☕️ BURNING QUESTIONS ☙ Tuesday, August 4, 2026 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

———————————————————

Millions of acres and hundreds of homes burning in the PacWest from ‘climate fires,’ meanwhile vagrant arrested for no reason; Washington Post confronts biggest scandal since Watergate: ChickenGate.

JEFF CHILDERS

AUG 4READ IN APP

Good morning, C&C, it’s Tuesday! Owing to an early hearing this morning, our roundup has only two stories, but both are solid: mentally ill man with history of violence arrested for impersonating the climate; background the media conveniently omitted, probably for ‘privacy’ or something; growing problem that progressives refuse to admit exists; Washington Post opens investigation into scandal nesting at the National Observatory; top experts from around the country cry fowl; and the chickens may be coming home to roost for the Vice President.

🌍🇺🇸 ESSENTIAL NEWS AND COMMENTARY 🇺🇸🌍

🔥🔥🔥

The thing that never happens, happened again! Amid a dry, hot summer season, Washington and Oregon states are engulfed in wildfires, with millions of acres burned, over 700 buildings destroyed, and 65,000 people evacuated so far. The latest count is 17 separate fires, the result of climate change. Oh, and this… Yesterday, NBC reported, “Man accused of arson in the biggest of 3 major fires in Spokane, Washington” Wait till you see all the details the media is hiding this time.

Yesterday, Spokane SWAT arrested Aaron Farinacci, 37, “without incident.” He’d been turned in by an alert citizen, who had called 911 and reported a man fitting Farinacci’s description lighting some tall grass near a forested area on fire. The blaze became known as the “Old Trails fire.” Cops later nabbed Farinacci with waterproof matches and a lighter in his pocket and said he “looked nervous.” Multiple reports say he told arresting police, “you don’t know the whole story.”

Spokane Mayor Lisa Brown called the recent fires the “worst natural disaster” the region has faced. The court set bail at $1 million.

🔥 Farinacci is a nutjob. As they euphemistically say, the 37-year-old is comfortable ‘navigating the complexities of the criminal justice system.’ Due to experience. In 2010, he shot and killed his own father in Mesa, Arizona, after the men argued about Farinacci doing the dishes. Farinacci was living with his parents at the time, aged 23, suggesting, er, other possible issues. He shot his dad and, after briefly holding the gun on his mother, he fled and was later arrested with a nonfatal self-inflicted gunshot injury.

After the patricide, Mr. Farinacci was charged with premeditated murder. Almost immediately after his arrest, his lawyers filed a motion to have him psychologically examined for competence to stand trial. He pleaded out to a lesser count of manslaughter and got a 12-year prison sentence, with two years off for time served. After he getting out, he crossed the country to the Pacific Northwest, which one YouTuber called “one of the last regions in North America where you can still disappear into mountains, forests or coastal wilderness” and live “on your own terms.”

But Washington State also has robust post-release mental health diversion and support programs, and Spokane County in particular has a generous ‘behavioral health court’ that diverts people with mental problems who keep breaking the law out of the traditional criminal justice system and gets them back into fully funded treatment.

He seems to have no social media footprint at all, which, for a 30s-aged man these days, is pretty weird. Just saying. None of the reporting mentions a job, either. But many reports describe him as known to walk the Old Trails area. His “address” was listed in the Sheriff’s press release as “the 2800 block of W. Elliott Drive.”

Coincidentally, that ‘2800 block’ is the location both for the Tamarack Center, a residential treatment and psychiatric facility, and also a low-income, government-funded apartment complex, which is likely where Tamarack stashes some of its indigent patients who, perhaps, cannot appropriately reside with Tamrack’s minor-aged patients. Mind you, I don’t know. I’m just telling you what I found.

Nobody will say it. But it sure looks likeFarinacci is another crazy, unemployed homeless (or homeless-adjacent) person on government support with a deeply disturbing criminal record. It’s not like he did time for selling weed to college students or something. He killed his own father over a chores dispute— which is evil, but to liberals, just evidence of mental illness.

Farinacci is the walking, breathing embodiment of the progressive social experiment: a violently mentally ill convicted killer, released early, subsidized by the state, and left entirely unsupervised to wander the community.

Just as with other wildfires, we now have our arson suspect. Another ‘harmless’ homeless person. The thing that never happens keeps happening. News-4 Utah, last month:

Fires. Plural.

But wait. This story gets even dumber. The NBC article did not use the “C” word— but nearly everyone else did.

🔥 CNN, for example, described the sixteen other PacWest fires as “fueled by climate change” and somberly called it a “climate crisis”— even after reporting Farinacci’s arrest in the same news feed:

This isn’t an isolated incident. We saw the exact same script play out in Los Angeles. When fires ravage the hills of California, the immediate progressive reflex is to blame global warming. Yet time and time again, the actual ignition source turns out to be a homeless encampment cooking meth, or a deranged transient tossing a lit flare into the brush.

