Page 1 The Sun Bay Paper June 1, 2026 June 1, 2026 Volume 9 Issue 39 From Island to Bay, News on the Level production@sunbaypaper.com www.sunbaypaper.com Right... All Along Digital Version PRESIDENT TRUMP...DO NOT GO SOFT ON ANYBODY...ESPECIALLY JAMES COMEY... WE CAN CONVICT FOR TREASON AND ALL THE CRIMES HE AND THEY COMMITTED...TRYING TO GET YOU IMPEACHED...CHARGED WITH CRIMES...INDICTED...THEN ...PLAYED A DANGEROUS GAME WITH YOUR LIFE... 86 TRUMP... James Comey is a scoundrel, a liar, a backstabber, a cheat, a traitor ...and more! He knew ...full well...that the Steele Dossier was a fabricated document to impeach, arrest, and put you in jail. He admitted “that” on national TV... remember...when you asked him, “What do you think of the Steele Dossier”? He responded, “It is seditious and unverified...” knowing full well, it was the fruit of the poisonous tree...and he signed EVERYTHING...that he swore to be true and correct so help him God!!!! Please listen to me, Mr. President...the heads of agencies NEVER had to sign for warrants... it is not their job in the FBI. When a FISA or DOJ official (whose name I don’t recall) was asked by a reporter, he slipped and said that the court didn’t trust them! The proof is in the pudding. In October 2015, FISA started making heads of agencies swear to and sign the affidavits and warrants...WHY? The people who signed those documents, affidavits and warrants had NOTHING to do with producing any of that evidence. They created nothing except, possibly, witnessing the signatures of the DOJ executives who also did nothing to swear to ...and produced no evidence! The judge witnessed the signings. So, ask Rosenstein what he and all the others at his level are suddenly signing for ...what did they produce? Which is NOTHING... so, “why were heads of agencies made to sign affidavits and warrants”? For those of you who have no idea how the law works... in the FBI the Brick Agents did all the work. We produced all the evidence...period... they signed and swore to tell the truth!!! Supervisors generally do not tie themselves down by generating evidence, as they have enough to do, keeping the work load running. They cannot hang around the courthouse waiting to testify. If a supervisor did any real work outside, he might have to produce something he has to testify to in court! That didn’t happen...ever! I was different. I took the job of Supervisor on the BR squad under the conditions that I can still work cases, and I did. I still kicked doors, fought with resistors and enjoyed every minute. I was an Agent for 30 years and never saw any Supervisor do anything he would have to testify to...except me...! Comey used that Steele Dossier document for Probable Cause (PC) and signed the affidavits to get the search warrants (a wiretap is a search warrant) for Trump Towers, Carter Page, Roger Stone...Donald J. Trump, President Elect... et al., and your campaign, Mr. President. ALL before the FISA court ...to WIRETAP EVERYTHING...TO GET YOU! Ask Roger Stone if he would pardon that scum. Director Patel should have a team working on just Comey...NOW! He leaked information to RETIRED Agents, with directions to give to the press. He made his number one man, Andy McCabe, lie... twice...once about lying and then again that he didn’t leak... which got him fired! Comey set up FBI Headquarters (HQ) as the Office of Origin (what we called OO) for the Hillary investigation, putting the case under his direct oversight, so he could get her off...control the investigation...and no other reason. In my 30 years I knew of NO instance ever of HQ taking a criminal case...so why now? The Twin Towers destruction...NYO was Office of Origin. The Tim McVeigh case, Kansas City was OO. So why... Hillary Clinton? What other reason could Comey have... was he doing her? Ask any FBI Agent who came in BEFORE Comey if they ever heard of HQ working criminal cases They can’t, of course they can’t.... Comey stopped them from working criminal cases...you know ...too much talking to citizens and working criminal cases. Why would Cont’d. on pg. 2 PRESIDENT TRUMP...DO NOT GO SOFT ON ANYBODY The Right Side
Page 2 The Sun Bay Paper June 1, 2026 President Trump — cont’d. Cont’d. from pg. 1 Comey want to stop Agents from working cases...that’s what solves our cases...so no cases... no contact with the public!! I’LL TELL YOU WHY COMEY GAVE AWAY CRIMINAL CASES. For example, to the Marshals … all the fugitive cases. He gave the local PDs all the BRs in the cities and just dropped the “Unlawful Flight to Avoid” cases, in the toilet! Those cases ALONE broke the FBI’s back! He took away the most important cases that were keeping Agents sharp with the most dangerous crimes we encountered! Those crimes we were sworn to enforce gave us the training we needed, the on-the-job training, that kept us sharp! That gave us a lot of contact with citizens...citizens who solve our cases. We did not work in a vacuum...we NEEDED people to “make the case”! Comey took that away! He took Hillary’s name out of the TITLE of the case. He couldn’t do that if it stayed in a Field Office because Field Offices would not allow it...why not? Because there would be no way for Comey to stay on top of the evidence. He had to keep her close ...because she’s stupid and doesn’t know when to keep her mouth shut! Do you remember YEARS AGO...how often the FBI was on TV for a bank robbery or a kidnapping, or an interstate stolen car ring...? IS it “Where did those crimes go”? Did all that crime go just away? Why do you think crime in general is up...it’s out of control! To solve crimes ...you must investigate ...to learn to arrest and search for evidence. We must investigate and stay sharp...being an investigator is dangerous, difficult and can be very rewarding. My partner and I rescued a 5-year-old kidnap victim who was grabbed in Brooklyn, NY and brought to Charleston, SC. This was front page National News. I found her in an old plantation house out in the swamps of Charleston, SC. When she was close to me, she jumped into my arms and said, “Please don’t let me go”. With a gun in one hand, a light in the other, and Tondalaya Jones (5 years old) in my arms...I was in trouble! I hollered for Ray to get up here, I have her! We agreed to break free from the house and let the Squad finish and we covered each other and we broke for the car and floored it!! I don’t believe that two Agents of today’s FBI could handle a case like that! Comey didn’t want FBI Agents talking to the public!! That’s how we solved cases... TALKING TO THE PUBLIC! If we turned over the bank robberies to the locals...we have no reason to talk to all those witnesses and street people ...so what to do? Well, how do we find informants? We had to carry at least three informants or we were punished! How many arrests do you think the FBI was making before and after Comey took JUST BR’s away? How many? I arrested 57 bank robbers in my last year... on my cases...in addition to my partner’s cases. When I transferred to Buffalo, the ASAC Shandly said that the number 57 is more than the