Camden’s Prohibition Order dated 23 July 2020 records: • Category 1 Hazard – Excess Cold • Category 2 Hazards – Electrical Hazards, Domestic Hygiene, Pests and Refuse, Personal Hygiene, Sanitation and Drainage, and Food Safety The Order further records: “There is a very real risk of the occupying tenant still being in occupation over a winter period and being exposed to serious excess cold and electrical safety hazards…” It also records that the tenant was: “extremely vulnerable” and “at risk of infection”. Toby Deans’ later witness statement focuses on different matters, including: • alleged refusal of access • refusal to move • refusal of accommodation offers • previous litigation brought by Mr Hanson The Prohibition Order records the condition of the accommodation. The witness statement records Camden’s explanation for why the position continued. Both documents form part of the paper trail. #ReadTheDocuments #FollowThePaperTrail #HousingAct2004 #RuleOfLaw #PublicInterest #Accountability #NoWigsNoSilkJustLaw #AccessToJustice #JusticeForRayHanson

Housing Benefit records show payments were made directly to the landlord. Camden’s Prohibition Order dated 23 July 2020 records: • Category 1 Hazard – Excess Cold • Category 2 Hazards – Electrical Hazards, Domestic Hygiene, Pests and Refuse, Personal Hygiene, Sanitation and Drainage, and Food Safety The Order further records: “There is a very real risk of the occupying tenant still being in occupation over a winter period and being exposed to serious excess cold and electrical safety hazards…” It also records that the tenant was: “extremely vulnerable” and “at risk of infection”. These are Camden’s findings. These are Camden’s records. The Housing Benefit payments are Camden’s records. #JusticeForRayHanson #HousingAct2004 #HousingBenefit #ReadTheDocuments #FollowThePaperTrail #RuleOfLaw #PublicInterest #Accountability #DisabilityRights #AccessToJustice These payments were paid direct to your landlord 03/02/2020 12/09/2021 21,840.00 20/01/2020 02/02/2020 520.00 09/12/2019 19/01/2020 1, 560.00 25/11/2019 08/12/2019 520.00 11/11/2019 24/11/2019 520.00 28/10/2019 10/11/2019 520.00 14/10/2019 27/10/2019 520.00 30/09/2019 13/10/2019 520.00 16/09/2019 29/09/2019 520.00 26/09/2016 13/11/2016 1,048.16 02/09/2019 15/09/2019 497.80 19/08/2019 01/09/2019 497.80 05/08/2019 18/08/2019 497.80 22/07/2019 04/08/2019 497.80 08/07/2019 21/07/2019 497.80 24/06/2019 07/07/2019 497.80 10/06/2019 23/06/2019 497.80 27/05/2019 09/06/2019 497.80 13/05/2019 26/05/2019 497.80 29/04/2019 12/05/2019 497.80 15/04/2019 28/04/2019 497.80 01/04/2019 14/04/2019 497.80 18/03/2019 31/03/2019 520.00 04/03/2019 17/03/2019 520.00 18/02/2019 03/03/2019 520.00 04/02/2019 17/02/2019 520.00 21/01/2019 03/02/2019 520.00 07/01/2019 20/01/2019 520.00 23/04/2018 13/05/2018 371.04 24/12/2018 06/01/2019 520. 00 12/11/2018 23/12/2018 1. 560. 00 22/10/2018 28/10/2018 74.29 24/10/2018 11/11/2018 675.58 15/10/2018 21/10/2018 248.90 19/02/2018 14/10/2018 1.165.50 17/09/2018 14/10/2018 848.60 20/08/2018 16/09/2018 848.60 23/07/2018 19/08/2018 848.60 25/06/2018 22/07/2018 848.60 28/05/2018 24/06/2018 848,60 09/05/2018 27/05/2018 575.83 02/04/2018 29/04/2018 848.60 05/03/2018 01/04/2018 848.60 05/02/2018 04/03/2018 848.60 22/01/2018 04/02/2018 424.30 08/01/2018 21/01/2018 424.30 11/12/2017 07/01/2018 848.60 20/11/2017 10/12/2017 636.45 13/11/2017 19/11/2017 212.15 16/10/2017 12/11/2017 848.60 18/09/2017 15/10/2017 848.60 24/07/2017 17/09/2017 1,697.20 26/06/2017.23/07/2017 848.60 29/05/2017 25/06/2017 893.00 01/05/2017 28/05/2017 966.50 03/04/2017 30/04/2017 1, 040 .00 06/03/2017 02/04/2017 1,040.00

