đ¨This morning we reached the required 218 signatures on my discharge petition for Epstein Files Transparency Act II !
Iâm working closely with @RepJayapal, @RepTeresaLF and @RepRoKhanna to get this to the floor for a vote soon.
Thomas Massie just said the quiet part out loud.
Voting in the midterms will only get you âdifferent clowns.â
âTheyâre all clowns.â
Then, he revealed how to actually make a difference from firsthand experience.
Even Democratic Rep. Chellie Pingree had to admit:
âThatâs about as good a metaphor as Iâve ever heard.â
This is what he said:
âPeople talk about how you get better people in Washington.â
âHow do we replace those clowns?â
âHow do we get better clowns?â
âThis November, youâre going to get different clowns.â
âSpend more of your energy getting the clowns to get in the clown car you want.â
âInstead of trying to get a different clown, just accept theyâre clowns.â
âAnd then treat them like cattle.â
âMake sure they feel the electric fence.â
âThen you wonât even have to turn the fence on someday.â
@RepThomasMassie@chelliepingree
280 community notes from just ONE person. Just incredible. Every day people wake up and just fictionalize narratives about me. I work for Russia, I work for the Vatican, I work for Israel, Iâm funded by Qatar, Iâm getting a divorce, Iâm a lesbian, I was in love with Charlie, I secretly hated Charlie, I have a mansion that houses my illegal 8 nannies, my husband is Mi6, Iâm reading ads for the Mossad, Iâm hiding money in secret LLCs for fear of bankruptcy. I plan to flee to Russia.
Iâm Timeâs Most Vile Person of the year.
Like what actually is there left to make up about my life. Where do we go from here? I want you guys to think carefully about this while Iâm on maternity leave because I think Iâve made it clear that I AM NOT LETTING THE DEEP STATE, PUBLIC ASSASINATION OF CHARLES JAMES KIRK GO. He was an innocent young man who didnât deserve the betrayal and death sentence he received.
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
Nidal Hasan murdered 13 Americans at Fort Hood, including 12 active-duty soldiers, and wounded 32 others. They deserve to be remembered before we spend a single word talking about the man who killed them.
I will not be tuning in to watch his execution.
I will spend that time remembering the soldiers, their families, and the people whose lives were changed forever that day.
Let me explain something about @RealCandaceO and @MrsErikaKirk that I think a LOT of people, particularly the men, attacking Candace will NEVER fully understand.
Going back and looking at Candaceâs original tweets about Erika. Look at how she spoke about her. Candace didnât start out wanting war with this woman. There was a time when she was approaching this situation with a very different set of feelings.
So what changed?
4 AND A HALF HOURS.
Imagine being a woman already grieving, already searching for answers, already carrying the weight of trying to make sense of something that shattered your world. Then imagine being given the opportunity to sit across from the ONE person you believe might finally help you put the pieces together. The woman that told the President, âI know EVERYTHINGââŚ.
For a moment, imagine the hope. Maybe THIS is where I finally get answers. Maybe THIS is where I can finally understand. Maybe THIS is where I can find some closure and begin to put this nightmare to rest.
And then you walk away knowing that the person who sat across from you lied to your face for FOUR AND A HALF HOURS. Lied to your face as if you were nothing or nobody. Like you were just another dumb journalist looking to publish any form of of slop fed to you, and not the Friend of Charlie who loved him deeply and was undeniably loyal to him.
Do yâall understand what that does to a woman?
Itâs not just disagreement. Itâs not just a difference of opinion. Itâs the feeling of having your trust, your hope, and your vulnerability, entrusted to someone while youâre already incredibly fragile and vulnerable, handled in the most disrespectful, con artist way, by someone you believe deliberately deceived you when you were looking for answers.
I noticed something else: Candace went off air for several days after that meeting. I canât tell you exactly what was happening behind the scenes, but the timing made me pay attention. That conversation appeared to affect her in a way that went beyond another episode or another news cycle.
And WOMEN? We understand why that matters.
