All @TheBrancaShow mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2k

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month!
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kf

FOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nz

TODAY’s MEMBERS-ONLY SHOW: “Mailbox Vandalism: Poor Choices, Poor Outcomes!”
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/2w6fawtx
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/muhhns4z

The Trump Department of Justice has moved to vacate with prejudice the convictions of various Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, including members Sachary Rehl and Roberto Minuta of each of those organizations respectively, as well as others of both groups, who were given lengthy prison sentences for purported January 6-related misconduct.

Because the Trump DOJ is in favor of the dismissals, as obviously are the men convicted, the request to vacate is unopposed. 
This lack of opposition gives a sad face to Progressive Fascist Democrat Representative Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, who has rushed in with an estrogenically hysterical and largely fantastical amicus brief asking the D.C. Circuit to appoint adversarial counsel to fight the dismissal.

In response, Proud Boy defendant Zachary Rehl has filed his own counter argument, pro se, and my buddy Bill Shipley has filed his own counter argument in defense of his client Oath Keeper Robert Minuta.

Rehl’s argument comes across as personally compelling, while Shipley brings the technical legal expertise one would expect of a career DOJ prosecutor who went on to defend more than 90 January 6 defendants.

We’ll break down both of those in today’s show!

Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET!

Episode #1303.

All @TheBrancaShow mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2k

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month!
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kf

FOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nz

For decades there has been only one state in America that allowed for the use of deadly force in defense of mere personal property—the great state of Texas. In every other state you are limited to only non-deadly force in defense of property, period—and often not even that much.

There’s been nothing to prevent other states from adopting as similar deadly force in defense of personal property law as Texas—it’s just that none ever has.

Now that may be changing. The Tennessee legislature is considering a statute that would allow for the use of deadly force in defense of personal property under certain circumstances. Known as SB 1847 in the TN senate or HB 1802 in the Tennessee house, the proposed statute borrows quite a bit from the long-standing Texas law, but also differs in important respects.

Join me LIVE at 4 PM ET as I break it all down!

Episode #1306.

All @TheBrancaShow mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2k

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month!
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kf

FOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nz

TODAY’s MEMBERS-ONLY SHOW: “Trump Fears SCOTUS Will NOT Close Invasion Loophole!”
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/7erdjy37
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/2npwy8jy

California thought it could seize authority over federal law enforcement — but the 9th Circuit just reminded Sacramento who actually runs the country. In a unanimous 3-0 decision in US v. California, a federal appeals court has enjoined California's "No Vigilantes Act," the state law designed to force ICE agents to wear visible identification during enforcement operations. The court didn't hedge or split hairs: when state law directly regulates the federal government's performance of its functions, the Supremacy Clause voids it — full stop.

This is a stinging rebuke of Governor Gavin Newsom's deliberate strategy to obstruct federal immigration enforcement through legislation. The panel, authored by Trump-appointee Judge Mark Bennett, rejected California's public safety fig leaf outright, ruling that constitutional supremacy isn't subject to a balancing test. "The Supremacy Clause forbids the State from enforcing such legislation." Done.

This is the second blow to California's anti-ICE legal campaign in two months — and another courtroom victory for the Trump administration. The Constitution is not a menu from which ambitious governors get to order selectively. Today, the 9th Circuit made sure Newsom knows it.

Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down!

Episode #1301.

All @TheBrancaShow mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2k

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month!
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kf

FOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nz

TODAY’s MEMBERS-ONLY SHOW: “SPLC Was PAYING the KKK — DOJ Drops Bombshell Indictment”
YouTube: https://youtube.com/live/Xzya7MLiwdU
Locals: XXX

The Supreme Court just handed down DC v. R.W., reversing a DC Court of Appeals ruling that said a police officer lacked reasonable suspicion to stop a driver who was slowly backing out of a parking lot at 2 AM — after two of his companions bolted on foot when a cop arrived. The Court ruled 7-2 that the officer's "totality of the circumstances" analysis was textbook Fourth Amendment law.

The decision is straightforward, well-reasoned, and consistent with decades of precedent. What's not straightforward is Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's solo dissent — a performance so disconnected from the legal mainstream that even Justice Sotomayor refused to join it. Jackson accused her colleagues of "wordsmithing" the lower court, and argued that two people fleeing a parked car at 2 AM raise no suspicion whatsoever.

I'll break down exactly what the Court held, why it's correct, and why Jackson's dissent reads like just another petulant diatribe. This is SCOTUS doing its job well — and one justice doing hers poorly.

Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down!

Episode #1299.

BE HARD TO CONVICT if you’re ever compelled to use force in defense of yourself, your family, or your property! FREE WEBINAR! Saturday, April 25! FREE but you MUST REGISTER NOW: hardtoconvict.com

NEW LAW OF SELF DEFENSE YOUTUBE CHANNEL:    / @lawofselfdefense 

All @TheBrancaShow mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2k

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month!
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kf

FOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nz

Detroit-area resident Dayton Knapton, who shot at a group of fleeing burglars on July 8, 2025, killing 17-year-old burglar Sivan Wilson, has been bound over for trial on a charge of manslaughter for the killing, multiple counts of assault with intent to do great bodily harm, and two counts of a firearm enhancement.

