Post from Truth Social

One slot in a South Carolina endorsement run

This is the fifth South Carolina House endorsement posted on November 2, the day before the midterm, and it sits between a TeleRally notice ("I will be doing a TeleRally, LIVE, at 4:00pm ET") and parallel endorsements of Russell Fry (SC-7), Wes Climer (SC-5) and William Timmons (SC-4). The posts share a skeleton almost clause for clause: a credential sentence, then the same list of policy phrases ("Grow our Economy, Cut Taxes and Regulations, Promote MADE IN THE U.S.A., Champion American Energy DOMINANCE, Keep our Border SECURE, and Protect our always under siege Second Amendment"), then "Complete and Total Endorsement." Only the name, the district and the biographical clause change. Biggs's entry is personalized by "A distinguished Nurse and Lieutenant Colonel in the Air National Guard." The Timmons post uses the same military framing ("A Captain in the South Carolina Air National Guard") to set up the same "knows what it takes" construction.

Who wrote it

At 20:26 UTC on the first Monday after daylight saving ended, the post went up at 3:26 p.m. Eastern, half an hour before the announced South Carolina TeleRally. The historian notes place his final-days tele-rallies at Mar-a-Lago, which is on the same clock. The timing, the batch, and the fill-in structure all point to a staff-built endorsement queue released to warm up the call. The words that read as his own are also stock parts of the template. "Dumocrat" now appears in endorsement copy routinely, and "Transgender Mutilization of your Children," with its nonstandard "Mutilization," recurs across many endorsement posts. The repetition makes it a fixed phrase in the template, not a slip made while typing. The post has no drift and no aside about himself, and it reacts to nothing in the news, so his involvement probably stopped at approving the slate.

The attack paragraph

The only adversarial material is the template's standard opponent paragraph. Eunice Lehmacher is labeled a "Radical Left Dumocrat" and assigned the standard set of positions: "massive Tax Increases, Open Borders, Men playing in Women's Sports, and Transgender Mutilization of your Children," closing with the alliterative triad "Reckless, Radical, and Dangerous!" Nothing in the post comes from her record. The positions are attributed to her by party membership, a device that splits the race into a protective candidate ("SHE WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN!") and a threatening one. The contingency claim ("if she and the Dumocrats ever got in, all of these things will be terminated") is an appeal to fear about losing benefits, set as a prophecy. Every voter is meant to have a stake in it, since tipped workers, overtime earners and retirees are each named in turn.

"Mutilization of your Children" is the most charged phrase in the post. It is aimed at a policy category, not at a person or a group to be removed, and it carries no call to act beyond "GET OUT AND VOTE." It is a GOTV appeal with no violent framing anywhere.

Personality and motive

The trait reading is thin because the text is a form. What it shows is agency organized around coalition-building: the endorsement extends his status to a loyal incumbent ("has my Complete and Total Endorsement") and frames the House majority as his to protect. Communion appears only as patronage toward "the incredible people of South Carolina's 3rd Congressional District." The narrative role is the kingmaker, and the Democrats are the contrasting other who would take back what he gave ("NO TAX ON TIPS, NO TAX ON OVERTIME, and NO TAX ON SOCIAL SECURITY"). On the order and chaos axis he defends his own new order. The tax provisions are framed as gains that a Democratic win would "terminate."

Claims

The biography checks out. Biggs, elected in 2024 to succeed Jeff Duncan, is a nurse and a Lieutenant Colonel in the South Carolina Air National Guard. "NO TAX ON SOCIAL SECURITY" overstates the 2025 law, which added a temporary deduction for seniors and did not exempt benefits from tax. Saying that a Democratic House win would end all three provisions ignores the Republican Senate and the presidential veto, and the tip and overtime deductions run through 2028 under current law. The search did not turn up Lehmacher's specific positions, so the claims about her are graded unverifiable.

There is no word-retrieval or sequencing error a cognitive reading could use. The text is templated staff prose and says nothing about his own language production. The linked swampthevoteusa.com page is a get-out-the-vote landing site and makes no claim of its own.

Fact Verification

Tips, overtime and Social Security: I found no statement from her on any of these. They don't appear on her campaign site's issue pages (Lower Today's High Prices, Build a Bigger Table, Increase Access to Doctors & Hospitals, Courage Not Chaos, Integrity). They also don't appear in her 2026 Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey, the Greenville Journal and SC Lawyers Weekly candidate guides, or the Upstate Today forum coverage. Searches pairing her name with 'tax on tips', 'tax on overtime' or 'big beautiful bill' returned nothing. The closest link is indirect. She wants to 'restore funding for Medicaid and the ACA', which were cut in 2025 by the same law (the One Big Beautiful Bill Act) that created the tips and overtime deductions. Opposing part of that law is not the same as opposing these tax breaks. Context: the law did not enact 'no tax on Social Security'. It added a temporary $6,000 senior deduction, and the tips and overtime deductions themselves expire after 2028 under current law.

Massive tax increases: partly supported, but not as described. A search-result summary of her Vote Smart profile said she supports raising taxes on individuals and corporations with higher incomes. I couldn't open the page to confirm it (it returned 403), and it may be from one of her state House questionnaires rather than the 2026 race. Her 2026 platform talks about rehiring IRS auditors to collect past-due taxes from individuals and corporations, cutting the deficit, and adding grants and tax credits for affordable housing. None of that amounts to broad 'massive' increases on ordinary taxpayers.

Open borders: contradicted by her own platform. Her immigration page (euniceforsc.com/immigration-reform) calls for 'More border enforcement. Increase enforcement to prevent undocumented immigrants from crossing the border between official entry points.' It would let new arrivals stay only if they enter at an official port of entry and pass a credible-fear interview, and it calls for 'a balance of enforcement' with legal reform. She does hold positions critics would call lenient. She wants to stop mass deportation of people without criminal records, raise legal immigration caps, and offer a path to legal status for long-term residents. In her Ballotpedia survey she says she would 'stop funding ICE and long term detention of legal immigrants', and her site says 'Stop funding masked ICE agents.' In 2024, as a state House candidate, she answered 'Neutral' on whether the U.S. should do more to physically secure the southern border (iVoterGuide). Wanting more enforcement between ports of entry is still not an open-borders position.

Outside this claim, the post's line about men in women's sports matches her 2024 iVoterGuide answer that 'Transgender women are women.'

Overall, the post gives her standard opposition talking points with no sourcing. Her own platform contradicts the open-borders claim and never mentions tips, overtime or Social Security. Only a narrow version of the tax-increase claim, higher taxes on top earners, has any support. |

Overall Veracity: 40%