Trump Directs DOJ To Penalize States and Cities That Use Cashless Bail
As part of his response to the alleged crime emergencies taking place nationwide, Trump signed an executive order restricting federal funding from jurisdictions with cashless bail policies.

On Monday, President Donald Trump, who has called cashless bail a "government-backed crime spree," signed an executive order to end the policy nationwide. The order restricts the allocation of "Federal policies and resources" to jurisdictions and states with cashless bail policies for "crimes that pose a clear threat to public safety and order." It tasks Attorney General Pam Bondi with creating a list of such jurisdictions within 30 days, at which point the federal funds of these jurisdictions may be suspended or terminated.
While the Eighth Amendment prevents excessive bail, defendants are not guaranteed an absolute right to bail. The Bail Reform Act of 1984 allows for the denial of bail for defendants who pose a flight risk, including those charged with violent crimes, offenses carrying life imprisonment or death, certain drug offenses, repeat felony offenders, and those posing a danger to society.
When a defendant is arraigned, a judge may release them on their own recognizance (a promise to appear), detain them, or release them on bail. With bail, a cash guarantee is provided and returned upon the conclusion of the case. Bail is determined by the jurisdiction where the crime is prosecuted, meaning in some jurisdictions, bail isn't required for lesser charges.
With cashless bail, defendants who are not deemed a flight risk or threat to public safety are released on a promise to return, without monetary collateral. Proponents argue that cash bail disproportionately impacts black and Latino populations, and ending this practice would reduce recidivism rates, since data suggest that longer pretrial detention is linked to quicker new arrests.
Multiple jurisdictions and states have experimented with cashless bail to varying degrees of success. In 2023, Illinois became the first state to abolish cash bail. Under the Pretrial Fairness Act, judges must instead hold detention hearings to determine whether a defendant is a flight risk or a public safety threat. "Not too different from how we release people now. It's just that money will no longer be a condition of release," NPR reported at the time.
It's unclear if these reforms had any impact on crime, although a study by Loyola University Chicago's Center for Criminal Justice notes that violent crimes and property crimes declined a year after cashless bail was enacted. That same report found that the percentage of people who missed a required court date declined from 25.1 percent to 22.8 percent.
New York's bail reform law, enacted in 2019 and amended in 2023, limits cash bail and pretrial detention primarily to violent felonies. Defendants are typically released on recognizance unless there's a flight risk, and New York law narrows the parameters for bail consideration to "the kind and degree of control or restriction necessary to reasonably assure the principal's return to court."
Following the passage of New York's laws, a 2023 study by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice found that the state's bail reforms neither increased nor decreased recidivism rates.
New Jersey's risk-based bail system, which was finalized in 2017, offers more judicial discretion than New York's, but still eschews cash bail for low-risk defendants in favor of a public safety assessment. In 2023, New Jersey's Joint Committee on Criminal Justice Reform attributed the state's rearrest rate of less than 1 percent to the 2017 bail reform, noting that over 80 percent of defendants who completed pretrial services were not rearrested.
The president also signed an executive order on Monday aimed at cashless bail policies in Washington, D.C., which have been in place since 1992. The order mandates that federal law enforcement in the city hold arrestees in federal custody and pursue federal charges and pretrial detention to ensure they aren't released from custody before trial.
It also authorizes Bondi to review the Metropolitan Police Department's retrial release policies and direct Democratic Mayor Muriel Bowser to align D.C. policies with the president's methods for dealing with crime in the city. Under the order, federal agencies must also identify actions, including funding allocation and federal services, to coerce D.C. to abandon its cashless bail system.
Last year, the city released 87 percent of the people arrested in D.C. without bail. Of those, 89 percent remained arrest-free, and 86 percent of released defendants made all scheduled court appearances, according to data from D.C.'s Pretrial Services Agency.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
You choose the consequences when you choose the behavior.
And YOU, PervFected and Mind-Infected Chumpy-Humpy-Dumpy Simp-Chimp-Chump; DR... DeRanged... Stranger Danger!!! THE Moist DeRanged Stranger of ALL... Are choosing Punishment-Worshit! You, too, will reap twat Ye so PervFectly sow! Punishment-Worshit does SNOT end well!
