Sunday, May 10, 2026

This Ancient Roman Artifact’s Weird Properties Point to Evidence of 1600-Year-Old Nanotechnology, Scientists Say


Ancient Roman Nanotechnology?


During the 4th-century, a remarkable artifact was produced by Roman artisans that exhibits optical qualities so unique they have baffled scholars for centuries.

Known as the Lycurgus Cup, it is one of the most unusual examples of glassworking ever produced by the Roman Empire, as it is made from dichroic glass—a material that appears to exhibit an entirely different coloration when light passes through it—causing it to look green when illuminated from the front but appearing a striking amber-red when illuminated from behind.

The artifact’s unique name refers to its depiction of King Lycurgus, who, according to mythology, attempted to murder Ambrosia, who transformed into a vine and entwined the king, ultimately killing him. Since Ambrosia was a follower of Dionysus, he is depicted on the cup along with his followers taunting the ill-fated mythical king.

Art historians identify the artifact as a late-Roman luxury vessel known as a “cage cup,” although speculation about its specific purpose includes theories that it once served as a lampshade or was purely decorative.

Whatever the true intention behind its creation, the cup’s almost preternatural appearance has garnered widespread attention from archaeologists and historians, with many arguing that it ranks among the most significant Roman artifacts ever recovered.

“The Lycurgus cup is, without any doubt, one of the most fascinating glass artifacts in the history of humankind,” wrote the authors of a 2020 study that examined its remarkable appearance. “Art historians and glass artists alike have wondered at the fabrication of its intricate structure since its first discovery.”

However, the curious appearance of the Lycurgus cup had not been all that researchers Lars Kool, Floris Dekker, and their colleagues observed in their research, detailed in the study, which revealed something far more remarkable about the enigmatic 4th-century artifact: that its mysterious optical qualities pointed to evidence of something very unexpected for the era in which it was made.

Ancient Roman Nanotechnology?

According to Kool, Dekker, and the team, analysis of the Lycurgus cup’s color-changing properties revealed the presence of nanoparticles within its ancient glass—a discovery that predates the modern development of nanotechnology by an astounding 1,600 years.

“This peculiar effect, which has perplexed scientists for centuries, was discovered to be due to the presence of nanoparticles in the glass,” the researchers wrote in their study. Based on their analysis, they concluded that this is attributable to two varieties of nanoparticles—silver and gold, both in colloidal form—which were found within the glass.

“The Lycurgus cup is the only intact ancient glassware exhibiting this optical property,” the researchers noted of their discovery, adding that only “a few other small human-made dichroic glass fragments were found around the world.”

Given the era in which it was made, the effect appears to have been accidental, and the researchers concluded that it was unlikely the makers had a deep understanding of the processes at work or how to leverage them to their fullest effect. In any case, the mysterious techniques employed by the Lycurgus cup’s ancient creators resulted in one of the most unique human-crafted objects ever produced by the ancient world.

And now, scientists finally understand how they did it.
Recreating a Baffling Ancient Artifact

For Kool, Dekker, and their colleagues, their interest in the Lycurgus cup began with a hope to recreate one of history’s most baffling ancient human-crafted objects.

“This research started as curiosity-driven research,” the study’s authors said, adding that they essentially had wondered whether modern knowledge of nanotechnology, combined with 21st-century capabilities like 3D printing, could be used to recreate such an unusual 1600-year-old artifact.

Finding the answer to this question led them to begin by producing a modern synthesis of dichroic silver nanoparticles, which they embedded in a 3D-printable nanocomposite.

With the addition of the next ingredient—gold nanoparticles—the team quickly discovered they had an almost exact match for the curious 4th-century cage cup.

“The addition of gold nanoparticles to the silver nanoparticle composite … gave a 3D printable nanocomposite with the same dichroism effect of the Lycurgus cup,” the team reported in their study.
Contamination, or Something Else?

The question remains as to exactly why nanoparticles of gold and silver would have been present within the artifact’s unique dichroic glass. One theory involves contamination, although it cannot be entirely ruled out that these metals were intentionally introduced for some reason.

