Jordan Guy🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈

@NEWSMAX @CarlHigbie @CPAC That was absolutely bat shit

"We call it Sharia, but the problem is actually Islam." @CarlHigbie moderates a panel discussion on radical Islam at CPAC. @CPAC #CPAC2026

@NathanielSami girl

They are so out of touch with the American people! Thank you Lauren Boebert for calling them out.!!!

Rick Scott: “I’m furious about hardship.” Also Rick Scott’s legacy: running Columbia/HCA before its $1.7 billion Medicare fraud settlement. These people don’t just rewrite history. They mug it in broad daylight. One line that hits especially hard: You don’t get to wrap yourself in working-class pain after making your name at a company tied to one of the biggest Medicare fraud scandals in American history.

Thanks for showing this clip, @KateBolduan. Here’s why this makes me so mad ⬇️ I grew up poor. My family lived in public housing. I watched my parents struggle A LOT just to make ends meet. Because of the Democrat shutdown of DHS, our TSA agents are now feeling the same hardship I watched my parents go through. It makes me FURIOUS. If Democrats (who make $174k) want to block the paychecks of TSA agents (who make ≈ $50k), they shouldn’t get their paychecks either. I’ve tried to pass my No Budget, No Pay bill to make that happen, but Democrats block it every time. @SenRubenGallego even said he couldn’t support it because he has a mortgage to pay….does he think TSA agents don’t have bills too? Yes, I’ve had success in business. I won’t apologize for that and it will NEVER keep me from fighting for people who are being treated unfairly. I donate my entire Senate salary every year and am leading the fight to make members of Congress go without pay if they force that upon federal employees in a shutdown. I don’t know why the Democrats won’t support my bill.

@Kola203 I know this must look like GPT to someone who writes like a gas station Facebook rant, but some of us can actually communicate in English.

@GuyJordan Continuing to let your gay leftist chatGBT do the thinking for you? The US is not strictly an English only speaking country but it is predominantly English speaking and majority of Americans speak ENGLISH. It’s only difficult to understand because you’re stupid

Spanish has been spoken in what is now the United States longer than English. St. Augustine was founded in 1565—over 40 years before Jamestown. The U.S. has never been an English-only country. German, Yiddish, Italian, Polish, and Chinese newspapers were common well into the 20th century. Entire American cities functioned bilingually for generations. Multilingualism isn’t a sign of decline—it’s literally how this country has always worked

What makes Bessent so revealing is that he is plainly not a fool. He has the education, background, and intellectual tools to know that no serious official can promise “absolute security” or “50 years of safety.” So when he says things like that anyway, the most logical conclusion is not ignorance. It is compliance. He is functioning less like an economist and more like a courtier, dressing up political propaganda in the language of sober expertise so it sounds respectable to people who want to be lied to politel

Bessent: "Many people, especially the Democrats, underestimate the will of the American people for short-term volatility for 50 years of safety that we are gonna have on the other side of this"

Scott Bessent says Americans are willing to endure “short-term volatility” for “50 years of safety” and even “absolute security.” That is a very elegant way of saying: “You peasants absorb the pain now, and we’ll reward you later with promises so exaggerated they sound like they were focus-grouped in a villain’s boardroom.” “Short-term volatility” for whom, exactly? For the hedge fund manager? For the donor class? For the people close enough to power to somehow always land on the right side of the trade? Or for regular Americans, who hear phrases like “volatility” and then discover it means higher prices, shakier markets, more uncertainty, and one more lecture about sacrifice from people who rarely do any? And then comes the real comedy: “50 years of safety.” “Absolute security.” That’s not policy language. That’s late-stage imperial fan fiction. No serious government can promise “absolute security.” None. Not in America. Not in Europe. Not in the Middle East. Not on Earth, where humans remain committed to making every problem worse the second a microphone appears. Security is never absolute. It is managed, defended, negotiated, maintained, and constantly threatened. Anyone who uses the word “absolute” in foreign policy is either insulting your intelligence or borrowing confidence from a supply he did not earn. And “50 years of safety”? Based on what? What model? What doctrine? What historical example? What measurable strategy? Because if the answer is basically “trust us,” then this is not leadership. It is mythology with cufflinks. This is how they always do it. Dress up risk as courage. Dress up pain as patriotism. Dress up vagueness as strength. And when people ask for details, accuse them of weakness or disloyalty. No. That’s not how this works. If you want the public to absorb economic pain and geopolitical danger, then explain: what the mission is, what success looks like, how long it lasts, what the real costs are, and why your prediction deserves to be believed. Otherwise “short-term volatility for 50 years of safety” is just another polished slogan from the people who are forever wrong in expensive suits. And “absolute security” is the kind of phrase that should make every adult in the room sit up straighter, because it means somebody is trying to sell certainty where none exists. That’s not realism. That’s propaganda.

