Rep. Massie reveals NEW info about the Jan 6 pipe bomb



If you listen to the left, you probably believe that democracy “almost died” on January 6. But if you listen to Thomas Massie, you’ll walk away with a better understanding of the story.

Massie has new information that completely turns the January 6 stories upside down: the January 6 pipe bomb found at the DNC headquarters in Washington, D.C., was found by a plain-clothes U.S. Capitol Police officer.

The U.S. Capitol Police officer was originally reported to be a random passerby.

Before the truth about the DNC pipe bomb was uncovered, Massie’s “charitable interpretation of the video” was, “That’s some random passerby and he says to the cops, ‘There’s something bright and shiny over there in the weeds, you might want to check it out,’” Massie tells Pat Gray.

“Maybe that could explain their lackadaisical approach to the bomb,” he continues, “but I got confirmation that not only was that an undercover police officer, he told them there was a bomb over there.”

“So, then your thought process is that they knew it was a serious problem, yet they just sat there like it was no big deal,” Gray says.

According to Massie, the bomb sat for 17 hours and was outfitted with a 60-minute kitchen timer.

“Everybody keeps telling me this thing was viable, but it had a minute kitchen timer,” Massie says in disbelief. “If these were operable bombs, which the FBI maintains, this is one of the most serious threats to a vice president ever because she was sitting 30 feet away.”


Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat's biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Massie EDUCATES Dems on High Gas Prices THEY Caused

Massie EDUCATES Dems on High Gas Prices THEY Caused

GOP Rep. ERUPTS on Dem Plan for Gun Control: “None of Them Work”

GOP Rep. ERUPTS on Dem Plan for Gun Control: “None of Them Work”

Horowitz: It’s time for a government shutdown fight over COVID measures



They are experimenting on our babies. They are destroying people’s jobs, creating apartheid, and blocking medical treatment for people who don’t receive expired, dangerous shots. They are criminalizing doctors who use treatment that would save many people from COVID. They are criminalizing our ability to breathe while traveling. With everything we know now about the crimes committed by our federal government against humanity over the past two years, if Republicans fail to take this fight to the brink, then they don’t deserve to be in the majority.

It’s embarrassing that Canadians are fighting more forcefully for liberty and basic human rights than those in the supposed “land of the free.” With the federal budget deadline looming in two weeks, why not create our own trucker convoy to D.C. with the demand that Republicans block any budget bill that fails to defund all of the vaccine and mask mandates and change FDA/NIH policies regarding treatments, as well as approval of the now defunct and discredited shots on babies and toddlers? We already have a convoy that plans to ride from Ottawa to D.C.; now we need a political party on the inside to take up the cause.

Democrats need 60 votes in the Senate to pass a budget bill and send it to Joe Biden’s desk. They only have 51 votes with the vice president and therefore need nine Republican votes to secure passage. How can any Republican vote for a bill that funds such fascism and malfeasance without proper redress for the people?

Madison wrote in Federalist #58 that the power of the purse vested in Congress is “the most complete and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people, for obtaining a redress of every grievance, and for carrying into effect every just and salutary measure.” If this grievance is not worthy of using the leverage of this power, then Republicans should all resign from Congress.

Moreover, as we head into the election season, such a brinksmanship over Democrat policies that are increasingly unpopular would force Democrats like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema to finally stop straddling the fence. These red-state Democrats reject just enough of the far-left proposals to manipulate their voters to keep them in office, but if they had any integrity and desire to represent their constituents, they should have no problem joining with Republicans to block the mandates. Thus, even if Democrats threatened to abolish the filibuster during a budget fight, these two senators could be pressured to either deny them those votes or make it more likely they will lose their seats.

Republicans like Mitch McConnell will abrasively reject this idea because they’re concerned about a “government shutdown.” But what we have experienced the past two years is the ultimate shutdown, a shutdown he tacitly voted for by shepherding the most expensive trillion-dollar bills in American history through the Senate. They shut down our physical health, mental health, economy, schools, ability to breathe, small businesses, and bodily autonomy and destroyed the mental and emotional health of children. Republicans failed to lift a finger while they still controlled the Senate, and in the many states where they command supermajorities, to fight the issue of our time when it mattered and in the way it mattered. Now is the time to repent.