Punish-punish-punish! Personally, I think that punishment should be strictly reserved for only those who cannot otherwise be corrected, and then, “the punishment should fit the crime”. What is needed, and then no more, as far as the severity of the punishment goes. Even criticism is punishment, and it, too, should be carefully rationed.
What have very varied thinkers through the years said about this?
"Beware of all those in whom the urge to punish is strong." - Friedrich Nietzsche
“Mistrust all those in whom the desire to punish is imperative.” Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
"Let he who is without sin, throw the first stone." - Jesus
“How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while there is still a beam in your own eye? You hypocrite! First take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.” - Jesus
Chumpy-Humpy-Dumpy Simp-Chimp-Chump lusts after punishing (and KILLING?) Jesus, Gandhi, and MLK Jr, because Chumpy-Chump can CLEARLY see that these 3 were SOOOOO WRONG for SNOT buying (for resisting) "my Tribe's violence GOOD; your tribe's violence BAD!"
This shit is just MORE of Trump trying to punish "Blue" areas, for SNOT voting for Trump, using other excuses!
Wow Chumby, look at this freak prove your point.
Yes, ALL of the NON-freaks LOVE punishing others!!! And telling them to commit SUICIDE, ass does The PervFected MASTER Christian, THE Moose-Mammary Necrophiliac!!! Jesus TOLD PervFected, Mind-Infected Her to PUSH for suicide! In Her PervFected Mind, that is...
In reality, shit is the Evil One who tells Moose-Mammary the PervFected Necrophiliac, to advocate for suicide! (Ass well ass identity theft, by the way.) Moose-Mammary is THE PervFected, Mind-Infected, Soul-Infected Servant, Serpent, and Slurp-Pants of the Evil One!
(Can You please post for us, a PervFected video of You spinning Your Head 360 degrees and more, and spitting gray-green shit-pea soup? THEN the dimwitted ones among us might FINALLY see twat I am saying!)
Chumby has had the shit eater muted for some time.
Chumpy-Chump is THE PervFected Third-Person Self-Worshitting Royal WEE, I see! I bet that His PervFected Pee-Pee is ALSO a bit on the WEEEEE side!
That's not fair. He doesn't eat his shits, he carves them into figurines and plays with them in the tub. Quite an imagination on that one.
Do you recall the awesome enchanter named “Tim”, in “Monty Python and the Search for the Holy Grail”? The one who could “summon fire without flint or tinder”? Well, you remind me of Tim… You are an enchanter who can summon persuasion without facts or logic!
So I discussed your awesome talents with some dear personal friends on the Reason staff… Accordingly…
Reason staff has asked me to convey the following message to you:
Hi Fantastically Talented Author:
Obviously, you are a silver-tongued orator, and you also know how to translate your spectacular talents to the written word! We at Reason have need for writers like you, who have near-magical persuasive powers, without having to write at great, tedious length, or resorting to boring facts and citations.
At Reason, we pay above-market-band salaries to permanent staff, or above-market-band per-word-based fees to freelancers, at your choice. To both permanent staff, and to free-lancers, we provide excellent health, dental, and vision benefits. We also provide FREE unlimited access to nubile young groupies, although we do firmly stipulate that persuasion, not coercion, MUST be applied when taking advantage of said nubile young groupies.
Please send your resume, and another sample of your writings, along with your salary or fee demands, to ReasonNeedsBrilliantlyPersuasiveWriters@Reason.com .
Thank PervFected You! -Reason Staff
Does anyone not at this point?
...being 'Federal Funds' going-to (i.e. Subsidizing) States.
I resent the fact that life is getting tougher for criminals.
Not a fan of the presumption of innocence, I see.
That generally happens at the bail hearing, but that's not what is happening in these dem states. There are repeated instances of violent criminals committing more violent crimes when on cashless bail. There are sexual assaults, murders, more theft by those released on cashless bail. At what point to non violent criminals get some protection over those poor victimized criminals on bail? Propose a solution.
You claim to be a lawyer so perhaps you can tell me what the difference is between cashless bail and being released on their own recognizance.
Is it something to do with mandatory minimums or mandatory bail for particular crimes?
Honestly curious, because I don't see why cashless bail exists at all when it's formally the same as being released without bail pending trial. At least to my eye, which is not the eye of a lawyer.
I could look it up of course, but I'd be curious on your take for why such a thing exists at all.