However, most scholars agree that it is most probable that these metals made their way into the glass by accident, and that the cup’s makers had likely been unaware that the fine particles of colloidal gold dust observed in the material were present at all.

One theory of the gold’s origin suggests it was already present in the silver; another posits that very small amounts of gold could have been transferred to the glass on tools used in its creation.

Fundamentally, the team found that in addition to solving the mystery of the Lycurgus cup’s appearance, the process they used to unravel the artifact’s secrets may also have modern technological applications.

“Using the methodology presented here, it is also possible to synthesize plasmonic nanocomposite 3D printable smart materials, which behave differently to different angles of illumination,” the team wrote.

So altogether, the ancient creators of the Lycurgus cup are now recognized as among the earliest to employ nanotechnology, although somewhat remarkably, other examples have surfaced in recent years that appear to point to precocious, accidental use of nanotechnology in antiquity.

In the case of the ancient Romans who crafted the Lycurgus cup, such novel practices helped them create one of ancient Rome’s most peculiar artifacts—even though they had been unaware of the full extent of their achievement at the time.

Kool, Dekker, and their colleagues’ study, “Gold and silver dichroic nanocomposite in the quest for 3D printing the Lycurgus cup,” appeared in Beilstein Journal of Nanotechnology.

https://thedebrief.org/this-ancient-roman-artifacts-weird-properties-point-to-evidence-of-1600-year-old-nanotechnology-scientists-say/

Biden Moves to Block Release of 70 Hours of Audio Recordings With Ghostwriter

Former President Joe Biden plans to go to court to block the Trump administration from releasing roughly 70 hours of partially redacted audio recordings of his conversations with a ghostwriter, the Justice Department said in new court filings Friday.

DOJ attorneys told U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich that they expected Biden to seek to “prevent any such disclosures” of the recordings to both Congress and the conservative Heritage Foundation, which filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit to access the materials. The Justice Department set a Tuesday deadline for Biden to file legal action and agreed to hold off on any release until June 15 if he does.

A spokesperson for Biden confirmed Sunday that the former president plans to fight the release.

“President Biden cooperated fully with Special Counsel Hur, and agreed to provide audiotapes of conversations with his biographer for a book about his deceased son on the condition that they would not be made public,” spokesperson TJ Ducklo said in a statement. “The DOJ themselves have said these tapes serve no public interest.”

What the Audio Is, and Why It Matters

The recordings were gathered by investigators working for Special Counsel Robert Hur, who was appointed by then-Attorney General Merrick Garland in January 2023 to investigate Biden’s handling of classified materials. The probe began after documents turned up at a University of Pennsylvania think tank Biden had been affiliated with post-vice presidency, and later at his Delaware home.

Mark Zwonitzer, a writer and documentary filmmaker, worked with Biden on two memoirs: “Promises to Keep,” published in 2007, and “Promise Me, Dad,” released in 2017. The latter book dealt with the death of Biden’s son Beau. The audio now at issue was recorded during sessions for that second memoir.

Hur’s report, released in February 2024, concluded that Biden “willfully retained and disclosed classified materials” but declined to bring charges, citing Biden’s cooperation with the probe and the likelihood that a jury would view him as a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”

The recordings DOJ now seeks to release reportedly include sessions in which Biden read aloud from notebooks that officials later determined contained classified entries. According to exchanges cited in Hur’s report, the audio also captures Biden telling Zwonitzer, “I just found all the classified stuff downstairs.”

Biden has repeatedly contested that characterization. “I did not share classified information,” he said in February 2024. “Guarantee you, I did not.”

The recordings and transcripts DOJ plans to make public are expected to be edited for privacy purposes and to remove any underlying classified information before release.

Ghostwriter Attempted to Delete the Recordings

Zwonitzer did not simply hand the recordings over. According to Hur’s report, he moved audio files into his computer’s recycle bin after learning that a special counsel had been appointed. Investigators recovered the recordings, and Zwonitzer was later granted immunity by prosecutors in exchange for his cooperation.

Hur considered but ultimately declined to charge Zwonitzer with obstruction of justice, finding insufficient evidence to prove criminal intent beyond a reasonable doubt.

