
This story has been moved to the Trophy Club Voice. Click Here to read.
Featured
“Paid Influencer Ecosystem”?
Thune’s Dismissive Smear of Election Integrity Concerns Demands His Immediate Ouster
Opinion – Senate Majority Leader John Thune has revealed his utter contempt for the American electorate. Amid mounting pressure to advance the SAVE America Act—a straightforward bill requiring voter ID and proof of citizenship to safeguard federal elections—Thune shrugged off the grassroots outcry as nothing more than a “paid influencer ecosystem.”
This arrogant dismissal, captured in recent comments to reporters, isn’t just tone-deaf; it’s a betrayal of the millions of everyday Americans who demand secure elections as a cornerstone of our republic.
Thune’s remarks didn’t emerge in a vacuum. They came as conservatives, including President Trump and a chorus of activists, ramped up calls for the Senate to use procedural tools like a talking filibuster to force a vote on the SAVE Act.
The legislation, already passed by the House, addresses widespread fears of voter fraud by ensuring only citizens cast ballots—a measure supported by an overwhelming 80-90% of Americans across party lines, according to polls from Gallup, Rasmussen, and others. Yet Thune, ensconced in his leadership perch, waved it away, implying the push is manufactured by compensated online agitators rather than genuine civic concern.
As one critic aptly put it, this reduces the legitimate worries of voters to a “social media echo chamber,” ignoring the real-world efforts of poll watchers, state lawmakers, and ordinary citizens who’ve fought for transparency since the chaotic expansions of mail-in voting during the 2020 pandemic.
Let’s be clear: Thune’s words aren’t a mere slip; they’re a window into the soul of a career politician who’s lost touch with the base that elevated Republicans to Senate control. Public skepticism about election integrity isn’t fringe—it’s mainstream. Polls consistently show that a significant portion of voters, including independents and minorities, harbor doubts about the security of our processes, fueled by irregularities in battleground states and the rapid, unchecked changes implemented under the guise of COVID emergencies.
Organizations like the Election Integrity Network and grassroots groups have documented these issues through audits, lawsuits, and reform proposals, all driven by patriotism, not paychecks.
To smear these efforts as the work of “paid influencers” is not only insulting but dangerously divisive, echoing the elitist disdain that has alienated voters from the GOP establishment for years.
This isn’t Thune’s first rodeo in undermining conservative priorities. As the No. 2 Republican under Mitch McConnell, he previously downplayed candidates focused on 2020 election concerns, blaming them for midterm setbacks rather than addressing the underlying voter frustrations.
Now, as Majority Leader, he wields immense power over the legislative agenda, yet he’s dragging his feet on border security, spending reforms, and yes, election safeguards—issues that define the MAGA movement and the party’s platform. His reluctance to “bust the filibuster” or rally votes for the SAVE Act, despite a Republican majority, reeks of cowardice or worse: complicity in preserving a system that benefits the uniparty elite. Even Elon Musk has publicly questioned if Thune is “owned by someone,” a sentiment echoed across conservative networks.
The backlash has been swift and justified. Activists, commentators like Tomi Lahren, and everyday Americans on platforms like X have torched Thune for his arrogance, with calls to “vacate the chair” gaining traction. From podcasters decrying him as a “RINO on steroids” to voters labeling him a “damn liar,” the outrage underscores a deeper fracture: Senate Republicans are failing their base, and Thune is the poster child for this dysfunction.
Thune Must Go—Step Down or Be Vacated
John Thune’s tenure as Senate Majority Leader is a disgrace, a glaring example of how Washington insiders prioritize self-preservation over the will of the people. By belittling the fight for election integrity as a fabricated “ecosystem” of influencers, he has spit in the face of the 77 million-plus Trump voters and the broader conservative coalition that demands action, not excuses.
This isn’t leadership; it’s sabotage. In a constitutional republic, where the legitimacy of government rests on the consent of the governed, dismissing voter concerns as paid propaganda erodes the very foundation of our democracy. Thune isn’t just wrong—he’s unfit.
It’s time for Thune to face the music: Step down immediately and let a true conservative warrior take the reins. If he refuses, Senate Republicans must summon the spine to vacate the chair, just as House conservatives did to oust Kevin McCarthy when he failed to deliver.
Anything less is a capitulation to the swamp, allowing Democrats to block vital reforms while illegals potentially sway elections and fraud festers unchecked.
The American people aren’t “paid influencers”—we’re the bosses. And we’re done with traitorous enablers like Thune. Remove him now, or risk losing the Senate and the republic along with it. The clock is ticking, Republicans: Act, or be replaced.