Ive never claimed to be a lawyer.
RoR is usually reserved for first offenses and non violent crimes.
In the blue DA districts they have essentially removed all bail, so only hold criminals for offenses no bail is offered. This includes violent crimes.
The list of crimes for RoR is generally much shorter.
With bail it is generally a 3rd party involved who will also ensure court appearances and such.
Please establish cause and effect. Correlation is not sufficient.
How many of those cases are because of cashless bail and how many are because of prosecutors and/or judges using cashless bail as an excuse to release violent offenders with a propensity to re-offend? We're seeing more and more bleeding heart judges releasing violent offenders with the dumbest and flimsiest excuses.
Up here in Canada we went to cashless bail four years ago and crime went up 800% until they stopped reporting it.
Probably just some weird sort of coincidence though.
Down here in the USA we STOPPED blocking Moose-Mammary Farter-Fuhrer Death-and-Suffering Nymphomaniac-Necrophiliacs from cumming down here... So they polluted Our Pure Blood And Soil in WAVES AND RAVES, and crime went up 800% until they stopped reporting this scummy crime wave of Evil-One Worshitters, Rapists, Kill-bots, Snot-Sluts and Servants, Serpents, and Slurp-Pants of the Evil One! Now NO ONE knows about this crime wave!
Probably just some weird sort of coincidence though.
And for SOME reason, I do SNOT have CITATIONS to prove my points!!! Wow, that reminds me of some LIARS that I know all too well!
Sarc’s location redemption center/discount liquor mart went cashless and he was fine with that as he rolled over all the money he makes from empties into new product.
Why are you arguing a distinction without a difference? Nobody is claiming they're committing crimes due to the cashless nature of bail but that them being free to reoffend, regardless of cause in the system, is a problem with the system.
Had they kept it to petty, non-violent offenses it wouldn't be an issue but the activist prosecutors and judges decided all crime is non-violent if they torture the facts enough.
Why is correlation not sufficient when the rise is directly related to the transition point to cashless bail?
When a family member fronts bail they will tell the shit head to knock it off. If they are such a shit head people won't pay their bond, they probably shouldn't be out.
"Not a fan of the presumption of innocence, I see."
For bail??
WTF?
What does presumption of innocence have to do with it?
The people appearing at a bail hearing are merely *accused* of committing a crime. They haven't been convicted. They retain the presumption of innocence.
And they’re not guaranteed bail. You’re the kind of worthless pinko faggot that thinks you should send social workers to respond to 911 calls involving violent thugs.
No, they aren't guaranteed bail. But they shouldn't be regarded as if they were guilty either. They retain a presumption of innocence. Do you agree?
Calm down buddy! There’s no need for such offensive language.
Well, if we presume they're innocent why have a trial at all? That is the next step in this logic chain of yours.
lol you all really did sleep through all of school, didn't you?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence
The presumption of innocence is a legal principle that every person accused of any crime is considered innocent until proven guilty. Under the presumption of innocence, the legal burden of proof is thus on the prosecution, which must present compelling evidence to the trier of fact (a judge or a jury). If the prosecution does not prove the charges true, then the person is acquitted of the charges.
So a person who is arrested and charged, but awaiting trial, enjoys a presumption of innocence because the state hasn't yet proved that he/she is guilty of the crime.
How did you think the justice system actually worked? Cops arrest someone, and that proves guilt right then and there?
Jeffy, fuck off. We understand all of this better than you do.
Sarc says the cops don’t arrest you unless you are guilty.
You deserve to be raped and murdered
Did your cracker Jesus tell you that? Seems awful harsh for someone mentioning the presumption of innocence?
Boring.
Progressives will always rely on the racist premise that, and let's be frank here, black people are stupid. I personally don't agree with that proposition. Criminals will react to incentives and weigh cost versus benefit in every circumstance. If there is no cost to comitting a crime in the short or long term there will be more crime. It's not rocket science. Most crime in America's inner cities is committed by young black men. That's just an uncomfortable fact. Putting these young men back on the street will lead to more victims, mostly black people.
Most crime in America
's inner citiesis committed by young black men.Fixed it.
What are you talking about, blacks don't know how to use computer, or tell time!
Whoa there fella! There’s no need for racism.
The President has zero power over bail polices. Even his dictation to DC had no legal basis. Trump is an authoritarian.
