Authored by Anne Johnson via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Choosing when to collect Social Security retirement benefits is a consequential decision. It will affect your finances for the rest of your life. You’ll be able to claim reduced retirement benefits as early as 62.

Claiming Social Security early could cost you—especially if you’re still working. Rix Pix Photography/Shutterstock

In fact, in 2022, nearly 30 percent of new Social Security beneficiaries began receiving benefits at age 62, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center. The full retirement age (FRA) for those born in 1960 or later is 67, according to the Social Security Administration (SSA). Although you can claim the benefits early, there are drawbacks. And one of them relates to any continued employment.

Social Security Earnings Test

You can receive Social Security or survivors’ benefits and work at the same time. But the Social Security earnings test will be applied to you.

According to the SSA, if you start collecting retirement benefits before FRA and earn more than $24,480 in 2026, you will be penalized. The SSA deducts $1 from your benefits for every $2 you earn above $24,480.

If you reach FRA in 2026, the SSA deducts $1 from your benefits for every $3 you earn above $65,160 until the month you reach FRA.

For example, you file for benefits in January 2026, and your payment is $600 monthly, or $7,200 annually. But during 2026, you plan to work and earn $26,080. You will be $1,600 above the limit. The SSA would withhold $800 of your Social Security benefits.

How Do You Pay the Penalty?

If you file for Social Security benefits at 62 in January 2026, and your benefit is $600 a month, or $7,200 per year. During 2026, you plan to work and earn $26,080, which is $1,600 above the limit. The SSA would withhold $800 of your Social Security benefits ($1 for every $2 you earned over the limit).

To do this, they would withhold all $600 benefits in January and all $600 benefits in February to take the $800. Keep in mind that the SSA does not make partial payments. So, they would take all the February benefits. In other words, you would go two months without benefits. But you would receive all your $600 benefit in March.

The SSA would pay you the additional $400 they took from February 2026 back to you in January 2027.

The SSA doesn’t actually know your earnings in advance. They rely on three items: your estimate when you apply; your employer’s wage reports; and your tax return later.

Often, they don’t know you’ve gone over the maximum until the following year. At that point, they would withhold the overage.

First-Year Rule Saves Money

Sometimes, people younger than FRA begin receiving benefits in the middle of the year. At that point, they may have already exceeded the yearly limit.

According to the SSA, under the first-year rule, you can receive full Social Security benefits for any whole month you are retired, and earnings are below the monthly limit. In other words, the limit starts the month you start receiving benefits, not for the prior months when you may have gone over the limit.

So, if you started receiving benefits in July 2026, you must be under the limit from July through December 2026. But you don’t have to be below the limit from January 2026 through June 2026.

This rule allows you to work earlier in the year, retire midyear, and still collect Social Security immediately without losing benefits earned before you started collecting them.

Social Security Refunds Penalties at FRA

Although some of your benefits may be reduced if you work, they will be returned later. According to the SSA, if some of your benefits are withheld because of your earnings, your monthly benefit will increase starting at FRA. It will take into account those months when benefits were withheld.

Earnings Drawback to Collecting Social Security Before FRA

Whether or not you’re working, if you start drawing your Social Security benefits before FRA, you’ll receive less money.

If you start receiving benefits early, your benefits will be reduced by a small percentage for each month before your FRA. According to the SSA, those born in 1960 or later will have their benefits reduced by 30 percent if they retire at 62.

So, if your FRA benefit is $1,000, because of the reduction, you’ll receive $700 if you start benefits at age 62. A spouse’s benefit is reduced by 35 percent, which brings it down to $325, according to the SSA.

How to Contact the Social Security Association

The best and most convenient way to contact the SSA is to visit www.ssa.gov. You’ll be able to use their services and receive information. If you live outside the United States, visit www.ssa.gov/foreign to access online services.

If you don’t have internet access, call 1-800-772-1213 or the TTY number, 1-800-325-0778 if you’re deaf or hard of hearing. They recommend calling between Wednesday and Friday and later in the month when it’s less busy.

Amid the ongoing fracturing of the private credit industry, which after enjoying years of stable, levered growth (and when it ran out of institutional greater fools, it aimed lower, toward HNWs and retail) finally hit a brick wall thanks to the Claude-inspired SaaSpocalypse, which has led to a historic surge in redemption requests across the biggest (and certainly smallest) names in the industry, last week we said that debt funds managed by powerhouse firms including Blackstone, BlackRock, Cliffwater, Morgan Stanley and Monroe Capital have agreed to honor only 70% of the $10.1bn of redemption requests they have faced, according to FT calculations, as fund after fund is gating investors.

