Eight defendants were convicted of rioting, providing material support to terrorists, conspiracy to use and carry an explosive, and use and carry of an explosive — the explosive being fireworks. Daniel Sanchez Estrada was convicted of corruptly concealing a document or record. He and Maricela Rueda were also convicted of conspiracy to conceal documents.
Description of the event from Wikipedia:
On July 4, eleven people[1][21] gathered near the Prairieland Detention Center at 10:37 pm,[22] several dressed in black "military-style"[23] or black bloc clothing with their faces covered.[1][21] A suspect was seen removing a wagon filled with fireworks from a vehicle and pushing it towards the detention center.[20] Law enforcement officials allege that the participants conducted a "diversion" to draw ICE officers out into the open; fireworks were set off, the group split up into several smaller groups, and a participant spray-painted vehicles and a guard structure with slogans including "Ice pig" and "traitor".[2] One small group remained near the facility entrance, apparently keeping watch.[21] The ICE officers called 911 to report the incident to local law enforcement.[23][22]
Only one person (Benjamin Song, a former Marine reservist) in the group fired shots, nonfatally hitting an officer. The defense argued that the other members of the group intended only to peacefully protest and not to bait out officers for Song. This, of course, brings us back to the classic, airplane-on-a-treadmill style "Does Antifa exist" debate.
The jury heard several perspectives about the night of the shooting and the events surrounding it: a recap of Morris’ interviews with law enforcement after her arrest and direct testimony from cooperating defendants Sharp, Sikes, Kent, Thomas and Baumann.
All told law enforcement and the government that they didn't expect violence the night of July 4 — just a noise demonstration with fireworks. Morris told investigators she suspected Song used others present at Prairieland as a distraction so he could pull off his "fantasy" and run away.
The cooperating defendants' answers varied on whether a "North Texas antifa cell" existed. Some testified the people in their circles never seriously referred to themselves as members of antifa. Others named specific defendants they considered "antifa." Defense attorneys later sparred with Kyle Shideler, the prosecution's controversial antifa expert, over his testimony that the defendants' actions aligned closely with prosecutors called a handbook on antifa beliefs authored by Mark Bray. The prosecution wrapped up its case during closing arguments by describing Song as a "ringleader" who worked with his politically-aligned inner circle to coordinate an ambush at Prairieland, escape and hide any physical or digital evidence.
All these articles are light on evidence, so let's go to the DOJ press release.
Evidence at trial revealed that most of the Antifa Cell involved in the Prairieland attack looked to Benjamin Song as a leader. Song acquired firearms that he distributed to co-defendants and recruited members at gun ranges and combat sessions he conducted, as well as from various ideologically aligned groups. For example, defendants Ines Soto, Elizabeth Soto, and Savanna Batten were part of a group that created and distributed insurrectionary materials called “zines,” according to trial evidence.
Witnesses testified that an Alvarado police officer responded to the scene after correctional officers called 911. When the officer began issuing commands to defendant Nathan Baumann, Benjamin Song can be heard on police bodycam video yelling, “get to the rifles!” and then he opened fire on the officers, striking the Alvarado police officer in the neck as the unarmed correctional officers ducked and ran for cover. Police arrested most of the Antifa Cell shortly after the attack, many near the scene. Benjamin Song escaped and remained at large with the help of others until his capture on July 15, 2025.
Trial evidence demonstrated that collectively, the Antifa Cell acquired over 50 firearms in the Fort Worth/Dallas area prior to July 4. During trial, the government introduced numerous chats of the members, who used an encrypted messaging app to coordinate with each other that had auto-delete functions, permanently deleting some Antifa Cell members’ communications. They also used monikers in group chats to hide their identities, and some of the planning chats included only trusted participants. The chats introduced at trial revealed that members in this limited group conducted reconnaissance and discussed what to bring to the riot, including firearms, medical kits, and fireworks:
"rifles might make the situation more hot if this is the case either way" (Rueda)
"I think you'd be surprised. Cops are not trained or equipped for more than one rifle so it tends to make them back off" (Song)
From the texts released, it doesn't seem like there's firm evidence that they knew what Song was planning. Of course, many of the messages were deleted, so it's hardly exonerating.
Dumb analogy: is the Arab Gulf basically the Avatar of the world? A bajillion dollars and zero cultural impact (at least in the West).
You can make 239Pu from a LWR but it's horrendously inefficient and requires further processing. The bigger worry on that front was their heavy water reactor at Arak, but that was already shut down (and bombed for good measure). That's why all the talk is about their uranium.
Would it surprise you that non technical people could make such a mistake (that a reactor does not actually do the enriching)?
