One of the biggest bombshell allegations from the Department of Justice’s recent Epstein document dump is where Jeffrey Epstein claims Bill Gates orchestrated a nefarious secret plot to hide his extramarital relations with “Russian girls.” According to unsent email drafts written by Epstein in 2013, Gates allegedly asked for his help obtaining antibiotics he planned to secretly slip to his then-wife Melinda to treat an STD he might have passed to her.

Gates’ response to these allegations, delivered through spokespeople and in direct interviews, consistently dismisses the claims as false, absurd, and motivated by Epstein’s grudge after their relationship soured.

Yet scrutiny persists — even from some mainstream sources.

During an interview with 9 News Australia, political editor Charles Croucher asked Gates some pointed questions. BlazeTV host Sara Gonzales invites body language expert and behavior analyst Scott Rouse to scrutinize Gates’ response.

“You’ve no doubt seen the allegations, including some of them from the last 24 to 48 hours. Are they true?” Croucher asked.

“No. Apparently Jeffrey wrote an email to himself. That email was never sent. The email is, you know, false, so I don’t know what his thinking was there,” Gates responded. “You know, was he trying to attack me in some way? But you know, it just reminds me, you know, every minute I spent with him, I regret, and I, you know, apologize that I did that.”

“The problem is some of the things that he has sent, some of the information about other people that has come up in those files has been true. Why would he do this and say this about you, do you think?” Croucher followed up.

“You know, it’s factually true that I was only at dinners. You know, I never went to the island; I never met any women, and so you know the more that comes out, the more clear it’ll be that although the time was a mistake, it had nothing to do with that kind of behavior,” said Gates.

Sara believes Gates is “squirming in his chair” as he answers Croucher’s blunt inquiries about his alleged salacious dealings, but she asks Rouse to analyze the clip and give his professional opinion.

“This is a prepared answer,” says Rouse, suggesting that Gates might have even set up the interview himself.

“I know that because the structure of his sentences is different than the sentences that are structured for just talking.”

If you put this viral clip into its full hour-long context, he says, you’ll notice that Gates’ “sentences are longer” and more “flowing” than they are when he’s just talking casually.

When Croucher hits him with a direct question, Gates “doesn’t seem shocked” but actually “prepared,” he tells Sara. Instead of wandering around the room, his eyes focus on Croucher, his head and shoulders “[shake] really quickly,” and he adjusts his glasses — a stress coping mechanism Rouse calls an “adaptor.”

“So that lets us know that he’s really focused on these [questions] because he knows it’s important,” he explains.

“I’m sure this is the only reason he’s done this interview because he knows those questions are going to come up. The interview with his ex-wife just came out, and there’s a lot of focus on that as well. So he’s prepared for this,” Rouse assures.

“There’s no way that somebody that’s been on the world stage like he has for so long and is so experienced with talking to the world that he wouldn’t prepare for this.”

To hear more of Rouse’s analysis, watch the video above.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara’s no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

​Sara gonzales, Sara gonzales unfiltered, Blazetv, Blaze media, Epstein files, Bill gates, Gates epstein 

The FBI’s narrative about the autistic Virginia man being prosecuted in federal court for allegedly placing two pipe bombs on Capitol Hill keeps running into snags, including suspect Brian J. Cole Jr.’s apparent location during key segments of the pipe-bomb timeline.

After arresting Cole, 30, of Woodbridge, Va., on Dec. 4, the FBI said Cole waived his Miranda rights and made a “detailed confession” with no attorney present. Cole allegedly said he planted bombs at the Democratic National Committee building and the Capitol Hill Club adjacent to the Republican National Committee building on Jan. 5, 2021.

‘At least 10 different USSS agents and two K-9 units came within feet of the pipe bomb.’

Some of the details in Cole’s confession, which his attorneys now question, conflict with newly developed evidence from independent investigations.

Cole’s prosecution does not explain other case details, including years of the FBI altering video evidence, failure to preserve key case evidence, and the dozens of police officers and Secret Service agents who went near the bombs on Jan. 6 but did not act as if they were a threat to the public.

Blaze News examined the charges against Cole to see if his arrest fits with the case history and facts already in the public square. The list of conflicts, problems, and lingering questions is extensive. This is Part 2 of our series. Part 1 was published Jan. 16.

6 minutes of separation

In a court filing in the U.S. Department of Justice’s criminal case against Cole, the FBI said Cole parked his blue 2017 Nissan Sentra SV on the south side of D Street SE sometime prior to 7:34 p.m. on Jan. 5. The FBI claims Cole then walked to the DNC building to place the first of the two pipe bombs he allegedly transported to Capitol Hill.

