Author: Brick Tungsten

Brick Tungsten was forged in a Ford F-150 during a Toby Keith guitar solo and baptized in the smoke of a backyard BBQ. A former bass fisherman, amateur theologian, and full-time enemy of tofu, Brick believes America peaked somewhere between the invention of the Budweiser tallboy and Reagan’s first cold stare into the Soviet soul. He doesn’t write columns. He delivers freedom sermons. Each one is a bugle-blast of righteousness straight from the front lines of the culture war—where gender is a science, guns are gospel, and facts are best when cooked medium rare. Brick doesn’t trust the government, but he does trust his gut, his Glock, and the guy who sold him raw milk out of a barn in 2014. He quotes the Constitution like Scripture, Scripture like prophecy, and anything on AM radio like it was beamed straight from Sinai. Every week, he unleashes verbal roundhouse kicks on WOYJO.com—targeting liberal elites, soy-sympathizers, woke kindergarten teachers, and anyone who thinks freedom is optional. His motto? “Live free, grill hard, and don’t apologize.” He has six American flags, one wife (Betsy), two kids named Liberty and Buckshot, and zero regrets.

  • Tax Day Brisket: 53 Million Already Took Trump’s Cuts

    ByBrick Tungsten

    The grill is hissing, the air smells like hickory smoke and warm paperbacks, and Tax Day math is the loudest thing in the yard. According to the Department of the Treasury, millions of Americans have already grabbed Trump’s new tax breaks. And when that many people are filing and claiming, the paperwork crowd does not get to pretend the relief is imaginary.

    Treasury: Over 53 Million Filers Claimed Before the Deadline

    Here’s the verified headline: as of April 14, 2026, more than 53 million filers claimed at least one of President Trump’s signature new tax cuts. The average refund this filing season is over $3,400, up 11 percent. The average tax cut for filers benefiting from one of the signature provisions is over $800. In other words, these are not just talking points, they are numbers.

    Treasury also broke out the biggest buckets: over 6 million filers claimed No Tax on Tips, with an average deduction of over $7,100. Over 25 million claimed No Tax on Overtime, with an average deduction of over $3,100. Over 30 million seniors claimed the Enhanced Deduction for Seniors, with an average deduction of over $7,500. And for people buying American vehicles instead of leasing, over 1 million filers deducted No Tax on Car Loan Interest, with an average deduction of over $1,800.

    Who benefits, and who hates receipts

    On top of that, Treasury says 5 million Trump Accounts have been opened, with 1.2 million eligible for the $1,000 pilot program contribution. Over 34 million families claimed the enhanced Child Tax Credit, which is permanently doubled and expanded by the Working Families Tax Cuts. And over 105 million filers claimed the permanently doubled standard deduction, meaning fewer forms and fewer chances for gatekeepers to slow-walk relief.

    Now, I love America and working people. But when relief shows up for tips, overtime, seniors, and car interest, that means fewer dollars get shoved into the administrative maw. And when fewer dollars flow through their choke points, the swamp loses leverage, so the usual chorus of lobbyists, bureaucrats, and media grifters gets loud about “receipts” being the problem.

    So what does it mean?

    Higher take-home pay isn’t just personal. Treasury says refunds average over $3,400, and that cash can stretch to the basics and keep small businesses and neighborhoods moving. The standard deduction doubling matters too, because Treasury says over 105 million filers claimed it, which cuts down the hassle and makes the system simpler.

    So here’s the AM radio salute to the Working Families Tax Cuts. Fire up the liberty cosplay, keep the cold one close, and let the receipts do the arguing. If your tips or overtime finally got a break, why are the grifters still acting like the problem is “the receipts”?

  • Tax Day Bonfire: Treasury Says 53 Million+ Filers Claimed Trump’s Cuts

    ByBrick Tungsten

    The air smells like printer toner and backyard charcoal. Tax Day is supposed to be paperwork, but the Treasury release is doing something louder than filing season math. It is thumping the bar like a bass line at a country jam.

    Treasury: 53 Million+ Filers Claimed Signature Working Families Tax Cuts

    Treasury says that as of April 14, 2026, more than 53 million filers claimed at least one of President Trump’s signature Working Families Tax Cuts. It also says the average refund this filing season is over $3,400, up 11 percent from last season. And for filers who benefited from one of the signature provisions, the average tax cut is over $800. Not just done. Cooked.