Biden’s Legal Arguments Are Uncertain

Biden’s attorneys have not yet specified what legal arguments they plan to raise. Potential avenues include arguing that the recordings are personal records rather than federal ones, or that releasing them would invade his privacy. Those arguments, however, are unlikely to block disclosure to Congress.

To stop Congress from getting the recordings, Biden would need to argue that lawmakers are unfairly targeting him because of his former office and that the materials aren’t necessary for any legitimate legislation.

There is relevant precedent. In a 2020 Supreme Court ruling involving House requests for Donald Trump’s financial records, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that “Congressional demands for the President’s papers can implicate the relationship between the branches regardless whether those papers are personal or official.” The case was remanded to lower courts to weigh Congress’s need against Trump’s interest in avoiding harassment, and the parties ultimately reached a settlement in which a limited set of records was produced.

Heritage Foundation Presses On

The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project filed the original FOIA lawsuit seeking the materials. Mike Howell, president of the project, had little patience for Biden’s move Sunday.

“These tapes will further prove the massive lie regarding Biden’s fitness for office and the fact Biden revealed classified information,” Howell said. “The shenanigans aren’t over: At the last possible second, and after every delay tactic possible, the autopen is objecting to the American People receiving transparency.”

Biden’s office countered by pointing to a separate set of records the Trump administration has not released. “What’s happening now isn’t about transparency. It’s about politics,” Ducklo said, calling on the administration to release Volume 2 of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s report on Trump’s own alleged mishandling of classified documents. “That report contains information Americans actually deserve to see.”

https://redstate.com/joesquire/2026/05/10/biden-moves-to-block-release-of-70-hours-of-audio-recordings-with-ghostwriter-n2202199 

Should 'The View' Be Considered News? ABC and FCC Go to Battle Over Embattled Show

Should ultra-progressive talk show “The View” be considered news?

That peculiar question is at the heart of a roiling feud between the show’s parent network and company (ABC and Disney respectively) and the Federal Communications Commission.
The Federal Communications Commission is going after ABC over its controversial show "The View."
The Federal Communications Commission is going after ABC over its controversial show "The View."

According to CBS News, the ABC and FCC are in a war of words over the actual classification status of “The View” and whether or not the show had broken any rules pertaining to the equal time rule.

That rule effectively requires broadcast stations that interview one political candidate to give equal airtime to all other candidates for the same office.

Given that such a rule could prove burdensome for news stations beholden to strict airtime constraints, Congress ultimately decided decades ago that certain “bona fide” news stations could apply for and receive exemptions from this equal-time rule.

“The View has been broadcasting under a bona fide news exemption granted to it more than twenty years ago, consistent with longstanding Commission interpretations,” ABC wrote in its petition to the FCC.

The issue now, however, is that the FCC is effectively asking ABC and “The View” to prove that the divisive talk show is a “bona fide” news program to even qualify for such an exemption.

And as Fox News reports, the bona fides are in serious doubt.

“Ron Burgundy has a stronger claim of being ‘bona fide news’ than Whoopi Goldberg,” one government insider told the outlet.

One of the major flashpoints in this drama appears to have been Texas Democrat and senatorial candidate James Talarico‘s appearance on “The View” from early February.

“Until now, it has never been disputed that The View qualifies as a bona fide news interview program,” ABC claimed in its petition.

The network added: “The View continues to qualify as a bona fide news interview program because it continues to meet all of the legal requirements set forth by Congress and the Commission. Specifically, (1) The View is a regularly scheduled program, (2) The View is fully controlled by ABC, which produces the show for broadcast by the ABC Television Network, and (3) decisions concerning The View’s format, content, and participants are based on newsworthiness rather than on an intention to advance or harm an individual’s candidacy.

“With respect to whether a broadcaster’s programming decisions are based on newsworthiness, the Commission has long recognized that it was Congress’s intent that the Commission respect the good faith news judgments of broadcast licensees.”

The FCC, for its part, appears willing to give “The View” a fair assessment when it comes to the show’s classification as news.