entire Buffalo Division did in arrests in two years! In the NYO we had 500 bank robberies my last year and 35 Agents. The next biggest to New York was LA ...solved about 67% ...pretty good? That’s 335 solved ...the closet to NYO was LA with 250 BR Cases ...we solved more than LA had. Look at how many citizens the current FBI Agents missed talking to because of Comey... they did not work those cases. Unless the FBI gets these crimes back ...the FBI, under anybody who tries to “Fix IT”, will never be successful because of Comey ...the BASTARD ruined the FBI, as the BEST Crime Fighting Agency in the world. Get those crimes back and put the criminal Congressmen and Senators who we all know are thieves, cheats, disloyal to our country, like the treasons ...lies Hussein committed...Schumer, Swallow, Shitty, Maxine Waters, Hakeem Jeffries, Nancy Pelosi, and Jasmine Crockett. Take your pick ...most violated the Treason Laws on Sedition; many deserve an all-out total cash flow audit...follow the money. Some threatened supreme court justices ...some threatened the President and defied him while the President was talking to our enemies, and the military were under fire! THERE IS NO STATUTE OF LIMITATION FOR TREASON...and the death penalty applies! J. Gary DiLaura, FBI RET Owner, SBP Media LLC therightsidejgarydilaura.com
Page 3 The Sun Bay Paper June 1, 2026 Our Savings Matter, but This Bipartisan Push Misses the Mark The New York Times Hunts for an Anonymous White Male Dissent Leftists in the media cannot stand the idea that Team Trump is coming to the defense of white males at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. They believe white males should never file a complaint, given their centuries of massive white male privilege. Last week, The New York Times reported scornfully on how discrimination claims by white men and Jews are “Discrimination Cases That Match Trump’s Agenda,” according to their headline. In their view, the EEOC should always match the leftist agenda. It’s supposed to be a captive agency of the Left under every administration. This week, the EEOC sued The New York Times for discrimination against a white male employee who applied for a deputy real estate editor position. Despite experience in real-estate journalism, he was excluded from the final pool of candidates, which was composed of a white female, a black male, an Asian female and a multiracial female. The multiracial female won the job, despite a lack of experience in real-estate journalism. The lawsuit argues the hiring manager at the Times greenlit this external candidate for inclusion in the final interview panel without her first going through the standard interview processes for the position. Moreover, she was chosen despite the company’s own final interview panel rating her less favorably than two other final candidates. Times spokeswoman Danielle Rhoades Ha claimed the suit was “meritless” and the administration is “blatantly weaponizing a traditionally independent government body to serve a predetermined narrative.” When they say “independent,” they mean liberal. The “predetermined narrative” in this case is exposing the newspaper’s own publicly stated racial and gender quotas. But here’s the really fun part. Charlotte Klein at New York magazine lined up angry anonymous sources inside the paper hunting for this anonymous dissident. Turnabout is fair play, but now the aggressive weaponizers of anonymous sources can’t stand their own game in reverse. Klein relayed: “Reporters at the paper have been scrambling to figure out the employee’s identity, driven in part by bafflement that one of their own colleagues would sell out the paper to the administration, which has used tools of the federal government to attack the press.” Another staffer complained it’s a “(poop)show behind the scenes -- people trying to figure out who the aggrieved person is.” Every day in many ways, The New York Times is using anonymous warriors to attack the administration, and apparently, they shouldn’t have to face their own tactics. One anonymous reporter complained, “You’re giving the Trump administration a weapon while they’re trying to persecute journalists.” Attack them and they’re “persecuted.” When they attack you, it’s Journalism. Inevitably, an anonymous jerk had to proclaim it “absurd” that a white male has filed a discrimination complaint. “I’m sorry, there are plenty of white guys at the top of the New York Times. Not really something that’s holding you back.” That’s wrong. That perception -- that there are too many white guys editing the paper -- is what creates “affirmative” discrimination. This controversy at the Times underlines what we all know -- that the words “diversity,” “equity” and “inclusion” are devoid of all meaning when deployed by the Left. They can’t stand diverse viewpoints, they don’t want them included, and “equity” is a code word for creating a new policy where white men get exactly the reverse discrimination they deserve for about 400 years. Tim Graham Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center and Executive Editor of the blog NewsBusters.org President Donald Trump and Congress want to help you increase your savings. And you should. At the household level, saving is the foundation of financial security and the seed capital for a better retirement. At the economy-wide level, savings fund investment that expands the capital stock, raises wages and grows the economy. A society that does not save is a society slowly consuming its future. So, any politician who wants to help Americans save more deserves at least a hearing. What should such a politician propose? The first thing to do is remove all government-made barriers to savings. This includes a Social Security design that disincentivizes saving, and a tax code that hits much of our savings twice, as both income and investment returns. Addressing our massive debt -- which threatens to bring inflation back and literally destroy the value of the savings we already have -- would help too. Alas, this isn’t what Trump has in mind with his new executive order directing the Treasury to launch “TrumpIRA.gov,” a portal where workers without employer-sponsored retirement plans can shop for private accounts. And some of them will be able to claim a Federal Saver’s Match of up to $1,000 a year. The plans are vague, but we can get an idea from a bipartisan bill currently before Congress. The Retirement Savings for Americans Act would automatically enroll workers earning below the national median income in new retirement accounts and provide government matching contributions. According to RAND Corporation research, roughly 63 million workers would be eligible for these accounts, and 42 million would qualify for the match. Bipartisan support for the idea is growing. Wall Street firms see new customers. Progressives see expanded government involvement in retirement. Some conservatives see a backdoor route to Social Security privatization. I urge skepticism. Start with the core of the proposal. The Saver’s Match is not a Trump innovation. It was created by the 2022 SECURE 2.0 Act under former President Joe Biden. Trump’s executive order merely accelerates its rollout and expands its visibility. It will be very expensive. Romina Bocca at the Cato Institute writes in The Washington Post that if modeled after the bill mentioned above, then “starting in 2027, low-income workers with existing retirement accounts are set to receive up to $1,000 in matching funds, at a cost to federal taxpayers of $9.3 billion through 2032. Expanding eligibility and automatically enrolling workers without existing accounts, as proposed by the bipartisan Retirement Savings for Americans Act, would be far more costly. Some projections put the price tag at $285 billion over the first decade alone.” That’s real money being added to a federal balance sheet already groaning under the weight of a Social Security system facing roughly $28 trillion in long-term shortfalls. Cont’d. on pg. 4
