MMN Editor

California Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton dressed as his Democratic opponent, Xavier Becerra, for Halloween, wearing a gray-haired mask and holding a sign advertising a mock mileage tax bill to highlight what he called another hit on drivers already facing the nation’s highest gas prices and vehicle registration fees.
Hilton wore the costume to a Trunk or Treat event in Highland Park, Los Angeles.
WATCH:

Trunk-or-Treat in Highland Park, LA!
Becerra’s policies should FRIGHTEN you: $8 gas, sky-high vehicle registration fees… and now a $1,000 mileage tax!
Just 3 days left to vote against this INSANITY. Tell everyone you know to do the same! https://t.co/FSbCaemRtN
— Steve Hilton (@SteveHiltonx) October 31, 2026

Xavier Becerra’s mileage tax idea is so terrible, even a child knows it’s a bad idea! https://t.co/zUGcrn593f
— Steve Hilton (@SteveHiltonx) October 31, 2026

Hilton busted out the mask again during an appearance on Fox News’ The Big Weekend Show.
During the Fox appearance, Hilton wore the Becerra mask, impersonated the Democrat, and declared that Californians love taxes.
Hilton told Tomi Lahren, “I’m sorry Steve Hilton couldn’t be with us today, so I’m here as Xavier Becerra and my mileage tax is going to go up and up and up every mile you drive, and you’re going to love it, because Californians love taxes.”
WATCH:

Halloween fell just three days before the election.
Becerra recently said that “everything should be on the table” when asked about a vehicle-miles-traveled tax to help pay for roads as more drivers switch to electric vehicles that do not pay the gas tax.
Becerra noted that California’s roads are not maintained by magic and that electric-vehicle owners should contribute, while defending the existing 63.4-cent-per-gallon state gas tax.
Hilton has repeatedly called the idea a regressive tax that would add roughly $1,000 a year for the average California driver on top of already elevated costs, and he has said he would veto any such measure.
WATCH: California Gubernatorial Candidate Steve Hilton Films ‘Becerra’s Missing Migrant Children’ Living in Tents on LA’s Skid Row

The Republican candidate’s campaign has promoted lower gas prices, a $73 vehicle-registration cap, and no mileage tax.
California has not elected a Republican governor since Arnold Schwarzenegger.

The post WATCH: California Gubernatorial Candidate Steve Hilton Dresses as Opponent Xavier Becerra for Halloween appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Oh, By The Way, Private Credit Defaults Just Hit A Record…

Submitted by QTR’s Fringe FinanceWhile Wall Street remains preoccupied with unfolding shitshow in tech and AI right now, there’s another little problem quietly developing beneath the surface from a sector I’ve been warning about nonstop for 2 years: private credit defaults just hit a record high.According to Forbes, citing Fitch Ratings’ latest third-quarter private credit report, the U.S. private credit default rate climbed to 6.3% over the trailing 12 months, up from 6.0% in the previous quarter. It’s the highest reading in Fitch’s series, which has now deteriorated for five consecutive quarters.Fitch recorded 27 default events in the third quarter alone, compared with 20 in the second quarter, bringing the trailing annual total to 91 unique borrowers.But check this out…roughly 88% of those defaults involved some form of restructuring rather than an outright bankruptcy. Lenders are allowing struggling borrowers to defer interest, capitalize unpaid interest into additional debt, or extend loan maturities rather than force an immediate reckoning.In other words, the financial industry’s favorite pastime of extend and pretend is alive and well. About half of the defaults involved interest deferrals or payment-in-kind arrangements, while another 38% involved distressed maturity extensions. These arrangements can keep companies technically operating while doing very little to fix the underlying problem: too much debt and not enough cash flow.And the trouble isn’t evenly distributed. Fitch found default rates of 9.7% in both industrial and manufacturing businesses and consumer products and services. Healthcare providers accounted for 16 individual defaults over the past year.Moody’s has identified similar problems. Its analysis of middle-market borrowers found that a reported 4% default rate increased to 5.8% when distressed debt exchanges were included.The bigger concern is what happens next. A substantial wave of private loans originated during the cheap-money years of 2020 through 2022 will need refinancing in 2027 and 2028. Many of these companies borrowed under financial conditions that no longer exist, and some have already exhausted their easiest options for postponing repayment.Moody’s found that borrowers with deeply speculative credit profiles account for more than half of the debt coming due in those two years within its middle-market CLO sample. That means the next couple of years could force lenders to confront losses they’ve spent years trying to postpone.To be clear, this doesn’t mean the entire private credit market is about to implode. Senior creditors have structural protections, and some borrowers will undoubtedly refinance or recover. But it does suggest that the industry’s apparent stability deserves considerably more skepticism than it’s been receiving.I’ve been arguing that the financial system is increasingly dependent on perpetual refinancing, accommodating creditors, and the assumption that somebody will always be willing to provide another round of capital.Private credit is now offering a particularly revealing test of that assumption.The defaults are already at records, the maturity wall is approaching, and much of the distress is being managed by pushing obligations further into the future. This cannot last forever…Extend And Pretend Eventually Comes To An EndIt’s worth remembering that financial crises don’t usually begin when everyone suddenly realizes there’s a problem. They begin when the mechanisms used to conceal or postpone the problem stop working.85% OFF FOREVER IF YOU SUBSCRIBE TODAY: I am again offering an 85% discount to anyone that wants to become a Fringe Finance annual subscriber today. It’s a discount you can keep and stays applied for as long as you wish to remain a subscriber: Get 85% off foreverAnd right now, private credit looks like an industry that’s doing an awful lot of postponing while the broader market burns in the background. Lenders are restructuring loans, extending maturities, and finding increasingly creative ways to avoid recognizing losses. But none of that changes the underlying economics. It merely buys time, and time becomes a very expensive commodity when liquidity is disappearing, credit conditions are tightening, and investors are becoming increasingly unwilling to take risks.My concern is that the panic, restrictiveness, and desperate scramble for liquidity we’re beginning to see elsewhere in the financial system will eventually spread to every corner of the credit markets.When that happens, the luxury of kicking the can down the road disappears. Lenders will want their money back, borrowers will find refinancing increasingly difficult, and the entire industry’s favorite strategy of “extend and pretend” could very quickly become “pay us right fucking now.”And that, dear reader, is when we find out just how much trouble has been hiding beneath the surface.QTR’s Disclaimer: Please read my full legal disclaimer on my About page here.
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/01/2026 – 11:45

