I mentioned last week that Truth Social — Trump’s social network — only had a bit more revenue than TPM. And needless to say, TPM doesn’t have a multi-billion dollar stock valuation. (If anyone disagrees on this point, contact me.) Today the company released its first 8-K, basically one of the many SEC-mandated disclosures for public companies in which lying means committing a crime. There’s a bit more there on the inflows and outflows. TS brought in about $4.1 million last year and spent $58 million. So that means that TS had about 30% more revenue than TPM and roughly 20 times the expenses. Not great! There’s some other interesting details, like the fact that $39 million of that $58 million went to interest payments. Go figure.

These data points are pretty good evidence that this company is a joke. And they make for good fun. But it’s not proof. A social network in its early stages can be bleeding lots of money and still be legitimately worth a ton of money. This isn’t just hypothetical. Facebook had already become a force of nature before Mark Zuckerberg turned his attention to monetizing the engine of value he created. So there was a time when Facebook was also spending way more money than it made and investors were dying to buy in. Those who did made tons of money.

So the revenue and expenses aren’t the proof. But the proof is there.

Along with seven or eight other papers, which tend to be in swing or swingish states, I subscribe to The Cleveland Plain Dealer. So I get various emails from them. And one is an email that comes from their editor, Chris Quinn. I glance at these occasionally but they normally deal with local issues or issues about the paper that are more for local residents. But one came Saturday that grabbed my attention. The headline was “There aren’t two sides to facts” and, as Quinn explains, it’s an answer to Trump supporters who complain that the paper judges Trump and Biden by two separate standards.

Keep an eye on the events out of Israel. It seems possible they’re reaching some kind of turning point, though one hesitates to use that phrase about a country which has been in such an extended political paralysis for so long. The key to understand is that whatever crisis or shift may be in the works isn’t driven by the issues animating coverage in the U.S. To the extent it is tied to the Israel-Hamas war it is about the hostages and the widespread belief that the Netanyahu government isn’t that focused on striking a deal to get them home. Hovering around this is the fact that the government has at best tended to ignore and shun the hostages families. The communities along the border with Gaza tend to be made up of left-leaning Kibbutznik types. So they’re not Netanyahu’s people by any stretch of the imagination. That’s been a subtext to much that has happened over the last six months.

You also have the anti-judicial coup coalition which was holding massive weekly protests for almost a year before October 7th going back to the streets. All of that had stopped cold on October 7th. It’s been slowing reassembling since. But the protests this weekend are bigger than any since just before the massacres in southern Israel. They are now a coupled message for the government to resign and to bring the hostages home.

We are still in the running to hit 700 new TPM Members by the end of today. We’re currently at 644. 56 more of you on a Friday afternoon is a tall order. But it’s possible. Please listen to this: If you’ve been considering joining during our drive, please choose to do it today, right now. It will take just a couple minutes tops. Click right here and let’s see if we can do this together.

Late Update: We might actually get there! 668!

Later Update: 11:56 PM on the east. But we’re at 680 and there’s still time out West. In range! Become part of our club!

Even Later Update: 687! Saturday is the new Friday! 700 is within reach!

Let me add a brief follow-up to my post from last night which seems to have resonated with people. I’ll say it again: I don’t think this is going to happen. But this isn’t just a caveat or covering myself if it doesn’t. It’s kind of why I did the post. In life and political analysis (and so many other things) we’re constantly having to be on the look out for new data which challenges our assumptions about what’s happening. In this case, the data points I mentioned definitely challenge my assumptions about what’s happening. And I’m still sticking with my assumptions! But those data points are high volume enough, not random little edge case things, that it’s at least worth me clearing my throat and telling myself I’m seeing a bunch of things that don’t square with my assumptions, sort of a punditing note to file if you will.

As I said, I’m sticking with my assumptions. But keep it in the back of your head, or write your own note to file.