    Who’s Seeing the Benefits: Tips, Overtime, and Seniors

    Treasury’s breakdown points to specific relief families claimed. Over 6 million filers claimed No Tax on Tips, with an average deduction over $7,100. Over 25 million claimed No Tax on Overtime, with an average deduction over $3,100. And over 30 million seniors claimed the Enhanced Deduction for Seniors, with an average deduction over $7,500.

    That is not some abstract talking point. It is cash getting hauled out of the smokehouse and into real life.

    Spreading Out Across Households: Credits and Standard Deduction

    Treasury also says 5 million Trump Accounts have been opened, with 1.2 million eligible for the $1,000 pilot program contribution. It adds that over 34 million families claimed the enhanced Child Tax Credit, and that over 105 million filers claimed the permanently doubled standard deduction. That is a wide spread of the meat, not a garnish for VIPs.

    What It Means: More Breathing Room, Louder Questions

    Look, inflation can be a stubborn pit boss. But if households are seeing bigger refunds and more deductions that lower taxes, then people are more likely to have breathing room for groceries, bills, and the basic cost of being alive in 2026.

    This Tax Day release is not just about refunds. It is about dignity, about the idea that policy should show up at the kitchen table.

    So tell me, fellow Patriots: are you feeling the difference in your own numbers, or are you still stuck on the old story where Washington always wins and you always lose?

  • Smoke, Paper, and a Gotcha Vote: The Gonzales Expulsion Shuffle

    ByBrick Tungsten

    Washington always smells like burnt paper when the cameras start spinning, and this one was no different. On April 13, Rep. Tony Gonzales of Texas said he will retire from Congress after bipartisan calls for expulsion. And suddenly the House sounded like an AM radio arguing with itself, with both sides cooking up the same hot-button idea.

    What Gonzales said, and why the temperature rose

    Here is what remains consistent in the record. Gonzales announced he would step away from office when Congress returns, and he had already dropped his reelection bid. The expulsion talk did not come out of nowhere.

    Gonzales admitted to an affair with a staff member who later died by suicide. The House Ethics Committee initiated an investigation, and under House rules, members cannot engage in sexual relationships with employees they supervise.

    In other words, there is a line. And once the line is in the spotlight, the question becomes whether the institution enforces its standards the same way every time, not only when it is convenient for the storyline.

    Bipartisan fury: principle, or incentives?

    The story also points to a bigger pattern. Pressure built not only around Gonzales, but separately around Rep. Eric Swalwell of California, as scrutiny renewed. With a slim margin in play, some House members discussed expulsion talk through a trade-off lens, aiming to keep partisan numbers steady while still making a statement.

    The logic described is blunt: expelling members would require a two-thirds vote, and some reporting noted that even if both Gonzales and Swalwell were expelled, it would not change the balance in the House. So the incentive is obvious in this telling: protect the arithmetic, keep the brand clean enough for November, and let the issue burn loud and fast.

    Retirement as the escape hatch

    Gonzales and his allies chose retirement over a likely expulsion fight. Under the ethics framework referenced here, once a member leaves, the committee does not have jurisdiction over former members. The clock becomes politics, and the consequence becomes more about managing fallout than completing a process.

    So what should Americans take from this beyond the smoke? Enforcement has to be real. Accountability should not be selective. And when Congress treats ethics like a staged spectacle, trust pays the price. Tonight the grill is still hot, but the lesson is the same: rules are not optional, and power games should not get to hide behind procedure.

  • Ethics Expulsion Math: Congress Lets the Smoke Clear on Its Own Schedule

    ByBrick Tungsten

    In my backyard, when the brisket hits the stall, everybody starts talking like it is a philosophy. On Capitol Hill, the “stall” is ethics, and Congress is treating the paperwork like it is a grill timer. When expulsion math shows up, two House members decided to leave voluntarily instead of waiting for the floor vote.

    Congress reaches the breaking point on its ethics crisis

    On April 13, Axios reported that two House members chose a tactical retreat, walking away rather than sticking around for the political math of expulsion. And make no mistake, this is not “redemption.” It is Congress running the clock, then calling the result accountability.

