SARAH HOYT’S SHOCKED FACE TOOK XANAX AN HOUR AGO: Mullin warns non-citizen voter registrations in NJ ‘could be much higher.’ “He also revealed that DHS had identified 278,000 non-citizens registered to vote in cooperative states.”

More: It wasn’t a glitch.

Developing…

INDEED:

But whatever you do, don’t be this guy:

The arresting officer, on the other hand, maybe deserves some kind of medal.

KRUISER’S MORNING BRIEFING: GOP Midterm Theme Should Be ‘Joe McCarthy Was Right.’ “The Democrats can’t tiptoe around their future plans anymore. Thus far, the elders of the party have met the youthful zeal of the young Democratic Socialists of America with timid acquiescence. It’s understandable, shouting people down has been the Dems’ modus operandi for a long time, of course the loudest miscreants among them are prevailing now.”

MUCH OF THE TARGETING IS BEING DONE WITH AI NOW, WHICH MEANS THE PATTERNS MAY BE LESS OBVIOUS AT FIRST GLANCE:

HMM: Democrats raise more money than Republicans in every key Senate race except Iowa.

Fundraising in the second and first quarter shows that Democrats hold a strong campaign finance advantage in all key races, except Iowa, the New York Times reported, citing new campaign finance filings.

The party’s financial picture is complicated by the Maine race, where it had to scramble to find a new nominee following Graham Platner’s exit. Republicans also outperformed Democrats in money raised through main party committees and super PACs.

The largest gap between Democratic and Republican fundraising was seen in the Texas race, where Democratic nominee James Talarico brought in $54.5 million through his campaign committee, compared with $3.9 million that Republican nominee Ken Paxton has raised.

Let’s just say that fundraising isn’t always an accurate gauge of actual support.

Still, maybe Republicans need to get serious about supporting their candidates.

WALTER DURANTY, CALL YOUR OFFICE:

AND IT WOULD BE AWESOME:

TRADING PLACES:

NIGEL FARAGE: Make no mistake this is a coup – we MUST have an election now.

In the space of just a few short weeks, Andy Burnham has effectively crowbarred his way into No10 without anyone even trying to block his path.

He has arrived there unelected, unopposed and with no mandate from the public whatsoever but for a by-election victory in Makerfield.

Meanwhile, the rest of the country has been left scratching its head in bewilderment as it faces yet another handover of power to someone it never asked for, nor, frankly, knows very much about politically at all.

Considering this is someone who claims he wants to bring about the biggest change in our politics for 40 years, this represents a very disturbing state of affairs indeed.

Make no mistake, this is a coup, plain and simple. There must be a General Election immediately.

Worryingly, what few words Burnham did say before he disappeared behind that famous black door indicate his time in office promises to be every bit as disastrous as Sir Keir Starmer’s, if not worse.

Worse.

It’s true that Britain needs a general election, stat. But Labour needs the three years before the next election is required to import more Third World hooligans.

Labour has power and doesn’t mean to relinquish it.

INMATES RUNNING THE ASYLUM:

Related: “The quote you are thinking of is: ‘democracy is like a streetcar; you ride it until you reach your destination, then you get off.'”

 

AN EPITAPH, OF SORTS, FOR JOHN ROBERTS’ CREDIBILITY:

Roberts is entirely situational. He decides each case on its own terms based on the political climate of the day. Roberts does as much as he thinks he can get away with, no more and no less. In one case, minimalism. In another case, maximalism. Rules of prudence are thrown to the wind when the cause is just. And the Chief Justice uses whatever magic is needed to get there.

Roberts is not an institutionalist. He is an illusionist. But like all other illusionists, once he is off the stage, he will be quickly forgotten. Chief Justice Marshall’s decisions are still revered. Will anyone even remember the sorts of political compromises the Roberts Court navigated? Why did he vote to save Obamacare? Why did he vote to save Roe? I can barely remember the situations from the first Trump administration. Roberts’s opinions may as well be written with disappearing ink.

A weak man, performing weakly.

OUR PATHETIC ELITES:

Socialism is for losers. It provides a way that they can advance without producing anything of value and — more importantly — an avenue for revenge upon those who do.