U.S. Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), one of the de facto leaders of the far-right Freedom Caucus, expressed outrage Thursday afternoon as the House debated a spending bill required to keep the government running and avoid a shutdown Friday at midnight.

Blasting Republicans and Democrats voting for the legislation, Roy lamented agencies and individuals he opposes that will also receive funding should the bill pass as expected. (The bill did pass.)

“They’re gonna vote to continue to fund the radical progressive policies embedded in it. Continue to fund the bureaucracy that’s at war with the American people. Continue to fund open borders. Continue to fund Alejandro Mayorkas, even as we attempt to impeach him in the Homeland Security Committee. We’re going to fund him. We’re going to fund those open borders. We’re going to fund the United Nations. We’re going to fund the World Health Organization. We’re going to fund UNRWA to give money to the Palestinians that gets to Hamas. And we’re gonna go campaign against those things, but we’re gonna fund them.”

“It is Groundhog Day in the House chamber all the time, every day,” he added.

READ MORE: ‘War on Women’: Trump Defense Is Now to Blame E. Jean Carroll Say Legal Experts

Roy: We’re going to campaign against those things but we’re going to fund them. pic.twitter.com/jwOhejrIHy

— Acyn (@Acyn) January 18, 2024

Roy, who was among the first to float the idea of removing Republicans’ latest Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, on Thursday announced, “It does not matter who is sitting in the Speaker’s seat or who has the majority. We keep doing the same stupid stuff.”

Rep. Roy (R-TX): It doesn’t matter who is sitting in the speaker’s seat or who has the majority. We keep doing the same stupid stuff. pic.twitter.com/7VOhkRJeyd

— Acyn (@Acyn) January 18, 2024

He was quickly heckled.

Chip Roy now getting heckled pic.twitter.com/YDmi7tRVir

— Acyn (@Acyn) January 18, 2024

Congressman Roy, a self-professed chaos supporter and a former chief of staff to U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), made national headlines – and some enemies on the right – when he brought his anger to the House floor late last year, berating his colleagues and admitting they had accomplished nothing all year – and had nothing to campaign on.

READ MORE: ‘Jailing and Killing Americans’: Expert Issues Warning on Trump’s Latest Claim

“One thing!” the angry congressman from Texas shouted. “I want my Republican colleagues to give me one thing. One. That I can go campaign on and say we did. One! Anybody sitting in the complex, if you want to come down to the floor and come explain to me, one material, meaningful, significant thing the Republican majority has done besides, ‘Well, I guess it’s not as bad as the Democrats.’”

In 2019, during one of Congressman Roy’s first remarks in a committee, he broke down, almost in tears, furious that Americans were angry that big pharmaceutical companies were making so much money.

Congressman Roy called it “offensive” – not that companies were dramatically raising prices on life-saving drugs they sell in other countries for a fraction of the cost, but over Americans criticizing the drug manufacturers for making exorbitant profits while people are literally dying because they can’t afford the high cost of their prescriptions.

“I hope you make a lot of money!” Roy declared, waving his hand in the air.

Rep. Chip Roy’s meltdown about profit is wild. Just wild. Never seen anything like it. pic.twitter.com/FrSKTzWGE0

— Jason Rosenberg (@mynameisjro) May 16, 2019

That same year he was one of just seven Republicans to vote against naming a U.S. Post Office after Democratic U.S. Rep. Louise Slaughter of New York, who served in Congress for 31 years, literally until the day of her death.

Rep. Roy also that year blocked a 5-month overdue disaster aid relief bill, and said it’s “fine” that migrant children are dying at the border.

In 2021 Roy suggested Republicans would declare Civil War if Democrats won the Georgia runoff elections (they did).

In 2022 Roy voted against funding to help ease the baby formula shortage.

Roy tried to derail the Respect for Marriage Act, which protects same-sex and interracial marriages.

He has voted against legislation to aid victims of child sex abuse.

He has called for defunding the Dept. of Homeland Security.

And Congressman Roy has called to defund the U.S. Armed Forces if the Pentagon allows LGBTQ Pride celebrations.

Watch the videos above or at this link.

RELATED: ‘Close Friends’: Johnson’s Grip Slips as Far Right Feuding Intensifies

Donald Trump’s legal team appears to have cemented defense their strategy and are now blaming the victim, E. Jean Carroll, in the penalty phase of her defamation and sexual abuse civil case against the ex-president, experts are saying. This portion of the trial is to determine how much Trump must pay Carroll, a journalist who this week on the stand detailed how Trump’s attacks cost her her valuable reputation and her income.

“Attended the E Jean Carroll trial today,” writes former FBI General Counsel and MSNBC legal analyst Andrew Weissmann. He notes that “the Trump defense appears to be Carroll is to blame, since by going public with the sexual assault claim, Trump had to defame her and her reputation suffered only because of her decision to report the assault.”

“Trump defense=war on women,” Weissmann adds.

MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin, also at the trial in Manhattan, adds a detailed explanation.

READ MORE: ‘Jailing and Killing Americans’: Expert Issues Warning on Trump’s Latest Claim

Trump attorney Alina Habba’s “strategy seems to be a variation on a well-known political theme: Are you better off today than you were four years ago?” Rubin reveals.

