My take is that over the long run, libertarian ideals -- i.e., actual liberty -- will create a healthy, prosperous, and free society.
But right now, we're at the end of a thousand+ years of corruption, interrupted only partially and temporarily by the American Revolution, and especially since 1913 we've been turned into a sick, corrupted, impoverished and bankrupted society that the founders would weep for, if they could be brought back to view it.
Trump is doing what is necessary to right the ship. That ISN'T always what will be right for the long run -- pounding Iran into dust, for example -- but it HAS to be done (in this case) if we're going to avoid dealing with a nuclear-armed terrorist organization sworn to take over the world, and with "Death to America" as its best-known slogan.
I agree with much of what Kung Fu describes, but ultimately a balanced budget, less corporatism, and other libertarian goals are what I'm rooting for.
The last "libertarian" worth their salt was Ron Paul. Everybody else under the banner of "libertarian" is a lukewarm poser, with unrealistic utopian dreams that can't pick a lane. They hurt this country more than help with their wishy-washy nonsense.
If you can't be decisive & you're going to waver and play games, you're NOT MAGA.
I'm not sure I'd call Ron Paul a libertarian as much as I'd say he's a Constitutionalist. I was a supporter of his in 2008 and 2012. I went to our state convention in 2008, and afterward we walked around outside the convention center chanting "Ron Paul Revolution, legalize the constitution!" The John McCain delegates were dicks. Good times.
Talked the talk...from a wheelchair, as it were. Completely impractical views on foreign policy. I thought his son, Rand, was going to be better in that department, but it hasn't worked out that way.
Voluntaryism is a political philosophy asserting that all forms of human association should be voluntary and consensual, rejecting the use of force or coercion by the state. Proponents argue that the state is inherently illegitimate because it funds itself through taxation, which they view as theft, and that all services (including law and security) should be provided by the free market.
Voluntaryism traces its modern roots to 19th-century thinkers like Lysander Spooner and Benjamin Tucker, but it gained significant traction in the 20th century through Murray Rothbard and the anarcho-capitalist movement. While often used interchangeably with anarcho-capitalism, voluntaryism is technically the broader ethical framework (the "why") that argues all interactions must be consensual, whereas anarcho-capitalism is a specific economic model (the "how") proposing private markets for law and defense.
Key distinctions include:
Scope: Voluntaryism applies the non-aggression principle to all human interaction, not just economics.
Strategy: Some voluntaryists focus on cultural change and "exit" strategies (opting out of state systems) rather than direct political revolution.
Overlap: Most voluntaryists are anarcho-capitalists, but not all anarcho-capitalists strictly adhere to the voluntaryist label if they support transitional state measures.
My hope (not that I believe it's likely to happen) is that MAGA and the US Constitution's pro-freedom accomplishments will, THIS time, lead the nation to gradually replace ALL government force against citizens with consensual, market alternatives.
Any entrenched, "legitimized" (i.e.; government) coercive structure will grow (Example: the past 250 years in the United States) into a tyranny of -- eventually -- epic proportions.
Thanks for acknowledging this, so I wont drag this discussion any further. We will get to see, hoefully soon enough, how everything ends up working out. This is a whole new era in our civilization and we will be learning the real way of the world, so to speak - truths we can't even imagine right now, but will become clear.
I would be delighted if it turns out to be any kind of viable utopia, but happy with whatever system that gives us freedom from the Satanic ideas for atleast another 2000 years.
I agree. There's plenty of room for improvement and if we can't have perfection (and we probably can't), "freedom from the Satanic ideas for at least another 2000 years" would be a blessing.
I read a theory once, though I’m not sure I buy it, that the whole point of the “libertarian party” was to split the more fiscally conservative republicans out of the mainstream party and get them focused on arguing among themselves.
They’re useless politically, in multiple ways, but their literature and thought provocations are good. If nothing else, they’ve done a wonderful job rediscovering and disseminating truths about money.
What the reconciliation/role should be between MAGA/republicanism/conservatism and libertarianism? Couldn’t tell you.
Bogus theory. I joined the LP in 1972 and was involved in the Hospers campaign. It was a sincere attempt to put forward principles of capitalism and non-globalism, most effectively promoted by the novelist, Ayn Rand. But it quickly got overtaken by the anarcho-capitalists, led by Murray Rothbard. Rothbard was a decent economist, but his theory of government was---frankly---nuts. The only operational example of his principles in action was the Mafia. Eventually, the conservative element tired of the internecine nonsense with the anarcho-capitalists and drifted away, leaving the Anarchs to squabble over the spoils among themselves. I saw this big time in a corruption episode I had to investigate in the 1990s, from which I walked away from the Party as it had become a useless psycho-drama.
And they degenerated into "all talk and no action." At no time did the Party ever take an announced or active role in the protection of the 2nd Amendment (such as by the NRA, Gun Owners of America, and other activist organizations). It was like the issue didn't exist, or was beneath libertarian notice. I took note of that, being a gun owner.
But, yes, they are useless politically...because they are useless in most other ways. They like to preach, but they don't much like to DO anything. MAGA needs to move along with the principles of the Founding Fathers, the Constitution, the free market, and popular Christianity.
It was a sincere attempt to put forward principles of capitalism and non-globalism, most effectively promoted by the novelist, Ayn Rand. But it quickly got overtaken by the anarcho-capitalists, led by Murray Rothbard.
No doubt the ground game is typically earnest. The theory was posited at the Rand/Rothbard level and above. Tactical ideology being a bait and switch away from unity and action.
That theory may just be because of Rand, Rothbard, Block, and several others being of a certain persuasion. Who knows these days?
Big L vs little l. The Party vs the principle. Massie is as much of a libertarian as Stalin was in real terms, but was really good at rhetoric like all politicians are.
America First in pure form would reconcile every honest person.
Rich people are still sending poor people to wars they didn't start and harassing hard working people at home.
Far too much corruption and carcinogenic-levels of idealism in the Libertarian party.
But I agree, those general principals greatly align with how this country was founded. Restricted government, personal freedoms, and GENUINE liberty.
Unfortunately, it became apparent during the Biden-admin tyranny that there are plenty of conservatives (sadly, there's some here on GAW) that want to shrug off the current authoritarian nature of the U.S./State governments so that they can implement their own brand of authoritarianism.
I don't ever see myself belonging to a political party (unless it's one I start :) ), but the very general principals of libertarianism / classical liberalism will always appeal to me.
Libertarians, and some with other outlooks, prefer the unattainable perfect over the attainable good. In conscience? OK a vote here and there to keep the goal before the public. But NOT to sabotage the good for the perfect, like cutting off one's nose to spite one's face, but it ends up being our faces that get spited by the same old, same old ineffective tactics.
The Libertarian Party has gone the exact same way that the Tea Party went and Ross Perot's Reform Party went.
They got infiltrated and sabotaged from the inside.
Bob Barr was the start of the infiltration.
1971 - David Nolan and others founded the Libertarian Party when Nixon reneged on the gold standard. Nixon did the dirty (and illegal and unconstitutional) deed on August 15, 1971. The Libertarian Party was officially created 4 months later, on December 11, 1971.
That was the reason the party was founded. They were a group of Republicans who realized that the BUSH CLAN of the Republican Party was NOT going to stick to constitutional principles. Richard Nixon was HAND PICKED for the Republican party by Prescott Bush, George HW Bush's daddy. BTW, Prescott Bush's daddy was Samuel Bush, who worked directly for Frank Rockefeller, brother of John D. Rockefeller.
These Republicans were heavily influenced by Leo Strauss of the Chicago School (a lot of them went to school there). They were indoctrinated into the Neocon philosophy -- a branch of communist ideology. They took over the Republican Party, and the Republicans who were opposed to this movement within the party decided to try an alternate option by creating a new political party.
1988 -- Ron Paul ran for president for the Libertarian Party. Good man. Principled. Known as "Doctor No" in Congress, first because he was a medical doctor, and second because he stood on principle that he would honor his Oath of Office to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. He voted "no" on more legislation than anyone in Congress, because MOST legislation proposed by Congress is ... UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
These neocons wanted nothing but power and influence so they could get rich and control the masses -- same exact philosophy as the Democrats, who are closet communists, which have the exact same goal (but are more brutal about it).
ALL of these people -- BOTH SIDES -- systematically IGNORE THE CONSTITUTION, thus violating their oaths of office.
1996, 2000 -- Harry Browne ran for president for the Libertarian Party. He was even better than Ron Paul, in terms of his ideas and brilliance. He seemed to be gaining momentum for the party, at least compared to its weak history in politics. He died in 2006, and that was the Big Shift.
2006 -- Bob Barr infiltrated the Libertarian Party and basically destroyed it from within.
Interesting. I left the LP in the 1990s, viewing it as a pigpen in which the Rothbardians wallowed. I was unaware of any Bob Barr influence, but I wasn't paying attention by then, as the LP was off in the corner, playing by itself.
Is it possible in a few sentences to summarize what Bob Barr's influence led to?
I knew enough about Barr to know he was no libertarian, so I wondered what was up.