The section of D Street that runs between Folger Park and Providence Park is just beyond the coverage area of U.S. Capitol Police street cameras.

The pipe-bomber was able to avoid CCTV detection for eight minutes of the more than 50-minute bomb-drop period, possibly due to a familiarity with the location of USCP security cameras. That potential familiarity is evidenced by the suspect’s seeming sudden appearance at 7:35 p.m., disappearance from the bomb route at 8 p.m., and reappearance at 8:08 p.m.

The FBI has theorized that the suspect retreated into or near Folger Park — which is bounded by 2nd Street, D Street, 3rd Street, and E Street — likely to retrieve the second pipe bomb for placement behind the Capitol Hill Club.

In a October 2025 video update, the FBI stated the bomber only carried one device at a time in a backpack. Folger Park, where there are no USCP cameras, appears the likely place to which the suspect retreated during the “missing” eight minutes when the bomber didn’t appear on security cameras.

The hoodie-clad pipe-bomb suspect was first seen on security cameras (at right) at 7:35 p.m. on Jan. 5, 2021. The same scene in daylight hours (left).U.S. Capitol Police CCTV

The suspect first appeared on USCP Camera 5050 walking north across North Carolina Avenue SE at the intersection with 1st Street SE. It is not clear what route the bomber used to reach the intersection, as it is on the edge of Capitol Police CCTV coverage.

After placing the pipe bomb at the DNC building at 7:54 p.m., the FBI says the suspect was last seen at 8 p.m. walking east on E Street toward North Carolina Avenue. This route suggests the bomber walked back to somewhere in or near Folger Park to pick up the second pipe bomb. The suspect was missing from security video for eight minutes.

The walk from the last known location to Folger Park would take about two minutes. That would put the suspect in or around the park from 8:02 to 8:03 p.m.

At that exact time, a blue Nissan Sentra that is a visual match to Cole’s vehicle was seen more than one mile away driving north on 3rd Street SW, as documented by USCP Cameras 3823 and 3821, located on the Ford House Office Building.

The Nissan was discovered by an independent investigator who goes by the social media handle “Armitas” and has asked not to be otherwise named publicly for security reasons. Armitas scrubbed the feeds of dozens of Capitol Police CCTV security cameras and located three blue Nissan Sentras in the Capitol Hill area between roughly 7 p.m. and 8:10 p.m. on Jan. 5.

One of the Nissans was driven by a white individual, with a white passenger in the front seat, Armitas said. Cole is black. A second Nissan matched the exterior features and appearance of Cole’s vehicle, compared to photos of the vehicle on the street outside his home and in Prince William County Police bodycam footage from a 2024 traffic accident involving Cole. The third Nissan was seen near Folger Park after 7 p.m., but that vehicle had fog lamps, which Cole’s Nissan does not have.

Car a visual match

The Sentra driving on 3rd Street SW at 8:03 p.m. was a visual match for Cole’s 2017 Sentra, with identical 16-by-6.5-inch steel wheels with covers, rear opera window, right rear wrap-around tail light, right side door handles, identical gaps in the brake lights for the reverse light, and the right headlight for the turn signal (see graphic).

Brian J. Cole Jr.’s 2017 Nissan Sentra is a visual match to a Sentra captured on Capitol Police cameras during the time the pipe bomb suspect was planting the devices.Graphic by Armitas

The FBI claims Cole parked along D Street SE between Folger Park and Providence Park before walking to the DNC building to place the first pipe bomb. Because that section of D Street is restricted to one-way eastbound traffic, Cole would have had to enter it from the west. However, his Nissan does not appear on security video driving onto this section of road.

A similar-looking Nissan Sentra was in the Folger Park vicinity at 7:20 p.m., Capitol Police security video shows. That vehicle might have been mistaken for Cole’s Sentra. The vehicle had its fog lamps engaged when it drove past the CCTV cameras. Cole’s Nissan does not have fog lamps, according to Armitas and photographs of Cole’s vehicle reviewed by Blaze News.

According to the National Motor Vehicle Title Information System, Cole’s Sentra does not have the optional fog lights.

Brian Cole Jr. would have had to take a less direct route (in green) from South Capitol Drive to Folger Park. The more direct route (red) would send his vehicle past U.S. Capitol Police security cameras. His vehicle does not appear on any cameras along that route.Map by Armitas

Cole could not have been on 3rd Street SW in his vehicle and on foot near Folger Park at the same time on Jan. 5. The 3rd Street location is a six- to seven-minute drive from Folger Park.

