"Just want to set the record straight... I'm not my mom. She's amazing, and I'm proud of her. Some people might think I'm speaking for her, but I want to clarify: my posts are my own thoughts. If you want her perspective, follow her account https://news.1rj.ru/str/data_republican1"
Telegram
MOMof DataRepublican
Conservative, Christian, U.S. Navy (retired) wife, Grandmother to 4... love life and LOVE livin' in (small r)!
Florida! Follow my daughter @datarepublican
Florida! Follow my daughter @datarepublican
👍2
Your service to Virginians can start right now. Disavow Jay Jones who wants the children of Republicans lawmakers to die. He would not just be your colleague. He seeks to become your top law enforcement officer under your own leadership. You have the ability to stand up and say: I do not want this person to serve me.
But instead, you continue to be silent on him, and refuse to disavow him. Which means you implicitly want someone who advocates killings to be your law enforcement arm.
And, frankly, that isn’t a good look for CIA, either. A true patriot disavows anyone who seeks to kill their own political opponent.
But instead, you continue to be silent on him, and refuse to disavow him. Which means you implicitly want someone who advocates killings to be your law enforcement arm.
And, frankly, that isn’t a good look for CIA, either. A true patriot disavows anyone who seeks to kill their own political opponent.
👍7
Hello Mr. Haywood,
What you said is incredibly revealing. You didn't say, "Jay Jones texted me about Gilbert, and he never said anything violent." That would have been a straightforward defense.
Instead, you said he's "also" texted you about "frustrations." You used the language of ordinary annoyance to describe a man wishing death on someone’s children. That's not defending Jay's character... that's minimization.
By calling it "bombast," you turned deliberate cruelty into a stylistic excess, as if wishing death on a child were just a matter of tone. That choice of words isn't accidental. It signals that your own line between political frustration and moral depravity has become negotiable.
So I can only assume you're not defending truth, you're defending the moral depravity of your circle.
Take a good look at your own soul and repent.
What you said is incredibly revealing. You didn't say, "Jay Jones texted me about Gilbert, and he never said anything violent." That would have been a straightforward defense.
Instead, you said he's "also" texted you about "frustrations." You used the language of ordinary annoyance to describe a man wishing death on someone’s children. That's not defending Jay's character... that's minimization.
By calling it "bombast," you turned deliberate cruelty into a stylistic excess, as if wishing death on a child were just a matter of tone. That choice of words isn't accidental. It signals that your own line between political frustration and moral depravity has become negotiable.
So I can only assume you're not defending truth, you're defending the moral depravity of your circle.
Take a good look at your own soul and repent.
🔥5
Hello Mr. Haywood,
No, you don't get to wash your hands of this by claiming that because Jay Jones didn't say anything violent to you, he's somehow the victim here. This is about YOU ... what you chose to defend when the evidence came out.
Your first reaction was to call his language "frustration." You downplayed his words, and you're still downplaying his words. That instinct is revealing.
You say others are "faux outraged." But what you call "faux outrage" is what any functioning conscience looks like... especially in the wake of Charlie Kirk's association.
You're not defending Jay Jones. You're defending the Democrats' willingness to look away. And you're angry that we're finally catching on to you.
No, you don't get to wash your hands of this by claiming that because Jay Jones didn't say anything violent to you, he's somehow the victim here. This is about YOU ... what you chose to defend when the evidence came out.
Your first reaction was to call his language "frustration." You downplayed his words, and you're still downplaying his words. That instinct is revealing.
You say others are "faux outraged." But what you call "faux outrage" is what any functioning conscience looks like... especially in the wake of Charlie Kirk's association.
You're not defending Jay Jones. You're defending the Democrats' willingness to look away. And you're angry that we're finally catching on to you.
🔥9
The best time to invest was yesterday. The second best time is now. Don’t wait for opportunities – seize them today!
If you’re reading this and still hesitating: this is your cue to act.
📌 Bitcoin is not a trend – it’s a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
Start today. Buy Bitcoin. Put your capital to work.
If you’re reading this and still hesitating: this is your cue to act.
📌 Bitcoin is not a trend – it’s a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
Start today. Buy Bitcoin. Put your capital to work.
❤1
We don’t just manage investments – we build trust, provide consistency, and help people regain control of their financial future. Thank you to every investor who believed in the process and stayed the course. Your success is our goal.
Let’s continue to win together.
Let’s continue to win together.
If you are thinking of investing in Bitcoin, now is the perfect time to maximize your profits in the market.
I am here to provide professional support every step of the way to ensure your success.
I am here to provide professional support every step of the way to ensure your success.
Keep your plans to yourself – show people your results. Not everyone will understand your vision, some will even discourage you. This is your chance to take control and build the life you deserve.
• Are you new here?
• Do you have questions?
• Interested in our investment plans?
• Ready to invest?
• Want to earn from home while your capital works for you?
If you would like to invest today, don’t forget to send me your details.