    Why the smoke cleared fast

    Eric Swalwell announced he would resign after allegations of sexual assault and misconduct, and after the House Ethics Committee said it had begun an investigation. The committee’s statement cited whether he engaged in sexual misconduct, including toward an employee working under his supervision. Under House ethics rules, lawmakers are not allowed to have a sexual relationship with a House employee under their supervision.

    Tony Gonzales, a Texas Republican, said he would retire as bipartisan calls for expulsion swelled. The House Ethics Committee had already launched an investigation into alleged sexual misconduct, and it is here that the incentives show up like headlights in the driveway.

    The two-thirds trap

    Expulsion in the House takes a two-thirds majority. So the process turns into timing, bargaining, and calculations, where everyone hopes the show burns out before the vote lights. It is due process on paper, but in practice it can become a shield made of calendars.

    Two investigations, one deadline problem

    The committee process moves like a bureaucrat on a treadmill. For Swalwell, the committee said it began an investigation under its Rule 18(a) framework. For Gonzales, it voted to establish an Investigative Subcommittee with jurisdiction over allegations involving violations of the Code of Official Conduct, including sexual misconduct and allegations of discriminating unfairly by dispensing special favors or privileges.

    Due process can be real. But in Congress, it can also be weaponized, buying time while the next cycle spins.

    Cherfilus-McCormick and the disaster-relief stink

    AP reported that an ethics panel found Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick committed 25 ethics violations, including breaking campaign finance laws. AP also reported allegations tied to millions of dollars stemming from an overpayment of roughly $5 million in disaster relief funds, and that she was accused of using money connected to those funds to fund her 2022 congressional campaign through a network of businesses and family members. She has denied wrongdoing.

    The House Ethics Committee’s public statement said that after a March 26 adjudicatory subcommittee hearing, Counts 1 to 15 and 17 to 26 were proven, and that shortly after the House returns from the April recess, the full committee would hold a hearing to determine what sanction to recommend.

    Mills and the ethics buffet

    Axios also pointed to Cory Mills. The House Ethics Committee said its investigative subcommittee would cover allegations that he may have failed to properly disclose required information, violated campaign finance laws in connection with his 2022 and 2024 campaigns, improperly solicited and or received gifts (including connected travel), received special favors by virtue of his position, engaged in misconduct related to allegations of sexual misconduct and or dating violence, and misused congressional resources or status. He denies wrongdoing.

    So what does this mean? Congress can’t even clean its own house without treating due process and timing like party logistics. The people watching for corruption learn the same old lesson: scandal is survivable if you can make it slow enough.

  • Court Date for AI Piracy Fight: Brick Roasts the Settlement-Deadline Shuffle

    ByBrick Tungsten

    Smoke is thick in the air tonight, folks. Not just grill smoke. Court smoke. The kind where you can almost hear a docket clerk flipping pages like a drumroll while the rest of us wonder what, exactly, is being negotiated behind closed doors.

    What’s verified: the Bartz fairness hearing moved to May 14, 2026

    In Bartz v. Anthropic, the court order moved the settlement fairness hearing to May 14, 2026 at 2:00 p.m. Pacific. The order was signed by Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin, and the case appears in the Northern District of California docket for Bartz et al v. Anthropic PBC. Authors Alliance also reported the same hearing date and time after the order.

    So why does the new clock matter?

    Because when a hearing schedule changes, somebody gets breathing room, and somebody else gets forced to wait. Brick’s focus is simple: this is not just “paperwork theater.” A fairness hearing is where the judge is supposed to look at what the settlement means, and whether the process actually holds up.

    The proposed settlement described in coverage is pegged at $1.5 billion, and objectors are already in the mix. Authors Alliance frames the dispute as involving representation, including how the settlement notice was received, plus other objections tied to the record.

    That means we are not dealing with vibes. We are dealing with objections, notices, and the judge deciding what gets counted as fair. That is how real courts work, even when Silicon Valley wants to wrap everything in a “don’t worry, it’s fine” bow.

    Freedom sermon: accountability does not require a deadline conspiracy

    Here is the point Brick keeps pounding the table on: if creators’ work is being treated like raw material, then people should be allowed to raise legitimate concerns in front of the court. If the parties think everything is fair, then a fairness hearing should not be something to sweat like a smoke alarm in a dry barn.