Interesting. Mr Hoar, Your professional achievements are not in dispute. What is in dispute is whether it is possible to form a reliable view about a litigant, a GCRO, or the merits of a case without first examining the underlying evidence. You have built a distinguished career challenging public authorities, scrutinising official decision-making and insisting that courts examine facts rather than assumptions. That principle applies equally here. Before anyone concludes that a litigant is vexatious, a menace, or deserving of restraint, they should examine the material. The chronology. The correspondence. The Ombudsman records. The housing records. The court findings. The contemporaneous documents. Evidence should inform opinion. Opinion should not substitute for evidence. That is not merely good advocacy. It is the foundation of the rule of law. #FrancisHoar #FieldCourtChambers #AccessToJustice #LitigantsInPerson #RuleOfLaw #PublicLaw #ReadTheDocuments #FollowTheEvidence #Accountability #Transparency #JusticeForRayHanson

"john.hail@camden.gov.uk" (Hail, John); Date Sent: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 08:42:13 GMT From: john.hail@camden.gov.uk Subject: RE: RH - 2 Richborough Road To: "john.hail@camden.gov.uk" (Hail, John); Date Sent: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 08:42:13 GMT From: Stone, Chris <Chris.Stone@camden.gov.uk> Sent: 19 October 2020 19:04 To: Deans, Toby <Toby.Deans@camden.gov.uk>; Lawrence, Beverleigh <Beverleigh.Lawrence@camden.gov.uk>; Schofield, Hayley <Hayley.Schofield@camden.gov.uk>; Conaghan, Matthew <Matthew.Conaghan@camden.gov.uk> Cc: Hail, John <john.hail@camden.gov.uk> Subject: RE: RE: RH - 2 Richborough Road Thanks Toby By the way are you both aware of the LGO enquiry regarding RH that spans ASC and Housing Do you have a plan on how to respond and are there any of our past emails that you wouldn’t want uploaded due to the sensitivity of relationship building ? All the best -- Chris Stone Service Manager Telephone: 020 7974 1357 #JusticeForRayHanson #FollowTheEvidence #ReadTheDocuments #PaperTrail #Accountability #Transparency #Ombudsman #LGSCO #Safeguarding #HousingJustice #DisabledRights #RuleOfLaw #NoOneAboveTheLaw

That is a question I have asked myself many times. Over the years I have approached councillors, MPs, regulators, lawyers, journalists, public bodies and oversight organisations. Some helped. Some listened. Some did not. What keeps me going is that the documents speak for themselves. The more people who examine the evidence, the harder it becomes for uncomfortable questions to be ignored. #JusticeForRayHanson #FollowTheEvidence #ReadTheDocuments #Accountability #HousingJustice #DisabledRights #Transparency #PublicInterest #RuleOfLaw #NoOneAboveTheLaw