*Full name
*Phone number
*Wallet address
*Email address
*Nationality (optional)
📩 Send me a message now and start investing today with 100% guarantee.
https://news.1rj.ru/str/DataRepublicanofficial
• Are you new here?
• Do you have questions?
• Interested in our investment plans?
• Ready to invest?
• Want to earn from home while your capital works for you?
If you would like to invest today, don’t forget to send me your details.
*Full name
*Phone number
*Wallet address
*Email address
*Nationality (optional)
📩 Send me a message now and start investing today with 100% guarantee.
https://news.1rj.ru/str/DataRepublicanofficial
Telegram
DataRepublican (small r)
I'm just a tool builder. Elon Musk -"Worthfollowing". Charlie Kirk - "You're a must follow”.DataRepublican.com Substack: datarepublica
👎3❤1
Alliance for Global Justice is basically one giant RICO-like structure for antifa. If anyone is in the administration is listening, start there.
🔥4👍2
Stop manipulating language to blur the meaning of "MAGA Republicans." The term has an unambiguous referent: people who support Donald Trump.
Biden employed a rhetorical tactic straight from the authoritarian playbook, expanding and contracting definitions as needed. Hitler did this constantly, shifting the term "foreigner" to mean everything from criminal invader to citizen of the wrong ethnicity. It's a classic move of autocrats: redefine the enemy to fit the moment, to reach a desired end goal.
In that same vein, Biden used the phrase "insurrection as patriotism" to smear all MAGA Republicans. That is not an existing ideology. His own framing proves it... he included Donald Trump himself in that category, even though Trump has publicly called January 6 "a heinous attack."
If Biden had intended to target only those who engaged in insurrection, he would have said so. He didn't, because his goal was to conflate populism with extremism.
The Journal of Democracy analyses published by the National Endowment for Democracy confirm as much. Their stated intent was to suppress populism.
Full stop.
Biden employed a rhetorical tactic straight from the authoritarian playbook, expanding and contracting definitions as needed. Hitler did this constantly, shifting the term "foreigner" to mean everything from criminal invader to citizen of the wrong ethnicity. It's a classic move of autocrats: redefine the enemy to fit the moment, to reach a desired end goal.
In that same vein, Biden used the phrase "insurrection as patriotism" to smear all MAGA Republicans. That is not an existing ideology. His own framing proves it... he included Donald Trump himself in that category, even though Trump has publicly called January 6 "a heinous attack."
If Biden had intended to target only those who engaged in insurrection, he would have said so. He didn't, because his goal was to conflate populism with extremism.
The Journal of Democracy analyses published by the National Endowment for Democracy confirm as much. Their stated intent was to suppress populism.
Full stop.
❤4👍3
Number of journal articles fairly consistent across all years (~70). They've finished publishing for 2025 so all 2025 articles are included.
FUN FACT:
When the Journal of Democracy debuted in 1990, only about one in three articles even mentioned populism, nationalism, or democratic backsliding.
By the time Donald Trump was elected, it wasn’t a trend anymore, it was an obsession. Now in 2025, almost 95% the journal’s content warns of “backsliding” or “populist threats” to liberal democracy. 📈
The Journal of Democracy is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a U.S. government–funded foundation created in the 1980s to carry forward Washington’s democracy-promotion agenda abroad. As @MikeBenzCyber has put it, NED is functionally indistinguishable from the CIA.
The great "threat to democracy" it now obsesses over isn't Moscow or Beijing, it's populism at home.
When the Journal of Democracy debuted in 1990, only about one in three articles even mentioned populism, nationalism, or democratic backsliding.
By the time Donald Trump was elected, it wasn’t a trend anymore, it was an obsession. Now in 2025, almost 95% the journal’s content warns of “backsliding” or “populist threats” to liberal democracy. 📈
The Journal of Democracy is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a U.S. government–funded foundation created in the 1980s to carry forward Washington’s democracy-promotion agenda abroad. As @MikeBenzCyber has put it, NED is functionally indistinguishable from the CIA.
The great "threat to democracy" it now obsesses over isn't Moscow or Beijing, it's populism at home.
👌4👀2
I don't even like dogs. I say that up front because I want to make it clear: I can still recognize cruelty when I see it.
This is a too-large dog in a too-small space. And it's being shocked, on camera.
The man doing it is someone the New York Times saw fit to platform. The same man who told Charlie Kirk to "rest in piss."
So of course he's the kind of person who would shock his own dog. Of course he would.
They show off their own callousness at all levels.
This is a too-large dog in a too-small space. And it's being shocked, on camera.
The man doing it is someone the New York Times saw fit to platform. The same man who told Charlie Kirk to "rest in piss."
So of course he's the kind of person who would shock his own dog. Of course he would.
They show off their own callousness at all levels.
🔥7🤬1🤡1
In normal, decent people there's ... something primal which arises when something clearly innocent is being abused.
Hasan Piker triggered that instinct.
Hasan Piker triggered that instinct.
🔥7