Grab one while they last! Get yours HERE!
New design!
Blog
Pennsylvania Sues Snapchat Over Lack of Age Verification
Child safety is an extremely powerful weapon used to force private companies to implement age verification digital ID checks and, in some cases, change the design of their platforms. And once this is done, it’s not clear that children are any safer, but one thing is certain: online privacy and anonymity are weakened, and in some cases, lost.
This is the context in which the latest legal action against a major US tech company should be seen. Pennsylvania Attorney General Dave Sunday has sued Snap, the maker of the Snapchat app, accusing it of violating the state’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (UTPCPL).
The filing, in Philadelphia County on August 25, 2026, is framed as consumer protection, but it is about pressing Snap to verify its users’ ages and to change how the app is designed.
“Child safety” is a broad and vague banner that can cover a lot of ground – from protecting minors from predators and inappropriate content, to shielding them from features that the state decides are “addictive.”
But before it gets to the “addictive” part, the complaint states that Snapchat’s age gate is not good enough – specifically, that it defaults to 18, and that this makes it “unreliable.”
The filing further states that this has “helped render Snap’s efforts to protect young users from predatory adults practically useless for any safety features that depend on accurate age-gate information.”
The remedy the state wants is a court order forcing Snap to implement reliable age verification for all users.
Other claims made in the suit are that Snap has misrepresented how often adult-themed content appears on the platform in order to get the app a 13+ rating in stores – and that it has built “addictive” features into the app, such as infinite scroll and autoplay.
“Snap deliberately designed Snapchat to be addictive,” the complaint says, adding that the company “knows that minor users especially are susceptible to Snapchat’s addictive features.”
The features that the state wants a court to stop Snap from using are: Snapstreaks, push notifications, infinite scroll, autoplay, ephemeral content, and Snapchat+’s Friend Solar System.
The suit also wants the court to order Snap to pay civil penalties and cover the costs of the suit.
LOCK HER UP: Slippery Democrat and MI Gubernatorial Candidate Jocelyn Benson Dropped NGO Fraud Charges Against MI AG Dana Nessel’s Wife After She Received a Call from Nessel – No Repercussions!
Jocelyn Benson was caught in a major scandal in Michigan in December.
As you may know, the current Secretary of State is running for governor to replace failed Democrat and buddy, Gretchen Whitmer.
Benson has a performance record that would make most normal individuals blush in shame. But not Jocelyn.
The Democrat Secretary of State has lost at least nine election-related lawsuits as she works to make elections less secure in the Wolverine state.
She is that bad.
Recently, information has resurfaced that Benson dropped NGO fraud charges against state AG Dana Nessel’s wife after she received a call from Nessel to do so!
Wall Street Apes tweeted out about this scandal this weekend.
This evidence of the call was leaked to the Michigan House Oversight Committee late last year. Republicans hold the Michigan House majority with 58 representatives to 51 Democrat representatives.
Here are the facts on the incident:
Michigan House Oversight Committee hearings in December 2025 revealed that Attorney General Dana Nessel contacted Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson to have a criminal case involving her spouse, Alanna Maguire, re‑evaluated.
The case centered on Bipartisan Solutions, a nonprofit accused of violating Michigan’s Campaign Finance Act by raising about $700,000 to support the Fair & Equal Michigan ballot committee. Maguire served as a co‑chair of that committee, creating a clear conflict of interest.
Michigan law gives the Secretary of State sole investigative authority under the Campaign Finance Act. If unresolved after 90 days, the matter may be referred to the AG for possible criminal enforcement, but the AG cannot conduct its own investigation.
In April 2020, Nessel’s office established a “conflict wall” barring her from involvement in Fair & Equal Michigan matters, and she acknowledged in writing that it would be inappropriate to oversee the case.
According to internal emails obtained by the Oversight Committee, Nessel told her staff that the AG had reached out directly to Benson, who agreed to “take this matter back for further review”. The AG’s chief legal director responded that the office had no legal authority to “restart” the process.
Nessel refused to appear before the committee.