Page 4 The Sun Bay Paper June 1, 2026 Here is a bit of advice from a guy who gives Social Security advice for a living. Don’t take any advice from your friends or neighbors about Social Security. It’s always wrong! OK, it’s not always wrong. But I’ve learned from many thousands of readers over the years that it’s wrong often enough to make it wise to heed my warning: When it comes to Social Security, don’t listen to your friends and neighbors. I’ll share examples of what I mean in today’s column. Q: I get my Social Security check on the fourth Wednesday of each month. My wife gets hers on the second Wednesday of each month. And I thought that’s the way things work. Social Security checks come out on various Wednesdays. But I have a neighbor who insists he gets his checks on the seventeenth of each month. Why is that? A: It isn’t like that. Your friend does not get his Social Security check on the seventeenth of each month. I’m not sure why he would say that. But it really doesn’t matter. He’s just wrong. For about the first 50 years of the program, Social Security checks always came out on the third of each month. But about 40 years ago, for a variety of reasons, Social Security officials decided to stagger the delivery date of checks based on a person’s day of birth. People born on the first through tenth day of each month would get their checks on the second Wednesday of each month. Those born on the eleventh through twentieth would get their benefits on the third Wednesday of each month. And people born on the twenty-first through the thirty-first would get their benefits on the fourth Wednesday of each month. And for reasons a little too messy to explain here, a few folks still get their benefits on the third of each month. But no one, your neighbor included, gets a benefit check routinely on the seventeenth of the month. Q: I will be reaching my full retirement age of 66 and 10 months in April 2026. I was planning to start my benefits then. But I have a friend who is the same age as me and he insists that anyone who doesn’t wait until 70 to start their benefits is a darn fool and is throwing money away. What do you say? A: Well, I say I must be a darn fool because I started my benefits when I was 62 years old. But I did that for a variety of reasons that I’ve explained many times in past columns and just don’t have the space to get into today. The truth is, no one really knows when the best time is to start their benefits because no one really knows when they are going to die. For example, your friend could wait until 70 to start his benefits and then get hit by a bus two months later. Then who was the “darn fool?” All each of us can do is consider issues such as your health, your other sources of income, your marital status and other factors and then just make the best choice you can about when to start your Social Security checks. And by the way, many financial planners today would say you are right to start your benefits at your full retirement age. Q: I was talking to a group of neighbors about the future of Social Security. One of them said that Congress will never take any action to fix Social Security until they are forced to pay into the program themselves. Isn’t that a good idea? A: It’s a non-starting idea: Members of Congress, the president and all other top officials of the federal government have been paying Social Security taxes since the early 1980s. Q: Late last year, I got a small increase in my monthly Social Security check. I wasn’t sure what that was about until several weeks later when I got a letter explaining what happened. (It was based on earnings I had the prior year that increased my benefit amount.) I was talking to a friend about this. He said the same thing happened to him a couple of years ago. He said the delay in sending letters of explanation was because former President Joe Biden messed up Social Security’s computer systems and that President Donald Trump just hasn’t gotten around to fixing things yet. What do you know about this? A: I know your friend is full of malarkey! Why do some people insist on looking for political shenanigans and conspiracies when a very simple explanation is in order? So why does a letter of explanation come many days, or even a week or so, after a change in Social Security benefits? It’s really not a great mystery. And it’s not a political conspiracy. It’s simply that electronic fund transfers can happen almost instantaneously. Whereas a physical letter takes a while to prepare and mail. In other words, once the Social Security Administration figures out that someone is due an increase in their benefits, they push a few buttons and a payment is on its way to the beneficiary’s bank account. And then after those buttons are pushed, someone else at the SSA has to prepare a letter explaining what happened and then that letter has to go through the SSA’s mailroom and then to the U.S. Postal Service and finally to the recipient’s mailbox. Some readers have remarked to me that the SSA should time the delivery of the check to coincide with the delivery of the letter. I remember many years ago, while I still worked for the SSA, being involved in meetings where that issue was discussed. And SSA officials decided that it was best to get the money out to people as fast as possible (it’s their money, after all) and live with the consequences of a delayed letter of explanation. Tom Margenau If you have a Social Security question, Tom Margenau has two books with all the answers. One is called “Social Security -- Simple and Smart: 10 Easy-to-Understand Fact Sheets That Will Answer All Your Questions About Social Security.” The other is “Social Security: 100 Myths and 100 Facts.” You can find the books at Amazon.com or other book outlets. Or you can send him an email at thomas.margenau@ comcast.net. Your Friends and Neighbors Are Wrong! Cont’d. from pg. 3 But the fiscal objection, while serious, is not the deepest one. The deeper problem is that the proposal’s backers misread the savings behavior of the households they claim to help. Decades of economic research tell a consistent story: Low-income