Connect with us

Published

on

Does Crockett want Trump dead? – Sponsors “DISGRACED Former Protectees Act” to make it happen.

Dallas, TX — A storm is brewing in North Texas politics as Rep. Jasmine Crockett [D-TX-30], whose district lies just south of Dallas, faces fierce backlash from Texas Republicans. The uproar stems from her co-sponsorship of H.R.8081, the “Denying Infinite Security and Government Resources Allocated toward Convicted and Extremely Dishonorable Former Protectees Act.” This bill, had it passed, would have stripped former President Donald Trump of his Secret Service protection following his conviction on felony charges in New York.

The call for Crockett’s resignation was led by 16 Texas Republicans, including prominent figures such as State Rep. Brian Harrison and State Sen. Bob Hall. In a letter released Monday, these lawmakers stated, “Texans believe that, regardless of party, Presidents of the United States of America, both current and former, must be protected.”

Crockett’s legislative move came under intense scrutiny especially after the recent assassination attempt on Trump during a rally in Pennsylvania. Trump, grazed by a bullet that penetrated his right ear, was swiftly attended to by secret service, who surrounded the President while other agents neutralized the would be assassin.

Despite the controversy, Crockett remained defiant. Her office has yet to comment on the calls for her resignation or her stance on the bill following the assassination attempt. On her official X account, Crockett expressed her concerns, stating, “My thoughts are with Mr. Trump as he recovers. My deepest appreciation is extended to law enforcement for their selfless & decisive action. Political violence in all forms must be condemned.”

Hollow words from a Congressman that literally would vote to put his life in jeopardy. Maybe Mrs. Crockett should have thought about that before cosponsoring the bill.

With Crockett up for re-election, the timing of this controversy could not be more pivotal. Facing Independent candidate Ken Ashby, who is gaining traction among conservative voters, Crockett finds herself in a precarious position. Notably, there is no Republican candidate running in District 30, making Ashby the primary conservative alternative.

Crockett’s political career has been marked by her dedication to civil liberties and justice, particularly for underrepresented communities. From her early days as a public defender to her tenure in the Texas House of Representatives, she has consistently championed progressive causes. However, her involvement with the controversial DISGRACED Former Protectees Act has cast a shadow over her legislative achievements.

Ken Ashby, the independent challenger, has seized this opportunity to criticize Crockett’s judgment and question her commitment to the safety and security of American leaders. In a recent statement, Ashby remarked, “This bill is a dangerous precedent. We must protect all our Presidents, past and present, to uphold the dignity of the office and ensure national security.”

As Election Day approaches, voters in Texas’ 30th District will have to weigh Crockett’s track record of advocacy and reform against the recent controversy and the calls for her resignation. The outcome of this race could significantly impact the political landscape in North Texas, highlighting the ongoing tensions and divisions within the state’s political sphere.

About Rep. Jasmine Crockett

Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett has a storied career dedicated to public service and justice. She has worked as a public defender, civil rights attorney, and was a key figure in the Texas House of Representatives. Crockett has been a vocal advocate for criminal justice reform, economic opportunity, and civil liberties. Her work in Congress aims to expand healthcare access, voting rights, and economic equity across Texas. She is a member of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. and holds degrees from Rhodes College and the University of Houston.

As the political drama unfolds, one thing remains clear: the voters of District 30 have a critical decision to make, one that will resonate far beyond the boundaries of North Texas.

Michael Pipkins focuses on public integrity, governance, constitutional issues, and political developments affecting Texans. His investigative reporting covers public-record disputes, city-government controversies, campaign finance matters, and the use of public authority. Pipkins is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ). As an SPJ member, Pipkins adheres to established principles of ethical reporting, including accuracy, fairness, source protection, and independent journalism.

Council

La Marque Mayor Keith Bell Arrested on Indecent Exposure Charge, Released on $75,000 Bond

Published

on

Keith Bell Allegedly with pants down.

La Marque, TX – Keith Bell, 53, the mayor of La Marque, was arrested Friday in Angleton on a warrant charging him with indecent exposure, a Class B misdemeanor. He was released Saturday after posting a $75,000 bond, with a judge ordering him to have no contact with the woman who reported the incident, stay away from her residence and stay away from the school she attends.

According to the Houston Chronicle, Bell was allegedly seen masturbating in the lobby of an office building in Angleton on Friday morning. A woman, whose identity is being withheld, reportedly witnessed the incident and contacted authorities, prompting Brazoria County Sheriff’s deputies to respond. The Chronicle reported that Bell was taken into custody and booked into the county detention center.

Those are allegations, not a conviction. Bell has not been found guilty of the charge, and the publicly available reporting does not identify an attorney representing him or provide a statement from Bell disputing the accusation.

Keith Bell – Mugshot

The City of La Marque confirmed the arrest Friday, in a statement where they stated, “To the residents of La Marque, we recognize that this is a shocking and disheartening development during a period that has already brought significant uncertainty and challenges to our community. We understand and share your concerns.” City officials also emphasized that the alleged conduct occurred outside Bell’s official duties as mayor and said the city would follow its charter and applicable law while gathering verified information.