It’s really wild to watch them try to lie their way through this

They send a cheap Shahed drone. We blow a million-dollar missile on it. Then oil prices spike, sanctions get eased, and Putin’s people make more money. The 21st century has somehow become a machine for turning bad strategy into expensive irony.

Speaker Mike Johnson, on the floor of the House of Representatives, defending the SAVE Act: "We all know, intuitively, that a lot of illegals are voting in federal elections. But it's not been something that is easily provable. We don't have that number." Read that again. The Speaker of the House admitted — publicly, on the record — that the problem this law is designed to solve is not easily provable and they don't have the number. This is the evidentiary foundation for a law that would impose burdensome new documentation requirements on 21 million American citizens, cost states an estimated $510 million per election cycle, and send election officials to federal prison for paperwork errors. "We know it, intuitively." I'll be honest with you: I support election security. I want every vote to be cast by an eligible citizen. But I also want laws to be based on evidence. If the Speaker himself is admitting they can't prove the problem exists at scale, that's not a security bill. That's something else. What do you call a law that solves an unproven problem by creating a proven one?

@EricLDaugh Huhb? I think he might be a few short of a dozen

🚨 BREAKING: Incredible moment as Nick Shirley reveals his Christian faith ensures he does the right thing "Even when I went on my mission trip, I was still making videos interviewing people about Jesus in Spanish." "I had returned back from a two-year mission for my church and I had zero dollars. So I when I came home back from that trip, I worked for an entire month I power washed houses and my goal was to make ten thousand dollars in cash." "Then I then took that ten thousand dollars in cash and use that to funnel my YouTube channel for the first three months until I could actually make a profit." "More so than anything [my faith] kept me on the straight and narrow and it's kept me on a good path." @nickshirleyy 🙏🏻

Linda McMahon: "We had a whole system of people not repaying their loans, so now we need to get back into the business of collecting the money that is owed to the taxpayers of the federal government"

@jeffreywatters @JoeforHouston God ur beautiful

It is voting time again. Voted for @JoeforHouston today in the City of Houston District C Special Election.

@jeffreywatters God you are so beautiful

Finally feeling well enough to get outside

@_domtologist Fuck ur so Damm beautiful

haircut is the first thing i’m getting back in NYC

@jeffreywatters Handsome

Now 0-4 watching Rockets home games this season

@_domtologist Ur so Damm sexy

I’ve been eating goooood i don’t know if you can tell😇

in my twink chamber era

Repeal permeant appointment act of 1929

@ShawnOnTheRight Repeal permanent a portion act of 1929, it is literally destroying the structure of our government that the founders intended.

Repeal the 17th Amendment. The founders intended for the House to represent the people, and the Senate to represent the interest of the States. Without State representation, powers were given away to the Federal Government. That’s how we got here.

@RandPaul Kentucky ratified the amendment that would fix Congress in 1792. Congress has been hoping you wouldn’t notice for 232 years.

@RandPaul Article the First” was amendment NUMBER ONE. Before free speech. Before arms. Before anything. The very first thing the Founders wanted to fix after ratification was House size. If that’s not a signal about priorities, what is?

As yet another preemptive war is begun in the Middle East, John Quincy Adam’s words of wisdom still ring true: “Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be.” Like most Americans I have sympathy for the plight of the Iranian people and all subjected people around the globe, from North Korea to Tibet. But as Adam’s wrote, America:  “goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.” The Constitution conferred the power to declare or initiate war to Congress for a reason, to make war less likely.   Madison wrote that “the Executive Branch is the branch most prone to war, therefore, the Constitution, with studied care, delegated the war power to the legislature.” As with all war, my first and purest instinct is wish Americans soldiers safety and success in their mission.   But my oath of office is to the Constitution, so with studied care, I must oppose another Presidential war.

@RandPaul Kentucky ratified the amendment that would fix Congress in 1792. Congress has been hoping you wouldn’t notice for 232 years.