[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 84 (Friday, May 14, 2021)]
[House]
[Pages H2348-H2353]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ISSUES OF THE DAY
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Williams of Georgia). Under the
Speaker's announced policy of January 4, 2021, the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Gohmert) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the
minority leader.
Mr. GOHMERT. Madam Speaker, it has been interesting. I get to take my
mask off under the rules now.
We haven't quite caught up with the science here in the House. The
House of Representatives that has leadership proclaiming that we need
to follow the science refuses to do so, so far. But we are hoping we
will eventually get at least the majority of people here to follow the
science.
It has been an interesting time, not a good time, not a wonderful,
enriching time to be in the House of Representatives. It has been an
exceedingly frustrating time.
After January 6, apparently, the number one goal here in the House
was something referred to as optics. According to the Sergeant at Arms,
the reason the National Guard was not brought up in advance on January
6, so there would be no one entering the Capitol that was not desired
to enter the Capitol, was that word, ``optics.''
So, the Capitol Police, doing the best they could, were left to fend
for themselves without the support they needed. It is a big place. But
had the number one concern before January 6 by people here in
Washington, at the Capitol, at least, if that number one concern had
not been optics, there would have been no one coming into the Capitol
that we didn't want to be in the Capitol.
Since then, we have been entertained by all kinds of false
statements, false allegations. It has really been amazing. The number
one thing we keep coming back to is, apparently, it is not about
getting at the truth. It is all about optics.
The top person charged with the safety of Members of Congress, the
head of the Capitol Police, months ago indicated that there was no
intel from any source that any Member of Congress was at risk or a
threat to any other Member of Congress. No Member of Congress was at
risk from another Member of Congress.
Since then, as I understand it, there was an ethics charge leveled at
Marjorie Taylor Greene that she was encouraging a debate with another
Member of Congress and somehow that is apparently an ethics violation.
I had a Democrat some years back come up and threaten to kick my
buttocks. I think he used other language. But had he swung, I might
have filed a complaint.
Here on the House floor, what we have are words. We get into very
heated debates at times because we care deeply about the things we care
deeply about. But those are not assaults.
There have been assaults in the Capitol, and I know memory is
apparently a big question these days, but when the President of the
United States stands right up here at the second level, as Presidents
have since this opened before 1860, and have made speeches--in this
case, it wasn't to a joint session; it was to an invitation-only
session--but he indicated that what happened on January 6 was the worst
attack on democracy since the Civil War.
{time} 1200
So being an ongoing student of history since Coach Sam Parker
instilled a love in me for history, especially American history--the
good, the bad, the ugly, the incredible--I have continued to be a
student of American history, and World history as well.
So sometimes it is helpful for those who don't know our history or
can't remember our history to be reminded that since the Civil War put
an end to slavery in America, even though it took an ordained Christian
preacher resolutely, peacefully advocating for civil rights, and that
the Constitution should be used as a document that means what it says.
And as the Declaration of Independence made clear, we are endowed not
by government, but by our creator with certain unalienable rights.
And Dr. King's letters from the Birmingham jail, as he was unjustly
incarcerated, pretty powerful words from a man full of vision. We miss
his vision. I think things would be very different if he were still
alive today. The assassin did great damage to the United States of
America, and the benefits that we would have had from a visionary still
if he were alive today.
Because there are some who say if you even use words to debate, that
somehow you are an insurrectionists, you need to be jailed. And that
has been happening since January 6. In fact, January 6 of 2017, I
believe there were 11 different Democrats that stood up and forcefully
objected to the results and to the electors that were voting for
President Trump.
And there was not a single Republican I ever heard on our side of the
aisle that accused them of trying to overthrow the government,
insurrection--all these things that some of us have been accused of--
simply wanting a fair election in which the votes of tens of millions
of Americans were not disenfranchised. The very same thing even our
current Speaker has said back in prior days about prior elections.