“Decades ago, Congress passed a law that generally prohibits broadcast television programs from putting a thumb on the scale in favor of one political candidate over another,” an FCC representative told Fox News. “Specifically, Congress put protections in place to ensure that covered programs offer legally qualified candidates for office (both Republican and Democrat) equal time on the public airwaves.

“The equal time law encourages more speech and empowers voters to decide the outcome of elections. The FCC will review Disney’s assertion that ‘The View’ is a ‘bona fide news program’ and thus exempt from the political equal time rules.”

Kurdish Leader: Trump Is ‘Master of the Deal,’ Can Land Major Deal to End Iran War and Create Worldwide Economic Boom

DELPHI, Greece — Qubad Talabani, the Deputy Prime Minister of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq, told Breitbart News exclusively here last month that President Donald Trump can secure a massive deal with Iran that creates a worldwide economic boom and is good for both the United States and Iran in the aftermath of the war between the two countries.

Talabani, who helps lead the semi-autonomous region governed by Kurds inside Iraq right on the border with Iran, is the son of the former president of all of Iraq, Jalal Talabani. Talabani’s father held office from right after the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2005 until 2014, and now his son is a leading voice in Iraq and specifically in Kurdistan in pushing for peace and economic prosperity across the region.

“The deal’s got to be between the U.S. and Iran, and he cannot allow a third party to ruin his deal,” Talabani told Breitbart News.

“I think that President Trump again left to his own devices and left to America’s interests, and truly applying an America First agenda, could reach a good deal with Iran,” Talabani added. “That is also good for Iran.”

Talabani told Breitbart News he is rooting for Trump to pull off an amazing deal with Iran, one that has key economic components in addition to ending Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions.

“I think President Trump is a master of the deal, and I think he knows that a deal needs both sides to buy in for it to stick,” Talabani told Breitbart News. “If a deal is imposed by one side on the other, even if they reach an agreement, it may not stick. So, I think what we need now is a deal that is between the United States and Iran.”

Talabani sat down with Breitbart News for a lengthy exclusive interview in Delphi, Greece, on the sidelines of the Delphi Economic Forum in late April. At that time, in the early days of the now-extended-multiple-times ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran, the early picture of a possible deal was starting to come together.

“Well, first we need peace in the region and in Kurdistan,” Talabani told Breitbart News. “We’re rooting for a deal. We’re supporting a deal, and we’ve made it clear to all sides we’re willing to help in any way that we can whether it’s through back channels, whether it’s to utilize Kurdistan’s strategic location to support any deconfliction — we need this deconfliction. The impact of this war on Iraq, on Kurdistan, was significant, primarily economically as it has impacted the rest of the world. So, we welcome the ceasefire. We welcome the extension of the ceasefire. As they say, it takes more bravery to end the war than it does to start it. I think this is where we are at now, and we’re hoping that President Trump will do the right thing and do what it takes to get a deal that brings peace to the region, brings peace between the United States and Iran, and that will have I think enormous ramifications positively for the rest of the world.”

Talabani said that for a deal to succeed, it has to be solely between the United States and Iran, and not include other third parties.

“I’m hopeful that Iran and the United States reach a deal, and I’m also hoping that other actors do not go out of their way to scupper that deal,” Talabani said.

As for the timeline here, Talabani was unsure how long it will take but hopes it is soon.

“I wish I could tell you. I’m not being coy,” Talabani said when asked how long this will take. “I really don’t know, and nobody knows. I think the only person that could know is President Trump. Again, I will repeat, if he’s left to his own devices, and if other countries are not trying to dissuade him from a deal, then the likelihood of reaching that deal in a shorter period of time increases.”

As for the Strait of Hormuz specifically, Talabani said the beginnings of a deal need to materialize before it opens.

“I think that there needs to be some concrete agreements between the United States and Iran before the strait opens,” he said. “I think if the strait could have been opened militarily, it would have been done by now. So, I think there is an understanding that this strait can only be opened through a deal. So, the Iranians are very good negotiators, and I don’t think they’re going to be very willing to give up this massive card that they have without a return — without something that is concrete. I think if the United States weighs up all of the variables that make up the complete deal this is a big one.”