households are not failing to save because they lack tax-advantaged ways to do it. They fail to save because when you live paycheck to paycheck, locking money in an account you cannot access without incurring penalties, such as IRAs, 401(k)s and 529s, is risky. Vanguard data show that households at the lowest income levels have the highest early withdrawal rates from existing retirement accounts, with penalties accounting for a disproportionate share of their tax burden. According to Boccia, penalties account for 43% of all taxes paid by individuals with adjusted gross incomes below $5,000. Automatic enrollment, which animates much of the enthusiasm for expanded accounts, does not change this calculus for everyone. Research using Danish pension data found that some workers simply offset mandatory contributions by reducing voluntary saving. A large-scale UK study found that 18-21 cents of every dollar saved through autoenrollment is offset by taking on debt. A recent study shows that the benefits of auto enrollment are much smaller than original estimates assumed. The better path is genuine simplification: a universal savings account that shields its owner from the tax bias against saving, allows contributions from any after-tax income, imposes no restrictions on withdrawals and requires no government match and no new federal spending. Canada and the United Kingdom have run this experiment. Accounts were used enthusiastically across all income levels, including by moderate- and lower-income households who value flexibility above all else. Finally, if politicians truly care about securing Americans’ retirement income, they should have the courage both to reform Social Security (to stop lower-income seniors from being hit with an automatic 23% benefit cut while preventing massive increase of the debt) and to reform a tax code that creates silly disincentives to save. DAILY EDITORIALS BY: VERONIQUE DE RUGY Our Savings Matter, cont’d.
Page 5 The Sun Bay Paper June 1, 2026 Three Household Products I Don’t Buy Anymore -- and Why Copyright © SBP Media LLC and Sun Bay Paper All rights reserved. This newspaper or any portion thereof may not be reproduced or used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of the publisher. Quote of the Week “What lies behind you and what lies in front of you, pales in comparison to what lies inside of you.” — Ralph Waldo Emerson The Sun Bay Paper MAIL: PO Box 471, Sanborn, NY 14132 EMAILS: production@sunbaypaper.com thesbpmedia@gmail.com WEBSITE & DIGITAL VERSION: www.sunbaypaper.com OWNER/PUBLISHER: J. GARY DILAURA CONTRIBUTORS: RICHARD LUTHMANN, BOBBY MIMMO The information contained in this publication is for educational, general information, and entertainment purposes only and is never intended to constitute medical, financial or legal advice or to replace the personalized care of a primary care practitioner, financial or legal expert There was a time when I assumed I needed to buy name brand, readymade cleaning solutions and laundry products. If something needed cleaning, fixing, deodorizing or shining, surely there was a brightly labeled bottle for that -- preferably one promising miracles in a trigger spray. I bought them faithfully. And then one day I realized something mildly embarrassing: I was paying a premium for watered-down versions of things I already had at home. That realization didn’t turn me into a homesteader or a pioneer woman. It just made me more stubborn about spending money on products that didn’t earn their keep. Here are three everyday items I stopped buying once I learned how easy the substitutes were. Take glass cleaner. I used to keep a dedicated bottle under every sink, even though it always ran out at the exact moment the windows needed attention. Then I learned what’s actually in most commercial glass cleaners: water, a bit of alcohol, and fragrance. So now I mix my own. In a spray bottle, I combine 1 cup of water, 1 cup of white vinegar, a tablespoon of rubbing alcohol, and four -- yes, only four -- drops of Blue Dawn dishwashing liquid. That’s it. I shake and use it on mirrors, windows and even the glass on the microwave door. No streaks, no residue, no fumes that make me feel like I should be wearing goggles. The cost? Pennies per bottle. The bonus? It works just as well, and I never run out because the ingredients live permanently in my pantry and medicine cabinet. Laundry is another area where I used to overspend without realizing it. Scented detergent, stain boosters, fabric softeners -- my laundry shelf looked like a chemistry lab, and my husband and sons suffered with itchy skin. The first thing to go was fabric softener. It’s mostly fragrance and a waxy coating that builds up on fabrics over time. Now I pour half a cup of plain white vinegar into the fabric softener dispenser, released during the final rinse. Clothes come out soft, towels stay absorbent, and the vinegar smell disappears once everything dries. For stains, I mix one part Blue Dawn dishwashing liquid with two parts fresh hydrogen peroxide in a spray bottle -- one-third cup Dawn to two-thirds cup peroxide. I spray it on grease, food stains and just about anything else, let it sit for 20 minutes, then launder as usual. I didn’t lose softness or cleanliness -- but I did lose extra bottles and recurring expense. Then there’s the product category I call “mystery cleaners” -- sprays for sinks, tubs, counters and appliances. I used to buy different ones for each job because the labels told me I should. These days, I make one all-purpose cleaner and call it good. In a spray bottle, I mix 2 cups of warm water, 1 teaspoon of liquid dish soap like Blue Dawn, and a half cup of white vinegar. It works on kitchen counters, bathroom sinks, stovetops and even the outside of appliances. It cuts grease, lifts grime, and doesn’t leave a sticky film. For tougher jobs like soap scum, I sprinkle baking soda on the surface and spray the cleaner over it, letting the fizz do the heavy lifting. Fewer bottles, fewer fumes and one less aisle to wander. I didn’t set out to become “DIY.” I just wanted products that worked without draining my budget or cluttering my cabinets. These substitutes didn’t require special equipment, rare ingredients or a learning curve. They just required questioning the idea that everything useful has to come in a plastic bottle with a marketing slogan. Once you learn a few of these swaps, something interesting happens. You stop seeing household problems as shopping opportunities -- and start seeing them as solvable with what you already have. MARY HUNT EVERYDAY CHEAPSKATE Mary invites you to visit her at EverydayCheapskate.com, where this column is archived complete with links and resources for all recommended products and services. Mary invites questions and comments at https://www.everydaycheapskate.com/contact/, “Ask Mary.” This column will answer questions of general interest, but letters cannot be answered individually. Mary Hunt is the founder of EverydayCheapskate.com, a frugal living blog, and the author of the book “Debt-Proof Living.”