    What it means for the country, not just the nerd blogs

    America runs on the idea that rules are real, not optional. So when a federal court moves a fairness hearing to a specific date and time, it signals that the process is not just a background hum. It is a checkpoint.

    Brick’s taunt for the comment section: if Anthropic and its defenders believe the settlement is fair, why does the fairness hearing schedule feel like pressure, not reassurance? And what do you think the judge should focus on first?

  • CFTC’s Selig Heads to the House, and Arizona’s Smoke-Fire Starts to Burn Back

    ByBrick Tungsten

    The grill is hissing, the smoke is curling, and somehow the country is still arguing about whether people should be allowed to place a wager on reality. Not poker night, not a back-alley bookie, but the stuff modern Americans do when they watch sports, track outcomes, and talk straight. And now Congress is turning up the heat.

    Selig heads to the House Agriculture Committee as prediction markets get scrutinized

    On April 14, reports said you could watch live as Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chairman Michael Selig headed to the House Agriculture Committee. The docket listed Thursday, April 16, at 10 a.m. EDT, and the topic was prediction markets, those event contracts where people trade probabilities like they are running a scoreboard in their heads. It is not exactly a tailgate, but it has the same energy: who gets to set the rules, and who is just trying to grab the cash and call it policy.

    When state regulators bring the paperwork cart, the Constitution brings the fire

    Here is the conflict laid on the grates: state gambling regulators and Arizona prosecutors pushed their theory that platforms like Kalshi should be treated like illegal gambling, even while federal regulators say these contracts fall under the CFTC’s jurisdiction. That kind of power grab is the bureaucrat version of pulling rank at a bar. If you can get state enforcement teams to light the match, you can slow-walk competitors, scare off operators, and create an excuse for more control.

    And the federal courts have not been shy about that fight. In a separate, related case, a federal judge temporarily barred Arizona from enforcing its gambling laws against prediction market operator Kalshi and paused the prosecution. Reporting described the order as leaning on the idea that the Commodity Exchange Act framework puts these contracts in the swap lane and gives the CFTC exclusive jurisdiction. The practical message is simple: checking the fire marshal while someone tries to pretend there is no smoke does not change the rules.

    Jurisdiction wrestling does not protect consumers. It just roasts everyone else

    When oversight is clear, bettors, businesses, and investors can plan. When states bring criminal charges, cease-and-desist letters, and enforcement threats, you get whiplash. Platforms scramble to interpret shifting local demands, legal fees spike, and transparency gets roasted alive. The result is an obstacle course designed to make smaller players stumble, while louder agencies claim they are protecting the public from the consequences of their own meddling.

    Selig’s job in the hearing is to push the federal authority line. If these contracts are traded on federally regulated markets, the rules belong to the CFTC, not a patchwork of state-by-state enforcement whims. Predictive markets may be new furniture, but the Constitution is not a porch swing.

    Sports fans want consistency, not intimidation

    Sports fans are not asking for government to run the concession stand. They want a rulebook that is consistent and transparent. Congress can ask hard questions about prediction markets, but it should also ask harder questions about intimidation masquerading as consumer protection. If federal jurisdiction keeps mattering in court, then the smoke clears. Bettors will keep showing up. The question is whether the rulebook stays steady, or keeps getting lit by whoever shouts loudest.

    So tell me: are you tired of regulators acting like they own the grill, or do you think states should get to light criminal fires every time a new sports-adjacent technology pops up?

  • Brick Tungsten: NIH Shrinks CRISPR for In-Body Delivery, and the Smoke Clears for Real Science

    ByBrick Tungsten

    The grill is hissing, the smoke is thick, and my AM radio is crackling like a live wire. Then I read the latest NIH news and it feels like somebody just flipped the breaker on real science, not the usual paperwork theater.

    NIH-backed scientists shrink CRISPR for precision delivery inside the body

    When the gene editor is too big, the whole dream gets stuck in the mud

    Here’s the unglamorous problem: common CRISPR gene-editing proteins are big. Too big, in fact, for targeted delivery systems that doctors want to use inside the human body. NIH reports researchers found a naturally occurring enzyme, Al3Cas12f, small enough to fit into adeno-associated virus, or AAV, vectors, a leading delivery method for gene therapies. Delivery is the choke point. If you cannot get the tools where they need to go, the toolbox stays locked.