He’s just controlling the money supply .
He has some wiggle room on allocation of federal funds though.
Forcing Dems to own the repurcussions of idiotic no cash bail policies is a political genius move. The Dems will, as always, walk right into another trap.
Leave it to MAGAs to see everything Trump does as a petty political move to own the libs, even if that move is wildly unconstitutional. MAGAs have zero concept of right from wrong.
Tony, nobody has ever cared what you think. Not even the underage boys you diddle against their wishes.
And owning the libs is a good in and of itself. Fuck the lot of 'em. Told you not to go down those roads and you ignored it. C'est la vie. You will suffer the consequences you made.
You will suffer the consequences you made.
So when do the trains full of left-wingers going to American Auschwitz begin rolling?
Yeah, with what you fascist creeps were up to in the last four years means you can shut the fuck up.
Get back to us when Trump tries to imprison and shoot the opposition, or the GOP hold a kangaroo court in congress for lefty protesters, or the FBI targets lgbtqwtf and calls them a threat to democracy like they did the Catholics, or Trump makes a red speech like Biden's.
blah blah blah no sane person should accept your bullshit framing of anything. You lie and shill habitually for your team. Tell us again, how many lies did Trump tell during his first debate?
Yeah... Also "get back to us" after Dear Orange Leader (Bleeders of the peons) tortures and KILLS the opposition! Are Ye gonna PervFectly "channel" us in from the Beyond The Beyond, Oh Great Death-Worshitting One? WARNING: We just MIGHT tell You shit that Ye do SNOT wanna hear! Just like now, all of the time!!! Truth is truth, regardless of which side of the Beyond The Beyond it cums from!
Next on the Hit Parade from Dear Orange Orgasmic-Orgy Orangutan-Leader TrumpfenFarter-Fuhrer and Ron DeSatan:
Alligator Alcatraz, meet Auspicious Auschwitz! Europe will be forced to relinquish the museum at the former cuntcentration campy-camp of Auschwitz, to be turned into an American Gulag and torture chamber! The “Arbeit Macht Frei” sign will be hauled down, to be replaced by a MUCH larger and MUCH more garish, glaring neon-and-LEDs sign, which will announce, “Welcome to Auspicious Auschwitz, illegal sub-humans and other scum! Good luck! Tariffs from The Donald are setting and scamming and scumming you FREE!!!”
You just want to track all Americans using ankle monitors you fascist.
Won't their phone do?
So you try to be nice to people by releasing them ROR. But then they shit on your niceness by committing another crime.
How many times should keep getting shit on before you put your foot down?
All criminals should just STOP cummiting crimes, damn-shit-all!!!
I do care, so I am doing my part...
To find precise details on what NOT to do, to avoid the flute police, please see http://www.churchofsqrls.com/DONT_DO_THIS/ … This has been a pubic service, courtesy of the Church of SQRLS!
That's the thing. In IL where I am, people arrested and released can be jailed/sanctioned or have pre-trial release revoked entirely if they commit a new crime while out for a previous one. It happens all the time.
There is a side of this that people don't see. Before, people sitting in custody for long periods of time because they couldn't afford $500 or $1,000 or something typically would end up pleading to something simply to get out with time served. Now, those people are not in custody and not racking up time served. Their incentive to simply plea to get out is non existent. One of the main issues with the criminal justice system right now is the plea system...which gives prosecutors an incentive to charge or threaten to charge everything at an extreme to coerce someone to take a plea to something less.
Likewise, before no cash bail, people with serious charges would have their bail set so high it was effectively no bail and the vast majority of people couldn't post. Those same very serious crimes [sex assault, armed robbery, homicide, etc...] are denied release now under no cash bail as the state can easily argue they are a danger to the public or risk of fleeing - so for that set of accused it isn't effectively much different. In other words, the most serious and violent offenders are locked up whilst more petty offenders are not. Which is how it should have been all along.
It's pretty sad for someone to be sitting in jail simply because they can't post a couple hundred dollars. Which happened every day before no cash bail. The news and right wing will glob onto a salacious story of someone with a serious crime getting out but will ignore the exponentially larger number of people with less serious crimes keeping their job, keeping their housing, etc... simply by not having to post $ they don't have.
EXACTLY RIGHT. But they know all this.
