Daniel Miller and the TEXIT Debacle: The Incompetence that Doomed a Movement
In the expansive realm of Texas politics, Daniel Miller, the dynamic President of the Texas Nationalist Movement (TNM), has been a fervent advocate for the TEXIT movement since its inception in 1996. Recognized on major news networks and international outlets, Miller’s charismatic stance on Texas independence has positioned him as a central figure in the Lone Star State’s political landscape. As the face of the TEXIT movement, Miller’s leadership warrants scrutiny, delving into both successes and challenges that shape the narrative of his tenure.
Background History of Daniel Miller:
Daniel Miller, a sixth-generation Texan, brings a unique blend of tech consultancy and entrepreneurial spirit to the TEXIT movement. His political journey, however, is marked by setbacks. In the 2012 House District Republican primary, Miller faced a formidable defeat against Allan Ritter, securing only 27% of the votes. Undeterred, he ventured into the 2022 Texas Lt. Governor primary, yet the outcome echoed his previous loss, with Dan Patrick commanding 76% of the votes and Miller securing a distant second with just 7%. These early challenges in Miller’s political career provide context for the hurdles he would later navigate in steering the TEXIT movement toward its goal of Texas independence.
The Texas Nationalist Movement (TNM):
The TNM, under Daniel Miller’s leadership since its evolution in 2005, has become a pivotal force in Texas politics, not because of Miller’s involvement, but in spite of it. Evolving from a faction of the old Republic of Texas, the TNM’s mission is explicit: “the complete, total and unencumbered political, cultural and economic independence of Texas.” Operating as an unincorporated association, the TNM’s focus on peaceful political advocacy, education, and the pursuit of a statewide referendum sets the stage for the TEXIT movement. Miller’s role extends beyond advocacy, as he testifies on legislation and participates in conferences globally, solidifying the TNM’s status as a formidable political entity.
Series of Failures:
Referendum Mishaps:
The handling of the TEXIT referendum became a critical juncture in Miller’s leadership. He failed to understand the law and submit ballots on time. He failed to understand the legal requirement for wet signatures. And technical glitches on the petition website likely meant that many more signatures could have been obtained. These missteps not only delayed the movement’s momentum but raised questions about the TEXIT leadership’s competence and preparedness.
The technical failure of the petition website was particularly problematic. For days, perhaps weeks, programming errors plagued the platform, preventing individuals from completing the registration process. The system’s incapacity to rectify errors disenfranchised countless individuals. The severity of these issues questioned the TEXIT movement’s technological infrastructure and its ability to navigate complex legal processes. We should also mention that this is actually the type of business that is Miller’s main job … and it failed miserably.
TEXITCON Press Restrictions:
The TEXITCON event, which was a great idea that was long overdue, faced a critical misstep under Miller’s leadership – a failure to allow free press opportunities. The Texas Liberty Journal’s attempts to secure a press pass were met with complete silence, pointing to a broader issue of restricted media coverage and public awareness. Access to the event would only be possible if one paid for admission. This is not how the press operates and any amateur event organizer would know this. This communication breakdown not only hindered media engagement but also raised concerns about the real motivations of the event. Was it about awareness and organization? Or was it just about making money?
This press restriction holds broader implications. Limited media coverage restricts the dissemination of information about the TEXIT movement’s goals, progress, and activities. The absence of a robust media presence opens the door to misinformation and limits constructive public discourse. In a movement where public perception is pivotal, stifling media access has far-reaching consequences, potentially isolating the TEXIT movement from valuable feedback and alternative viewpoints.
Legal Troubles and Financial Irregularities:
a. IRS Closure of 501c(4):
A significant episode under Miller’s leadership was the closure of TNM’s 501c(4) status by the IRS in May 2023. This move may signal legal troubles or it may once again represent incompetence. In the very least it represents a lack of transparency as no mention of this has been made by the TNM. The closure raises questions about the internal governance and financial practices of the Texas Nationalist Movement Inc. as well. Did they stop being a non-profit? Where is the money from the online store going?
The IRS closure unveils a broader challenge in managing the legal aspects of the movement. As a key advocacy organization, maintaining compliance with federal regulations is paramount. The closure not only tarnishes the image of the TNM but underscores the importance of robust governance mechanisms in movements of this nature.
b. Business Registration Shell Game:
Further scrutiny reveals a concerning practice – the shelling of the Texas Business Registration through another company, “TNM Protective Services, LLC.” This maneuver introduces an element of opaqueness into the organizational structure. Coupled with the inactive status of the “Texas Nationalist Movement Foundation Inc”, this prompts questions about organizational transparency and accountability.