He bashed Ron Paul a lot, which was not helpful to the LP membership
He always had a tough stance of locking people up for drug use (I think he was a fed prosecutor doing that before getting to Congress). LP members generally don't like that idea
In Congress, he voted for the Patriot Act -- TWICE. Not a good look, considering how intrusive and unconstitutional that was
He supported some foreign military intervention (not defensive wars, but "we gotta help out" type of stuff)
He advocated for a new, national sales tax
He wanted to do something about "global climate change" (Al Gore praised him for this)
All I really remember was that whatever he was saying had nothing to do with the Non-Aggression Principle or really much of anything to do with libertarian philosophy.
He was a grifter. Could not become President as a Republican, so used the Libertarian Party as a platform. Due to high name recognition, he made some ground ... but he was never a libertarian, and nobody liked him.
The LP seemed to just fade away after that. So, I credit him with it, but there was probably more to it than just him.
Oh my gosh. Kind of like the polar opposite of the Rothbardians from a policy standpoint. (They were also grifters.) From one distasteful extreme to the other. Glad I wasn't there to see it. Thanks for filling in that gap.
Nothing in this world is perfect. Only Jesus Christ was perfect. Reminds me of the argument with Evangelicals. Won't vote for Trump bc he won't outlaw abortions, but allows some exceptions. They want 100% their way, ignoring the fact that Trump is president of the entire USA. Something is better than nothing. Its old.
So are the ziocucks going to just keep spinning this as much as they possibly can for the next few weeks/months so we can deny our lying eyes?
Everyone knows what happened here and people are cope spinning with "UH BUT AKSHUALLY TERM LIMITS, so its ok", "UH BUT AKSHUALLY LIBERTARIANS SUCK, so its ok".
He got booted because he wasn't letting up on the Epstein files.
Pro-Israel groups and AIPAC spent between $9 million and over $15.5 million in the 2026 Kentucky Republican primary, with varying totals depending on reporting sources and whether affiliated groups and donors are included.
AIPAC’s super PAC, United Democracy Project (UDP), spent between $2.6 million and $4.1 million, while the Republican Jewish Coalition Victory Fund spent approximately $3.9 million to $4.0 million, according to AdImpact and major news outlets. However, broader totals that include affiliated groups and donors show significantly higher spending:
Three pro-Israel-linked PACs together spent over $15.5 million, with UDP exceeding $4.1 million and the RJC Victory Fund around $3.9 million.
MAGA KY, a pro-Trump super PAC heavily funded by pro-Israel billionaires like Paul Singer ($1 million) and Miriam Adelson ($750,000 via Preserve America PAC), spent $7.5 million, further amplifying pro-Israel financial influence.
The New York Times and Politico reported that pro-Israel groups collectively spent more than $9 million, a figure widely cited in post-election analyses.
Overall, outside spending in the race exceeded $32 million, making it the most expensive House primary in U.S. history, with pro-Israel interests playing a dominant role.
Our "allies" have multiple operations where they systematically abuse and rape and murder CHILDREN. Epstein and Maxwell weren't the beginning, and they weren't the end.
When you realise Israel is just like America - country with a deep state, with the sheep, with some who are awake, with white hats who understand bigger picture and the usual pedo-class - it gives you a better perspective.
“Americans have Republicans, Conservatives, Neocons, Watermelons, Libertarians, but Israel is a monolith and they’re ALL in on the Epstein Blackmail Ring!!!!!!!!!!!”
Your statement is a dumb take.
If you look at a comment I made yesterday, I do not know the basis of the divisions, but they’re clearly there.
The globalists are those who print all the money in the world and loan it at interest. That would be the Rothschild dynasty and Israel was given to the Rothschilds by Britain. It's a Rothschild fiefdom, and that could be why they control our congress. No dual citizenship in Congress!
If you read your own comment carefully you will identify the hierarchy.
British gave Israel to Rothschilds (not entirely accurate, but will suffice for this arguement).
In this structure, British are the owners, Israel is the object and Rothschilds are the subject endowed with the object.
Israel indeed is a creation of the British (much like America itself), and like all creations, it was created with intentional wedges and strings to control it. In case of Israel, the wedge was the Palestine. (Rothschild own Israel, according to you. Rockefellers who were agents of Rothschilds created UN. UN created the Palestine problem. This was not an accident), and with this, it became a powerful asset for the British (more specifically the City of London).
Trump architected the Abraham accords - which normalized relations with many of the important the Arab countries with Israel. Each normalization cut a string. This is how Trump cut a lot of strings and allowed the factions within Israel that wants peace to take control from the factions that pushed forever wars.
Oct 7 happened when Saudi was getting ready to sign Abraham accords. This would have essentially tilted the balance against Iran and would have ended the middle east forever war.
It was only after Trump got the Abraham accords that suddenly it became acceptable, if not fashionable, to hate Israel and Jews on the social media. People mistook this for "Awakening", when it fact it was a controlled burn of an asset that was already turning against its masters in the City.
British gave Israel to Rothschilds (not entirely accurate, but will suffice for this arguement).
Sorta ... but not really.
It looks that way on paper. But the jews used their influence in both Britain and the USA to help Britain win WW1 against the Germans.
Germany was winning. They offered a peace deal to Britain. The jews, in the background, got the Balfour Declaration deal done, which brought the USA into the war. That was enough to help Britain win.
So sure, let's say that Britain "gave" Palestine to the jews. But that was only done to carry through on what the jews had helped them with in getting the USA into the war. Otherwise, Germany would have won.
In this structure, British are the owners, Israel is the object and Rothschilds are the subject endowed with the object.
Again ... on paper.
This is similar to the structure of the Federal Reserve.
The Chairman of the FR is appointed by the President. But once confirmed, the President has no power.
The power of the FR is their ability to manipulate the money supply -- both expanding and contracting so as to manipulate the economy. And since the insiders already know ahead of time what they will do, they can position themselves financially to become wealthy off of their moves.
The money supply manipulation is done through their Open Market Operations.
The OMO's are done ONLY at the New York branch of the FR. No other branch has any say in this. And since it is the primary power of the FR, the New York branch is really where the power is.
This is why the President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank is the ONLY position that has a permanent seat at the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), when they discuss interest rate "policy."
And THIS guy is the one who runs the OMO's to manipulate the money supply.
I would speculate, since this information is a closely-guarded secret, that the New York Fed president doesn't even have the power over the OMO's. He might sign off on it, officially, but I would bet that there are other people behind the scenes that actually call the shots.
After all, the STRUCTURE of the Federal Reserve started out in 1913 as a trust, which had owners who were the Rothschild and Rockefeller puppets.
There is no reason to believe that they ever gave up REAL power behind the scenes just because the legal structure and framework changed over the years.
So ...
While something can LOOK like one thing on paper, it might ACTUALLY BE something else when certain people make certain decisions that everyone else must follow.
Israel ... was created with intentional wedges and strings to control it.
Exactly my point!
... it became a powerful asset for the British (more specifically the City of London).
I don't believe that someone like King Charles has any REAL power. He is a left-over figurehead from a bygone era.
The City of London certainly does have a lot of power, but I am skeptical that a lot of BRITISH people have the real power.
Maybe they do, and maybe they don't. That kind of power does not advertise itself to the public.
It stays hidden.
What is on paper is often ... makebelieve.
If you are interested, look up the document that was the Standard Oil Trust (1892, I think).
I don't have a handy citation for it at the moment.
Reading through it, you will see that there were hundreds of oil companies, all ultimately either owned or controled by the Standard Oil Trust.
This is why it was a monopoly, although to the general public it looked like a lot of competing gas companies.
The trust document showed that the Board of Trustees were named, and then elections for board members would happen every few years.
Rockfeller was on the Board. I believe that he also had written side agreements done in such a way that he actually controlled everything behind the scenes, even though on paper it looked like 9 (if I remember correctly) people had voting power for the trust.
The side agreements, assuming they existed (and why wouldn't they if you were Rockefeller), would have been proxy voting agreements or signed but undated letters of resignation that could be backdated and anyone booted off the board, etc. Many ways to have control without it looking that way.
Own nothing; control everything. -- John D. Rockefeller
Now going on 7th or 8th generation of massive wealth.
And that is probably small compared to the Rothschilds, if they still own most of the banking system.
Thank you. Some people are dredging up everything they can on Massie with long posts to justify their betraying the principle of America First.
We can discipline our own without foreign money.
We need to do better.
Your picture of the power structure is pretty accurate, but I would disagree with assertion that a lot of people make:
So sure, let's say that Britain "gave" Palestine to the jews. But that was only done to carry through on what the jews had helped them with in getting the USA into the war. Otherwise, Germany would have won.
I have read this in every piece about this history, and I have wrote it in my comments in the past as well, as if it were a fact, but when I dug in at some point to find evidence for this assertion, what I found is a very different picture.
The plan for the creation of a state of Israel for Jews were put into motion in mid 1800s with the creation of Palestine Exploration Fund between the monarchy and the Rothschilds. This was not an after thought nor simply a transaction for helping British win against Germany.
Nazi Germany was a carefully created construct, funded by the city of london via their agent Hajalmaar Schaacht who Hitler specifically chose to be his central banker. The City was never in fear of losing control of machinery. The Nazis were created to take down Stalin, since Stalin was the one who cut lose from the City and started creating havoc to their plans. This is why Hitler chose to move against USSR rather than Britain first, and even allowed the British troops to escape inexplicably.