So imagine the shock for those of us who, for the last 20 years, had
been preached to by people on the other side of the aisle about the
unfairness of election, the vulnerability of electronic
[[Page H2349]]
elections, who seemed disgusted that some of us had the same kind of
objections as they had about the election in November.
There is nothing illegal, improper, against the House rules of
objecting, yet we had people on the other side of the aisle who were
encouraging all kinds of punishment for those on this side of the aisle
who did exactly what Democrats have been doing for 20 years or so--
objecting, as they did January 2001. And we saw objection January 6 of
2005.
And these ``woke'' corporations that now want to punish anybody that
objected to potentially--and there is evidence of fraud in the November
2020 election--and those who say there was no fraud in the election are
either doing so knowingly, knowing that it is false what they are
saying, or just because they bought in to what the mainstream/lame-
stream media has reported. But there was fraud in that election. There
usually is some fraud in national elections.
And in States where it was somewhat close compared to the number of
people voting, like Arizona, they are doing the right thing. They are
trying to have an audit. And, obviously, the efforts of the audit is
being covered up. There is evidence being destroyed. I guess a bit like
when you have a Secretary of State that destroys evidence that she has,
that has been sought, has it destroyed with a hammer or with BleachBit,
obstruction of justice.
But, fortunately, for some, we had a Justice Department that saw
crimes committed by Democrats that did not need to be pursued or
punished, and things that were not crimes that Republicans did needed
to be punished.
People all across America are naturally going to be upset when they
don't just perceive, they see and know that there is a two-tiered
justice system--one for certain high-place Democrats and one for
Republicans, or those who support Republicans. And Heaven help them if
they support President Donald Trump.
That is what has been so amazing to someone like me, who has been
part of the justice system and seeing the law enforced for so much of
my adult life. It is unbelievable. And hearing from FBI agents around
the country who repeatedly said, if anybody in our office, in this
location, that location, different locations around the country had
done a fraction of the things that were done by top FBI officials in
Washington, D.C., then we would not only have been fired, but they
would have been looking at coming after us with criminal charges. And
they were despondent because they were devoting their lives to justice.
Republican and Democrat prosecutors in different parts of the country
couldn't believe what they were seeing. The injustice coming from what
was supposed to be the Justice Department. And what has happened since
January 6 is quite sickening. It is a war. It is an assault on our
Constitution.
Now, it is not new. Back when Mueller was head of the FBI, and the
inspector general shocked everyone who was paying attention, that there
had been over 3,000 abuses of the national security letter where FBI
agents had just wanted to do fishing expeditions--no crime, no probable
cause. They just wanted information about people when the Constitution
did not permit it.
So they send a national security letter demanding that a bank
accompany an individual, give them all the information on another
American, just because they wanted it. Outrageous. And that, we know,
occurred during President George W. Bush's administration, while
Mueller was FBI Director.
Now, he made a statement: Gee, I will take all the blame.
Well, he should because he created an environment at the FBI that
apparently encouraged lawlessness by top FBI agents. And if you look at
Ted Stevens, Senator from Alaska, who was framed by the FBI, and you
look at what Director Mueller did in the aftermath of finding out if he
did not know all the time before that while it was going on, that Ted
Stevens was framed, that he was not guilty of what was charged.
And the FBI had evidence that he was not guilty, and they covered
that up and they helped create evidence to make it look like he was
guilty. And they saw that he was tried right before his election. And
the loss seemed like it was between 1,000-2,000 votes. He lost his
seat.
The FBI did that. Mueller's FBI did that. And when one FBI agent with
a conscience pointed that out in an affidavit, the injustice that had
occurred by the FBI and his supervisor, well, Mueller's reward for that
FBI's agency was to drive him out of the FBI. And his reward for the
person that--according to the affidavit, helped frame Ted Stevens--was
that that FBI agent was promoted, got a better job with the FBI.
Apparently, Mueller likes people who are quite good at framing
somebody and getting them convicted, because that is what happened.
