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.

  • SCOTUS Said No, and the Bank-Blacklist Brigade Smelled Opportunity

    ByBrick Tungsten

    I had hickory smoke in my shirt and AM radio in my ear, and then the Supreme Court did what it sometimes does best: nothing. No fireworks. No sermon. Just a quiet little “cert denied” that lands like a bar tab you didn’t order.

    SCOTUS denies NRA bid to revive free speech suit against former New York regulator

    On February 23, the Supreme Court declined to take up the NRA’s latest appeal in its long-running dispute with former New York financial regulator Maria Vullo. The result: the Court let stand a lower-court ruling that shields Vullo from personal liability under qualified immunity, and the NRA’s damages claims are effectively done in this round.

    No big opinion. No signed dissents. It appeared on an order list, the legal version of a bartender pointing at the “We don’t serve that here” sign.

    The core fight: starving a speaker without banning it

    This case traces back to accusations that New York officials and regulators pressured banks and insurers to treat the NRA like contraband. Not through a law passed by legislators, but through “guidance,” nudges, and the kind of reputational-risk talk that sounds polite right up until your access to financial services starts disappearing.

    The NRA’s point is simple: if government officials can lean on private companies to punish disfavored speech, the First Amendment turns into a decorative throw pillow.

    What already happened, and why this denial matters

    • In 2024, the Supreme Court unanimously revived the NRA’s suit against Vullo on the basic First Amendment theory: officials cannot use their power to coerce private companies into suppressing disfavored speech.
    • Back in the lower courts, the Second Circuit tossed it again, this time leaning on qualified immunity, concluding the law was not clearly established enough (at the relevant time) to hold Vullo personally liable for damages.
    • On February 23, the Supreme Court declined to review that qualified-immunity ruling.

    So the scoreboard reads like this: the principle gets a nod, but the person accused of doing it gets the legal invisibility cloak.

    Qualified immunity: the nonstick pan for bureaucrat behavior

    In Brick terms: someone slaps your spatula, warns the neighborhood not to buy your burgers, then shrugs and says, “Show me the exact rule that said I couldn’t do that in that exact way back then.” Qualified immunity is meant to protect officials when the law is genuinely unclear. Out here, it can feel like a professional courtesy card.

    My bar-stool takeaway

    A cert denial is not an endorsement. But the real-world effect is still real: the qualified-immunity shield holds, and the bank-pressure playbook stays tempting. If you’re cheering because you dislike the NRA, remember the mechanism, not the target. If government can squeeze one disfavored speaker through financial gatekeepers, it can squeeze others the same way.

  • Mortgage Rates Hit the 5s Again, and the Swamp Wants a Medal

    ByBrick Tungsten

    I smelled hickory smoke and heard that familiar AM radio crackle, like freedom arguing with a fax machine. Then came a headline that actually hits your wallet: mortgage rates slipping back into the 5s. And right on cue, the swamp-adjacent victory lap started, like somebody in Washington personally hauled your drywall and installed your cabinets.

    Mortgage News Daily: 5.99% and the six got its hat knocked off

    On February 23, Mortgage News Daily reported the average top-tier 30-year fixed mortgage rate fell to 5.99%. Not a typo. That is the kind of number that makes first-time buyers sit up straighter and makes the refinance crowd start digging through paperwork like raccoons in a cooler.

    But do not let anyone sell you a fairy tale about “the” mortgage rate. Bankrate’s daily read has been hovering a little over 6% this week, and NerdWallet (using Zillow data) has shown rates in the high 5s for some borrowers. Different surveys, different methods, different borrower profiles. That is how your cousin swears he got 5.9, your coworker swears she got 6.6, and both think the other one is lying.

    The fine print they whisper: this is market weather, not a press release

    Mortgage rates are not carved into Mount Rushmore. They move with expectations, Treasury yields, lender margins, and Wall Street mood swings. One gust of fear and money runs into bonds, yields can slide, and mortgage rates can follow. If somebody says, “Look what Washington did for housing,” you should grab your wallet with both hands.

