Tristan

"Had to be me. Someone else might have gotten it wrong."

Views expressed here are my own

[Tristan @Tpayne80]

@xcaliz0rz God I love people who mod lol

[Tristan @Tpayne80]

Shit like this is why outdated things are sometimes still worth it

[Jon Favreau @jonfavs]

Anthropic CEO worries we're 6-12 months away from a swarm of AI agents capable of taking over the ENTIRE internet

Calls for immediate, global 1-2 year slowdown in AI development

Time to trust the people building the technology over the people merely investing in it

[Eric Michael Garcia @EricMGarcia]

Amid all the dooming about AI, reminder that the Senate passed Laurel Lee and AOC's DEFIANCE Act, which would allow victims of nonconsensual DEEPFAKE AI porn to file civil suits and Luna cosponsored, by unanimous consent. But Jim Jordan refuses to have a hearing on it.

[Tristan @Tpayne80]

Like bro...what the fuck man

[Kyle Griffin @kylegriffin1]

Trump dismissed concerns from families of service members about the grim conditions aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln.

Asked whether the deployments have gone on for too long and whether he's worried about troops' mental health, Trump said: "No. No. No — not nearly long enough."

[Jason, @jasonc_nc]

The Endangered Species Act was passed in 1973. The median Baby Boomer was 18. It was passed from pressure by Silent Gen voters, by Geatest Gen legislators.

The ~doubling of the National Parks system occurred in the 60-70s. Again, same situation.

The Baby Boomers keep being credited for things they ~enjoyed~ the benefits of. Not things they caused to occur. Or paid for.

The defining legacy of their control of Congress has been a chronic underproduction of housing, mass financialization, an inexorable rise in inequality, and the most dysfunctional legislative sessions in American history.

[Thomas Massie @RepThomasMassie]

I’ll soon be sponsoring a bill to withhold federal money from municipalities and police departments that deploy Flock (and other style) cameras to surveil law abiding citizens.

[Tristan @Tpayne80]

Part of the reason you can't take the GOP seriously at all

[Thomas Massie @RepThomasMassie]

The House will pass a $12 billion bailout for farmers suffering from high fuel & fertilizer prices caused by the Iran War, expensive equipment & parts caused by tariffs, and lower sales prices for commodities due to trade disputes with China.

But the GOP is fighting communism!

[Tristan @Tpayne80]

@Politics1com This is so funny, he votes what 90% of the time with the Dems? Just shows how dumb politics can be

[Tristan @Tpayne80]

@UrinatingTree Where was this in the other 3 game lol

[Tristan @Tpayne80]

@S1apSh0es Well when you spend the last what 25 years kicking cans down the road you kinda stop doing cool things lol

[S1apSh0es @S1apSh0es]

Baelor’s post Trial of Seven ct scan.

[Jeff Gluck @jeff_gluck]

I keep comparing today’s F1 decisions to mid-2000s NASCAR decisions. NASCAR fans know how that went. Now here’s another for F1:

[Tristan @Tpayne80]

@alaskalandmine Good for AK bad for the wallet lol

[Joe @electionsjoe]

ALL STATES SHOULD HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS

[Blake Allen @Blake_Allen13]

Just like I called out Chuy Garcia’s reprehensible insider dealing to set up his CoS to be his replacement I am going to call this out too. It’s naked political corruption designed to prevent voters from making a choice on who will represent them. This is shameful

[space cadet 🇪🇺🌐🇩🇪 @actsmaniac]

I have a 1960s mindset.

1. Defeat the communists

2. Build more houses

3. Build more nuclear powerplants

[Tristan @Tpayne80]

@tencor_7144 What'd I do to have a governor like Phil Scott here in ny

[Tristan @Tpayne80]

@JaguarGator9NFL Working with the public and reading the internet sometimes really makes me wonder how we got this far lol

[Thomas Massie @RepThomasMassie]

Can you, the people, “vote your way out of this?”

Honestly, not if you get your news from these folks.

The swamp has tricks for deceiving the public, and most even work on congressmen. Here’s an example of how Laura and Greg played along as happy tools of the swamp.

Please ask yourself why your own congressman has never talked about this. He either hasn’t gotten this far in the game (80% chance), or he likes the way the swamp obscures what’s going on (10% chance), or he dislikes the system but the price he’d pay for telling you is too high (10% chance). If a congressman sees this post and wants to debate me, I accept!

The House has rules we adopt at the beginning of each Congress. Honestly we should just use those - some go all the way back to Thomas Jefferson. Some are like Robert’s Rules of Order which branched from House rules a century ago. But we have a rules committee that modifies the rules every week. I served on the rules committee for two years. When I was on the committee, I refused to vote for rules changes if the purpose was to mislead or obscure. Every week, the rules committee bends the rules to suit the Speaker, but you can’t place the blame just on the committee or the Speaker. Every rules change must be approved by the whole House with a majority vote.

Rank and file congressmen are told to vote for these rules modifications each week for the sake of party loyalty because the rules are temporarily modified by the majority to keep the minority from using the permanent rules against us. This is partly true, so most congressmen never question beyond this.

Typically, every week the rules committee meets before other committees and writes a rules package to protect bills that will come to the floor that week. Then the whole house votes on this rules package early in the week before significant legislation comes to the floor. The vote is typically on party lines. Sometimes a block of congressmen in the majority will take the rules package hostage and withhold their vote to get something else that has nothing to do with the rules. I’m not a big fan of this, but after 13 years, my hands aren’t completely clean of this tactic.

The high-road position that I try to maintain is that if the rules package is bad, you shouldn’t vote for the rules package, and in general you shouldn’t withhold your vote from a rules package if there’s nothing wrong with the rules package… even if you disagree with the policy that is enabled to come to the floor by the rules package.

There are more details, but that’s all you need to know to understand what I’m going to explain next.

This week the Speaker wanted to do two things outside of our base rules, so he put those inside of the rules package that also had the rules for bringing bills like the popular SAVE Act to the floor, knowing members would be afraid to vote against something associated with SAVE. THIS IS INTENTIONAL.

The Speaker wanted to circumvent the National Emergencies Act of 1976 to avoid voting on tariffs and he wanted to turn off the ban on bringing a spending bill to the floor the same day it’s introduced.

The first rules package that came to the floor this week failed because myself and other republicans objected to it. The rules committee met again, wrote a new rules package without the tariff-trick, and we voted on the second rules package. I voted no but internet goons, like clockwork, characterized this as a vote against the SAVE Act.

The swamp used that second rules package to give them authority to pass a bill before anyone could read it. They hid that authority inside the rule for the SAVE act because they knew people like Laura and Greg would help them disparage anyone who didn’t go along.

If you fell for Laura and Greg’s slop you were cheering for the Pelosi doctrine that we should pass bills to see what’s in them. If the rules package had failed, the rules committee would have written a better one and SAVE Act would have still come to the floor.

[Tristan @Tpayne80]

@tencor_7144 State politics are so interesting. They control 90% of the government you interact with in your day to day and yet most bearly know their local state senator or assembly/house member is.