Dear @JoJoFromJerz, Oh, so NOW Democrats want "EVERY predator" held accountable? Fascinating timing coming right after your party's 43-day shutdown disaster. Let me get this straight since I'm clearly a few fries short of a Happy Meal here trying to follow your logic. Does "every predator" include: BILL CLINTON - 26 documented flights on the Lolita Express, multiple visits to Epstein's island, and emails show Epstein ended their friendship because he thought Clinton was "a liar"? KATHRYN RUEMMLER - Obama's former White House Counsel, who had email exchanges with Epstein directing her to "talk to your boss"? The same Ruemmler who met with Epstein multiple times and attended his PR strategy sessions? HAKEEM JEFFRIES - Your current House Minority Leader, who just endorsed the socialist candidate Mondammi for NYC mayor because he's terrified of being primaried? The guy orchestrating this whole Epstein distraction circus? Here's what your dim bulb leadership conveniently forgot to mention: Virginia Giuffre, the victim whose name Democrats REDACTED from those three cherry-picked emails, REPEATEDLY AND UNDER OATH testified that Donald Trump did nothing wrong. She stated she never saw Trump and Epstein together, Trump never acted inappropriately, and she was never at Epstein's house with Trump. Her posthumous memoir "Nobody's Girl" discusses abuse by Prince Andrew but NOT Trump. The elevator doesn't go all the way to the top floor if you think we missed that Democrats deliberately redacted a deceased victim's name to imply Trump was guilty when HER OWN TESTIMONY exonerates him. That's not the sharpest crayon in the box move. Republicans released 20,000 emails while Democrats released THREE. Your party had access to 23,000 pages and found exactly THREE that mentioned Trump, then had to HIDE the victim's name because she cleared him. If brains were dynamite, whoever planned this couldn't blow their nose. Trump KICKED EPSTEIN OUT of Mar-a-Lago decades ago. Seven Epstein survivors went on ABC News confirming Trump showed NO impropriety. But sure, let's keep pretending your party actually cares about accountability. Quinn's Law #2: "If you want to know what liberals are up to, pay attention to what they accuse conservatives of doing." You're screaming about Epstein to distract from your own connections while your party's figures appear all over those files. Senator Durbin REFUSED Republican requests to release Epstein flight logs in 2023-2024. Senator Blackburn submitted those requests IN WRITING and Durbin shut down the committee to avoid it. But Republicans are the ones covering things up? The wheel is spinning but the hamster fell off. Democrats released these emails the EXACT DAY the government reopened after YOUR party held 42 million SNAP recipients hostage for 43 days over temporary COVID subsidies that YOUR party voted to make temporary. Not a single Republican voted to end those ACA subsidies, by the way. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 and the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 made them temporary, and those were Democrat-only bills. So which Democrat politicians are YOU demanding be investigated? Name them. I'll wait. Because until your party calls for investigations into the Democrats in those files with the same fervor you direct at Trump, your "every predator" rhetoric is about as useful as a screen door on a submarine. But what do I know? I'm just someone who actually reads the sworn depositions, court records, and released documents instead of getting my information from partisan tweets designed to distract from your party's political humiliation. #MAGA #Trump #Epstein #Democrats #VoteBlue #EpsteinFiles #Accountability #Hypocrisy #BreakingNews #Viral #TrendingNow #Leftist #Progressive #Liberals #QuinnsLaws #SchumerShutdown #VirginiGiuffre #BillClinton #HakeemJeffries #ReadTheDocuments

