[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 8 (Tuesday, January 10, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H129-H143]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   SELECT SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WEAPONIZATION OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, as the designee of the majority leader, 
pursuant to House Resolution 5, I call up the resolution (H. Res. 12) 
establishing a Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal 
Government as a select investigative subcommittee of the Committee on 
the Judiciary, and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 5, the 
resolution is considered read.
  The text of the resolution is as follows:

                               H. Res. 12

       Resolved,

     SECTION 1. SELECT SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WEAPONIZATION OF THE 
                   FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

       (a) Establishment; Composition.--
       (1) Establishment.--There is hereby established for the One 
     Hundred Eighteenth Congress a select investigative 
     subcommittee of the Committee on the Judiciary called the 
     Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal 
     Government (hereinafter referred to as the ``select 
     subcommittee'').
       (2) Composition.--
       (A) The select subcommittee shall be composed of the chair 
     and ranking minority member of the Committee on the 
     Judiciary, together with not more than 13 other Members, 
     Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner appointed by the 
     Speaker, of whom not more than 5 shall be appointed in 
     consultation with the minority leader. The Speaker shall 
     designate one member of the

[[Page H130]]

     select subcommittee as its chair. Any vacancy in the select 
     subcommittee shall be filled in the same manner as the 
     original appointment.
       (B) Each member appointed to the select subcommittee shall 
     be treated as though a member of the Committee on the 
     Judiciary for purposes of the select subcommittee.
       (b) Investigative Functions and Authority.--
       (1) Investigative functions.--The select subcommittee is 
     authorized and directed to conduct a full and complete 
     investigation and study and, not later than January 2, 2025, 
     issue a final report to the House of its findings (and such 
     interim reports as it may deem necessary) regarding--
       (A) the expansive role of article II authority vested in 
     the executive branch to collect information on or otherwise 
     investigate citizens of the United States, including ongoing 
     criminal investigations;
       (B) how executive branch agencies work with, obtain 
     information from, and provide information to the private 
     sector, non-profit entities, or other government agencies to 
     facilitate action against American citizens, including the 
     extent, if any, to which illegal or improper, 
     unconstitutional, or unethical activities were engaged in by 
     the executive branch or private sector against citizens of 
     the United States;
       (C) how executive branch agencies collect, compile, 
     analyze, use, or disseminate information about citizens of 
     the United States, including any unconstitutional, illegal, 
     or unethical activities committed against citizens of the 
     United States;
       (D) the laws, programs, and activities of the executive 
     branch as they relate to the collection of information on 
     citizens of the United States and the sources and methods 
     used for the collection of information on citizens of the 
     United States;
       (E) any other issues related to the violation of the civil 
     liberties of citizens of the United States; and
       (F) any other matter relating to information collected 
     pursuant to the investigation conducted under this paragraph 
     at any time during the One Hundred Eighteenth Congress.
       (2) Authority.--
       (A) The select subcommittee may report to the House or any 
     committee of the House from time to time the results of its 
     investigations and studies, together with such detailed 
     findings and legislative recommendations as it may deem 
     advisable.
       (B) Any markup of legislation shall be held at the full 
     Committee level consistent with clause 1(l) of rule X of the 
     Rules of the House of Representatives.
       (c) Procedure.--
       (1) Rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives 
     and the rules of the Committee on the Judiciary shall apply 
     to the select subcommittee in the same manner as a 
     subcommittee except as follows:
       (A) The chair of the select subcommittee may, after 
     consultation with the ranking minority member, recognize--
       (i) members of the select subcommittee to question a 
     witness for periods longer than five minutes as though 
     pursuant to clause 2(j)(2)(B) of such rule XI; and
       (ii) staff of the select subcommittee to question a witness 
     as though pursuant to clause 2(j)(2)(C) of such rule XI.
       (B) The Committee on the Judiciary (or the chair of the 
     Committee on the Judiciary, if acting in accordance with 
     clause 2(m)(3)(A)(i) of rule XI) may authorize and issue 
     subpoenas to be returned at the select subcommittee.
       (C) With regard to the full scope of investigative 
     authority under subsection (b)(1), the select subcommittee 
     shall be authorized to receive information available to the 
     Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, consistent with 
     congressional reporting requirements for intelligence and 
     intelligence-related activities, and any such information 
     received shall be subject to the terms and conditions 
     applicable under clause 11 of rule X.
       (2) The provisions of this resolution shall govern the 
     proceedings of the select subcommittee in the event of any 
     conflict with the rules of the House or of the Committee on 
     the Judiciary.
       (d) Service.--Service on the select subcommittee shall not 
     count against the limitations in clause 5(b)(2)(A) of rule X 
     of the Rules of the House of Representatives.
       (e) Successor.--The Committee on the Judiciary is the 
     ``successor in interest'' to the select subcommittee for 
     purposes of clause 8(c) of rule II of the Rules of the House 
     of Representatives.
       (f) Sunset.--The select subcommittee shall cease to exist 
     30 days after filing the final report required under 
     subsection (b).

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The resolution shall be debatable for 1 
hour, equally divided and controlled by the majority leader and the 
minority leader or their respective designees.
  The gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) and the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole).


                             general leave

  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on H. Res. 12.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Oklahoma?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 12, a resolution 
establishing the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the 
Federal Government.
  This select subcommittee is modeled on the famous Church Committee, 
which investigated the American intelligence community in the 1970s and 
uncovered and exposed a wide variety of abuses, including many directed 
against American citizens.
  Similar to the situation that confronted America in the 1970s, in 
recent years we have witnessed abuses of the civil liberties of 
American citizens committed by the executive branch.
  The select subcommittee will operate as a select investigative 
subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee and will be tasked with 
studying and reporting on the executive branch's authority to collect 
information on or otherwise investigate citizens of the United States.
  It will investigate how executive branch agencies work with and 
exchange information with the private sector and other government 
agencies to facilitate action against American citizens; how executive 
branch agencies collect, compile, analyze, use, or disseminate 
information about citizens of the United States; the laws, programs, 
and activities of the executive branch as they relate to the collection 
of information on citizens of the United States; and any other issues 
related to the violation of the civil liberties of American citizens.
  Mr. Speaker, it is undeniable that, in recent years, the executive 
branch of the Federal Government has abused its authority and violated 
the civil liberties of American citizens, often for political purposes. 
There are many examples to point to, ranging from a father being 
labeled a ``domestic terrorist'' for confronting a school board over 
the sexual assault of his daughter, to the Federal Government's role in 
suppressing information on Twitter, to the Department of Homeland 
Security's plans to create a Disinformation Governance Board, and to 
the revelations regarding the FBI's abuse of its Foreign Intelligence 
and Surveillance Act authority.
  All these examples and many more demonstrate how prevalent such 
abusive actions have become.
  Mr. Speaker, the American people deserve to have confidence in their 
government. They deserve to know that the broad powers granted through 
the Federal Government to the FBI, to the Department of Homeland 
Security, and to the intelligence agencies are not being abused. They 
deserve to know that the executive branch is not positioning itself as 
the final arbiter of what constitutes truth. They deserve to know that 
they will not be labeled a domestic terrorist for advocating for their 
children in front of a school board.
  Mr. Speaker, it was Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis who stated 
that ``sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.'' At the end 
of the day, that is the purpose of the select subcommittee. It will 
bring abuses by the Federal Government into the light for the American 
people and ensure that Congress, as their elected representatives, can 
take appropriate action to remedy them.
  I have confidence that this select subcommittee will accomplish that 
goal.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, today, we will consider the creation of a new 
subcommittee here in the House that Republicans call the Select 
Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. I call it 
the McCarthy committee, and I am not talking about Kevin. I am talking 
about Joe.
  Mr. Speaker, this committee is nothing more than a deranged ploy by 
the MAGA extremists who have hijacked the Republican Party and now want 
to use taxpayer money to push their far-right conspiracy nonsense.
  Let's start with the subcommittee's mandate, which is recklessly 
broad.

[[Page H131]]

Speaker McCarthy is essentially handing Mr. Jordan the power to target 
anyone and anything he doesn't like, anything and anyone he deems 
unconstitutional, illegal, or unethical.
  Who decides what is unconstitutional, illegal, or unethical? Mr. 
Jordan does.

                              {time}  1330

  Why don't we just be blunt here? Republicans claim to care about law 
enforcement, but this new committee is about attacking law enforcement. 
It is about going after people. It is about destroying people's careers 
and lives. It is about undermining the Department of Justice, defunding 
the police, and settling scores on behalf of the twice-impeached and 
disgraced former occupant of the Oval Office.
  The MAGA extremist fringe of the Republican Party will use this 
committee to push QAnon conspiracy theories and lies from Truth Social. 
They are going to use it to gin up fake investigations into nonexistent 
scandals. I think we need to just start calling this the tinfoil hat 
committee.
  Speaker McCarthy even changed the language at the last minute to 
provide unprecedented authority for the subcommittee to interfere in 
ongoing criminal investigations.
  Let me repeat: The Republican Party, the party that claims to care 
about law and order, has created a committee not just to defund the 
police based on their wacky conspiracy theories, but to actually try to 
shut down ongoing investigations, including into domestic terrorists, 
phony electors, insurrectionists, people who are on trial for sedition 
because they tried to overthrow the government, and even disgraced 
former President Donald Trump.
  This is outrageous. We are a country of laws, but this committee 
seeks to undermine the law, undermine the police, and make a complete 
mockery of the investigative and oversight powers of the House.
  As seen on this week's Sunday shows, some sitting Republicans being 
investigated right now by the FBI and the Department of Justice want to 
serve on this committee.
  I mean, what? I mean, come on. Give me a break. I know my Republican 
friends have some ethically challenged members who asked for pardons 
from the former President, but this is beyond the pale. This is 
unconscionable. This is a conflict of interest.
  First, they gut the Office of Congressional Ethics. Now, they give 
Members of Congress the ability to investigate and to try to shut down 
criminal investigations that they are subjects in. One set of rules for 
the American people, another set of rules for Republican Members of 
Congress. It is incredibly offensive.
  On their first real week in the majority, this is what my Republican 
friends are pushing through? Not a bill to fight inflation. Not a bill 
to raise wages for people. A bill for Republican Members of Congress to 
shut down investigations into their own wrongdoings. What is wrong with 
these people?
  On top of all of that, this subcommittee expects to use the power of 
the subpoena to advance their delusional QAnon conspiracy theories and 
harass Federal law enforcement agents.
  I would say it is almost comical if it wasn't so disturbing that 
Speaker McCarthy and Mr. Jordan refused to comply with bipartisan 
subpoenas issued by the January 6th Committee. So I guess for them, it 
is do as I say, not as I do.
  In my mind, it speaks volumes that House Republicans are choosing to 
prioritize this kind of dangerous partisan garbage instead of actually 
trying to help everyday Americans.
  Whatever happened to Republicans' commitment to America? They 
promised to tackle inflation, end the opioid crisis, reduce the 
national debt, and more. None of those issues are addressed in their 
first 12 bills.
  In fact, the very first bill they passed last night doesn't reduce 
the deficit, it adds $114 billion to the deficit by making it easier 
for billionaires to cheat on their taxes.
  This is where we are week 2 of the 118th Congress, and we are 
creating a witch-hunt committee where Republicans plan to air their 
grievances and further incite crazy fringe conspiracy theories from the 
internet at the taxpayers' expense.
  Senator Joseph McCarthy would be very proud of what Republicans are 
doing today. Putting their own personal power and partisan politics 
over the needs of the American people. Just like Senator McCarthy 
looking for imaginary communists, they are going to find QAnon 
conspiracies everywhere they look because that is what they want to 
find.
  Just like the McCarthy committee, this will become another shameful, 
disgraceful moment for the Congress of the United States.
  This has nothing to do with the rule of law, nothing to do with 
proper oversight of government. It is simply about revenge. It is about 
disrupting and destroying rather than collaborating and creating. It is 
about putting politics over people instead of putting people over 
politics to build a better future for America.
  This subcommittee is an awful idea, and I urge my colleagues, in the 
strongest possible terms, to vote ``no'' on this monstrosity that will 
further empower the extremists at the expense of the American people.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio 
(Mr. Jordan), who is my very good friend and the distinguished incoming 
chairman of the Judiciary Committee.
  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding.
  A ploy? It is not a ploy when the Department of Justice treats 
parents as terrorists; moms and dads who are simply showing up at a 
school board meeting to advocate for their son or daughter. It is not a 
ploy when the FBI pays Twitter $3 million, not 1, not 2, $3 million to 
censor American citizens.
  It is not a ploy when the Department of Homeland Security tries to 
set up a disinformation governance board because we all know that the 
Department of Homeland Security can tell what is good speech and what 
is bad speech. You have got to be kidding me.
  I will tell you what, dozens of whistleblowers who have come and 
talked to Republican staff on the Judiciary Committee don't think this 
is a ploy. That is why they came to talk to us. They know how serious 
this is.