We also said that the number of both redemptions and gates is expected to spike over the coming weeks, as funds managed by Ares Management, Apollo Global, Blue Owl, Oaktree and Goldman Sachs tally up how many of their investors are heading for the exits, as discussed here.

According to the above table, Apollo’s private credit fund, APODS, was supposed to report its Q1 outflow in early May. However, the surge in redemptions was so big the private equity giant decided not to wait that long, and according to Bloomberg, Apollo Global Management has joined a growing number of its peers in gating redemptions from one of its largest non-traded private credit funds for retail investors, becoming the latest alternative asset manager to be flooded by a surge in such requests.

The $25 billion business development company, Apollo Debt Solutions (APODS), capped withdrawals at 5% of outstanding shares Monday after clients sought to redeem 11.2%, according to a shareholder letter seen by Bloomberg, thus gating more than half of the redemption requests. 

“Periods of complexity and uncertainty can create some of the most attractive investment opportunities, but only for those with the flexibility to act decisively,” the firm said, adding that “while the market has repriced risk, the fundamentals of the fund’s underlying borrowers remain strong.”

The firm expects the granted redemptions to amount to roughly $730 million of gross outflows for the first quarter, offsetting the roughly $724 million of inflows for the period. Apollo Debt Solutions has been building its reserves in the past month, doubling the size of one credit line to $1 billion and signing a new $500 million facility.

What’s worse is Apollo has effectively pre-gated next quarter’s redemption requests, saying that it intends to stick to the same cap next quarter as it balances “the interests of shareholders seeking liquidity with those who choose to remain invested,” it said in the letter, noting that challenging times can benefit investors in the long run.

With redeeming investors receiving just 45% of their capital, Apollo Debt Solutions is returning less cash to clients than some of its peers that capped withdrawals. As we reported previously, while BlackRock also capped redemptions from its $26 billion non-traded BDC at a pre-set 5% earlier this month, investors had “only” requested 9.3% of their shares. Meanwhile, Morgan Stanley’s North Haven Private Income Fund’s pro-rated redemptions were granted at a similar rate to Apollo’s.

It seems that with every passing week, after Blue Owl started the private credit firesale a month ago, more investors are seeking to return their capital… and more are being gated. 

As regular readers are aware, while private credit funds typically limit redemptions to 5% of outstanding shares, the recent bank run redemption scramble among retail investors has tested firms’ flexibility. Some firms such as Blackstone opted to exceed the cap – and fund the shortfall out of the partners’ own pocket – in the hopes of quelling investor panic and stanching further outflows. That valiant effort failed after Blackstone’s peers such as Blackrock, Cliffwater and Morgan Stanley gated their own investors. 

Apollo, which has been pushing for more transparency in private markets, also said Monday that Apollo Debt Solutions had returned 1% over the past three months. At the same time, its net asset value dipped by 1.2% over the same period. Last night we reported that the largest private credit fund, Blackstone’s BCRED, reported its first monthly decline since September 2022. 

Meanwhile, in related news, late on Monday a private credit fund jointly run by Future Standard and KKR was the first to get junked, losing one of its investment-grade ratings, a rare occurrence in the $1.8 trillion private credit market, and one which will certainly result in higher borrowing costs for the $14 billion investment vehicle.

Moody’s Ratings lowered its assessment of FS KKR Capital Corp. to Ba1, or one level into junk, because of what it described as “continued asset quality challenges” that have hurt profitability and the value of the fund’s portfolio relative to peers, the credit grader said in a statement on Monday.

The fund’s non-accrual rate, which measures soured loans, rose to 5.5% of total investments as of the end of last year, one of the highest percentages among peers. It also expressed concern over other investments not classified as non-accrual that have have suffered significant markdowns, including a loan to software company Medallia.

The rating agency also called out FSK’s higher proportion of payment-in-kind income relative to peers, which it said is a sign of “weaker earnings quality.” PIK provisions allow borrowers to pay interest by accumulating additional debt instead of paying out cash.   

