Category: You Can’t Make This Up

How Did an Honors Student Who Says She Can’t Read or Write Get Into College?

Aleysha Ortiz, 19, alleges she cannot read or write yet says she graduated with honors from Hartford Public High School in 2024. She has since filed a lawsuit against the Hartford Board of Education and city officials, accusing them of negligence in failing to provide adequate special education services throughout her schooling, per reporting from Connecticut’s News 8 WTNH.

Ortiz, who is now enrolled at the University of Connecticut (UConn), said she relied heavily on assistive technology such as speech-to-text and text-to-speech programs to complete schoolwork, according to CNN.

Why It Matters

Ortiz’s lawsuit underscores broader concerns about systemic failures in public education, particularly in providing adequate support for students with learning disabilities. The case has drawn attention to how academic achievement is measured and whether special education students are truly receiving the skills they need to succeed beyond high school.

Additionally, it raises questions about how colleges assess applicants, especially those facing severe academic challenges.

Ortiz told CNN she was promoted through school without acquiring fundamental literacy skills. In a May 2024 city council meeting, she testified that after 12 years in Hartford Public Schools, she was unable to read or write, despite being awarded an honors diploma.

Days before her graduation, school officials reportedly offered her the option to defer her diploma to receive additional support, but she declined, according to CNN.

How Did She Get Into College?

Her admission to UConn was possible due to the school’s holistic application process, which does not require SAT scores. According to UConn admissions, the university evaluates applications based on GPA, coursework, extracurricular activities and essays.

Ortiz, who told CNN she used voice-to-text software to complete her application, also received financial aid and scholarships to support her education.

Once in college, Ortiz faced academic difficulties. She shared with CNN that while UConn has provided support services, she took a leave of absence starting in February 2025 for mental health reasons. She has stated she intends to return to her studies but has faced challenges in adapting to the rigor of college coursework.

Experts have pointed out that Ortiz’s case is not unique. Literacy advocates argue that disparities in educational resources disproportionately affect students in underfunded districts, contributing to cases where students graduate without essential skills.

Continue reading “”

Someone explain to me why the U.S. was sending money to the cartel in the first place.

I won’t connect my dishwasher to your stupid cloud
March 24, 2025

Jeff Geerling:

This weekend I had to buy a new dishwasher because our old GE died.

I bought a Bosch 500 series because that’s what Consumer Reports recommended, and more importantly, I could find one in stock.

After my dad and I got it installed, I went to run a rinse cycle, only to find that that, along with features like delayed start and eco mode, require an app.

Bosch dishwasher Home Connect logo

Not only that, to use the app, you have to connect your dishwasher to WiFi, set up a cloud account in something called Home Connect, and then, and only then, can you start using all the features on the dishwasher.

Video

This blog post is a lightly-edited transcript of my latest YouTube video on Level 2 Jeff:

Continue reading “”

 HUGE: Barack Obama Was Using USAID to Pretend to Send ‘Aid’ Overseas But Was Laundering It to Train ‘Rent-a-Riots’ Instead.

Mike Benz, the founder of the Foundation for Freedom Online, recently joined Joe Rogan on his very popular podcast The Joe Rogan Experience with over 19 million subscribers.

** The entire podcast is here.

The podcast was filmed several weeks ago but a clip from this discussion is making the rounds this week on social media.
During their conversation, Mike Benz shared how Barack Obama was using money to USAID to pretend to send “aid” overseas. In actuality, Obama was laundering the taxpayer dollars and using it to train “rent-a-mobs” instead!

This is a huge development but maybe not so surprising considering how Democrats believe they can do anything they please. With other people’s money.

Continue reading “”

Ninth Circuit Upholds California Mag Ban, But Not Without Epic Dissent From Trump-Appointed Judge

Thursday’s decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upholding California’s ban on “large capacity” magazines wasn’t exactly unexpected, but the video dissent from Judge Lawrence Van Dyke was a curveball that I doubt anyone saw coming.

An en banc panel had previously ruled the state’s magazine ban in line with the Second Amendment, but SCOTUS vacated that decision and remanded the case back to the appellate court after Bruen in 2022. In turn, the Ninth Circuit sent the case back down to U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, who’d previously declared the ban unconstitutional. Benitez reached the same conclusion the second time around, and just like before an en banc panel has now overruled the West Coast “saint” of the Second Amendment.

“First, the Founders protected the right to keep and bear ‘Arms,’ not a right to keep and bear ‘Arms and Accoutrements,’ a common expression at the time of the Founding,” the opinion said. “Large-capacity magazines are optional accessories to firearms, and firearms operate as intended without a large-capacity magazine. A large-capacity magazine is thus an accessory or accoutrement, not an ‘Arm’ in itself. Possession of a large-capacity magazine therefore falls outside the text of the Second Amendment.”

The judges wrote that even if large-capacity magazines were covered by the Second Amendment, “California’s law falls neatly within the Nation’s traditions of protecting innocent persons by prohibiting especially dangerous uses of weapons and by regulating components necessary to the firing of a firearm.”

Under the Ninth Circuit’s argument, virtually all detachable magazines, regardless of their capacity, would fall beyond the Second Amendment’s protections because they’re “accoutrements” and not arms. The Court tried to get around that absurdity with its argument about a national tradition of prohibiting “especially dangerous uses of weapons”; establishing a whole new test that flies in the face of existing Supreme Court precedent. Going back to Heller the Court has held that arms that are in common use for lawful purposes are, prima facie, protected by the right to keep and bear arms. Magazines that can hold more than ten rounds aren’t just common, they’re ubiquitous, and they are possessed and used by far more lawful gun owners than violent criminals or mass shooters.