Bell’s arrest does not automatically remove him from office. The city said Saturday that Bell remains mayor unless he resigns or is removed through the procedures established by the city charter and Texas law. City leadership said it had not communicated with Bell following his release, and Bell had not contacted city staff at the time of reporting.

This isn’t Bell’s first trip with controversy.

Bell has been involved in La Marque government for years. He served on the council for 17 years before becoming mayor, and he was sworn into the mayor’s office in January 2021. He was reelected in May 2024, defeating Joel Camacho with 63.57 percent of the vote, according to official Galveston County election results.

Bell also survived a 2022 recall election. More recently, he faced another recall effort in 2025, which Bell disputed as based on false allegations. That political history doesn’t establish anything about the current criminal case, but it does mean La Marque’s mayor has never exactly been a stranger to controversy.

Under Texas Penal Code §21.08, indecent exposure involves exposing the anus or genitals with intent to arouse or gratify sexual desire while being reckless about whether another person is present who will be offended or alarmed. A first offense is generally a Class B misdemeanor.

Continue Reading

Featured

Is Mitch McConnell Dead? Citizens Demand Proof of Life

Published

on

Mitch McConnell on Life Support

Kentucky, USA – Mitch McConnell has been out of public view for 71 days. No speech. No interview. No video. No public appearance. Not even a short phone recording of the 84-year-old senator telling Kentucky voters, in his own voice, that he’s doing OK.

For a man who spent nearly two decades at the center of American political power, that is an extraordinary silence. And it has created a vacuum, as every vacuum eventually does, that the internet has been more than happy to fill.

McConnell’s last confirmed in-person Senate vote came June 11, when he voted on a cloture motion involving judicial nominee Justin D. Smith. He had also been present during the Senate’s marathon June 4 vote-a-rama, which ran into the early morning hours, and Senate records show him presiding over a Defense Appropriations subcommittee hearing June 9.

Three days after that last confirmed Senate appearance, McConnell was hospitalized following a fall at his Washington residence that left him “briefly unconscious”. His office later said he suffered a mild case of pneumonia and was undergoing rehabilitation.

On July 12, McConnell allegedly addressed Kentuckians in a written statement, saying he was recovering from the fall and pneumonia. His office released a photograph showing him sitting beside his wife, Elaine Chao, holding that day’s Washington Post.

That photo did not end the questions. It multiplied them.

A second photograph, released July 27 and reportedly dated July 26, showed McConnell again with Chao. Neither image included video or audio of McConnell speaking.

McConnell was discharged from a rehabilitation facility Aug. 6 and said he would continue intensive physical therapy at home while remaining engaged with Senate business remotely. His office has not announced when, or whether, he will return to the Capitol.

Republican colleagues have said they have spoken privately with him. Former McConnell adviser Scott Jennings described a lengthy conversation in which he said McConnell sounded alert and discussed politics and world affairs. But those conversations remain private.

And that is the heart of the problem.

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, a Democrat, has repeatedly called for McConnell to provide a direct public update. Beshear recently said he had received “absolutely nothing” back from McConnell despite reaching out.

Meanwhile, social media has gone full Texas-sized conspiracy mill.

Benny Johnson on X wrote July 7 that McConnell’s family should answer demands for “proof of life,” while raising questions about Chao’s China connections and travel. Laura Loomer on X went considerably further, claiming without publicly established evidence that McConnell was “brain dead” and being kept alive by machines.

There is no actual evidence establishing those claims.

But dismissing every question as a conspiracy theory is equally lazy. The public record really is unusual: an elderly senator suffers a serious fall, spends weeks hospitalized and in rehabilitation, releases two questionable photographs and written statements, and remains completely absent from public view.

If he were truly coherent, a 30-second video would solve the issue … speculation grows that this is simply not possible and that is the reason they haven’t provided one.

There is now a natural deadline looming over this strange saga: September 14, 2026. That is the date the Senate is scheduled to return to regular business after its August recess, meaning McConnell will have been absent from public view for 95 days since his last confirmed appearance on June 11.

By then, a photograph and another written statement attributed to McConnell simply won’t cut it. If he is healthy enough to continue serving, his constituents should be able to see and hear him. If he isn’t, Kentucky voters deserve to know that, too.

September 14 shouldn’t necessarily be a literal deadline for his medical recovery, but it is a reasonable public accountability deadline: when the Senate comes back to work, the senator whose name appears on the roll should be able to demonstrate, in his own voice and on camera, that he is alive, aware and capable of carrying out the job for which Kentucky elected him.

If the nation doesn’t hear from him by September 14th, a criminal investigation should take place.

Continue Reading

Featured

Rowlett Police Officers, Drugs and a Barroom Encounter: What the Chief Didn’t Tell the Public

Published

on

Denning Hang Time Discipline

Rowlett, TX – On July 28, 2026, Rowlett Police Chief Michael Denning took to Facebook with what he called a message of “transparency and accountability” concerning an incident involving three off-duty Rowlett police officers at a local bar in 2025.

