, Homendy also accused Norfolk Southern — which has spent nearly $100 million greasing the hands of politicians in Washington, D.C., since 1990 — of tripping up the investigation and abusing its status as a party to the investigation, "Norfolk Southern’s abuse of the party process was unprecedented and reprehensible," said Homendy. The railroad apparently dragged its feet when providing investigators with critical information. At other times, Homendy suggested that Norfolk Southern did not even bother providing requested information. The NTSB also stressed in its report that Norfolk Southern's delayed provision of consistent information to emergency responders "needlessly increased the time emergency responders spent near the derailment pileup and delayed the evacuation order, resulting in unnecessary and increased exposure of emergency responders and the public to postderailment hazards." The release of the board's findings comes one month after a federal judge approved Norfolk Southern's $600 million class action settlement addressing class-action claims within a 20-mile radius of the derailment and personal injury claims within 10 miles of the derailment. Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The WNBA changed its media policy to allow teams to exempt players from media availability in certain situations.All players were previously obligated to speak with journalists after morning shootaround sessions several hours before their game. However, it has been reported that teams are now allowed to exempt two players from media availability at that time.Chicago sports reporter Josh Frydman noted on X that WNBA team Chicago Sky noted that they would immediately use the new rule to exempt star rookie Angel Reese along with Brazilian Kamilla Cardoso."The Sky weekly media availability comes with this note: 'Per a change in the WNBA Media Season Access policy, two players from each team can be exempt from all shootaround media availabilities. Angel Reese & Kamilla Cardoso are exempt.'"Frydman later clarified that the players are still available before the game."Reese and Cardoso are exempt from game day shootaround interviews, but can still be made available pregame on the court (usually 90 minutes before tip)." — (@) 'I know how y'all like to twist my words ... I can't trust any of y'all.'Reese was fined in early June 2024 for breaking media availability rules. She was supposed to be available to in-person media outside the locker room, according to CBS, and was likely avoiding questions surrounding her team's aggressive play toward the league's new superstar Caitlin Clark.Fellow Sky player Chennedy Carter was also being asked repeatedly about a flagrant foul she committed on Clark:"It happened ... it's over with, I don't know why we're dragging it," Carter said at a June 3 press conference.That foul was seen as heinous by fans, even resulting in Republican Congressman Jim Banks sending a letter to the commissioner of the WNBA asking what steps the league was taking to curb "excessive physical targeting" of players.Later that same month, Reese told media members that she didn't trust reporters."I know how y'all like to twist my words, so I'm just keeping it short and sweet," Reese said, according to Outkick. "I can't trust any of y'all, so I'm just letting you know — short and sweet," she added.. Clark has faced consistent pushes from media members during shootaround to condemn racism and misogyny, and she simply stated that she didn't like the idea of anyone using her name to push narratives.Other players have theorized that young white women in the league receive more positive attention because they are more "feminine."The Mirror noted that while a WNBA official confirmed "pregame and postgame media availability stays the same," the pregame interviews are usually in group situations as opposed to one-on-one. The outlet also reported that it has experienced inconsistent implementation of pregame media accessibility guidelines when players who were allegedly set to appear for media questions did not show up.Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The Democratic National Committee has shelled out millions of dollars to two law firms with ties to some of the lawfare cases against former President Donald Trump, an exclusive report from the Daily Caller says.According to the outlet, the DNC has paid $2 million to Kaplan Hecker & Fink LLP and "several" millions to Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, all just in the last three years. The DNC claimed these payments were for "legal services," according to its FEC filings.'There is now clear and explosive evidence that the Biden DNC is paying Democrat law firms to engage in in this unprecedented lawfare and election interference against President Trump.'Prior to 2021, the DNC had no relationship with Kaplan Hecker & Fink LLP, which was founded in 2017 with the mission of establishing a law firm "rooted in principles of equity, integrity, and justice." Then, about a year ago, founding partner Roberta A. Kaplan represented E. Jean Carroll in a civil case in which Carroll accused the former president of sexually assaulting her in department store dressing room in the