The Nissan that is a visual match to Cole’s drove north on 3rd Street SW to C Street SW, turned west, and came to a stoplight at C Street and 2nd Street, in front of the O’Neill House Office Building, security camera footage showed. From there, the Nissan entered the on-ramp to Interstate 395, traveling south and west, away from Capitol Hill.

‘In some circumstances, absence of evidence actually is evidence of absence.’

The FBI said Cole’s vehicle was photographed by a license plate reader on the exit ramp from I-395 onto South Capitol Drive. That exit would have put Cole traveling south on South Capitol Drive, away from Capitol Hill, at 7:10 p.m.

To reach D Street SE from this location without being detected by Capitol Police video cameras would require detailed knowledge of camera placement and the border of USCP’s territory.

Since Cole’s vehicle does not appear on any public video driving from I-395 to Folger Park, that likely means he would have passed up the most direct route and taken a longer, more circuitous path. The less direct route (see map) avoided Capitol Police cameras, possibly suggesting Cole would have had knowledge of the camera locations.

“Not having Cole’s car on video in locations where Cole’s car should be present is strong evidence Cole was not there,” Armitas said. “In some circumstances, absence of evidence actually is evidence of absence.”

During his interrogation, Cole allegedly said he used Google Maps to find the DNC and RNC sites, indicating he was not familiar with the area. However, the hoodie-clad bomber exhibited behavior that strongly suggests knowledge of the geography and security of the bomb sites.

“He allegedly claimed that he had used Google Maps to look up these locations in advance, and yet the person we see on footage meanders their way to the DNC block,” Armitas said. “When they get to the DNC block, they take the longest way around, and then just before reaching the DNC, they U-turn back up South Capitol Street, turn around again toward the DNC, only to stop and sit there at the destination.”

‘I recognized the government tags immediately.’

After dropping the device along the rear wall of the Capitol Hill Club near the RNC building at about 8:16 p.m., the bomb suspect walked an escape route east on Rumsey Court toward 2nd Street SE, the FBI has said. The suspect would have come up to a solid plank fence at the end of Rumsey Court where it borders the garden of St. Peter’s Church on Capitol Hill, a senior congressional source told Blaze News

That fence appeared to be a single contiguous piece with no visible entrance or way of egress, the source said. Armitas said a law enforcement source told him there was a hidden gate latch built into the fence. Only someone who was very familiar with the area — or who had done a test run of the bomb route — would have known there was a hidden gate leading into the church garden.

Although the fence has been replaced since Jan. 6, Blaze News confirmed that the new fence has the same hidden-gate feature.

Surveillance of Cole only began Nov. 13

An FBI whistleblower who lives in the same area of Woodbridge, Va., as Cole and his family, said the bureau only began FISUR — or physical surveillance — of Cole on or around Nov. 13, 2025. He said this indicated that the investigation of Cole was very new.

“I recognized the government tags immediately. I saw they were set up on it,” the whistleblower said. “I can tell you that they weren’t there before.”

The FBI told congressional leaders in December that the bureau empaneled a “red team” in October 2025 that included law enforcement sources from outside the FBI.

A briefing by the FBI was conducted via Zoom and in person for congressional leaders on Dec. 5. The meeting was led by Darren Cox, assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Washington Field Office, and Joshua Stone, special agent in charge of the Washington Field Office’s Counterterrorism Division.

Officials from the FBI’s Evidence Response Team and the Special Operations Branch walk toward the home of Jan. 6 pipe-bomb suspect Brian Cole Jr. in Woodbridge, Virginia, Dec. 4, 2025.Photo by Andrew Leyden/Getty Images

That red team “analyzed the FBI’s evidence and identified Cole as the suspect within six weeks,” U.S. Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) wrote in a Jan. 22 letter to FBI Director Kash Patel. Loudermilk is the chairman of the House Select Subcommittee on the Remaining Questions Surrounding Jan. 6.

Loudermilk asked the FBI if Cole’s phone number was among the 186 phones identified in February 2021 as being on Capitol Hill about the time the bombs were dropped on Jan. 5. The FBI previously said that Cole’s arrest was not based on any new investigative leads or information.

“As new data was produced to and evaluated by the [Christopher] Wray FBI, was Cole’s phone number ever among the ‘numbers of interest’?” Loudermilk asked. “If so, when was Cole’s cell phone number first recognized as of interest? What prompted the FBI to cease investigating that phone number? If not, how was his cell phone number overlooked?”

Loudermilk asked Patel to provide answers to those and other pipe-bomb questions by Feb. 5.