Denning said the officers had been approached by a man who didn’t know they were police. The man allegedly produced what appeared to be an illegal substance and said he was known to deal drugs at the establishment. According to Denning, one officer recognized an opportunity to gather intelligence on local narcotics activity, briefly engaged the man and arranged a follow-up narcotics transaction at another location. No transaction occurred, Denning said.

“The officers”, according to the chief’s account, realized the encounter could become an unauthorized investigation and promptly notified an on-duty supervisor. They were told to disengage and go home, and they complied.

Denning also acknowledged something else: all three officers had violated department policy and had received discipline.

What the chief didn’t tell Rowlett residents was exactly what happened inside that bar, what the officers did after leaving it, which department policies they violated, and how serious the resulting discipline actually was.

Pipkins Reports has now obtained the Rowlett Police Department’s internal affairs records concerning the incident. The department’s own investigation provides a much fuller account.

And it’s considerably less tidy than the Facebook version.


According to the March 11, 2025 internal affairs report, the incident began on Jan. 23, 2025, after the three officers had finished their shift. They met for drinks, first going to Brass Tap in Rockwall before heading to Hang Time in Rowlett. The report states that at least some of the officers had consumed alcohol.

At Hang Time, a patron identified in the investigation as “Shane” approached the officers, apparently unaware that they were police officers. During the conversation, one officer detected a strong odor of marijuana and asked Shane whether he had any.

Shane produced a bag containing an unknown substance and placed it on the table.

One of the officers picked up the bag, examined its contents, and removed some of the substance to smell it. They used the flash on their cellphone to illuminate the substance, which may have contributed to alerting the public. The officer later told investigators that he believed the substance was Delta 9. The bag was returned to the table, where Shane retrieved it, the report says.

The conversation then moved beyond marijuana.

Shane told the officers he could obtain other narcotics, including mushrooms, and asked whether they wanted to meet him to obtain them. The officer agreed.

At one point, Shane expressed concern about being robbed. An officer responded by lifting his shirt and displaying his department-issued firearm. The investigative report says he did so on three occasions during the encounter, including once when he indicated the weapon with his right hand.

This was not an authorized Rowlett Police Department undercover operation. It was three off-duty officers at a bar. And that distinction becomes important when the department’s findings are examined.

This was an off-duty encounter that eventually produced an internal affairs investigation, multiple sustained policy violations, and disciplinary action against all three officers. The Rowlett Police Department’s own investigative report tells a considerably more complicated story than the sanitized version that Chief Michael Denning presented to the public in a July 28 Facebook statement.

After some interaction inside the bar, which was recorded on various surveillance cameras and reviewed during the investigation, Shane suddenly became eager to leave and stated he would meet them at a nearby gas station.

While Shane was leaving, one of the officers contacted Sgt. Hughes, with Rowlett Police, and reported that Shane might be driving while intoxicated and that he had attempted to sell the officers narcotics. The sergeant advised that the officers should leave and let on-duty police handle the situation.

Before they could leave, however, the bar manager confronted them after being told they were attempting to sell narcotics, which would not be permitted in their establishment. The officers identified themselves as police and explained they weren’t involved in illegal activity. They told the manager they had already reported the incident to the on-duty sergeant. They paid their bill and left.

But the encounter wasn’t quite over.

After leaving Hang Time, one officer went home. The other two drove past Shane’s residence, using an address obtained during their conversation at the bar.

After speaking with Sgt. Hughes, the officers decided to get fuel at a different gas station than the EZ Mart on their way home.

What the Investigation Found

The department did not conclude that the officers committed a crime involving marijuana. Investigators found insufficient evidence to establish a violation of Texas Health and Safety Code §481.121, noting questions about whether the substance was actually marijuana and the lack of testing to establish its composition. The video also did not clearly establish what was inside the bag.

The internal investigation did, however, sustain several departmental violations.

Among them were violations involving conduct, off-duty law enforcement actions, firearms and alcohol, and displaying police identification. This is what the officers were disciplined for. The investigation also found that the officers’ actions amounted to an unauthorized operational plan because they were off duty and the encounter was not an official police operation.

The department recommended a two-day, 20-hour suspension without pay for one officer, along with ABLE training.

Another officer received a written reprimand and was required to complete an ABLE refresher.

The most severe discipline went to the officer who displayed the firearm. The department recommended a four-day, 40-hour suspension without pay (Reduced to 30 hours by Chief Denning), removal from the Problem-Solving Unit (PSU), reassignment to Patrol, ABLE training, and a law-enforcement de-escalation course.

A Note About Names

Pipkins Reports received the complete 91-page investigative report, but one officer’s identity was redacted in the records provided to us. We are not going to speculate about the reason for that redaction.

We have chosen to redact the names of the other officers in this article. Their identities do not change the facts, the department’s findings, or the discipline imposed, and in our opinion, publishing their names serves no legitimate public interest. Our redactions are clearly labeled in the accompanying copy of the report; the department’s original redactions are not labeled.

Continue Reading