    And here is the villain worth naming: the fee-hungry housing-industrial complex. Not the guy framing a house in the cold. I mean the middlemen, consultants, securitizers, lobbyists, and policy whisperers who eat whether you win or lose. Their incentive is churn and signatures, not “affordability.”

    Who eats when rates yo-yo?

    When rates fall, refinances wake up. The Mortgage Bankers Association said in its latest weekly survey that refinance activity has been running dramatically higher than a year ago. That is not a sermon, that is a cash register singing.

    Even at 5.99%, affordability is still stubborn math: a monthly payment, not a talking point. Tight inventory, zoning obstruction, permit delays, and local boards playing hall monitor keep scarcity alive. Falling rates do not automatically lower rents either, and they do not undo years of investor gamesmanship.

    So yes, I will take rates in the 5s like a cold beer after mowing the yard. But I am not handing the swamp a medal. Rates in the 5s are a spark, not the bonfire. The question is who shows up with real wood, and who shows up with a press release and a selfie stick.

  • SCOTUS Just Grabbed the Keys to Boulder’s Climate Lawsuit Joyride

    ByBrick Tungsten

    I smelled it like that sharp, electrical scent right before the fireworks crack. Hickory smoke in the air, AM radio barking, and some clipboard cowboy somewhere trying to invoice the weather like it is a busted water heater.

    Well, somebody just lit the fuse.

    SCOTUS agrees to hear ExxonMobil and Suncor bid to block Boulder climate lawsuit

    On February 23, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court granted review in Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County (No. 25-170). In Brick terms: the black-robed referees finally decided they are going to step onto the field and sort out whether this Boulder, Colorado climate lawsuit belongs in court at all, and if it does, which court.

    And SCOTUS did not just grab the keys. It popped the hood. The Court told both sides to brief and argue an extra question: whether the Supreme Court even has statutory and Article III jurisdiction to hear the case at this stage. That is not a footnote. That is the bartender setting a glass of water down and asking if everyone is sure this is a good idea.

    The scariest question: “Do we even have the right to be here?”

    When a court starts talking statutory and Article III jurisdiction, it is asking whether it is legally allowed to decide the dispute right now. If the answer is no, the whole courtroom parade gets paused, rerouted, or told to quit pretending a local lawsuit can steer a planet-sized issue like it is a homeowner association dispute.

    That is not me predicting an outcome. That is me reading what the Court itself ordered the parties to address.

    Why ExxonMobil and Suncor want federal lane lines, and Boulder wants home field

    • The companies’ pitch: greenhouse gas emissions and national energy policy are not something one county can micromanage through state-law tort claims, and this belongs in a federal lane as a national question.
    • Boulder’s pitch: the county says it faces real local costs, wants state court, and wants to hold companies accountable under state law.

    But if every city, county, and ambitious legal team can run the same play, you do not get clarity. You get a patchwork national energy policy written by whichever courtroom has the friendliest jury pool and the loudest press conference.

    The villain: the lawsuit industrial complex

    Call it what it is: regulation-by-lawsuit, with money and power in the driver’s seat. Normalize the idea that a county can sue to recover billions for climate impacts, and you have effectively invented a new tax. Not voted on. Not debated. Not signed into law. Just extracted through litigation.

    AP also reported that President Donald Trump’s administration supported the oil companies’ position in the broader fight over these suits. Not shocking. Energy dominance is not a slogan. It is leverage.

    SCOTUS taking this case is a big deal because it could shape the strategy of using state courts to steer national climate policy. Either way, the Court just turned the stadium lights on.

  • Trump Hits the Section 122 Switch: 10% Import Surcharge, 150-Day Shot Clock

    ByBrick Tungsten

    I could smell it before I even finished the first paragraph. That hot, metallic stink of a supply chain that got lazy, like cheap charcoal that never lights, just smolders while the “experts” tell you it’s fine. Well, today America got a new aroma: the import habit getting cut back.

    10% temporary import surcharge takes effect today

    As of today, President Trump’s temporary import surcharge of 10% is in effect on a wide swath of imports for up to 150 days, using Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. This is not a vibes memo. It is a formal presidential proclamation aimed at what the White House calls a “large and serious” balance-of-payments deficit. Normal language: we have been bleeding dollars overseas like a leaky fuel line, then acting shocked when the engine coughs.