Mother Nature, apparently, does not deserve the presumption of innocence until proof of guilt. Corporate media’s desperate need to automatically pre-convict Mother Nature is not just annoying; it is actively dangerous. It is a massive, deliberate misdirection campaign designed to shield their own catastrophic policy failures from public scrutiny.

Consider the sheer incoherence of the progressive mind. (Briefly, before real damage sets in.) For a virus with a 99% survival rate, they were perfectly willing to strip productive, law-abiding citizens —with their own houses and jobs— of their fundamental constitutional rights. They closed businesses, locked children out of schools, forced toddlers to wear cloth masks, mandated jabs, declared people “non essential”— all on the paper-thin excuse of protecting the community from an invisible menace. (A menace, it turned out, that none of their rights-destroying mitigations actually stopped).

But when faced with a very real, very visible, and highly combustible menace —legions of crazy, drugged-out, subsidized, and often violent transients wandering our streets with pockets stuffed with butane lighters— progressives suddenly discover a deep reverence for civil liberties. They flat refuse to institutionalize the violently mentally ill. They refuse to enforce vagrancy laws. They even refuse to admit where the fires are actually coming from.

They literally will not talk about the fact that homeless people are actually menacing our communities. Instead, they point at the sky as if it were a giant space squirrel and yell, “Carbon! Look over there!”

Real headline from the New York Post, from January of this year:

Progressives literally allow murderous mental patients free rein in society until somebody dies, like that poor Ukrainian girl who got her throat cut on a commuter train in North Carolina. By whom? A mentally ill repeat offender, of course. And worst of all when it comes to all the homeless arson, their climate fig leaf shifts the blame for the death and destruction to us.

It’s our own fault.

🔥 But in reality, if we want to stop our cities and forests from burning to the ground, we don’t need to ban gas stoves or force everyone to drive a Prius. We need to stop the progressive policies that are importing the arsonists, subsidizing their existence —making us pay for it!— and handing them the matches.

If progressives had planned this kind of chaos and destruction on purpose, it’s hard to see how they would have done it any differently.

They even have a word for what they themselves are doing: stochastic terrorism. They invented the term to describe President Trump. It just means provoking random crazy people to commit violence. The argument is that nobody needs to directly order an attack; they just have to create the conditions that make an attack statistically predictable. Headline from ABC-7 Los Angeles, April:

LA is the nation’s capital for homeless program funding. As usual, when Democrats coined the term “stochastic terrorism,” they were projecting.

When progressives refuse to institutionalize the violently mentally ill, release convicted father killers after less than a decade, subsidize lunatics’ housing next to psychiatric facilities, leave them unsupervised and unemployed, with no jobs that could occupy their time and nothing to do, and no monitoring of what they are actually getting up to —and do all that at scale, across every major progressive city— they have created the precise conditions under which it is statistically likely that someone in that population will eventually burn down millions of acres and 700 homes (and counting).

Until we confront the issue of the crazy, meth-addled, and taxpayer subsidizedmentally ill and homeless threatening our communities, the fires will continue. And progressivism will keep blaming the weather, right up until the day we finally say enough is enough.

🐓🐓🐓

Speaking of crazy people allowed to roam free, yesterday the Washington Post reported, and I used that word very loosely, “The Vances added a chicken coop to the vice president’s residence. We had questions.” It is the latest burgeoning White House scandal. WaPo even offered its first two, deeply sinister questions right in the subheadline: “Who will be raising the hens at the Naval Observatory? And whyare the Vances taking on this project?”

The storied Washington Post — a 148-year-old newspaper that broke Watergate and toppled the Nixon Administration, employs hundreds of journalists, has a dedicated White House beat team, and maintains direct communications with the Office of the Vice President— had urgent questions about who is raising the chickens and why. Burning, compelling, democracy-dies-in-darkness types of questions that apparently could not be answered by the one journalistic technique that has existed since the invention of journalism: asking the Vances.

Well, he sort of asked. The reporter, food columnist Tim Carman, confirmed this hard-hitting investigative approach: “A spokesman for Vance did not respond to multiple emailsseeking comment.”

So. He emailed the Vice-President of the United States’s spokesman about … the Veep’s chicken coop. Multiple times! And when his urgently worded emails weren’t returned, he did what any seasoned investigative journalist would do: he convened a panel of backyard chicken experts.

I did not make that up.

The article somberly explained, and I quote, “The Washington Post turned to former and current backyard chicken keepers to gather insights on what may be going on at Number One Observatory Circle.”

What may be going on! At a chicken coop! Behold: The Washington Post’s finest minds, assembled to crack the case.