In America, there was great animosity against Jews who would try to convince people that America should enter the war, even resorting to violence. Jews never changed American minds to enter the war. Hence the elaborate ploy of provoking Japan.
FDR was incredibly clued in on the central bankers ability to create trouble and understood that nazis were their puppets. He and Stalin shared this clarity and hence the lend lease program to ensure Stalin would not be taken down by the Nazis. He already wanted to enter the war not for the Jews, but to stop the City backed wrecking ball in Europe. Hence he resorted (as mentioned before) to provoking the Japanese.
When Hitler asked permission from the president of Bank of England regarding allowing Jews to make deposit of their assets and leave Germany, he was expressly forbidden to allow them to emigrate anywhere else except Palestine and Hitler agreed to this. The City never cared nor owed anything to the Jews. They used the ordinary Jews ("Lesser Brethren" from the Protocols) purely as pawns to establish a conflict base in middle east.
None of this supports the idea that Israel was "given to the Jews" but rather Israel was a very meticulously planned construct, using Jews as pawns, for the furthering of the Great Game.
American voters should decide who gets elected to serve. not Anti Christ Anti American foreign donors.
That's like hiring a stranger to beat up your troubling siblings.
This is why the Founding Fathers discouraged political parties.
I agree with him on this bevause I have always been an America First Patriot.
I approach every decision with "how does this serve america?" And hamfisting power into the greatest ally that hasn't even apologized for the U.S.S. Liberty is not America First.
The fact of the matter is that Israel apologized for confusion of battle, mistaken attack, and paid reparations for the deaths and injuries. No one has inquired why the U.S. government instructed the Liberty to move from a location outside the battle zone to a location within it. I'm inclined to think of that as a "setup," wouldn't you?
That’s way too far of a take. It makes a lot of assumptions for a very serious charge. Serious charges require serious evidence and specific conditions.
Not for me. He continues to vote against MAGA agenda as laid out by Trump. His idea of America first is the same old BS Mitch McConnell pushed. Massie knew the election of 2020 was stolen yet he voted with Democrats on the election and blamed Trump for the RIOT of Jan 6. He is a rat globalist traitor.
I do get what you’re saying, and he does not seem to be the innocent kitten so many are painting him as.
Is that the metric you’d want to be judged for treason with? “I think this is good, and you opposed some key things over 14 years, while seeming to help on others, but the opposition is treason”?
Or do you mean “traitor” in a more vernacular sense, rather than formal? In that case, him being a traitor is whatever. Just keep him out off office.
It’s hard to tell these days given how many people have committed formal treason.
Owens, Jones and Carlson came out for Massie. They are all anti MAGA so that kinda tells me Massie is one of those like Mitch and Pelosi---standing for the DS that keeps them in power. If Trump had came out for Massie---I would not understand it---but he would still be up there. He is just one of many RINOs working against Trump which is working against the Q Plan. To me THAT is supporting the WEC and the globalist agenda. It might not meet the standards of "traitor" by the law but I think the Washington and Jefferson would think he betrayed the Republic. My opinion and I am glad he is OUT of there.
YOU people are NOT REALLY getting what these A$$HOLES REALLY ARE...You're squeeling like lil' children and splitting hairs where there aren't any.
The American People DESERVE & DEMAND that these A$$HOLES who tried to sink this country with their "ideals under a name" deserve a TRAITORS JUSTICE...FIRING SQUAD!!!!
30 YEAR RETIRED MILITARY...and Just a SMALL QUESTION in case some of you get deranged some more:
HOW MANY OF YOU PUT ON THE UNIFORM OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and defended this country AGAINST ALL ENEMIES BOTH FOREIGN AND "DOMESTIC" FOR 30 YRS?????
As noted, if it’s meant in a vernacular sense, “he’s a traitor to MAGA”, that’s a whole other story and much less weight. I can totally get onboard with “that dude ain’t MAGA.” It was FORMAL TREASON that I was debating, but I was probably being too literal in my interpretation.
You however, seem to be onboard with literal treason. There is a good case to be made that Massie has been working against the country on behalf of foreign powers on purpose, and plenty of smoke to vote him out of office in spite of his veneer of liberty-oriented positions. I’m not arguing that such a case can’t be made, but from what I’m aware, such a case has not yet been made.
To your question, no, but I’ve been trying to figure out how to take the Adversaries of freedom on for quite some time, as a civvy, and I also don’t trust peoples’ judgment. Sorry. If you go back to both Greco-Roman philosophers and Biblical Scripture, you’ll see a LOT of guarding against the passions, misconception, and false witness as precursors of reliable Justice as well.
Working for the DS agenda is a traitorous action as far as I am concerned. Did he betray Trump--YES---like so many other RINOs. It might not meet the Constitutional standard for traitor but supporting a globalist agenda I think would meet the Founding Fathers definition.
Yeah. I gave it also when i realized libertarianism os bound wholly to the british sytem. However, im not a republican either. I'll stay independent and vote MAGA since MAGA is a reengagemwnt of the American System.
I clicked on this thinking the money flows discussion was going to be about Massie’s largest benefactor. So far the only post on the guy dates back to Mastriano’s run for PA Governor.
In the OP twitter post Mastriano claims the Yass organization would only support his candidacy if he renounced President Trump.
I’m trying to understand how Massie could claim to be ant-Israel and accept support from this guy?
Because its never been about Israel - Israel is just a window dressing. For a long time he skirted past without anyone making the Jeff Yass connection. Massie had a good propaganda, helped by all the usual suspects and too many wide eyed people fell for it.
I have one difference of opinion. It might actually be about Israel and its DS. They desire to hamstring President Trump’s efforts to bring down the cabal and hopefully run the clock out in his term.
If paying people to besmirch their country and claim it is controlling President Trump severely erodes his political power they would privately be congratulating themselves. Publicly they would discredit all their controlled opposition operatives and continue their influence operations.
I don't know because I have not looked into it much at all.
But question: Did Yass donate money DIRECTLY to Massie's campaign, OR ... did Yass CREATE HIS OWN PAC that he donated money to?
That would be a BIG difference, because candidates have no control over what people do with their PAC's and SuperPAC's.
It could be that Yass hates Trump and saw that Massie was not going along with everything Trump wants, and therefore put out ads related to that, but without Massie's involvement.
You’re right, the bulk of Yass’s support went to PACs. I’m not sure who controls them. But, can’t it be said that is just a clever way to make it appear there us an “arm’s length” relationship?
Wouldn’t a principled person would publicly ask that someone with such wide ideological differences stop their support? So far, to my knowledge, he never publicly asked Yass to stop funding PACs that support his campaign.
Some people say Yass is Massies' biggest supporter.
But if Yass is only contributing to his own PAC, which "officially" (according to election laws) cannot work with the candidate and can only support the candidate indirectly, it means that Yass has issues with Trump that Massie also has issues with, and that is why Yass spends the money.
I mean, I don't know if Massie has ACTUALLY SAID that the Israeli influence in American politics is a problem. I kind of indirectly said it when he said everybody in Congress has an AIPAC guy, but maybe Yass just thinks, "Yeah, so?" and doesn't care about that Massie statement.
Regardless ... SOME JEWS, SOMEWHERE ... put A SHITLOAD of money into a small Kentucky district ... against Massie ... who NOTICED.
So now, ALL members of Congress with have AIPAC influence.
I've been a libertarian since I was 19. Thomas Massie was my literal north star of politicians for over a decade. What changed? My understanding of money and capital flows. The more I learned the more his grift became obvious. I'm also no longer a libertarian. It's a neat rhetoric but addresses nothing. This is my research below using an AI framework I built and operate.
How Thomas Massie’s votes during Trump 2.0 directly harmed his Kentucky 4th District constituents:
Voted against Trump’s major tax and spending package (“One Big Beautiful Bill”):
Massie’s spin: “I won’t vote for bloated spending and more debt. Principles over party."
This bill contained critical tax relief, domestic manufacturing credits, and energy production incentives. Northern Kentucky’s manufacturing and logistics hubs in Boone, Kenton, and Campbell counties (Hebron, Erlanger, Covington) would have directly benefited from reshoring and job growth in auto parts, aerospace components, and advanced manufacturing.
Opposed Trump’s tariffs on China and adversarial nations:
Massie’s spin: “Tariffs are taxes on Americans. Free markets and free trade are the answers.”
Kentucky’s steel, aluminum, and auto parts suppliers along the Ohio River and I-75 corridor were getting crushed by Chinese dumping. His repeated “no” votes kept the globalist offshoring incentive alive, directly threatening factories and blue-collar jobs in Gallatin, Carroll, and Boone counties.
Sponsored War Powers Resolution to restrict Trump’s Iran actions:
Massie’s spin: “Congress must check executive war powers. No more endless wars.”
Northern Kentucky has major logistics, trucking, and fuel distribution tied to stable energy prices. Weakening leverage on Iran prolonged supply chain risk and higher diesel/fertilizer costs for local manufacturers and farmers in his district.
Voted against key industrial policy and DPA 303 reshoring measures:
Massie’s spin: “Government picking winners and losers is cronyism. I support small government.”
The 4th District has strong potential in advanced manufacturing and critical minerals. Blocking these tools delayed job creation in economically depressed areas like Grant and Pendleton counties that lost factories during the globalist offshoring wave.