In September 2025, the DOJ Civil Rights Division filed its first lawsuits to acquire voter registration lists. This was against Oregon and Maine. About a week later, they filed against 6 more states. So far, they have filed 31 lawsuits, including against DC.
The DOJ wants these voter rolls primarily to ensure only citizens are voting. They need more details than the typical VotReg lists that can be purchased from a state. The DOJ also needs DOB, Driver’s License #, and the last 4 of the SS#.
Oklahoma settled its lawsuit and provided its list. Three other lawsuits in District Courts are still pending. The other 27 cases were dismissed by District Court Judges, leaving the DOJ with a record of 0 wins and 27 losses (0-27).
Then there’s this…
Almost every state refusing is a member of ERIC, the Electronic Voter Registration Center (see column 2 below). ERIC regularly receives the same information the DOJ has been requesting, and much more. TGP has discussed ERIC often over the years.
DOJ lawsuit outcomes for voter registration data.
ERIC member states signed contracts or passed laws committing to the 3-employee non-profit. Each state then provides ERIC with its voter registration lists AND its DMV/MVD database every two months. In the chart, the overwhelming number of officials resisting the DOJ are Democrats.
It’s extremely hypocritical, if not corrupt, to hand this data to a tiny nonprofit regularly, then refuse it to the DOJ, which simply wants clean elections. In fact, only 2 of the 28 ERIC members complied. These were Alaska and South Carolina, which handed over their data without a lawsuit.
Of the 27 cases dismissed by federal District Courts, the DOJ has appealed 23 to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Only the Michigan appellate case has been decided. On June 24, 2026, the 6th Circuit upheld the district court’s dismissal of the DOJ lawsuit. No cases have made it to the U.S. Supreme Court.
WHY CASES ARE DISMISSED:
Overall, these federal judges say the 1960 Civil Rights Act doesn’t establish legal authority for the DOJ to force states into turning over unredacted voter registration data. Each judge has sided with the State, for various reasons.
Some judges say privacy laws restrict access to the personal information the DOJ needs. Other judges said the request is too broad – that the DOJ is seeking millions of records without a clear need.
Others said the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) and Help America Vote Act (HAVA) don’t authorize disclosure of confidential voter records. They think the DOJ’s demands exceed the powers Congress provided. Blah blah blah!
It’s no secret the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ was a blatant Democrat operation for decades. Harmeet Dhillon is the senior DOJ official overseeing these nationwide lawsuits and has also been cleaning out the division’s bias and corruption.
In the first two cases the DOJ filed (Maine and Oregon), they explained the data is already provided to ERIC, “a private organization without enforcement authority.” They explain the state “supplies ERIC with the same information the U.S. Attorney General requested but refuses to provide it to the DOJ.
DOJ voter data request from states, vs ERIC.
As far as we can tell, this comparison hasn’t been brought up in DOJ lawsuits since September 2025. Not a single judge has been pushed to address the bizarre hypocrisy of states that supply data to ERIC, then refuse the DOJ.
The courts aren’t saying the DOJ can’t investigate voter fraud or voter registration irregularities. They’re just making it impossible to check for bloated voter rolls, non-citizen voters, and other list manipulation. This is really appalling at every level.