Talabani represents the Kurds who totally agree with Trump’s assessment of U.S. failures in Iraq — Trump has argued America should have taken the oil, something former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama failed to do — as he told Breitbart News the year before in Delphi. Now, he believes that in the aftermath of the war in Iran, the U.S. should get engaged economically and bring in American energy companies to help develop Iran’s underutilized oil and natural gas assets that have not been realized to their fullest potential for years because of international sanctions. Talabani hailed the possible “economic benefits” of a U.S.-Iran deal for both sides, arguing that for this to fully succeed the negotiations need to go beyond simply the security elements.

“I believe that if you look beyond the security dynamic between America and Iran, there is a whole giant world for an economic angle to this war,” Talabani told Breitbart News. “So much of what has been discussed between U.S. and Iran has been on the nuclear issue, on security, on the ballistic missiles issue, but I haven’t had any discussions about the economic benefits of a deal between Iran and the U.S. and again, this is a mutually beneficial deal, a deal that can greatly increase Iran’s economy but also give American interests access to a whole new market, which has been by and large strangled for the last 40 years. So, the opportunities are vast.”

Talabani said the idea that Iran can get a nuclear weapon is finished now thanks to Trump. But again, for a big deal to succeed the Kurds hope that it will tie together the economic components of energy production — something Trump has done with adversaries and allies worldwide, a sort of trademark move of the president. Of course, Trump has used this same move in places like Venezuela after the capture of Nicolas Maduro but also with allies like here in Greece where natural gas explorations are set to begin offshore early next year by two American energy companies, Chevron and Exxon-Mobil, something that can unleash economic prosperity in the region. Something similar could be on the horizon in Iran.

“I think we’re beyond that now, also because to be fair to the Iranians, they’ve never said they wanted a nuclear weapon, and they made it very clear to Mr. Witkoff that this was not on their agenda, and they’ve made it clear to other world actors,” Talabani said. “The detail was about the level of enriched uranium. How relevant that discussion is today, I’m not privy to the information on the damage done but I think again if we just look at this through a very sliced window of nuclear file, ballistic missile file, then there’s not really much room for a deal. But if we broaden that horizon to look at all of the other benefits for both sides and for the global economy and for America’s economy and Iran’s economy, there are many other variables that could make this a very good deal. Again, if we just limit everything to these two specific cases, I can’t see it. I’m not optimistic.”

Trump himself has similarly said since this interview with Talabani was recorded that there “could be” U.S. energy companies entering Iran as a component of a broader deal with them, telling Breitbart News that could end up happening. And now, with Trump’s trip to China coming up around the corner, it’s likelier and likelier that economic components could emerge as a major part of this equation moving forward.

“China is obviously the big importer of Iranian oil,” Talabani said when asked if China can help Trump land the deal. “But I think you will not find any international actor not wanting the strait to open for maybe different reasons but everyone wants this to open. So, I’m hoping that this will kind of expedite the necessity of a deal because it’s gotten bigger than just what the immediate objectives were before the war started. Now, the economy here in Greece, which is such a massive maritime economy, how many of their ships are now unable to do what they used to be able to do in the Gulf? They’re not used to shipping things by land, right? So, the world is not ready and won’t be ready to adjust to the closure of the strait. So, this is why everybody needs to not just have an opinion but use that opinion to force a deal or to get people closer to a deal.”

Talabani said that what is needed to be included in any end deal is “the economy and infrastructure and what comes with this lifting of sanctions, increased trade, greater inclusion.”

“You know, ultimately, Iran would also need to feel a level of confidence that they’re welcomed players again in the world,” Talabani added.

He even said that a deal could include mineral and rare earth development, too, but also warned that the U.S. should understand how unified Iran is in his view right now.

