patrick.net

Maga_Chaos_Monkey says

I thought it was already funded in the Big Beautiful Bill?

This is for the year after, starting in September.

FortWayneHatesRealtors says

Knowing twitter/X this probably fake news or exaggerated. There is a reason Massie makes videos explaining his votes, doesn't help though with people who just trust everything they see on X.

It's not. It really is that simple. Just like Massie didn't understand there are multiple laws allowing the seizure of Ghost Tankers and the difference between appropriations and seizure-connected assets.

Or claiming Trump needs the War Powers act to enforce already Congress-approved authority and laws about seizing false flag tankers or arresting Narcoterrorists (inc. using the military to do so).

Or blaming Trump for complying with other laws requiring that victim identifying information be blocked out.

Or tying up every lawyer not actively at trial going through a dead Perv's legal documents to, as Congress ordered, conceal every possible identification marker of his victims. Instead of starting new prosecutions of Democrats.

No it's not that simple, you want to believe it, but its not true.

He does explain his votes, feel free to read if you care. If you don't that's your choice...

https://x.com/RepThomasMassie

https://x.com/RepThomasMassie/status/2014753767430688884

Patrick says

He also voted with the Democrats to defund ICE, the #1 issue with Republicans (not Libertarians) is deport, deport, deport.

In Massie's weird reading of the Constitution, the explicit authority given to the Federal Government to regulate immigrants doesn't exist.

You keep ignoring this because you for whatever reason decided to trust some clickbait title. He explained it clearly, the bill involved other things, it wasn't a clean bill. @TheAntiPanicanLearingCenter

Only 88% of Massie's donations are from outside Kentucky, not 90%! DEBOOONKED!

Patrick says

Where's Massie's bill?

FortWayneHatesRealtors says

You keep ignoring this because you for whatever reason decided to trust some clickbait title. He explained it clearly, the bill involved other things, it wasn't a clean bill. TheAntiPanicanLearingCenter

No clean bill will pass until the Senate removes the fillibuster.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/24/us/democrats-congress-reaction.html

Clean Bills are like saying "I want a 5'6" 36D-24-34 25-year old redhead"

Establishment GOP/RINOS and Libertarians have the same impact from different sides. One doesn't want to do anything, the other demands absolute pristine perfection or will actually oppose.

A reminder that Massie cleared Biden's 2023 Spending Blowout from his Committee, the last big spending bill before Trump's 2nd Administration.

Massie's job to to stop Trump with "Libertarian Fiscal Princuhpuls" perspective.

I’m not supporting that abomination of the bill to fund child sacrifices. And no excuses ok that.

"Carrying a firearm is not a death sentence, it's a constitutionally protected God-given right, and if you don't understand this you have no business in law enforcement or government." -- Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY)

"
This has nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment. You have every right to keep and bear arms but the decision to bear arms in public means if you commit a crime while in possession of said firearm the penalty is elevated and your conduct becomes subject to a second set of standards in that by going armed you publicly demonstrate your capacity to use deadly force. This is a serious personal decision -- it is one you have every right to make but you are responsible for the consequences. Further and in all cases intent matters; Minnesota State Law requires a CWP holder to carry identification while in possession of said weapon in public and this individual deliberately did not do so. That speaks directly to his intent to commit an unlawful act while armed.

The standard for getting shot by law enforcement is that you present to them a reasonable belief (on their part, in the instant of the circumstances, not on a frame-by-frame slowed video analysis afterward) that you will inflict upon any of them or any other person in the area great bodily harm or death. If that standard is met they are authorized to terminate said threat by whatever means are available and necessary. Whether that standard has been met is the only issue on the table here and it is not entirely clear from what I've seen thus far which way that decision does or should fall. But what is very clear and in fact unquestioned is that the individual who was shot decided of his own free will to interfere with an arrest as a deliberate act while carrying a firearm in public and that act of interference is clearly shown and without reasonable question as to whether it was committed.

In every case actively interfering with an arrest by law enforcement is a felony and makes you an accessory to the original crime the person sought committed originally. If you go to a protest and exercise your First Amendment right to speak while armed there is not only no problem you are entirely within your rights. After all some random thug might****ault you unprovoked and you have the right to exercise self-defense in that instance.
"

https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=254835