The answer is a qualified “yes,” but she explains why the question itself is a poor one.

“Carroll earns more money today by posting to her Substack roughly three times a week than she did in 2019, when she wrote her column for Elle once a month for half the salary she had been paid just a couple of years prior,” says Rubin.

“But the attempt to prove the backlash to Carroll’s account predated Trump’s attack fell flat, in large part because the tweets Habba showed were qualitatively different than the violent threats & accusations of paid political work that began with Trump’s 6/21/19 attack,” Rubin writes. “And those threats, as Carroll powerfully testified yesterday and today, have never stopped, ending her world as she knew it. Even beyond the threats, she maintained, more people know her today, but she is also reviled as a liar, a wack job, and a partisan operative.”

Rubin explains that “Habba wanted the jury to doubt Carroll’s credibility because she has (gasp!) written about sex openly and with humor. She’s even written about ‘dominat[ing] men’ and jokingly asked what women should do about the problem of their partner’s penises.”

READ MORE: Brown Bags and Ballots: Viral Videos Capture Chaotic Iowa Caucus System

CNN legal analyst Norm Eisen earlier Thursday surmised damages the jury might require Trump to pay Carroll could be “big.”

“E. Jean Carroll is a powerful witness,” Eisen wrote. “Combine that w Trump’s rude demeanor & asides—big damages award likely coming.”

Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Signorelli offered more insight into damages.

“The jury will hear about how ‘wealthy’ Trump says he is. Punitive damages are in part based on the defendant’s wealth [because] they are meant to punish a wrongdoer and only a large award can do so w/ a well to do defendant.”

He says he’s expecting “an extremely large award.”

MSNBC executive producer Kyle Griffin highlights how much Trump’s actions might cost the ex-president who is an adjudicated rapist.

“Northwestern professor Ashlee Humphreys, who was called as a witness by E. Jean Carroll’s lawyers as an expert on damages, testified it could cost up to $12.1 million for Carroll to repair her reputation with those who likely believed Donald Trump.”

Donald Trump’s latest pronouncement, an overnight outburst directed at the U.S. Supreme Court, claiming he is entitled to “complete and total immunity” because he was president, even if he “crossed the line,” is being seen as a dangerous and deadly threat and a harbinger of what a second Trump presidential term would mean.

Critics on Thursday have been highly-focused on the ex-president’s remarks, which he posted just before 2 AM on his Truth Social website, with many now sounding the alarm.

“A President of the United States must have full immunity, without which it would be impossible for him/her to properly function,” Trump wrote, in all-caps. “Even events that ‘cross the line’ must fall under total immunity, or it will be years of trauma trying to determine good from bad.”

“All presidents must have complete & total presidential immunity, or the authority & decisiveness of a president of the United States will be stripped & gone forever. Hopefully this will be an easy decision. God bless the Supreme Court!” insisted the ex-president, a recently-adjudicated rapist who is facing 91 federal and state criminal charges in four cases across three jurisdictions, not to mention the civil trials that may end up costing him part of his real estate empire, and possibly hundreds of millions of dollars.

READ MORE: Backlash for ‘Pro-Putin’ Johnson After Admitting ‘Frequent’ Talks With Trump on Border Bill

New York University professor Ruth Ben-Ghiat “writes about fascism, authoritarianism, propaganda, and the threats these present to democracies around the world,” her bio reads. She has become a go-to expert on cable news and is an MSNBC columnist.

Professor Ben-Ghiat did not mince words on Thursday.

“Trump is telling Americans very clearly that he will be jailing and killing Americans,” she warned. “Anyone who votes for him is complicit with these future crimes because of this transparency & these threats. Americans cannot say they did not know ahead of time.”

“This is the dream of every authoritarian and why they do what they do to arrange things so they seem untouchable,” she added, pointing to her book, “Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present.”

The Atlantic’s Brian Klaas, a University College London professor, wrote: “Let’s not mince words: Trump is literally endorsing the idea of a dictatorship in which presidents are shielded from prosecution, no matter which crimes they commit. He said that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and get away with it. He wants that to be legal precedent.”

Ben-Ghiat endorsed that post, writing: “100%.”

New York Magazine’s Jonathan Chait notes that “every previous president has managed to conduct his job without ever having been assured he is free from prosecution. This only became a problem when we elected a career criminal as president.”

“The Trump argument is that as an elected president he should be permitted to commit any crimes whatsoever, and there should be no legal consequences. What do you call a system in which the chief executive is not bound by law?”

READ MORE: Trump Complains It Was ‘Ridiculous’ He Had ‘Follow the Laws’ and Leave Office
Just last week Trump’s attorney told judges on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals of the ex-president’s claims of absolute immunity.

Trump and his attorneys argued he has “presidential immunity,” and therefore cannot be charged, prosecuted, or tried in the federal (and state) trials he is facing for election subversion and other unlawful acts surrounding the 2020 election and January 6 insurrection.

Asked if Trump, or another president, who “ordered S.E.A.L. Team 6 to assassinate a political rival” could be “subject to criminal prosecution,” the ex-president’s lawyer said only after he had been impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate. Roll Call reported judges on the appeals court last week sounded “skeptical” of the immunity claims.