The post 27 States Win Lawsuits Against DOJ Saying They Would Violate Privacy Rights If They Divulged ‘Confidential’ Voter Info to US Government – But Same States Give Voter Registration Data to ERIC Every 60 Days! appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Third Russian Refinery Attacked By Ukraine In 3 Days

The overnight hours into early Sunday morning hours saw yet a third Russian refinery attacked by long-range Ukrainian drones since Ukraine abandoned a short-lived halt on energy site attacks.Russia’s Kstovo oil refinery is ablaze, becoming the third refinery hit in just three days. What’s known as the “Lukoil-Nizhegorodnefteorgsintez” oil refinery and the adjacent Novogorkovskaya combined heat and power plant in the city of Kstovo were impacted.The complex is Russia’s fourth-largest refinery and its second-largest gasoline producer. Mulitple large fires reupted as a result of the strikes, across the industrial site.”Residents in Kstovo began circulating footage of major blazes lighting up the skyline around 4:00 a.m. local time, reporting repeated loud detonations and low-flying drone engine sounds over the municipal industrial zone,” regional media reports.Many inbound UAVs were observed penetrating the region’s air defenses, and images of dramatic scenes of large fires at the site quickly thereafter began ciculating.Ukrainian media is acknwoledging and detailing the assault. Kyiv Post writes, “The installation manufactures high-octane automotive gasoline, diesel fuel, jet propulsion kerosene, bitumen, and specialized petroleum fractions utilized directly by Russian military logistics and heavy mechanized equipment.”Russia’s Kstovo oil refinery burns in multiple locations tonight, following a Ukrainian drone attack. This is the third refinery attacked this week. pic.twitter.com/XSJUMmMAhL— Woofers (@NotWoofers) November 1, 2026
The Zelensky government had starting Friday shattered the energy ceasefire which had held for some two weeks. The attacks have persisted in defiance of Trump pressure.The Wall Street Journal had deailed Friday morning in that “Ukraine struck an oil refinery in Russia’s Samara region early on Friday, ending a two-week pause in refinery attacks that came amid heavy pressure from the Trump administration to halt such operations.”The publication reviewed, “Ukrainian forces last hit an oil refinery on Oct. 15, and had not struck Russian oil infrastructure of any kind since Oct. 20. The pause took place against a background of repeated demands by Trump and other U.S. officials to stop hitting refineries.”Trump envoy Jared Kushner had reportedly asked Kiev to abide by a 30-day halt. President Zelensky later said he agreed to a brief pause in the strikes, but did so begrudgingly. Relations between his government and the US have been at a lowpoint, amid reports that Washington has moved to cut off vital intelligence sharing and other military assistance. 
Tyler Durden
Sun, 11/01/2026 – 11:20

Jonathan Taylor’s almost certain trade from the Indianapolis Colts by the NFL’s Nov. 10 trade deadline comes with a multitude of subplots but none more gripping than the interest the Green Bay Packers have in the running back and what that means.The Packers’ interest, at whatever level that has reached, shows the team’s willingness to move on from Pro Bowl running back Josh Jacobs, who is currently on their roster but has been a disappointment and something of a headaches because of his legal problems.It has been widely reported, and confirmed by OutKick and Fox News Digital that the Packers are among the teams that have expressed varying degrees of interest in trading for Taylor – a list that includes the Denver Broncos, Minnesota Vikings, New York Giants and, yes, the Packers.PACKERS ACTIVATE JOSH JACOBS; RUNNING BACK SET TO PLAY IN FIRST GAME SINCE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ARRESTAnd while the interest from the other teams is generally tied to a desire get consistent production in their running game, the Packers’ interest glows in neon because Jacobs’ days with the Packers seem numbered.Jacobs, 28, has played in two games for Green Bay this season after spending the first six games on the Commissioner’s Exempt List — which is effectively a paid suspension.That time on the list followed Jacobs pleading no contest in September to battery and criminal-damage-to-property charges stemming from a May domestic incident with his former girlfriend.But Jacobs remains under serious NFL scrutiny as the league said Saturday it is reviewing previously unreported allegations that Jacobs physically abused three other women.That review expanded after police records released Oct. 30 showed that the three other women had contacted authorities about alleged physical or verbal abuse by Jacobs in incidents dating to 2021.Jacobs’ attorneys David Z. Chesnoff, Richard A. Schonfeld, and Clarence F. Duchac III, released a statement Saturday addressing the allegations by saying police had weighed the allegations from the three other women and moved forward with “only two misdemeanor charges.”But that is not the point.The point is an NFL suspension under the Personal Conduct Policy is in the works and now could include newfound allegations of abuse.And regardless of when that suspension comes, the new allegations are a black eye against Jacobs and the Packers by extension for continuing to support a player who carries an expanding list of domestic abuse allegations.JOSH JACOBS FACES TWO MISDEMEANORS CHARGERS AFTER STRANGULATION ARREST AND PACKERS PREPARE FOR ANY SCENARIOSo would the Packers be better off with Jonathan Taylor, who is among the league’s rushing leaders and is tied for league lead with eight rushing touchdowns? Or would they be prefer to continue carrying Jacobs and his uncertain playing status upon completion of the NFL’s Personal Conduct Policy Review?These are not tough questions. And the Packers’ apparent interest in Taylor has already delivered an answer.The greater problem here is whether the Packers would be willing to pay the heavy price to acquire Taylor. The Colts want a deal founded on the Christian McCaffrey trade of 2022 between the Carolina Panthers and San Francisco 49ers.The Niners sent Carolina a second-, third-, and fourth-round pick in 2023 and a fifth-rounder in 2024.COLTS TRADE PRO BOWL GUARD QUENTON NELSON TO SEAHAWKS, THE FIRST OF WHAT COULD BE MULTIPLE DEADLINE MOVESIf the Packers are willing to pay that price, the jettisoning of Jacobs and his domestic abuse ties seem uncomplicated by comparison.The Packers could actually trigger in the neighborhood of $5 million in salary cap savings by releasing Jacobs by the trade deadline.ZERO BS. JUST DAKICH. TAKE THE DON’T @ ME PODCAST ON THE ROAD. DOWNLOAD NOW!And while there is a dead cap charge the team would have to absorb the remainder of this year and next, the cap savings for 2027, the final year of Jacobs’ contract, would be around $13 million.The math makes sense. The upgrade at the position makes sense. The relief of what has become a growing legal headache makes sense.The Packers’ interest in Jonathan Taylor makes sense in context of moving on from Josh Jacobs.FOLLOW ARMANDO SALGUERO ON X: @ARMANDOSALGUERO