“I think it’s all about the optics. I think both sides need to come out of this deal feeling victorious, and the victory for President Trump is he came into this war with some objectives, you could argue he fulfilled those objectives,” Talabani said. “At the same time, you have an Iran that has proven to be much more resilient than anyone expected them to be. Now the landscape is conducive for a deal that includes the economy, that includes energy, that includes oil, that includes minerals, right? So, and I think too much is made of this schism between the diplomats in Iran and the IRGC. I think Iran is very unified right now as a state, but also as a nation. They’re reeling from the effects of this war, and the damage done to their country has created a sense of national pride in Iran. I don’t think this is a bad thing for the United States. It’s something that could be tapped into by the United States because again you can show the benefits of a relationship with the United States in a way that perhaps before you could not.”

Talabani stressed again that Iran is very unified.

“The difference between Iran and a country like Syria, and a country like Iraq was in Syria when Assad fell, the state fell,” Talabani said. “In Iraq, when Saddam fell, the state fell because the states were tied to the individual. Iran is not a country where everything was tied to the Ayatollah, Ayatollah Khamenei. It’s a country of institutions. It has a military institution, it has a civilian institution, it has a paramilitary institution. Then it has the religious clerical establishment, and each one has its own infrastructure. I think this was perhaps those around the world that thought by decapitating Iran that you will then in turn bring the collapse of the regime. They miscalculated. Iran is a country that has institutions, and right now those institutions are in sync. The military side are doing what they’re doing, the diplomats are doing what they’re doing. I think there’s greater unity now in Iran than there’s probably ever been.”

Iraq broadly, and Kurdistan specifically, “took hits too” economically, Talabani said.

“Iraq’s main source of revenue is oil, to include the Kurdistan Region,” Talabani said. “So, when the straits are closed, there’s no oil being sold, which means there’s no revenue coming into Kurdistan. A big portion of Kurdistan’s revenue relies on trade between Iraq and Iran, and if there’s no trade, then there’s no revenue. So, the impact on the economy has been massive, and that’s why we’re very eager for there to be progress so the economic angle can begin to normalize. I think that’s one aspect that has been a direct impact on Kurdistan. At the same time, I think we were very clear with everybody involved that the Kurds of Iran should not be used as a tool or as a vehicle to bring about regime change in Iran. We did not think that was a good policy, a good strategy. And I’m very happy that President Trump also came to that conclusion.”

Talabani expanded on that point about how Trump in his view correctly determined that using the Kurds in Iran to effectuate regime change in Tehran would have been not a good strategy by noting he thinks they would have been “massacred.”

“He was able to analyze the situation and realize this was not going to work,” Talabani told Breitbart News. “The Kurds would have been massacred had they have been the tip of the spear in this and so this took up a lot of energy for us to work our relations on all sides including with the Kurds of Iran to say ‘don’t be duped by a third party into thinking that you guys can make this happen.’ Again, to be absolutely transparent, the U.S. knew very early that this was not the vehicle — that the Kurds of Iran should not be the tip of the spear.”

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2026/05/10/exclusive-kurdish-leader-trump-is-master-of-the-deal-can-land-major-deal-to-end-iran-war-and-create-worldwide-economic-boom/

Radical Woke Bexar County Judge – The County’s First Openly LGBT Activist on the Bench – Resigns in Disgrace and Accepts LIFETIME BAN from Judiciary

Mugshot of an individual with short gray hair, wearing a brown suede jacket and patterned shirt, against a plain background.

Judge Rosie Speedlin Gonzalez 

Bexar County Court-at-Law No. 13 Judge Rosie Speedlin-Gonzalez, the self-proclaimed “first openly LGBT judge” in the county, has been forced to resign in disgrace and accept a permanent, lifetime disqualification from ever holding judicial office in the State of Texas again.

According to the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct, Speedlin-Gonzalez signed off on the deal on April 20, 2026, quietly slinking off the bench effective immediately.

In exchange, prosecutors dropped felony unlawful restraint and misdemeanor official oppression charges against her.

The scandal stems from a December 2024 courtroom meltdown during a domestic violence probation revocation hearing. Defense attorney Elizabeth Russell dared to try changing her client’s plea mid-hearing.

Speedlin-Gonzalez flew into a rage, accused the attorney of “coaching” her client, and ordered bailiffs to slap handcuffs on Russell right there in open court.