Loudermilk said former FBI Supervisory Special Agent John Nantz, a 20-year FBI veteran, testified at a Jan. 14 House hearing “that it was ‘likely’ the FBI knew Cole’s identity in February 2021.”

‘The defendant did not plant prop bombs filled with sand or sugar, or constructed with Legos.’

A January 2025 House report said the FBI identified 186 phone numbers of interest on Feb. 3, 2021, based on a geofence warrant and cell-tower dumps.

Thirty-six of those numbers were assigned to agents for interviews. Nearly 100 numbers “required additional investigative steps,” and 51 numbers “were identified as ‘not needing further action’ because the phones ‘belong[ed] to law enforcement officers or persons on the exclusion list,’” the report said.

The 186 cell numbers of interest have not been divulged publicly, nor have details on how the individuals behind each phone number were cleared. The names and numbers of the 51 individuals on the law enforcement list, whom the FBI did not investigate, have also remained hidden.

FBI didn’t evacuate Cole’s neighbors

A neighbor told the BBC that when the FBI went to arrest Cole on Dec. 4, it did not evacuate the nearby homes on the cul de sac in Woodbridge, Va. A whistleblower told Blaze News that given that the original FBI affidavit accused Cole of manufacturing powerful “viable” explosives at his home, a bomb squad should have evacuated the neighborhood while it searched the Cole home.

FBI agents and technicians search the 2017 Nissan Sentra belonging to Jan. 6 pipe-bomb suspect Brian Cole Jr. outside his Woodbridge, Virginia, home on Dec. 4, 2025.Photo by Andrew Leyden/Getty Images

An elderly couple who live next door to the Cole residence were not allowed to leave their home during the FBI operation. This caused the husband to miss a doctor’s appointment, the source said.

According to the FBI’s Counter IED Unit and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, a pipe bomb requires a mandatory evacuation distance of 70 feet and a preferred evacuation distance of at least 1,200 feet. Discovery of a pipe bomb or similar improvised explosive device requires people in buildings or outside to proceed to the preferred evacuation distance.

Expert: Devices weren’t bombs

Cole’s defense team contends that what the FBI has for five years called “viable” pipe bombs were not bombs at all. The devices lacked the needed chemicals and proper fusing system that would have made them explosives, according to Brennan Phillips, a 20-year veteran of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

“Based on my review of the materials provided, the two suspected pipe bombs in question do not contain an explosive filler capable of causing an explosion,” Phillips wrote in a report filed by the defense.

“Beyond the lack of a viable explosive filler for the two pipes, neither device has a functional fuzing and firing system capable of igniting a flame-sensitive explosive filler,” he wrote. “Based on my experience and testing, a single 9-volt battery attached to a 1.5-inch square of steel wool will not generate enough heat to ignite Black Powder.”

Above: the Capitol Hill pipe bombs before they were rendered safe by a bomb robot. Below: One of the devices reconstructed by the FBI. FBI images

Prosecutors fired back on Phillips’ report, noting that black powder retrieved from the bomb scenes produced a flame in one of the samples tested.

“The FBI explosives chemistry examiner who conducted the flame test detailed in his case file that this powder sample, when heated, ‘sizzled, produced flying burning embers, and sustained a flame,’” Assistant U.S. Attorney Charles Jones wrote in a reply memo.

“The defendant did not plant prop bombs filled with sand or sugar, or constructed with Legos,” Jones wrote. “The defendant assembled two improvised explosive devices, he planted them, and he set each to explode.”

“Each device,” Jones noted, “contained all the components necessary to explode and was viable.”

One former FBI special agent and a current supervisory special agent who worked on the pipe-bombs investigation in 2021 said they received a briefing on the devices in January 2021. An official from the federal Joint Program Office for Countering Improvised Explosive Devices told the agents that the bombs were “inert devices.” The former agent said the devices “just looked good.”

Two bombs and the Keystone Kops

Perhaps the thing that drew the most suspicion in the five-year pipe-bombs case was the shocking, cavalier attitude of U.S. Secret Service agents who were outside the DNC building during a visit of then-Sen. Kamala Harris, the vice president-elect.

The Secret Service did not find the bomb that the FBI insists was sitting in public view at the DNC building from 7:54 p.m. the night before. It was one of numerous egregious failures identified in a report by the Homeland Security Inspector General.

“Prior to Vice President-elect Harris’ 11:25 a.m. arrival, at least 10 different USSS agents and two canine units came within feet of the pipe bomb yet never discovered the device,” the 2025 Subcommittee on Oversight report said. “In fact, at least one USSS agent spent five hours posted near the garage entrance throughout the morning and early afternoon before the pipe bomb’s discovery.”