Alex Padilla Set Up California with Dominion Voting Machines While Secretary of State, Now Senator Padilla Fights to Prevent Them from Being Examined
By Christine Bish
Forty counties and the election system Padilla is fighting to protect
Forty of California’s 58 counties were using the same Dominion central vote-counting system by 2020. That number belongs at the center of every conversation about Alex Padilla’s defense of California elections.
Padilla ran the state office that certified voting equipment and administered the money helping counties replace it. His decisions helped shape what counties could buy with public assistance. Now he is urging the Justice Department to drop voter-roll lawsuits and demanding limits on seizures of election materials. He tells California election officials, “We have your back.”
What, exactly, is Alex Padilla protecting? His own record is a good place to start.
I began following that record in November 2020, when I asked Sacramento County’s voter registration office why it had chosen Dominion. The answer sent me looking for contracts: I was told there had been two bids, but Dominion was the only system certified to qualify for reimbursement of up to 75 percent. I recorded that explanation in a December email. Several people helped me collect county contracts in 2021.
Sacramento committed to Dominion in late 2017, with its contract taking effect in January 2018. The county’s own public explanation says Dominion was the only bidder that held the certification Sacramento required. The new state reimbursement program did not become law until June.
Dominion was selling the value of that approval. In a proposal included with San Luis Obispo County’s January 2018 contract, the company advertised its product as the “only system in California” certified to the standard cited in its pitch. Exclusivity was part of the sales presentation.
Dominion cleared the newer state standards in October 2017, 13 months before competing vendor Hart received its qualifying approval. When the new reimbursement program began, that newer certification became a condition for funding new systems. Sacramento’s experience shows how a county could receive competing bids and still have only one that met its requirements.
Counties’ cost concerns were already on the record. Legislative analysts reported doubts about affording the new vote-center model. The Legislature and Governor Jerry Brown created a roughly $134 million replacement program in 2018, initially requiring an equal county match. Padilla’s office administered it, and qualifying earlier purchases could be reimbursed.
Padilla also put his own authority behind the spending. His office said he earmarked $20 million in federal election funds to help counties buy new equipment as they moved to the vote-center model. In February 2019, he directed counties to retire older systems under a transition schedule with an extension process. Hart was already qualified by then.
That June, the Legislature and Governor Gavin Newsom added roughly $87 million. For counties such as Sacramento, the state’s share rose to 75 percent of qualifying costs within their allocations, including under the earlier funding allocation. Sacramento had already chosen Dominion. The revised rules made a larger subsidy available for eligible purchases already made.
Then there is the fine print. Sacramento’s Dominion software license bars the county from reverse engineering, decompiling or analyzing the software without the company’s prior written permission. The records of authorized testing and independent reviews deserve close attention.
The contract also subjects confidentiality to California’s public-records law. If Dominion marks requested information confidential, the agreement calls for notice to the company and release unless it obtains a court order. A confidentiality label should lead to a demand for the legal basis, the records covered and any order preventing disclosure.
The political paper trail continues after Padilla moved to the Senate. In May 2021, three lobbyists named on Dominion’s federal account made personal contributions totaling $1,000 to his Senate campaign. The lobbying disclosure identifies Nadeam Elshami, Brian McKeon and Zachary Pfister; the campaign filings show the payments.
Today, Padilla is helping lead the fight over how Washington can examine election administration. His August 5 letter asked DOJ to abandon lawsuits seeking states’ voter rolls. His October 15 letter sought a promise against seizing ballots and equipment while they remained necessary for voting, counting and certification. The senators cited privacy and disruption concerns and acknowledged federal inspection and copying through proper demands.
California also won an emergency ruling on October 28, when a federal judge rejected DOJ’s proposed ballot restrictions involving a disputed list of suspected ineligible voters. That courtroom fight now sits alongside a public record of approvals, contracts and spending that reaches back through Padilla’s tenure.
Padilla has a political legacy in the system he is defending. Californians should be able to examine it from the voter rolls that determine where mail ballots are sent to the equipment that counts accepted ballots. The bid evaluations, certification decisions, testing records and actual reimbursement payments can show how much choice counties had and what taxpayers received.
California’s Democratic leaders are asking voters to trust the election structure they helped shape. They should be prepared to open its records to lawful scrutiny. Forty counties using the same Dominion counting system is reason enough to follow every purchasing decision and every public dollar behind it.
Padilla has promised election officials that he has their backs. Californians are entitled to know who is watching theirs.
Reporting records
Source documents supporting the article and the underlying investigation. Links in the article open selected records; the full list preserves contract locations, legal provisions and the fundraising ledger.