The use of multiple entities and the status of these entities raise concerns about financial practices and organizational integrity. Advocating for political, cultural, and economic independence necessitates a level of transparency that aligns with the movement’s core values. The complexities in business registration demand a closer examination of the TEXIT movement’s financial strategies and its commitment to ethical conduct.
c. Lost Domain Name
When Miller launched his book in 2020 “Texit: Why and How Texas Will Leave The Union“, the back cover of his book listed his domain as www.DanielMiller.com. Sometime after the publication he lost control of his own domain. This often happens when the owner fails to pay the renewal fee to their domain host. Generally, domain names run about $15.00 / year but when the owner fails to renew a domain, ‘squatters’ can jump in and grab it. Often, they will then jack up the price and hope that the owner will pay to have it restored. For common names, or names of celebrities, the fee can go up quite a bit. In this case, DanielMiller.com is currently offered for sale at $79,888.
Few in their right mind would pay such a fee and such a domain name is only valuable to a person who shares this name…that’s a pretty small market. This appears to be the case for Miller who has subsequently registered the domain www.DanielOMiller.com … adding the ‘O’. But the question remains, how does one fail to renew their own domain name? What does it say about a person’s management skills that they would fail at such a simple task? Miller has not returned our inquiry so we are unable to get his side of the story.
The Elusive Financial Trail:
The uncertainty surrounding the online TEXIT product store adds another layer to this financial opaqueness. With little information available about the revenue distribution and the company handling these transactions, questions linger about the accountability of the TEXIT movement. Transparency in financial matters is not just a legal requirement but a moral obligation, especially for a movement that seeks to empower Texans in determining their destiny.
Conclusion: A Call for Renewed Leadership in the TEXIT Movement
As we meticulously examine Daniel Miller’s leadership of the TEXIT movement, a pattern of failures and incompetence emerges, raising serious questions about his ability to steer the movement forward after over two decades. The challenges faced, from referendum mishaps to the restrictions on press freedom and legal and financial irregularities, paint a concerning picture of the movement’s current trajectory.
Delayed ballot submissions, a lack of understanding about legal requirements, and technical failures on the petition website, showcase a level of incompetence that is detrimental to a movement striving for Texas independence. These missteps not only hinder the momentum of TEXIT but also cast doubt on Miller’s capacity to navigate the intricate legal and technological landscape that such a movement demands.
The press restrictions observed at TEXITCON further underscore a deficiency in leadership. In a movement that claims to champion transparency and democratic principles, stifling media access raises serious concerns about accountability and openness. The lack of media engagement limits public awareness and stifles constructive discourse, hindering the movement’s ability to gain broad support.
The IRS shut down the 501c(4), a move that typically happens after a company fails to turn in its forms for 3 consecutive years. The questionable business registration practices that hide who is running the company reveal an unsettling lack of governance and transparency. For a movement that advocates for the political, cultural, and economic independence of Texas, such financial opaqueness is not just a red flag; it is a fundamental betrayal of the ideals the movement professes.
After more than 20 years under Miller’s leadership, it becomes imperative for the people invested in the TEXIT movement to critically assess its direction. The numerous failures and shortcomings raise a pivotal question: Is Daniel Miller the right leader to guide the movement into the future? A movement takes more than passion to succeed, it takes leadership, experience, and competence. Perhaps it is time for the people to seek out a new representative who can bring these fresh perspectives and a strategic understanding of the complexities of politics.
Moving the TEXIT movement forward requires adept leadership that can learn from past mistakes, adapt to challenges, and effectively navigate the intricate web of politics, legality, and public relations. The vision of a free and independent Texas is too significant to be hindered by the failures of the past. It is time for the people to seek a leader who can reinvigorate the movement, inspire confidence, and, most importantly, lead Texas toward a future that aligns with the aspirations of its people.
Featured
“Judge Speedy” Hits the Wall: Bexar County Jurist Resigns, Accepts Lifetime Ban from Texas Bench
SAN ANTONIO, Texas — The political and legal downfall of Bexar County Judge Rosie Speedlin-Gonzalez came to a dramatic conclusion after the embattled jurist resigned from office and accepted a permanent lifetime ban from serving on the Texas bench .
The resignation agreement, signed in April and confirmed by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, ends months of controversy surrounding Speedlin-Gonzalez, who faced criminal charges and multiple judicial misconduct complaints stemming from a heated courtroom confrontation involving a San Antonio defense attorney.