  The former Democrat chair of the Judiciary Committee is in the press 
today saying we are going to fight this tooth and nail. This is 
political. Meanwhile, the former Democrat chair of the Intelligence 
Committee pressured Twitter to censor a journalist. You have got to be 
kidding me.
  This is about the First Amendment, something you guys used to care 
about. I had actually hoped we could get bipartisan agreement on 
protecting the First Amendment, the five rights we enjoy as Americans 
under the First Amendment: Your right to practice your faith, your 
right to assemble, your right to petition the government, freedom of 
press, freedom of speech. Every single one has been attacked in the 
last 2 years.
  The Government was telling people they couldn't go to church just a 
few years ago; your right to assemble. Your right to petition the 
Government. The Democrats kept the Capitol closed. You couldn't, as a 
citizen, come to your Capitol that you pay for to address your Member 
of Congress to redress your grievances because Nancy Pelosi wouldn't 
let you in.
  Freedom of the press. I just told you what the head of the Intel 
Committee tried to do to a journalist. The most important right we 
have, though, is your right to talk. Because if you can't talk, you 
can't practice your faith, you can't share your faith, you can't 
petition your government. The right to speak is the most important, and 
that is what they are going after. That is why we have had dozens of 
whistleblowers come talk to us. We want to focus on that because we 
want it all to stop. We want the double standard to stop. This idea 
that, oh, if you are a pro-life activist, you are going to get your 
door kicked in and you are going to get arrested and handcuffed in 
front of your seven kids and your spouse for simply praying in front of 
abortion clinic, and telling the guy who was harassing your son to 
knock it off you are going to have the FBI raid your home; but the 
protests that went on at Supreme Court Justices' homes in the aftermath 
of the leak of the Dobbs opinion, oh, no problem there. Americans are 
sick and tired of it.
  We don't want to go after anyone. We just want it to stop. We want to 
respect

[[Page H132]]

the First Amendment to the Constitution that the greatest country in 
the world has. That is what this committee is all about, and that is 
what we are going to focus on. That is what we are going to do.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record an article from 
The Hill titled: ``January 6 panel names six House GOP lawmakers who 
asked for pardons.''

                     [From The Hill, June 23, 2022]

    Jan. 6 Panel Names Six House GOP Lawmakers Who Asked for Pardons

                 (By Mychael Schnell and Emily Brooks)

       The Jan. 6 committee investigating the attack on the 
     Capitol revealed Thursday that at least a half-dozen 
     Republican lawmakers asked for presidential pardons for their 
     role in voting to overturn election results in certain states 
     on Jan. 6, 2021, according to testimony from former Trump 
     aides.
       Testimony from Trump aides named Reps. Matt Gaetz (Fla.) Mo 
     Brooks (Ala.) Louie Gohmert (Texas), Andy Biggs (Ariz.), and 
     Scott Perry (PA.) as seeking pardons.
       An aide also said that Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.) 
     contacted the White House Counsel's office seeking a pardon.
       Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), a member of the panel who 
     played an elevated role in Thursday's proceedings, presented 
     an email from Brooks, dated Jan. 11, 2021, in which the 
     congressman asked for presidential pardons for himself, 
     Gaetz, and lawmakers who objected to the Electoral College 
     vote for Arizona and Pennsylvania.
       ``President Trump asked me to send you this letter. This 
     letter is also pursuant to a request from Matt Gaetz,'' the 
     email reads.
       ``As such, I recommend that President give general (all 
     purpose) pardons to the following groups of people:,'' the 
     email adds. ``Every Congressman and Senator who voted to 
     reject the electoral vote submission of Arizona and 
     Pennsylvania.''
       A spokesman for Brooks forwarded a full copy of the email, 
     which included a concern that Democrats would ``abuse 
     America's judicial system by targeting numerous Republicans 
     with sham charges.''
       ``The email request says it all. There was a concern 
     Democrats would abuse the judicial system by prosecuting and 
     jailing Republicans who acted pursuant to their 
     Constitutional or statutory duties under 3 USC 15,'' Brooks 
     said in a statement. ``Fortunately, with time passage, more 
     rational forces took over and no one was persecuted for 
     performing their lawful duties, which means a pardon was 
     unnecessary after all.''
       The panel also showed a video of former special assistant 
     to the president Cassidy Hutchinson, saying Gaetz and Brooks 
     ``both advocated for there to be a blanket pardon'' for 
     members of Congress involved with a meeting that took place 
     on Dec. 21, 2020, presumably the huddle at the White House 
     that focused on overturning the 2020 presidential election.
       She also said Gaetz and Brooks advocated for a blanket 
     pardon for ``a handful of other members that weren't at the 
     Dec. 21 meeting.'' Those were meant to be ``preemptive 
     pardons,'' she noted.
       Additionally, Hutchinson said ``Gaetz was personally 
     pushing for a pardon, and he was doing so since early 
     December,'' but said she did not know why.
       Gaetz reached out to Hutchinson asking for a meeting with 
     Meadows ``about receiving a presidential pardon,'' according 
     to her closed-door testimony presented at Thursday's hearing.
       Hutchinson said Biggs, Gohmert and Perry also asked for 
     pardons, but did not reveal more details.
       And she said Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), a fierce defender of 
     Trump, ``talked about congressional pardons, but he never 
     asked me for one,'' noting that he was largely inquiring 
     about whether or not the White House was going to grant the 
     lawmaker pardons.
       Brooks, Biggs, Perry and Jordan were all issued subpoenas 
     by the select committee in May.
       Perry previously denied that he asked for a pardon, and 
     stood by that in light of new testimony.
       ``I stand by my statement that I never sought a 
     Presidential pardon for myself or other Members of Congress. 
     At no time did I speak with Miss Hutchinson, a White House 
     scheduler, nor any White House staff about a pardon for 
     myself or any other Member of Congress--this never 
     happened,'' Perry said in a statement.
       A spokesman for Perry previously denied that he asked for a 
     pardon, calling it ``laughable, ludicrous, and a thoroughly 
     soulless lie.''
       In a statement Thursday night, Gohmert said he requested 
     pardons for U.S. service members and military contractors--
     not himself.
       He called the claim that he requested a pardon for himself 
     ``malicious, despicable and unfit for a U.S. Congressional 
     hearing.''
       ``I requested pardons for brave U.S. service members and 
     military contractors who were railroaded by the justice 
     system due to superiors playing politics, as well as a 
     civilian leader who was also wronged by a despicable 
     injustice,'' Gohmert said. ``These requests were all far 
     prior to, and completely unrelated to January 6.''
       Biggs also objected to the committee's assertion that he 
     sought a parton, writing in a statement Thursday night that 
     Hutchinson ``is mistaken.''
       He said the testimony of Hutchinson discussing the pardons 
     was ``deceptively edited to make it appear as if I personally 
     asked for her a presidential pardon.''
       Greene, Hutchinson said, did not contact her directly, but 
     she said she had heard that Greene contacted the White House 
     Counsel's office for a pardon.
       Greene pushed back on the testimony in a tweet, but did not 
     directly deny asking for a pardon.
       ``Saying `I heard' means you don't know,'' Greene said. 
     ``Spreading gossip and lies is exactly what the January 6th 
     Witch Hunt Committee is all about.''
       Eric Herschmann, a former Trump White House attorney, was 
     also asked by the Jan. 6 committee in a deposition if Gaetz 
     was seeking a pardon.
       ``Believe so,'' Herschmann said in a video presented at the 
     hearing. ``The general tone was, `we may get prosecuted 
     because we were defensive of, you know, the President's 
     positions on these things.''
       Herschmann said that Gaetz's pardon request was ``for any 
     and all things,'' and that Gaetz had mentioned former 
     President Richard Nixon's pardon. Herschmann said that 
     Nixon's pardon was not that broad.
       Trump adviser John McEntee also testified that Gaetz told 
     him he asked Meadows for a pardon.
       A spokesman for Gaetz responded to testimony about the 
     pardon request by pointing to a tweet from Gaetz calling the 
     committee a ``political sideshow.''