Rather than question the official narrative of the shutdown in March and April 2020, Mitch McConnell, who was then the Senate majority leader, bragged about embarking on a WWII level of “investment” to basically reward, incentivize, and praise the lockdown governors. We now have Johns Hopkins admitting that none of these measures worked and caused so much collateral damage.

But some of us knew that from day one. On March 20, 2020, I wrote of the first $2.2 trillion bill, “How can Congress treat the fallout of a problem it has failed to define and whose solutions are helping to drive the problem?” I noted, “Panic mixed with shameless pandering is a recipe for a bigger crisis than the coronavirus itself. It’s time for real men to stand up and be counted.” Well, one man stood up.

Rep. Thomas Massie took a brave stance against Trump and the other Republicans promoting these bills. He knew this would lead to irrevocable damage and catalyze an immutable change to our culture, economy, civilization, privacy, and even bodily autonomy. There were numerous other bills passed months into the lockdowns, after it became clear that these measures would never work. Let’s not forget that the inflation, loss of liberty, war on treatment, and all the mandates we suffer from today were born out of or enabled because of those bills passed with Republicans in control of two of the three organs of the federal government.

Nearly two years later, we should have 50 Massies in the Senate.

As it stands now, despite some victories in the courts, we still have the following problems from the federal government:

  • CMS is forcing hospitals to fire doctors who don’t get an expired shot that now has created a higher rate of infection to the point that hospitals are calling COVID-infected doctors with vaccines back to work.
  • The DOD is now discharging everyone from the military who declined to get the shot that never stopped transmission, despite very concerning DOD data possibly correlating with vaccine injury in the military.
  • Absent a new court injunction, most federal workers and contractors are still subject to the mandate.
  • The federal government is publicly working with “private” entities to get them to enforce these human rights violations as well.
  • The TSA and FAA are still illegally criminalizing flying while breathing even for 2-year-olds, two years after no evidence can be produced demonstrating they have such legal authority or scientific rationale.
  • The FDA is approving more shots for babies without the proper data, much less informed consent.
  • The FDA and NIH are blocking lifesaving treatments while abusing the EUA statute to approve therapeutics that should never be approved.

In other words, it’s time to finally force the fight, debate, and discovery of facts that Republicans failed to do before they took away our liberties in 2020 without due process. But now they cannot claim ignorance. A vote for the budget bill is a vote against life, because it funds all the Pfizer fascism our government continues to work on that is causing so much needless death, depression, devastation, and economic destruction.

A national debate amidst a budget brinksmanship would provide Republicans not just with an opportunity to vote for the people but serve as a voice for the people. Why is it that Sen. Ron Johnson is the only one who has held forums on the most important issues affecting our lives – from vaccine injuries and dangerous therapeutics to the war on early treatment and the human rights violations in the hospitals? All 50 Republicans should hold an entire week’s worth of hearings next week leading up to the budget deadline to educate the public on all the harms from these immoral and illogical policies.

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) is circulating a letter demanding that all funding for some of these mandates and policies be stripped from the budget and is calling upon all of his colleagues to oppose the current budget proposal. Sadly, only 49 House Republicans and just four senators signed the letter.

The four senators are Rand Paul (Ky.), Ron Johnson (Wis.), Ted Cruz (Texas), and Mike Lee (Utah).