Page 6 The Sun Bay Paper June 1, 2026 The Truth Is Not a Disaster The United States Supreme Court has released its decision in Louisiana v Callais. To listen to Democrats, including former President Barack Obama, who just argued that a wildly drawn partisan redistricting scheme in Virginia was “fair,” is to hear hysterics lying to whip partisans into a frenzy. A few days after a progressive activist, inflamed by leftwing rhetoric attempted a mass assassination of the president and his cabinet in Washington, perhaps Democrats should rein in their lies. The Supreme Court said, plainly, that states cannot draw legislative districts based on race. Several states cannot draw districts to be predominantly white to preclude Black voters from representation. Several states also cannot draw districts to be predominantly Black to preclude white voters from representation. The Constitution requires a color-blind society. Fifty-eight Black men and women serve in the United States House of Representatives. A majority of them represent districts where white voters outnumber Black voters. The idea that Black Americans cannot get elected to Congress without majority-minority districts is, here in the twenty-first century, nonsense. The same racism that led Democrats to believe Black Americans need affirmative action to get ahead led them to believe Black Americans need racially discriminatory congressional districts to get elected. The data shows otherwise. In the Callais case, Louisiana had drawn partisan congressional districts to protect Republicans. A federal judge determined that, in so doing, Louisiana had denied Black voters the opportunity for a second majority-minority district. The judge ordered the state to specifically draw a district that would most likely elect a Black member of Congress. Louisiana was sued a second time for doing so, and another court found that Louisiana had explicitly drawn a district based on race. The Supreme Court agreed and said that it was unconstitutional. Democrats reacted as if the Supreme Court had just reimposed slavery. For the last several decades, the Supreme Court has demanded that states give up racial discriminatory practices like racial preferences in college admissions and hiring. Now, the same line of logic applies to legislative redistricting. Therein lies the problem. A simple review of Republican states shows their districts are mostly compact, keeping communities of interest together. Democrat states have gerrymandered with legislative districts meandering across whole states to achieve partisan purposes. Democratic policies have pushed their residents to move to Republican led states. Those Democratic states are struggling with both a loss of population and their voters living in urban cores. Their legislative lines must be stretched out from the urban cores to prohibit Republicans from getting elected. Racially gerrymandered districts in Southern states also must be stretched across states and communities of interest to ensure Black politicians get elected. By ending racial gerrymandering, Black politicians can still get elected, but in Southern states, it will be harder for Democrats to get elected. All the problems for the Democratic Party right now come down to power. Their states are losing populations, which is why they support illegal immigration. The Constitution requires counting residents, not just citizens, for purposes of congressional apportionment. Congressional apportionment then determines a state’s Electoral College vote. As Democrat states lose their citizens, who can vote, they must rely on illegal aliens who cannot vote, but whose residency can prop up population numbers for congressional apportionment. Southern states, which have long been required to draw majority-minority districts, no longer have to. That will reduce Democrats in the House of Representatives. Combine that with the loss of population in Democratic states and it will reduce, across the nation, both the number of Democrats in Congress and the Electoral College vote of Democratic states. The truth is irrelevant to Democrat hysteria. They see the loss of their power as an existential crisis. Unfortunately, Democrats have internalized the idea that only they are virtuous and only their use of power is virtuous. Republicans in charge are a threat to democracy, which is why so many on the Left have taken to firing bullets at the right. The Callais decision is common sense and ends racial discrimination. That it hurts Democrats shows how that party has preserved itself through racial politics and how, as times change, that party will be profoundly altered. DAILY EDITORIALS BY: ERICK ERICKSON The Fort Myers Mighty Mussels defeated the Jupiter Hammerheads by a final score of 4-1 on Saturday night at Lee Health Sports Complex. The Mighty Mussels (28-22) won tonight on the back of 11 walks from the Jupiter (28-22) pitching staff. Fort Myers has now taken an astounding 47 free passes in the series, the most they’ve taken in a series with one game still to play. The Mussels’ previous high for walks in a series was 38 in early May against the Tampa Tarpons. Despite leaving 15 runners on base, Fort Myers became the first team