Sacramento County Election Integrity Full Document
County account of the 2017 bid and certification requirements, use of Dominion since 2018, and availability of testing and manual-tally records. Accessed October 30, 2026.
Secretary of State CCROV 18206 dated August 29 2018
Pages 1–2. Initial matching formula, CVSS requirement for new voting systems, and eligibility for qualifying contracts after April 29, 2015.
Voting Systems Used by Counties November 3 2020 General Election
Printed page 15. Counted the Tabulation System column: 40 Dominion, 12 Hart, 5 ES&S, 1 Los Angeles VSAP; 58 unique counties.
Christine Bish email dated December 28 2020
Author’s contemporaneous account of a November 2020 meeting with the Sacramento registrar; explains the reimbursement statement she was given and the origin of the contract investigation.
Dominion proposal in the San Luis Obispo January 23 2018 contract
Original file 20180123-Item13_Dominion_Voting_Contract.pdf. PDF page 117 / printed page 92 contains the Secretary of State requirement. The quoted spelling of VVSG is from PDF pages 127 and 130 / printed pages 102 and 105; page 117 has a malformed acronym. The proposal’s 4.14 claim and its wording of the standard are reproduced as written. They are distinct from the later 5.2 CVSS approval. Original and excerpt are in the accompanying source archive.
Dominion Democracy Suite 5.2 signed approval
Page 5, signed October 16, 2017. Page 1 identifies testing against California Voting System Standards.
Hart Verity 3.0.1 signed approval
Page 4, signed November 16, 2018. The interval from the Dominion 5.2 approval is 396 days, exactly 13 calendar months.
Los Angeles VSAP Tally 1.0 approval and staff report
Staff report PDF pages 4, 8 and 10 describes mail-ballot tabulation and internal Los Angeles use. Signed approval dated August 21, 2018 is available at https://votingsystems.cdn.sos.ca.gov/vendors/LAC/vsap-cert.pdf.
ES&S EVS 5.2.1.0 CA approval in CCROV 17126
Signed November 27, 2017; notice dated November 28. An earlier Unity approval was signed April 14, 2017. These approvals predate the later CVSS-compliant version.
Secretary of State CCROV 19015 dated February 27 2019
Pages 1–3. Three-system CVSS list, withdrawal of older approvals, transition dates and extension process.
Secretary of State CCROV 19056 dated July 23 2019
Pages 1–2 amend the matching requirement for both funding years. Attachment A, PDF page 3, lists Sacramento’s allocations. Allocations are not payment totals.
Secretary of State press release AP19 020 dated February 27 2019
Pages 1–3 explain the newer standards, funding restriction, three certified systems and replacement deadline. Page 2 says Padilla designated $20 million in federal HAVA funding for new equipment as counties transitioned to the Voter’s Choice Act.
Voting Systems Used by Counties September 14 2021 Recall Election
Printed page 12. Same 40 Dominion ImageCast Central 5.10A entries as the 2020 table.
Sacramento Dominion contract MA00036417
Contract reproduced with Change Order 3. Page 1: contract dated November 22, 2017, effective January 13, 2018, and RFP 8484. Page 17: confidentiality and public-records provisions. Page 19: software license restrictions, including analysis without prior written permission.
Sacramento January 2018 amended Election Administration Plan
PDF pages 80–81, Appendix J. Replacement commitment and equipment-cost planning estimates before the June 2018 program.
Legislative Analyst report dated March 30 2017
Considering the State’s Role in Elections. Section on counties unlikely to implement the new model in 2018 documents equipment and implementation-cost concerns.
Legislative Analyst report dated March 16 2018
Voting Equipment for Counties. The proposed $134 million funding included reimbursement for counties that had recently updated equipment.
AB 1824 Chapter 38 Statutes of 2018
Approved June 27, 2018. Section 1 added Elections Code 19402, including earlier-contract eligibility, CVSS certification, payment documentation and dollar-for-dollar matching.
SB 82 Chapter 29 Statutes of 2019
Approved June 27, 2019. Sections 78–79 amended the program; section 19402(c)(5) specifies three-to-one reimbursement, subject to allocation, with a small-county exception.
Brownstein registration to lobby for Dominion
Federal lobbying registration effective January 14, 2019.
Dominion lobbying disclosure for the second quarter of 2021
Contemporaneous Brownstein account roster names Elshami, McKeon and Pfister. Reported lobbying income is separate from campaign contributions.
Alex Padilla for Senate FEC filing 1527030
PDF pages 152, 410 and 479 show the May 19, 2021 personal contributions from Elshami, McKeon and Pfister.
Itemized Padilla fundraising research ledger
44 dated receipts with source URLs and transaction identifiers. The $27,000 federal total is gross receipts identified in 82 recovered filings; Senate 2023 Q4 and 2026 Q3 reports were not recovered. Leadership-PAC raw-file coverage ends August 2026. No matching itemized federal refund was found in those recovered filings.
California Secretary of State campaign and lobbying data
Brownstein’s 2010–2014 receipts appear in filings 1522827, 1637693, 1819567 and 1854270. Latest amendments retained; duplicate late-contribution notices excluded.
Padilla statement to California election officials October 23 2026
Official statement opposing DOJ demands concerning ballots sent to allegedly ineligible voters. Contains the quotation used in the opening.
Padilla and Senate colleagues letter on voter rolls August 5 2026
Pages 1–3 ask DOJ to abandon litigation seeking state voter-registration lists and cite the NVRA quiet period, privacy concerns, disputed SAVE data and court orders. The letter also recognizes list maintenance as an important function outside the restricted period.
Padilla Durbin and Whitehouse letter on election materials October 15 2026
Signed October 15; announced October 16. Pages 1 and 4–5 seek a commitment against seizure of materials needed for voting, counting and certification. Page 2 expressly acknowledges federal inspection, reproduction and copying through appropriate demands.
United States v California order denying temporary restraining order October 28 2026
Case 2:26-cv-12025-DOC-ADS, Document 149. Pages 2 and 26 state the denial; the opinion addresses constitutional authority, the disputed data and requirements for emergency relief. Described as an emergency ruling, not a final disposition of every related proceeding.