The 49 house members are Reps. Scott Perry (Penn.), Warren Davidson (Ohio), Lauren Boebert (Colo.), Bob Good (Va.), Dan Bishop (N.C.), Andy Biggs (Ariz.), Jody Hice (Ga.), Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.), Ken Buck (Colo.), Mary E. Miller (Ill.), Louie Gohmert (Texas), Alex X. Mooney (W.V.), Matt Rosendale (Mont.), Ralph Norman (S.C.), Bill Posey (Fla.), Clay Higgins (La.), Randy K. Weber (Texas), Andrew Clyde (Ga.), Paul A. Gosar (Az.), Russ Fulcher (Idaho), Thomas Massie (Ky.), Barry Moore (Ala.), Brian Mast (Fla.), Michael Cloud (Texas), Troy E. Nehls (Texas), David Schweikert (Ariz.), Matt Gaetz (Fla.), Scott DesJarlais (Tenn.), Tom Tiffany (Wis.), Brian Babin (Texas), Dr. Michael Burgess (Texas), Pete Sessions (Texas), Ronny L. Jackson (Texas), Greg Steube (Fla.), Ted Budd (N.C.), Dan Crenshaw (Texas), Madison Cawthorn (N.C.), Lance Gooden (Texas), Mo Brooks (Ala.), Kevin Hern (Okla.), Mark Green (Tenn.), Ben Cline (Va.), Byron Donalds (Fla.), and Tim Burchett (Tenn.).

On the most important issue of our lifetime, we only have less than a quarter of the House Republicans and less than a twelfth of Senate Republicans willing to pick a meaningful fight. Yet it’s not too late to do the right thing.

Republican Rep. Thomas Massie calls out CNN reporter for misrepresenting his comment on Jan. 6 riot



Republican Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) called out a CNN reporter for misrepresenting his comment about the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol.

CNN's chief congressional correspondent Manu Raju stopped Massie to pepper him with questions about the riot, but Massie says his report did not document his comment correctly.

"Do you agree with Trump that the election was rigged or stolen somehow?" asked Raju.

"We didn't have hearings, there's no way to litigate that up here. If you're in the minority, the DOJ wouldn't investigate it," responded Massie.

"There's no evidence of widespread fraud," replied Raju.

"That's your opinion," smiled Massie.

"Are you concerned by suggesting that there's something wrong it could lead to more violence?" asked Raju later in the interview.

"No, no," Massie replied.

"Why?" Raju challenged.

"I don't see any violence," Massie said as he walked away.

The CNN report claimed that Massie said, "I didn't see any violence," as if he were denying the attacks on the U.S. Capitol in January.

Massie warned that he may not take any more questions from CNN unless the network corrects its report.

"I said 'don't,' not 'didn't' The audio is there for all to hear," said Massie on Twitter.

I said “don't," not “didn't" The audio is there for all to hear. Please fix your article @mkraju @CNN I'm one of t… https://t.co/hm4oEfnA3y
— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) 1620950426.0

"Please fix your article @mkraju @CNN I'm one of the few GOP folks who will even talk to you in the hallway. There will be zero if you insist on misreporting our words," he added.

The CNN report tried to group Massie's comment with other Republicans who refused to talk about the rioting at the Capitol or downplayed the violence that occurred.

Massie had previously earned the ire of former President Donald Trump when he tried to derail passage of the first coronavirus relief bill in March 2020. Trump called him a "third rate grandstander" and called for the party to expel him.

Here's the misleading report from CNN:

CNN reporter chases GOP lawmaker after Capitol riot remarkwww.youtube.com

Horowitz: Congressman accuses CDC of misleading the public about need for vaccine for those already recovered from COVID-19



Just how much does our government want to promote the false premise that natural infection with COVID-19 does not convey long-term immunity? Officials appear to want the public to believe that those already infected should get the vaccine just as quickly as those who haven't gotten the infection, which would likely lead to people who don't need it using up scarce doses of the vaccine.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), having had the virus himself, was perturbed when he noticed a startlingly false statement in the CDC's "Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices' Interim Recommendation for Use of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine" published in December with regard to those who have already had the virus. "Consistent high efficacy (≥92%) was observed across age, sex, race, and ethnicity categories and among persons with underlying medical conditions, as well as among participants with evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection," stated the original version of the report, co-authored by over a dozen authors and scientists.