Security video shows 10 Secret Service agents walking onto the DNC driveway after walking past the bomb just before 8:22 a.m. After about two minutes, most of the agents walked back toward the bomb in the direction of a building entrance.

A group of 10 Secret Service officials gathers outside the Democratic National Committee building in Washington D.C. just before 8:30 a.m. Jan. 6, 2021. A bomb-sniffing dog (right) sweeps the area just before 9:30 a.m. before a visit by Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris.U.S. Capitol Police CCTV

Harris’ motorcade pulled into the DNC garage at 11:25 a.m., driving just feet away from the park bench and the pipe bomb. Harris had left the U.S. Capitol at 11:22 a.m. Federal prosecutors used her presence at the Capitol to seek harsher penalties for Jan. 6 criminal-case defendants. Some indictments and charging paperwork had to be reissued after it was discovered by Politico that Harris slipped away from the Capitol to the DNC.

‘Somebody’s not doing their job.’

If the Secret Service agents thought the bomb was real, they did not act like it. Agents and police stood calmly just feet from a bomb that could have potentially killed them all had it detonated. The response was so bad that a key lawmaker compared it to the bumbling Keystone Kops of silent-film-era fame.

Capitol Police security video showed that it took Secret Service agents nearly two and a half minutes to emerge from their vehicles to investigate after they were told about the bomb by a plainclothes Capitol Police counter-surveillance officer, who discovered it under a bush near a DNC park bench.

No one moved with urgency. A blast perimeter was not established. Pedestrians were allowed to stroll past the device. More than 40 vehicles were allowed to drive near the DNC building, and 10 civilians walked close to the bomb or otherwise breached the security perimeter, the January 2025 House report said.

Commuter trains rumbled by on a nearby trestle for 15 minutes after the bomb discovery. Even after multiple warnings on Capitol Police radio for officers to maintain a blast perimeter, pedestrians and vehicles were allowed near the DNC building, contaminating the crime scene, the Subcommittee on Oversight report said.

The Secret Service motorcade of Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris drives past the Democratic National Committee pipe bomb (left). Agents rush Harris into a dark SUV (right) and the motorcade moves out at 1:16 p.m. — 11 minutes after discovery of the device.U.S. Capitol Police CCTV

Harris was not evacuated from the DNC for 11 minutes after discovery of the bomb. If the FBI’s timeline is accurate, her security detail drove into the DNC garage at 11:25 a.m., mere feet from where the device sat. Harris never publicly mentioned what could easily have been viewed as an assassination attempt.

The motorcade of former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was allowed to drive within feet of the pipe bomb as Pelosi was evacuated from the Capitol to Fort McNair. Just before 2:30 p.m., Pelosi’s motorcade was allowed inside the blast zone and drove right past the device, just as a Capitol Police bomb robot prepared to blast the device with a water cannon.

There were also security lapses outside the Capitol Hill Club, where a pipe bomb was found about 12:40 p.m. Jan. 6. More than 40 minutes after the bomb discovery and three minutes after Capitol Police dispatched a bomb robot to the scene, a couple crossed C Street and walked south on 1st Street toward the Capitol Hill Club entrance. A police officer shouted to them to reverse course and leave the area.

“Sir, I have people walking down First Street right in front of the Republican Club,” a USCP officer said over police radio. “Somebody’s not doing their job.”

Two civilians walk onto Capitol Hill Club property and toward the building entrance more than 40 minutes after a pipe bomb was discovered behind the club at 12:40 p.m. Jan. 6, 2021.U.S. Capitol Police CCTV

A senior D.C. law enforcement official told the Epoch Times in February 2024 that the deadliness of pipe bombs should be known by anyone working in law enforcement, and milling about near a live bomb would be “stupidity.”

“If a pipe bomb goes off, shrapnel from that pipe bomb travels — it’s going to travel at about anywhere from 18,000 to 23,000 feet per second,” the official told The Epoch Times. “There’s nothing you can do. By the time you hear the boom, the shrapnel is going to be hitting you.

“That’s just stupidity. Unless, for some reason, they had no reason to be concerned.”

Cole ostensibly could not have known the planned timing and movements of Harris that were scheduled for Jan. 6.

Even taking Cole’s confession at face value that he intended the devices to detonate on Jan. 5 — and planting the devices had nothing to do with Jan. 6 — the result still put the lives of two top Democrat politicians in peril. Yet Harris and Pelosi have not publicly acknowledged that the DNC device could have maimed or killed them.