The attorney was then marched into the jury box and detained like a common criminal, all because she had the audacity to advocate for her client in front of this power-drunk judge.

The downfall was politically humiliating as well. Speedlin-Gonzalez had already lost her Democrat primary reelection bid earlier this year.

Express News reported:

Speedlin Gonzalez had been indicted on charges of unlawful restraint by a peace officer and official oppression for allegedly having a defense attorney handcuffed after the two argued in court over one of the judge’s rulings. Speedlin Gonzalez also faced possible disciplinary sanctions by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, which had already suspended her without pay over the incident.

A settlement was reached whereby prosecutors dropped the criminal charges, the commission promised not to pursue sanctions and Speedlin Gonzalez — without admitting “guilt, fault or liability” — agreed to resign and never again seek or hold judicial office. She had been a judge since 2018.

She was not the first Texas jurist to be permanently banished from the bench. Since 2012, three dozen have accepted lifetime bans, according to records of the judicial conduct commission. They had been accused of sexual harassment, duping investors, non-performance of their duties or other misconduct.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/05/radical-woke-bexar-county-judge-countys-first-openly/

Nearly 19,000 Minnesota Voters Used ‘Vouching’ on Election Day 2024, and the State Didn’t Track How

 Minnesota allowed nearly 19,000 people to register to vote or update their registrations on Election Day 2024 using a system called “vouching,” where another person confirms a voter’s address in lieu of standard proof of residence. That is the finding from records obtained by America First Legal from the Minnesota Secretary of State’s office.

The total figure is 18,898. Of those, 5,457 were brand-new Election Day registrations, and 13,441 were updates to existing registrations. Both categories relied on vouching rather than conventional documentation to verify that the voter lived at the address claimed.

Perhaps more striking than the number itself is what the state says it does not know. AFL requested breakdowns by vouching method, residential facility totals, certified lists of facility employees authorized to vouch, and any reports of suspicious or unlawful vouching activity. Minnesota’s response: it either does not record that data or has no responsive records.

America First Legal released the records it obtained and provided the year-over-year context:

AFL says the records show 18,898 Election Day registrations or registration updates using vouching in 2024, up from 10,278 in the 2022 midterms and 17,616 in the 2020 presidential election. The 2024 figure includes 13,441 updates to existing registrations and 5,457 new vouched-for registrations. In 2020, the breakdown was 12,547 updates and 5,069 new registrations. In 2022, it was 8,063 updates and 2,215 new registrations.

The records fight did not stop at the topline number. AFL says it requested data that would distinguish between general registered-voter vouching and residential-facility staff vouching, along with facility-specific totals, certified lists of authorized facility employees, and reports of suspicious or unlawful vouching-related activity. The state response, as AFL described it, was that Minnesota either does not maintain the vouching-method data or had no responsive records for many of the categories that would make the system auditable after Election Day.

To be clear, none of this proves that a single fraudulent vote was cast through vouching. What it does show is that a state processing nearly 19,000 vouched registrations or updates in one election cannot tell the public how those vouches broke down, who authorized them at residential facilities, or whether any red flags were ever raised. That is not evidence of fraud. It is evidence of a system that would have no idea if fraud occurred.

Alpha News provided additional local context, including the state’s defense of the system:

Under Minnesota law, a person seeking same-day registration can have a registered voter from the same precinct sign an oath confirming the person’s address. A registered voter may vouch for up to eight people. Staff at residential facilities, however, are not bound by that eight-person limit and can vouch for all eligible voters living in the facility. The Minnesota Secretary of State’s office defended the practice, telling Alpha News that vouching has been part of state law for more than 50 years. The office said vouching accounted for less than 0.6% of all votes cast in the 2024 general election. It also emphasized that vouching is used only to confirm a voter’s residence in the precinct, while the voter must still provide a Minnesota driver’s license or ID card number, or the last four digits of a Social Security number, for identity verification. The office added that vouchers sign oaths under penalty of perjury and that any discrepancies must be referred to local law enforcement.