    The exceptions list is long on purpose

    Before the TV hair-gel brigade screams “it hits everything,” the proclamation spells out major carve-outs. The surcharge does not apply to categories including:

    • Energy and energy products
    • Certain critical minerals
    • Certain agricultural products
    • Pharmaceuticals and ingredients
    • Certain electronics
    • Certain vehicles and parts
    • Certain aerospace products
    • Items already subject, or later subjected, to additional import restrictions under Section 232 (and other carve-outs)

    That is not random. That is trying to protect the country without kneecapping what still has to run.

    Supreme Court lever pulled, Trump grabbed a different wrench

    The backdrop is simple: the Supreme Court just kneecapped Trump’s earlier tariff strategy that leaned on emergency powers. Fine. That’s the system. The Founders built more levers than a Peterbilt has gears. So Trump went rummaging and grabbed Section 122, a temporary import surcharge authority designed for balance-of-payments problems, with a built-in clock.

    Who hollers, who breathes

    The first to holler are the import middlemen, corporate procurement departments, and K Street acronym-slingers. They chant “uncertainty,” “volatility,” and “retaliation” like a vegan saying “protein” while you drop a brisket on the cutting board. But Washington admitting out loud that a nation can’t outsource its industrial guts forever is the real shock.

    Small business reality

    For small businesses, a broad surcharge can raise input costs, especially for shops still forced to buy components that aren’t made here anymore. That’s real. But when imported goods aren’t allowed to undercut everything, domestic producers can get breathing room, and local orders can stick around long enough for expansion to make sense.

    Starter pistol, not the whole race

    A temporary surcharge does not build a machine shop by itself. It can change the math, and changing the math is how behavior changes. Let it run its clock. Let Congress decide whether the mission gets extended. Use the window to renegotiate, reshore, and rethink what “normal” has meant.

    Steak-and-potatoes sanity. Served hot. Swamp excuses in the drip pan.

  • Consumer Confidence Tick Up, But the Checkout Line Still Feels Like a Gut Check

    ByBrick Tungsten

    There is a special kind of silence at the grocery checkout right before the total pops up. It is not just math. It is mood. And America’s mood, according to the latest consumer confidence data, is trying to lift its head while the bills keep pressing down.

    Conference Board: confidence rises to 91.2, but expectations stay shaky

    The Conference Board reported that its Consumer Confidence Index in February rose to 91.2, up from an upwardly revised 89.0 in January. That is a move in the right direction, but it is not a parade.

    Under the hood, the mixed signals get louder. The Present Situation Index slipped to 120.0 from January, while the Expectations Index climbed to 72.0. The release notes the survey cutoff was February 17, 2026, meaning this is a snapshot of how people felt while staring at the same familiar stack of costs.

    And here is the part that keeps the champagne corked: 72.0 is still below 80, a level the Conference Board has long flagged as a recession-warning zone. The AP noted the Expectations Index has remained below that threshold for the 13th straight month. That is not “all clear.” That is the check-engine light staying on.

    The jobs question: “plentiful” rises, but so does “hard to get”

    The most human part of the report is the labor read. The share of consumers saying jobs are “plentiful” rose to 28.0% from 25.8% in January. That is tangible optimism.

    But the other side moved too: the share saying jobs are “hard to get” increased to 20.6% from 19.0%. That is the push-pull families feel in real time, where opportunity can exist and anxiety can still grow in the same week.

    What it means: confidence is not a press release

    Yes, confidence ticked up. Take the win. But the expectations number is the tell: people are not ready to bet big on tomorrow. The Conference Board also noted that consumer spending intentions are still tilted toward necessities and cheaper thrills, not large, expensive commitments.

    So the story is simple: Americans are resilient, but cautious. You can publish an index, but you cannot argue with the way a household budget feels when the total hits the screen.

  • DOJ v. New Jersey: When a State Tries to Put a Padlock on Federal Law

    ByBrick Tungsten

    You can smell a federalism fight the way you smell charcoal: sharp, hot, and unmistakable. This one lit up fast, because it is not just a policy dispute. It is a question of who gets to set the rules when federal law meets state-controlled space.