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, there were at least six House Members who 
sought pardons from President Trump following the January 6 
insurrection, and many of them would like to be on this committee, we 
are told.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Nadler).
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this 
resolution, which appears designed to launch a dangerous and 
unprecedented attack on our law enforcement agencies.
  Last week, Americans across the country watched the Republican Party 
melt down the moment it encountered its first test. For days, the 
extremist wing of the party held the rest of their caucus hostage as 
they demanded a steep price for their support. Today, we have the first 
of their many demands on display, an open-ended investigation into 
whatever conspiracy theories may be headlining the rightwing echo 
chamber at the moment, with unchecked authority to undermine ongoing 
criminal and intelligence investigations.
  For example, the select committee can use its expansive authorities 
to protect Donald Trump, those who perpetrated fake elector schemes to 
overturn the 2020 Presidential election, insurrectionists facing trials 
for their crimes, and other domestic terrorists.
  It aims to undermine the safeguards of our democracy and to embolden 
MAGA extremists who would rather see our institutions fail than to see 
Democrats and President Biden succeed.
  Make no mistake, the destroy democracy subcommittee will enable the 
House Republicans to interfere with the free operation of businesses 
they do not like, to inhibit the fight against domestic terrorism, and 
to settle political scores on behalf of Donald Trump.
  The Judiciary Committee has serious work to do. But rather than 
trying to solve the problems of the American people, this new 
subcommittee will expend untold time and money undermining our Nation's 
law enforcement agencies, our justice system and our intelligence 
community, all for a political stunt catering to the extremist wing of 
the Republican Party.
  Mr. Speaker, I oppose this resolution, and I encourage my colleagues 
to do the same.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kentucky (Mr. Comer), my very good friend, the incoming chairman of the 
Oversight Committee.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the creation of 
the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.
  The Federal Government exists to serve the American people, 
administer the law impartially, and protect our cherished freedoms 
enshrined in the Constitution.
  However, some unelected, unaccountable Federal bureaucrats have 
abused their positions of power. The other side of the aisle likes to 
talk about ``threats to democracy,'' but they refuse to do any 
congressional oversight as the Federal Government weaponized its 
authority, influence, and power to target American groups and citizens 
based on their political and ideological views.
  Just yesterday, we learned that classified documents from Joe Biden's 
time

[[Page H133]]

as Vice President were stashed in an unsecured closet. The National 
Archives knew about these documents several months ago, before the 
election, but the American people were just informed yesterday, thanks 
to some investigative reporting.
  Meanwhile, the FBI conducted a raid on former President Trump's Mar-
a-Lago residence for the same violation. Why has President Biden, who 
has repeatedly kept classified materials in an unsecured location for 
years, never faced a raid? Is it because we have a two-tier system of 
justice?
  The left also continues to push for an expanded IRS, even though the 
agency has a history of targeting conservative political groups. They 
have pushed for more audits of middle-class Americans instead of better 
customer service. In another example, at President Biden's direction, 
the Department of Homeland Security formed a dystopian disinformation 
board tasked with policing American speech online.
  While this board has been disbanded, we continue to learn more almost 
every day about how the Biden administration pressures big tech to 
censor and oppress Americans' views online that are contrary to their 
political narrative.
  The Biden administration's Justice Department also actively targeted 
parents concerned about woke curricula in their children's schools and 
labeled many as domestic terrorists. The American people have made it 
clear that they want accountability for these abuses.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Kentucky.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, we cannot delay accountability any longer. We 
need to get to work now. We must expose the abuses committed by the 
unelected, unaccountable Federal bureaucracy and enact solutions to 
prevent similar abuses from happening in the future.
  I look forward, as chairman of the House Oversight Committee, to work 
closely with this new select committee.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a CNN article 
titled: ``There are clear distinctions between Trump and Biden's two 
cases.''

                   [From CNN Politics, Jan. 10, 2023]

       There Are Clear Distinctions Between Trump and Biden's Two 
     Cases

                         (By Stephen Collinson)

       Republicans seized on revelations that several classified 
     documents from Joe Biden's time as vice president were found 
     in his former private office to create cover for former 
     President Donald Trump's hoarding of secret records.
       The disclosures Monday about the material found last fall 
     spun up an immediate political storm at a time when Trump is 
     in increasing legal peril. The new GOP House majority is 
     meanwhile rushing to undermine investigations against him and 
     unleashing a wave of counter investigations against the 
     current president.
       But there are clear distinctions between the two cases.
       The new controversy so far appears to be on a smaller scale 
     than the more than 100 classified documents--some bearing the 
     highest designations of government secrecy--taken from 
     Trump's resort at Mar-a-Lago after a court-approved search by 
     FBI agents. And Biden appears to be cooperating with the 
     National Archives and the Justice Department in a way that 
     Trump failed to do and unlike the former president he is not 
     being investigated for possible obstruction of justice.
       But Trump, who brands attempts to make him face 
     accountability for his conduct in office and afterward as 
     political victimization, sought to capitalize on Biden's 
     discomfort over the documents in a post on his Truth Social 
     network.
       ``When is the FBI going to raid the many homes of Joe 
     Biden, perhaps even the White House? These documents were 
     definitely not declassified,'' he wrote.
       New House Oversight Chairman James Comer told CNN: ``This 
     is (a) further concern that there is a two-tiered justice 
     system.''
       New House Speaker Kevin McCarthy also moved quickly to 
     respond to the discovery of the documents in an office used 
     by Biden after he left the vice presidency.
       ``Oh, really? They just now found them after all these 
     years,'' he told CNN. ``What has he said about the other 
     president having classified documents?''
       Attorney General Merrick Garland has asked the US attorney 
     in Chicago to review the material, some of which bore the 
     marking ``sensitive compartmentalized information''--showing 
     that it came from intelligence sources.


                       Questions Biden must face

       Fairness and respect for the law dictate that Biden should 
     answer many of the same questions that Trump is facing, 
     regarding whether he was entitled to the records, why they 
     were not previously turned over, whether they were securely 
     stored and how they ended up in his office in the first 
     place.
       Critics will also wonder why Biden didn't immediately 
     disclose the discovery of less than a dozen documents last 
     fall to the public, given the huge sensitivity of the Justice 
     Department probe of Trump on a similar question. And the 
     president will be sure to face accusations of hypocrisy given 
     his sharp criticisms that Trump did not take the proper steps 
     to secure classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.
       Still, even if there are adequate answers to these issues, 
     any distinctions in the severity of the Biden and Trump 
     documents will be obliterated in the political torrent that 
     is already stirring and with conservative media likely to 
     draw false equivalencies between the two cases.
       The report offers an immediate opening for Trump as he 
     seeks to dodge culpability for his behavior and claims he's a 
     victim of persecution to thwart his 2024 campaign. The former 
     president is a master at turning one incident into an entire 
     campaign narrative--as he did with former Democratic nominee 
     Hillary Clinton's emails in 2016.
       And the report will give the new Republican House majority 
     fresh material as it unleashes a multi-front investigative 
     assault against the White House. And while there so far 
     appear to be clear differences in the magnitude of the cases, 
     the report--first carried by CBS--about Biden will inevitably 
     raise political pressure on Special Counsel Jack Smith's 
     investigation into Trump's retention of classified material.
       Smith is also now reaching even deeper into the ex-
     president's inner circle by subpoenaing his former lawyer 
     Rudy Giuliani as part of a federal grand jury probe looking 
     at Trump's fund raising, among other issues related to the 
     2020 election.


                           Garland's dilemma

       The Biden document disclosures will also deepen the already 
     intense political headache facing Garland as he contemplates 
     an eventual decision on whether to charge Trump, whose status 
     as an ex-president and an active 2024 candidate carries huge 
     political implications.
       Garland insists that investigations will go where the 
     evidence and the law demands as he seeks to stress the 
     independence of the Justice Department--which was perpetually 
     in question when Trump was president. But now, inevitably and 
     however the Biden vice presidential documents issue is 
     resolved, a decision to charge Trump over the classified 
     documents case but not to take the same action against Biden 
     would incite political uproar among conservatives who would 
     be sure to allege double standards.
       The former president's legal team issued a temperate 
     response to the Biden report that sought to broaden openings 
     that could shield their client. One lawyer said that the 
     Biden story was ``indicative of a larger problem with trying 
     to keep track of classified information in the offices of the 
     President and the VP. There is an over classification 
     problem, and at the end of an Administration, things get 
     packed up and moved and it's hard to keep track.''
       The lawyer also warned that if Trump were to be charged, 
     his representatives would demand all communications between 
     the National Archives and Biden's team on the matter.


                          The Biden discovery

       Biden's attorneys found the documents in a locked closet in 
     a private office in Washington the future president used as a 
     visiting professor with the University of Pennsylvania. The 
     White House Counsel's office notified the National Archives 
     and officials at the agency took control of the documents the 
     morning after they were found. Biden wasn't aware the 
     documents were in the office until his personal lawyers 
     reported their existence and remains in the dark of the 
     content of the material, a source familiar with the matter 
     told CNN. Federal office holders are required by law to 
     relinquish official documents and classified documents when 
     their government service ends.
       Unlike in Trump's case, Biden doesn't appear to have tried 
     to assert ownership of the files, to obstruct their handover 
     or make outlandish claims that he had previously declassified 
     them based on an undisclosed private thought.
       Trump is being investigated by Smith to see whether he 
     infringed the Espionage Act by keeping classified material 
     and for the possible obstruction of justice.


      Republicans muster for investigative assault on White House

       The Biden documents case will intensify the showdown 
     already emerging between the new Republican House majority 
     and the White House.
       For two years, Trump has been rocked by blow-after-blow 
     from congressional and criminal probes over his conduct 
     during and after his presidency that have nudged him ever 
     closer to accountability.
       But help is on the way.
       The new Republican majority in the House is ready to 
     unleash a vast investigative machine apparently designed to 
     discredit and distract from Trump's alleged transgressions 
     and to wound Biden's nascent reelection race.
       Such an offensive was always coming, given the extent to 
     which the deeply conservative House GOP remains in thrall to 
     the

[[Page H134]]

     ex-president. But the intensity, scope and financial muscle 
     of the investigations was bolstered by the concessions 
     offered by McCarthy as he caved to right-wing hardliners in 
     order to win his speakership last week. And it represents a 
     fast-expanding challenge for the White House, which has 
     already spent months preparing its defense.
       A new House rules package passed on Monday for instance 
     will set up probes into alleged political bias in agencies 
     like the FBI and the Justice Department and what Republicans 
     see as political weaponization of such agencies.
       The move cements the GOP's sharp turn away from the FBI, 
     once seen as one of the most conservative agencies in the US 
     government following Trump's repeated claims he was illegally 
     targeted by investigations and his failure to enlist the 
     bureau as a weapon to advance his political grievances.
       Rigorous scrutiny and oversight are inevitable and 
     desirable as part of the constitutional duty of Congress and 
     responsibility to ensure accountability with taxpayer money. 
     And in the first two years of the Biden administration, there 
     are multiple questions that merit further investigation and 
     over which the public deserves more clarity.
       This includes the chaotic management of the withdrawal from 
     Afghanistan in 2021, the way that Covid-19 mitigation funds 
     were spent or the administration's unwillingness at least 
     until recently to consider the rising numbers of migrants 
     crossing the southern border as a crisis. Proper oversight 
     can avoid the repeat of errors and inform better policy in 
     future.
       But as always in Congress, there are questions over when 
     genuine oversight stops and hyper-partisan politically 
     motivated witch hunts begin, especially in the case of key 
     Republicans who have a long record of crossing over the line.
       Incoming House Judiciary Chairman Rep Jim Jordan, for 
     instance, was a leading player in a previous investigation by 
     a GOP House into the death of US ambassador to Libya Chris 
     Stevens and three other Americans who were killed by Islamic 
     militants in Benghazi in 2012.
       The two-year GOP-run House probe found a perfect storm of 
     bureaucratic inertia, rapidly worsening security in Libya and 
     inadequate resources led up to the killings. But Jordan was 
     not satisfied when the final report did not bear out 
     conservative attacks on the conduct of Hillary Clinton--who 
     was Secretary of State at the time of the deaths.
       The Ohio lawmaker released his own far more critical 
     report, along with then Rep. Mike Pompeo, who later became 
     Secretary of State himself. And at the time, McCarthy boasted 
     that the investigation harmed Clinton's 2016 presidential 
     campaign, apparently revealing partisan motivations behind 
     the probe.
       As well as the building storm over classified documents, a 
     key focus of the new GOP House majority will be to 
     investigate the House Select Committee in the previous 
     Democratic-run House that painted a damning picture of 
     Trump's behavior following the 2020 election and before the 
     Capitol insurrection.
       The fact that many of the current members of the House 
     voted to deny certification of Biden's election victory based 
     on lies about electoral fraud Trump was using to try to steal 
     power underscores why many observers are raising new 
     questions about the partisan nature of Republican 
     investigations.
       But after the revelations about documents found in Biden's 
     office, Republicans know a political gift when they see it.