Council
Recall War in Fate: Councilwoman’s Past Disclosure Comes Back to Haunt Her
FATE, TX – Just two months after Councilwoman Codi Chinn publicly posted an unredacted recall affidavit that included citizens’ names and home addresses, she now refuses to release a similar document that would reveal her supporters. Her explanation for the change, however, appears to conflict with information provided by city officials.
The dispute centers on an “Affidavit of Petitioners’ Committee,” the formal document required to begin a recall process under Texas law. The affidavit lists the members of the committee seeking the recall, including their names and home addresses.
Earlier this year, such an affidavit was filed to initiate a recall election against Chinn. According to records obtained by Pipkins Reports, Chinn received the document through her city-issued email account and later posted the affidavit publicly on Facebook without authorization or redacting the listed addresses.
The disclosure drew widespread criticism from residents and local observers who argued that publishing citizens’ home addresses could expose them to harassment or intimidation. A police report later named Chinn as a suspect in a possible unlawful disclosure investigation, a matter previously reported by Pipkins Reports.
Among the individuals listed on that recall affidavit were Andrew Greenberg and several members of the Fate City Council.
At the time, Chinn denied wrongdoing and defended her decision to publish the document.
The political situation in Fate has since flipped.
Supporters aligned with Chinn recently filed their own recall affidavit targeting Greenberg along with council members Mark Hatley, Rick Maneval, and Martha Huffman.
When residents asked on social media whether Chinn would again release the affidavit publicly, she declined and suggested there was a key distinction between the two situations.

“… there’s one big difference between the email we received from the city secretary when it was notifying council about my recall and the one notifying us about the recall for Greenberg, Hatley, Maneval, and Huffman,” Chinn wrote online. “One came without a confidentiality disclaimer and the other did. I’ll let you do your ‘investigative journalist work’ to figure out why that is.”
So, we did. To verify the claim, Pipkins Reports contacted Fate City Manager Michael W. Kovacs to ask whether the city had changed the language used in emails sent to council members regarding recall documents.

Kovacs said it had not. “All City originated emails have always carried the notice below,” Kovacs wrote in an email response.
The notice warns recipient that the message “may contain confidential and/or privileged information” and it cautions against copying or disclosing the contents if the recipient is not authorized.
In addition to the standard email disclaimer, Kovacs also noted that council members have long received additional guidance reminding them that although elected officials may view unredacted documents in their official capacity, they remain subject to restrictions on disclosing confidential information. The additional disclaimer says, “As Mayor and Council Members you are entitled to see any document of the city without redaction of confidential information,” Kovacs wrote. “However, you are also bound to the restrictions against disclosure of any information deemed confidential by the Public Information Act.”
Kovacs added that the city recently moved the confidentiality language higher in the email to emphasize the notice, following consultations with the city attorney during a period that included several recall petitions and open records requests. (ie: after Chinn disclosed the document)
Public records law and city policy
Under the Texas Public Information Act, most government records are presumed public unless they fall under specific statutory exceptions. The law requires government bodies to withhold certain categories of sensitive personal information, such as Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers, financial account data, and some contact information. While a citizen’s name and address may appear in some public filings, many municipalities (including Fate) adopt internal practices designed to limit the disclosure of personal identifying information when documents are shared publicly. This includes the redaction of addresses of the public.
Opinion and analysis
The facts of the situation are relatively straightforward.
When the recall affidavit targeted Chinn, she had no problem releasing the document publicly on social media with citizens’ addresses intact. When a similar affidavit surfaced targeting her political opponents, the same kind of disclosure suddenly became off limits.
Chinn has attributed that difference to changes in the email disclaimer language. The city manager’s explanation suggests the warning language was not new, but rather long-standing. Only the prominent location of the language changed.
So it would appear that Chinn’s response is a case of political convenience.
Ultimately, voters in Fate will decide how they view the episode. But the unfolding recall battle has already delivered one clear lesson. In politics, the standard you apply to others often returns to test you.
### Pipkins Reports has requested a copy of the Affidavit of Petitioners’ Committee from the City of Fate. When received, we will provide that information to the public … redacted of course, as we did previously.
Featured
CENTCOM Commander Provides Update on Operation Epic Fury
VIDEO
PENTAGON – United States Central Command released a new operational update on Operation Epic Fury. In a March 11 briefing, U.S. Navy Adm. Brad Cooper addressed the public with the latest details on the rapidly developing mission. Speaking on behalf of the command, Cooper outlined current military actions, operational goals, and the strategic posture of U.S. forces in the region. The update offers a rare inside look at how CENTCOM is executing Epic Fury, and what commanders say comes next as the operation continues to unfold.