That said, the ratings firm said the fund is “well positioned” from a liquidity perspective, with about $2.5 billion available after repaying a $1 billion note earlier this year.

“FSK remains well positioned despite the decision,” a spokesperson for the fund, referring to its stock-exchange ticker, said in an emailed statement. “It has a strong, well‑laddered liability structure with no 2026 unsecured maturities and limited near‑term maturities, enabling us to continue supporting our portfolio companies and navigate the current market environment.”

And now it’s junk.

Authored by Jim Bovard

Obituaries on eminent Washingtonians usually omit the dreadful precedents they set that will vex Americans long after their death. Not this piece.

Former FBI director Robert Mueller died last week at the age of 81. The New York Times eulogized him as a “button-down, lockjawed, rock-ribbed exemplar of a vanishing caste.” In reality, Mueller was simply a twenty-first century version of J. Edgar Hoover, trampling the Constitution and seizing new power on any pretext.

Mueller took over the FBI one week before the 9/11 attacks and he was worse than clueless afterwards. On September 14, 2011, Mueller declared, “The fact that there were a number of individuals that happened to have received training at flight schools here is news, quite obviously. If we had understood that to be the case, we would have—perhaps one could have averted this.” Three days later, Mueller announced, “There were no warning signs that I’m aware of that would indicate this type of operation in the country.” His protestations helped the W. Bush administration railroad the Patriot Act through Congress, vastly expanding the FBI’s prerogatives to vacuum up Americans’ personal information.

Photo by Jim Bovard while covering the 2018 Women’s March in Washington.

Deceit helped capture those intrusive new prerogatives. The Bush administration suppressed until the following May the news that FBI agents in Phoenix and Minneapolis had warned FBI headquarters of suspicious Arabs in flight training programs prior to 9/11. A House-Senate Joint Intelligence Committee analysis concluded that FBI incompetence and negligence “contributed to the United States becoming, in effect, a sanctuary for radical terrorists.” FBI blundering spurred The Wall Street Journal to call for Mueller’s resignation, while a New York Times headline warned: “Lawmakers Say Misstatements Cloud F.B.I. Chief’s Credibility.”

But the FBI was off and running. Thanks to the Patriot Act, the FBI increased by a hundredfold—up to 50,000 a year—the number of National Security Letters (NSLs) it issued to citizens, business, and nonprofit organizations, and recipients were prohibited from disclosing that their data had been raided. NSLs entitle the FBI to seize records that reveal “where a person makes and spends money, with whom he lives and lived before, how much he gambles, what he buys online, what he pawns and borrows, where he travels, how he invests, what he searches for and reads on the Web, and who telephones or e-mails him at home and at work,” The Washington Post noted. The FBI can lasso thousands of people’s records with a single NSL—regardless of the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable warrantless searches.

The FBI greatly understated the number of NSLs it was issuing and denied that abuses had occurred, thereby helping sway Congress to renew the Patriot Act in 2006. The following year, an Inspector General report revealed that FBI agents may have recklessly issued thousands of illegal NSLs. Shortly after that report was released, federal judge Victor Marrero denounced the NSL process as “the legislative equivalent of breaking and entering, with an ominous free pass to the hijacking of constitutional values.”

Rather than arresting FBI agents who broke the law, Mueller created a new FBI Office of Integrity and Compliance. The Electronic Freedom Foundation, after winning lawsuits to garner FBI reports to a federal oversight board, concluded that the FBI may have committed “tens of thousands” of violations of federal law, regulations, or Executive Orders between 2001 and 2008.

President George W. Bush, scorning a unanimous 1972 Supreme Court ruling, decided he was entitled to impose warrantless wiretaps on Americans. At an April 2005 Senate hearing, Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) asked Mueller, “Can the National Security Agency, the great electronic snooper, spy on the American people?” Mueller replied, “I would say generally, they are not allowed to spy or to gather information on American citizens.”

Mueller presumably knew his answer was at least misleading if not blatantly deceptive. Nearly nine months later, The New York Times revealed that Bush had unleashed NSA to illegally wiretap up to five hundred people within the United States at any given time and peruse millions of other Americans’ emails. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales responded to the uproar by asserting that “the president has the inherent authority” to order such wiretaps. Mueller had no trouble with that dictatorial doctrine—even though the same claim spurred one of the articles of impeachment crafted against President Richard Nixon.