But the Post’s investigative ambitions did not stop at consulting amateur poultry enthusiasts. No. They went further. They went all the way. They reported the Vances to DC codes enforcement.

“We even checked with a city official,” the WaPo said, airily, “to discuss whether the Vances are following the proper protocols to raise hens in Washington.” Forget about Iran, China, healthcare fraud. The WaPo is about to break open ChickenGate.

That’s right. The Washington Post contacted Washington, D.C. codes enforcement to ‘investigate’ whether the Vice President of the United States had the proper permits for his chickens. That’s like telling your neighbor you only called codes to find outwhether their fence was too high, not to rat them out or anything.

Anyway, the city official, who spoke on condition of anonymity “because he wasn’t authorized to talk to the media” (but did anyway), informed the Post that D.C. regulations don’t apply on federal property anyway — a disappointing fact that, one imagines, could have been established with a thirty-second Google search or a ten-second AI prompt before dispatching a reporter to surveil the Naval Observatory.

Now, who served on the WaPo’s panel of expert sources assembled for this eight-minute story? Look at everyone the Post consulted in trying to get to the bottom of this story: the coop builder, a DC bar owner who used to keep chickens in his backyard, a Utah chicken keeper named Danny Bowers who uses they/them pronouns and cuddles a bearded white Silkie bantam named Karen as an emotional support animal when their autoimmune disorders flare up —I promise I did not make up or even exaggerate that one— and, for the financial analysis, the Post’s own “Unearthed” columnist, Tamar Haspel, who raised chickens for 15 years on Cape Cod. (Tamar helpfully calculated that, if you amortize the donated $100,000 coop over the remaining months of the Trump administration, each dozen eggs would scandalously cost the Vances $139.)

The Post also noted, with evident concern, that “Usha Vance, who is due to deliver the family’s fourth child later this month, may be off the hook for a little while — numerous state health departments say pregnant women should avoid handling chickens.” Investigative journalism, folks. Democracy dies in darkness, but not before we’ve confirmed that a pregnant woman probably shouldn’t be shoveling chicken manure.

But the Post was not finished. There was still the political angle to investigate.

🐓 “The addition,” the Post reported gravely, “has led to speculation” —by whom?— “that there may be political motivations behind the flock’s appearance.” For answers, they checked with their chicken experts. “It’s a theory that resonates with Danny Bowers, who keeps 19 chickens on a suburban property in Utah County, Utah. Bowers, and who uses they/them pronouns. They point out that some conservatives have embraced the values espoused by ‘trad wife’ influencers, many of whom raise chickens.”

My goodness. That paragraph was doing a lot of work.

The Washington Post —faced with the pressing question of why a conservative Vice President might keep chickens — did not call a political scientist, a historian, a campaign strategist, or a member of the Vance family. They called Danny Bowers. Danny Bowers keeps 19 chickens in Utah County, uses they/them pronouns, and keeps an emotional support chicken inside his house.

Danny Bowers is, by the Post’s own account, the nation’s foremost authority on the political subtext of the Vance poultry operation.

And Danny Bowers’ theory —the theory that ‘resonates’ with ‘them’— is that the Vances’ hens and rooster are a secret signal, a chicken-whistle, to the trad wife movement.

The trad wife movement! Which, for Portlanders, is a social media trend in which married women embrace traditional homemaking, cooking, and —yes— even raising chickens. A farming endeavor humans have often undertaken for thousands of years. The Post’s argument, delivered through their non-binary Utah chicken expert, is that JD Vance installed a chicken coop as a covert ideological message to women who bake sourdough and wear aprons.

In short: The hens are a psyop!

Put differently, the Washington Post consulted a they/them chicken keeper in suburban Utah to explain the political motivations of a man who, two years earlier, had complained on camera about the price of eggs. The simpler explanation —that the Vances like eggs and thought it would be fun for the kids— apparently did not resonate with anyone in the Post’s newsroom. That potential explanation did not survive the editorial scissors.

Or, if you prefer, it did not survive the chicken run.

To recap: The second family of the United States installed a donated chicken coop on a 72-acre federal property. The Washington Post responded by contacting codes enforcement, consulting a non-binary chicken keeper in Utah and a panel of “backyard” experts, calculating the per-dozen egg price under multiple amortization models, and warning its readers about salmonella risks for pregnant women (like Usha Vance) — all without ever receiving a single comment from the Vances.

The subheadline wondered why the Vances are taking on this project. Here is my best guess, after connecting all the dots, offered free of charge: they like chickens.

You’re welcome, Washington Post. That’ll be $139 per dozen.

Have a terrific Tuesday! Be sure to land back here tomorrow morning for another stimulating roundup of essential news and caffeinated commentary.

———————————————————