Opposed major border security funding in appropriations bills:
Massie’s spin: “I won’t support bloated omnibus bills with waste.”
Construction, meatpacking, and service industries in Kenton and Campbell counties face direct wage suppression from illegal immigration. His resistance prolonged downward pressure on working-class wages in his own backyard.
Voted against foreign aid packages tied to bilateral energy and security deals:
Massie’s spin: “We shouldn’t be the world’s policeman. America First means no foreign entanglements.”
These packages supported alliances that stabilize energy flows. Kentucky’s agricultural exporters (bourbon, soybeans, tobacco) and energy-dependent manufacturers needed reliable trade routes. His votes undermined the bilateral architecture that would have given Kentucky producers better market access.
Blocked government funding bills containing America First priorities:
Massie’s spin: “I refuse to vote for continuing resolutions that kick the can down the road.”
These bills included tariff enforcement funding, domestic energy production, and manufacturing tax credits. His obstruction delayed practical help for the I-75 manufacturing corridor and Ohio River industrial towns in his district.
Bottom line: Massie consistently wrapped globalist-friendly votes in libertarian rhetoric. He knew the data on offshoring damage and energy vulnerability in Northern Kentucky, yet chose ideological purity over policies that would have delivered real jobs, higher wages, and economic security to his constituents.
Thanks for providing some SPECIFICS about Massie's votes AND his reasoning why -- something nobody else has mentioned here (but everybody is an "expert" on Massie). LOL.
Voted against Trump’s major tax and spending package (“One Big Beautiful Bill”): Massie’s spin: “I won’t vote for bloated spending and more debt. Principles over party."
I agree with Massie on that. All the bloated spending, over many years, is why the federal government is effectively bankrupt (except they can get the Federal Reserve to just print more money -- but that is a fool's game).
If Trump is pushing omnibus bills through, and giving it a spin of "Big, Beautiful Bill," then Trump is wrong.
Too much bloat is too much bloat.
$40 TRILLION in debt.
Why is that number STILL GOING UP?
Opposed Trump’s tariffs on China and adversarial nations: Massie’s spin: “Tariffs are taxes on Americans. Free markets and free trade are the answers.”
Trump says he wants tariffs to REPLACE THE INCOME TAX.
So far, I have not seen THAT official proposal from Trump. Just talk (so far). And BTW, I don't think Trump WILL do it, despite the rhetoric, but I would love to see it.
I agree that tariffs are taxes on Americans, and that free trade is better ... BUT ... I also see that China is a cheat and is an adversary, not a friend. So, I would have voted against Massie (and with Trump) on that one.
Sponsored War Powers Resolution to restrict Trump’s Iran actions: Massie’s spin: “Congress must check executive war powers. No more endless wars.”
That was just a resolution, not a bill. So, it's just a way to pontificate, either way.
We know that Obama, the traitor, gave a lot of cash to Iran to build nukes. Destroying those nuke ops was probably the right thing to do.
Voted against key industrial policy and DPA 303 reshoring measures: Massie’s spin: “Government picking winners and losers is cronyism. I support small government.”
It depends on whether only certain people are making a shitload of money off of this. If so, it IS cronyism. But I don't know the specifics.
Opposed major border security funding in appropriations bills: Massie’s spin: “I won’t support bloated omnibus bills with waste.”
Again .. the omnibus is the REASON he voted no. He wasn't voting against border security. He was voting against the BLOAT.
This is why a lot of people are dishonest about Massie and people like him.
Congress should have ONE SUBJECT for each bill, and then vote yes or no.
Omnibus bills are why we get shit like Ilhan Omar sneaking garbage in to fund $1 million to her Somali friends. And there are billions more pushed into these bills.
Let members of Congress stand on ONE issue for each bill -- not the bloated garbage that they think they have to pass or the important stuff won't get passed.
This is SPEAKER MIKE JOHNSON'S FAULT -- not Massie's.
Construction, meatpacking, and service industries in Kenton and Campbell counties face direct wage suppression from illegal immigration. His resistance prolonged downward pressure on working-class wages in his own backyard.
We can't have the federal government focused on Kenton county, Kentucky and their particular problems.
We have to GET ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS OUT.
That will solve the problem for EVERYONE.
Everybody wants their own little community to get benefits.
But we have to look at the bigger picture -- and turd world immigration is one of the biggest problems we ALL face today.
Voted against foreign aid packages tied to bilateral energy and security deals: Massie’s spin: “We shouldn’t be the world’s policeman. America First means no foreign entanglements.”
I wonder if these foreign government "aid packages" included gibs to Israel. Would be an interesting twist if that was the case -- which I bet it was.
These packages supported alliances that stabilize energy flows. Kentucky’s agricultural exporters (bourbon, soybeans, tobacco) and energy-dependent manufacturers needed reliable trade routes. His votes undermined the bilateral architecture that would have given Kentucky producers better market access.
Again ... the person who wrote this on Fakebook is focused on THEIR OWN personal issues.
That is NOT what the federal government is for.
Besides that, there is NO WAY that the person who wrote that could KNOW that the outcome would be the way he/she wants.
Many variables involved -- mostly, corruption along the way.
Blocked government funding bills containing America First priorities: Massie’s spin: “I refuse to vote for continuing resolutions that kick the can down the road.”
I agree with Massie. Stop kicking the can down the road.
These bills included tariff enforcement funding, domestic energy production, and manufacturing tax credits. His obstruction delayed practical help for the I-75 manufacturing corridor and Ohio River industrial towns in his district.
AGAIN with the ... focus on MY priorities.
That is WHY we get all the pork spending and $40 TRILLION in debt.
Bottom line: Massie consistently wrapped globalist-friendly votes in libertarian rhetoric.
Nonsense. These are not "globalist." These are "constitutional restraints" on politicians' bloated wet dreams.
Besides, where do you think all that bloated spending goes?
It goes to the fucking GLOBALISTS who run globalist businesses and NGO's.
USAID was a slush fund for taxpayers to give government gibs to ... GLOBALISTS.
Hello?
Anybody home?
Does anyone think that a federal government spending plan for a meat packing plant in Kentucky will not ALSO include enough for "consultant fees" and "legal fees" and a bunch of other crap that will go to those globalist type firms?
Big Government and Big Business lay in bed ... TOGETHER.
Sounds like Massie said no, and he was right.
He knew the data on offshoring damage and energy vulnerability in Northern Kentucky, yet chose ideological purity over policies that would have delivered real jobs, higher wages, and economic security to his constituents.
Sounds like a Democrat campaign slogan.
Massie has REASONS he votes the way he does. And the fact that he has his own ideas that do not always agree with Trump do not make him a traitor, or a globalist.
It means he, more or less, wants to honor his OATH OF OFFICE -- which 99% of members of Congress ... DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT.
And they certainly don't give a shit about you or me, much less the Constitution.
Again ... thanks for adding some specifics on Massie's votes to the discussion.
Yep, I remember the days when I used to think McCain was such an awesome guy. He had the same aura - said all the seemingly sensible things, seemingly took moderate positions what not. So imagine just how bad Massie must be, considering how bad Noname turned out to be.
Wow! Excellent analysis. Exposes what libertarians have become: sanctimonious preachers. "Since no proposed solutions are perfect---I will oppose all solutions."
Its not just that. Any kind of extreme ideology will always lead you down the wrong path. This is one thing Trump managed to undo that people don't give credit - Finding middle ground. The Cabal loves for us to push the pendulum to the far extreme. They dont care which extreme we push it, because the momentum it generates is enough for them to crush us with. A lot of Anons haven't fully appreciated it.
Is it "extreme" to say that children should not be trafficked to child molesters?
Is that what you think he cares about?
If he cared so much about children, why didn't he make it clear that the "victims" he was advocating to have their identities protected were infact those who started off as victims but became child procures themselves?
Extreme ideology is when you say blanket no to things like Tariffs, budget spending on important items like border protection etc.
Massie's largest donor was ((Jeff Yass)), who also contributed $10M to Pro-H1B RINO Vivek Ramaswamy. Massie also voted against declaring an emergency at the Southern border and border wall funding early-on in Trump's term.
No, Yass has his own PAC that he donates to, and then uses that to push whatever anti-Trump stuff he wants.
It just so happens that Massie has SOME things that he disagrees with Trump on, and THOSE are the things Yass is using his PAC for.
Massie also voted against declaring an emergency at the Southern border and border wall funding early-on in Trump's term.
This appears to have been from an OMNIBUS bill, which throws all sorts of shit into one huge bill -- vote yes or no on EVERYTHING.
If Massie voted no because it was too much bullshit thrown in, then it does not mean he didn't want border security.
This is why we need SPEAKER MIKE JOHNSON to do his fucking JOB and make each topic of spending to stand on it's own and NOT push this harmful omnibus garbage bills.
$40 TRILLION in debt is on the horizon -- AND NO DEBT LIMIT.
My take is that over the long run, libertarian ideals -- i.e., actual liberty -- will create a healthy, prosperous, and free society.
But right now, we're at the end of a thousand+ years of corruption, interrupted only partially and temporarily by the American Revolution, and especially since 1913 we've been turned into a sick, corrupted, impoverished and bankrupted society that the founders would weep for, if they could be brought back to view it.