The state’s 0.6% figure is technically accurate but somewhat beside the point. The concern is not whether vouching is common across all voters. The concern is whether the state can verify the integrity of the nearly 19,000 transactions that did use it. Based on the records AFL received, the answer appears to be no.

The Minnesota Secretary of State page on Election Day registration lays out how vouching works:

The state’s Election Day registration guidance lists several ways a voter can prove residence at the polling place, and one of them is vouching. A registered voter from the same precinct may sign an oath confirming the person’s address. That voter may vouch for up to eight voters, and someone who was vouched for cannot then turn around and vouch for another person. The guidance also creates a separate route for residential facilities. A staff person can confirm the address of eligible voters living in the facility, and that staff member may vouch for all eligible voters who live there after proving employment at the facility.

That means the state itself publicly acknowledges two different vouching paths: ordinary same-precinct voter vouching and residential-facility staff vouching. That distinction is exactly why the missing breakdowns matter. Without those records, the public can see the total number of vouched registrations and updates, but not how the process was actually used.

The residential-facility carve-out is one of the sharpest parts of the story. A single staff member at a nursing home, group home, or similar facility can vouch for every eligible voter in the building. There is no cap. And as AFL’s records request revealed, the state does not maintain certified lists of which employees are authorized to do it. There is no publicly available data showing which facilities used vouching or how many residents were vouched for at each one.

Minnesota is one of 21 states that allow same-day voter registration. Vouching is the mechanism that makes same-day registration work when a person does not have a utility bill, bank statement, or other qualifying document on hand. The policy question is not whether the system exists. It is whether the state has built any infrastructure to audit it after the fact.

Based on the records AFL obtained, the answer is that the state tracks the total number of vouched registrations and updates but not the details behind them. No breakdown by method. No facility-level data. No reports of suspicious activity. That means the only real safeguard is the oath signed by the voucher, which carries a perjury penalty that is only meaningful if someone investigates.

With 2026 midterms approaching and Minnesota once again expected to be competitive in key races, 18,898 is not a rounding error. It is a volume of election activity that should come with the same level of documentation and transparency the state applies everywhere else in its system. If the vouching process is as clean as the Secretary of State’s office says it is, proving it should be easy. The fact that the state cannot produce the data to do so is the real story.

https://100percentfedup.com/nearly-19000-minnesota-voters-used-vouching-election-day/

Jessica Tarlov PRAISES AOC for Moronic Attacks on Billionaires, Trips SPECTACULARLY Over Her Own Wealth

Democrats have been using the same, boring, silly talking points for decades now.

Remember when Obama claimed wealthy people 'didn't build that'?

Welp, looks like AOC has adopted that same moronic talking point, and Jessica Tarlov couldn't wait to cheer her on.

From Real Clear Politics:

FOX News commentator Jessica Tarlov on Friday said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) made a salient point about earning a billion dollars, "that the idea that you've done it on your own is just not founded in reality."

"Dismissing AOC and what she has been talking about, this idea that the system is rigged to benefit the rich and that the working class and up to the middle class cannot get ahead, is one of the most salient political arguments," Tarlov said.

"Go back to 2016 with Donald Trump, where he said, I use the loopholes," Tarlov said on 'The Five' on Friday. "Of course I do, and I'm going to get in there. I'm going to change it, which is the exact opposite of what he did. He was tapping into the same emotion, the same feeling that you should have better health care, that you should have affordable housing, that your schools should be good, and that the rich live in another planet."

K.

Bad Hombre dropped some savage receipts.

Post continues:

... hedge fund manager and landed her gig as the token airhead on FOX thanks to her friendship with Democrat pollster Douglas Schoen.

Jessica has never built or done anything on her own. To feel better about herself, she says no one else has either.

Ouch.

https://twitchy.com/samj/2026/05/10/tarlov-praises-aoc-for-saying-people-cant-do-anything-on-their-own-n2428042

This Ancient Roman Artifact’s Weird Properties Point to Evidence of 1600-Year-Old Nanotechnology, Scientists Say

Ancient Roman Nanotechnology? During the 4th-century, a remarkable artifact was produced by Roman artisans that exhibits optical qualities...