Three judges appointed during President Donald Trump’s first term authored dissenting opinions. Judge Ryan Nelson wrote that his colleagues flouted the standard set by the Bruen ruling and in so doing “(butchered) the Second Amendment and (gave) a judicial middle finger to the Supreme Court.”

Judge Lawrence VanDyke included in his dissent a video of himself operating firearms in his chambers. Seven of the eight judges who were part of the majority opinion joined in an opinion calling the video “wildly improper,” both because the video introduced facts that were not part of the record and because VanDyke appeared to be attempting to offer expert testimony.

It may be wildly improper in the eyes of VanDyke’s gun-controlling colleagues, but frankly I’d like to see more of this. Most folks aren’t going to read through more than 100 pages of legal arguments, but they’d be much more inclined to watch an 18-minute video on YouTube.

Continue reading “”

Democratic Rep. Raul Grijalva dead at 77. “Grijalva, D-Ariz., died of lung cancer-related issues on Thursday

UN Judge, Onetime Columbia University Human Rights Fellow, Found Guilty of Slavery.

A United Nations judge was convicted on Thursday of trafficking a young woman to the United Kingdom and forcing her to work as a slave.

Ugandan judge Lydia Mugambe, 49, “exploited and abused” the victim, prosecutors said, forcing her to work as an unpaid maid and caregiver while barring her from seeking other employment. A jury found Mugambe guilty of multiple offenses, including facilitating illegal immigration, forced labor, and witness intimidation, the Independent reported.

Mugambe was a fellow housed within Columbia University’s Institute for the Study of Human Rights, whose fellows work to “address some aspect of a history of gross human rights violations in their society, country, and/or region,” in 2017.

Columbia did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Mugambe became a judge on the U.N. International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals in May 2023, even though police had been called to her home in Oxfordshire three months earlier, according to the Independent. Mugambe was studying for a law Ph.D. at Oxford at the time.

A jury agreed with the prosecution’s case that Mugambe, who also serves as a judge on Uganda’s High Court, conspired with Ugandan diplomat John Leonard Mugerwa in a “very dishonest” quid pro quo. Mugerwa, the prosecutors said, arranged for the Ugandan embassy to sponsor the victim’s entry into the United Kingdom under false pretenses, while Mugambe attempted to influence a judge overseeing a case in which Mugerwa was involved.

Mugambe denied the charges, insisting she always treated the young woman with “love, care, and patience,” the BBC reported.

SCOTUS is going to have to do something about this and slap these silly lower courts down, or things aren’t going to be pretty

Seventh Circuit Panel: SBRs Aren’t ‘Arms’ Protected by the Second Amendment

The Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms. That should mean any weapon used for offensive or defensive acts. The reason was very clear. It was intended for us to be able to maintain a militia that could defend this nation from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

But the Seventh Circuit has decided that short-barreled rifles, or SBRs, aren’t arms covered by the amendment.

(I had to use a screenshot that I linked since X is having issues with the embed codes)

Now, this is a problem for a lot of reasons.

First, let’s talk a bit about the Miller decision. Yes, it’s a Supreme Court decision that lower courts have had to contend with for ages now. However, Miller dealt with a sawed-off shotgun. The Court in that decision said that such a weapon had no militia use, thus it wasn’t covered by the Second Amendment. That was wrong, of course, because that ruling was issued in 1934, so after shotguns had been used so effectively in World War I that the Germans tried to get using them considered a war crime.

Further, Miller himself was dead, so there wasn’t really another side arguing one way or the other in that case.

Still, when you look at Bruen, it doesn’t say anything about how you can just decide something isn’t an arm simply because you don’t think it’s useful for warfare.

Of course, then there’s the fact that if SBRs aren’t useful for warfare as a tool of the militia, then why is the standard issue weapon for the United States Army technically an SBR? The M4 has a barrel length of 14.5 inches, which is an inch and a half shorter than what is necessary for a rifle to not be considered an SBR. If SBRs aren’t useful for militia use, then why is it issued to every one of our combat troops and was used in pretty much every firefight out troops saw in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Now, let’s talk about the “step two in our Bruen” thing that’s cut off.

We turn to step two in our Bruen analysis in the interest of completeness. As discussed below, even if short-barreled rifles were “arms” within the meaning of the Second Amendment, historical tradition likely supports regulating them.

The court goes on to argue that Rahimi permits similar but more modern laws can be considered.

Rahimi, 602 U.S. at 692. When the historical laws “address[ed] particular problems” there is a good chance “contemporary laws imposing similar restrictions for similar reasons” are also permissible. Id. The laws do not need to “precisely match”—the contemporary one must only “comport with the principles underlying the Second Amendment….” Id.

Now, I’m not an attorney, but this sure looks like the Rahimi decision seems to suggest that contemporary laws can be applied when the historical laws addressed either that problem or similar ones. In other words, if the Founding Fathers were trying to address drunk people carrying guns, as they did, a more contemporary law seeking to address a similar problem would apply.

Instead, the Seventh Circuit judges just decided to accept contemporary laws as good enough simply because they don’t like the idea of SBRs.

That’s not even getting into the possibility that these judges’ nominations might not even be valid since everything Biden signed looks to have been the result of an autopen and we can’t be sure Biden even knew what was happening in the first place.