It's pretty sad for someone to be sitting in jail simply because they can't post a couple hundred dollars.
To them it's not "sad", because if they didn't do anything wrong, why were they in jail to begin with? That's their "reasoning". This is the same "reasoning from the people who don't believe in "presumption of innocence".
Need me to post some stories from IL about those arrested and given cashless bail again while already on cashless bail?
Tony, we need to get rid of you, and your party. Your kind can never be allowed to run the government ever again. Trump is making an effort to ensure that doesn’t happen.
Would you prefer we follow a more direct plan and hunt you down? Trump is being kind.
Calm down there pal! There’s no need for those kind of threats.
Boring the first time.
Proponents argue that ... ending [cash bail] would reduce recidivism rates, since data suggest that longer pretrial detention is linked to quicker new arrests.
Let me get this straight. The implication is "shorter pretrial detention is linked to slower new arrests". So, proponents argue that slower new arrests means reduced recidivism?
Well, if they don't go to jail. they cannot be recidivists, right?
So you're claiming that the data shows something other than the author claims? Or something? To be fair I have no idea what the author is trying to say here.
If I assume most criminals are on the edge or junkies then longer detention is more time for shit to fall apart and less time to be careful or prudent in how you solve the immediate issues. This isn't reduced recidivism but increased opportunities so they can choose less risky crimes.
Trump signed an executive order restricting federal funding
Which the LiBeRtaRiaNs are now suddenly against.
Y'know, it's sh** like this that make it glaringly clear that you're not pro-liberty. You're pro-crime. And that you wear "liberty" like a skinsuit in order to rationalize criminal behavior. Weaponized virtue against American ideology.
You say "restricting federal funding" is a "penalty." That is some straight up socialist nonsense.
No locale has to accept these terms. They can reject federal funding and keep with any cashless bail system they want. One would think you'd respect such a liberty-based approach. But you don't.
What you hate - what you refuse to admit - is the same thing the hospitals do. They're reliant on federal funding, and they fail without it.
A real libertarian periodical would have run the headline, "Cashless bail under attack. Time for cities to reject federal funding."
But you won't, will you. Got your lips wrapped allllll the way around that federal teat.
Almost spot on. You’re off just a little on your final statement. They do have their lips wrapped around something that expels a white substance.
It just isn’t a teat.
Good. So many state/fed drug task forces can fuck right off. Please end federal funding for those. No more sharing dirty asset forfeiture proceeds. No more DEA involvement in local cases. Less cases getting referred to the feds for prosecution? Sounds like a win.
Claims to be a lawyer, hates agreed to laws. Lol.
When a defendant is arraigned, a judge may release them on their own recognizance (a promise to appear), detain them, or release them on bail.
What is the fucking point of cashless bail when they can be released on their own recognizance in the first place one might ask.
It's totally illogical to call it bail when no cash is involved. It's not the thing at all.
Dear colleague...
So many of you are getting this wrong, because you choose not to inform yourself on the topic, instead just emoting and reacting.
The term 'cashless bail' does not refer to the type of monetary transaction for paying bail. The term refers to HOW the bail decision is made in the first place.
In an ideal world, at a bail hearing, a judge is supposed to determine if an accused person is a flight risk or a threat to the community before deciding whether the person can be released or not, and if so, deciding how much bail should be needed to ensure that the person shows up at trial. But instead, what happened in many places was that judges just skipped the threat assessment part and used cash as a proxy. So a poor person who couldn't pay the bail would have to stay in jail even if he/she was no more of a threat or flight risk than a similarly situated rich person who could pay the bail. And remember, these are people who were only *accused* of a crime, so they still retain a presumption of innocence.
The 'cashless bail' reforms were about actually making judges do the risk assessment. So even though it is a fairer way to make bail decisions, it is harder to do.
But Trump's handlers know exactly what is going on, they understand all of this, and so instead of trying to argue against this idea on the merits - BECAUSE THEY CAN'T - they simply try to redefine the idea itself to mean "violent criminals roam free because they didn't have to pay bail". That is never what the idea of "cashless bail" was supposed to do. This is a case where Team Red cannot win on the battlefield presented to them, so instead they try to change the battlefield itself.
The 'cashless bail' reforms were about actually making judges do the risk assessment. So even though it is a fairer way to make bail decisions, it is harder to do.