We understand what it feels like to walk into a conversation hoping for honesty and walk away questioning everything you were just told. We understand how the hurt changes when you believe someone looked you directly in your eyes and chose to deceive you anyway.
So when Candace came back with a different energy and said she wanted WAR with all of them, I understood why the shift mattered.
Because sometimes, the anger you see is not where the story began. Sometimes, it comes AFTER the hope is gone.
You donât have to agree with every conclusion Candace reaches to understand that distinction. But stop acting like a womanâs change in posture must be inexplicable simply because you donât understand what that kind of perceived betrayal feels like.
She walked into that meeting hoping for closure and answers. She walked away believing she had been lied to.
And THAT, ladies, is a very different starting point for a war.
Yâall can argue about Candace all day. But women who have lived through betrayal know exactly why the story doesnât begin with the moment she got angry. It begins with the moment the trust broke.
So yes, she wants war, with ALL of them!
TPUSA brands itself as a champion of free speech. So why was a man escorted out by police after questioning Ben Shapiro on the genocide in Gaza?
Shapiroâs response? âShut the fuck up.â
Charlie Kirk invited students to the mic to debate. Now that he's gone, someone challenges the narrative and gets a police escort out of the event.
Apparently, free speech is sacredâuntil someone says something they donât want to hear.
If you were mad about gas prices under Biden and complained constantly but youâre silent now, you are a fool.
Youâre in a cult and youâre dishonest.
Thomas Massie is a literal genius with a masters in mechanical engineering from MIT, built his own house, grows his own food, and has a bunch of guns.
In a zombie apocalypse, Iâm picking Massie 100 times out of 100. đŤĄđşđ¸
âConservativesâ want toâŚ
-Cut spending
-Follow the Constitution
-Stop endless wars
-Stop foreign aid
-Stop funding illegals
-Hold corrupt leaders accountable
Until they hold all 3 branches of government. Then itâs just about renaming bodies of water.
Almost everyone is against Flock cameras and the AI surveillance state, right now.
But if we don't abolish them soon, in a few years most people won't care about them anymore.
A generation later, they'll think we'd have total chaos without them.
The time to end them is now.
Hard to take @nickshirleyy seriously until he starts calling out Johnson, Thune, and Trump for funding the daycare fraud in every Omnibus and CR bill with no guardrails.
Top 3 dumbest excuses people make when defending mass surveillance and Flock cameras:
1) "You have no expectation of privacy in public."
Except long term tracking isn't just "being seen" - it's an imposed, automated dragnet and stalking. Courts recognize the "mosaic theory": individual public moments, when stitched together 24/7, reveal your doctor visits, political rallies, and entire daily life without your consent or a warrant. It's not the same as someone watching you pass by.
2) "Your phone spies on you already."
This is pure defeatism that ignores personal agency. You can buy a Faraday bag, De-Google your phone, no have one at all, or choose to leave it at home entirely - you have consumer choice. You canât opt out, alter, or opt out of a state monitored network of automated license plate readers scanning every public road.
3) "If your kid was abducted, youâd want one."
When you resort to absurd emotional traps and logical fallacies (Appeal to Emotion, False Dilemma, Faulty Generalization), it's a confession you can't defend the tech on its merits. Police have solved crimes for generations without violating constitutional rights, and extreme edge cases don't justify permanent dragnet surveillance of the entire population.
This woman received a summons to appear in court for theft based on flock camera evidence that she was stealing packages. The problem for law enforcement is that she had her own cameras set up, which absolutely proved that it wasnât her. The officer refused to show her the evidence at her door because he said that she was arguing with him and not being forthright. When you look at the camera footage, it is two totally different people. He absolutely was refusing to cooperate with her. He was convinced that the camera footage showed her, even though she had camera footage to prove that it wasnât. This is the danger of these cameras. Law enforcement in some cases is using and abusing them .
Ultimately, she was able to prove her innocence using her own camera footage, but what if she didnât have her own cameras set up?