That was...a joke. The "interviewer" was Jiminy Glick.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Representative|Republican|North Carolina District 8
Mark Harris
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 535
Yes76%
No24%
Present0%
Not Voting0%
Party align92%
Cross-party1%
SoupScore
District Map
Congressional District 8
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Mark Harris
U.S. RepresentativeRepublicanNorth Carolina District 8
SoupScore
Mark's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 14 sponsored · 69 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
It doesn't matter.
It's not good enough.
It won't change things.
It's just cosmetic.
It should have happened years ago.
It doesn't mean anything.
It's too late.
It doesn't make up for the fact that...
Pissing on glimmers of hopefulness isn't tough-minded. It's just wallowing in a comfort zone.
On CNN, Anderson Cooper using the sentence "That was a lie" over and over tonight regarding the words of Noem, Miller and Bovino.
I'm getting "Don't be so ridiculously cheerful!" in response to THIS POST. Bluesky, never change.
Actually, no, change a little.
The President of the United States appears to have begun a journey toward deciding that federal thugs murdering innocent people does not make the great TV he assumed it would. I wish we did not live in a world in which this counts as encouraging news, but it does.
I cannot tell you how many people, including me, have been seriously screwed by this. Both sides deserve to be locked in a room without food, water, heat, or mercy until a deal can be reached.
This country is in crisis because of its reckless and deranged leadership, something a majority of Americans are coming to understand. That is worth stating plainly and clearly in an editorial. It does not require both-sides-ism, false equivalence, blame-shifting, or rhetorical ass-covering. x
Second, like many manifestly disingenuous sentences, this one collapses under the weight of its necessarily vague language. What does "to AVOID violence" mean? Not to commit acts of violence? Or to make sure that you do absolutely nothing that might encourage any ICE agent to put you in harm's way?>
To be clear: First of all, no. The obligation of protesters in the street--whether mere observers or the civilly disobedient--is in no way EQUAL to the obligation of a masked, poorly trained, unaccountable, armed federal force rolling through American streets at the behest of an authoritarian.>
This is from the NYT masthead editorial about the murders of Renee Good and Alex Pretti. The highlighted line invalidates not just the editorial, but the very idea of newspaper editorials crafted by the consensus of a board. Better to publish nothing at all than to publish a line like this.
!["The temperature in Minneapolis is dangerously high. There is an urgent need for the federal agents deployed to the city to step back and take a breath before more Americans are hurt or killed. [Highlighted]: Those protesting the Trump administration have an equal obligation to avoid violence.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did%3Aplc%3Azknk3rjsatent75sdbbopown/bafkreid6g5bmlf3gyxj2egzcy33hkwiaqgrzuoh3yhbpenmvdmvyyobfq4@jpeg)
I will say, watching Blanche, Scalise, Bessent, and Noem today, that it's clear the administration knows it's losing. The combo of "This was a tragedy"/"Who can really tell what's on that video?"/"But he had a gun"/"This would only happen in Minneapolis" was flailing and panicky. They're scared.
This administration is never more dangerous than when it knows it's losing a public-relations war, because the only two responses it ever makes are 1) pretend it won but quickly pivot or 2) double down. It's hard to know which way these bottomlessly evil people will go. We're in for a fateful week.>
These monsters have worked for decades to create an America in which it's perfectly okay for civilians to walk around with a loaded weapon, and now they're saying if you have a gun at a protest, the state can murder you.
For anyone out there who wishes I would stay in my lane: I would LOVE a world in which I can just post about old Columbo episodes and Ross Macdonald novels and the history of best supporting actress and my next book. I just need several conditions to be met first. Let us work toward them together!
Reposted byMark Harris
Kare 11 local news just read, in full, this statement from Michael and Susan Pretti, the parents of Alex Pretti.
"Please get the truth out about our son."
You can help to stop it by voting against the funding bill. Will you do that?
I hope Democratic senators and congressmen understand, out of pure lizard-brain self-interest if moral decency happens to be unavailable, what is at stake for them if they don't handle this the right way. This is a true "If not now, when?" moment.
No. They do not "appear to" contradict it. They contradict it.
Reposted byMark Harris
Alex Pretti, the man killed by federal agents today in Minneapolis, appears to have been a registered nurse, an athlete, a son and a brother, with ties to Colorado and Wisconsin.
Here is a photo he used for several accounts.
The Strib has identified him. Alex Pretti. Another 37-year-old executed for standing up for our immigrant neighbors. For shame.
www.startribune.com/ice-raids-mi...
Nope, I don't think he's rational. But I think one of the very few things he understands with some clarity is the impact of TV--and to him this is TV.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History535 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
535 total votes
Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.
| Date | Bill | Question | Position | Party Maj | Align? | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-20 | H.R. 1681 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-04-17 | H. Res. 1175 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | YES | ✕↔ | Failed |
| 2026-04-17 | H. Res. 1175 (119th) | Approve amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-04-17 | H. Res. 1175 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-04-16 | H. Res. 1156 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-04-16 | H.R. 1689 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-04-16 | H. Res. 965 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-04-16 | H.R. 6398 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-04-16 | H.R. 6398 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-04-16 | H.R. 6409 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-04-16 | H.R. 6409 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-04-16 | H. Con. Res. 40 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-04-15 | H. Res. 965 (119th) | Motion to Discharge | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-04-15 | H. Res. 1174 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-04-15 | H. Res. 1174 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-04-14 | H.R. 7613 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-04-14 | H.R. 1011 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-28 | H. Res. 1142 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-28 | H. Res. 1142 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-28 | — | Motion to Adjourn | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-27 | H.R. 7084 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-26 | H.R. 8029 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-26 | H.R. 8029 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-03-26 | H. Res. 1128 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-25 | H.R. 5103 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-25 | H.R. 5103 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-03-25 | H. Res. 1131 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-25 | H. Res. 1131 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-24 | H.R. 6422 (119th) | Fast-track passage | NO | YES | ✕ | Passed |
| 2026-03-19 | H.R. 4638 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-18 | H.J. Res. 139 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-03-18 | H.R. 1958 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-18 | H.R. 556 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-18 | H.R. 556 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-03-17 | H. Res. 1115 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-17 | H. Res. 1115 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-17 | S. 3971 (119th) | Fast-track passage | NO | YES | ✕ | Passed |
| 2026-03-17 | H.R. 4294 (119th) | Fast-track passage | NO | YES | ✕ | Passed |
| 2026-03-05 | H.R. 7744 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-05 | H.R. 7744 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-03-05 | H. Con. Res. 38 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-03-05 | H. Res. 1099 (119th) | Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-04 | H. Res. 1100 (119th) | Motion to Refer | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-04 | H.R. 6472 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-04 | S. 723 (119th) | Fast-track passage | NO | YES | ✕ | Passed |
| 2026-03-04 | H. Res. 1095 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-03-04 | H. Res. 1095 (119th) | End debate now | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-02-25 | H.R. 4758 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-02-25 | H.R. 4758 (119th) | Send back to committee | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-02-24 | H.R. 4626 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
Alignment stats consider only votes where a clear yes/no majority existed for the legislator's party. Cross-party marks divergence where the vote matched the opposite party majority. ↔ indicates cross-party divergence.