That should have been all the wake-up call we needed to have a
housecleaning at the top of the FBI, but that didn't happen. So the
abuses got worse during the Obama administration, and you had things
like fast and furious, where people actually encouraged the sale and
distribution of weapons to drug cartels. And no one, even to this day,
has ever been held accountable for that.
In fact, there was a cover-up by the Justice Department then. They
wouldn't let us have the documents so we could see exactly what
happened. In fact, Congress was so inane in its effort to obtain those
documents, that the best job--both on fast and furious and on the
Benghazi cover-up--was done by Judicial Watch. They got more
documentation out of the Justice Department than Congress did, and we
are charged with oversight.
Even when the Republicans had the majority, people were put in place
who did not pursue justice and a cleanup of the Justice Department. So
by the time President Trump came along, he had a number of people at
the top who created the Russia hoax--a fraud.
And as others have said, when the Justice Department and the FBI can
work as effectively at trying to frame the President of the United
States, who happens to be a billionaire, then most of us would be in
severe trouble. And that is the case, and we have seen it in the last
few years.
We have seen a Justice Department--of course, Christopher Wray--my
humble opinion--when he was put in there with a job of cleaning up the
FBI, his idea of cleaning up the FBI was to sweep as much of the dirt
under the rug so that people couldn't see it.
Just like now, Homeland Security and Health and Human Services, their
job is not to just secure the border under this administration. Their
job is to now get them away from the border as quickly as possible so
that people don't see them. They are not in the news every night
because they have moved them out.
As the border patrolmen have said, they are looked upon as the
Mexican drug cartels' logistics. The drug cartels get paid money or
agreements to pay money from people they bring, including unaccompanied
minors; and then the U.S. Government is their logistics because the
government ships future drug sailors, traffickers, human traffickers,
sex traffickers. Our U.S. Government ships them around the United
States so that they can get to the town the drug cartels want them
doing their drug trafficking, human trafficking or sex trafficking.
{time} 1215
The government has become a part of the process for the drug cartels,
all to the damage and often the death of American citizens.
When Pancho Villa and his minions invaded, I believe it was New
Mexico, John Pershing, General Pershing, was sent down. He had a
lieutenant named Patton. They were sent down to Mexico, even invade
Mexico, going after Pancho Villa and his troops because there were some
families who they killed in New Mexico.
We have thousands of people dying from fentanyl coming from Mexico,
and the answer of this administration, we heard in the last couple of
days, the administration is going to add 13 miles to the wall but
otherwise leave over 1,000 miles without wall.
The answer has not been to secure the border. The answer from this
administration has been to say that the border is secure, when anybody
with eyes to see or ears to hear knows that is not true.
The injustices that have occurred since January 6 appear to be a
continuation of the goal of that one word, ``optics,'' the one word
that prevented our
[[Page H2350]]
leadership from having the National Guard on hand to ensure that the
Capitol was not invaded.
We heard in the Judiciary Committee--that is why I had videotape,
which we are not allowed to have here on the House floor, obviously,
but had the videotape of John Sullivan, a Trump-hater, who has been
supportive of groups that wanted Trump pulled out of office, or as Mr.
Sullivan--and I will paraphrase--wanted to yank him out of the White
House and do things to him. But he was one of the first ones in the
Capitol. He is on video. He was bragging: See, I told you we would be
able to do this, getting into the Capitol. He was there egging on
people, even at the shooting of the young lady who was shot by a
Capitol policeman.
Many of us would like to know the full circumstances of so much that
went on here, but the thousands of hours of tape are not being used.
Now, some of us had heard that the wonderful Capitol policeman, Office
Sicknick, that he had died of natural causes. Yet, it was all over the
media that he was beaten with a fire extinguisher. It turned out that
was completely false. There is an article about that by Julie Kelly in
American Greatness, April 26.