Massie told me he jumped out of his seat upon reading that line, because the CDC was in fact saying that the clinical trial on the Pfizer vaccine proved the vaccine to further advance immunity among those naturally infected just like it does for those without infection. Having already contracted the virus, Massie was appalled that the CDC, in this report and through other campaigns, would be suggesting that he take just as high a priority for the vaccine as someone who doesn't have any natural immunity.

The congressman was interviewed by Sharyl Attkisson, who reported on Massie's correspondence with the CDC in his attempt to correct the record. Indeed, no clinical trial has shown that the vaccine furthers one's immunity after already having had the virus. In fact, among approximately 1,300 people who had prior infections in the Pfizer study (650 in the vaccine group and 650 in the placebo group) there were 10 reinfections in the vaccine group and 9 in the placebo group after the first dose and one in each group after the second dose. Thus, their own trial actually showed zero evidence of the vaccine advancing the degree of immunity beyond that which is conveyed naturally. Some recent studies have already shown that natural infection offers at least as much protection from future infection, especially from serious symptoms, as the vaccine.

This false claim by the CDC cannot be viewed in a vacuum. Attkisson released a transcript of a conversation Massie had with CDC official Dr. Amanda Cohn in which she thanks him profusely for catching the mistake. "I think we read that thing so many times that when, you know, we just skipped right over it," said Dr. Cohn in the conversation that Massie recorded. "We know we can't be perfect, we know we're gonna miss things. You will forever after be known in our office as 'Eagle-Eyed Man.'"

However, just two days later, Dr. Cohn moderated a panel discussion with medical professionals from the CDC to answer questions about the vaccine. Dr. Sara Oliver of the CDC, the lead author of the guidance with the original mistake about vaccine efficacy for those with prior infection, said clearly during the video conference, "Data from both clinical trials suggests that people with prior infection are still likely to benefit from vaccination."

The CDC refuses to convey the truth to the public that natural immunity is at least as effective as the vaccine and that no study has ever shown at this point that the vaccine furthers natural immunity. Attkisson reports that for at least a month after Massie's phone calls with the CDC, the agency refused to change the document. Finally, they corrected the sentence about effectiveness in those with prior infections, but basically restated the false premise that evidence shows effectiveness among those with prior infection.

The updated version from January 29 separated the original sentence into two sentences and reads as follows: "Consistent high efficacy (≥92%) was observed across age, sex, race, and ethnicity categories and among persons with underlying medical conditions. Efficacy was similarly high in a secondary analysis including participants both with or without evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection."

If you are scratching your head wondering how this is a correction, you are not missing anything. Rep. Massie told me in an interview that "these words 'with or without evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection' imply that regardless of whether you had COVID or not, this vaccine is proven to be effective." According to Massie, "this is absolutely not borne out in either the Pfizer or Moderna trials."

"They are still misleading people, and this time it's intentional," said the irate congressman. "This is just a restatement of their mistake; this is not a correction."

The Moderna vaccine showed similar results to the Pfizer one, with no further efficacy of the vaccine vs. natural infection. For the CDC's interim recommendation on Moderna, which was written a week later, the CDC indeed made sure to properly and accurately explain the results. "High efficacy (≥86%) was observed across age, sex, race, and ethnicity categories and among persons with underlying medical conditions." The report does not mention those with prior infection, and in fact, in the sentence before, it says explicitly that the effectiveness was "among persons without evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, which was the primary study endpoint" (emphasis added).

So why does the CDC still refuse to accurately publish the Pfizer recommendation in accordance with the results from the clinical trial, and why are officials still refusing to publicize the benefits of natural immunity and caution against prioritizing those who were already infected? Either the powers that be in Big Pharma don't want to lose their customer base, given that over 100 million people likely contracted the virus already, or our government wants to continue peddling panic and fear forever with no expiration date by misleading people to think they will always be at risk for serious illness from a relapse of COVID. Which is perhaps why officials are demanding that the human rights violations continue even after we receive the vaccine itsself – a vaccine that they claim is more effective than natural immunity.