So, the Oversight Committee voted 10–6 to find Nessel in contempt for failing to appear and cooperate, calling her conduct “impeachable” and suggesting she stepped around ethical firewalls to benefit people close to her.
I’d say!
So why are Jocelyn Benson and Dana Nessel still in office in Michigan?
WOW! Slimy DSA Democrat Who Ran as “Poor Waitress” in Wisconsin Primary Was Making Bank from Soros Orgs.
DSA Candidate Rebecca Cooke won her primary this week in Wisconsin’s 3rd district, a plus-3 Republican district. Rebecca will now run against retired Navy SEAL, Representative Derrick Van Orden.
In a recent political ad, DSA candidate Cooke ends with this… “We need real working people in Washington. And that’s why I approve of this message.”
Cooke ran as a working-class waitress. But, since she’s DSA (commie), you know there’s more to this story.
In fact, FOX News recently discovered that Rebecca Cooke delayed reporting her personal financial disclosure until two days after the Democrat primary.
Cooke requested a 90-day extension from the Clerk of the House on April 24, moving her disclosure deadline from May 15 to August 13, according to the official extension request.
Wisconsin’s primary was held on August 11.
Cooke ultimately defeated former Eau Claire City Council President Emily Berge with approximately 60 percent of the vote, setting up a November rematch with Republican Rep. Derrick Van Orden.
Britain’s Biggest Council Pushes Two-Year Jail Term For Flying National Flags
Britain’s largest local authority has gone to the High Court to stop people hanging the Union Flag and the St George’s Cross from lampposts, with campaigners warning that a breach could mean up to two years behind bars.
Birmingham City Council filed the application this week as the latest move in a year-long war on “unauthorised attachments.” The attachments in question are the flags of the country. The penalties being threatened include prison, unlimited fines, and seized assets.
Protesters who fly the Union Jack from lampposts could criminal proceedings if the injunction is granted.
Former Metropolitan Police detective Peter Bleksley called it what it is. “It’s absolutely scandalous!”
The Free Speech Union described the move as “truly mental.”
JUST WOW: This Is Who Colorado Democrats Are Running Against Conservative Rep. Brandi Bradley — Arrested Mid-Campaign and Hogtied in a Police Van
Video circulating online reportedly shows Colorado Democrat Christian Schilder restrained in the back of a police transport vehicle following his arrest in Texas, an incident that occurred while he was actively campaigning for the state legislature.
Schilder is the Democratic candidate challenging Republican State Rep. Brandi Bradley in Colorado House District 39. The general election is scheduled for November 3, 2026.
Official Colorado campaign records show Schilder filed his candidate affidavit in November 2025 and continues to maintain an active campaign.
According to a published Brazos County booking record, Schilder was booked on May 8, 2026, on reported charges of:
- Public intoxication, first offense
- Resisting arrest, search, or transport
The record lists bonds of $300 and $6,000, respectively. Brazos County provides an official online jail-record search portal for public records.
Douglas County Campaign Watch published a graphic that it said reproduced an account from arresting Officer Jonathan Wynn.
According to the officer narrative presented by the organization, Schilder allegedly refused to walk to the patrol vehicle and had to be physically carried by three officers.
The Entire Financial System Is Chained to Government Debt
The Bank for International Settlements is warning that near-record public debt and the growing role of hedge funds and other nonbank financial institutions have created what it calls a “fiscal-financial stability nexus.” That is sanitized bureaucratic language for a system in which governments, banks, pension funds, insurers, hedge funds, and central banks are all chained to the same mountain of sovereign debt. If government bonds begin to fail, the losses will not remain confined to some account at the Treasury. They will spread through the institutions holding the public’s savings and eventually force central banks to choose between the currency and the financial system.
Government debt is treated as the foundation of modern finance. Banks use sovereign bonds as collateral, pension funds hold them to match future obligations, insurers depend on them for income, and hedge funds trade them using enormous leverage through repurchase markets. Regulators assign government debt privileged treatment because they have declared it “risk-free,” but no investment is free of risk. The label exists because government needs financial institutions to purchase its bonds, and admitting that sovereign debt can become unstable would expose the fraud supporting the entire system.
The BIS estimates that the probability of a financial-stress event comparable to the Global Financial Crisis occurring within three months is roughly ten times higher when public debt relative to GDP is elevated. The probability rises from approximately 0.3% under lower-debt conditions to 3.8% when government debt is high. The risk increases further when nonbank financial institutions hold a larger share of the market because many depend on leverage and short-term funding that can disappear the moment bond prices move against them.
This is how a routine selloff can become a systemic event. Government bonds decline, yields rise, and leveraged funds suffer losses. Lenders demand additional collateral, forcing those funds to sell more securities into a falling market. Liquidity disappears, borrowing costs surge, and the losses spread to banks and other institutions connected through funding markets. Government then complains that the market is “dysfunctional” because investors are no longer purchasing its debt at politically convenient prices.
The central bank is forced to intervene because allowing the bond market to clear naturally could bring down the financial system. It purchases government securities, supplies emergency liquidity, and claims that the operation is temporary and has nothing to do with financing the state. Yet every rescue teaches the market that excessive leverage will be protected and teaches politicians that reckless borrowing carries no immediate consequence. This creates the next crisis by encouraging the exact behavior that caused the first one.
The BIS openly admits that repeated central-bank interventions can weaken market discipline over government spending. This is the vicious circle they cannot escape. Governments borrow excessively, bond markets become unstable, central banks suppress the instability, and politicians interpret the rescue as permission to borrow even more. The debt increases until each attempt to restore honest interest rates threatens the banks, pensions, and funds that were encouraged to hold it.
RESIGN: Democrat Josh Shapiro Still Refuses to Answer Basic Questions on Two So-Called Measles Deaths — Second Person Still Unkown
Pennsylvania Democrat Governor Josh Shapiro is still refusing to provide the public with basic information about two deaths his administration labeled “measles-associated,” even after the Lancaster County coroner determined that one of the individuals, a newborn baby, died from a ruptured spleen and massive blood loss, not measles.
During a Friday press conference, a reporter confronted Shapiro directly about the serious discrepancy between his administration’s explosive announcement and the findings of Lancaster County Coroner Dr. Stephen Diamantoni.
“Since you had your news conference in Lancaster, we’ve learned a little bit more information about the case with the baby—that it was a newborn,” the reporter said.
“The coroner said that it was a ruptured spleen and didn’t consider it a measles death,” she continued. “Given the fact that we’re in an environment where there is misinformation and there is confusion, why not be a little more specific and transparent about that case?”
Shapiro would not answer. He waved the question off as if Pennsylvanians were not entitled to know whether their governor just stood in a hospital and used a dead infant as a political prop.
The Democrat governor dismissed the growing demands for transparency as “conspiracy theories.”
“I don’t think it serves the interest of public health or slows the spread of this outbreak for me to get into a back-and-forth about conspiracy theories that are showing up online,” Shapiro said.
The Truth About Non-Disclosure Agreements In Non-Profits
MORE NON-PROFITS START DEMANDING VOLUNTEER NDAS
We were recently asked a question about NDAs for non-profit organizations by someone who had been asked to sign one. In light of that discussion, THE EASTON GAZETTE did some research on NDAs.
Non-disclosure agreements seem to be more prevalent than ever. Most of the time, we hear about non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) as they apply to high powered CEO’s leaving their positions or individuals involved in settlements of lawsuits. But now we are hearing about them in the context of local, small non-profit groups. What is an NDA?
A non-disclosure agreement (NDA) is a binding contract that obligates one or both parties to keep specified information confidential and to refrain from disclosing or misusing it. An NDA protects trade secrets, client lists, financial data, product designs, and other proprietary information. Parties sign NDAs before sharing sensitive material during deals, employment, or negotiations. Are NDAs Legally Enforceable?
Please follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Truth Social, Gettr, Twitter
The practice of getting people to sign non-disclosure agreements applies in many different situations. For example, an employee either is hired for or leaves their job, and they may get slapped with signing an NDA by their employer. Some employees may sign an NDA upon retirement. That NDA must specify a particular time period for which that NDA is in effect. It also cannot use retirement benefits as leverage for signing an NDA. In other words, an employee cannot be coerced to sign with a threat of losing or reducing retirement benefits or health care.
are non-disclosure agreements enforceable?