Her article pointed out there is no reason to keep these men in jail,
let alone in solitary confinement in a D.C. prison. The cause of
Capitol Officer Sicknick's untimely death on January 7 is finally
settled, but the prosecution of his alleged attackers rages on. After
months of dishonest accounts about what happened to Officer Sicknick--
first, that he was bludgeoned to death by insurrectionists with a fire
extinguisher, and then that he died of an allergic reaction to bear
spray.
The D.C. medical examiner's office confirmed that 42-year-old Officer
Sicknick died of a stroke. The chemical sprayed in his direction during
the chaos outside the Capitol on January 6 did not contribute to his
death.
In its haste to bolster the new narrative, maintaining Sicknick was
killed by rioters wielding bear spray, the Acting Attorney General was
in on the lie from the start. The Justice Department charged two men
with the chemical attack. George Tanios and Julian Khater were arrested
March 14 and charged with several crimes, including four counts related
to possession and use of a deadly or dangerous weapon and for
conspiring ahead of time to use the spray against the officers. They
have been behind bars ever since.
Both were transported to the Nation's Capital, where they joined
dozens of January 6 detainees held in solitary confinement in a D.C.
Jail. A judge on Tuesday, this was dated April 26, will consider
motions filed by their attorneys to release both defendants as they
await trial.
This says, as I have reported: For the past few months, Federal
courts, at the direction of Joe Biden's Justice Department, are denying
bond to nonviolent protestors as their cases continue a slow slog
through an intentionally overloaded D.C. judicial system. The
presumption of innocence has been suspended for Trump supporters
involved in the January 6 protest, largely based on a supposed thought
crime of doubting the legitimacy of the 2020 election.
Parenthetically, if that were a crime, there would be Democrats who
would have been arrested and gone to jail going back to January 2001,
when an objection was made to electors. There were no woke corporations
back then saying they would no longer do business with those Democrats,
nor did they do that after the Democrat objections on January 6, 2005,
or after the significant number of objections on January 6, 2017.
Now, all of a sudden, it is supposed to be a crime, a heinous act, to
object under the rules in the Constitution? Things have to turn around
here if we are going to save this little experiment in self-government.
Anyway, dangerous evidence, the article questions, law enforcement
officials have argued in court pleadings that defendants shouldn't have
unfettered access to tens of thousands of hours of video evidence
because they might pass along the information to those who wish to
attack the Capitol again.
Instead, according to a recent Politico article, prosecutors are
``working to build an archive of video that would permit defendants to
peruse relevant clips but sharply restrict their access and permit
prosecutors a chance to object if they feel such footage could be
misused or present a risk.''
Now, that sounds a great deal like what the prosecutors and the FBI
were saying about Ted Stevens and their evidence, that they restricted
him having access to his own evidence that would have proved his
innocence had he been allowed all the evidence that was seized from his
home and other places.
Anyway, toward the end of the article, it says:
``Khater's family is asking the court to release him on a $15 million
bond guaranteed by 16 family members. As one journalist noted, that
amount is three times higher than Harvey Weinstein's bail.
``Judge Thomas Hogan will hear the case on Tuesday and then decide
whether to keep Khater and Tanios behind bars until their next court
date or confine the pair to home detention.
``There is no reason to keep these men in jail, let alone in solitary
confinement in a D.C. prison. Cherry-picked video evidence does not
support the weapon charges against them. The chief investigator
confessed no evidence exists to prove that the can of spray ever was
used or that Khater sprayed it at anyone, including police officers.
The Justice Department's refusal to allow access to the video evidence
raises plenty of red flags.
``Neither man has a criminal record. George Tanios and Julian Khater
pose no threat to society. Their only crime, as is the case with
hundreds of nonviolent Capitol protestors, was supporting Donald Trump
and daring to question the validity of the 2020 Presidential election,
a doubt shared by tens of millions of Americans.''
So we have Federal judges that are playing along with this whole
outrageous miscarriage of justice for hundreds of Americans who were
concerned, as Democrats were in 2001, 2005, 2017. But fortunately for
them, Republicans didn't try to create a Federal crime out of
questioning election results.