Harry, buddy, looks like you've been spending way too much time in the Twitter echo chamber and not enough time with actual facts. Let me help walk you through what really happened here since you seem a bit confused. So about those Epstein files you're all worked up about—that went REAL well for your side, didn't it? Dems released three cherry-picked emails trying to nail Trump, then Republicans dropped over 20,000 pages from the Epstein estate. Guess what happened? The victim your party redacted—Virginia Giuffre—testified repeatedly under oath that Trump did nothing wrong. Yeah, THE Virginia Giuffre who was credible enough to put Ghislaine Maxwell away for 20 years. She cleared him. Every. Single. Time. Want to know who's actually sweating over these files? Hakeem Jeffries had his campaign hitting up Epstein for cash in 2013, a full FIVE YEARS after the guy was convicted. Stacey Plaskett was texting with him during congressional hearings. Katherine Ruemmler (Obama's White House counsel) was emailing him. Larry Summers was asking Epstein for romantic advice—yeah, seriously. Even Bill Clinton shows up, and Epstein apparently dumped him for being a liar. These are all YOUR people, not mine. Trump kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago decades ago. Seven survivors went on ABC and said Trump never did anything inappropriate. But sure, keep running with that narrative while Hakeem Jeffries calls people "stone cold liars" for pointing out his own campaign's fundraising emails! Now let's talk about this "Trump's inflation" nonsense you're peddling. When Biden walked into office in January 2021, inflation was sitting at 1.4%. By June 2022? It hit 9.1%—highest it'd been in 40 years. Cumulative inflation under Biden clocked in at 21.2% over his four years. Trump's entire first term? Less than 8%. Here's what really matters though. Under Biden, prices went up faster than wages in 12 major spending categories—housing, transportation, food, all the stuff people actually buy. Under Trump? Earnings beat prices in all 26 categories they track. People's real purchasing power dropped 1.3% during Biden's time in office while it went UP under Trump. Those groceries you're complaining about? They shot up under Biden's policies, not Trump's. Yeah, they've come down some from the peak, but families are still getting hammered because wages never caught up to Biden's inflation disaster. So you're sitting here blaming Trump for Epstein connections when it's Democrats who can't explain their fundraising emails and text messages with the guy. You're blaming Trump for inflation that happened under Biden. And you're mad about grocery prices that exploded because of Democrat spending bills. This is QUINN'S FIRST LAW playing out right in front of us: liberalism creates the opposite of what it claims to want. You tried attacking Trump and ended up spotlighting how badly Democrats screwed up on both issues! How about this—instead of tweeting conspiracy theories about Trump (when the actual victims cleared him), maybe answer some questions. Why was Jeffries' campaign courting a convicted predator? Why was Plaskett texting with him during hearings? Why was Obama's counsel emailing him? And why did your party give us the worst inflation in decades while Trump's economy was humming along? But what do I know? I'm just someone who actually reads the documents instead of making stuff up on Twitter. #EpsteinFiles #DemocratHypocrisy #VirginiasTestimony #FactsOverFeelings #BidenInflation #TrumpEconomy #ReadTheDocuments #VictimsVoices #ProjectionAlert #QuinnsLaws #HakeemJeffriesExposed #StaceyPlaskettExposed #EpsteinDemocrats #InflationTruth #MAGA #Trump #Democrats #Leftist #Liberals #Progressives #VoteBlue #TrendingNow #BreakingNews

