Thursday, January 15, 2026

Fired

No, Billy Bob Thornton is not leaving Landman; despite his character Tommy Norris being fired from his M-Tex presidency in Season 2, he is confirmed to return for Season 3, as he's central to the show, which is named after his role and was written for him. While his job changed, his storyline continues, likely focusing on a partnership with his son Cooper. 

• Confirmed Return: Thornton has stated he plans to stay on the show for years, and the series' renewal for Season 3 ensures his presence. 
• Character Arc: His firing was a plot point to shift his role, not to write him out; he's expected to work with his son, Cooper, in a new venture. 
• Show's Identity: Many believe the show would end without him, as he is the titular "Landman". [2, 3, 4, 5, 6]  

AI responses may include mistakes.




Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals

Change

The post you're referring to from the account "Taking Back America" (posted about 4 hours ago as of your query) shares a dramatic headline: a **7-2 Supreme Court ruling** on mail-in ballots that supposedly marks a major shift for the **2028 election**.

This refers to a real U.S. Supreme Court decision issued on **January 14, 2026**, in the case involving Illinois Republican Rep. **Mike Bost** (and others) challenging the state's law on late-arriving mail-in ballots.

### What the Ruling Actually Did
The Supreme Court ruled **7-2** that candidates for federal office (like members of Congress) have **legal standing** to challenge state election laws governing how votes are counted — even if they won their election and can't prove the rule directly changed the outcome.

- Illinois law allows mail-in/absentee ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if received up to about **14 days** later (during the provisional ballot counting window).
- Bost argued this violates federal statutes setting a uniform "Election Day" for federal elections.
- Lower courts dismissed the case, saying Bost lacked standing (no concrete injury since he won).
- The Supreme Court reversed that, saying candidates have a direct personal stake in the rules for counting votes in their own elections. Chief Justice **John Roberts** wrote the majority opinion.
- The two dissenters were Justices **Sonia Sotomayor** and **Ketanji Brown Jackson**, who warned it could open the floodgates to more election litigation and destabilize the process.

Importantly:  
This ruling **does not** ban or restrict mail-in ballots nationwide. It doesn't declare late-arriving ballots unconstitutional. It only revives Bost's lawsuit and sends it back to lower courts to decide the merits. It makes it easier for candidates to bring similar challenges in the future.

### Connection to 2028 (and Broader Context)
The post exaggerates this as a game-changer for **2028** (the next presidential election). Some conservative outlets and commentators frame it that way because:
- It could encourage more lawsuits against "grace periods" for late mail ballots in various states.
- A separate pending case (e.g., involving Mississippi's 5-day grace period) might address the substantive issue of whether such laws conflict with federal "Election Day" rules — potentially with bigger implications if decided similarly.
- Broader Republican efforts (including executive actions) have targeted extended counting windows, often citing concerns over election integrity and confidence.

However, mainstream reports emphasize this is procedural (about who can sue), not a direct ban or overhaul. It won't automatically stop mail-in voting or late counts in 2026 midterms or 2028. Many states have long allowed grace periods for practical reasons (e.g., mail delays, especially in rural or overseas/military voting).

The image in the post (stacks of ballots + a photo likely of Justice Clarence Thomas or another figure) is typical sensational framing from partisan accounts, but it doesn't reflect new evidence of fraud or a sweeping invalidation.

If you're seeing claims of this "ending mail-in ballots" or proving widespread cheating, those go beyond what the ruling actually says. It's more about opening courthouse doors for challenges than resolving the underlying debate. For the full opinion or details, check official Supreme Court sources or neutral outlets like AP, PBS, or SCOTUSblog. Let me know if you want more on related cases!



Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals

Fish finder

The list you provided matches the current **"Do Not Eat"** or strict avoidance advisories from the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) and Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks (KDWP) for 2026, as reported in recent releases and news coverage (including from KSNT on January 13, 2026).

These are locations where consumption is strongly discouraged or prohibited due to specific contaminants or other risks:

