Rathbone (@_rathbone) header
Rathbone (@_rathbone) profile picture

I livestream every night on Youtube 5pm PST

Joined November 2014
Photo by Rathbone (@_rathbone)Photo by Rathbone (@_rathbone)Photo by Rathbone (@_rathbone)Photo by Rathbone (@_rathbone)Photo by Rathbone (@_rathbone)Photo by Rathbone (@_rathbone)Photo by Rathbone (@_rathbone)Photo by Rathbone (@_rathbone)Photo by Rathbone (@_rathbone)Photo by Rathbone (@_rathbone)
Rathbone retweeted
It’s no coincidence that the 11 democrats who failed to show up to the vote to impeach Hegseth ALL took money from Israel PACs. All of them. They couldn’t even wait a week to commit literal treason.
60
1,344
15
5,192
28,355
He's already changing his tune. He released a previous video blaming Republicans for the failure of the Hegseth vote. No one believed him and he was community noted. He sees which way the wind is blowing so he's getting ahead of it. Now he makes a video acknowledging the 11 democrats who didn't show up for the vote. Our politicians are actors with scripts and no one should believe a word they say.
People are right to be angry about the Hegseth vote failing. The Democratic Party has not led as an anti-war party. This is another example of that. Iraq. Libya. Yemen. Israel. Iran. A new generation must make us an anti-war party.
10
60
2
298
3,368
AOC, Professor of Powerlessness.
AOC busts out the whiteboard to explain why democrats can’t do anything and you won’t be getting healthcare.
33
165
6
960
9,042
The way she went from 'I affirmatively support Jeffries bc he supports my housing agenda in NYC' to 'I support Jeffries bc the race is unopposed' -- eg i have no choice -- is quite telling. She's being exposed for offering *no* resistance whatsoever. What she's saying here is basically: 'Ofcourse new electeds are coming here with a mandate & don't expect to have to immediately bend the knee...but they'll bend eventually. Look at me. I'm proof.'
Rep. @AOC defends newly elected Dems who want answers about the agenda before pledging their support to @RepJeffries — who she says she is supporting in the “unopposed” race
109
566
17
2,948
45,593
I’m sure those 11 democrats will be present when it’s time to vote in AIPAC Shakur as Speaker of the House though.
31
393
7
3,201
20,521
Democrats are using black people as human shields to launder Zionism through Congress.
13
65
3
190
2,631
What are the names of the democrat representatives that didn’t show up for work yesterday? @grok
13
25
277
8,302
Adam is always correct.
In flailing to impeach Hegseth, which they had the votes to do, the Democratic Party has just proven, once again, that they aren’t with shit and revolution is the only answer.
7
61
592
8,136
Rathbone retweeted
In flailing to impeach Hegseth, which they had the votes to do, the Democratic Party has just proven, once again, that they aren’t with shit and revolution is the only answer.
71
746
20
4,882
47,283
Rathbone retweeted
They do not have it in them!! They have “numbers”, but no heart!!!!
⭕️ It would take just ~43 House Democrats to keep Hakeem Jeffries from becoming speaker. The Congressional Progressive Caucus alone expects more than 100 members in January. 🔹Its chair, Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), co-sponsored Rep. Rashida Tlaib's November 2025 resolution "recognizing the genocide of the Palestinian people in Gaza." Now he says he expects to "deliver the votes" for Jeffries. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), another co-sponsor, told MS NOW on Monday that Jeffries will have the caucus's unanimous support, calling his expected rise a "pretty historic moment." In all, 22 House Democrats backed the genocide resolution and well over 40 have described Israel’s actions as genocide. 🔹Jeffries has been one of the strongest supporters of Israel’s military response in Gaza. He opposed a July bid to cut off US military aid to Israel, saying it would "restrict our country's ability to confront Hamas, Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations in the region." His promised "reset" wouldn't touch aid until the current 10-year deal expires in 2028. 🔹The math: Speaker needs 218 votes cast for a person by name on Jan 3, 2027. With roughly 260 Democrats, if 43 commit to naming someone else and every Republican votes against Jeffries, he falls short. 🔹It's been done before. In January 2023, about 20 Republicans withheld their votes from Rep. Kevin McCarthy through 15 rounds of voting. He won only after major concessions, including a rule letting any single member force a vote to remove the speaker, which Rep. Matt Gaetz used to oust him nine months later. 🔗 Drop Site's Julian Andreone asked Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), another co-sponsor of the genocide resolution who backs Jeffries, whether progressives could use that kind of leverage.
29
163
4
1,113
16,274
This is the real story. Thank you @5149jamesli !!
🚨 EXPOSED: 11 Democrats “mysteriously” failed to show up to work today, allowing Republicans to pass a motion to block Pete Hegseth’s impeachment from moving forward. It’s almost like they’re all on the same team… 🤨
6
76
1
409
4,953
If you hear the phrase “chinese spy” in a headline, you can be sure the story was crafted by the CIA.
9
57
2
315
2,839
AOC admits that Republicans were able to oust their speaker in 2023 bc of the small margins in the house. When there were similarly small margins in 2021, major left media outlets & Jayapal claimed the plan was impossible bc: 1) you’d end up with a Republican speaker (which is impossible unless Dems voted Republican) 2) you needed someone to run against Pelosi. (False, if you don’t get 118 votes you’re not speaker even if hold outs don’t coalesce behind an alternative). AOC claimed it would be a bad idea to force the vote bc she wanted to reserve her political capital to win a $15 min wage. Min wage is still 7.25. Progressives have leverage and choose to bend the knee. And they can always find access journalists on the left to run cover for them.
I asked @AOC about her position on Hakeem Jeffries’ bid for Speaker of the House. She told me that since nobody else is running, an attempt to challenge him is “unrealistic” xitter.twitterapi.xyz/DropSiteNews/status/21…
45
340
6
1,290
25,493
We should all be following @briebriejoy
I was worried about keeping up with my $1000 a month insurance premium, but since a congress member who has healthcare (and makes more than me) might lose their job, I guess I'll just struggle. After all, whom among us would be willing to lose their job for their principles?
15
90
1
819
10,773
And not only that, it would break the private insurance monopoly. They would never allow that to happen politically.
Replying to @_rathbone
They’ll never give us healthcare, it means losing too much donor money.
7
17
1
120
2,471
Replying to @brhodes @AhmedMoor
Everyone get ready for a lot more of this under the so-called “leader” Hakeem Jeffries!
17
57
2
632
12,270
Again, you don't need an "alternative." You can write in "Janet Jackson" and if Jeffries doesn't get 118 votes, he's not speaker. Republicans did this to McCarthy in 2023 over 15 rounds of voting.
“More than a million people signed a petition asking @HouseDemocrats to not elect @RepJeffries speaker— will that carry weight?” @AOC reiterates that nobody is running against Jeffries, telling @JulianAndreone “it’s not a race right now” so 40+ Dems opposing is unlikely
133
1,121
37
5,879
83,536
I'll say that I think Mamdani and AOC have made a major miscalculation in forging whatever deal they did with Jeffries last year and are missing a major opportunity to jump in front of the clear populist rage against the democratic party centrist Zionist leadership.
177
776
35
7,881
119,779