mid-1990s. Last May, as Blaze News previously reported, a Manhattan jury took just three hours to determine that Trump had sexually abused and defamed Carroll, though it declined to say he had raped her. In total, Trump was ordered to pay Carroll nearly $90 million for defamation. At a hearing in January, Kaplan had argued that "an unusually high punitive award" was necessary to keep Trump from calling her client a liar and a "wack job."Another Kaplan Hecker & Fink LLP partner, Joshua Matz, represented the House Judiciary Committee in Trump's first impeachment trial, the Daily Caller reported. Matz also participated in the second Trump impeachment. Yet when the Republican-controlled House voted in January to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas of the Biden administration, Matz suddenly changed his tune and lamented that congressional impeachment powers had been weaponized as an extra-electoral means of affecting political outcomes. "As a practical matter, there's a good reason why the impeachment power has never functioned in any worthwhile way when it comes to the Cabinet," Matz said at the time."They're struggling to come up with the votes to impeach President Biden. One thing they can all agree on is to impeach Mayorkas, because they believe immigration is a popular and salient issue in the presidential election."In addition to Kaplan Hecker & Fink LLP, the DNC likewise gave several million to Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP for "legal services" in the past three years, more than $2 million between 2021 and 2022 alone, FEC filings show. Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP has filed multiple amicus briefs in the federal case against Trump regarding the 2020 election and January 6.The Daily Caller also noted that several former Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP members, including Secretary Mayorkas and Ambassador to Mexico Ken Salazar, have since become high-profile members of the Biden administration. Former special counsel Robert Mueller was also once a part of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, which has partnered with the DNC "for a long time," according to ABC News."There is now clear and explosive evidence that the Biden DNC is paying Democrat law firms to engage in in this unprecedented lawfare and election interference against President Trump," said Mike Davis, a legal adviser to Trump and the founder and president of the Article III Project.The DNC did not respond to the Daily Caller's request for comment about its payments to the two law firms. In response to questions about who paid for Joe Biden's legal bills during special counsel Robert Hur's investigation, DNC spokesperson Alex Floyd said: "The DNC does not spend a single penny of grassroots donors’ money on legal bills."Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

More than 400 illegal aliens were smuggled into the United States by an ISIS-affiliated network, and many were released by the Biden administration’s Customs and Border Protection, according to a recent report from NBC News.U.S. officials told the news outlet that the Department of Homeland Security identified hundreds of illegal foreign nationals from Central Asia and elsewhere who were unlawfully brought into the country by a smuggling group linked to ISIS.'Scrambling to locate these individuals.'Many of the 400 individuals were detained by CBP after illegally crossing the southern border and subsequently released into the interior of the country after they did not appear on the government’s terrorism watch list, officials told NBC News. More than 150 individuals have been arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Some of those individuals were previously deported, officials said.The whereabouts of 50 “subjects of concern” remain unknown, the news outlet reported. Former FBI counterterrorism section chief Christopher O’Leary told NBC News, “The fact that the whereabouts were unknown is clearly alarming.”“I believe the [U.S.] is scrambling to locate these individuals, and using the immigration charges is not uncommon,” O’Leary stated. “They are in violation of that law. And if you need to take somebody off the street, that’s a good approach to do it.”A senior Biden administration official told NBC News, “In this case, it was the information that suggested a potential tie to ISIS because of some of the individuals involved in [smuggling migrants to the border] that led us to want to take extra care.”“And out of an abundance of caution make sure that we exercised our authority in the most expansive and appropriate way to mitigate risk because of this potential connection being made,” the official stated.The official noted that no information has emerged tying the illegal immigrants to any national security threats. Some of the “subjects of concern” have been charged with immigration violations; none have received terrorism-related charges.Recent terrorist attacks in Russia have prompted the DHS to “look[] more closely” at foreign nationals from countries where ISIS has been active, NBC News reported.A June report from the DHS’ Office of Inspector General found that ICE released more than 11,000 “high flight risk” illegal aliens into the U.S. from fiscal year 2022 through 2023, Blaze News previously reported. Over 300 of those individuals were considered to be a “high risk to public safety.”Another recent report from the inspector general revealed that the DHS’ vetting procedures for illegal immigrants need improvement and “were not fully effective to screen and vet noncitizens applying for admission into the United States or asylum seekers whose asylum applications were pending for an extended period.”Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Sen. Mike Lee's Thread Recounts 2020 Classified Briefing When Intel 'Flat-Out Lied to Us'