    DOJ sues New Jersey over Executive Order No. 12 limiting ICE on state property

    The U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against New Jersey and Gov. Mikie Sherrill over Executive Order No. 12, arguing the state is interfering with federal immigration enforcement. DOJ says the order blocks ICE and other federal immigration officials from making arrests inside nonpublic areas of state property, including state correctional facilities.

    New Jersey has framed the order as a safety-and-rights measure. The state’s public description emphasizes that ICE should not use state property as a launchpad for operations, that access to nonpublic areas should require a judicial warrant, and that the state is also rolling out tools such as a know-your-rights website and a reporting portal where residents can upload interactions with ICE.

    The real argument: access rules or outcome-shaping?

    Here is the hinge: a state can say, “These are our facilities, and these areas are nonpublic.” But DOJ’s position is essentially that New Jersey built rules that make federal enforcement harder, and that states do not get to throw sand in the gears when the federal government is acting within its lawful authority.

    New Jersey’s stated position, as described publicly, is closer to: “Sensitive facilities need clear lines, and if federal officials want in, we want a warrant and oversight.” That sounds like property control and safety policy. DOJ says it operates like a constraint aimed at immigration enforcement specifically.

    Why everyone’s cameras are already rolling

    DOJ leans hard on public safety, arguing that non-cooperation can mean dangerous criminals get released when federal authorities would otherwise take custody. DOJ’s announcement cites conviction categories it says are implicated, including aggravated assault, burglary, and drug and human trafficking.

    New Jersey leans hard on civil liberties and process: warrants, access restrictions tied to state property, and new public-facing tools.

    What the courts will have to decide

    • Property control vs. regulation: Is New Jersey managing access to nonpublic areas, or effectively regulating how the federal government enforces immigration law?
    • Neutrality: Does the order single out federal immigration agencies rather than applying an across-the-board access rule?
    • Real-world effects: Does it push arrests into less secure conditions, as DOJ claims, or prevent disruption in sensitive facilities, as New Jersey suggests?

    As basic reporting notes, this is a live federal lawsuit and part of a broader national pattern of battles between the Trump administration and states and cities over cooperation with immigration enforcement.

  • CISA Lit the Flare on Roundcube, and the Swamp Still Wants a Meeting

    ByBrick Tungsten

    You know that burnt-electronics smell, like an overheated router gasping for mercy in a broom closet? That is the aroma of a weekend getting sacrificed to a blinking server rack. And it is back, because email is still the front door to the whole house. The burglars know it, and they love it.

    CISA just put Roundcube on the bullseye

    This is not a pretend panic. Two Roundcube Webmail flaws, CVE-2025-49113 and CVE-2025-68461, are now in CISA’s Known Exploited Vulnerabilities ecosystem. Translation into F-150 language: when it hits KEV, it is not a polite suggestion. It is the red flare that says people are getting popped.

    Per KEV metadata reflected in NIST’s National Vulnerability Database, federal agencies have a remediation due date of March 13, 2026. That is a deadline with teeth, not a “nice-to-have.”

    What the two bugs mean

    • CVE-2025-49113: the nasty one. Under certain conditions, it can lead to remote code execution in unpatched Roundcube setups. It was patched on June 1, 2025, which means folks had time to do the simplest job in tech: update the software.
    • CVE-2025-68461: a cross-site scripting problem tied to the animate tag in an SVG document. Roundcube shipped fixes in December 2025 via security updates 1.6.12 and 1.5.12.

    The real vulnerability: “later”

    Here is where the grease starts popping. Patch Tuesday comes. A ticket gets created. Then come the sacred rituals: maintenance windows, change boards, risk assessments, and the words that should be illegal in an IT department: “we will circle back.” While the suits are circling, the bad guys are sprinting.