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the difference is clear. Unlike in Trump's case, Biden 
doesn't appear to have tried to assert ownership of the files to 
obstruct their handover or make unhinged claims that he had previously 
declassified them through his thinking. Trump is being investigated to 
see whether he infringed the Espionage Act by keeping classified 
material and for the possible obstruction of justice.
  I would just say to my colleague who spoke before, the American 
people also have expectations of elected officials, such as respecting 
the Constitution and respecting free and fair elections and not trying 
to overturn free and fair elections. Unfortunately, a majority of my 
friends on the other side of the aisle chose to ignore that.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Goldman).

                              {time}  1345

  Mr. GOLDMAN of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to make something 
crystal clear: The primary purpose of this special subcommittee is to 
interfere with the special counsel's ongoing investigation into a 
conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election.
  This is a shocking abuse of power, but it is not just the usual 
efforts by Members on the other side of the aisle to, once again, do 
Donald Trump's dirty work. This time they are trying to protect 
themselves.
  One of them, a Member from Pennsylvania, had his cell phone seized 
pursuant to a court order finding probable cause that he committed a 
crime. Yet, he has indicated that he wants to be on this subcommittee 
so that he can undermine a criminal investigation into himself.
  My Republican counterparts can dress up the subcommittee with a 
menacing name, but let's call it what it really is: the Republican 
committee to obstruct justice.
  The American people don't want that. They don't want yet another 
front of the Republican war on democracy and the rule of law.
  Mr. Speaker, I will vote ``no'' and urge everyone to do so.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio 
(Mr. Turner), my very good friend and the distinguished incoming 
chairman of the Intelligence Committee.
  Mr. TURNER. Mr. Speaker, last Congress, I served as the ranking 
member of the Intelligence Committee. Chairman Jordan and I have 
already been working to ensure that the intelligence community and the 
Department of Justice, including the FBI, are not violating the civil 
rights of law-abiding Americans.
  Sadly, we already have very troubling evidence to begin our 
investigation to ensure that our intelligence community and law 
enforcement agencies are not violating Americans' constitutional 
rights. Some of this information is similar to what has been publicly 
disclosed by the Twitter files, which is a small portion of the 
information that we have that is gravely concerning about the improper 
use of government authority that this committee will be focusing on.
  This subcommittee is about protecting rights, a task that everyone in 
this body just took an oath to protect last week. Our committee will be 
assisting this subcommittee. We look forward to working with Chairman 
Jordan on this important issue, and we know that this is important to 
the American people.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record an article from 
The Guardian titled: `` `It's going to be dirty': Republicans gear up 
for attack on Hunter Biden,'' and an article from Politico titled: 
``It's not just Hunter Biden: Prepare for a 2023 packed with House GOP 
investigations.''

                   [From the Guardian, Jan. 8, 2023]

  `It's Going To Be Dirty': Republicans Gear Up for Attack on Hunter 
                                 Biden

                            (By David Smith)

       When Borat--alias British actor Sacha Baron Cohen--told 
     risque jokes about Donald Trump and antisemitism at last 
     month's Kennedy Center Honors in Washington, Joe Biden was 
     not the only one laughing in a red velvet-lined balcony.
       Sitting behind the US president was Hunter Biden wearing 
     black tie and broad smile that mirrored those of his father.
       The image captured the intimacy between the men but also 
     the sometimes awkward status of Hunter as both private 
     citizen and privileged son of a president. It is a dichotomy 
     likely to come under a harsh public glare this year as 
     congressional Republicans set about making Hunter a household 
     name and staple of the news cycle.
       ``The right wing is licking its chops at the chance to go 
     after him,'' said Joshua Kendall, author of First Dads: 
     Parenting and Politics from George Washington to Barack 
     Obama. ``The level of venom is going to be over the top and 
     really, really dirty. The Republicans' rhetoric might get so 
     heated that it detracts from some of the actual behaviour.''
       Republicans have been waiting a long time for this moment. 
     After regaining control of the House of Representatives in 
     last November's midterm elections, they used their first 
     press conference to promise to investigate the Biden 
     administration and, in particular, the president's allegedly 
     errant son.
       Hunter has long faced questions about whether he traded on 
     his father's political career for profit, including efforts 
     to strike deals in China and reported references in his 
     emails to the ``big guy''.
       Hunter joined the board of the Ukrainian gas company 
     Burisma in 2014, around the time that Joe Biden, then vice-
     president, was helping conduct Barack Obama's foreign policy 
     with Ukraine. Hunter earned more than $50,000 a month over a 
     five-year period.
       Senate Republicans claim that his appointment may have 
     posed a conflict of interest. Last year more than 30 of them 
     called for a prosecutor to be given special counsel authority 
     to carry out an investigation into alleged ``tax fraud, money 
     laundering, and foreign-lobbying violations''. But they have 
     not produced evidence that it influenced US policy or that 
     Joe Biden engaged in wrongdoing.
       House Republicans and their staff have been studying 
     messages and financial transactions found on a now notorious 
     laptop that

[[Page H135]]

     belonged to Hunter. Having gained the majority, they now have 
     the power to issue congressional subpoenas to foreign 
     entities that did business with him.
       Richard Painter, who was chief White House ethics lawyer in 
     the George W Bush administration, believes that Joe Biden 
     should have recused himself from matters relating to Ukraine. 
     ``The Ukrainian gas company wanted to curry favour with Joe 
     Biden so they put his son on the board,'' he said.
       ``It's pretty clear what's going on there but the missing 
     link the Republicans are looking for--but I don't think 
     they're going to find--is any kind of a quid pro quo, Joe 
     Biden for the Ukrainian gas company. Still, it would have 
     been better if Joe Biden had said: `Look, my son is going to 
     be on this board, maybe the secretary of state or somebody 
     else could handle Ukraine,' and he'd step aside.''
       Hunter's taxes and foreign business work are already under 
     federal investigation with a grand jury in Delaware hearing 
     testimony in recent months. There are no indications that 
     this involves the president, who insists that he has never 
     spoken to Hunter about his foreign business arrangements.
       Republicans are pulling at another strand. Ethics experts 
     have accused Hunter of cashing in on his father's name as he 
     pursues a career as an artist. He is represented by the 
     Georges Berges Gallery in New York, which reportedly struck 
     an agreement with the White House to set the prices of the 
     art and not reveal who bid on or bought it.
       Berges said in an lnstagram post in November that 
     Republicans on the House oversight committee had written to 
     him with ``certain requests'' and subsequently got into a 
     Twitter debate with Painter about money and influence in art. 
     Berges wrote: ``If you're going to scrutinize a profession 
     then scrutinize all of them and every position that children 
     of Congress take in DC and elsewhere.''
       Painter said in an interview: ``I don't think there's 
     anything corrupt about the White House or anything corrupt 
     about President Biden. But keeping the identities of the art 
     buyers secret was a bad idea. It leads to suspicion that 
     people are passing money under the table. It's hard to keep 
     who buys the art secret in the close-knit world of Hunter 
     Biden's friends or Hunter Biden himself so the secrecy was a 
     bad idea.''
       Fox News and other rightwing media may relish an 
     opportunity to demonise the president's son ahead of an 
     election in 2024. But Republicans are in danger of overreach. 
     Trump's attempt to get Ukraine to examine Hunter's business 
     dealings led to his first impeachment. His efforts to 
     weaponise Hunter's troubles in the 2020 presidential election 
     fizzled.
       David Brock, a veteran political operative and president of 
     Facts First USA, a new group set up to combat the 
     congressional investigations, said: ``What we're going to see 
     in the hearings is a recycling and a rehash of old 
     discredited stories and conspiracy theories. They're doing it 
     for political reasons. [Congressman] Jim Jordan is on the 
     record saying that the investigations are all about 2024 and 
     electing Donald Trump again. That's his own words, not 
     mine.''
       Hunter's 2021 memoir, Beautiful Things, generated sympathy 
     in some quarters for a man who 50 years ago last month 
     survived a car crash that killed his mother and sister and 
     who has been honest about his struggle with alcoholism and 
     drug abuse. Brock believes that a fresh Republican onslaught 
     will backfire.
       ``Going after someone who has an addiction and has had 
     mental health issues is sadistic politics and I don't think 
     it will work with the American people,'' he added. ``There 
     are so many people who have family members who've suffered in 
     one way or another and will identify with Hunter; they won't 
     identify with the attackers. The Hunter-hating narrative has 
     been out there for three years. It hasn't really gained any 
     traction outside of the far right and I don't think it 
     will.''
       Republicans could also lose credibility by focusing on 
     Hunter and other retreads of the past instead of advancing a 
     plan for domestic issues such as inflation, jobs and taxes.
       Kurt Bardella, a Democratic strategist who served as a 
     senior adviser for Republicans on the House oversight 
     committee from 2009 to 2013, said: ``For all the talk about 
     Republicans saying they want to return to regular order, they 
     want to have better stewardship over taxpayer dollars, they 
     want to act more responsibly with legislative power, well, 
     OK, but how does investigating Hunter Biden do anything to 
     help the American people?''
                                  ____


                     [From Politico, July 19, 2022]

 It's Not Just Hunter Biden: Prepare for a 2023 Packed with House GOP 
                             Investigations

                          (By Jordain Carney)