NEW: Team Biden Hunts for More Than 50 Illegals Delivered by Smugglers With Tie to Islamic Jihad Network

As Figma's Config 2024 conference kicks off, the company just unveiled its new suite of software, with a redesign and several AI features coming to users later this year. "In a world where more software is being created and reimagined because of AI, designing and building products is everyone’s business," said Dylan Field, co-founder and CEO of Figma. "From AI tools that elevate professional designers to developer tools that create stronger connections between design and code, Figma wants to make it possible for teams to go from idea to product—all in one place.” From a product design tool, Figma has expanded to serve more parts of project development, including its first-ever hardware release, a FigJam keyboard. During Config 2024, the company announced its new AI design tools to help speed up designer workflows and elevate the craft of professional designers with: Make designs: Create mobile and web UI mocks with different styles and layouts via a text prompt. Visual search: Browse your team’s work using a frame, image, or screenshot to find the exact design you are looking for or get inspiration from teammates solving similar problems. Name layers: Contextually rename and organize all the layers in your file in one click. AI-powered prototypes: Wire static mocks into a working prototype without all of the manual steps. Actions to automate tedious tasks: Use AI actions to add realistic text, translate, adjust the tone, make images, remove image backgrounds, and more — all within Figma Image source: Figma The new AI features also come with a redesigned UI, giving Figma a more approachable interface, resizable and more customizable panels for ergonomics, and a new toolbar at the bottom of the canvas with easy access to the latest features. In addition, the recently-released Dev Mode has even more tools, such as a new "Ready for Dev" view with improved design statuses, notifications to stay informed of changes, a focus view for inspection, and the ability to surface component code from your design system or a supported UI Kit instead of auto-generated code. The highlights of Config 2024 also include Figma Slides, a new product for both professional designers and their collaborators to create and deliver interactive presentations. This product offers: Image source: Figma Design for all skill levels: The power and precision of Figma meet easy-to-use slide functionality for designers and their collaborators. Bring in Figma designs and prototypes without losing any detail, leverage all your company’s pre-designed styles with customized templates, or turn on design mode to use Figma’s design tools. Co-create and present together: Presentations that come together as smoothly as they look with collaboration features like comments, chat and audio, as well as an organized grid view, co-presenting controls, speaker notes, and more.  Get assistance from AI: Adjust writing tone, rewrite or shorten text, generate and edit images — all in one place. Turn one-way presentations into two-way conversations: Craft conversations that keep your audience engaged and capture feedback and questions throughout so you can move work forward. All of these features are coming in open beta today, although some might be limited to a few users. Apple users get even more features during Figma's Config 2024 Image source: Figma In addition to all of these features coming to Figma customers, the company had one extra surprise for Apple users, as they can find the latest iOS UI kit directly in Figma's assets panel. Each UI kit includes component sets and example mockups. Users can drag in an entire example screen on their Figma canvas that is fully editable with components from the library. Plus, each of these UI kits is backed by Code Connect, a new feature in Figma’s Dev Mode that surfaces component code so developers can implement the right code with consistency and speed. BGR will keep following Figma's latest announcements, and we’ll let you know as they become available to everyone. Don't Miss: Figma just announced its ultimate keyboard for designers The post Figma announces redesign, AI integration, and more at Config 2024 appeared first on BGR. Today's Top Deals Today’s deals: Early Prime Day sales, $50 Ring Doorbell, $80 Keurig coffee maker, $470 Dyson V11, more Today’s deals: $79 AirPods, $99 Ninja blender, 25% off Google Pixel 8 Pro, Waterdrop RO filters, more Best Fire TV Stick deals for June 2024 44 best cheap Apple deals under $100