The Jan. 6 Select Committee appointed by Pelosi in 2022 barely mentioned the pipe bombs in its final report.

“Their 845-page final report only referenced ‘pipe bomb’ five times,” Loudermilk said in March 2024. “These references are situational, and as far as I can tell, no investigation was conducted.

“In contrast,” Loudermilk said, “‘President Trump’ is mentioned in the report one thousand, nine hundred and one times.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​January 6 

Sites like Kalshi and Polymarket let you put money on who will win the Super Bowl, but they also let you guess when Taylor Swift is getting married or when and if the United States will strike Iran.

Americans can also make these predictions in any state.

‘They can ban you if you make money. … That’s a scam.’

While it is true that many gambling websites offer bets for political outcomes and other non-sports wagers, what these prediction markets are doing is not technically gambling at all, and therefore fly right over any state gambling bans.

Alabama, Alaska, California, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Minnesota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah are the 11 states that have restrictions/bans on sports betting, but prediction markets are not subject to these laws.

When users want to predict the price that a Pokémon card will go for at auction, under the law they are not placing a bet; they are entering into an “event contract.”

What is a prediction market?

According to Gambling Insider, prediction markets operate like financial exchanges, which means they are regulated federally by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Website Next.io notes that prediction markets do not need a sportsbook license, as there is no “house” setting the odds, and trading activity determines the prices for all event contracts. In sports betting, the house can set the odds to whatever it wants, but those odds are typically based on expertise in the sport or field.

RELATED: Polymarket bettors RAGE as the app says Maduro’s capture doesn’t count as an invasion

Photo by Ethan Miller/Getty Images

Prediction markets have no odds, and there is no bet slip. Rather, the user is purchasing a share like a commodity, which trades between $0 and $1, and the payouts on each share is $1.

The closer a share is to $1, the more likely the market thinks the event is going to happen. For example, if the share is 99 cents, if that event happens, the payout at $1 will be minimal. If it was traditional betting, in that case the bet would be made at odds of about 100:1; betting $100 would win $1.

In prediction markets, users can sell at any time — which is not always available for traditional gambling — and garner profit that way. If a share or contract is purchased at 50 cents and the price (likelihood) rises to 70 cents, the user can duck out to gain the difference. This is akin to selling a stock that has risen in price before a big merger or significant market event.

RELATED: Jeffrey Epstein was BANNED from Xbox Live — for harassing other gamers

STRDEL/AFP via Getty Images

Major gambling networks like DraftKings and FanDuel have started to include predictions, which offer a much wider audience by expanding to a national market. DraftKings, for example, also allows for predictions on the stock market and cryptocurrency, which mirrors what most financial apps are becoming: banking and stock-trading hubs.

In November, Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan called traditional sportsbooks “a ripoff,” criticizing the fact that one can only “trade against the house.”

“They can ban you if you make money, and they can profile you as a user and change the prices based on you. That’s a scam,” he said.

The practice does have its higher-profile critics. Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (R) said in January that prediction markets “need to be stopped” and that they threaten “the integrity of the sport.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Fearless, Gambling, Prediction markets, Betting, Trading, Stock trading, Sports betting, Super bowl, Nfl, Football, Nba, Sports, Tech 

A new bill before Congress claims it will curb lawsuit abuse. It won’t. In reality, it will limit ordinary Americans’ access to civil courts.

The Protect Third Party Litigation Funding from Abuse Act, sponsored by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), would force plaintiffs in “any civil action” to disclose “the identity of any person (other than counsel of record) that has a legal right to receive any payment or thing of value” from the case.

Third-party funding is not clogging courts. It expands access to justice.

Plaintiffs would need to provide that information to defendants and the court. Anyone with a functioning brain can see what will happen next: The names leak, activists and corporate PR shops pick targets, and the people financing the lawsuit get punished for it.

If that sounds like a blackmail scheme, it is. And it would be perfectly legal.

Third-party litigation funding works like this: An individual, company, or organization advances money to a plaintiff or law firm to cover the costs of a lawsuit. In exchange, the funder receives a share of any judgment or settlement. If the plaintiff loses, the funder gets nothing.

The arrangement exists for a reason. Lawsuits can be expensive. Complex cases require investigators, expert witnesses, depositions, document review, and months or years of legal work. Deep-pocketed defendants know they can bury a plaintiff under delays, discovery fights, and endless motions while the meter runs at hundreds (sometimes thousands) of dollars an hour.

Litigation funding helps level that field. It gives plaintiffs a fighting chance against defendants who can afford to grind them down.

