A pro-Trump PAC is running an AI-generated attack ad that depicts Rep. Thomas Massie in a fabricated romantic "throuple" with Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ilhan Omar, and former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene says the ad breaks a federal law that President Trump signed less than a year ago.
The ad, paid for by a political action committee called MAGA Kentucky, landed this week as Kentucky's GOP primary approaches on May 19. It targets Massie, a libertarian-leaning Republican who has represented Kentucky's 4th Congressional District since 2012, over his opposition to Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill." The PAC exists, as Mediaite reported, for the explicit purpose of pushing Massie out of office.
The ad itself uses AI-generated imagery and includes a disclaimer acknowledging as much. Its central claim, that Massie is somehow romantically entangled with two of the most prominent progressive members of Congress, is fabricated. The ad's actual message, dressed in metaphor, is that Massie has been "cheating with the Squad on the America First movement" in Washington. It urges Kentucky voters to back Ed Gallrein, Massie's Trump-endorsed primary challenger.
Massie shared the ad online and did not mince words. He called it what it is: a lie designed to fool voters who might not recognize AI fakery.
"Woke Eddie's billionaire puppet masters are running this disgusting and defamatory ad now. It reeks of desperation, but they're hoping the older generation won't realize it's an AI generated lie."
That response included a plea for donations, a sign that Massie sees the race tightening. The latest Big Data Poll showed him leading Gallrein 52 to 48 percent, a margin within the poll's four-point margin of error.
Greene then amplified Massie's post and went further, invoking a specific federal statute.
Greene's response was direct. She called the ad a violation of the TAKE IT DOWN Act, the law championed by First Lady Melania Trump that criminalizes the knowing publication of intimate images, including AI-generated ones, of non-consenting adults or minors. President Trump signed it into law, Greene said, "nearly a year ago."
"This FAKE AI campaign ad LYING about Thomas Massie is a violation of The TAKE IT DOWN Act that First Lady Melania Trump championed, we voted for, and President Trump signed into law nearly a year ago!!!"
Greene laid out the law's provisions: it makes it illegal to knowingly publish or threaten to publish intimate images of non-consenting adults, including AI-generated imagery, and mandates that websites and social media platforms remove such content within 48 hours of being notified by a victim.
She also flatly denied the ad's premise. "Thomas Massie NEVER dined, held hands with, or intimately engaged with AOC and Ilhan Omar," Greene wrote. The denial is almost absurd in its necessity, the ad fabricated a scenario out of whole cloth using artificial intelligence, then slapped a disclaimer on it and called it political speech.
AOC, for her part, has been no stranger to political controversy in recent months. She refused to endorse her own former chief of staff in the race for Nancy Pelosi's seat, a move that raised eyebrows across the progressive wing.
Greene did not stop at the legal argument. She named names, specifically, three donors she accused of bankrolling the ad and the broader effort to unseat Massie. GOP megadonor Paul Singer was identified as the PAC's initial big donor. Hedge fund manager John Paulson and Miriam Adelson's separate PAC were also referenced in connection with the effort.
"Thomas Massie should sue the 3 Israel FIRST billionaires funding woke Eddies campaign and everyone involved in making this fake video and everyone who puts it out."
That language, "Israel FIRST billionaires", is Greene's, and it carries its own freight. But the underlying point about the donor structure is worth examining on its own terms. When a sitting member of Congress faces a primary challenge backed by outside billionaire money and fueled by AI-fabricated imagery, voters deserve to know who is writing the checks and why.
The "why" is not mysterious. Massie opposed the "Big Beautiful Bill," and the MAGA Kentucky PAC was launched specifically in response. That is the stated purpose. The ad is the method.
Greene also took aim at Gallrein's own record, or lack of one. She accused the challenger of ducking debates entirely.
"The only record Ed Gallrein has is being too timid, too weak, and too afraid, to debate Thomas Massie and refused to show up at campaign debates in the district he's trying to get elected in!!!"
A candidate who won't show up to debate but whose backers will deploy fabricated AI imagery is a candidate whose campaign raises serious questions about accountability and transparency.
Greene also pushed back on the broader narrative that Massie is disloyal to the MAGA movement. She cited a specific number.
"Thomas Massie has voted with Trump 91% of the time EXCEPT when he's pushing war, protecting Epstein pedophiles, violating your freedoms with warrantless spying FISA 702, or overspending your money into further ruinous debt!!!"
That framing matters. A 91 percent alignment rate is not the record of a turncoat. The exceptions Greene listed, foreign intervention, FISA surveillance, and deficit spending, are issues where a significant portion of the conservative base has long shared Massie's skepticism. Fiscal discipline and civil liberties are not progressive positions. They are foundational conservative principles.
The broader pattern of intra-party conflict is not limited to Kentucky. Democrats have their own internal fractures, with figures like Sen. John Fetterman openly clashing with AOC over foreign policy and party direction.
And AOC herself has faced pointed criticism from unexpected quarters. Ana Kasparian accused her of "Trump-like" personal attacks after a dispute over Israel voting records, a reminder that the congresswoman from the Bronx generates friction across the political spectrum.
Whether the MAGA Kentucky ad actually violates the TAKE IT DOWN Act is an open question. Greene asserted it does. The law, as she described it, targets intimate images of non-consenting adults, including those generated by AI. The ad's AI-generated imagery depicts Massie in a fabricated romantic scenario, but whether it meets the statute's definition of "intimate images" would likely require legal interpretation.
What is not in dispute is that the ad is fabricated, that it uses AI to create a false scenario, and that it was produced with the financial backing of major donors to influence a Republican primary. The ad itself carries a disclaimer acknowledging its AI origins. But a disclaimer does not undo the damage if voters, particularly older voters, as Massie himself noted, do not read the fine print.
Greene's closing message was blunt: "TAKE IT DOWN."
The progressive left's own internal squabbles have been well documented. AOC's former chief of staff launched a congressional bid calling for the replacement of Democratic leaders Schumer and Jeffries, a sign of just how fractured that coalition has become.
The Kentucky 4th District primary is shaping up as a test case for something larger than one congressional seat. It is a test of whether outside money and AI-generated disinformation can override the judgment of local voters who know their representative's record.
Massie is not a moderate squish. He is a fiscal hawk and a civil-liberties absolutist who has voted with the president nine times out of ten. His dissents have come on spending, surveillance, and foreign entanglements, positions that put him squarely in the tradition of limited-government conservatism.
The response to his independence has been a billionaire-funded PAC, a challenger who reportedly won't debate, and an AI-fabricated ad depicting him in a romantic relationship with two progressive Democrats. If that is the best case against Thomas Massie, Kentucky voters can draw their own conclusions.
When the establishment has to fabricate the evidence, it usually means the real record speaks for itself.