Epstein list disclosure, Congressional speech immunity, Thomas Massie Marjorie Taylor Greene
BREAKING: Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) announces he and Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) are seriously considering naming the “Epstein list NAMES” on the house floor under their Constitutional “speech or debate” immunity – because the victims could get sued for doing it themselves. pic.twitter.com/EpaSAHo7cG
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 4, 2025
- YOU MAY ALSO LIKE TO WATCH THIS TRENDING STORY ON YOUTUBE. Waverly Hills Hospital's Horror Story: The Most Haunted Room 502
BREAKING: Rep. Thomas Massie and Marjorie Taylor Greene Consider Naming "Epstein List NAMES"
In a bold move, Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) have announced they are seriously considering revealing the "Epstein list NAMES" on the House floor. This decision stems from their belief in the protection afforded by Constitutional "speech or debate" immunity. By utilizing this immunity, they aim to bring attention to names that might otherwise remain undisclosed, due to concerns that victims could face legal repercussions for making such declarations themselves.
Why This Matters
The implications of naming individuals associated with Jeffrey Epstein are significant. Epstein’s case has been a focal point in discussions about accountability and justice for victims of sexual abuse and trafficking. With both Massie and Greene advocating for transparency, this potential announcement could spark a broader conversation about the ongoing impacts of Epstein’s actions and the individuals involved.
The Role of Congressional Immunity
Congressional "speech or debate" immunity is a critical aspect of the legislative process that allows members of Congress to speak freely without the fear of legal consequences. This provision is designed to encourage open debate on important issues, but its application in this context raises questions about the ethics of naming individuals on the House floor.
Public Reaction
The announcement has already garnered significant public interest and varying opinions. Supporters argue that it could be a necessary step towards justice, while critics caution against the potential implications of publicly naming individuals without due process.
For those looking to stay informed on this developing story, follow Eric Daugherty’s updates on Twitter for the latest developments. As this situation unfolds, it will be interesting to see how it shapes the narrative around accountability in cases of sexual misconduct and victim protection.