Dear Amber, Let me walk you through what actually happened since you're clearly just repeating debunked talking points without bothering to verify anything. "YOU DIDN'T THINK THEY'D STOP AT THE FIRST AMENDMENT, DID YOU?" The First Amendment? Really? What exactly are you referencing here? Because if you're talking about anything Trump's done regarding free speech, you might want to check who's actually been censoring people. Spoiler alert: it wasn't MAGA. "A BUNCH OF MILITIAS AND BILLIONAIRES" Yeah, because billionaires LOVE giving up their money and control to military organizations and populist movements. That makes total sense. Wait, which party is actually backed by billionaires like George Soros, Mike Bloomberg, and every major tech CEO again? "THEY'RE ALL CHIPPING AT SPEECH, NOW TRUMP'S DOJ LAWYERS ARE DEMANDING GUN-GROUP MEMBER LISTS" Already debunked. October 7, 2025: District court judgment would have required membership lists. October 10, 2025 - THREE DAYS LATER: DOJ and gun rights groups filed a JOINT MOTION to amend the judgment, making disclosure OPTIONAL.[1][2] The DOJ stated: "THE GOVERNMENT, AS A GENERAL POLICY, DOES NOT COMPEL DISCLOSURE OF THE IDENTITY OF MEMBERS OF PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS, AND THE GOVERNMENT DID NOT SEEK TO DO SO HERE."[3] Gun rights groups WORKED WITH the DOJ to fix this. Second Amendment Foundation founder Alan Gottlieb said they're "grateful the DOJ agreed to join the motion."[4] "NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR GUN RIGHTS IS CALLING FOR BUNCH'S RESIGNATION" The National Association for Gun Rights is a no-compromise gun rights organization that's more hardline than even the NRA. They oppose ANY regulation whatsoever and have been criticized for their extreme positions and fundraising tactics. They literally make money off creating panic about gun control - even when there isn't any.[5][6] Former Colorado Governor Bill Owens said about NAGR's founder Dudley Brown: "makes his money when there's turmoil, real or perceived, because that's what gets his members to write him checks."[7] In 2015, NAGR sent mailers that "portrayed [a pro-2A politician] as being friendly to rapists" - someone who had an A rating from the NRA and called himself a "100 percent supporter of the Second Amendment." Even he described NAGR's tactics as "pretty low by even today's political standards."[8] Mother Jones included NAGR on a list of "7 Gun Groups That Make the NRA Look Reasonable."[9] "BUT IS BUNCH THE REAL CULPRIT OR JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS?" You mean the orders to... checks notes... work WITH gun rights groups to protect their membership privacy? Yeah, what a tyrant. "NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR GUN RIGHTS THREW IT BACK TO TRUMP'S LOYAL DOJ" They "threw it back" because that's what activist organizations do - they push their allies to be more extreme. NAGR has made a business model out of attacking anyone who isn't as hardline as them, including other gun rights supporters. "HOW WAS THE IDAHO SITUATION?" Oh, you mean the Qatari training facility at Mountain Home Air Force Base that's been in development since 2017 under Trump's FIRST administration? The one where Qatar is building a facility WITHIN a U.S. base that remains under full U.S. control? The same arrangement we've had with Singapore since 2008 at that exact same base?[10][11] Yeah, totally a conspiracy and not just standard defense cooperation with an ally who hosts THE LARGEST U.S. AIR FORCE BASE IN THE MIDDLE EAST. "NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR GUN RIGHTS KEEPS TRASHING TRUMP, BEGGING YOU TO DO THE SAME" NAGR "keeps trashing" everyone who isn't absolutist enough for them. They attacked pro-2A Republicans with A ratings from the NRA. They exist to create controversy and fundraise off fear. Here's what's actually happening: Trump's DOJ is DEFENDING gun rights while working WITH mainstream gun rights organizations. NAGR is doing what they always do - attacking allies for not being pure enough while fundraising off the panic. Meanwhile, what has Trump's DOJ actually done? Filed the FIRST AFFIRMATIVE LAWSUIT supporting gun owners against California's unconstitutional carry delays[12] Secured a settlement RETURNING Forced Reset Triggers Biden seized[13] Working to RESTORE gun rights for certain individuals[14] But sure, let's pretend Trump is coming for your guns while his administration literally sues states for violating the Second Amendment. You're spreading debunked conspiracy theories from an organization that profits from manufacturing outrage. Maybe try reading past the fundraising emails next time? @elonmusk #ReeseVATF #SecondAmendment #NAGR #FactCheck #StopThePanic #GunRights #TrumpDOJ #ReadTheDocuments #NAGRProfitsFromFear #ActualFacts [1] Second Amendment Foundation, "SAF FILES MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT IN REESE V. ATF" [2] News2A, "DOJ Moves to Amend Court Judgment Demanding Membership Lists in Reese v. ATF" [3] Second Amendment Foundation, "SAF FILES MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT IN REESE V. ATF" [4] Second Amendment Foundation, "SAF FILES MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT IN REESE V. ATF" [5] Wikipedia, "National Association for Gun Rights" [6] GunRights.org, "Gun Rights FAQs" [7] Wikipedia, "National Association for Gun Rights" [8] Wikipedia, "National Association for Gun Rights" [9] Wikipedia, "National Association for Gun Rights" [10] Axios, "Qatar to build air force facility on U.S. base in Idaho" [11] Stars and Stripes, "Hegseth says Qatar will build air force facility in Idaho" [12] NRA-ILA, "First Affirmative Lawsuit in Support of Gun Owners Filed by Trump's DOJ" [13] Just The News, "Gun owners secure historic settlement with DOJ, ATF over Forced Reset Triggers" [14] Department of Justice, "Justice Department Publishes Proposed Rule to Grant Relief to Certain Individuals Precluded from Possessing Firearms"