Speedlin-Gonzalez, an openly gay Democrat who had served on Bexar County Court-at-Law No. 13 since 2018, formally agreed she would be, “forever disqualified from judicial service in the State of Texas.” The agreement prohibits her from serving as a judge, accepting judicial appointments, or performing judicial duties in the future.
The scandal centered on a December 2024 courtroom incident involving defense attorney Elizabeth Russell. Prosecutors alleged Speedlin-Gonzalez ordered Russell handcuffed and detained in the jury box during a contentious exchange after accusing the attorney of coaching her client during a probation revocation hearing.
A Bexar County grand jury later indicted the judge on charges of unlawful restraint and official oppression. Court documents alleged that Speedlin-Gonzalez knowingly restrained Russell without consent while acting under the authority of her judicial office.
The incident generated national attention and quickly became one of the most talked about judicial controversies in Texas. Video clips and courtroom details circulated widely online, while critics questioned whether the judge had crossed a clear constitutional line by using courtroom authority against a practicing attorney during active proceedings.
KSAT reported last month that special prosecutor Brian Cromeens later moved to dismiss the criminal charges after Speedlin-Gonzalez agreed to resign and permanently leave the judiciary. According to reports, prosecutors concluded the resignation and lifetime ban sufficiently addressed the public interest concerns surrounding the case.
The resignation agreement also referenced several additional complaints against the now former judge. One complaint alleged she displayed an “unprofessional demeanor” toward a criminal defendant and failed to timely address motions involving bond modifications and habeas corpus requests. Three additional complaints accused her of abusing judicial authority by issuing “no contact” orders restricting communications among court personnel and former employees.
Speedlin-Gonzalez had already faced disciplinary scrutiny before the handcuffing controversy erupted. According to the San Antonio Express-News, the State Commission on Judicial Conduct previously issued a public warning after she congratulated winning attorneys on social media and posted their photographs on her official judicial Facebook page. The commission also reportedly ordered additional education after complaints involving a pride flag displayed inside her courtroom.
In January, shortly after the indictment became public, Speedlin-Gonzalez defended herself in comments to the New York Post.
“I’m a proud public servant, I’m LGBTQ, I own a gun, I’m bilingual, I’m an American citizen, and I have every right to defend myself,” Gonzalez told the outlet. “As long as I walk in righteousness and have God at my side I will be fine.”
The judge was suspended without pay earlier this year while disciplinary proceedings continued. During that suspension, visiting judges rotated through County Court-at-Law No. 13 to handle pending cases and specialty court matters.
Court-at-Law No. 13 is known in part for overseeing Reflejo Court, a specialty program focused on first time domestic violence offenders and treatment based intervention programs.
The controversy also arrived during a difficult reelection season for Speedlin-Gonzalez. In March, she lost her Democratic primary race to challenger Alicia Perez, effectively ending her political future even before the disciplinary case concluded.
The agreement signed by Speedlin-Gonzalez states that by accepting resignation and permanent disqualification, she does not admit fault or guilt regarding the allegations against her. Such provisions are common in negotiated judicial disciplinary settlements.
One narrow exception remains under the agreement. Speedlin-Gonzalez may still officiate wedding ceremonies, provided she does not wear judicial robes or imply she retains judicial authority while conducting them.
Speedlin-Gonzalez was widely described as the first openly LGBT judge elected in Bexar County. Supporters frequently highlighted that milestone during her tenure on the bench, while critics argued the attention surrounding identity politics often overshadowed concerns about courtroom conduct and professionalism.
Permanent judicial disqualifications remain relatively uncommon in Texas, particularly involving sitting elected county judges. The case now joins a growing list of disciplinary actions taken by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct against jurists accused of misconduct or abuse of authority.
FATE, TX — Voters in the City of Fate have removed Councilwoman Codi Chinn from office following a successful recall election held May 2, 2026, according to unofficial results released Saturday night.
With UNOFFICIAL VOTE TOTAL: 56.34% FOR RECALL / 43.66% AGAINST | TOTAL VOTES CAST: 1711, a majority of voters supported removing Chinn from her seat, ending her term nearly a year early. The results remain unofficial until canvassed by the City Council, but the margin indicates a clear outcome.
The recall follows a rapid petition effort earlier this year in which residents gathered 396 verified signatures, well above the 351 required under the city’s home rule charter. Once validated, the council was legally required to call the election, leaving no discretion to delay or deny the process.
Chinn was elected in June 2024 after defeating Cinnamon Krause in a runoff, securing 835 votes (56.92%) to 632 (43.08%). Some have argued that her success in the election was a surprise, given how she became increasingly caustic on social media during the final days of early voting. The recall petition alone represented nearly half of her original vote total, signaling early and organized opposition that ultimately carried through to election day.