in six weeks to take a series from the Hammerheads. Dameury Pena, JP Smith II, and Henry Kusiak each turned in impressive offensive nights. Pena walked three times and had two hits, Smith had three hits and a walk, while Kusiak hit a home run and reached base four times. Fort Myers sent Matthew Dalquist (1-2) to the mound to make his eighth start of the season. Dalquist allowed two hits but held Jupiter off the scoreboard in the first. The Mighty Mussels offense got rolling against Walin Castillo (1-3) in the second inning. The first three men reached, with Smith and Kusiak singling followed by a walk from Jayson Bass. Two batters later, Irvin Nunez drove Smith in on a sacrifice fly to give Fort Myers the early lead at 1-0. Dalquist was very good across his five innings, throwing 73% strikes and fanning three in a scoreless outing. He retired 14 of the final 16 men he faced, including eight in a row from the first to the third inning. It was his third time completing five innings this season and he has gone at least four innings in each of his eight starts. In the bottom of the fifth, Smith singled with one out to set the table for Kusiak, who belted his first affiliated home run to extend the lead. The ball left the bat at 100.8 mph and travelled 398 feet over the Minnesota Twins retired number placards in left-center field. The Mighty Mussels led 3-0 after five innings. Jupiter struck back in the sixth inning facing new Mussel arm Dylan Questad. Following back-to-back walks to begin the inning, PJ Morlando drove in the Hammerheads first run of the game on an RBI groundout. That made the score 3-1 Fort Myers. Questad gave way to Jonathan Stevens in the seventh inning, who worked around a leadoff single to preserve the two-run lead. In the bottom half, the Mussels used more small ball to produce runs. Fort Myers loaded the bases with two walks and a single, then Ryan Sprock brought home a run on a sac fly to make it 4-1. Jake Murray (S1) came in with two on and two out in the eighth inning to secure a key strikeout of Andrew Salas, who represented the tying run. Murray locked down the game in the ninth, working around a one-out walk by striking out the final two hitters to complete the win. The series concludes on Sunday, May 31. Fort Myers will send Reed Moring (1.42) to the mound as the Hammerheads counter with Manuel Genao (3.96) . First pitch is scheduled for 12:05 p.m. Coverage will begin at 11:20 a.m. as the Mighty Mussels Baseball Network will air a special pregame on-field ceremony honoring six Gold Star families for a Military Tribute. Trio of Mussels Turn in Big Nights; Fort Myers Clinches Series against Jupiter
Page 7 The Sun Bay Paper June 1, 2026 What’s New around Fort Myers June Programs from Lee County Library System Lee County Library System locations are hosting programs for all ages. Registration is required for some programs. For more information or to register, please call the library at 239-479-INFO (4636). Program information is also available online at https://www.leegov.com/library/programs 2026 Festivals and Events National Seashell Day June 21 visitfortmyers.com/national-seashell-day 30th annual MangoMania July 11 pineislandchamber.org/chamber-events/ mangomania Island Hopper Songwriter Fest Sept. 18-27 island-hopperfest.com 41st Cape Coral Oktoberfest Oct. 17-19 & 24-26 German-American Social Club capecoraloktoberfest.com Sanibel Island Writers Conference November tba FGCU fgcu.edu/siwc 36th annual American Sand Sculpting Championship, Fort Myers Beach Nov. 19-23 fmbsandsculpting.com 38th Fort Myers Beach Christmas Boat Parade Dec. 5 fortmyersbeach.org 2027 Festivals and Events 42nd annual Cape Coral Art Festival and Market Place January tba capecoralartfestival.com 36thth Tour De Cape in Cape Coral January tba Rotary Park tourdecape.net ArtFest Fort Myers, downtown Fort Myers Feb. 5-7 artfestfortmyers.com Cape Coral Friends of Wildlife 9th Annual Ground Owl Day February tba Pelican Baseball Complex ccfriendsofwildlife.org/events/2026/ ground-owl-day 89th Edison Festival of Light Grand Parade, Fort Myers February tba Downtown Fort Myers edisonfestival.org 25th annual Burrowing Owl Festival, Cape Coral February tba Rotary Park Environmental Center ccfriendsofwildlife.org/burrowing-owl-festival-2 Southwest Florida Ag Expo Feb. 25-March 7 Mike Greenwell Regional Park swflagexpo.com Spring training Boston Red Sox February-March tba mlb.com/redsox/spring-training JetBlue Park, Fort Myers Minnesota Twins mlb.com/twins/spring-training February-March tba Lee Health Sports Complex/Hammond Stadium, Fort Myers 90th annual Sanibel Shell Festival, Sanibel Island March tba Sanibel Community House sanibelcommunityhouse.net/shell-festival 28th annual Southwest Florida Reading Festival, Fort Myers March tba Fort Myers Regional Library, downtown Fort Myers readfest.org Fort Myers Beach Lions Club Shrimp Festival March 13-14 fortmyersbeachshrimpfestival.com Taste of the Islands event March tba Sanibel City Hall tasteoftheislands.org Be sure to enjoy the many downtown Fort Myers celebrations hosted by local businesses and the River District Alliance (RDA). Check out all the happenings this month on the events calendar on fortmyers.gov!