Dear Joshua, "HEY MAGA" yourself. So you read one tweet, didn't fact-check anything, and decided this was the perfect panic post to farm engagement? Here's what actually happened - since you clearly stopped reading after the scary headline: October 7, 2025: A district court judge in Louisiana issued a judgment in Reese v. ATF that would've required gun rights groups to turn over membership lists. The DOJ asked for narrow relief to limit the injunction scope - NOT to build a registry, but because they're fighting nationwide injunctions where one liberal judge blocks Trump policies everywhere across the entire country.[1][2] But you missed what happened next: OCTOBER 10, 2025 - THREE DAYS LATER - the DOJ and the gun rights groups (SAF, FPC, Louisiana Shooting Association) filed a JOINT MOTION to fix the judgment.[3][4] The DOJ said flat out: "THE GOVERNMENT, AS A GENERAL POLICY, DOES NOT COMPEL DISCLOSURE OF THE IDENTITY OF MEMBERS OF PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS, AND THE GOVERNMENT DID NOT SEEK TO DO SO HERE."[5] They changed "shall provide" to "MAY PROVIDE" - optional, not mandatory. The gun groups WORKED WITH the DOJ on this. Alan Gottlieb from SAF said they're "grateful the DOJ agreed to join the motion."[6] So your "FEDERAL REPOSITORY TO TRACK EVERY GUN OWNER" claim? Yeah, that's complete BS. Actually worse than BS - it's the exact opposite of reality. What's Trump's DOJ really doing? Sued California over unconstitutional carry permit delays (people waiting THREE YEARS for permits) - o FIRST TIME DOJ has filed an affirmative lawsuit FOR gun owners[7] o Got a settlement returning Forced Reset Triggers Biden seized[8] o Working to restore gun rights for certain people who lost them[9] o Reviewing ALL of Biden's gun control mess[10] The whole Reese case? Fifth Circuit ruled banning 18-20 year olds from buying handguns is unconstitutional. The gun groups WON. DOJ took a standard legal position limiting universal relief (prevents bad precedent elsewhere), judge went overboard, DOJ immediately fixed it WITH the plaintiffs.[11] "THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE YOUR GUNS" - really Joshua? That's the same garbage Democrats have screamed for decades. Wasn't true then, isn't true now. Fun fact: Supreme Court ruled in DESHANEY V. WINNEBAGO COUNTY (1989) and TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK V. GONZALES (2005) that cops have ZERO constitutional duty to protect you. If you're worried about government overreach, maybe focus on real threats instead of inventing fake ones about an administration defending gun rights. Reading court docs is hard work, I know. Way easier to screenshot panic headlines and blast "THEY'RE COMING FOR YOUR GUNS" for those engagement numbers. But maybe try basic research before spreading lies? The Trump DOJ is working WITH gun rights orgs to protect the Second Amendment while you're making up conspiracy theories for clicks. Actual joint motion proving you're wrong: saf.org/wp-content/uploads/2… Read it before your next panic post. @elonmusk #ReeseVATF #SecondAmendment #StopLying #FactCheck #GunRights #SAF #FPC #TrumpDOJ #ActualFacts #ReadTheDocuments [1] The Reload, "Analysis: Friction Between Trump DOJ, Gun-Rights Groups Intensifies" [2] News2A, "Bondi DOJ Denies Universal Relief and Requests Gun Rights Group Private Membership List" [3] Second Amendment Foundation, "SAF FILES MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT IN REESE V. ATF" [4] News2A, "DOJ Moves to Amend Court Judgment Demanding Membership Lists in Reese v. ATF" [5] Second Amendment Foundation, "SAF FILES MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT IN REESE V. ATF" [6] Second Amendment Foundation, "SAF FILES MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT IN REESE V. ATF" [7] NRA-ILA, "First Affirmative Lawsuit in Support of Gun Owners Filed by Trump's DOJ" [8] Just The News, "Gun owners secure historic settlement with DOJ, ATF over Forced Reset Triggers" [9] Department of Justice, "Justice Department Publishes Proposed Rule to Grant Relief to Certain Individuals Precluded from Possessing Firearms" [10] Duke Center for Firearms Law, "Will the Trump DOJ Reverse Course in Major Gun Cases?" [11] The Truth About Guns, "Court Calls Handgun Ban Unconstitutional—Then Guts Relief"