Issa calls this “abuse” because hedge funds and speculators sometimes fund cases in hopes of a return. “We believe that if a third-party investor is financing a lawsuit in federal court, it should be disclosed rather than hidden from the world,” Issa said when he announced the bill.

That sounds reasonable only if you ignore what trials are for.

A civil trial asks three questions: Did the defendant do what the plaintiff alleges? Did the defendant’s actions cause harm? If so, what were the damages (if any)? The identity of a funder does not help a jury answer any of them. If anything, it distracts from the merits and invites a side show: the defendant arguing the plaintiff is a puppet and the case is illegitimate because someone with money helped pay the bills. That argument deserves no special protection.

What counts is what the defendant did or didn’t do and whether it hurt the plaintiff. Who finances the plaintiff’s lawyers doesn’t change the facts of the case.

RELATED: A one-way national divorce: Anarchy for them, coercion for us

Cemile Bingol via iStock/Getty Images

A successful plaintiff also has the right to spend an award as he or she chooses, including paying debts and obligations incurred to bring the case. Issa’s bill would chill that option by scaring off funders through forced disclosure. The bill doesn’t touch defendants, who can hire every white-shoe law firm on the planet. It targets the side that usually needs help.

Issa’s bill also pretends it’s solving a crisis that doesn’t exist. The number of lawsuits filed each year in the United States, at both state and federal levels, has fallen by roughly one-third since 2012, according to Consumer Shield. Meanwhile fewer than 1% of state civil cases go to trial, and fewer than 2% of federal civil cases do. Most settle or get dismissed. Third-party funding is not clogging courts. It expands access to justice.

The bill also reaches far beyond any plausible federal interest. Federal cases account for only about 1.4% of civil litigation nationwide. States already have authority to regulate litigation funding — and some have. As of July 2025, seven states — Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Oklahoma, West Virginia, and Wisconsin — had regulations governing litigation funding, according to the Washington Legal Foundation. The fact that most states haven’t bothered tells you what lawmakers think: This isn’t a pressing problem.

The broader claim — that litigation funding drives frivolous suits — fails under scrutiny. A 2022 report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office found funders vet cases carefully and avoid interfering in litigation. They do that for a simple reason: They get paid only if the claim succeeds. The report put it plainly: “Funders select the most meritorious cases to fund because they only receive returns when claims are successful.”

Economic reality imposes its own discipline. Third-party funding does not “abuse” the system. It democratizes access to it.

Issa’s bill would do the opposite. By threatening people who finance lawsuits, it would tilt the playing field further toward big corporations and the ultra-wealthy — the parties most able to outspend and outlast everyone else.

Like it or not, civil suits help keep a free society free. They allow ordinary people to hold powerful actors accountable for harm. Restricting access to courts doesn’t stop abuse. It increases it — by giving the powerful more insulation from consequences. That’s the kind of “reform” Americans don’t need.

​Opinion & analysis, Lawsuits, Congress, Darrell issa, Third party, Litigation, Funding, Big business, Deep pockets, Plaintiffs, Investors, Civil court, Jury, Reform, Freedom, Free society 

Florida police said they worked quickly to identify a 19-year-old man who allegedly drove 1,500 miles to kidnap two sisters he met on Roblox and spoke with on Snapchat.

The sisters, 12 and 14 years old, were reported missing from their home in Indiantown on Saturday, which led to a multi-state search by local and federal law enforcement authorities.

‘There is no application online that is safe. If you can communicate with someone away from your house in the quiet of your own room, it can be a problem. So parents have to be vigilant.’

They were found by the Georgia Highway Patrol the next day when they pulled over a vehicle they believed the sisters were in.

Martin County Sheriff John Budensiek said the man was identified as Hser Mu Lah Say, who had driven 22 straight hours from Nebraska down to Florida on Friday.

“We’re dealing with a grown man that drove all the way from another state, an individual they had never met in person, picked them up, and we really don’t know what he was gonna do,” Budensiek said.

Surveillance video helped police identify the car Say was driving. They provided images of the man in what appeared to be a convenience store.

Say was charged with two counts of kidnapping and three counts of interference of child custody. Budensiek said the man may face additional charges.

The sheriff made it a point to say the girls were “rescued” from the “scenario that they had placed themselves in.”

The Roblox game is widely popular among children but has been criticized for not doing enough to keep predators away from underage users. The company released a statement about the latest incident.

“We are investigating this deeply troubling incident and will fully support law enforcement,” the company statement reads.