Trump is doing what is necessary to right the ship. That ISN'T always what will be right for the long run -- pounding Iran into dust, for example -- but it HAS to be done (in this case) if we're going to avoid dealing with a nuclear-armed terrorist organization sworn to take over the world, and with "Death to America" as its best-known slogan.
I agree with much of what Kung Fu describes, but ultimately a balanced budget, less corporatism, and other libertarian goals are what I'm rooting for.
Purist libertarianism is only a theoratical construct. For example you won't have a balanced budget without tariffs.
☝🏻☝🏻☝🏻☝🏻☝🏻
Spot on.
The last "libertarian" worth their salt was Ron Paul. Everybody else under the banner of "libertarian" is a lukewarm poser, with unrealistic utopian dreams that can't pick a lane. They hurt this country more than help with their wishy-washy nonsense.
If you can't be decisive & you're going to waver and play games, you're NOT MAGA.
I'm not sure I'd call Ron Paul a libertarian as much as I'd say he's a Constitutionalist. I was a supporter of his in 2008 and 2012. I went to our state convention in 2008, and afterward we walked around outside the convention center chanting "Ron Paul Revolution, legalize the constitution!" The John McCain delegates were dicks. Good times.
McDick delegates SUCK!
Paul was a huge disappointment.
Talked the talk...from a wheelchair, as it were. Completely impractical views on foreign policy. I thought his son, Rand, was going to be better in that department, but it hasn't worked out that way.
That's certainly true if you're talking a forcible government.
I'm talking voluntaryism, which is beyond what the US has ever tried and more of what Thoreau was talking about in Civil Disobedience and the Voluntaryism of Auberon Herbert and others.
A quick AI summary on Voluntaryism:
My hope (not that I believe it's likely to happen) is that MAGA and the US Constitution's pro-freedom accomplishments will, THIS time, lead the nation to gradually replace ALL government force against citizens with consensual, market alternatives.
Any entrenched, "legitimized" (i.e.; government) coercive structure will grow (Example: the past 250 years in the United States) into a tyranny of -- eventually -- epic proportions.
I'm aware of how most people view that idea.
Thanks for acknowledging this, so I wont drag this discussion any further. We will get to see, hoefully soon enough, how everything ends up working out. This is a whole new era in our civilization and we will be learning the real way of the world, so to speak - truths we can't even imagine right now, but will become clear.
I would be delighted if it turns out to be any kind of viable utopia, but happy with whatever system that gives us freedom from the Satanic ideas for atleast another 2000 years.
I agree. There's plenty of room for improvement and if we can't have perfection (and we probably can't), "freedom from the Satanic ideas for at least another 2000 years" would be a blessing.
I read a theory once, though I’m not sure I buy it, that the whole point of the “libertarian party” was to split the more fiscally conservative republicans out of the mainstream party and get them focused on arguing among themselves.
They’re useless politically, in multiple ways, but their literature and thought provocations are good. If nothing else, they’ve done a wonderful job rediscovering and disseminating truths about money.
What the reconciliation/role should be between MAGA/republicanism/conservatism and libertarianism? Couldn’t tell you.
Bogus theory. I joined the LP in 1972 and was involved in the Hospers campaign. It was a sincere attempt to put forward principles of capitalism and non-globalism, most effectively promoted by the novelist, Ayn Rand. But it quickly got overtaken by the anarcho-capitalists, led by Murray Rothbard. Rothbard was a decent economist, but his theory of government was---frankly---nuts. The only operational example of his principles in action was the Mafia. Eventually, the conservative element tired of the internecine nonsense with the anarcho-capitalists and drifted away, leaving the Anarchs to squabble over the spoils among themselves. I saw this big time in a corruption episode I had to investigate in the 1990s, from which I walked away from the Party as it had become a useless psycho-drama.
And they degenerated into "all talk and no action." At no time did the Party ever take an announced or active role in the protection of the 2nd Amendment (such as by the NRA, Gun Owners of America, and other activist organizations). It was like the issue didn't exist, or was beneath libertarian notice. I took note of that, being a gun owner.
But, yes, they are useless politically...because they are useless in most other ways. They like to preach, but they don't much like to DO anything. MAGA needs to move along with the principles of the Founding Fathers, the Constitution, the free market, and popular Christianity.
No doubt the ground game is typically earnest. The theory was posited at the Rand/Rothbard level and above. Tactical ideology being a bait and switch away from unity and action.
That theory may just be because of Rand, Rothbard, Block, and several others being of a certain persuasion. Who knows these days?
What "theory" and what "certain persuasion"? Do you even know what you are talking about?
Big L vs little l. The Party vs the principle. Massie is as much of a libertarian as Stalin was in real terms, but was really good at rhetoric like all politicians are.
America First in pure form would reconcile every honest person. Rich people are still sending poor people to wars they didn't start and harassing hard working people at home.
Amen.
Well said, Narg.
Far too much corruption and carcinogenic-levels of idealism in the Libertarian party.
But I agree, those general principals greatly align with how this country was founded. Restricted government, personal freedoms, and GENUINE liberty.
Unfortunately, it became apparent during the Biden-admin tyranny that there are plenty of conservatives (sadly, there's some here on GAW) that want to shrug off the current authoritarian nature of the U.S./State governments so that they can implement their own brand of authoritarianism.
I don't ever see myself belonging to a political party (unless it's one I start :) ), but the very general principals of libertarianism / classical liberalism will always appeal to me.
The fact is, had Congress voted with Massie, this country would still be the same as it was under Biden.
Libertarians, and some with other outlooks, prefer the unattainable perfect over the attainable good. In conscience? OK a vote here and there to keep the goal before the public. But NOT to sabotage the good for the perfect, like cutting off one's nose to spite one's face, but it ends up being our faces that get spited by the same old, same old ineffective tactics.
The Libertarian Party has gone the exact same way that the Tea Party went and Ross Perot's Reform Party went.
They got infiltrated and sabotaged from the inside.
Bob Barr was the start of the infiltration.
1971 - David Nolan and others founded the Libertarian Party when Nixon reneged on the gold standard. Nixon did the dirty (and illegal and unconstitutional) deed on August 15, 1971. The Libertarian Party was officially created 4 months later, on December 11, 1971.
That was the reason the party was founded. They were a group of Republicans who realized that the BUSH CLAN of the Republican Party was NOT going to stick to constitutional principles. Richard Nixon was HAND PICKED for the Republican party by Prescott Bush, George HW Bush's daddy. BTW, Prescott Bush's daddy was Samuel Bush, who worked directly for Frank Rockefeller, brother of John D. Rockefeller.
These Republicans were heavily influenced by Leo Strauss of the Chicago School (a lot of them went to school there). They were indoctrinated into the Neocon philosophy -- a branch of communist ideology. They took over the Republican Party, and the Republicans who were opposed to this movement within the party decided to try an alternate option by creating a new political party.
1988 -- Ron Paul ran for president for the Libertarian Party. Good man. Principled. Known as "Doctor No" in Congress, first because he was a medical doctor, and second because he stood on principle that he would honor his Oath of Office to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. He voted "no" on more legislation than anyone in Congress, because MOST legislation proposed by Congress is ... UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
These neocons wanted nothing but power and influence so they could get rich and control the masses -- same exact philosophy as the Democrats, who are closet communists, which have the exact same goal (but are more brutal about it).
ALL of these people -- BOTH SIDES -- systematically IGNORE THE CONSTITUTION, thus violating their oaths of office.
1996, 2000 -- Harry Browne ran for president for the Libertarian Party. He was even better than Ron Paul, in terms of his ideas and brilliance. He seemed to be gaining momentum for the party, at least compared to its weak history in politics. He died in 2006, and that was the Big Shift.
2006 -- Bob Barr infiltrated the Libertarian Party and basically destroyed it from within.
This is how the Deep State maintains power.
INFILTRATION.
That is what we are fighting against.
It's a shame when a third party sucks votes away such that the dem gets elected. . .
I hate Woodrow Wilson getting in that way!! Look what he did to US?
This. Watched it happen and was very disapointed.
Interesting. I left the LP in the 1990s, viewing it as a pigpen in which the Rothbardians wallowed. I was unaware of any Bob Barr influence, but I wasn't paying attention by then, as the LP was off in the corner, playing by itself.
Is it possible in a few sentences to summarize what Bob Barr's influence led to?
I can just give a vague overview.
I knew enough about Barr to know he was no libertarian, so I wondered what was up.
He bashed Ron Paul a lot, which was not helpful to the LP membership
He always had a tough stance of locking people up for drug use (I think he was a fed prosecutor doing that before getting to Congress). LP members generally don't like that idea
In Congress, he voted for the Patriot Act -- TWICE. Not a good look, considering how intrusive and unconstitutional that was
He supported some foreign military intervention (not defensive wars, but "we gotta help out" type of stuff)
He advocated for a new, national sales tax
He wanted to do something about "global climate change" (Al Gore praised him for this)
All I really remember was that whatever he was saying had nothing to do with the Non-Aggression Principle or really much of anything to do with libertarian philosophy.
He was a grifter. Could not become President as a Republican, so used the Libertarian Party as a platform. Due to high name recognition, he made some ground ... but he was never a libertarian, and nobody liked him.
The LP seemed to just fade away after that. So, I credit him with it, but there was probably more to it than just him.