    NIH also reports the team engineered an enhanced version that improves gene-editing performance in human cells. They used imaging and machine-learning tools to analyze the enzyme’s structure. And they point to two key ideas: Al3Cas12f forms a stable complex in the cell, and its design lets it function more effectively once the pieces are produced. That is what it looks like when researchers tackle the mechanical limitation, not the loud headline.

    Editing that jumps from under 10% to over 80%

    According to NIH, the engineered variant known as Al3Cas12f RKK dramatically improved editing efficiency from less than 10% to more than 80% across tested targets, with efficiency reaching 90% in a commonly edited genomic region. NIH says the team introduced the instructions into human cells originally isolated from a patient with leukemia, and targeted genes associated with diseases including cancer, atherosclerosis, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or ALS.

    The Nature Structural & Molecular Biology paper supports the engineering story. It describes structure-guided engineering of Al3Cas12f RKK and frames the improvement as moving from a low editing baseline to an efficient performance level across tested conditions. Nature also notes Al3Cas12f RKK is a lead engineered variant derived from combinatorial mutations, and it reports high activity at specific loci under the study’s tested parameters.

    Who benefits: patients and researchers

    NIH notes support in part by NIGMS through grant R35GM138348. Federal support is the nation’s long-haul engine. It does groundwork, and this breakthrough is the kind of groundwork you would expect from an agency doing its job. So tonight, instead of hunting for the next bureaucratic excuse, celebrate a win made of molecules and math.

    Now answer this: if we can shrink CRISPR for delivery and push editing efficiency past the 80% mark, what other scientific choke points are getting blocked that we should knock loose next?

  • Boulee Slams the Door on FBI Election-Record Secrets

    ByBrick Tungsten

    Fireworks on the timeline, smoke in the record. Tonight we’re talking about secrecy that bureaucrats swear is “routine,” right up until someone asks for answers.

    Judge J.P. Boulee denies Fulton County’s secret FBI election-records bid

    Here’s the verified headline straight out of the smoke: a U.S. district judge, J.P. Boulee, rejected Fulton County officials’ request to force the government to hand over internal communications and a timeline tied to the FBI seizure of 2020 election materials.

    The county sought details including when the criminal investigation began, when an attorney named Kurt Olsen referred the matter to the FBI, and whether Justice Department officials discussed using a criminal warrant to bypass delays in ongoing civil lawsuits.

    Boulee’s ruling was basically: the rule that allows a court to receive evidence in these property-return fights is not a magic key for extraordinary discovery into government secrets, especially when it could turn one kind of case into something much bigger before anyone is even indicted.

    A locked toolbox, not a fair exchange

    Now let’s talk about who benefits. When internal timelines and investigative file details stay behind the curtain, the story stays flexible. You can keep options open while the other side burns daylight and patience.

    Fox 5 Atlanta reports Boulee told Fulton County the high-level discovery it requested would be inappropriate in this proceeding, warning against what the decision described as tantamount to extraordinary pre-indictment discovery.

    In plain AM radio terms, the court told the county: you don’t get to pull back the foil and demand every ingredient in the FBI kitchen on command. You get evidence the law allows, through the proper channels.

    The schedule matters, and so does the pressure

    The reporting says Boulee gave Fulton County until April 27 to submit additional evidence the county can gather on its own. If the government won’t be forced to produce internal investigative materials through the requested motion, the county has to grind forward through other legal tools, piece by piece.

    Why the underlying fight still hangs in the air

    To understand the bigger picture, remember the context: the dispute traces back to a January 28 FBI seizure of Fulton County’s 2020 election materials, following years of allegations and litigation. The Associated Press described earlier court arguments over whether the seizure was unusual and how the legal standards for the process were presented.

    So yes, the fight is procedural. But procedure is how power protects itself, and why accountability can be delayed, complicated, and priced out.

    Now tell me: if the government can seize hundreds of boxes of election materials, and then say this moment isn’t the right moment for explanations of the internal timeline, what does that do to trust in the system, and how much longer should counties be forced to burn coal just to ask basic questions?