Page 8 The Sun Bay Paper June 1, 2026 Republicans Set to Best Democrats in Mid-Decade Redistricting War For almost a year now, America’s two parties have been engaged in a mass congressional redistricting battle royale. The fun kicked off in Texas last July, when Gov. Greg Abbott, following President Donald Trump’s urging, first pushed the Texas Legislature to redistrict the Lone Star State’s congressional maps in a pro-Republican direction. Missouri and North Carolina soon followed, prompting California Gov. Gavin Newsom to get in on the action: Golden State voters approved the use of a new map at the ballot box last November. On April 21, Virginia voters narrowly approved a new congressional map that heavily favors Democrats. This week, Florida responded with a Gov. Ron DeSantis-led redistricting that heavily favors Republicans. In the interim, some other states, such as Ohio and Utah, redistricted for nonvoluntary reasons such as litigation or statutory requirement. And other states, such as Indiana, famously defied Trump and refused to voluntarily redraw their maps. One might be inclined to ask who started this latest bout of mass, iterative gerrymandering. It’s true that Texas, an iconic red state, drew first blood last July -- although the U.S. Supreme Court didn’t finally permit Texas’s new maps to go into effect until a summary order earlier this week. What’s more, Texas’s new GOP-heavy map will likely provide Republicans less of a lopsided partisan advantage in its congressional delegation than will California’s own new map for the Golden State’s regnant Democratic Party. Republicans also claim Democrats have been the more blatant systemic gerrymanderers for decades -- an assertion buttressed by even a cursory glance at bright-blue Illinois’ hilariously delineated congressional map. The reality is that both parties have gerrymandered their respective controlled states for a very long time. That is a tedious and uninteresting observation. The more interesting and pressing question, as this rare mid-decade redistricting war nears its end, is this: Looking at the aggregate nationwide redistricting efforts, which party will come out on top in advance of the midterm elections this November? Democrats had a projected one-seat partisan advantage according to the website Ballotpedia, as of Thursday. But there are multiple reasons why this is likely to change. It appears the big victor will be the GOP. First, this tally does not account for Florida’s redistricted map, which just passed through a special session of the Florida Legislature on Wednesday and has not yet (as of this writing) been signed into law by DeSantis. That alone will likely net the GOP four additional seats. Second, Virginia’s controversial ballot referendum redistricting measure, which was just approved by Old Dominion voters by a much narrower margin than that by which Virginians swept Democrats back into power last November, is facing serious legal challenges. Most recently, on Wednesday, the Virginia Supreme Court left in place a lower-court order blocking the commonwealth’s certification of the referendum results. If Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s new map is tossed out, Democrats will likely be out an additional four seats. Finally, there is the landmark redistricting case that the U.S. Supreme Court just decided this week. In Louisiana v. Callais, the court held that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which prohibits states and localities from imposing any voting “qualification or prerequisite” that “results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen ... to vote on account of race or color,” cannot be invoked to create race-conscious congressional maps -- a dubious practice lawmakers had been blithely engaging in for decades. The court correctly held that such race-conscious mapmaking, including the devising of so-called majority-minority districts across many Southern states, runs afoul of the 14th Amendment’s sweeping equal protection guarantee. Bright-red Louisiana, which was party to the Callais case, already suspended its upcoming primaries to give its legislature enough time to draw new congressional maps. In addition, many other safe Democratic “majority-minority” seats across the broader South are now extremely vulnerable. These Southern states can either redistrict of their own accord to comply with the Supreme Court’s new ruling, or they will be forced to do so through offensive litigation. Either way, the era of race-conscious mapmaking is now over. This is first and foremost a victory for the colorblind U.S. Constitution. But it will also benefit the GOP before November’s midterms -- in Louisiana and likely beyond. Our redistricting battles tend to rile up passions on all sides. But it’s a practice as old as the republic: The “gerry” in “gerrymandering” refers to Elbridge Gerry, who served in the First Congress and eventually as James Madison’s vice president. If one disapproves of how his state draws its maps, there is always the political check of the ballot box. And if that fails, he can always vote with his feet and leave. In fact, that’s already happening en masse: from blue states to red states. And for Democrats, that’s a trend not even the most aggressive gerrymandering can possibly alleviate. DAILY EDITORIALS JOSH HAMMER Last issue’s puzzle solution to ‘HERE AND THERE’
Page 9 The Sun Bay Paper June 1, 2026 A SCOTUS Case Exposes the Dangers of Two Dubious Fourth Amendment Doctrines: ‘Geofence’ Searches Illustrate the Perilous Combination of Modern Technology and Deference to Law Enforcement Seven years ago, police in Midlothian, Virginia, sought to identify a bank robber by asking Google to search the records of more than 500 million people who used the company’s “location history” feature. That search identified 19 devices that were in or near the bank around the time of the robbery, which police winnowed down to three people, including Okello Chatrie, the man who was ultimately convicted of the crime. Depending on your perspective, that use of a “geofence” warrant was either an unobjectionable example of smart police work or an outrageous invasion of privacy. On Monday, the Supreme Court weighed the merits of those contending views in a case that illustrates the threat that two dubious doctrines pose to Fourth Amendment rights now that Americans routinely entrust huge volumes of personal information to tech companies that help them with myriad quotidian tasks. In 1967, the Supreme Court said the Fourth Amendment applies only when you have a “reasonable expectation of privacy.” In subsequent cases that involved bank and telephone records, the court said you have no such expectation when you voluntarily share information with third parties for their own business use. The problems with those principles were clear in a 2018 case that addressed the FBI’s tracking of a robbery suspect via location data collected by cellphone sites. Although the majority held that such tracking generally requires a warrant, that