Oh my gosh. Kind of like the polar opposite of the Rothbardians from a policy standpoint. (They were also grifters.) From one distasteful extreme to the other. Glad I wasn't there to see it. Thanks for filling in that gap.
I am glad more people are starting to see this point. Indeed, the biggest problem is pushing any good idea to the extreme, until it can be weaponised.
Nothing in this world is perfect. Only Jesus Christ was perfect. Reminds me of the argument with Evangelicals. Won't vote for Trump bc he won't outlaw abortions, but allows some exceptions. They want 100% their way, ignoring the fact that Trump is president of the entire USA. Something is better than nothing. Its old.
So are the ziocucks going to just keep spinning this as much as they possibly can for the next few weeks/months so we can deny our lying eyes?
Everyone knows what happened here and people are cope spinning with "UH BUT AKSHUALLY TERM LIMITS, so its ok", "UH BUT AKSHUALLY LIBERTARIANS SUCK, so its ok".
He got booted because he wasn't letting up on the Epstein files.
Your lying eyes are lying to you add you have swallowed the propaganda hook line and sinker
Pro-Israel groups and AIPAC spent between $9 million and over $15.5 million in the 2026 Kentucky Republican primary, with varying totals depending on reporting sources and whether affiliated groups and donors are included.
AIPAC’s super PAC, United Democracy Project (UDP), spent between $2.6 million and $4.1 million, while the Republican Jewish Coalition Victory Fund spent approximately $3.9 million to $4.0 million, according to AdImpact and major news outlets. However, broader totals that include affiliated groups and donors show significantly higher spending:
Three pro-Israel-linked PACs together spent over $15.5 million, with UDP exceeding $4.1 million and the RJC Victory Fund around $3.9 million. MAGA KY, a pro-Trump super PAC heavily funded by pro-Israel billionaires like Paul Singer ($1 million) and Miriam Adelson ($750,000 via Preserve America PAC), spent $7.5 million, further amplifying pro-Israel financial influence. The New York Times and Politico reported that pro-Israel groups collectively spent more than $9 million, a figure widely cited in post-election analyses. Overall, outside spending in the race exceeded $32 million, making it the most expensive House primary in U.S. history, with pro-Israel interests playing a dominant role.
And why did massie her funded by a Jewish billionaire himself?
If it took pro Israel groups to pull us out of the jaws of globalists then i can see why they are or allies
Our "allies" have multiple operations where they systematically abuse and rape and murder CHILDREN. Epstein and Maxwell weren't the beginning, and they weren't the end.
When you realise Israel is just like America - country with a deep state, with the sheep, with some who are awake, with white hats who understand bigger picture and the usual pedo-class - it gives you a better perspective.
Jesus is Lord in America. not so in Israel. Huge difference.
“Americans have Republicans, Conservatives, Neocons, Watermelons, Libertarians, but Israel is a monolith and they’re ALL in on the Epstein Blackmail Ring!!!!!!!!!!!”
Your statement is a dumb take.
If you look at a comment I made yesterday, I do not know the basis of the divisions, but they’re clearly there.
The globalists are those who print all the money in the world and loan it at interest. That would be the Rothschild dynasty and Israel was given to the Rothschilds by Britain. It's a Rothschild fiefdom, and that could be why they control our congress. No dual citizenship in Congress!
If you read your own comment carefully you will identify the hierarchy.
British gave Israel to Rothschilds (not entirely accurate, but will suffice for this arguement).
In this structure, British are the owners, Israel is the object and Rothschilds are the subject endowed with the object.
Israel indeed is a creation of the British (much like America itself), and like all creations, it was created with intentional wedges and strings to control it. In case of Israel, the wedge was the Palestine. (Rothschild own Israel, according to you. Rockefellers who were agents of Rothschilds created UN. UN created the Palestine problem. This was not an accident), and with this, it became a powerful asset for the British (more specifically the City of London).
Trump architected the Abraham accords - which normalized relations with many of the important the Arab countries with Israel. Each normalization cut a string. This is how Trump cut a lot of strings and allowed the factions within Israel that wants peace to take control from the factions that pushed forever wars.
Oct 7 happened when Saudi was getting ready to sign Abraham accords. This would have essentially tilted the balance against Iran and would have ended the middle east forever war.
It was only after Trump got the Abraham accords that suddenly it became acceptable, if not fashionable, to hate Israel and Jews on the social media. People mistook this for "Awakening", when it fact it was a controlled burn of an asset that was already turning against its masters in the City.
Sorta ... but not really.
It looks that way on paper. But the jews used their influence in both Britain and the USA to help Britain win WW1 against the Germans.
Germany was winning. They offered a peace deal to Britain. The jews, in the background, got the Balfour Declaration deal done, which brought the USA into the war. That was enough to help Britain win.
So sure, let's say that Britain "gave" Palestine to the jews. But that was only done to carry through on what the jews had helped them with in getting the USA into the war. Otherwise, Germany would have won.
Again ... on paper.
This is similar to the structure of the Federal Reserve.
The Chairman of the FR is appointed by the President. But once confirmed, the President has no power.
The power of the FR is their ability to manipulate the money supply -- both expanding and contracting so as to manipulate the economy. And since the insiders already know ahead of time what they will do, they can position themselves financially to become wealthy off of their moves.
The money supply manipulation is done through their Open Market Operations.
The OMO's are done ONLY at the New York branch of the FR. No other branch has any say in this. And since it is the primary power of the FR, the New York branch is really where the power is.
This is why the President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank is the ONLY position that has a permanent seat at the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), when they discuss interest rate "policy."
And THIS guy is the one who runs the OMO's to manipulate the money supply.
I would speculate, since this information is a closely-guarded secret, that the New York Fed president doesn't even have the power over the OMO's. He might sign off on it, officially, but I would bet that there are other people behind the scenes that actually call the shots.
After all, the STRUCTURE of the Federal Reserve started out in 1913 as a trust, which had owners who were the Rothschild and Rockefeller puppets.
There is no reason to believe that they ever gave up REAL power behind the scenes just because the legal structure and framework changed over the years.
So ...
While something can LOOK like one thing on paper, it might ACTUALLY BE something else when certain people make certain decisions that everyone else must follow.
Exactly my point!
I don't believe that someone like King Charles has any REAL power. He is a left-over figurehead from a bygone era.
The City of London certainly does have a lot of power, but I am skeptical that a lot of BRITISH people have the real power.
Maybe they do, and maybe they don't. That kind of power does not advertise itself to the public.
It stays hidden.
What is on paper is often ... makebelieve.
If you are interested, look up the document that was the Standard Oil Trust (1892, I think).
I don't have a handy citation for it at the moment.
Reading through it, you will see that there were hundreds of oil companies, all ultimately either owned or controled by the Standard Oil Trust.
This is why it was a monopoly, although to the general public it looked like a lot of competing gas companies.
The trust document showed that the Board of Trustees were named, and then elections for board members would happen every few years.
Rockfeller was on the Board. I believe that he also had written side agreements done in such a way that he actually controlled everything behind the scenes, even though on paper it looked like 9 (if I remember correctly) people had voting power for the trust.
The side agreements, assuming they existed (and why wouldn't they if you were Rockefeller), would have been proxy voting agreements or signed but undated letters of resignation that could be backdated and anyone booted off the board, etc. Many ways to have control without it looking that way.
Now going on 7th or 8th generation of massive wealth.
And that is probably small compared to the Rothschilds, if they still own most of the banking system.
Thank you. Some people are dredging up everything they can on Massie with long posts to justify their betraying the principle of America First. We can discipline our own without foreign money. We need to do better.
Your picture of the power structure is pretty accurate, but I would disagree with assertion that a lot of people make:
I have read this in every piece about this history, and I have wrote it in my comments in the past as well, as if it were a fact, but when I dug in at some point to find evidence for this assertion, what I found is a very different picture.
The plan for the creation of a state of Israel for Jews were put into motion in mid 1800s with the creation of Palestine Exploration Fund between the monarchy and the Rothschilds. This was not an after thought nor simply a transaction for helping British win against Germany.
Nazi Germany was a carefully created construct, funded by the city of london via their agent Hajalmaar Schaacht who Hitler specifically chose to be his central banker. The City was never in fear of losing control of machinery. The Nazis were created to take down Stalin, since Stalin was the one who cut lose from the City and started creating havoc to their plans. This is why Hitler chose to move against USSR rather than Britain first, and even allowed the British troops to escape inexplicably.
In America, there was great animosity against Jews who would try to convince people that America should enter the war, even resorting to violence. Jews never changed American minds to enter the war. Hence the elaborate ploy of provoking Japan.
FDR was incredibly clued in on the central bankers ability to create trouble and understood that nazis were their puppets. He and Stalin shared this clarity and hence the lend lease program to ensure Stalin would not be taken down by the Nazis. He already wanted to enter the war not for the Jews, but to stop the City backed wrecking ball in Europe. Hence he resorted (as mentioned before) to provoking the Japanese.
When Hitler asked permission from the president of Bank of England regarding allowing Jews to make deposit of their assets and leave Germany, he was expressly forbidden to allow them to emigrate anywhere else except Palestine and Hitler agreed to this. The City never cared nor owed anything to the Jews. They used the ordinary Jews ("Lesser Brethren" from the Protocols) purely as pawns to establish a conflict base in middle east.