    What to do instead of scheduling another meeting

    Email is resets, MFA prompts, invoices, HR, payroll, and keys to everything duct-taped to the internet. So if you run Roundcube anywhere in your orbit, the correct response is simple:

    • Patch the webmail and confirm the version.
    • Verify what changed and that fixes actually landed.
    • Hunt for signs of compromise and review logs.
    • Rotate credentials if you have any reason to suspect compromise.
    • Reduce exposure. If you do not know what you are running, that is not a mystery, it is negligence.

    Stop treating cybersecurity like a quarterly training video. Treat it like changing the oil. Skip it long enough, and you do not get a gentle warning. You get a blown engine on the highway, and everybody behind you pays the price.

  • Charlotte’s $800M Stadium Glow-Up: When ‘Tourism Taxes’ Magically Turn Into Billionaire Seat Cushions

    ByBrick Tungsten

    You ever watch somebody baptize a grill with lighter fluid like they are trying to summon George Washington out of the charcoal? That is the vibe coming off Charlotte teeing up an $800 million makeover for Bank of America Stadium: hot, loud, and sold like the smoke is somehow not coming from your own backyard.

    What the deal says, in plain English

    • Total renovation: $800 million for Bank of America Stadium.
    • Public share: $650 million from Charlotte’s hospitality and tourism tax bucket.
    • Private share: Tepper Sports & Entertainment puts in $150 million.
    • Overruns: Tepper Sports & Entertainment covers cost overruns.
    • Teams stay: Panthers and Charlotte FC remain through at least 2045.
    • Timeline: Renovations are phased from 2027 into 2030, with games continuing at the stadium during construction.

    The ‘not really taxes’ word game

    The sales pitch leans hard on this line: relax, it is not a new tax hike. It is restricted hospitality and tourism tax money that has to be used on tourism-type purposes anyway. And yes, they say that money cannot be used for schools, transit, public safety, affordable housing, or the other everyday stuff people actually argue about at the dinner table. It is like being told the coupon says “must be spent on ribs.” Convenient, huh.

    The villain: the stadium subsidy machine

    Let’s name the villain slow and clear. The villain is the public-private stadium subsidy machine. Politicians get press conferences and “economic impact” talking points. Team ownership gets a modernized venue that helps sell premium seats, suites, sponsorships, and concerts. Everybody gets ribbon cuttings. The public gets told it is basically free because the money came from “visitors,” like that means the city is not still dedicating tax revenue.

    Not just football: the event factory logic

    This is not being pitched as a Sunday-only project. It is the stadium as a year-round engine: soccer, concerts, college football, special events, the whole traveling circus. The renovation talk includes the usual fan-experience upgrades: new seats, new tech and video, upgraded sound, improved concourses, patios, and more.

    There is also the practice facility piece, with reporting pointing to a new Panthers practice facility opening in 2027. And nearby, there is a planned 4,400-seat indoor performance venue tied to a partnership with Live Nation. Reports have not been perfectly aligned on the opening year, with some pointing to 2029 and others citing 2030, but the direction is clear: more bookings, more revenue, more “campus.”

    Bottom line

    Maybe this is a smart play for Charlotte. Maybe it keeps the teams anchored and keeps big events rolling in. But do not sell adults a tax-funded commitment by pretending it is not public money. If the public is putting in $650 million, then the terms should be ironclad: real transparency, real accountability, real non-relocation teeth, and overruns handled exactly as promised. Treat fans like grown-ups, not like a focus group.

  • NSF Merit Review Reform: Watch the Grant-Industrial Complex Start Sweating

    ByBrick Tungsten

    I can smell it before I even see it: burnt coffee, printer toner, and panic. That is the grant-industrial complex realizing somebody might crack a window and let daylight hit the process.

    Because when Washington starts saying things like “new management structure” and “merit review reform,” the binder-clutchers start fanning themselves like they leaned too close to the brisket smoker.

    Feb. 25 National Science Board meeting: management structure + merit review reform

    A Sunshine Act notice sets a National Science Board meeting for Wednesday, February 25, 2026, from 11:35 a.m. to 4:20 p.m. Eastern, in Washington, D.C. and by video, with open portions viewable online.