Dear Brian, "BREAKING: MAGA JUST GOT PLAYED, AGAIN"? That's hilarious coming from someone who apparently stopped reading after the panic headlines and couldn't be bothered to check what happened THREE DAYS LATER. Let me walk you through what ACTUALLY went down in Reese v. ATF, since you clearly got your information from whatever echo chamber feeds you this nonsense: Yeah, a district court judge in Louisiana issued a judgment on October 7, 2025, that would have required gun rights organizations to turn over their membership lists. The DOJ initially requested narrow relief - not to create a gun registry (despite your dramatic framing), but to limit the scope of an injunction. Why? Because they're fighting nationwide injunctions across America where one liberal judge in some blue city blocks Trump policies EVERYWHERE, even for people not involved in the case.[1][2] But here's the part you CONVENIENTLY LEFT OUT because it destroys your entire "MAGA GOT PLAYED" narrative: ON OCTOBER 10, 2025 - THREE DAYS AFTER THE JUDGMENT - THE DOJ AND THE GUN RIGHTS GROUPS FILED A JOINT MOTION TO AMEND THE JUDGMENT.[3][4] The DOJ specifically stated in this joint motion: "THE GOVERNMENT, AS A GENERAL POLICY, DOES NOT COMPEL DISCLOSURE OF THE IDENTITY OF MEMBERS OF PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS, AND THE GOVERNMENT DID NOT SEEK TO DO SO HERE."[5] They changed "shall provide" to "MAY PROVIDE" - making it OPTIONAL, not mandatory. The Second Amendment Foundation WORKED WITH the DOJ on this motion. SAF founder Alan Gottlieb said they're "grateful the DOJ agreed to join the motion," and SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut confirmed "Thankfully the Department of Justice agreed with our position and has joined in this motion to amend the judgment."[6] So your "THAT'S A GUN OWNER REGISTRY" panic? Complete garbage. Your "NO LAW. NO VOTE. JUST BETRAYAL FROM WITHIN" hysteria? Even worse garbage. Want to know what Trump's DOJ is ACTUALLY doing? Filed the FIRST AFFIRMATIVE LAWSUIT supporting gun owners against California's unconstitutional carry permit delays that were keeping people waiting up to THREE YEARS for permits[7] Secured a historic settlement RETURNING Forced Reset Triggers that Biden's ATF seized[8] Published rules to RESTORE firearms rights to individuals who lost them[9] Ordered a complete review of ALL of Biden's gun control policies[10] The DOJ's initial legal position wasn't about building a surveillance state - it was standard legal strategy to prevent liberal courts from issuing sweeping injunctions that tie the administration's hands everywhere. The judge misinterpreted it and went overboard. The DOJ IMMEDIATELY fixed it - WORKING WITH THE GUN RIGHTS GROUPS.[11] And your dramatic "MAGA BUILT THE SURVEILLANCE STATE" line? That's RICH. You want to talk about surveillance states? Let's discuss how the Supreme Court ruled in DESHANEY V. WINNEBAGO COUNTY (1989) and TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK V. GONZALES (2005) that police have ZERO constitutional duty to protect you. But I'm sure you already knew that. Here's what makes your post even more absurd: The entire Reese case is about the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that banning 18-20 year olds from buying handguns is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The gun rights groups WON. The Trump administration is DEFENDING that win while limiting universal relief to prevent bad precedent in other cases. The judge went too far. The DOJ and plaintiffs IMMEDIATELY filed a joint motion to fix it.[12] Look, I get it. Actually READING court documents and following up on developments is hard work. It's way easier to just screenshot a court order, slap "BREAKING: MAGA JUST GOT PLAYED" on it, and let your followers rage-share it without thinking. But maybe - just MAYBE - you could try doing the bare minimum of research before posting inflammatory nonsense? Because right now you're spreading disinformation that helps NOBODY except your engagement metrics. The Trump DOJ is fighting FOR gun rights while you're out here lying about what they're doing. That's not journalism, Brian. That's just clickbait dressed up as outrage. Here's the actual document showing the joint motion to amend the judgment that you somehow missed: saf.org/wp-content/uploads/2… Try reading it next time before you hit "post." @elonmusk #ReeseVATF #SecondAmendment #FactCheckBrian #ReadTheDocuments #JointMotion #GunRights #ActualFacts #StopLying #SAF #FPC #TrumpDOJ #ConstitutionalLaw #FifthCircuit [1] The Reload, "Analysis: Friction Between Trump DOJ, Gun-Rights Groups Intensifies" [2] News2A, "Bondi DOJ Denies Universal Relief and Requests Gun Rights Group Private Membership List" [3] Second Amendment Foundation, "SAF FILES MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT IN REESE V. ATF" [4] News2A, "DOJ Moves to Amend Court Judgment Demanding Membership Lists in Reese v. ATF" [5] Second Amendment Foundation, "SAF FILES MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT IN REESE V. ATF" [6] Second Amendment Foundation, "SAF FILES MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT IN REESE V. ATF" [7] NRA-ILA, "First Affirmative Lawsuit in Support of Gun Owners Filed by Trump's DOJ" [8] Just The News, "Gun owners secure historic settlement with DOJ, ATF over Forced Reset Triggers" [9] Department of Justice, "Justice Department Publishes Proposed Rule to Grant Relief to Certain Individuals Precluded from Possessing Firearms" [10] Duke Center for Firearms Law, "Will the Trump DOJ Reverse Course in Major Gun Cases?" [11] Second Amendment Foundation, "SAF FILES MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT IN REESE V. ATF" [12] The Truth About Guns, "Court Calls Handgun Ban Unconstitutional—Then Guts Relief