       House Republicans are planning to bombard Joe Biden's 
     administration with investigations next year, from Hunter 
     Biden to the border to the chaotic U.S. withdrawal from 
     Afghanistan.
       As the GOP prepares for a likely takeover of the chamber 
     next year, committee chairs-in-waiting have laid out a 
     lengthy list of oversight goals that goes beyond Biden's 
     White House--including Democrats' formation of the Jan. 6 
     select committee. But the party's highest-profile targets are 
     those with the potential to politically bruise the president 
     ahead of 2024: his son's business dealings, Afghanistan, the 
     origins of the coronavirus, inflation causes and the U.S.-
     Mexico border.
       Months before the midterms, Republican lawmakers are 
     already working behind the scenes to divvy up which committee 
     gets which piece of the investigative action next year. That 
     includes talks with Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and other 
     conference leaders, plus member-on-member discussions.
       ``I've been really impressed with leadership--both from 
     [Rep.] Jim [Jordan], from [Rep.] Jamie Comer, from Kevin's 
     office--in already starting to talk about that,'' said Rep. 
     Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.).
       Republicans view executive-branch oversight as a 
     significant piece of their 2023 agenda, driven in part by the 
     reality that divided government would leave no path for most 
     of their legislative priorities. Investigations also give the 
     House GOP high-profile chances to lob subpoenas and tough 
     questions at Biden officials heading into 2024, when it hopes 
     to take the Senate and White House too.
       Republicans still need to nail down the timelines and other 
     specifics for each investigation, but they've already taken 
     initial steps such as document preservation requests. Those 
     have already hit the Jan. 6 panel, administration officials 
     involved in the Afghanistan withdrawal and Twitter over its 
     legally challenged sale to Elon Musk, among other recipients.
       After four years in the House minority, Republicans have a 
     backlogged wish list of topics to dig into. Their real 
     challenge, GOP lawmakers predict, won't be finding areas to 
     investigate but rather winnowing down their focus.
       ``It's not something where we're having to drum up, 'OK, 
     what are we going to do?' It's more of a limiting factor of, 
     we only have 50 weeks a year,'' said Rep. Michael Cloud (R-
     Texas).
       Much of the investigative churn will spin out of the 
     Oversight Committee, a legislative octopus with 
     jurisdictional tentacles that can reach into several parts of 
     the administration.
       Jamie Comer, the Kentucky Republican who is expected to 
     lead the panel should Republicans take the majority, said 
     that he was trying to lay the groundwork now so that he and 
     his members could start right away in January.
       Republicans on the committee plan to hold high-profile 
     probes into Hunter Biden's dealings with overseas clients, 
     but they also want to hone in on eliminating wasteful 
     government spending in an effort to align the panel with the 
     GOP's broader agenda. They're also expected to probe the 
     infant formula shortage and the Food and Drug Administration, 
     which regulates formula.
       ``We're going to spend a lot of time in the first three, 
     four months having investigation hearings and then we're 
     going to be very active in the subcommittee process, focused 
     on substantive waste, fraud and abuse type issues. . . . I'm 
     going to bring the Oversight Committee back to what its 
     original intent was,'' Comer said in a brief interview.
       Comer said he's already having conversations with the 
     expected chairs of other committees to avoid duplicating 
     investigative work, adding that his panel is ``so broad, 
     sometimes you ruffle feathers with other chairs.''
       The U.S.-Mexico border, for example, is expected to be a 
     hot point for several committees.
       Jim Jordan, the Ohio Republican and House Freedom Caucus 
     founding member who is line to chair the Judiciary Committee, 
     immediately pointed to Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro 
     Mayorkas and the border as a focus for his panel in 2023.
       ``We certainly need to dig into more of the terrible way 
     Mayorkas has run--I think intentionally--the way he has the 
     Department of Homeland Security,'' Jordan said.
       Jordan pointed to two potential areas he wanted to probe: 
     border enforcement and the creation of a DHS 
     ``disinformation'' board, which the department subsequently 
     paused after a flood of GOP criticism. Jordan has also been 
     communicating with Senate Republicans who are brainstorming 
     their own investigative plans if they are able to flip the 
     upper chamber this fall.
       Republicans are still sorting out how they will probe the 
     Jan. 6 panel and Capitol security, an area of particular 
     interest within the conference. Illinois Rep. Rodney Davis, 
     the current top Republican on the House Administration 
     Committee, had pledged to use his panel as an investigative 
     springboard into the select committee next year but recently 
     lost his primary to Rep. Mary Miller (R-111.).
       And some conservatives in the conference are pushing for 
     investigations into debunked 2020 election fraud claims, 
     underscoring how embedded former President Donald Trump's 
     baseless claims to that end have become within the party.
       Beyond the headline-grabbing probes, Republicans are 
     prepping more bread-and-butter oversight hearings that will 
     give nearly every committee a pathway to dive into government 
     agencies.
       ``Oversight is going to be significant. And we'll have 
     significant oversight of the Securities and Exchange 
     Commission, as well as the [Consumer Financial Protection 
     Bureau],'' said Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.), who hopes to 
     chair the Financial Services Committee.
       And while Republicans' legislative dreams would have to 
     clear a high bar--given Biden's ability to veto anything for 
     the next two years--they see their oversight goals

[[Page H136]]

     dovetailing with their legislative agenda, giving them 
     another lane to pressure Biden and congressional Democrats. 
     Investigations have a longer political half-life, spanning 
     weeks and months beyond a one-time floor vote.
       Armstrong pointed to a border security and immigration 
     reform bill, a decades-long legislative white whale, as a 
     springboard for Republicans holding oversight hearings on 
     related areas like fentanyl--potentially building pressure on 
     Democrats heading into 2024.
       ``If you can't get to 60 in the Senate, you can make it a 
     real issue . . . going into the next election,'' he said.

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, without a doubt, Mr. Jordan will use this 
subcommittee to go after people MAGA extremists see as their opponents. 
All the MAGA Republicans seem to want to do is create a forum for 
settling scores and pushing conspiracy theories. They are not 
interested in governing.
  They want to go on FOX. They want to investigate Hunter Biden's 
laptop. They want to try to steal elections. They want to shut down the 
government if they don't get their way.
  We are at a very dangerous moment in this country, and it is one of 
the reasons why many of us were so stunned that the new Speaker gave 
away so much of his authority to a group of extremists in the 
Republican Conference who have spent their entire careers trying to 
blow this place up.
  The bottom line is this committee is basically an assurance that we 
are going to see these very partisan, political, MAGA-driven 
investigations go forward.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote 
``no.''
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. 
Grijalva).
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the time.
  As Ranking Member Nadler from the Judiciary Committee said, H. Res. 
12 is a dangerous government attempt to interject extremist politics 
into our justice system and shield MAGA extremists from legal 
consequences for their actions, including January 6 and the follow-up 
and investigations that are ongoing now. He is right about that 
Republican strategy. H. Res. 12 is both political cover and a political 
weapon.
  Like any legislation, H. Res. 12 is driven by the motivation of its 
sponsors, the Republican majority in the House of Representatives. For 
example, legislative action on climate change is motivated by urgency 
and our collective health and life, but H. Res. 12 is intended to 
intimidate, scare, and ultimately cower our public institutions into 
standing down as our descent into division and fascism continues.
  Power for the sake of power is truly dangerous. H. Res. 12 is just 
that.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Montana (Mr. Zinke), my very good friend and a distinguished veteran 
who served the United States in a variety of capacities, in and out of 
uniform.
  Mr. ZINKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of a select committee 
to investigate the weaponization of the Federal Government, something I 
have a lot of experience with firsthand.
  I proudly served as the 52nd Secretary of the Interior. Despite the 
deep state's repeated attempts to stop me, I stand before you as a duly 
elected Member of the United States Congress and tell you that a deep 
state exists and is perhaps the strongest covert weapon the left has 
against the American people.
  There is no doubt the Federal Government deep state coordinates with 
liberal activists and uses politicians and willing media to carry their 
water.
  The deep state runs secret messaging campaigns with one goal in mind: 
to increase its power to censor and persuade the American people.
  Dark money groups funded by liberal billionaires and foreign 
investors funnel money to shell organizations and repeatedly attempt to 
destroy the American West. In many cases, they want to wipe out the 
American cowboy completely, remove public access to our lands, and turn 
Montana into a national park. They want to control our land and our 
lifestyle.
  Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record two parts of a five-part series 
of investigative articles by the Capital Research Center titled: 
``Arabella's Long War: Web of `Pop-Up' Groups'' and ``Arabella's Long 
War: `Keep it in the Ground.' ''

           [From the Capital Research Center, Nov. 12, 2021]

   Arabella's Long War: Web of ``Pop-Up'' Groups--How Leftist ``Dark 
 Money'' Activists Brought Down Trump's Secretary of the Interior and 
          Paved the way for Biden's Radical Environmentalists

                           (By Hayden Ludmig)


                       A Web of ``Pop-Up'' Groups

       Enter Arabella Advisors, a consulting firm based in 
     Washington, DC, that quietly runs arguably the most powerful 
     activist and lobbying network in politics. Arabella manages 
     four in-house nonprofits collectively called the ``sisters,'' 
     each of which controls a small army of activists and a legion 
     of ``pop-up'' groups. And each pop-up group is made to look 
     like a slick, stand-alone website. These pop-ups target 
     virtually every issue in politics--control of the courts, 
     abortion access, gun control, and voter registration and 
     mobilization, even the Trump-Russia collusion hoax--pushing 
     left-wing policies in every corner. What makes Arabella so 
     powerful is how these ``pop-ups'' deceive individuals into 
     believing they represent genuine local grassroots interests, 
     such as one pop-up in Alaska created to oppose creation of 
     the Pebble Mine run from Arabella's plush offices in DC.
       Arabella's network is extraordinarily well-funded. In 2019 
     alone, the four ``sisters'' reported total revenues exceeding 
     $730 million and poured out $648 million. Between the 
     network's creation in 2006 and its Form 990 filing for 2019 
     (the latest available), Arabella's empire has received more 
     than $3 billion and spent nearly $2.5 billion. Most of that 
     funding was directed to the network's flagship 501(c)(3) 
     nonprofit, the New Venture Fund, whose largest known donors 
     include the Gates, Ford, Hewlett, Packard, and Buffett 
     Foundations.
       Beginning in 2017, Arabella turned its guns on Trump's 
     Department of the Interior using a pop-up pair: Western 
     Values Project (WVP) and its ``sister,'' Western Values 
     Project Action (WVPA).
       According to their websites, WVP and WVPA were created in 
     2013 in Helena, Montana, to expose corrupt corporate 
     lobbyists preying on public lands in the West. In reality, 
     WVP is run by the 501(c)(3) New Venture Fund while WVPA is 
     run by the 501(c)(4) Sixteen Thirty Fund, Arabella's in-house 
     lobbying shop. Whatever staff the groups actually have would 
     have been paid by one of Arabella's nonprofits or possibly by 
     Arabella Advisors itself; we'll likely never know. But in its 
     2018 Form 990, New Venture Fund revealed that it is the 
     ``paymaster'' for Sixteen Thirty Fund (which reported zero 
     employees on its own 2018 Form 990) and ``pays the salary and 
     immediately invoices Sixteen Thirty Fund, which reimburses 
     the full amount.''
       It's common for groups to use both kinds of nonprofit to 
     maximize their ability to lobby through the 501(c)(4) and 
     raise non-lobbying funds through the 501(c)(3), since donors 
     may deduct donations to the 501(c)(3) from their taxes. But 
     Arabella takes that tactic to another level, using pop-up 
     fronts for its nonprofits that can take advantage of the New 
     Venture and Sixteen Thirty Fund's respective tax advantages 
     without disclosing their relationship to one another. 
     Donations to WVP and WVPA in fact benefitted the Arabella-run 
     nonprofits behind the projects, as an archived version of 
     WVP's website from October 2019 reveals.
       Until late 2019 the website for WVP and WVPA revealed a 
     handful of staffers, including Chris Saeger, ex-
     communications director for the Montana Democratic Party and 
     former Service Employees International Union (SEIU) staffer; 
     Jayson O'Neill, a Democratic staffer for Montana's 
     legislature and Gov. Brian Schweitzer (D); and Yetta Stein, a 
     staffer for the left-wing political action committee End 
     Citizens United and staffer for the 2018 reelection campaign 
     Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT). The archived website also showed a 
     small advisory board consisting of:
       Kjersten Forseth, a former chief of state for Colorado 
     State Senate Democrats, former director of the left-wing 
     strategy group ProgressNow Colorado, political director for 
     the Colorado AFL-CIO, and chief political strategist for 
     Rocky Mountain Voter Outreach, a Denver-based get-out-the-
     vote and ballot initiative firm.
       Kent Salazar, an environmental health manager for 
     Albuquerque, New Mexico, former New Mexico State game 
     commissioner for Gov. Bill Richardson (D), and a board member 
     for the left-wing National Wildlife Federation.
       Pat Smith, a lawyer representing Indian tribes in Montana, 
     member of the 2010 Montana Redistricting Commission, and 
     appointee of Montana Gov. Steve Bullock (D) to the Northwest 
     Power and Conservation Council.
       WVP's advisory board also included Caroline Ciccone, who in 
     2019 was executive director of the New Venture Fund pop-up 
     and anti-Trump ``oversight'' group Restore Public Trust. 
     Ciccone is a former communications director for the 
     Democratic National Committee (DNC), Obama appointee to the 
     U.S. Small Business Administration, and Democratic 
     strategist. From 2014 to 2017 she led Americans United for 
     Change (AUFC), a top left-wing strategy group whose national 
     field director Scott Foval was recorded in late 2016 by 
     undercover journalists from Project Veritas bragging that 
     AUFC had paid mentally ill and homeless people to instigate 
     violence at Trump campaign rallies. ``We know that Trump's 
     people will [tend to]

