According to Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, Reyes has collectively given thousands of dollars to various Democrat candidates and causes throughout her professional career.

During her time working as a private lawyer, she donated to the presidential campaigns of Barack Obama (2012), Hillary Clinton (2008 and 2016), Kamala Harris (2020), and Joe Biden (2020). She’s additionally shelled out money to several Democrat House and Senate candidates, including the campaigns of Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y.

Reyes’ financial support for Democrats also extends to left-wing political action committees.

From 2021-2022, she gave more than $1,700 to Defeat by Tweet, which is “a Democratic-aligned super PAC that allows liberal donors to sign up to contribute as little as 1 cent to political organizers in battleground states for each time President Donald Trump posts to Twitter,” according to InfluenceWatch. The organization was reportedly launched with assistance from Patrisse Cullors, a co-founder of Black Lives Matter.

According to its website, Defeat by Tweet has closed its operations since the 2024 election, with the group reallocating its “final resources and support” to Black Church PAC. The latter organization seeks to “mobiliz[e] churches and leaders nationwide to reclaim political power, fight [so-called] voter suppression, end mass incarceration, and heal communities impacted by gun violence.”

In 2020, Reyes gave numerous donations to Win the Era, a political action committee founded by failed 2020 presidential candidate and later Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg.

Since at least 2013, Reyes has also given dozens of small-dollar donations to ActBlue, a Democrat-aligned fundraising platform that is the subject of congressional and state investigations over allegations that it allowed unlawful foreign monies to fund left-wing political causes.

https://thefederalist.com/2025/03/19/biden-judge-blocking-the-militarys-trans-policy-donated-thousands-to-democrat-candidates-causes/

>>22788407

The matter of the supremacy and influence of the Judiciary in a representative republic has been an issue of contention since this nation’s inception as the Founders, while brilliant in their overall concept of government, erred greatly in the creation of an unaccountable judiciary by relying on a factious Congress to serve as a check and balance on a co-equal branch when necessary.

A major debate during the constitutional ratification process in 1788 concerned the structure, power, and control of the Judiciary. The issue was twofold: 1) the degree of independence and the level of accountability of federal judges and 2) Judicial review of laws and statutes passed by Congress.

This prompted Alexander Hamilton (a staunch defender of the current system), using the pseudonym “Publius” to write in Federalist Paper No. 78 that the Judiciary would be the weakest of the three branches as it would not be able to overpower the Congress, since it controlled the purse strings and the President controlled the enforcement of the court’s decisions.

Thus, the courts would have to depend on these branches to uphold their judgements. Further, federal judges must have life tenure and thus independence; however, Congress could remove a sitting judge via impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors. He also argued that the courts should be tasked with the duty of reviewing statutes passed by Congress to determine if they are consistent with the Constitution as a means of restraint on the legislature. Hamilton further stated that because of the court's inherent weakness in enforcing their judgements, the possibility of corruption affecting judicial reviews would be a non-issue.

Countering Hamilton’s argument was Robert Yates, using the pseudonym “Brutus” in the Anti-Federalist papers, who contended that his primary concern was that judges would substitute their will for the plain text of the Constitution. He wrote:

There is no power above them [the Courts] to control any of their decisions. There is no authority that can remove them, and they cannot be controlled by the laws of the legislature. In short, they are independent of the people, of the legislature, and of every power under heaven. Men placed in this situation will generally soon feel themselves independent of heaven itself.

Thomas Jefferson, a staunch opponent of a powerful central government, also recognized the potential abuse of power by an out-of-control Judiciary and a recalcitrant Congress. In a letter to a Mr. Jarvis in 1820 Jefferson wrote:

You seem to consider the judges the ultimate arbiter of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our Judges and their power are the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and are not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. When the legislative or executive functionaries act unconstitutionally, they are responsible to the people in their elective capacity. The exemption of judges from that is quite dangerous.

The entire ongoing judicial debacle relative to the Executive Orders and actions by President Trump is a giant leap forward into what all these men feared: that Federal District and Appellate Court judges, with the blessing of the Supreme Court, would substitute their will or political opinions for the text of the Constitution or statutes, thus, establishing an uncontrolled oligarchy resulting in potential chaos as future presidents would either ignore or acquiescence to their rulings.

By refusing to address this long-festering issue, Chief Justice John Roberts and the Supreme Court have given the green light to 856 District and Appellate judges to effectively determine, for example, if all self-declared refugees must be granted asylum and together with any visa holder can remain in the country regardless of national security considerations.

Therefore, the Judiciary, not the President or Congress, is in charge of the nation’s sovereignty as the Courts would be declaring themselves to be the sole arbitrators of all immigration policy relating to either legal or illegal immigrants as well as refugees.