None of this supports the idea that Israel was "given to the Jews" but rather Israel was a very meticulously planned construct, using Jews as pawns, for the furthering of the Great Game.
And the REASON all that money was spent on a small district in Kentucky is BECAUSE MASSIE SPOKE OUT AGAINST THE JEWS.
He proclaimed that "Everybody in Congress has an AIPAC guy ... except me!"
He got a tame version of what Charlie Kirk got, once the NOTICING started ... PUBLICLY.
THAT. IS. THE. BOTTOM. LINE.
Using all caps to make a declaration does not make it true, ya know. I get that in your mind this is the only possible explanation, but it’s not.
American voters should decide who gets elected to serve. not Anti Christ Anti American foreign donors. That's like hiring a stranger to beat up your troubling siblings. This is why the Founding Fathers discouraged political parties.
I agree. Thanks for chiming in.
I agree with him on this bevause I have always been an America First Patriot.
I approach every decision with "how does this serve america?" And hamfisting power into the greatest ally that hasn't even apologized for the U.S.S. Liberty is not America First.
The fact of the matter is that Israel apologized for confusion of battle, mistaken attack, and paid reparations for the deaths and injuries. No one has inquired why the U.S. government instructed the Liberty to move from a location outside the battle zone to a location within it. I'm inclined to think of that as a "setup," wouldn't you?
The post explains what is good and what is bad for America.
Massie is a traitor to the American people and the Republic to which he swore an oath to. A traitors justice he should be given!
Are we seriously standing behind deranged comments like this on GAW?
It drags down our credibility
You have your opinion and I have mine. Massie and McConnell betrayed the American people they are suppose to serve.
Maybe in your deranged thinking believes Massie is patriot. Kek
That’s way too far of a take. It makes a lot of assumptions for a very serious charge. Serious charges require serious evidence and specific conditions.
Not for me. He continues to vote against MAGA agenda as laid out by Trump. His idea of America first is the same old BS Mitch McConnell pushed. Massie knew the election of 2020 was stolen yet he voted with Democrats on the election and blamed Trump for the RIOT of Jan 6. He is a rat globalist traitor.
I do get what you’re saying, and he does not seem to be the innocent kitten so many are painting him as.
Is that the metric you’d want to be judged for treason with? “I think this is good, and you opposed some key things over 14 years, while seeming to help on others, but the opposition is treason”?
Or do you mean “traitor” in a more vernacular sense, rather than formal? In that case, him being a traitor is whatever. Just keep him out off office.
It’s hard to tell these days given how many people have committed formal treason.
Owens, Jones and Carlson came out for Massie. They are all anti MAGA so that kinda tells me Massie is one of those like Mitch and Pelosi---standing for the DS that keeps them in power. If Trump had came out for Massie---I would not understand it---but he would still be up there. He is just one of many RINOs working against Trump which is working against the Q Plan. To me THAT is supporting the WEC and the globalist agenda. It might not meet the standards of "traitor" by the law but I think the Washington and Jefferson would think he betrayed the Republic. My opinion and I am glad he is OUT of there.
In politics, there are more than just two sides to everything.
It sounds like you meant it in vernacular then, or “traitor to MAGA”, yes?
Much easier case to make and carries much less gravitas.
Sorry for being too literal. Autists gonna autist.
YOU people are NOT REALLY getting what these A$$HOLES REALLY ARE...You're squeeling like lil' children and splitting hairs where there aren't any.
The American People DESERVE & DEMAND that these A$$HOLES who tried to sink this country with their "ideals under a name" deserve a TRAITORS JUSTICE...FIRING SQUAD!!!!
30 YEAR RETIRED MILITARY...and Just a SMALL QUESTION in case some of you get deranged some more: HOW MANY OF YOU PUT ON THE UNIFORM OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and defended this country AGAINST ALL ENEMIES BOTH FOREIGN AND "DOMESTIC" FOR 30 YRS?????
NO MATTER WHAT THE CIRCUMSTANCES!!!!!!
Did you ever read the book, "War is a Racket," by Marine Corps Gen. Smedley Butler -- most decorated general in American history?
Just curious.
Don’t you CAPSLOCK on me now, eagle! Don’t you do it!!!
I was being very specific.
https://greatawakening.win/p/199hulwk4Z/what-is-treason/
As noted, if it’s meant in a vernacular sense, “he’s a traitor to MAGA”, that’s a whole other story and much less weight. I can totally get onboard with “that dude ain’t MAGA.” It was FORMAL TREASON that I was debating, but I was probably being too literal in my interpretation.
You however, seem to be onboard with literal treason. There is a good case to be made that Massie has been working against the country on behalf of foreign powers on purpose, and plenty of smoke to vote him out of office in spite of his veneer of liberty-oriented positions. I’m not arguing that such a case can’t be made, but from what I’m aware, such a case has not yet been made.
To your question, no, but I’ve been trying to figure out how to take the Adversaries of freedom on for quite some time, as a civvy, and I also don’t trust peoples’ judgment. Sorry. If you go back to both Greco-Roman philosophers and Biblical Scripture, you’ll see a LOT of guarding against the passions, misconception, and false witness as precursors of reliable Justice as well.
What actions did he take that would make you conclude he is a traitor?
He's a globalist. If he isn't with us, he is against us. What actions has he taken to help Americans?
Again. Citation needed. Crying "traitor!" With zero accounts of treason to back it up is liberal shit
Working for the DS agenda is a traitorous action as far as I am concerned. Did he betray Trump--YES---like so many other RINOs. It might not meet the Constitutional standard for traitor but supporting a globalist agenda I think would meet the Founding Fathers definition.
That's not an answer.
That sounds like George W Bush and his stupid, "You are either with us or against us."
NAME SOME POLICIES or VOTES (and WHY he voted the way he did) that would make him a traitor.
If he is a true open border guy (he might or might not be, I don't know), then I might side with you, somewhat.
But I doubt he is a globalist -- unless he is strongly open border and all turd worlders should come in.
If that is the case (again, I don't know), then I might agree with you.
But I have my doubts.
I suspect Massie votes the way he has due to MOST legislation being unconstitutional.
If that is the case, I agree with him.
Opinions are like buttholes, everybody has one and you are entitled to yours!
Yeah. I gave it also when i realized libertarianism os bound wholly to the british sytem. However, im not a republican either. I'll stay independent and vote MAGA since MAGA is a reengagemwnt of the American System.
This.
Ridiculous backwards propaganda
Care to explain why?
His emotions told him so
I clicked on this thinking the money flows discussion was going to be about Massie’s largest benefactor. So far the only post on the guy dates back to Mastriano’s run for PA Governor.
In the OP twitter post Mastriano claims the Yass organization would only support his candidacy if he renounced President Trump.
https://greatawakening.win/search?params=Yass&community=GreatAwakening
The Yass organization is also allegedly a big supporter of Netanyahu and his effort to make changes to Israel’s Judicial Branch.
I’m trying to understand how Massie could claim to be ant-Israel and accept support from this guy?
Because its never been about Israel - Israel is just a window dressing. For a long time he skirted past without anyone making the Jeff Yass connection. Massie had a good propaganda, helped by all the usual suspects and too many wide eyed people fell for it.
I have one difference of opinion. It might actually be about Israel and its DS. They desire to hamstring President Trump’s efforts to bring down the cabal and hopefully run the clock out in his term.
If paying people to besmirch their country and claim it is controlling President Trump severely erodes his political power they would privately be congratulating themselves. Publicly they would discredit all their controlled opposition operatives and continue their influence operations.
I don't know because I have not looked into it much at all.
But question: Did Yass donate money DIRECTLY to Massie's campaign, OR ... did Yass CREATE HIS OWN PAC that he donated money to?
That would be a BIG difference, because candidates have no control over what people do with their PAC's and SuperPAC's.
It could be that Yass hates Trump and saw that Massie was not going along with everything Trump wants, and therefore put out ads related to that, but without Massie's involvement.
I don't know.
Just speculating.
Anyone have more info?
You’re right, the bulk of Yass’s support went to PACs. I’m not sure who controls them. But, can’t it be said that is just a clever way to make it appear there us an “arm’s length” relationship?
Wouldn’t a principled person would publicly ask that someone with such wide ideological differences stop their support? So far, to my knowledge, he never publicly asked Yass to stop funding PACs that support his campaign.
That makes a BIG difference, to me.
Some people say Yass is Massies' biggest supporter.
But if Yass is only contributing to his own PAC, which "officially" (according to election laws) cannot work with the candidate and can only support the candidate indirectly, it means that Yass has issues with Trump that Massie also has issues with, and that is why Yass spends the money.
I mean, I don't know if Massie has ACTUALLY SAID that the Israeli influence in American politics is a problem. I kind of indirectly said it when he said everybody in Congress has an AIPAC guy, but maybe Yass just thinks, "Yeah, so?" and doesn't care about that Massie statement.
Regardless ... SOME JEWS, SOMEWHERE ... put A SHITLOAD of money into a small Kentucky district ... against Massie ... who NOTICED.
So now, ALL members of Congress with have AIPAC influence.
Not good.