[[Page H137]]

     freak the f-- out,'' Foval said in the video. ``It is not 
     hard to get some of these a------- to `pop off.' '' The 
     scandal ultimately led back to Robert Creamer, co-founder of 
     the powerful consulting firm Democracy Partners and a former 
     general consultant to AUFC who directed parts of a vast 
     network of advocacy groups all aligned in support of Hillary 
     Clinton's presidential bid. This led to speculation that his 
     firm helped Clinton's campaign violate collusion laws. Foval 
     described Creamer's role in the scandal as the ``kingpin'' 
     who is ``diabolical, and I love him for it.'' Within days of 
     the video's release Creamer resigned, and Foval was fired.
       Also present was Kyle Herrig, a New Venture Fund board 
     member who sat on the advisory boards of at least five New 
     Venture Fund projects, including American Oversight, a 
     judicial activist and litigation group; Allied Progress, 
     which attacked Trump cabinet officials; and the Ciccone-run 
     Restore Public Trust.
       In early 2020 it was announced that Western Values Project 
     and these three Arabella ``pop-ups'' were being rolled into a 
     new organization: Accountable.US, itself a former New Venture 
     Fund project fully established as an independent nonprofit 
     sometime later that year, headed by president Kyle Herrig and 
     executive director Caroline Ciccone. (It appears that Western 
     Values Project Action remains a project of Sixteen Thirty 
     Fund, but that remains unclear as of writing.)
       This reveals that Western Values Project, far from being a 
     grassroots group, is enmeshed in a deeply networked, highly 
     coordinated cabal of professional activists--and it always 
     was.
                                  ____


           [From the Capital Research Center, Nov. 12, 2021]

  Arabella's Long War: ``Keep It in the Ground''--How Leftist ``Dark 
 Money'' Activists Brought Down Trump's Secretary of the Interior and 
          Paved the Way for Biden's Radical Environmentalists

                           (By Hayden Ludwig)

       Summary: For years ``dark money'' activists ran a 
     coordinated campaign to sabotage and undermine the Trump 
     administration from the offices of Arabella Advisors in 
     Washington, DC. The campaign culminated in the most extreme 
     environmentalist regime in American history under President 
     Joseph Biden. This report goes inside that campaign to 
     destroy Trump's Department of the Interior and promote the 
     Left's war on affordable energy.
       In 2019, the Capital Research Center's groundbreaking 
     report on Arabella Advisors exposed the half-billion-dollar 
     network for the first time, dragging Arabella into the 
     limelight as the posterchild of the Left's ``dark money.'' 
     Since then we've continued to uncover this now $730 million 
     activist empire, tracing its shadowy campaigns on everything 
     from abortion on demand to packing the Supreme Court to its 
     war on the Trump administration.
       This report on the Arabella network examines the 
     professional Left's years-long campaign to undermine 
     President Donald Trump's Department of the Interior, laying 
     the groundwork for the Biden administration's crusade against 
     oil and the most radical environmentalist policies in 
     American history .


                       ``Keep It in the Ground''

       The U.S. Department of the Interior is primarily 
     responsible for managing roughly 450 million acres of federal 
     land and conservation of their natural resources, most 
     critically the nation's vast reserves of oil and natural gas. 
     It manages hundreds of dams and reservoirs, regulates 
     drilling on public lands, runs the National Park Service, and 
     maintains public monuments, including dozens attacked by 
     radical Black Lives Matter activists in 2020.
       The department also plays a role in foreign diplomacy and 
     national security. Under President Trump that included 
     international wildlife trafficking bans, encouraging trade of 
     precious metals and rare earths, and promoting his Indo-
     Pacific security and economic strategy.
       But the department's openness to expanding oil and gas 
     production brought the sharpest attacks from the Left. Since 
     the department is entirely under the president's purview, 
     halting all drilling on public land is far easier than 
     attempting to halt private oil and gas production 
     nationwide--the radical Left's ultimate goal.
       ``The natural place to start phasing out supply is on our 
     public lands and oceans where a ban on new leasing will keep 
     up to 450 billion tons of carbon pollution in the ground,'' 
     Center for Biological Diversity director Kieran Suckling said 
     in 2015. Bill McKibben, founder of the ultra-leftist 350.org, 
     has also stated that ``public lands are one of the easiest 
     places for us to control the flow of carbon into the 
     atmosphere.''
       Unsurprisingly, that's been the policy of Democratic 
     presidents and their activist allies for years. President 
     Barack Obama canceled lease sales in the Artic and Atlantic 
     offshore sites and banned the leasing of coal on federal 
     lands. Phasing down ``extraction of fossil fuels from our 
     public lands'' was in the Democratic Party's 2016 platform. 
     That same year a 350.org activist asked Democratic 
     presidential nominee Hillary Clinton what she meant by 
     ``extraction on public lands is a done deal?'' Clinton 
     replied, ``That's where [President Obama] is moving: No 
     future extraction. I agree with that.'' Her running mate, 
     Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine, later assured another 350.org 
     activist that ``I actually am now in that position.''
       But even ``phasing down'' is too conservative for today's 
     ``keep it in the ground'' Left. No less than 20 Democratic 
     presidential hopefuls vowed to ban drilling on public lands 
     outright during their party's 2020 primary. Ever the pawn of 
     the radical Left, on January 27, 2021--exactly one week after 
     his inauguration--President Biden indefinitely suspended 
     development of new oil and gas wells on public lands, which 
     the left-leaning San Francisco Chronicle cheered as ``a first 
     step to halting the granting of federal drilling leases 
     permanently.''
       Why does this matter? Federal lands account for roughly 24 
     percent of America's oil, natural gas, and coal production. 
     In 2019, total crude oil production reached an all-time high 
     of 4.471 billion barrels, with a significant chunk of that 
     growth coming from oil drilled on federal lands. Biden's ban 
     blocks future development of these key resources, removing 
     them from the supply stream and hampering the energy 
     independence the United States struggled to achieve in recent 
     years. This means higher gasoline and household electricity 
     prices, an estimated $11.3 billion in lost federal royalties 
     and rental fees, and the destruction of hundreds of thousands 
     of jobs across the economy.
       With a single executive order, the Left could advance its 
     crusade to ``keep it in the ground'' for years in the name of 
     global warming. The stakes couldn't be higher--all that stood 
     in its way was the Trump administration.

  Mr. ZINKE. We all knew politics was ugly, but we need to investigate 
and uncover corruption no matter where it lies. It is time to bring 
light to the shadows of the deep state and do our duty.
  Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this 
critical piece of oversight investigations.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, here is a curious thing. The legislation 
that creates this select committee, we were first given this on January 
2. Then, it changed on January 6, and we didn't get that until 10 p.m. 
on January 6, after 13 Speaker votes.
  What changed in this legislation--and this is really curious--is they 
expanded the select committee's authority to investigate ongoing 
criminal investigations--think about that--in an unprecedented way.
  I don't know how many votes that got, but clearly, it was important 
enough because we went through 13 Speaker votes before we got to this.
  The reason why this is included, and I am sad to say this, is because 
we have Members in this Chamber who themselves may be subjects of 
investigation. There are ongoing investigations against the former 
President. So, this was added.
  Why was this added? To try to frustrate those investigations.
  When we talk about corruption, when we talk about undermining the 
rule of law, let's understand what just occurred here.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Schiff).
  Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the 
Republican select subcommittee to investigate deep state conspiracy 
theories.
  If you had any doubt about what this committee is really about, about 
its true focus, my colleague from Montana just confirmed this is all 
about deep state nonsense.
  Republicans claim, without merit, that this subcommittee will 
investigate the so-called weaponization of the Federal Government. What 
it is really intended to do is to undermine the legitimate 
investigation of President Trump's incitement of a violent attack on 
this building, on this Capitol, on this citadel of democracy, an 
investigation that implicates some of the very Members of this body who 
want to sit on that committee.
  Make no mistake, this investigation, this investigate the 
investigators committee, will do deep damage to our national security 
and only breed distrust with our national security professionals, who 
will be reluctant to share with Congress the information policymakers 
need to protect our country.
  The committee will also seek to discredit law enforcement like the 
FBI, who are so important in the fight against domestic violent 
extremism.
  Republicans in Congress just don't care. The greatest terrorist 
threat to our country comes from violent, rightwing militia groups and 
their sympathizers, and Republicans in Congress just don't care.
  The last time Republicans were in charge of the House, Kevin McCarthy

[[Page H138]]

pushed to form another bogus select committee, that one on Benghazi. He 
did so, as he admitted, to tear down Hillary Clinton's numbers, a 
patently political exercise.
  Now, McCarthy is at it again, pushed into forming this bogus 
subcommittee by the QAnon members of his own Conference.
  He sacrificed a lot in his bid for Speaker. That was his choice. Now, 
the American people are going to pay the price in the form of a body 
blow to our national security.
  Vote ``no'' on this ill-considered measure. This is no Church 
Committee, not a bipartisan effort to reform government, but a partisan 
effort to tear it down, damn the consequences. Vote ``no.''
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Colorado (Mrs. Boebert), my very good friend.
  Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Speaker, in response to the blue anon rhetoric, I 
rise in favor of H. Res. 12 to establish a subcommittee on the 
weaponization of the Federal Government.
  The authoritarian left has used the full might and authority of the 
Federal Government to force its agenda on the American people. The 
Federal Government has been weaponized to pressure private companies to 
censor conservatives; target parents as domestic terrorists simply for 
caring about their children and their education; manipulate the 
American people by declaring Hunter Biden's laptop as Russian 
disinformation; even failing to inform American citizens about 
classified documents that a former Vice President had in his 
possession; and launch an unwarranted investigation into President 
Trump's Presidential campaign.
  Mr. Speaker, our Constitution is a contract with the American people 
and our government. That contract is designed to produce maximum 
freedom and minimum tyranny for this great country.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Newhouse). The time of the gentlewoman 
has expired.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentlewoman from Colorado.
  Mrs. BOEBERT. Sadly, the FBI and the DOJ, and many other agencies, 
are violating this contract and working to make the American people 
subjects rather than free citizens.
  This committee is essential, and I encourage its creation and the 
adoption of this resolution.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Johnson).
  Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H. Res. 12, the 
insurrection protection committee, which Speaker McCarthy, the 21st 
century McCarthyism, had to agree to last week in order to gain the 
Speakership.
  MAGA extremist Republicans forced, as a consequence of getting their 
vote, the Speaker to promise to create this select committee. Donald 
Trump had his hands in it. Donald Trump had his hands in it last week. 
During this circular firing squad, he was calling the shots, and this 
will benefit him.
  This insurrection protection committee is set up to insulate the ex-
President, along with various MAGA Republicans who are still serving 
here in the House and who are under investigation. It is here to 
protect them from that investigation. It is here to disrupt the flow of 
justice in this country.
  This is a dangerous, extreme committee that is put in the hands of a 
group of people who even defied congressional subpoenas and refused to 
come to testify before the January 6th Committee.