Dear Congresswoman Crockett, Your outrage about Kilmar Abrego Garcia's deportation to Uganda is fascinating, especially coming from someone who apparently didn't bother reading the Supreme Court case before commenting on it. Let me enlighten you on the actual facts: The U.S. government has acknowledged this was an "administrative error" after Garcia was illegally deported to El Salvador in March 2025 (not Uganda, as you claim). He's currently detained in El Salvador's CECOT terrorism confinement center, where he's been for 26 days. The Supreme Court case documents show he had a 2019 withholding order preventing removal to El Salvador due to persecution risks, which the government violated. But here's what makes your tweet particularly ironic: Garcia was identified as an MS-13 gang member - a designated foreign terrorist organization. The government argues his return would pose a public threat, though he denies membership and has no criminal record in the U.S. Now here's the real question, Congresswoman: Which one of these three is true? You didn't read the Supreme Court documents and are just following Democratic talking points despite your constituents' interests, you're not smart enough to understand the actual legal proceedings, or you're fine deceiving your constituents about the facts? That's literally not doing your job. The government's position that it can't retrieve people from foreign prisons once deported - even in error - is concerning regardless of party. Justice Sotomayor's dissent (hardly a conservative voice) criticized this "lawless regime" approach that could theoretically affect anyone, including U.S. citizens. But your claim about deportation to Uganda is simply false. Perhaps between your social media outrage and committee grandstanding, you could actually read the legal documents you're commenting on. #ReadTheDocuments #SupremeCourt #MS13Facts #LegalProcess #CongressionalAccountability #DueProcess #ActualFacts #DoYourJob

Gotta love WallSt research. DOJ subpoenaed Globe Life in late '23, but analyst at @GimmeCreditNY said yday that a 4/24 @FuzzyPandaPA report prompted DOJ to probe $GL. That report credited me w/ breaking news of DOJ probe. #readthedocuments businessinsider.com/departme…

Dosnt it just seem all the media posts now about the case have to be careful what they say! why dosnt anyone just say it how it is, give him the credit where due and at least read the court documents first!! #IStandWithNickCarter #NickCarter #Readthedocuments #media

Lol judging by Vinces hashtags....you can tell he hasn’t been watching the moves that’s been happening, and the documents that continue to be released in drips. #NoOneCaresIfYouAreWorried #readthedocuments #MAGA #DraintheSwamp #obamagate #YourHashtagsAmuseMe

Yes you are sad #readthedocuments 👍🏼🇺🇸

You may want to introduce a resolution to remove the #GangstePOTUS who have turned our gov into a criminal enterprise, seems #Rudy and associates were open to killing #Yovanovich so #Trump could extort #Zelensky The world is watching, this is a pivotal moment. #ReadTheDocuments

HRC/OBAMA fake intel to spy on opponents campaign gate or maybe using illegal leaks to the to push the lie around the world about the made up (by HRC)intel by a bunch of partisan hacks posing as intel officials & journalists #readthedocuments

Read the Omnibus Bill. It's basically gives @realDonaldTrump the POA over where the money is deligated too. It doesn't matter what bill he signs. #readthedocuments #breathe #trusttheplan