And then it turns out many judges are completely uninterested in doing so.
And in a bail system where cash is the determining factor, there are judges who are also completely uninterested in doing so and who let innocent people who are not a threat rot in jail only because they can't afford the bail.
Would you like me to post my dueling set of anecdotes?
Or would you care to explain why using cash as a proxy for flight risk, or threat to community, is a good idea on its merits?
pedo Jeffy, no one here, or anywhere else, gives a fuck about what you about anything. You’re a propagandist who favors letting violent criminals run wild, especially when it comes to raping young children which you undoubtedly don’t even see as a crime. Anymore than you see illegal border crossings as a crime, even for convicted child rapists (this by your own admission here). You are the epitome of the malignant democrat.
So why do t you isn’t save yourself the effort and go back to your 55 gallon drum of Ben & Jerry’s?
You're just not very good at this. You come off as just mean and not funny at all. Not even believable.
This is all about Trump PUNISHING "blue" areas for SNOT voting for Trump! Trump and Trump Lovers and Trump Worshitters LOVE punishment, snot only of poor people, butt ALSO of "blue areas" who DARE to go for cashless bail... All of the GOOD "team R" people favor having the RICH (AKA Good) people be able to post bail, and the poor people? PUNISH them and let them rot in jail, for a LONG time till supposedly "speedy" judgment takes place, without a cuntviction!!! Because Trump and "Team R" have NO cuntvictions, other than PUNISHMENT is GOOD!!!
ALL of the GOOD Christians KNOW that PUNISHMENT is GOOD!!! For shit's own sake, no less!!!!
Except that's not what bail reform has done! Instead, judges have no choice but to release people, even if they are a clear threat to the community.
That's not true at all. In Illinois, cashless bail made release the 'default' position, but it did not mandate that judges release anyone.
https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/how-will-cashless-bail-work-in-illinois-heres-an-explainer/3230518/
It has in New York!
So even though it is a fairer way
More egalitarianism fucking up things.
So the state should deliberately treat people unfairly?
lol the number of people in this comment section who even question the idea of "presumption of innocence" is hilarious if it wasn't so sad.
Did you all really think that cops only arrest guilty people?
Many-many "Team R" people these days just KNOW... Sometimes shit is "God" that told them so... That the MORE punishment that there is, the more JUSTICE that there is!!! (Except for them and their family and fiends... Punishment = = Justice applies only to their enemas!!!)
Did you all really think that cops only arrest guilty people?
You buddy sarc has already stated that.
If karma exists, Jeffy will be the victim of a brutal home invasion perpetrated by illegal Central American gangbanger rapists.
We’re talking about pre trial bail you dumb cunt. You apparently refuse to acknowledge how that works.
As far as Jeff is concerned, even if you have someone on video shooting up a school, you cannot hold them until they are convicted. Because he's that dumb.
As far as Jeff is *actually* concerned, those accused of violent crime, with rather compelling evidence of guilt of that crime (such as a video), should very probably be denied bail.
On the other hand, these kind of people probably should have received further consideration before imposing a cash bail.
https://www.aclumich.org/en/stories-broken-bail-system
Too late for you to backpedal.
lol
Here's a story that even you might appreciate.
https://www.aclumich.org/en/stories-broken-bail-system#Keith
Bottom line: he was given an unreasonably high bail because he did things that the government didn't like. That is another thing that the cashless bail system is supposed to avoid: deliberately pricing people out of the possibility of affording bail because the state has it in for you.
Whoa there buddy! There’s no need for that type of language!
Why don’t you go for a walk and calm down. Something is obviously triggering you.
Speaking of being calm and untriggered, tell us about your affection for the Mormon religion.
Well we can’t all unwind by getting spitroasted by Mormon missionaries like you.
Seems to me you’re the one interested in that kind of thing since you keep mentioning it.
Hope you were able to calm down!
My biggest hope is all jurisdictions ignore it.
Just to END the UN-Constitutional 'Federal Fund' bags of Federal tyranny.
Hey guys, remember the Trump Phone? It's actually just a Samsung Galaxy 25 with a barely repainted third-party case.
https://atlantablackstar.com/2025/08/24/trumps-big-phone-reveal-backfires-after-people-zoom-in-and-spot-another-logo/