                              {time}  1400

  Now they are trying to interfere with the Justice Department 
deliberations on whether or not they should be accused and charged with 
committing criminal offenses in the lead up to, on January 6, and 
thereafter. This is a very dangerous piece of legislation.
  MAGA Republicans are behind it, led by the head election denier in 
this country, who, by the way, instituted something down in Brazil this 
weekend. It is a worldwide affair. This is dangerous. We must stop it. 
Vote ``no'' on H. Res. 12.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North 
Carolina (Mr. Bishop).
  Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, with great power comes 
great responsibility. We entrust our Department of Justice, FBI, and 
intelligence community with great power to keep us safe. And yet, as 
long as these agencies have existed, they have violated everyday 
Americans' civil rights.
  The security state believes itself to be above the Constitution and 
the laws passed by Congress, or perhaps the belief is only tacit. It is 
aware only of power, not authority--power.
  The FBI spied on Frank Sinatra, John Lennon, Dr. Martin Luther King, 
Jr., and Muhammad Ali because they were national security threats--
celebrities, but everyday Americans as to their constitutional rights.
  The intelligence community abused their power to spy on Presidential 
candidates, a sitting President, and Members of Congress and their 
staffs.
  The FBI continuously coordinated with social media companies to 
moderate social content, the public square. So contemptuous and out of 
touch are they that when confronted with this just weeks ago, they 
said: We were merely engaging with our community partners.
  Leading up to the 2020 election, the FBI worked hand in hand with 
Twitter and Facebook to silence the Hunter Biden laptop story. 
Concealment from everyday Americans. They have continued to censor in 
silence criticism of COVID policies and vaccine mandates to the harm of 
everyday Americans.
  In 2013, the former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, 
lied to Congress about the NSA collecting data on millions of 
Americans. Yet, he has escaped a reckoning.
  The NSA spied on groups, including Human Rights Watch, Amnesty 
International, and other NGOs. FBI contractors conducted thousands of 
searches on NSA databases. The intelligence community spied on 
journalists and political opponents in clear violation of the First 
Amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from North Carolina.
  Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. That is not just all illegal, it is un-
American, and it cannot continue. The government's massive surveillance 
apparatus is well-documented, but there is still much more that we do 
not know. We owe it to the American people to reveal the rot within our 
Federal Government and cut it out so that it can no longer harm 
everyday Americans.
  Mr. Speaker, today we are putting the deep state on notice: We are 
coming for you on behalf of everyday Americans.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I remember after 9/11 when we all 
worked together to ensure the protection of the American people through 
the Patriot Act and dealing with the FISA courts, we worked together 
because truth is important.
  I just want to simply be on the floor today to speak about truth. I 
work with school boards across my district. I know that there is not 
one school board that does not welcome a parent to hear their voices 
because obviously they are partners in the education of our precious 
children.
  In September 2021, the National School Board Association sent Mr. 
Biden a letter pointing to a trend of violence and threats against 
school officials. It included a brief reference to Mr. Smith's arrest 
incident and a long list of examples with a footnote to a news account 
that mentioned the arrest in passing but without details, like his 
daughter's assault.
  The point is that this came about because there were threats against 
school board members.
  So can we have truth here?
  That is what I rise to bring to the attention of this body as relates 
to this committee and this select committee.
  Is there going to be truth finding? Is this going to be a committee 
that is going to collect information or otherwise investigate citizens 
of the United States and give the most right-wing Members who may have 
an ax to grind the ability to participate or is it going to be fair?

  Is it going to be a gross misuse of power with dangerous 
implications, unintended consequences, and potentially

[[Page H139]]

expose general operations of our national security infrastructure, 
which will put American lives at risk?
  Let me be very clear. Russia is one of our most dangerous 
adversaries. We are in the middle of a national quagmire, and to 
undermine that through investigations of the FBI and Central 
Intelligence is going to be extremely dangerous.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, the passage of this resolution would 
also give MAGA Republicans the ability to interfere in ongoing criminal 
investigations, including those investigating that day that some 
declared was just a bunch of tourists on January 6, 2021.
  Mr. Speaker, I have worked with my friends on the other side of the 
aisle. I have worked with Mr. Roy.
  But is this a question of truth?
  That is the issue that we stand here discussing today.
  In this country, no one is above the law, and to suggest that some 
people should be because they don't agree with the force of law being 
applied to their activities is contrary to the very fabric of fairness, 
justice, and equality that America was founded on.
  Let me, as an aside, indicate that we know what has been in the 
headlines--10 documents found in a locked closet that Mr. Biden may 
have had. Well, you know what, Mr. Speaker, the process of the law is 
proceeding. The call was made. The documents were surrendered, if you 
will. The process goes forward under the laws of this land. No one 
denied it. No one rejected it. No one did not in any way come to say 
anything other than: Follow the law. On the other hand, in Mar-a-Lago 
no law was found.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to consider the truth and vote 
against this resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H. Res. 12, a 
dangerous resolution whose passage would Establish a Select Committee 
on the Weaponization of the Federal Government or, more accurately, a 
subcommittee that would threaten our nations safety, security, and 
freedom.
  MAGA Republicans love to hide behind the idea that they are pushing 
an agenda that would help the American people, but let's see this for 
what it truly is, a blatant assault on our democracy, our law 
enforcement agencies, our justice system, and our intelligence 
community, and an attempt to shield the twice-impeached former 
president from ongoing investigations being conducted by the Department 
of Justice.
  The establishment of this subcommittee would give Republicans the 
ability to investigate any agency that ``can collect information or 
otherwise investigate citizens of the United States'' and gives the 
most right-wing members of the Republican party access to confidential 
documents solely intended for the members of the Permanent Select 
Committee on Intelligence.
  This gross misuse of power will have dangerous implications and 
unintended consequences and could potentially expose general operations 
of our national security infrastructure which will put American lives 
at risk.
  The passage of this resolution would also give MAGA Republicans the 
ability to interfere in ongoing criminal investigations including those 
investigating the extremist insurrectionists who lead the brutal attack 
on this institution two years ago.
  In this country, no one is above the law, and to suggest that some 
people should be, because they don't agree with the force of the law 
being applied to their activities, is contrary to the very fabric of 
fairness, justice and equality that America was founded on.
  This is a blatant attempt by House GOP members to stifle the federal 
government's investigatory powers, claiming that conservatives are 
being prosecuted and silenced.
  The new Select Subcommittee comes as federal agencies such as the 
Department of Justice are investigating the GOP and its allies in 
multiple criminal investigations.
  Members of the Republican party have been on press tours announcing 
this new subcommittee and have laid out their agenda, but how would 
this subcommittee help the American people in any way?
  For a party that claims to be pro-law enforcement, the Republican 
party is now getting ready to undermine the hard work of our law 
enforcement and surveillance agencies.
  Mr. Speaker what really is the intent here? I can tell you what I 
think it is. It is a back door effort to handcuff the current 
administration in their normal and usual course of operations?
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to oppose this dangerous and a 
completely irresponsible Resolution that will put the lives of 
Americans at risk and is a political stunt to further advance their 
dangerous conspiracy theories.
  Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record an article from The New York 
Times titled: ``Republicans Preparing Broad Inquiry Into F.B.I. and 
Security Agencies.''

                [From the New York Times, Jan. 8, 2023]

  House Republicans Preparing Broad Inquiry Into F.B.I. and Security 
                                Agencies

                (By Charlie Savage and Luke Broadwater)

       Newly empowered House Republicans are preparing a wide-
     ranging investigation into law enforcement and national 
     security agencies, raising the prospect of politically 
     charged fights with the Eiden administration over access to 
     sensitive information like highly classified intelligence and 
     the details of continuing criminal inquiries by the Justice 
     Department.
       The House plans to vote this week on a resolution to create 
     a special Judiciary subcommittee on what it calls the 
     ``weaponization of the federal government,'' a topic that 
     Republicans have signaled could include reviewing 
     investigations into former President Donald J. Trump.
       The panel would be overseen by Representative Jim Jordan, 
     Republican of Ohio, who is also poised to become the 
     Judiciary Committee's chairman. It remains to be seen who 
     else Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who made numerous concessions to 
     a far-right faction of his party to win the speakership, will 
     put on it.
       In a Fox News interview on Friday evening, Representative 
     Chip Roy of Texas, a lead negotiator for hard-right lawmakers 
     who pushed Mr. McCarthy's team for concessions, portrayed the 
     panel as part of the agreement they struck for their support. 
     He said Mr. McCarthy had committed to giving the subcommittee 
     at least as much funding and staffing as the House special 
     committee in the last Congress that investigated the Jan. 6, 
     2021, attack on the Capitol.
       ``So we got more resources, more specificity, more power to 
     go after this recalcitrant Eiden administration,'' Mr. Roy 
     said. ``That's really important.''
       A spokesman for Mr. Jordan did not reply to a request for 
     comment, but both he and Mr. McCarthy have spoken for months 
     about their desire for such an investigation and pledged to 
     voters during the 2022 campaign to carry one out.
       ``We will hold the swamp accountable, from the withdrawal 
     of Afghanistan, to the origins of Covid and to the 
     weaponization of the F.B.I.,'' Mr. McCarthy said in his first 
     remarks as speaker early Saturday. ``Let me be very clear: We 
     will use the power of the purse and the power of the subpoena 
     to get the job done.''
       The text of the resolution establishing the subcommittee 
     would give the panel essentially open-ended jurisdiction to 
     scrutinize any issue related to civil liberties or to examine 
     how any agency of the federal government has collected, 
     analyzed and used information about Americans including 
     ``ongoing criminal investigations.''
       The Justice Department has traditionally resisted making 
     information about open criminal investigations available to 
     Congress, suggesting that legal and political fights over 
     subpoenas and executive privilege are most likely looming.
       Republicans are promoting Mr. Jordan's panel as a new 
     ``Church Committee,'' referring to a 1970s investigation by 
     Senator Frank Church, Democrat of Idaho, that uncovered 
     decades of intelligence and civil liberties abuses by 
     presidents of both parties.
       But in an environment in which Mr. Trump has been the 
     subject of multiple criminal investigations for years--
     including continuing inquiries into his attempts to overturn 
     the 2020 election results and his hoarding of sensitive 
     documents--Democrats predicted the new investigative 
     subcommittee was likely to adopt a more partisan edge.
       Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, the top Democrat 
     on the Judiciary Committee, said the Church Committee had 
     been ``a serious and bipartisan attempt to reform the conduct 
     of the intelligence community, based on hard and verifiable 
     evidence.'' By contrast, he said that ``this new thing, 
     fueled by conspiracy theories and slated to be run by the 
     most extreme members of the MAGA caucus,'' was likely to be 
     more similar to the notorious House Un-American Activities 
     Committee of the mid-20th century.
       Mr. Jordan is a staunch ally of Mr. Trump. Late last year, 
     as the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee when his 
     party was still in the minority, he oversaw a 1,000-page 
     staff report that claimed that the F.B.I. had ``spied on 
     President Trump's campaign and ridiculed conservative 
     Americans'' and that the ``rot within the F.B.I. festers in 
     and proceeds from Washington.''
       The resolution appears to give him authority to subpoena 
     the Justice Department for information about the special 
     counsel inquiry into Mr. Trump's attempts to overturn the 
     2020 election and his handling of classified documents, along 
     with other politically charged matters like an open tax 
     investigation into President Biden's son, Hunter Biden.
       The text of the resolution would also grant Mr. Jordan's 
     panel the power to receive the same highly classified 
     information that intelligence agencies make available to 
     their