Mueller’s biggest coup against privacy occurred with Section 215 of the Patriot Act, which entitles the FBI to demand “business records” that are “relevant” to a terrorism or espionage investigation. In 2011 testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee, Mueller “suggested the FBI interpreted (Section 215) narrowly and used it sparingly,” the ACLU noted. But Mueller was the point man for the Bush administration’s bizarre 2006 decision (perpetuated by Barack Obama) that all Americans’ telephone records were “relevant” to terrorism investigations. Several times a year, Mueller signed orders to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, swaying it to continually renew its order compelling telephone companies to deliver all their calling records (including time, duration, and location of calls) to the National Security Agency.

On June 5, 2013, leaks from former NSA contractor Edward Snowden blew the lid off this surveillance regime. Federal judge Richard Leon slammed that records roundup as “almost Orwellian…I cannot imagine a more indiscriminate and arbitrary invasion than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every single citizen for purposes of querying and analyzing it without prior judicial approval.”

Mueller sought to dampen the Snowden uproar by testifying to Congress that the feds could not listen to Americans’ calls without a warrant for that “particular phone and that particular individual.” But NSA employees had broad discretion to vacuum up Americans’ info without warrants, and NSA’s definition of terrorist suspect was so ludicrously broad that it includes “someone searching the web for suspicious stuff.”

Mueller was replaced at the FBI by James Comey. After Comey was fired in May 2017 by President Donald Trump, Comey leaked official memos with confidential information to a lawyer who delivered them to The New York Times. Comey’s leak triggered the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller to investigate Trump. Mueller’s investigation generated endless allegations and controversies and helped Democrats capture control of the U.S. House of Representatives in 2018. In April 2019, after two years of media frenzies, Mueller finally admitted he found no evidence to prosecute Trump or his campaign officials for colluding with Russia in the 2016 campaign. In July 2019, Mueller testified to Congress on his investigation and the nation was shocked to see Mueller looking mentally clueless time and again under questioning.

It remains to be seen whether the media can restore Mueller’s halo after his death. But whitewashing Mueller’s record will simply invite more FBI depredations of Americans’ rights and liberties.

The Chicago City Council has approved a plan to boost tourism marketing by raising hotel taxes. Under Ordinance 2026-0022544, the total tax rate on hotel rooms will increase from 17.5% to 19% in downtown and nearby areas, according to Fox News.

The higher rate will apply to hotels with more than 100 rooms that choose to participate.

The report says that alongside the tax increase, the council created a Tourism Improvement District (TID) to fund Choose Chicago, the city’s tourism marketing organization. Revenue will support promotional campaigns and help cover bids for major events and conventions.

Chicago is already pursuing the Democratic National Convention, which requires a $1 million bid. The city previously hosted the event in August 2024 and is competing with several other cities.

Mayor Brandon Johnson called Chicago a leading destination for tourism and large-scale events, saying the city will continue investing in growth and development. Choose Chicago CEO Kristen Reynolds described the move as a “transformative moment” that will strengthen marketing efforts and attract more visitors.

Some critics, however, argue the 19% hotel tax — among the highest in the country — could make travel to Chicago more expensive and potentially discourage tourism.

The Chicago City Council has approved a plan to boost tourism marketing by raising hotel taxes. Under Ordinance 2026-0022544, the total tax rate on hotel rooms will increase from 17.5% to 19% in downtown and nearby areas, according to Fox News.

The higher rate will apply to hotels with more than 100 rooms that choose to participate.

The report says that alongside the tax increase, the council created a Tourism Improvement District (TID) to fund Choose Chicago, the city’s tourism marketing organization. Revenue will support promotional campaigns and help cover bids for major events and conventions.

Chicago is already pursuing the Democratic National Convention, which requires a $1 million bid. The city previously hosted the event in August 2024 and is competing with several other cities.

Mayor Brandon Johnson called Chicago a leading destination for tourism and large-scale events, saying the city will continue investing in growth and development. Choose Chicago CEO Kristen Reynolds described the move as a “transformative moment” that will strengthen marketing efforts and attract more visitors.

Some critics, however, argue the 19% hotel tax — among the highest in the country — could make travel to Chicago more expensive and potentially discourage tourism.

The Chicago City Council has approved a plan to boost tourism marketing by raising hotel taxes. Under Ordinance 2026-0022544, the total tax rate on hotel rooms will increase from 17.5% to 19% in downtown and nearby areas, according to Fox News.