The post Alex Padilla Set Up California with Dominion Voting Machines While Secretary of State, Now Senator Padilla Fights to Prevent Them from Being Examined appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

An invitation from a friend lands in your inbox. Something feels off, so you do the responsible thing. You email your friend to make sure the invitation is legitimate. A reply comes back confirming everything. You would probably feel comfortable clicking at that point, right?That’s what makes a recent email from John in Westlake, Ohio, so unsettling. He received a suspicious Evite and decided to investigate. However, the response he received raised even more questions. John has since confirmed with his friend that the emails were part of a scam. His experience reveals a potential weakness in how we verify suspicious emails, especially when someone else’s inbox may be compromised.Missed CyberGuy LIVE? Watch the replay and discover 5 ways to travel smarter and save money.Our free CyberGuy LIVE class, 5 Ways to Travel Smarter and Save Money, has ended, but you can still watch the full replay. Kurt “CyberGuy” Knutsson walks you through five practical ways to protect your phone and personal information, avoid common travel scams, find better deals, save money on bookings and use technology to make your travels easier and less stressful. No technical experience is needed.Watch the free replay + downloadable checklist now at CyberGuyLive.com.FAKE CHATGPT BILLING EMAILS CAN STEAL YOUR LOGINJohn received what appeared to be a fraudulent Evite from a friend. After reading our previous warnings about fake Evite emails, he decided to email his friend directly rather than click the invitation. What happened next made him even more suspicious.Here’s what John wrote:”I received what I thought was a fraudulent eVite from a friend. Thanks to your previous posts, I strongly suspected that this was a phishing attempt. So, I independently emailed my friend and asked if the eVite was legitimate. I got the response below.”Hi JohnThis is from me, and I sent it, Sorry for the confusion,Thank you”It appears that the scammers either set up an auto-response on the Gmail account or manually responded to my email. The punctuation was wrong, so I didn’t consider the response legitimate.”John thought the reply sounded unlike his friend and wondered whether someone had gained access to the account. He later contacted his friend again and confirmed that the emails were a scam. John also shared the actual Evite-branded invitation, which advertised a “Dinner Gathering & Celebration” and included a “View Invitation” button. Its polished design resembled a legitimate event invitation, showing how easily someone could mistake a fraudulent message for the real thing.WHY VERIFIED SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS CAN STILL LEAD YOU INTO A SCAMMost people know they should be cautious about unexpected links. In fact, we’ve repeatedly encouraged readers to verify suspicious messages before taking action. That remains excellent advice. However, there’s an additional concern when the email account you’re contacting may already be under someone else’s control.The Federal Trade Commission warned in May 2026 about fraudulent invitations that imitate popular services such as Evite and Paperless Post. These messages may appear to come from someone you recognize. When you try to view the invitation, a fake website can ask for your email password or a verification code.If criminals obtain access to that account, they may send more fraudulent invitations to the account owner’s contacts. The messages can appear to originate from a legitimate email address, making them especially convincing. Now consider what happens when someone replies to one of those invitations asking whether it’s real. If a criminal still controls the sender’s inbox, that person could potentially intercept the question and send a reassuring answer. A recipient might then believe the invitation is safe because a familiar email address confirmed it.John wondered whether someone had configured an automatic response inside his friend’s Gmail account. Technically, that’s possible. Gmail allows users to create email templates and filters that automatically respond to certain messages. Someone with unauthorized access could potentially misuse that feature or simply respond manually while impersonating the account owner.Although John confirmed the emails were fraudulent, we still don’t know how the reassuring reply was generated. There’s no technical evidence yet showing whether someone accessed his friend’s account, configured an automatic response or used another method to impersonate him. What John’s experience does demonstrate is that a reassuring email reply can accompany a confirmed scam.We reached out to Evite about John’s experience and asked whether the company was aware of this type of scam. In a statement provided to CyberGuy, Evite said:”We’re not currently seeing a rise in phishing scams, however, staying aware is always important, which is why we’re constantly monitoring and providing tools to help users spot the fakes at evite.com/blog/etiquette/how-to-spot-phishing-email-scam/ . The best way to tell the difference is that a scam is generic, but a real gathering today is highly specific. Real hosts are over-communicating, sharing everything from parking instructions and dress codes to very specific themes like ‘Strawberry’ or ‘Western.’ That level of detail is what makes a modern invite harder to fake and gives guests the confidence to say ‘yes’ without second-guessing.Evite advice? Check the details. If it just says ‘You’re invited’ with a link, be cautious. A real Evite host today is telling you where to park and what to wear.”Evite’s advice is worth keeping in mind, although scammers can also create convincing invitations with specific event details. That’s why it’s important to take additional precautions before clicking an unexpected invitation.A few changes to how you verify unexpected invitations can help prevent a suspicious email from becoming a much bigger problem.If an invitation seems unusual, contact the sender using a phone number you already have. You can also reach out through another established communication channel, provided you have reason to trust that account. Avoid using phone numbers included in the suspicious invitation. A criminal could provide a fake contact number designed to make the story sound legitimate.Be cautious if an invitation asks you to enter your email password or share a security code before revealing event details. A phishing website may use those requests to steal account access. If you expect an invitation from a particular service, open its official app or visit its website directly. Check whether the invitation appears in your account rather than following an unfamiliar link.Pay attention if a familiar contact suddenly uses an unusual writing style or gives an answer that doesn’t fit the conversation. Unexpected requests to click another link should make you even more cautious. However, don’t rely entirely on spelling mistakes or punctuation. Criminals can write convincing messages, while legitimate emails may contain errors. The safest approach is to confirm the situation through another trusted method.Fake invitations can sometimes lead to malicious downloads rather than stolen passwords. In certain attacks, criminals disguise remote access software as something you need to install to view an invitation. Strong antivirus software can help identify dangerous downloads and block known malicious websites on supported devices. Keep your operating system and security software updated so you receive the latest available protections. If you accidentally downloaded an invitation file, avoid opening it. Run a security scan using trusted software. If you entered login credentials on a suspicious website, change them through the legitimate service immediately. Get my picks for the best 2026 antivirus protection winners for your Windows, Mac, Android & iOS devices at Cyberguy.comIf you suspect someone has accessed your Gmail account, review its settings for changes you didn’t make. An attacker may use forwarding or automated email rules to interfere with incoming messages.On a computer, follow these steps:If you discover unfamiliar settings, investigate them and remove unauthorized changes. You should also secure your Google account and review recent sign-in activity.A strong, unique password helps protect your email. You should also enable two-factor authentication or use a passkey where supported. Passkeys provide stronger protection against phishing because they are tied to legitimate websites or apps. Visit your Google Account security settings at myaccount.google.com/security to review recent activity and connected devices. If you suspect unauthorized access, change your password using a trusted device and sign out unfamiliar sessions. A password manager can help you avoid reusing passwords across accounts. That way, one exposed password is less likely to compromise another service.Scammers often use personal information found online to make fraudulent messages sound more convincing. Data brokers collect and sell details such as your email address, phone number and information about your family. A personal data removal service can help reduce that exposure by requesting that participating data brokers remove your information. Although no service can erase everything or prevent a friend’s email account from being hacked, limiting what’s available online may make it harder for criminals to personalize scams. Check out my top picks for data removal services and get a free scan to find out if your personal information is already out on the web by visiting Cyberguy.comWhen you encounter a fraudulent invitation, use your email provider’s phishing-reporting tools. In Gmail, open the suspicious message, select the three-dot menu and choose Report phishing . You can also report scams to the Federal Trade Commission at ReportFraud.ftc.gov. If the message appears to come from a friend, contact that person using another trusted channel. They may need to secure their account and alert other people who received similar invitations.If your friend confirms that someone accessed their account, avoid interacting with the invitation. Save the suspicious message as evidence and report it to your email provider. You may also want to check whether you received any follow-up messages containing unfamiliar links.Encourage your friend to begin account recovery through their email provider’s official website. They should review their account activity and remove unauthorized access. If the scammer sent invitations to other contacts, your friend should warn those people through a communication method they still control. For Gmail users, Google provides instructions for securing a hacked account. Acting quickly may help prevent additional messages from reaching trusted contacts.John’s email made me reconsider a piece of advice I often give. I’ve always encouraged people to contact someone they know when a suspicious message arrives. I still believe that’s smart advice, but how you reach that person is important. If their email account has been compromised, you could end up communicating with the scammer instead. Personally, I’d rather pick up the phone and call a number I already trust. I’m glad John trusted his instincts and followed up with his friend. He received a reply saying the invitation was legitimate, yet he kept questioning it. That extra effort helped him confirm the scam. We can’t assume every strangely worded email comes from a hacker, but we also shouldn’t ignore something that feels wrong. Scammers count on us trusting familiar names and email addresses. John’s experience shows why a little extra verification can be worth the effort.Have you ever questioned a suspicious email, only to receive a reassuring reply that still didn’t sound like the person you knew? Did you later discover their account had been hacked? I’d like to hear what happened so write to us at Cyberguy.comSign up for my FREE CyberGuy NewsletterCopyright 2026 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved.

