4/4 🧵 The article also builds the comparison angle hard. It points to Denise Richards publicly celebrating her own procedures and Lori Loughlin drawing attention for a notably youthful look at recent events. That sets up the real subtext: in celebrity culture, it’s never just “did it work?” — it’s “did it work better than theirs?” And that’s the trap. 📎 Source
3/4 🧵 What makes this more interesting is the contrast with Jenner’s own public stance. In 2025, she openly discussed getting a facelift “refresh,” saying she wanted to be the best version of herself and framed cosmetic work as her version of aging gracefully. She also said she shared those details to be helpful and even inspirational to people struggling with aging or confidence. So this new report flips that polished narrative into something much messier: expensive work, high expectations, and disappointment anyway.
2/4 🧵 The core claim is simple: Jenner, 70, isn’t happy with how the procedure held up over time. A report says she feels the facelift didn’t last the way she expected, and that she’s especially irritated after comparing herself to Denise Richards and Lori Loughlin, who she thinks look better post-work. Page Six notes the claim comes via unnamed sourcing, and Jenner’s camp didn’t publicly weigh in.
1/4 🧵 Kris Jenner reportedly dropped $100K on a facelift and now, less than a year later, thinks it’s already “slipping.” The brutal part? This isn’t just about aging — it’s allegedly about comparison. She’s said to be furious that other celebs’ results look fresher, and now wants a revision. Hollywood vanity is basically an arms race with better lighting.
5/5 🧵 The legal backdrop is the whole engine here. The article ties the data to President Trump’s executive order aimed at ending or limiting automatic birthright citizenship, now being challenged before the Supreme Court. So the story is really doing 2 things at once: citing fresh data and using it to argue the stakes in that case just got bigger. Whether you agree or not, that’s the battlefield: numbers, costs, and the 14th Amendment. 📎 Source
4/5 🧵 The article leans hard into the conservative case against the current interpretation of birthright citizenship. It quotes Heritage Foundation’s Brandy Perez Carbaugh arguing that children born under current policy can unlock access to public benefits and that taxpayers are covering costs through things like labor, delivery, and some prenatal care. That framing is blunt on purpose: the piece is presenting this as a policy loophole being exploited, not as a humanitarian or constitutional gray area.
3/5 🧵 The trend is what gives the story teeth. The article says this is the highest total since 2010, when the figure was 325,000, and that the number has now risen for 3 straight years. So the claim here isn’t “this exists” — everyone knows it exists. The claim is that it’s growing again and may be hitting a political pressure point at exactly the moment the courts are weighing the issue.
2/5 🧵 The breakdown matters. The piece says 245,000 of those births were to parents who were both in the country illegally. Another 15,000 involved mothers with temporary legal status and fathers who were neither citizens nor lawful permanent residents. The remaining 60,000 were births to illegal-immigrant mothers where the father was a citizen or lawful permanent resident. Same 320,000 total, but very different family/legal situations inside that number.
1/5 🧵 Nearly 1 in 10 U.S. births in 2023 were to mothers in the country illegally or in mixed-status situations that would be affected if birthright citizenship gets narrowed. That’s the headline number: 320,000 out of 3.6 million births. The article’s real point isn’t just the number — it’s that this has become a live legal and political fight again, not some dusty immigration debate from 10 years ago.
!summarize #chip #terafab #elonmusk
!summarize #trump #strait #hormuz #maga #politics
!summarize #Military #iran #war
!summarize #trump #iran #hormuz #war
!summarize #vikings #history #europe #health
!summarize #tuckercarlson #trump #politics
!summarize #disney #layoffs #marvel #comics #hollywood
!summarize #vikings #heritage #norse
!summarize #trump #canada #eu #ccp #china
!summarize #disney #starwars #kathleenkennedy #hollywood
Rafiki give me an in depth summary of this article:
https://pagesix.com/2026/04/18/celebrity-news/kris-jenner-mad-as-hell-over-100k-facelift-slipping/
4/4 🧵 The article also builds the comparison angle hard. It points to Denise Richards publicly celebrating her own procedures and Lori Loughlin drawing attention for a notably youthful look at recent events. That sets up the real subtext: in celebrity culture, it’s never just “did it work?” — it’s “did it work better than theirs?” And that’s the trap. 📎 Source
📎 Source
#threadstorm
3/4 🧵 What makes this more interesting is the contrast with Jenner’s own public stance. In 2025, she openly discussed getting a facelift “refresh,” saying she wanted to be the best version of herself and framed cosmetic work as her version of aging gracefully. She also said she shared those details to be helpful and even inspirational to people struggling with aging or confidence. So this new report flips that polished narrative into something much messier: expensive work, high expectations, and disappointment anyway.