Knapton claims self-defense, and told responding officers that the burglars came at him. Unfortunately, his own home surveillance footage casts doubt on this narrative of self-defense.

Even worse, Knapton’s self-defense statements to police, while intended to be exculpatory, are actually likely to be used by the prosecution to incriminate him further than the damaging video alone.

Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down!

Episode #1294.

BE HARD TO CONVICT if you’re ever compelled to use force in defense of yourself, your family, or your property! FREE WEBINAR! Saturday, April 25! FREE but you MUST REGISTER NOW: hardtoconvict.com

All @TheBrancaShow mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2k

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month!
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kf

FOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nz

TODAY’s MEMBERS-ONLY SHOW: “SHOTS FIRED! Navy Hulls Iran Blockade Runner!”
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/mvwmzuu9
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/2xehhzvp

The great and powerful President Donald J. Trump has WON AGAIN in the DC Court of Appeals, securing an order forcing the unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior, federal district trial court Judge Leon to ALLOW the construction of the new White House ballroom to continue, overriding Judge Leon’s inane preliminary injunction stopping the construction at the request of a single woman who walks her dog around the neighborhood.

Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down!

Episode #1295.

BE HARD TO CONVICT if you’re ever compelled to use force in defense of yourself, your family, or your property! FREE WEBINAR! Saturday, April 25! FREE but you MUST REGISTER NOW: hardtoconvict.com

For complete Medicare guidance, dial (617) 644-0093 to speak with my trusted partner, Chapter.

All @TheBrancaShow mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2k

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month!
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kf

FOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nz

TODAY’s MEMBERS-ONLY SHOW: “DOJ Insider Exposes 16 Years of Political Takeover”
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/sd6n4bwj
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/mrx49dbr

FBI Director Kash Patel has filed a $250 million defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic over a hit piece packed with explosive claims — excessive drinking, missed meetings, a security team unable to wake him — and sourced almost entirely by anonymous officials hiding behind the reporter's promise of confidentiality.

The article cites "more than two dozen" people, grants all of them anonymity, and names exactly zero of them. Not one person willing to put their name behind what they told the journalist. If the story is true and Patel is the disaster they're describing, you'd think at least one of those two dozen people would stand up and say so publicly. Instead, we get a wall of shadows. That's not journalism. That's a drive-by.

Now, I want to be straight with you about what Patel is actually up against, because this lawsuit — however satisfying it may feel — faces a serious legal obstacle. Patel is a public official, which means he can't win a defamation case just by proving the story is false.

Under the New York Times v. Sullivan standard, he has to prove actual malice — that The Atlantic either knew the claims were false when they published them, or acted with reckless disregard for whether they were true or false. That is a brutally high bar, and it's the bar that has killed more defamation suits against media organizations than almost anything else.

So here's the question we're going to dig into today: does the complete absence of named, accountable sources — combined with the FBI's on-record denials before publication — give Patel enough to argue reckless disregard? We'll walk through the lawsuit, the legal standard, and what it's actually going to take for Patel to win this thing.

Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down!

Episode #1297.

BE HARD TO CONVICT if you’re ever compelled to use force in defense of yourself, your family, or your property! FREE WEBINAR! Saturday, April 25! FREE but you MUST REGISTER NOW: hardtoconvict.com

All @TheBrancaShow mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2k

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month!
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kf

FOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nz

TODAY’s MEMBERS-ONLY SHOW: “GOP Votes to Extend Haitian TPS & Mullin Favors Migrants!”
YouTube: https://youtube.com/live/Cet6pRu5dN4
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/mtk48y4s

The great and powerful President Trump has just announced that the “Strait of Iran” is “fully open and ready for full passage”!  Iran has bent the knee to America!

Oil prices are plummeting! Market values are souring!

Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down!

Episode #1292.

BE HARD TO CONVICT if you’re ever compelled to use force in defense of yourself, your family, or your property! FREE WEBINAR! Saturday, April 25! FREE but you MUST REGISTER NOW: hardtoconvict.com

All @TheBrancaShow mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2k

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! 
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9 
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kf

FOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nz

TODAY’s MEMBERS-ONLY SHOW: “Trump Confronts Politically-Compromised Pope! ”
YouTube:https://youtube.com/live/QycUYjY43Ds
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/4p9vas4r

In a stunning display of judicial activism, unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior federal DC district Judge Richard Leon has inserted himself into the heart of executive authority by blocking construction of President Trump’s privately funded White House ballroom—and the judge’s bosses on the DC Court of Appeals aren’t doing much to check his overreach of authority. 