(Note: Thank you for supporting businesses like the one presenting a sponsored message below and working with them through the links below which benefits Gateway Pundit. We appreciate your support!)

On Sunday night you felt fine.
It’s been a great weekend. Kids and grandkids gave you big hugs, the kind that presses a warm little face into you and stays there. Maybe they came over to the house. Snacks on the coffee table. Toys on the rug. Everybody breathing the same air for hours.
You feel fine on Monday, too. Fine enough to finish the dishes and relax with a walk.
Then Tuesday hits.
Your throat feels raw. Your temperature climbs. The kids are gone but they left you with something. A fever, a sore throat and desire to stay in bed.
The closest contact of the week was that hug, right when the kids had a bunch of school germs to pass along. You didn’t feel it when you said goodbye. You feel it midweek when they’re gone.
Too late to start looking
A lot of people wait until that Tuesday to dig for cough syrup. Or they call the clinic. Or they sit in a waiting room full of people with the same cough.
By then the fever is already high. And you feel terrible.
What Americans can keep ready
The Wellness Company’s Contagion Emergency Kit is a doctor-prescribed kit for when a respiratory bug hits, stocked at home so you aren’t starting from an empty shelf when the fever comes.
Inside:

Oseltamivir (generic Tamiflu)

Budesonide (generic Pulmicort) vials plus a nebulizer

Nobel Prize-winning Ivermectin (12 mg compounded tablets)

Hydroxychloroquine

Azithromycin (generic Z-Pak)

Emergency guidebook

Virtual consultation access

Get this and you’re not paying for a Tuesday scramble and a clinic wait. You’re paying once for a labeled kit on the shelf before the next bug hits.
Who stands behind it
The Contagion Emergency Kit comes from the Wellness Company and doctors like Dr. Peter McCullough, who told the truth during the COVID pandemic. The Kit is LegitScript certified. Dispensed by a licensed U.S. pharmacy after a licensed provider reviews your form.
People write about having the kit when flu hits, skipping the crowded waiting room, and keeping it ready when grandkids bring germs home.
What people say
“I am very grateful to have the Contagion Kit because I have upper respiratory infections most winters. Now I can use my kit when I get sick instead of going to the doctor office, clinic or even the ER.” — Karen M.
“It’s a great benefit & service to have medication in hand & a physician ready to advise in a medical emergency when it can take a week or more to get an appointment with a traditional physician. No waiting at the pharmacy either!” — Steven D.
“I feel so much better since getting my kits, there have been stories about different outbreaks around the world even in the States. Now I have peace of mind, if something happens and I need them, I have them.” — Michael W.
Get the Contagion Emergency Kit on your shelf and make sure you’re feeling better before the next weekend visit.
Note: The information provided on this website is intended for informational purposes only and should not be considered medical advice or used as a substitute for professional healthcare guidance. It is your responsibility to comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and guidelines regarding the purchase, possession, and use of prescription medications.

The post When the Weekend Hug Turns Into a Tuesday Fever – One Thing To Keep Ready appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.