The higher rate will apply to hotels with more than 100 rooms that choose to participate.

The report says that alongside the tax increase, the council created a Tourism Improvement District (TID) to fund Choose Chicago, the city’s tourism marketing organization. Revenue will support promotional campaigns and help cover bids for major events and conventions.

Chicago is already pursuing the Democratic National Convention, which requires a $1 million bid. The city previously hosted the event in August 2024 and is competing with several other cities.

Mayor Brandon Johnson called Chicago a leading destination for tourism and large-scale events, saying the city will continue investing in growth and development. Choose Chicago CEO Kristen Reynolds described the move as a “transformative moment” that will strengthen marketing efforts and attract more visitors.

Some critics, however, argue the 19% hotel tax — among the highest in the country — could make travel to Chicago more expensive and potentially discourage tourism.

The FCC has banned the import of all new foreign-made consumer wireless routers, citing “severe national security risks”.

The decision, announced today, follows a White House-convened inter-agency review that determined these devices – primarily those manufactured overseas – pose unacceptable threats to US households, critical infrastructure, and the economy.

Major brands like TP-Link (which holds a dominant share of the U.S. market), Netgear, Google Nest, Amazon Eero, Cisco, Linksys, and Asus produce most models abroad, often in China, which controls an estimated 60% of the U.S. home router market.

Interestingly, Netgear’s stock soared (presumably as a US company that has the potential to steal market share from TP-Link)…

The FCC highlighted how malicious state and non-state actors have exploited vulnerabilities in foreign-made routers for cyberattacks on American civilians, including espionage, network disruptions, intellectual property theft, and incidents linked to groups like Volt Typhoon and Salt Typhoon.

The ban applies only to new models manufactured outside the U.S., regardless of the company’s nationality, but does not affect routers already imported or in use.

Companies can seek exemptions through the Department of Defense or Department of Homeland Security if their products are deemed low-risk.

The move builds on prior FCC actions, such as the December 2025 ban on new foreign-made drones, and aligns with ongoing scrutiny of firms like TP-Link, which faces separate national security probes and a lawsuit from Texas over alleged deceptive marketing and data access risks.

Lawmakers, including Rep. John Moolenaar (R), chair of the House Select Committee on China, praised the order as a strong defense against Chinese cyberattacks.

“Routers are key to keeping us all connected,” he said, “and we cannot allow Chinese technology to be at the center of that.”

This policy could reshape the router market, encouraging domestic production or more secure alternatives while protecting against supply-chain vulnerabilities.

Existing devices remain unaffected, giving consumers and businesses time to adapt.

The Chinese Embassy has not commented.

The FCC has banned the import of all new foreign-made consumer wireless routers, citing “severe national security risks”.

The decision, announced today, follows a White House-convened inter-agency review that determined these devices – primarily those manufactured overseas – pose unacceptable threats to US households, critical infrastructure, and the economy.

Major brands like TP-Link (which holds a dominant share of the U.S. market), Netgear, Google Nest, Amazon Eero, Cisco, Linksys, and Asus produce most models abroad, often in China, which controls an estimated 60% of the U.S. home router market.

Interestingly, Netgear’s stock soared (presumably as a US company that has the potential to steal market share from TP-Link)…

The FCC highlighted how malicious state and non-state actors have exploited vulnerabilities in foreign-made routers for cyberattacks on American civilians, including espionage, network disruptions, intellectual property theft, and incidents linked to groups like Volt Typhoon and Salt Typhoon.

The ban applies only to new models manufactured outside the U.S., regardless of the company’s nationality, but does not affect routers already imported or in use.

Companies can seek exemptions through the Department of Defense or Department of Homeland Security if their products are deemed low-risk.

The move builds on prior FCC actions, such as the December 2025 ban on new foreign-made drones, and aligns with ongoing scrutiny of firms like TP-Link, which faces separate national security probes and a lawsuit from Texas over alleged deceptive marketing and data access risks.

Lawmakers, including Rep. John Moolenaar (R), chair of the House Select Committee on China, praised the order as a strong defense against Chinese cyberattacks.

“Routers are key to keeping us all connected,” he said, “and we cannot allow Chinese technology to be at the center of that.”