    The public agenda includes:

    • A briefing and discussion on NSF’s new management structure
    • Dedicated time on NSF merit review reform
    • Items tied to Science and Engineering Indicators 2026 updates
    • Closed-session business later in the day

    That is the official, paperwork version. The human version is simpler: the National Science Foundation is a major piggy bank for research, and the Board that oversees it is teeing up a public talk about how NSF is run and how it decides what gets funded.

    Merit review is the gate. Who has been holding the keys?

    In F-150 logic, merit review is the checkpoint where a panel decides who gets to drive the federal money convoy and who gets sent to the shoulder with a flat tire and a sad violin.

    The villain is not the scientist grinding away in a lab at 2 a.m. The villain is the grant-grifter ecosystem between taxpayers and discovery: the professional class that benefits when the system stays complicated enough that only they can navigate it, then calls the toll “compliance.”

    Sunshine is a disinfectant. It is also a spotlight for excuses.

    Yes, boards have closed sessions. Fine. But the open portion is where the meat is: NSF leadership on management structure, and the Board talking merit review while the public can watch.

    And that matters, because the biggest scam is pretending decisions are “neutral” just because they are wrapped in acronyms. Criteria is power. Power is not neutral. It is what the paper-pusher class trades like poker chips.

    Who benefits: taxpayers and researchers, or the toll booths?

    If NSF changes management and review, somebody wins. In a sane country, it is the taxpayer and the honest researcher with an actual idea, not a 90-page incantation. In the swampy model, the winners are the middlemen, the admin empires, and the process-addicted gatekeepers whose control is procedural.

    The National Science Board meets February 25. The agenda says management structure and merit review reform. Good. Let America watch. Let the questions get asked out loud.

  • Judge Cannon Locks Up Jack Smith’s Report and Tells the Swamp: Not Today

    ByBrick Tungsten

    I smelled the smoke before I saw the headline: that familiar odor of scorched taxpayer money and overheated cable-news graphics, like somebody parked a stack of subpoenas too close to the brisket. Washington was ready to plate up another serving of Trump drama. Then on February 23, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon walked in with the rulebook and kicked the whole tray off the buffet line.

    What Cannon blocked (and who asked for it)

    As reported by the Associated Press and others, Judge Cannon permanently barred the Justice Department from releasing the portion of former special counsel Jack Smith’s final report tied to the classified-documents case against President Donald Trump.

    She granted requests from Trump and his former co-defendants, Walt Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira. The order blocks Attorney General Pam Bondi, and even her successors, from releasing or sharing that volume outside the DOJ.

    The basic point: you don’t get a victory lap after the case is gone

    The pearl-clutching chorus will sing about “transparency” like it is a sacred hymn, always in the key of Get Trump. But the logic described in the coverage is straightforward: you do not get to publish a glossy accusation-novel after charges are dismissed and pretend it is “civic education.” That is not justice. That is a press release wearing a robe.

    Cannon cited basic fairness, including the presumption of innocence, and described release of the report as a “manifest injustice” to defendants in a case that did not end with a conviction.

    F-150 logic: prove it in court, not on the porch

    If you accuse your neighbor of stealing your lawnmower, you show up with evidence and you take it to court. You do not drop the case and then read a dramatic novella titled “Why I Was Right Anyway” while the local news treats it like scripture.

    The timeline that matters

    • Smith brought charges in 2023.
    • Cannon dismissed the classified-documents case in 2024 after ruling Smith’s appointment was unlawful.
    • Smith’s team ultimately abandoned the prosecutions after Trump won the 2024 election, in line with longstanding DOJ policy against prosecuting a sitting president.

    So what is the public report supposed to be now: a legal step, or narrative-building after the whistle?

    Why this principle is bigger than one defendant

    You can love Trump, hate Trump, or claim you never think about him while your feed screams his name. The principle is the same: in America, the government is supposed to prove its case in court, not publish a punishment pamphlet when the court process ends without a conviction.

    AP also noted Bondi had already deemed the report confidential and internal. Cannon’s order did not just slow the gossip mill. It padlocked the DOJ’s ability to hand that volume to the outside world, now or later.

    The swamp wanted a souvenir. The judge handed them a lock.

End of content

End of content