Von Clausewitz

Patriot, Husband , Ethnically American, Purveyor of justice, Advocate for common good. -Spaces Host -NRA firearms instructor. (Rebel Alliance)

[Von Clausewitz @FortJustice510]

@catturd2

[Von Clausewitz @FortJustice510]

@TheUnitedSpot__ @Hotshot_Movie This one’s a banger

[The United Spot @TheUnitedSpot__]

@Hotshot_Movie Nothing but winning, that’s what Spencer Pratt will do.

[The United Spot @TheUnitedSpot__]

@RealJamesWoods Karen Bass dropping bombs.

[The United Spot @TheUnitedSpot__]

@RealJamesWoods @davidlazor51 Gavin Newsom is a ……………….

[Overwatch🇺🇸 @mos6493]

https://t.co/K61i5h9di9

[The General @1776General_]

Judge orders gag order on Chud The Builder

It prohibits Chud from livestreaming or making social media posts while the case is ongoing

The judge is terrified of the support Chud has received and the exposure of the courts unprecedented discriminatory handling of the case.

The judge has stipulating how his extremely high unprecedented bond can be paid.

[Andrew Branca Show @TheBrancaShow]

WHAT A GREAT DAY FOR DALTON EATHERLY!

TLDR: The State's case against Eatherly appears to be utterly lacking in ANY LEGAL MERIT WHATEVER, based upon what appears to be the official Affidavit of Complaint just made public (attached).

This in a case in which the State's BURDEN is proof of guilt, and disproof of self-defense, beyond ANY REASONABLE DOUBT.

All of it: So, it appears the affidavit of complaint against Dalton "Chud the Builder" Eatherly has been made public, and the contents will ABSOLUTELY SHOCK many of you.

FIRST SHOCKER: THERE IS NOT A SINGLE WORD ABOUT DALTON HAVING UTTERED ANY RACIAL SLUR TOWARDS JOSHUA FOX WHATEVER, SO AS TO HAVE PROVOKED THE FIGHT AND THUS TO HAVE LOST THE LEGAL JUSTIFICATION OF SELF-DEFENSE.

NOT. ONE. WORD.

That was Dalton's biggest potential vulnerability on self-defense, and we can now be confident that we can put that concern to rest.

But it gets even BETTER for Dalton.

SECOND SHOCKER: Even if self-defense IS NOT EVEN CONSIDERED, the Affidavit of Complaint fails to present ANY evidence-based narrative that Dalton has committed ANY CRIME WHATEVER. (But, of course, self-defense WILL be raised, only further buttressing Dalton's legal position.)

Specifically, there's literally not a SINGLE WORD in this Affidavit of Complaint that describes ANY criminal conduct whatever.

I've embedded the Affidavit in my possession, but for purposes of succinctness, the relevant portions reads:

"... Dalton Eatherly and Joshua Fox engaged in a verbal altercation in front of the Montgomery County Courthouse."

This is not a crime, unless it's merely the misdemeanor of disorderly conduct, which would apply equally to both Eatherly AND Foxx. And in any case Eatherly has not been charged with disorderly conduct (nor Fox, of course).

"During this verbal altercation, Mr. Eatherly turned his body in a bladed stance towards Mr. Fox ..."

There's nothing unlawful about taking a defensive stance when dealing with an angry antagonist. Certainly Eatherly is not charged with the "crime" of "taking a bladed stance."

"... and reached for his firearm located in his right jacket pocket."

Again, there's nothing unlawful about reaching for a firearm in one's pocket in preparation for possible necessary self-defense. Note that Eatherly is not charged with the "crime" of "reaching for a firearm in located in his right jacket pocket."

"Thereafter, a physical altercation ensued."

Note the passive voice. The "altercation ensued." There's no claim that EATHERLY initiated the "altercation."

Indeed, if anything, to the extent the affidavit has detailed Eatherly's conduct, the absence of any representation of his conduct to indicate that it was EATHERLY who initiated the altercation, we can only infer that it was instead FOX who initiated the altercation.

This would, of course, make Eatherly the VICTIM of Fox's unlawful attack upon him.

The next paragraph: "Mr. Eatherly discharged his firearm, striking Mr. Fox multiple times."

There's nothing inherently unlawful about discharging a firearm and shooting someone multiple times. Thousands of shootings that fit this description occur every year, and qualify as perfectly lawful self-defense. Of course, now self-defense need actually be put on the table.

Then there's a discussion of Fox being flown to a hospital, followed by: "In addition, at the time shots were fired, there were several innocent bystanders in the area. Surveillance video fo the incident shows a ricocheting projectile hitting nearby walls."

Again, there is nothing inherently unlawful about firing shots that miss the intended target. Police involved in lawful shootings of suspects routinely miss about 70% of the shots fired. Those shots ALSO go flying about the neighborhood until they hit something. None of that is a crime, absent evidence of recklessness--and the affidavit provides no statement of recklessness. Indeed, not a word of recklessness.

Note that if the shots were fired in lawful self-defense, as a matter of law they were not fired recklessly.

I would also note that there's not a word in this affidavit that even contests, much less contradicts, even a single legal element of Dalton's anticipated claim of self-defense. Not Innocence, not Imminence, not Proportionality, not Avoidance, and Not Reasonableness.

Not a single element. Not a word of it.

If this were a civil case, I would argue that this complaint fails to state a cause of action.

Indeed, it's hard to recall the last time I saw an Affidavit of Complaint so utterly lacking in legal substance whatever.