This policy could reshape the router market, encouraging domestic production or more secure alternatives while protecting against supply-chain vulnerabilities.

Existing devices remain unaffected, giving consumers and businesses time to adapt.

The Chinese Embassy has not commented.

The FCC has banned the import of all new foreign-made consumer wireless routers, citing “severe national security risks”.

The decision, announced today, follows a White House-convened inter-agency review that determined these devices – primarily those manufactured overseas – pose unacceptable threats to US households, critical infrastructure, and the economy.

Major brands like TP-Link (which holds a dominant share of the U.S. market), Netgear, Google Nest, Amazon Eero, Cisco, Linksys, and Asus produce most models abroad, often in China, which controls an estimated 60% of the U.S. home router market.

Interestingly, Netgear’s stock soared (presumably as a US company that has the potential to steal market share from TP-Link)…

The FCC highlighted how malicious state and non-state actors have exploited vulnerabilities in foreign-made routers for cyberattacks on American civilians, including espionage, network disruptions, intellectual property theft, and incidents linked to groups like Volt Typhoon and Salt Typhoon.

The ban applies only to new models manufactured outside the U.S., regardless of the company’s nationality, but does not affect routers already imported or in use.

Companies can seek exemptions through the Department of Defense or Department of Homeland Security if their products are deemed low-risk.

The move builds on prior FCC actions, such as the December 2025 ban on new foreign-made drones, and aligns with ongoing scrutiny of firms like TP-Link, which faces separate national security probes and a lawsuit from Texas over alleged deceptive marketing and data access risks.

Lawmakers, including Rep. John Moolenaar (R), chair of the House Select Committee on China, praised the order as a strong defense against Chinese cyberattacks.

“Routers are key to keeping us all connected,” he said, “and we cannot allow Chinese technology to be at the center of that.”

This policy could reshape the router market, encouraging domestic production or more secure alternatives while protecting against supply-chain vulnerabilities.

Existing devices remain unaffected, giving consumers and businesses time to adapt.

The Chinese Embassy has not commented.

A quad-amputee professional cornhole player has been accused of shooting a man in Maryland before driving off in his Tesla with the corpse, or dying guy (unclear), leaving everyone stumped. 

NEW: Quadruple amputee professional cornhole player accused of murdering someone before driving off in his Tesla.

Dayton Webber, 27, who has no arms & legs and was featured on ESPN, is accused of shooting 27-year-old Bradrick Michael Wells during an argument.

“Police say Webber… pic.twitter.com/5J1UNoQccB

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) March 23, 2026

Dayton James Webber, 27, is accused of shooting and killing Bradrick Michael Wells, also 27, while the two were arguing in La Plata, Maryland. According to Fox5 DC, the incident occurred in Webber’s Tesla SUV, while Wells was in the passenger seat at the time of the alleged shooting. 

After the incident, Wells reportedly pulled over and asked two passengers in the back seat to pull Wells out – however they declined to do so and instead called the cops after getting out of the vehicle.

Webber, who had a quadruple amputation as a child due to a blood infection, then fled from the scene, leaving Wells in the Tesla (wait, don’t Teslas have cameras inside?).

Wells’ body was discovered in a yard on Newport Church Road in Charlotte Hall, and was pronounced dead at the scene. 

Webber, meanwhile, was found by police at a Charlottesville, Virginia hospital, placed under arrest, and charged as a fugitive from justice. He will now be extradited to Charles County where he’ll face first-degree murder, second-degree murder, and other charges. 

While you too may be stumped as to how a guy with no arms or legs can shoot a gun or drive, video has emerged of Webber loading a gun, racking the slide, and firing it. 

Video posted in January 2024 shows cornhole star Dayton Webber loading and firing a handgun.

Webber is accused of shooting and killing 27-year-old Bradrick Michael Wells in Maryland before driving off with the body in his car.

The American Cornhole League has released the… https://t.co/Jz1wC985bK pic.twitter.com/JUfRm2UgFO

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) March 23, 2026

“It’s early in the investigation, but there’s no evidence to suggest anyone else was involved in the shooting and that he acted alone,” said Charles County Sheriff’s Office’s Diane Richardson. 

No fingerprints could be found at the scene of the crime.

— Mullets & Memes (@brandon_FST) March 23, 2026

Perhaps if he dodges prison Webber can grab some coffee to think things over.

fin