conclusion was hard to reconcile with the third-party rule, as Justice Neil Gorsuch noted in his dissent. Chatrie’s case is broadly similar, except that the information used to identify him was collected by his own phone rather than cell sites. Although Google no longer keeps such data on its servers, many commonly used apps track the whereabouts of their users, and that information is often stored remotely. In Chatrie’s case, police obtained a warrant. But his lawyers argue that such orders sweep so broadly that they violate the Fourth Amendment, which says a warrant must be based on probable cause and must “particularly” describe “the place to be searched” and “the persons or things to be seized.” The Trump administration wants the Supreme Court to reject that argument. But it also maintains that geofence inquiries do not require any sort of warrant because people who consent to location tracking have no reasonable expectation that the resulting information will be kept private. If so, Chatrie’s lawyer, Adam Unikowsky, warned during oral argument on Monday, the same logic would allow the government to search people’s remotely stored emails, photos, calendars and documents at will. Several justices understandably viewed that prospect with alarm. Although Deputy Solicitor Eric Feigen assured the justices that his argument did not extend that far, those other examples likewise involve voluntary sharing of information with third parties, which supposedly makes the Fourth Amendment inapplicable. And even when the information is limited to location tracking, it can still reveal sensitive details of people’s lives. “The potential for abuse is breathtaking,” Unikowsky notes in a Supreme Court brief. “The government need only draw a geofence around a church, a political rally or a gun shop, and it can compel a search of every user’s records to learn who was there.” In addition to arguing that people reasonably view their location histories as private, Unikowsky takes a page from Gorsuch, who in 2018 questioned both that test and the third-party doctrine. Since the Fourth Amendment protects people’s “papers” and “effects” against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” Gorsuch suggested, the relevant question is whether the information sought by the government falls into those categories. Gorsuch thought it was plausible to argue that people retain a property interest in their records even when they share them with others for specific purposes. That argument, which Unikowsky adopts, seems like a promising way to escape the danger posed by the third-party doctrine, which modern technology has magnified to an extent that would have dismayed the Fourth Amendment’s framers. DAILY EDITORIALS BY: JACOB SULLUM
Page 10 The Sun Bay Paper June 1, 2026 Adding Topsoil Q: We are moving into a new subdivision, and we will have room for a raised vegetable garden. From what we have seen, the soil in the neighborhood is not very good. Since we are starting from scratch, what can we do to get good soil? A: If your house and/or the subdivision is still under construction, try to get as much good topsoil as you can for the whole yard. Good soil is the foundation for plant health. It is where the water and nutrients come from, so the more there is, the healthier your plants will be, and the less watering and fertilizing you will have to do. If you only need to do a few beds, consider using the square foot gardening method outlined in Mel Bartholomew’s book “Square Foot Gardening.” If you can’t get more good soil, you can use the double-dig method. This method replaces the bad soil with good topsoil on an as-needed basis. Everywhere that you want a plant’s roots to grow should be double-dug. It is easiest with annuals and vegetables that have roots that are not going to grow very far. It becomes harder for perennials, shrubs and trees. First, decide where the raised bed is going to be. Let us pretend it will be 4 feet wide and 20 feet long. On one end, dig one shovel depth deep all the way across the 4 feet. Remove the dirt and carry it to the opposite end of the bed, 20 feet away. Dig out a second shovel depth in the same trench, all the way across the 4 feet, but leave the soil there. Use the shovel to loosen the soil at the bottom of the trench. Add organic matter of any kind to the trench. The more composted it is, the better, although fresh material will do if it is all that is available. Mix the organic matter and the soil from the second depth. Next, dig the first shovel depth out of the next row, all 4 feet across. Add the second trench soil and some more organic matter to the first trench, mix it, and fill trench No. 1. Dig the second shovel full across trench No. 2, add the organic matter, and mix it in. Begin trench No. 3 and add the top layer with more organic matter to fill trench No. 2. Continue until you are all the way to the other end, and finish by using the soil from the first trench, mixed with organic matter to fill in the last trench. Since each shovel depth is 8-10 inches deep, you will have a good, deep soil. You can even use this method to go three shovel depths deep. Rototilling usually only scrapes the surface a few inches deep. Double-digging is a much better method of creating good soil. It is very helpful to dig one layer down into the existing ground under raised beds, so that they will drain properly. This provides a transition layer of soil between the good soil in the raised bed and the poor soil underneath. If there is no blending of soil, water will not drain well into the poor soil, and that will cause the bottom of the raised bed to become waterlogged. Putting sand or gravel in the bottom of a raised bed will actually make the drainage worse in the topsoil layer above it. Any type of wood can be used for supporting walls on a raised bed. Cedar, cypress and redwood all have natural oils that slow down the decay organisms. Wood that is treated with preservatives may be harmful to some plants. Landscape timbers from garden centers are used near ornamental plants without any adverse effect. The worry is that chemicals may leach into the soil and be absorbed by vegetables. A layer of plastic behind the board can keep the moisture away from the board, and even untreated wood will last a long time. Painted boards last even longer. Some hardware stores carry plastic or PVC boards that are used for low maintenance decking, and they can be used as raised bed boards. Other plastic or fiberglass sheets can be used if reinforced. An easy method to build a wall with good drainage is to use stones. Flowers and vines can also be planted between the rocks for a nicer view of the garden. Large boulders go at the bottom, medium ones in the middle and small ones on top. Many manmade concrete wall stones stack easily and have a relatively low cost. They usually have ridges for reinforcing that make them very durable. A GREENER VIEW BY: JEFF RUGG Email questions to Jeff Rugg at info@greenerview.com.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjA2ODE3