The average voter will care if gas prices are a dollar higher for longer than a couple weeks. Evangelicals are happy and river-to-the-sea lefties are sad, but Americans really don't care about foreign policy that much.
Oil prices have risen, but not to crazy levels- oil futures still seem to be assessing that the flow will resume before too long
TACO is priced in.
For some reason, Trump's energy secretary lied about a tanker getting a naval escort yesterday. We hope that it was mere market-manipulation and corruption instead of underlying incompetence.
Judging by the assessment of John McNaughton (assistant secdef for international security affairs) in March 1965, we achieved 20% of our aims.
- US aims:
70%—To avoid a humiliating US defeat (to our reputation as a guarantor).
20%—To keep SVN (and then adjacent) territory from Chinese hands.
10%—To permit the people of SVN to enjoy a better, freer way of life.
Also—To emerge from crisis without unacceptable taint from methods used.
Not—To “help a friend,” although it would be hard to stay if asked out.
The Rosenbergs were convicted of espionage, not treason. The last person executed for treason was during the Civil War.
China, or any other country, cannot just snap their fingers and go to war. Spinning up the war machine takes time and is very visible. If there were any inkling that they were seriously moving towards a war footing, this pseudo regime change op would end.
The bigger relevance is that of volume. How many interceptors does the US have, and how many can it produce? Any Chinese invasion would be kicked off with missiles aimed at every US airfield in the region; can they be protected? What does the supply of radars look like? Etc.
A month ago the airspace around El Paso was closed because a military AA system shot down a DHS drone. Probably not relevant, but you never know with this administration.
Pre FDR there was essentially no federal welfare of any kind, just local poorhouses and a single mothers/elderly pension at the state level. Then you had social security/welfare with FDR, medicare/medicaid/food stamps with LBJ, clinton's overhaul, and ACA medicaid expansion, to name a few.
The uniquely American aspect of spirit that prevented socialism from ever getting a serious grip appears to have washed away somewhat. Now people look to European countries that spend 2-3x federally on welfare.
9/11 was carried out by (mainly) Saudi nationals based from Afghanistan. The Beirut bombing would be a better example.
The problem in Iraq and Afghanistan was never 'getting in'. In Iraq we were actually there to nation build and the CPA fucked it up. In Afghanistan we could conceivably have declared 'mission accomplished' and left if we got OBL, but alas...
Warlord Hajji Zaman spelled this out for me one evening poolside at the Intercontinental, one of Kabul’s two luxury hotels. He wore rimless gold glasses and sported a pristinely coiffed beard, a look that belied his adventurous past as a commander in eastern Afghanistan. In December 2001, when Osama bin Laden and hundreds of other Arabs fled to the Tora Bora Mountains along the Pakistani border, Zaman had pocketed huge sums of money from the United States for his services in hunting them down.
“The Americans came to me because they knew only I could get the job done,” he said, raising a glass of scotch to his lips. He sat stiffly straight, a Kalashnikov leaning on one leg. On either side lolled a pair of bodyguards, who seemed to have had a few too many. The tinkling of a piano filled the air, and Western women dangled their feet in the pool. “This whole land,” he said, sweeping his hand across hundreds of tiny house lights studding the mountains around the city, “this whole land is filled with thieves and liars. This is what you Americans have made.” He ordered another round. “I know this game, I know how to survive.” He was slurring his words by now. “I went to the Americans and said, ‘I can find bin Laden.’ I told them, ‘Give me $5 million and I’ll bring you his head.’ So they went and talked to their bosses and arranged it, and I got $5 million. Then, a few days later, I went to al Qaeda and told them, ‘Give me $1 million or I’ll turn you over to the Americans.’ So they gave me $1 million, and I convinced the Americans to stop the bombing for a little while. I told them we could use the time to find Osama, but really it was so those Arab dogs could escape to Pakistan. Then I went to the ISI,” the Pakistani intelligence agency, “and said, ‘Give me $500,000 and I’ll give you al Qaeda.’ They pulled a gun and told me to get out of their face.”
https://x.com/i/status/2027578652477821175
Not insane enough for OpenAI, swooping in for the steal.
The funny part is that a large part of the funding is from the Saudis.
Anyways, it will probably work itself out. Paramount was financially struggling, and massively overpaying for Warner Bros famously hasn't worked out for much healthier companies.
Georgia expanded Medicaid with work requirements (which are coming to every state soon) in 2023. So far they've paid Deloitte about $90m to enroll about 10k people, with 2/3 of that cost being administrative. Surprisingly, that's not that terrible compared to Georgia's average of $5k medicaid spending per enrollee, but still quite a bit of waste to cover what should be a healthier population.