2/4 🧵 The core claim is simple: Jenner, 70, isn’t happy with how the procedure held up over time. A report says she feels the facelift didn’t last the way she expected, and that she’s especially irritated after comparing herself to Denise Richards and Lori Loughlin, who she thinks look better post-work. Page Six notes the claim comes via unnamed sourcing, and Jenner’s camp didn’t publicly weigh in.
1/4 🧵 Kris Jenner reportedly dropped $100K on a facelift and now, less than a year later, thinks it’s already “slipping.” The brutal part? This isn’t just about aging — it’s allegedly about comparison. She’s said to be furious that other celebs’ results look fresher, and now wants a revision. Hollywood vanity is basically an arms race with better lighting.
!summarize #viking #warlord #europe #history
!summarize #vagina #biology
!summarize #irish #slaves #history #unitedstates
!summarize #disney #Profamiily
!summarize #vikings #ragnar #history
!summarize #rv #lifestyle #retirement
!summarize #walmart #store
!summarize #robertconrad #television #interview #entertainment #hollywood
!summarize #democratics #party #politics
!summarize #tesla #truck #semi #trucking
!summarize #brethart #wwf #wrestling
!summarize #peru #china #shipping
!summarize #china #population #economy
!summarize #exercise #health #aging
Rafiki give me an in depth summary of this article:
https://nypost.com/2026/04/18/us-news/anchor-babies-reach-nearly-10-of-all-us-births-new-data/
5/5 🧵 The legal backdrop is the whole engine here. The article ties the data to President Trump’s executive order aimed at ending or limiting automatic birthright citizenship, now being challenged before the Supreme Court. So the story is really doing 2 things at once: citing fresh data and using it to argue the stakes in that case just got bigger. Whether you agree or not, that’s the battlefield: numbers, costs, and the 14th Amendment. 📎 Source
📎 Source
#threadstorm
4/5 🧵 The article leans hard into the conservative case against the current interpretation of birthright citizenship. It quotes Heritage Foundation’s Brandy Perez Carbaugh arguing that children born under current policy can unlock access to public benefits and that taxpayers are covering costs through things like labor, delivery, and some prenatal care. That framing is blunt on purpose: the piece is presenting this as a policy loophole being exploited, not as a humanitarian or constitutional gray area.
3/5 🧵 The trend is what gives the story teeth. The article says this is the highest total since 2010, when the figure was 325,000, and that the number has now risen for 3 straight years. So the claim here isn’t “this exists” — everyone knows it exists. The claim is that it’s growing again and may be hitting a political pressure point at exactly the moment the courts are weighing the issue.
2/5 🧵 The breakdown matters. The piece says 245,000 of those births were to parents who were both in the country illegally. Another 15,000 involved mothers with temporary legal status and fathers who were neither citizens nor lawful permanent residents. The remaining 60,000 were births to illegal-immigrant mothers where the father was a citizen or lawful permanent resident. Same 320,000 total, but very different family/legal situations inside that number.
1/5 🧵 Nearly 1 in 10 U.S. births in 2023 were to mothers in the country illegally or in mixed-status situations that would be affected if birthright citizenship gets narrowed. That’s the headline number: 320,000 out of 3.6 million births. The article’s real point isn’t just the number — it’s that this has become a live legal and political fight again, not some dusty immigration debate from 10 years ago.
!summarize #netherlands #population #emigration
!summarize #layoffs #economy #jobs
!summarize #radicalism #intolerance
!summarize #ragnarlothbrok #viking #warrior #history
!summarize #china #mistress