“Roblox has robust safety policies to protect users that go beyond many other platforms, and advanced safeguards that monitor for harmful content and communications,” it added. “We have filters designed to block the sharing of personal information, don’t allow user-to-user image or video sharing, and recently rolled out age checks globally to limit kids and teens to chatting with others their age by default. While no system is perfect, our commitment to safety never ends, and we continue to strengthen protections to keep users safe.”

RELATED: 14-year-old girls that went missing from sleepover were forced into prostitution by men they met online, police say

Budensiek warned parents to monitor their children’s use of online apps.

“There is no application online that’s safe. If you can communicate with someone away from your house in the quiet of your own room, it can be a problem. So parents have to be vigilant,” he said.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

​Hser mu lah say arrest, Predators on roblox, Online predators, Nebraska online predator, Crime 

After weeks of hysteria in Minneapolis, with politicians and paid agitators alike calling for resistance, we saw a church targeted by those opposed to ICE. We have gone off the deep end. I penned an op-ed calling for what I thought was common sense and titled it “Turn Down the Rhetoric.”

The Columbus Dispatch printed the column after the shooting of Alex Pretti, but changed the title to read, “Renee Good wasn’t an ‘innocent.’” That’s the opposite of calming down the rhetoric. It was purposely inflammatory. Any wonder why people don’t trust the legacy media any more?

Compare Minnesota’s unrest with states like Florida and Texas, which have had far greater ICE activity and deportations.

Good’s life ended in tragedy. So did Pretti’s. That’s true whether you support President Trump or oppose ICE. Each incident affects families and communities and undermines trust in the system. My point in the op-ed was that rhetoric motivates action. Speech is free, but actions have consequences and — as we have seen — those consequences can be horrific.

There can be no mistake: Infringe on others’ rights or obstruct law enforcement, and you’re breaking the law.

When public officials encourage such “resistance,” they are only making a bad situation worse. But some, like my Democrat opponent for attorney general, Elliot Forhan, are still using vile rhetoric. He recently posted a video explaining how he will “kill Donald Trump.” That is the type of comment we should all oppose.

We need to turn down the temperature.

We should defend anyone’s right to express his or her views peacefully. Are you for open borders? Against ICE? You get to say so. You can even buy signs and shout it from a megaphone in the town square in a peaceful assembly. But those with the opposite opinions get to exercise the same right.

Violence is unacceptable. Let me restate that, because these days it seems like people read that as “violence is unacceptable unless I think it’s justified.”

Any violence, under any circumstance, is unacceptable.

Obstructing law enforcement personnel when they’re doing their job isn’t “peacefully protesting” or exercising your right to free speech. It is not OK to justify your actions because you believe someone else is violating the law.

Public officials should not incite violence or lawlessness. That is one of the reasons Minnesota’s sanctuary policies are so dangerous. Many of the arrests of violent illegal aliens could be made in the safety of the local jail or with the help of local law enforcement without street-level activity.

Compare Minnesota’s unrest with states like Florida and Texas, which have had far greater ICE activity and more deportations. The biggest difference is that those states cooperate, don’t have officials inciting lawlessness, and don’t accept protests that descend into mayhem.

That brings me to a simple point I taught my children when they started to drive. When interacting with law enforcement, be polite and cooperate. Say “yes, sir,” “no, sir,” and follow instructions. If police make a mistake, we can sort it out later — as the law requires. But don’t try to block the road with your car, refuse their instructions, or physically impede their activities.

RELATED: The left is at war in Minnesota. America is watching football.

Blaze Media Illustration

Police can mess up. When they do, they should be held accountable in court, under the law, with a presumption of innocence, just like everyone else. Police misconduct should be investigated and addressed. Ohio rigorously reviews use-of-force incidents, many of which are handled by the state Bureau of Criminal Investigation and the attorney general’s office. Wrongdoing will be punished, and it will continue to be punished when I’m attorney general.

Alex Pretti’s shooting was a tragic situation, and I want truth and justice as much as anyone. The investigation is ongoing, and as a strong Second Amendment supporter, I believe having a gun doesn’t make you inherently dangerous. Your actions while carrying a gun might, however.

Highly contentious protests can spiral out of control quickly, and actions and reactions can be deadly, particularly when human beings make decisions without the luxury of hours of analysis or instant video replays.

That’s why, as I made clear in my Columbus Dispatch op-ed, common sense means we need to turn down the rhetoric.

​Ohio, Leftist violence, Radical left, Alex pretti, Ice, Dhs, Ice protest, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Attorney general, Free speech, Debate, Opinion & analysis, Renee good