TRAITORS all over specially Massie
Here is the X post
I've been a libertarian since I was 19. Thomas Massie was my literal north star of politicians for over a decade. What changed? My understanding of money and capital flows. The more I learned the more his grift became obvious. I'm also no longer a libertarian. It's a neat rhetoric but addresses nothing. This is my research below using an AI framework I built and operate.
How Thomas Massie’s votes during Trump 2.0 directly harmed his Kentucky 4th District constituents:
Voted against Trump’s major tax and spending package (“One Big Beautiful Bill”): Massie’s spin: “I won’t vote for bloated spending and more debt. Principles over party."
This bill contained critical tax relief, domestic manufacturing credits, and energy production incentives. Northern Kentucky’s manufacturing and logistics hubs in Boone, Kenton, and Campbell counties (Hebron, Erlanger, Covington) would have directly benefited from reshoring and job growth in auto parts, aerospace components, and advanced manufacturing.
Opposed Trump’s tariffs on China and adversarial nations: Massie’s spin: “Tariffs are taxes on Americans. Free markets and free trade are the answers.”
Kentucky’s steel, aluminum, and auto parts suppliers along the Ohio River and I-75 corridor were getting crushed by Chinese dumping. His repeated “no” votes kept the globalist offshoring incentive alive, directly threatening factories and blue-collar jobs in Gallatin, Carroll, and Boone counties.
Sponsored War Powers Resolution to restrict Trump’s Iran actions: Massie’s spin: “Congress must check executive war powers. No more endless wars.”
Northern Kentucky has major logistics, trucking, and fuel distribution tied to stable energy prices. Weakening leverage on Iran prolonged supply chain risk and higher diesel/fertilizer costs for local manufacturers and farmers in his district.
Voted against key industrial policy and DPA 303 reshoring measures: Massie’s spin: “Government picking winners and losers is cronyism. I support small government.”
The 4th District has strong potential in advanced manufacturing and critical minerals. Blocking these tools delayed job creation in economically depressed areas like Grant and Pendleton counties that lost factories during the globalist offshoring wave.
Opposed major border security funding in appropriations bills: Massie’s spin: “I won’t support bloated omnibus bills with waste.”
Construction, meatpacking, and service industries in Kenton and Campbell counties face direct wage suppression from illegal immigration. His resistance prolonged downward pressure on working-class wages in his own backyard.
Voted against foreign aid packages tied to bilateral energy and security deals: Massie’s spin: “We shouldn’t be the world’s policeman. America First means no foreign entanglements.”
These packages supported alliances that stabilize energy flows. Kentucky’s agricultural exporters (bourbon, soybeans, tobacco) and energy-dependent manufacturers needed reliable trade routes. His votes undermined the bilateral architecture that would have given Kentucky producers better market access.
Blocked government funding bills containing America First priorities: Massie’s spin: “I refuse to vote for continuing resolutions that kick the can down the road.”
These bills included tariff enforcement funding, domestic energy production, and manufacturing tax credits. His obstruction delayed practical help for the I-75 manufacturing corridor and Ohio River industrial towns in his district.
Bottom line: Massie consistently wrapped globalist-friendly votes in libertarian rhetoric. He knew the data on offshoring damage and energy vulnerability in Northern Kentucky, yet chose ideological purity over policies that would have delivered real jobs, higher wages, and economic security to his constituents.
Thanks for providing some SPECIFICS about Massie's votes AND his reasoning why -- something nobody else has mentioned here (but everybody is an "expert" on Massie). LOL.
I agree with Massie on that. All the bloated spending, over many years, is why the federal government is effectively bankrupt (except they can get the Federal Reserve to just print more money -- but that is a fool's game).
If Trump is pushing omnibus bills through, and giving it a spin of "Big, Beautiful Bill," then Trump is wrong.
Too much bloat is too much bloat.
$40 TRILLION in debt.
Why is that number STILL GOING UP?
Trump says he wants tariffs to REPLACE THE INCOME TAX.
So far, I have not seen THAT official proposal from Trump. Just talk (so far). And BTW, I don't think Trump WILL do it, despite the rhetoric, but I would love to see it.
I agree that tariffs are taxes on Americans, and that free trade is better ... BUT ... I also see that China is a cheat and is an adversary, not a friend. So, I would have voted against Massie (and with Trump) on that one.
That was just a resolution, not a bill. So, it's just a way to pontificate, either way.
We know that Obama, the traitor, gave a lot of cash to Iran to build nukes. Destroying those nuke ops was probably the right thing to do.
It depends on whether only certain people are making a shitload of money off of this. If so, it IS cronyism. But I don't know the specifics.
Again .. the omnibus is the REASON he voted no. He wasn't voting against border security. He was voting against the BLOAT.
This is why a lot of people are dishonest about Massie and people like him.
Congress should have ONE SUBJECT for each bill, and then vote yes or no.
Omnibus bills are why we get shit like Ilhan Omar sneaking garbage in to fund $1 million to her Somali friends. And there are billions more pushed into these bills.
Let members of Congress stand on ONE issue for each bill -- not the bloated garbage that they think they have to pass or the important stuff won't get passed.
This is SPEAKER MIKE JOHNSON'S FAULT -- not Massie's.
We can't have the federal government focused on Kenton county, Kentucky and their particular problems.
We have to GET ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS OUT.
That will solve the problem for EVERYONE.
Everybody wants their own little community to get benefits.
But we have to look at the bigger picture -- and turd world immigration is one of the biggest problems we ALL face today.
I wonder if these foreign government "aid packages" included gibs to Israel. Would be an interesting twist if that was the case -- which I bet it was.
Again ... the person who wrote this on Fakebook is focused on THEIR OWN personal issues.
That is NOT what the federal government is for.
Besides that, there is NO WAY that the person who wrote that could KNOW that the outcome would be the way he/she wants.
Many variables involved -- mostly, corruption along the way.
I agree with Massie. Stop kicking the can down the road.
AGAIN with the ... focus on MY priorities.
That is WHY we get all the pork spending and $40 TRILLION in debt.
Nonsense. These are not "globalist." These are "constitutional restraints" on politicians' bloated wet dreams.
Besides, where do you think all that bloated spending goes?
It goes to the fucking GLOBALISTS who run globalist businesses and NGO's.
USAID was a slush fund for taxpayers to give government gibs to ... GLOBALISTS.
Hello?
Anybody home?
Does anyone think that a federal government spending plan for a meat packing plant in Kentucky will not ALSO include enough for "consultant fees" and "legal fees" and a bunch of other crap that will go to those globalist type firms?
Big Government and Big Business lay in bed ... TOGETHER.
Sounds like Massie said no, and he was right.
Sounds like a Democrat campaign slogan.
Massie has REASONS he votes the way he does. And the fact that he has his own ideas that do not always agree with Trump do not make him a traitor, or a globalist.
It means he, more or less, wants to honor his OATH OF OFFICE -- which 99% of members of Congress ... DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT.
And they certainly don't give a shit about you or me, much less the Constitution.
Again ... thanks for adding some specifics on Massie's votes to the discussion.
Massie is the new no name.
Change my mind.
Yep, I remember the days when I used to think McCain was such an awesome guy. He had the same aura - said all the seemingly sensible things, seemingly took moderate positions what not. So imagine just how bad Massie must be, considering how bad Noname turned out to be.
Wow! Excellent analysis. Exposes what libertarians have become: sanctimonious preachers. "Since no proposed solutions are perfect---I will oppose all solutions."
"What changed?". "For the love of money is the root of all kinds of evils" 1 Tim 6:10
Its not just that. Any kind of extreme ideology will always lead you down the wrong path. This is one thing Trump managed to undo that people don't give credit - Finding middle ground. The Cabal loves for us to push the pendulum to the far extreme. They dont care which extreme we push it, because the momentum it generates is enough for them to crush us with. A lot of Anons haven't fully appreciated it.
Is it "extreme" to say that children should not be trafficked to child molesters?
That's just one example.
Point is: SOME extremes are good; not all are bad.
Is that what you think he cares about?
If he cared so much about children, why didn't he make it clear that the "victims" he was advocating to have their identities protected were infact those who started off as victims but became child procures themselves?
Extreme ideology is when you say blanket no to things like Tariffs, budget spending on important items like border protection etc.
Haven't found many like that.
Massie's largest donor was ((Jeff Yass)), who also contributed $10M to Pro-H1B RINO Vivek Ramaswamy. Massie also voted against declaring an emergency at the Southern border and border wall funding early-on in Trump's term.
https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2019/02/27/thomas-massie-one-13-republicans-vote-against-trump-emergency/3002703002/
https://x.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1101158107743481856
This is dishonest.
No, Yass has his own PAC that he donates to, and then uses that to push whatever anti-Trump stuff he wants.
It just so happens that Massie has SOME things that he disagrees with Trump on, and THOSE are the things Yass is using his PAC for.
This appears to have been from an OMNIBUS bill, which throws all sorts of shit into one huge bill -- vote yes or no on EVERYTHING.
If Massie voted no because it was too much bullshit thrown in, then it does not mean he didn't want border security.
This is why we need SPEAKER MIKE JOHNSON to do his fucking JOB and make each topic of spending to stand on it's own and NOT push this harmful omnibus garbage bills.
$40 TRILLION in debt is on the horizon -- AND NO DEBT LIMIT.
What could go wrong?