🚨Los Angeles Election Fraud Caught on Hidden Camera
LA election petitioners were caught on tape giving homeless individuals other voters' information, instructing them to forge voter names and signatures, and offering cash and drugs as incentives to register to vote.
Folks, we're dealing with a fraction of a percentage point difference, there's still hundreds of thousands of votes outstanding, and LA officials have given us the next 3 weeks to count! Let's git-r-dun!
Election Shambles Update:
1. California Democrats have turned our state into a global laughing stock. India counts 600 million + ballots in a day. California counts less than 10 million in a MONTH.
2. Make sure YOUR vote is counted. Watch this video for the steps you should take.
3. We're watching everything closely and have lawyers standing by if needed.
4. We're as confident as ever that we will make the top two.
5. As governor I will replace this absurd system. We cannot have another election that makes us look like a "failed state", as @NateSilver538 put it.
Link to check that your vote is counted:
https://t.co/3nhM0DvAZH
Link to report any incidents:
https://t.co/ajEO5EFY0a
Thank You - stay focused - Change is Coming!
It would be hilarious if the 49ers talked the Browns into flipping Verse right back to them for future picks and put him across the line from Bosa so he could play against the Rams in Week 1. 😂
Gavin Newsom’s new $20 million dollar NGO diapers program is spending TRIPLE the retail cost per diaper compared to Walmart
Here’s the math:
Diaper prices at Walmart
Huggies 160 count: $39.77
Pampers 160 count: $42.47
Luvs: 120 count: $34.97
Value Brand 162 count: $27.38
Gavin Newsom’s program is spending $20 million dollars to give 100,000 babies 400 diapers, that’s 50 cents per diaper
Compare that to Walmart
Value Brand: $0.16 per diaper
Huggies: $0.24 per diaper
Pampers: $0.25 per diaper
Luvs: $0.29 per diaper
Gavin Newsom is spending 2-3x+ more per diaper than it cost to buy diapers at retail price
Money laundering
We’ve agreed to a partnership with @SpaceX that will substantially increase our compute capacity.
This, along with our other recent compute deals, means that we’ve been able to increase our usage limits for Claude Code and the Claude API.
@GavinNewsom Talk about a grift? Why don’t you explain how you’ve allowed $100+ BILLION to be defrauded from taxpayers in your state?
You always complain about Trump but never address the problems you’ve caused in your state.
People are sick of the name calling, be a man and take action.
🚨 Musk's lawyers just showed the jury the most damaging document in evidence on Brockman:
November 2017 Brockman writes in his private diary:
>"the true answer is that we want [musk] out... if three months later we're doing b-corp then it was a lie"
>“can’t see us turning this into a for-profit without a nasty fight. i’m just thinking about the office and we’re in the office and his story will correctly be that we weren’t honest with him in the end about still wanting to do for profit just without him”
January 1, 2018 Brockman emails Musk:
>"it's an honor to work alongside you. every meeting with you, i continue to learn, grow, and see the world in a new way"
Brockman was planning to oust OpenAI co-founder Musk while publicly thanking him for the privilege of working alongside him.
This insane proposal has already driven billions of dollars of tax revenue out of our state. If implemented it would destroy California's innovation economy. As governor I will do everything in my power to stop it.
Kyle Shanaan the coach is unreal!
Kyle Shanahan the GM is closer to Joe Schoen.
I doubt the 49ers will ever get to see what this team could be like with an actual GM. John Lynch is more of a team president when it comes to the draft. Coaches have way too much control here.
Something is rotten in Santa Clara.
The 49ers draft process isn’t just off, it’s systematically broken. The 2026 class is just the latest entry in a 5+ year pattern of pissing down their own leg.
Here's a summary of the 2026 class:
- A 60-pick reach in Round 2.
- A flawed “need” player over higher-upside talent.
- And, of course, the "Shanahan classic:" a RB taken 40-70 spots earlier than expected while premium positions sit untouched.
This isn’t misfortunate. It’s a pronounced, fundamental failure to understand value and evaluate talent. One reach is defensible. Doing it every year, while consistently flaunting the board, is malpractice.
Take Stribling: the Niners passed on higher-graded players at positions of need - Bisontis, T.J. Parker, Kayden McDonald, Cashius Howell, C.J. Allen, Colton Hood (all who went within the next 8-9 picks) - to draft a traits-based WR projected for the middle of Round 3, if not later. Best case, he develops into a good player but contributes nothing this year while immediate impact options at guard or edge go elsewhere.
Then they trade back from 58, passing on players like Anthony Hill and Keyron Crawford, only to land Romello Height, a 25-year-old with a capped ceiling. Even if he produces, the opportunity cost is glaring. You don’t pass on young, ascending talent for marginal contributors unless you’ve got a broken framework for evaluating talent.
And then the signature move: reaching ~60 picks for Kaelon Black. A fine player, sure, but with no distinguishing traits (call him Jordan James redux...but taken 60 picks earlier). A Day 3 back taken on Day 2 while OL (Trey Zuhn, Gennings Dunker), WR (Chris Bell), EDGE (Barham), and S (Jalon Kilgore) talent remained on the board. It’s not just suboptimal, it’s flat-out incoherent.
At some point, this stops being debatable. Under @JohnLynch49ers, this regime has gone 6 drafts without producing a single Pro Bowl player. The results aren’t unlucky; they’re consistent. And consistently mediocre at best (see 2024/2025) and disastrous (2021, 2022 and 2023) at worst.
@JedYork, tolerating this is a choice. And that choice is settling for permanent underachievement. Enough is enough.
cc: @grantcohn@sportslarryk@Chase_Senior@SharpFootball@dieter@hutchdiesel