However, there are remedies if the Supreme Court continues to allow the inferior courts to usurp the powers of Congress and the president. Congress, if it could get over its fractious tribalism, can:

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/03/the_founders_provided_remedies_for_a_runaway_judiciary.html

>>22788446

part 2

Abolish or severely curtail judicial review for the lower courts as the Congress created and can break, divide, or regulate them at will. Per Article 1, Section 8 and the judicial vesting clause of Article III, Section 1, the legislative branch has full authority over the creation of all courts below the Supreme Court.

Redraw and change the boundaries of the district and circuit courts or even eliminate them entirely if they care to and create new ones with new judges.

Defund enforcement of unconstitutional court decisions. As noted above in Federalist 78, Hamilton was unconcerned that the Courts would become all-powerful, as they had no means of enforcing their decisions. Therefore, the executive branch could simply refuse to enforce their edicts and the Congress could cut off funding for enforcement in reaction to the court’s absurd behavior.

However, central to any of the above steps is that Congress discharges its responsibility, something that it has been loath to do, as it is held captive to ideology, partisanship, and self-aggrandizement. If these latest judicial debacles cannot spur them to action, then nothing short of national chaos will.

Since Marbury v. Madison in 1803, the Federal Courts have been gradually aggregating more power to themselves than what the Founders originally envisioned; however, over the past 50 years, the Judiciary has become an out-of-control and unaccountable bludgeon beholden to the statists bent on transforming the nation.

In every electoral cycle an overwhelming majority of the populace is entirely focused on the entertainment aspect of the winner-take-all feature in elections while ignoring the unfettered role of the Federal Judiciary as a whole. It matters only on the margins whether it is a Donald Trump or any constitutional conservative who may win the presidency in the future as any of their actions or policies the statists disagree with can be thwarted or interminably delayed by unending filings, appeals, and judgements in the Courts.

Unless and until the Supreme Court or Congress acts, America will continue to be held hostage by the Federal Judiciary as it proceeds apace in seizing the constitutional authority delegated to the President and Congress, as these past few weeks have amply displayed.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/03/the_founders_provided_remedies_for_a_runaway_judiciary.html

Tuesday on FNC’s “Hannity,” Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) head Elon Musk reacted to the acts of terrorism waged against him and his properties in recent weeks.

Musk told Fox News Channel host Sean Hannity the left was targeting him because of his pursuit of corruption within government.

“It’s really come as quite a shock to me that there is this level of, really, hatred and violence from the left,” he said. “I always thought that the left, you know, Democrats were supposed to be the party of empathy, the party of caring, and yet they’re burning down cars, firebombing dealerships, they’re firing bullets into dealerships, they’re smashing up Teslas. Tesla is a peaceful company. We’ve never done anything harmful.”

The tech CEO suggested that bigger forces were behind these efforts, which resulted in “bad people” doing “bad things.”

He said, “I think there are larger forces at work as well. I mean, who’s funding and who’s coordinating it — because this is crazy. I’ve never seen anything like this.”

“It turns out when you take away people’s, you know, the money that they’re receiving fraudulently, they get very upset,” Musk added. “And they basically want to kill me because I’m stopping their fraud, and they want to hurt Tesla because we’re stopping the terrible waste and corruption in the government. And, well, I guess they’re bad people. Bad people do bad things.”

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2025/03/19/musk-they-basically-want-to-kill-me-because-im-stopping-their-fraud/

Vice President JD Vance disclosed the specifics of an odd exchange with a multibillionaire technology CEO.

In a speech at the American Dynamism Summit, Vance described how he and his wife, Usha Vance, discussed the societal concerns of replacing workers with artificial intelligence during a dinner event they hosted in 2017 with a prominent group of Silicon Valley business leaders.

Vance recalled that one of the rich CEOs assured him that he was not concerned about job loss, claiming that ‘digital fully immersive gaming’ would give people a new sense of purpose, the Daily Mail reported.

“You would know his name if I mentioned it, he was the CEO of a multibillion-dollar company,” Vance said, without revealing the identity of the person who made the comment.

“My wife texted me under the table and said, ‘We have to get the hell out of here, these people are f-ing crazy,'” he continued.

https://conservativebrief.com/jd-vance-recall-90200/

CNN anchor Jake Tapper called the body of water where the returning astronauts splashed down the Gulf of America in a brief nod to the Trump administration — before adding that the rest of the world still recognizes it as the Gulf of Mexico.

https://nypost.com/2025/03/19/media/cnns-jake-tapper-refers-to-gulf-of-america-while-covering-astronaut-landing/

>>22788467

agree

all too convenient to claim would be assassin is mentally ill, especially considering the 3 letter agencies' mind control tech

>>22788546

>>22788599

well said, thank you for this explanation

>>22788677

Thank You to whomever is responsible for deleting the vati spam of satan worshiping and Jesus mocking posts

find it interesting that moojoo always shows up at the same time as vati

>>22788735