Mostly, yes. However, there are clear stipulations to when NDAs are enforceable and when they are not.
NDAs are enforceable when they identify clearly defined confidential information. In other words, the NDA must specify a reasonable scope of information that is protected. It cannot just be a general statement that makes everything protected.
The parties, disclosing and receiving, involved in the NDA must also be clearly defined and both parties must receive something for signing, employment, access to information, or a business relationship. Neither party may be coerced to sign the agreement.
NDA’s cannot cover illegal activity.
When NDA’s fail it is generally because of an unreasonable duration for the NDA, a vague designation of what is and isn’t covered, an application to an existing employee without giving them anything new for signing, or an attempt to hide fraud, safety violations or illegal activity.
So, for example, if a corporation attempts to get an employee to sign an NDA so that employee will not disclose fraud of any kind, the NDA is invalid.
Tax-deductible ‘charities’ served as pipelines to Democrat voter registration: report
Leftist nonprofits are using pass-through organizations to boost voter registration for demographics most likely to vote for Democrats, a new report alleges.
The report, titled “The ‘Charities’ influencing elections: 2024 and beyond,” written by the Capital Research Center (CRC), found that multiple left-leaning 501(c)(3)s, which are prohibited from engaging in any political campaign for or against a candidate and whose donations are tax deductible, acted as conduits for 501(c)(4)s, which are permitted to engage in direct partisan politics.
Those tax-exempt organizations spent $638 million during the 2024 election cycle, according to the report, to register voters most likely to vote for Democrats.
Three 501(c)(3)s – America Votes Education Fund (AVEF), Guarantee Our Votes Project (GOVP) and Democracy Matters Foundation – effectively routed their entire annual expenditure to affiliated 501(c)(4) organizations while conducting almost no independent program activity.
America Votes Education Fund: AVEF reported on its most recent IRS Form 990s that it gave $20,748,002 in grants to its 501(c)(4) affiliate America Votes while spending just $532 in office expenses and $274 in fundraising expenses in 2024, and paid no employees.
Further, three 501(c)(3) board members are also the president, chief operating officer, and treasurer of the 501(c)(4). America Votes, whose donations are not tax-deductible, says that its mission is to “create a fairer, more representative democracy by increasing voter participation across the country. Our coalition carries out non-partisan, education-focused programs to engage voters, particularly newly eligible and infrequent voters.”
Guarantee Our Votes Project: GOVP spent just 0.2% of its $13,919,873 expenditures in 2024 on legal and office expenses; the remainder went to grants, including $13.85 million to America Works USA and $30,0000 to the New Hampshire Youth Movement project. The amounts represent a massive increase in spending from the previous year, when GOVP gave out just $166,016 in grants.
America Works USA’s website is just one page, describing its mission as finding “unique and creative ways to promote progressive policy, strengthen our democracy, and build powerful infrastructure in states.”
Democracy Matters Foundation: DMF provided 96% of its 2024 expenditures to grants, according to its 990s, giving $31.38 million to its affiliated 501(c)(4), Democracy Matters, which says it exists to “connect and build a community of pro-democracy donors.”
None of the nonprofits listed above responded to a Just the News inquiry prior to press time.
Scott Walter, president of CRC, who was recently interviewed on “Just the News, No Noise,” detailed two other organizations that follow the same pattern.
“If you want to win elections, what do you need to do? You have to register voters, and then you have to get them to vote,” he said.
“Well, that’s what this machinery is focused on. And you have groups like the Voter Participation Center and the Voter Registration Project that claim they just are help – you know they’re helping people do their civic duty.
“But they micro-target their efforts to where they will turn out the most Democratic votes, and they claim that this is still charitable. But you know, you look at Voter Participation Center in an election year. They may spend two-thirds of their money that year on for-profit Democratic Party micro-targeting firms. Now, do you think: ‘Does that sound like nonpartisan charity work to you?'”
Hellbound and Down 
You must be logged in to post a comment.