What began as a straightforward national-security and event-space upgrade has become the latest flashpoint in the separation-of-powers fight.  The preliminary injunction issued by Judge Leon claims a single individual who has an aesthetic objection to the new ballroom that has not even yet been built is sufficient for the unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior, Article III Judicial branch to obstruct the core and plenary powers of the democratically elected Article II Executive branch. 

This case perfectly illustrates the federal judiciary overreaching its legitimate constitutional bounds. Instead of deferring to the executive on matters of White House security and operations, the court is demanding Congress or the court itself micromanage the president’s own residence. 

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals did issue a temporary stay until April 17, but only on the most superficial grounds, failing to recognize the inherent Constitutional inadequacy of the lawsuit itself.  This only underscores how shaky the district court’s reasoning is—yet the underlying message remains: activist judges believe they, not the elected president, get the final say on executive-branch real estate, as on everything else.

Join me as I translate the actual court filings into plain English, expose the thin legal arguments behind the injunction, and show exactly how this power grab threatens every future president’s ability to manage the White House. If you want to understand why the judiciary’s meddling here is constitutionally dangerous—and what it means for the balance of power—watch until the end.

Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down!

Episode #1288.

BE HARD TO CONVICT if you’re ever compelled to use force in defense of yourself, your family, or your property! FREE WEBINAR! Saturday, April 25!  
FREE but you MUST REGISTER NOW:  hardtoconvict.com

All @TheBrancaShow mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2k

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! 
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9 
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kf

FOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nz

The DC Circuit Court of Appeals has issued a writ of mandamus against District Court Judge Jeb Boasberg, one of the most powerful and public judicial rebukes a federal judge can receive. A writ of mandamus is not a polite suggestion. It is an appellate court telling a lower court judge, in plain terms, that he got it wrong, that he exceeded his authority, and that he needs to be corrected by force of court order. For Boasberg, who has made a habit of stretching his jurisdiction to its breaking point in case after case involving the Trump administration, this is not a surprise. It is a consequence.

This is not the first time Boasberg has been checked by the DC Circuit, and the pattern is worth understanding. Judge after judge, ruling after ruling, Boasberg has inserted himself into disputes where the law did not support the aggressive posture he was taking. His conduct in the Alien Enemies Act litigation, including his attempt to launch criminal contempt proceedings against the Trump administration, was a remarkable display of a judge who appeared to be driven by something other than neutral legal analysis. The appeals court has now, once again, made clear that there are limits, and that Boasberg has exceeded them.

In today's video, we break down the majority opinion issuing the mandamus, explain what the court said, what it means, and what it tells us about a federal judiciary that is still sorting out which judges are applying law and which are applying politics. If you have been following the Boasberg saga, this is the payoff episode. If you are new to it, this is the place to start. Either way, this one matters.

Join me LIVE at 2 PM ET as I break it all down!

Episode #1287.

BE HARD TO CONVICT if you’re ever compelled to use force in defense of yourself, your family, or your property! FREE WEBINAR! Saturday, April 25!  
FREE but you MUST REGISTER NOW:  hardtoconvict.com

All @TheBrancaShow mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2k

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! 
YouTube: https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9 
Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kf

FOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nz

TODAY’s MEMBERS-ONLY SHOW: “Trump's Grand Strategy: Leashing China's Energy SourcesX”
YouTube: https://youtube.com/live/_uWwU_xb86g
Locals: https://lawofselfdefense.locals.com/upost/7857541/trumps-grand-strategy-leashing-chinas-energy-sourcesX

Exactly a week ago an apparently deranged Jason Thomas Nichols made threatening demands at the front door of a home in Fairfield, CA, and engaged in a conversation with the homeowner through the Ring doorbell, which video captured the exchange.  

The homeowner involved in that conversation was not home at the time, but a woman and small child were inside the home.  Nichols managed to gain access to the interior of the home, where the just-returned homeowner confronted him with a shovel.  Both Nichols and the homeowner would end up with head injuries as a result of this confrontation, but no injuries described as serious were reported.

Shortly thereafter police arrived and Nichols was arrested, charged with four crimes, all of which could qualify as felonies, and then released on $35,000 bail. 

This all could have gone much worse, of course, including with a bunch of the people involved—Nichols, the homeowner, the woman or child, the police officers--ending up dead from a variety of causes. In particular, of course, the homeowner could have shot down intruder Nichols inside his home. 

But had the homeowner done so, would it have been a legally justified killing? California law does allow for the use of deadly force in defense of one’s home—but very specific conditions must be met, and the conditions set by California are different than the more common similar provisions in other states. 

What about those states with more common defense of dwelling statutes?  What if this had occurred in, say, Fayetteville, NC instead of Fairfield, CA.  What would North Carolina’s more common defense of dwelling law have allowed this homeowner to do in fighting off this home invader?

Let’s talk about defense of HIGHLY-DEFENSIBLE PROPERTY!

Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down!

Episode # 1285.