Julie Kelly has done extraordinary research on what has occurred
since January 6 and on January 6. Some points that she has found:
On April 28, 2021, Paul Hopper heard a ruckus in his house.
He was in his bedroom answering emails. Clad in his pajamas,
he went downstairs to see what was happening. He was
confronted by at least a dozen FBI agents, some pointing guns
at him and his wife, Marilyn. The couple, along with their
houseguests, including a teenager, were handcuffed.
Now, where is the outrage that we have been hearing in the Judiciary
Committee about young people being unfairly treated? Where is the
outrage about the treatment of people since January 6 by any Democrats?
Even our Vice President was raising money to pay their bail in places
where there was not just looting but there was burning, physical
assaults, and, like in Missouri, even death of innocent people.
The Hoopers were placed in separate rooms in their home in Alaska,
without legal counsel, without the chance to inspect a warrant. Paul
and Marilyn were interrogated for hours about their trip to Washington,
D.C., in January. They attended President Trump's speech and walked
down to the Capitol. They committed no crime. They did not even enter
the building.
They did what tens of thousands of Americans did on January 6. They
traveled to their Nation's Capital, just like all the leftists did that
did such damage, and tried to physically assault some of us here in the
Capitol last year.
Yet, not only were they not punished, those of us who were being
threatened and people running after us, we were not protected at all.
But Paul and Marilyn, as they were so unfairly and unjustly treated by
the FBI and the Department of Justice, the FBI claimed they were
looking for Nancy Pelosi's stolen laptop.
They said Marilyn looked like a woman in the Capitol who was a
suspect, but the photos--that anybody could clearly see--the photos
that the FBI finally presented, eventually, it was clear, that wasn't
Marilyn, and that wasn't Paul. They didn't take the laptop. Yet, their
freedom was taken from them to teach a lesson.
[[Page H2351]]
{time} 1230
Nonetheless, agents threatened both Paul and Marilyn Heupers, the
teenager that was there. They threatened them with legal recourse. They
ransacked their home, and they took their cell phones and their
computers. They even took a copy of the Declaration of Independence. I
wish they would read it and understand it.
The Huepers have not been charged with any crime, but more than 400
Americans have been charged with various offenses relating to January
6, but most face nonviolent trespassing and disorderly conduct charges.
Just yesterday, the Justice Department announced the arrest of an
Active Duty United States Marine stationed at Quantico for his
involvement in the protests that day.
Joe Biden's Justice Department is criminalizing political protest--
but only political protest by Republicans or conservatives. They are
destroying the lives of American families. They are weaponizing the
events of January 6 to silence Trump-supporting Americans.
You don't have to take our word for it. Michael Sherwin, the acting
U.S. Attorney who handled the first few months of the Capitol breach
probe, bragged that his office arrested at least 100 people between
January 6 and January 20 to stop people from coming to D.C. to protest
Joe Biden's inauguration.
``I wanted to make sure there was shock and awe, that we could charge
as many people as possible before the 20th, and it worked because we
saw through media posts that people were afraid to come back to D.C.
because if we go there, we are going to get charged.''
That is only part of what is happening. Dozens of Americans have been
hauled out of their homes, transported to Washington, D.C. and held in
solitary confinement for months awaiting delayed trials with no end in
sight. Nearly all have no criminal record. Some are veterans and ex-law
enforcement officers. But the Justice Department is throwing the book
at them. Even worse, Federal judges and prosecutors argue that these
folks are a danger to society because they doubt the outcome of the
2020 Presidential election.
In one case against a man who didn't even enter the building, a
Federal judge nonetheless denied bond and said this:
``This is an offense that, at bottom, was an attempt to stop
democracy from moving forward, because people were unhappy about the
results of the election. I don't think that the defendant will follow
my conditions if he believes I am part of this machine of the
democratic process.''
Well, that judge ought to be part of the Democratic Justice
Department, because that is how that judge is acting, not as a judge
but as an advocate and as a part and parcel of what you could call a
conspiracy because these people are working to silence anybody who has
supported Donald Trump. That is one example of how government lawyers
and judges are criminalizing someone's belief about the 2020
Presidential election. It is much like the U.S. Attorney who is saying
that if they charge enough people, then Trump supporters are not going
to be willing to come back out because they know they will get charged.
We have in this city political prisoners held hostage by their own
government. They are victims of an unequal system of justice in a
country where rioters and looters on the left are let off the hook--
even considered heroes--while those on the right are considered
hardened criminals without any record before trial can even begin.
Here is how one defense attorney described the conditions in the D.C.
Correctional Treatment Facility: Detainees are held in solitary
confinement for 23 hours a day. They cannot shower or shave regularly;
some have been physically assaulted by prison guards.
They cannot play a role in their own defense. They have no regular
access to tablets to communicate with their lawyers or family members.
In-person meetings with counsel are nearly impossible; conversations
between defendants and lawyers are overheard by other defendants and
their lawyers in addition to prison guards.
At a detention hearing on May 11 for the two men accused of using
pepper spray against police officers and against the late officer,
Brian Sicknick, one defense lawyer told the judge he had not been able
to speak with his client for 2 weeks.
Julian Khater and George Tanios--about whom we were speaking
earlier--were arrested in March for allegedly spraying the officers.
They are still being held in the D.C. jail for weeks awaiting trial.
This week, a Federal judge--one I spoke of earlier--denied bail to
both defendants. Julian Khater's family was willing to put up a $15
million bond package. Neither man has a criminal record, but you have a
judge and a Justice Department with an agenda, and so what these men
are getting is not only not bond, but they are getting the most
injustice the Department of Justice can throw at them. They never even
went inside the building and the government has yet to prove their
cases at all, but the judge basically tried the case himself this week
without either defendant present. Judge Hogan said the men are a danger
to society because they attempted to halt the democratic process.
Well, if that were a crime, we would have dozens of Democrats with a
criminal record for coming in here. It was the first and only time in
American history that one party came in, took over the House floor, and
prevented a session from taking place. It never happened before, and it
never happened since. Of course, the election didn't go too well for
Democrats after that. We had a very weak Speaker of the House at the
time who kept saying that those people will be punished for their
improprieties and for their unethical and unruly behavior. There were
at least a dozen or more rules of the House that were violated by most
of the Democrats.
Madam Speaker, you are not supposed to sit on the House floor, on the
floor itself. You are not supposed to bring food. Heck, food was
catered in here. You are not supposed to take pictures in here. There
were not only pictures taken, but there was a broadcast going on from
the House floor. Rule after rule were broken. There could have
potentially been criminal charges, but none were made. None of us filed
any criminal charges.
Even though the insurrectionists and the Democratic Party came in
here and prevented the House from doing business for 24 hours, Paul
Ryan kept saying he was going to do something about it. He never did.
No one has ever been punished for the massive improprieties that took
place.
Many of these people are finally being charged with preventing, or
conspiring to prevent Congress from taking action. Well, that is
exactly what many of the House Democrats did that day when they
prevented, for 24 hours, us from going into session here. The fact is,
I didn't and wouldn't advocate that any of the Democratic
Representatives be charged or should have been charged criminally.
There were rule violations. I felt like it should have been handled by
Ethics, but I would not want criminal charges brought against other
Members of the House for the very things that Trump supporters are
being charged with.
I would have felt that was inappropriate against Democratic Members
of Congress then, and I feel like it is inappropriate for those who
were nonviolent--at least many of them. It is a misdemeanor, it should
be, but they are trying to make it for optics purposes into some kind
of justification for having metal detectors out here, even though they
ought to be other places, and Capitol Police ought to be other places.
But it is a great deal like I look around, and anybody who is not
speaking has to wear a mask because of optics, that we want people to
think there is this grave, great danger here.
That is why we have the fence. They took the outer fence down. The
inner fence is still around here. We have National Guard troops that
could be helping secure our border. That doesn't violate posse
comitatus, because they would be enforcing our border against non-
American citizens, so posse comitatus, as I hear people bring up,
wouldn't come into play. They could be down there helping secure the
border, but instead, they are stuck around here in parking garages. I
see them in parking garages all the time. That is outrageous.
Why are they all here still after all this time?
[[Page H2352]]
Optics. Optics.
It was not as President Bush said when he signed the bill to be used
against political protesters, but that is exactly what is being done
right now. That bill did not apply to the thousands of people who
occupied the Senate and tried to stop the confirmation of Brett
Kavanaugh in 2018. It didn't apply to protesters who tried to stop his
swearing-in by banging on the doors of the Supreme Court. It didn't
apply to any of the protests we have seen over the years in Washington,
D.C., but people who were here on that day are being charged with that
offense, a felony punishable by up to 20 years in jail.
The media and Democrats continue to misrepresent what happened on
January 6. But nearly 200 people have been charged with ``obstruction
of an official proceeding.''
That is the vague law that President Bush signed into law in 2002. It
was aimed at white-collar criminals after the Enron scandal, and yet,
it is being used only against people who support President Trump, none
of those who officially obstructed the House Chamber for 24 hours who
were members of the Democratic Party.
Well, the claim about a fire extinguisher being used to murder
Officer Sicknick even made it into the Democrats' impeachment memo. But
it was a lie. We finally learned he died tragically at the age of 42 of
a stroke.
The three other people did not die because of what happened that day.
Two died of heart failure, and one died of a drug overdose. There is no
evidence as has been said on January 7 that this was an armed
insurrection--armed meaning with firearms. There were no firearms. Of
course, Bruno Cua had a little baton. He didn't use it against anybody,
but he still is being charged with using a deadly weapon.
Not one person has been charged with bringing a firearm to the
Capitol. People have been charged with carrying or using things like
Mace or a helmet, but no one brought a gun into this building, and we
still have no one in custody for allegedly planting inoperable pipe
bombs near the headquarters of the DNC and the RNC.
What was all of that about?
Some of us tried to get information about those bombs. Normally,
people don't put bombs that don't work out where people can see them
unless it is simply for the optics. Now, when they are serious, they do
what Bill Ayers' people, the Weather Underground, did when they set off
a bomb in the U.S. Senate. To me, that was more of an attack, more of a
war or an attack on democracy. In this very room, terrorists from
Puerto Rico came in here and shot four House Members. Four Members of
Congress were shot in this room in 1954.
{time} 1245
To me, that was more of an attack on democracy, for the President's
information.
When Pearl Harbor occurred, that was more, thousands, 2,000 to 3,000
people were killed. That was more of an attack on democracy than the
protest of January 6.
When 9/11 occurred--and I know it has been so long ago, there are a
lot of people who have forgotten, apparently, about 9/11--3,000 people
killed. The Pentagon was hit. The two World Trade Center buildings were
hit. Thousands died. That was more of an attack on democracy.
I just want the President to understand there have been things worse
than people without any firearms coming into a building.
Now, I have been a judge. I wouldn't put up with that kind of
activity, disruption. Sure, people go to jail for that. They would not
get charged a felony, normally, but certainly misdemeanors. So there is
punishment that should and could be used, but not innocent people, not
like Paul and Marilyn. FBI swarmed their home, took all their stuff.
That is just so wrong.
The coverup of the video that was available here in the Capitol that
could really establish what all went on is atrocious.
I have so many friends in the Capitol Police. They are wonderful
people. I admire them greatly. But there are people in leadership
positions, apparently, who are covering up video of what went on here.
Now, even the news media is asking the D.C. District Court for access
to video evidence presented in virtual court proceedings.
As one of my Republican colleagues said this week in the House
Oversight and Reform Committee hearing, we need to release all the
tapes so the American people can see what happened before, during, and
after the disturbance on January 6.
There is no doubt people came here on January 6 to cause trouble.
Most did not come here to cause trouble. Most came here to protest in
the manner that I have advocated for years, and that is the effective
manner that Dr. King advocated for. So much more is done by peaceful
protest.
But Americans need to make their voices heard. This power-hungry
group occupying positions of power in Washington, D.C., right now, they
are wanting to intimidate and use injustice for their own political
purposes.
The overwhelming number of people caught up in this ``unprecedented
investigation,'' as the Justice Department promises, they are actually
nonviolent, peaceful Americans. Their only crime was supporting Donald
Trump and concern about the fraud Democrats have been telling us about
in elections for many years.
An article from April 12, Julie Kelly, ``Indefinite Incarceration for
Protesters with `Wrong' Politics,'' a great article, documents about
different people who are getting death threats. The press has helped
bring about all kinds of calamities on people whose crime was being
concerned about the election and being here and peacefully protesting.
It documents some of the travesties that are occurring with some
people whose only crime was being concerned about fairness in the
election in America.
Another, as ``Capitol Defendants Rot in D.C. Jail, Portland Rioters
Get Leniency,'' documents how lenient the Justice Department--yes, the
same Justice Department that is locking up in solitary confinement
people who really didn't commit the actions they are charged with. That
same Justice Department is going easy on the looters and destroyers in
Portland.
An article from April 19, ``From `Insurrectionists' to
`Interruptionists'''--that is probably going to be the charge that ends
up sticking in most cases. They obstructed Congress from their jobs,
not for 24 hours like the Democrat Members of Congress who kept us from
having session in here for 24 hours. Not like that, but just for a
matter of hours till things were under control. Then we were back in no
time, back here in this Chamber, doing our business.
But the FBI raided the Hueper couple's home. That was with guns
drawn.
Here is this 18-year-old, Bruno Cua, the complaint I have here. He is
charged with assault on a Federal officer. Yet, there has been no
evidence presented of any assault on a Federal officer--civil disorder,
obstruction of an official proceeding. That is the one that probably is
why Julie Kelly says they have gone from insurrectionist to
interruptionist: enter or remain on the floor or gallery of either
House of Congress; violent entry or disorderly conduct; engage in
physical violence; obstruct or impede passage; and parade, demonstrate,
or picket on Capitol Grounds.
That is what we have come to, locking up this 18-year-old with no
criminal history whatsoever.
Interesting, in Bruno Cua's case, the Justice Department was arguing,
since he had begun to be homeschooled before January 6, as thousands
and thousands of American children have been since teachers are
refusing in so many places to come teach them, that is used by the
Justice Department to say you can't allow this guy to be released, this
dangerous 18-year-old with no criminal history.
It says, oh, but look at his social media, and he is being
homeschooled, so you can't release him home because, you know, that is
where he came from. That would be terrible.
Yet, in Portland, they are letting people go, right and left, with
long criminal histories and with actual violence that they have
committed.
Anyway, Rick Manning has a good article from May 12 in Townhall,
``Biden's America Resembles the Bad Old Days of 1973.''
I keep expecting, at any time, our President to say that we need to
put
[[Page H2353]]
out big pins with the letters W-I-N on them, as Gerald Ford did. That
stood for ``Whip Inflation Now,'' and that didn't work. Wearing a pin
with ``Whip Inflation Now'' did not whip inflation, nor did Jimmy
Carter wearing a sweater heal or fix our problem with a lack of energy.
That didn't work. But that looks like the kind of thing we are headed
back to.
There is a great deal of injustice, and I would think, for all of
those who obstructed an official proceeding here on the House floor,
under the leadership of the Democrat Party leadership, that for far
longer disrupted the House proceedings, violating countless House
rules, I would think that with that in someone's background, that they
have committed that crime that these people are being charged with,
that we would get a lot more sympathy from our colleagues across the
aisle.
Many were not here then. But the ones who were, who committed that
crime being charged now, have it a little easier on those who
interrupted us that day.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________