  • NAR’s Home-Sales Smoke Signal: 3.6% Down, Tight Inventory, and Mortgage Rates Still Locking the Doors

    ByBrick Tungsten

    The air is thick with that neighborhood barbecue smell, except tonight it is not brisket and freedom. It is mortgage math and anxious whispers. The National Association of Realtors just dropped its March snapshot, and the vibe is simple: fewer doors getting unlocked, more buyers stuck on the sidelines.

    NAR: Existing-home sales slid 3.6% in March as mortgage pressure kept demand pinned

    Right from the report: existing-home sales dropped 3.6% month-over-month to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 3.98 million. NAR also points to the inventory pinch, saying total housing inventory sits at 1.36 million units, with only a 4.1-month supply of unsold homes.

    Prices inch up, affordability dips, and mortgage rates keep stoking the flame

    NAR says the median existing-home price in March was $408,800, up 1.4% from a year earlier. At the same time, the Housing Affordability Index slipped to 113.7 in March, down from 117.5 in February. And mortgage rates add heat: Freddie Mac puts the average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage rate in March at 6.18%, up from 6.05% in February.

    NAR even revised its 2026 outlook, expecting existing-home sales to increase 4% this year, down from a previous projection. The upward trajectory of mortgage rates is called out as a factor.

    Why the squeeze feels “designed”: tight supply plus rate pressure

    When inventory stays tight, buyers face fewer options and less leverage. Pair that with mortgage rates that do not cooperate, and the same home carries a higher monthly cost. NAR also notes that 32% of sales were first-time homebuyers in March, but with supply only at 4.1 months and prices at a fresh March record high, the path to ownership stays narrow.

    What it means: policymakers should widen the gate, not guard it

    This is not just a real estate story. The report cites lower consumer confidence and softer job growth holding back buyers, with inventory below historical norms and mortgage rates rising enough to change the forecast. If you want a healthier housing market, the math points to more supply and fewer choke points, not more permission slips.

    So tell me this: are you feeling the burn, or are you watching homebuyers get priced out while the paperwork crowds profit from delay?

  • Courts Might Have To Do EPA’s Job on Soot

    ByBrick Tungsten

    The grill can burn all it wants, but the real stench here is the delay in the courtroom. This week, 17 health and community groups filed suit against the Trump EPA, saying the agency is stalling a strengthened soot rule instead of taking the steps needed to protect communities.

    Coalition sues for failure to implement the national soot standard

    Soot is made of tiny particles from fossil fuel combustion and other sources of burning. The coalition argues EPA refused to take even basic actions to move communities toward compliance with the 2024 National Ambient Air Quality Standard for particulate matter, as required under the Clean Air Act.

    The filing points to missed deadlines

    According to the filing and statements, EPA missed a key deadline in February for designating areas where soot levels exceed the new limit. Those designations are the first step toward a plan for cleaner air, not an endless waiting game.

    On Monday evening, the coalition brought the case in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California and moved for summary judgment, asking the court to set a deadline to force agency action.

    Nonattainment labels are not decoration

    Under the Clean Air Act, national standards like NAAQS are baseline health benchmarks. When an area does not meet the standard, it is designated as nonattainment. That label then triggers requirements and planning meant to reduce pollution, instead of letting it linger in neighborhoods.

    What the rule was supposed to deliver

    The strengthened standard EPA estimated it would prevent up to 4,500 premature deaths each year, avoid about 800,000 cases of asthma symptom flare-ups, and prevent around 2,000 emergency room visits. It also projected potential net health benefits of up to $46 billion once fully implemented.

    The lawsuit frames the delay as more than an environmental issue. The argument is that missed steps mean more preventable care costs, more children missing school, and more workers sitting in waiting rooms instead of earning paychecks.

    Courts as the grown-ups when agencies slip

    The coalition’s push is not about punishing energy production. It is about making the government follow the rules it already set and addressing stalled deadlines. If the EPA wants to revise standards later, the filing argues, it should not leave health protections hanging while deadlines slip.

    Bar-stool bottom line: implement the soot standard, stop the delay, and do not treat the Clean Air Act like a suggestion card. If you are tired of polluter-friendly smoke screens, say so, and ask: should the EPA be trusted to protect your air, or should courts be required to drag them back to the duty window?

End of content

End of content