- **Antioch Park Lake South** in Antioch Park, Overland Park (Johnson County) — **All fish** due to pesticides: dieldrin, heptachlor epoxide, chlordane, and dichlorophenyltrichloroethanes (DDTs).
- **Arkalon Park Lakes** in Liberal (Seward County) — **Any aquatic life** (not recommended to eat any), because the lakes are sustained solely by treated municipal wastewater.
- **Arkansas River** from the Lincoln Street dam in Wichita downstream to the confluence with Cowskin Creek near Belle Plaine (Sedgwick and Sumner counties) — **Bottom-feeding fish** (e.g., buffalo, carp, catfish, sturgeon, suckers) due to PCBs.
- **Kansas River** from Lawrence (below Bowersock Dam) downstream to Eudora at the confluence of the Wakarusa River — **Bottom-feeding fish** due to PCBs.
- **Mill Creek** from Washington (below 18th Road) downstream to confluence of Little Blue River (Washington County) — **Shellfish** (e.g., mussels, clams, crayfish) due to arsenic.
- **Shoal Creek** from the Missouri/Kansas border to Empire Lake (Cherokee County) — **Shellfish** due to lead and cadmium.
- **Spring River** from the confluence of Center Creek to the Kansas/Oklahoma border (Cherokee County) — **Shellfish** due to lead and cadmium.

These advisories are part of the annual updates based on the KDHE's Fish Tissue Contaminant Monitoring Program, which tests for pollutants like legacy pesticides, heavy metals, PCBs, and mercury using EPA risk assessment methods. The "do not eat" categories are the strictest; many other Kansas waters have limited consumption guidelines (e.g., 1-2 servings per month for certain species due to mercury, which is present to some degree in all fish statewide).

For the full 2026 list (including limited-consumption areas like parts of the Little Arkansas River for PCBs), check the official KDHE site: [Fish Tissue Contaminant Monitoring Program](https://www.kdhe.ks.gov/1268/Fish-Tissue-Contaminant-Monitoring-Program) or KDWP fishing resources at ksoutdoors.gov. If you're planning to fish or eat catches in these areas—especially if pregnant, nursing, or for children—follow these guidelines closely, as contaminants can pose higher risks to sensitive groups. If you have a specific location or species in mind, let me know for more details!

Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals

Truth

The post you shared from LindellTV (associated with Mike Lindell and featuring reporter Cara Castronuova) describes a recent confrontation where Castronuova questioned Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) as he exited a January 6-related hearing. She pressed him on topics like the death of Rosanne Boyland, accountability for January 6 events, his "autopen pardon," and potential future legal consequences for those involved in J6 (including himself). According to the post and similar recent shares on X, Raskin did not respond to any questions and walked away, prompting Castronuova's parting remark: "Thank you for the lies, Congressman. Keep spreading the propaganda."

This aligns with recent activity: Castronuova, now White House correspondent for LindellTV and a contributor to outlets like The Gateway Pundit, has been vocal on J6 issues for years. Recent X posts (from today, January 15, 2026) share the same or similar video clips of her confronting Raskin, describing her as a "truth warrior" pushing back against what they call lies from Raskin and former J6 committee members.

### Context on the Key Issues Raised
- **Rosanne Boyland's death**: Boyland died during the January 6, 2021, Capitol events. Official medical examiner reports concluded it was accidental acute amphetamine intoxication (drug overdose), with crowd crush contributing as she collapsed near the lower west terrace tunnel. Some conservative sources and activists (including Castronuova) allege police involvement, citing video of an officer (Lila Morris) striking a motionless person on the ground with a baton, claiming it contributed to or caused the death. Fact-checks and official accounts maintain it was not homicide by police, and no charges resulted from that specific action.
- **Accountability for January 6**: This remains highly partisan. Raskin was a key member of the House January 6 Select Committee, which investigated the attack as an insurrection. Hearings continue into 2026 (e.g., recent ones marking the 5-year anniversary and addressing pardons).
- **"Autopen pardon"**: In January 2025, outgoing President Biden issued preemptive pardons to members of the J6 committee (including Raskin) to shield them from potential future prosecution under the incoming Trump administration. Some critics (including Trump allies) claimed these were invalid if signed via autopen (a mechanical device for signatures). Raskin and others dismissed those claims as baseless, with no evidence they were voided.
- **Future legal consequences**: With Trump back in office and having pardoned many J6 defendants, the dynamic has shifted. Raskin has spoken out against broad pardons for rioters and called for hearings on related issues (e.g., crimes by pardoned individuals or hiring of former rioters in federal roles). No prosecutions of J6 committee members have occurred.

The video appears authentic based on matching descriptions and shares today, but it's from a strongly partisan source (LindellTV, tied to election fraud claims and pro-Trump/MAGA perspectives). Raskin has not publicly addressed this specific exchange in available recent coverage, consistent with politicians often avoiding ambush-style questions outside formal settings.

If this is the "truth" you're asking about, the core event (the unanswered confrontation) seems to have happened recently, but the framing and implications are heavily interpretive depending on political viewpoint. If you have the direct video link or more details, I can dig further!



Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals

J6th

Really 



Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals