[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.

                          ____________________