At this point I have to say that I've never felt more positive about Dalton Eatherly's claim of self-defense, at least based upon the representations of this apparently official "Affidavit of Complaint."

If these facts provided in this Affidavit of Complaint are all the State of Tennessee has on which to prosecute Dalton on the attempted murder, aggravated assault, reckless endangerment, and malicious firearms possession charges brought against him, I simply don't see any prospect to any reasonable degree of legal certainty of prosecutors securing a conviction on any of those charges beyond a reasonable doubt on the legal merits.

HEY! IF YOU LIKE THIS KIND OF USE-OF-FORCE LEGAL ANALYSIS, and would like to know more about how to be HARD TO CONVICT if YOU are ever compelled to defend yourself, your family, or your property against criminal predation, consider picking up a FREE copy of my best-selling plain-English book, "The Law of Self-Defense: Principles" (we only ask that you cover the S&H).

https://t.co/0CGqlDtmuO

@AmiriKing @ArchetypeTheory @JackPosobiec @DLoesch @Timcast @TheOfficerTatum @MyronGainesX @TateTheTalisman

[Von Clausewitz @FortJustice510]

@libsoftiktok @jakejakeny

[Von Clausewitz @FortJustice510]

@barrycunningham Ok fair enough

[Kar @KJ_E0D_INF]

https://t.co/ATqTmkvPNU

[Von Clausewitz @FortJustice510]

** not BS Barry. Here’s the breakdown with citations. I was joking about Trump being prime minister of Israel but he did jokingly say that yesterday in an interview.

AIPAC (via its super PAC, the United Democracy Project/UDP, and affiliated pro-Israel groups) and related donors spent roughly $9–16 million+ against Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) in his 2026 Republican primary.**<grok:render card_id="fe226f" card_type="citation_card" type="render_inline_citation"><argument name="citation_id">11</argument></grok:render>

This made it the most expensive U.S. House primary in history, with total ad spending exceeding $32 million (some reports cite up to ~$35 million overall, mostly from outside groups).<grok:render card_id="16f48b" card_type="citation_card" type="render_inline_citation"><argument name="citation_id">14</argument></grok:render>

### Key Breakdowns from Reports (as of mid-May 2026):
- **Pro-Israel groups overall**: Over **$9 million** directly attributed to AIPAC and allied pro-Israel interest groups (per Politico and others). Broader pro-Israel-linked PACs spent more than **$15.5–15.8 million** opposing Massie or supporting his challenger, Ed Gallrein (including UDP + Republican Jewish Coalition Victory Fund/RJC).<grok:render
- **United Democracy Project (AIPAC’s main super PAC)**: ~**$4.1–5 million** on ads attacking Massie (e.g., for votes against pro-Israel measures). Earlier AdImpact tracking showed ~$2.6 million at one point, with additional late spending.<grok:render card_id="7109c0" card_type="citation_card" type="render_inline_citation"><argument name="citation_id">13</argument></grok:render>
- **RJC Victory Fund**: ~**$3.9–4+ million** on ads.<grok:render card_id="c0708a" card_type="citation_card" type="render_inline_citation"><argument name="citation_id">13</argument></grok:render>
- Additional spending came via Trump-aligned super PACs (e.g., MAGA KY, ~$7 million total, funded in part by pro-Israel donors like Paul Singer and Miriam Adelson-linked groups) and others like Christians United for Israel.<grok:render card_id="f433d1" card_type="citation_card" type="render_inline_citation"><argument name="citation_id">14</argument></grok:render>

Massie (who receives no AIPAC money and has been a vocal critic of unconditional U.S. support for Israel and related lobbying) lost the primary to Gallrein. He and others highlighted the heavy outside spending as a key factor.<grok:render card_id="c691f7" card_type="citation_card" type="render_inline_citation"><argument name="citation_id">18</argument></grok:render>

Figures come from FEC data, AdImpact ad tracking, and outlets like Politico, The Intercept, and Al Jazeera. Exact totals can shift slightly with final filings, but the scale (~$9M+ from core AIPAC/pro-Israel efforts) is consistent across sources. For the most precise/current numbers, check FEC independent expenditure reports for the relevant committees.

[Von Clausewitz @FortJustice510]

Cucked out lawyer. If Chud continues with this guy, he’s fried.

[Robbie Harvey @therobbieharvey]

NEW: Chud The Builder’s Attorney Releases Statement. 🧵

I’m releasing it as it was posted. I’ve made no edits.

[Von Clausewitz @FortJustice510]

Who fired this bozo?

[The General @1776General_]

Ed Gallrein received 10,854 “mail in” ballots votes tonight.

Thomas Massie lost by 10,280 votes. I guess they couldn't out spend them so they just stole the election with fake mail in ballots.

There is no voting your way out of that level of corruption by a foreign nation. Trump was behind this.

[Von Clausewitz @FortJustice510]

@WhiteDudesWs Savage retards

[Von Clausewitz @FortJustice510]

@mattvanswol Retarded savages

[The General @1776General_]

Pro AIPAC candidate spent $25.6 million on advertising in a single US House primary against Thomas Massie.

KY-04 just became the most expensive House primary in American history.

Why is AIPAC spending that much money on a single seat and why is it so important for AIPAC to get Massie out.

[Von Clausewitz @FortJustice510]

@alphafox Go fuuuuuk yourself

[Von Clausewitz @FortJustice510]

@MrBenWick