"Hard" and "weak" are simply so vague as to make the theory virtually unfalsifiable. And there are so many other factors going into military prowess and conflict that make the connection extremely weak at best. Did the hard times of Vietnam and the 70s make the US better at kicking Saddam's ass, or were the two wars too different for any comparison? Something like the Schlesinger liberal-conservative cycle lays out somewhat clearer parameters.
Russia is waging a territory-centric war to secure the Donbas, probably so they can declare victory and wind down operations as much as possible. Ukraine is more attrition-aligned but territory is still necessary because it's good PR when Pokrovsk/Kupyansk/??? Holds. Syrsky is known as General 200 and loves his 'meat' counterattacks, but the Russians are performing similarly brutal operations. The Europeans have tried to pick up the slack from Trump but Belgium refused to liquidate frozen Russian assets. So, who really knows what's happening?
In 2024 several protestors in Bristol broke into an Elbit Systems defense factory with sledgehammers attempting to smash up the place. Police arrived and in the fracas one officer was hit in the back and seriously injured. They were acquitted on charges of aggravated burglary and partial or no verdicts were reached on criminal damage, violent disorder, and grievous bodily harm with intent.
Charlotte Head, 29, Samuel Corner, 23, Leona Kamio, 30, Fatema Zainab Rajwani, 21, Zoe Rogers, 22, and Jordan Devlin, 31, were all acquitted of aggravated burglary by the jury after more than 36 hours of deliberation. Rajwani, Rogers and Devlin were found not guilty of violent disorder, while the jury could not reach verdicts on the same charge against Head, Corner and Kamio. The jury could also not reach verdicts on an additional charge of criminal damage. Corner had also denied causing grievous bodily harm with intent for hitting a female police sergeant with a sledgehammer. The jury was unable to agree a verdict on that count.
The defense argued that the action did not rise to the level of GBH with intent, which is defined as
“Whosoever shall unlawfully and maliciously by any means whatsoever wound or cause any grievous bodily harm to any person with intent to do some grievous bodily harm to any person, or with intent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detainer of any person.”
For a Section 18 GBH charge to be proven, it must be shown that the offender physically caused the serious injuries and, at the same time as the assault took place, that this is what they intended to cause. It is the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime. For a case to be considered under Section 18, identifying reckless behaviour in the actions of the offender will not be sufficient enough to find an accused individual guilty. The act must be malicious in nature and deliberate, indicating malice aforethought often with a degree of premeditation.
Instead, Mr. Corner, an autistic man, was pepper sprayed, confused, and attempting to defend his comrade being restrained and arrested, so malicious intent was not present.
It should also be noted that protestors put up jury nullification signs around the trial.
There are economists who argue that employer health insurance tax exclusion pushes up overall costs. The ACA's cadillac tax was repealed before it came into effect, so we'll never know.
New epstein files stash released - search here: https://www.justice.gov/epstein
Trump is mentioned lots of times though some of the more lurid accusations (I was gangbanged by Trump and a bunch of other rich dudes) seem to be non credible. Epstein emailed himself about how he was annoyed that Bill Gates needed medicine from banging underage russian girls - probably fake blackmail. He also got banned from Xbox Live, shared coomer FNAF 4chan threads, talked with Chomsky about racial intelligence differences, getting advice on silencing a girl trying to expose his friends. For our global-intelligence-conspiracy friends, there are some connections to intelligence agencies.
Mods, remove this if it's a crappy post. It's hard to come up with a through line for this, other than "WOW he knew a lot of people".
But the ICE agents didn't shoot him as he was approaching them with gun in holster. They got him down on the ground, one agent took his gun, and the other agent shot him from behind as he was getting up (?).
Wouldn't you expect him to react more demonstratively? He looks back over his shoulder, not at the gun in his hand. All the other ICE agents wrestling with Pretti flinch back as though the shot was from the agent who pulls out his own gun (in video 1).
Who fired the first shot (at 21 seconds in the first video)? Logically it should have been the agent in center who pulls out his gun at 15 seconds and points it at Pretti. He obviously fires the second shot at 26 seconds - you can see the slide move and the casing eject. None of the other agents appears to have a gun in hand (other than the guy who pulls Pretti's gun from the holster and immediately turns and walks away).
Listening carefully, the first and second-fourth shots sound different. Does that have any significance?
- Prev
- Next

We could go back to the days of the three-person crew with a flight engineer, and ensure that 2 people are in the cockpit at all times.
Even with a second set of hands, a pilot can still irreversibly fuck up a plane during takeoff or landing, when the margin of error is smallest (see Air India 171).
More options
Context Copy link