Saturday’s results confirm that the dissatisfaction reflected in the petition effort translated into votes.
Social Media Strategy Backfires
In the days leading up to the election, Chinn and some of her supporters attempted to push back against the recall with a social media campaign that included imagery and messaging encouraging supporters to “flip off” critics—widely interpreted as directing a middle finger at fellow Fate residents.
Rather than diffusing tensions, the approach appears to have hardened opposition. Several residents cited the messaging as emblematic of broader concerns about tone, conduct, and representation at City Hall.
With the recall approved by voters, Chinn’s seat will be declared vacant upon official canvassing of the vote.
Looking Forward
Under the city charter, the remaining council members are expected to appoint a replacement to serve until the next general election. Normally, this would be the following May 2027, as the remainder of the term is for less than 12 months. However, in this situation, it will likely be in November 2026, where an election will be scheduled to consider the recall of three other council members, as well as the Mayor. At that time, voters will be asked to pick a replacement to fill the unexpired term of Place 1, which will be May of 2027. Assuming things go according to schedule.
Fate, TX
EXPLOSIVE: Former Fate DPS Chief Poised to Sue City Over Alleged Political Firing—Legal Reckoning May Be Imminent
FATE, TX – Attorneys for former Department of Public Safety Chief Lyle Lombard have sent a demand letter to the City of Fate seeking preservation of evidence and offering a pre-suit compromise, while also pursuing a federal lawsuit against the City of Fate and Michael Kovacs alleging unlawful termination, violations of due process, and infringement of constitutional rights.
The lawsuit has not yet been filed. According to the demand letter and proposed complaint, Lombard intends to file in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas if a settlement is not reached, alleging he was terminated in November 2025 in violation of Texas Government Code § 614.022 and his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
According to the complaint, Lombard began working for the City of Fate in April 2018 and received positive performance evaluations throughout his tenure. The filing states that after a series of social media posts by his spouse criticizing city leadership, Lombard received a negative performance review on October 30, 2025.
On November 12, 2025, Kovacs informed Lombard that he would be discussed in executive session and offered him a separation agreement that included two months’ severance.
The lawsuit further alleges that during a City Council executive session, Councilwoman Codi Chinn presented anonymous complaints regarding Lombard. The following day, Kovacs issued Lombard a written complaint summarizing those allegations, and Lombard was required to surrender his badge, identification, and service weapon. He was terminated on November 21, 2025.
Lombard claims the City improperly relied on anonymous, unsigned complaints in taking disciplinary action, which he argues violates Texas law requiring signed complaints against law enforcement officers.
The lawsuit also alleges that Lombard’s termination was motivated, at least in part, by his spouse’s protected speech, constituting retaliation in violation of the First Amendment.
Lombard is seeking reinstatement, damages, injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees. A pre-suit demand letter sent to the City requested $440,000 to resolve the matter prior to litigation.
The case remains pending, and the allegations have not yet been adjudicated in court.
Opinion and Analysis
The legal filings outline the formal claims, but previously reported evidence raises additional questions about how the City of Fate arrived at its decision to terminate Lombard.
Pipkins Reports has previously published details of a recorded conversation made by Councilman Mark Hatley in which City Manager Michael Kovacs can be heard alleging that Councilman Mark Harper threatened to terminate him (Kovacs) if Lombard was not removed. If accurate, that statement suggests the termination decision may have been influenced by council-level pressure, despite the expectation that a city manager operates independently in personnel matters. Harper has refused to confirm or deny the allegations.
A second recorded conversation involving Codi Chinn adds another dimension. In that audio, Chinn discusses the need to compile complaints from Department of Public Safety personnel into a format suitable for executive session review. However, based on the documents referenced in the lawsuit, and our Open Records Requests, the only material ultimately presented was the now-central “anonymous letter” provided to Kovacs. No other complaints or documents were ever provided.
In the same recording, Chinn also references Lombard’s wife and her social media activity. Chinn stated: “…it’s unfortunate because it didn’t have to be that way, but I think if he [Lombard] wasn’t so involved politically. You can’t do the things that you’re doing on an operational level that suck. And then have a bad attitude and a bad wife on top of it.”
That statement is notable because it aligns directly with one of the core allegations in the lawsuit—that Lombard’s termination was influenced, at least in part, by the protected speech of his spouse. The filings argue that such consideration would implicate First Amendment protections, a claim that will ultimately be tested in court.
Taken together, the recordings and the legal filings raise questions about whether the termination process was influenced by political pressure, reliance on anonymous complaints, and factors outside standard disciplinary procedures.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login