[[Page H140]]

     oversight committee, the House Permanent Select Committee on 
     Intelligence.
       Intelligence Committee members have access to some of the 
     most sensitive secrets in the government, including 
     information about covert actions, which are not shared with 
     other lawmakers. Traditionally, House leaders tend to place 
     on the intelligence panel members of their party they think 
     are especially trustworthy not to disclose classified 
     information.
       While Mr. Jordan's investigative unit will be housed within 
     the Judiciary Committee, its 13 members--eight of whom would 
     be Republicans--will not be limited to lawmakers on that 
     panel.
       It is not clear, for example, whether Republican leaders 
     would select hard-right members, such as Representative 
     Marjorie Taylor Greene, the Georgia Republican who was 
     stripped of her committee assignments in 2021 for making a 
     series of violent and conspiratorial social media posts 
     before she was elected. Mr. McCarthy has already promised her 
     a spot on the House Oversight Committee, and she broke with 
     other far-right members to support his speakership bid from 
     the first ballot, as did Mr. Jordan.
       Such a situation could result in lawmakers trying to 
     scrutinize a Justice Department investigation as that inquiry 
     potentially examines some of those same lawmakers' conduct 
     concerning the events of Jan. 6.
       In an interview on ABC's ``This Week'' on Sunday, 
     Representative Scott Perry, Republican of Pennsylvania, 
     rejected a suggestion that he should pledge not to serve on 
     Mr. Jordan's subcommittee because it may scrutinize the Jan. 
     6 investigation and as a witness in that inquiry, he had a 
     conflict of interest. Mr. Perry, who played an important role 
     in Mr. Trump's attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 
     election, had his cellphone seized by the F.B.I.
       ``Why should I be limited--why should anybody be limited 
     just because someone has made an accusation?'' Mr. Perry 
     said, adding: ``I get accused of all kinds of things every 
     single day, as does every member that serves in the public 
     eye. But that doesn't stop you from doing your job. It is our 
     duty and it is my duty.''
       Some Republicans also seem to see the panel as an 
     opportunity to raise culture-war issues and promote 
     conspiracy theories. In his interview with Fox, Mr. Roy 
     described the subcommittee's mission as going ``after the 
     weaponization of the government, the F.B.I., the intel 
     agencies, D.H.S., all of them that have been, you know, 
     labeling Scott Smith a domestic terrorist.''
       In fact, no agency labeled Mr. Smith a domestic terrorist. 
     Mr. Smith, whose daughter was sexually assaulted in a high 
     school bathroom in Virginia, was arrested after he lunged at 
     someone at a school board meeting during a tense and chaotic 
     debate over bathroom policy for transgender students. He was 
     convicted of disorderly conduct.
       In September 2021, the National School Boards Association 
     sent Mr. Biden a letter pointing to a trend of violence and 
     threats against school officials. It included a brief 
     reference to Mr. Smith's arrest incident amid a long list of 
     examples, with a footnote to a news account of the meeting 
     that mentioned the arrest in passing but without details like 
     his daughter's assault. The letter also said acts of violence 
     and threats against school officials could be classified as 
     ``equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and hate 
     crimes,'' and asked for federal help.
       A few days later, Attorney General Merrick B. Garland 
     issued a memorandum directing U.S. attorneys and the F.B.I. 
     to convene meetings across the country with local officials 
     to discuss ``strategies for addressing threats'' against 
     school officials and teachers. His memo did not call anyone a 
     domestic terrorist, and it specifically distinguished 
     spirited debate, which it stressed was constitutionally 
     protected, from acts of violence and threats.
       But voices on the right have made Mr. Smith a cause 
     celebre, falsely telling their viewers and readers that the 
     Biden-era Justice Department and the F.B.I. consider parents 
     who disagree with liberal school board policies to be 
     domestic terrorists.
       The subcommittee investigation proposed by Mr. Jordan is 
     just one of a number of inquiries House Republicans plan to 
     approve this week.
       Included in a separate rules package scheduled to come up 
     for a vote on Monday is a wide-ranging inquiry into the 
     coronavirus pandemic, including the origins of the virus, so-
     called gain-of-function research, the production of vaccines 
     and the conduct of Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, Mr. Biden's former 
     chief medical adviser, whom Republicans have pledged to haul 
     before them for questioning.
       Republicans are also planning to form a special committee 
     to investigate the Chinese government's ``economic, 
     technological and security progress, and its competition with 
     the United States.''
       Both the China investigation and the investigation into law 
     enforcement are scheduled for a vote on Tuesday.

  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy), my friend.
  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to my colleague from 
Texas as she recounted some of the realities when talking about school 
boards. Well, I have come to know Scott Smith of Loudoun County. I 
consider him a friend. I have been talking to him since the actions 
against his family--in response to his daring to go to the school board 
to question the abuse of his daughter--resulted in his name being put 
out as the poster child for the weaponization of government against 
parents who dare question school boards.
  And, yes, in fact, the National School Board Association sent a 
letter. But what became increasingly clear is that it was in collusion 
with the White House seeking the letter. That has become readily clear 
from the emails that we have gotten through Freedom of Information Act 
requests, that the Biden White House was seeking the National School 
Board Association to have that kind of a letter request in order that 
they, the Biden administration, be able to target Scott Smith and other 
parents around this country.
  Every American should shudder at the power of the government, the 
Federal Government, being targeted at parents for daring to stand up 
and defend a daughter who was abused in a bathroom in the Loudoun 
County Public Schools.
  By the way, the superintendent in Loudoun County has been indicted. 
This is the truth. Yet, this administration wanted to make Scott Smith 
the bad guy--not the rapist, not the school board that allowed this to 
occur in the schools in Loudoun County. It is not just parents.
  What about Bunni Pounds in the Christians Engaged organization? The 
IRS was targeting their nonprofit status because they happened to be 
religious. This is the power of the IRS.
  How about the power of our public health elite who made decisions and 
put out misinformation that undermined the ability of Americans to 
stand up and to continue their jobs and continue to go to school?
  Instead, they were masked and had needles put in their arms.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the 
gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. ROY. Now we want to know the truth. Not the origins, but the 
truth. This committee is critically important, and we are going to find 
the truth. We are going to defend the American people against the 
weaponization of government.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would simply say in response to that 
that there are oversight committees that are equipped and ready to look 
into all the issues that the gentleman just raised, and into all the 
conspiracy theories that they want to raise. But they went ahead and 
created this additional committee, and there is a reason for it.
  This new committee they are creating has the authority to basically 
investigate ongoing criminal investigations. It is unprecedented.
  In any event, I would remind the gentleman, you have oversight 
committees. You are in charge now; you can do whatever you want to do.
  But there is a reason for this committee and there is a reason why 
after 13 roll call votes for Speakership they added an additional line 
giving this committee the authority to look into ongoing 
investigations.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Pfluger), my very good friend, who served the 
country in and out of uniform.
  Mr. PFLUGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise because Americans are completely fed 
up. They are fed up with being targeted. And the assertion that I just 
heard that MAGA Republicans are domestic terrorists, the assertion that 
this is happening throughout the country, I must tell my 90-year-old 
grandmother.
  Mr. Speaker, this assertion has been made time and time again that 
MAGA Republicans will blow something up, that MAGA Republicans are 
terrorists. Listen, we have seen censorship and meddling by former 
intelligence community experts and current Federal law enforcement 
agencies against Republicans and preventing media stories from actually 
coming to light. This is a fact.
  My friend from Texas just talked about the IRS and other agencies 
that have done this. We are not standing idly by, and it is time that 
the truth

[[Page H141]]

comes out. When we say things like MAGA Republicans, I think we should 
all be very careful and not be disingenuous because there are plenty of 
good Americans and patriots that are willing to stand up to get the 
truth out.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the 
gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. PFLUGER. Mr. Speaker, it is important that free speech be 
upheld--protected free speech be upheld. Not libel, not slander, and 
not any sort of assertion that all MAGA Republicans are bad because we 
know that that is not true. In fact, there are many good Americans that 
are standing up for their rights.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman just got up and made all 
kinds of assertions that things were just said that weren't said. I 
don't know what the hell he is talking about.
  Mr. Speaker, I will, again, urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' against 
the creation of that committee because this is unprecedented. This is a 
witch hunt. This is a committee designed basically to protect those 
who, quite frankly, are under investigation right now.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1415

  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McClintock), who is my very good friend.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, in order to enforce our laws, we give 
terrifying powers to such agencies as the FBI, the IRS, and the CIA, 
among others. The misuse of these powers to effect political outcomes 
would be fatal to freedom, and it is the hallmark of any dictatorship. 
This, our Constitution, was written to prevent whoever is in power.
  Now, in recent years we have watched the IRS target individuals 
because of their political beliefs. We have seen a glaring double 
standard in the enforcement of our laws by our Justice Department based 
on the political beliefs of their targets. We have seen their powers 
used to intimidate citizens into silence, whether the Tea Party or 
parents questioning their school boards.
  Most alarmingly, we have seen the use of the FBI and our intelligence 
agencies to suppress political viewpoints disagreeable to those in 
power or to manufacture or propagate one of the greatest scandals in 
American history: the Russian collusion hoax.
  Now, when a government can interfere with the elections that govern 
it and when agencies can act independently of the outcome of these 
elections, then democracy will die.
  This select committee is designed to get to the bottom of these 
alarming allegations, and I would hope the Democrats would be just as 
eager to sort this out as the Republicans. After all, it was not that 
long ago that these powers were turned against the left and could be 
again if we do nothing.
  As Madison warned: Democracy alone is not enough to protect our 
liberty, for in a pure democracy, 51 percent of the people can vote any 
time to throw the other 49 percent in jail. That is why we have a 
Constitution which limits the powers of government through checks and 
balances like this Congress and like our Bill of Rights, and it is why 
each of us takes an oath to support and defend it.
  Let us all honor that oath today.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, let me just make this clear for my colleague. A change 
was made in this legislation, and it was not just to allow the 
committee to investigate ongoing criminal investigations which is quite 
nefarious in and of itself.
  Originally it was only supposed to be able to have investigative 
authority over the Department of Justice, DHS, and the FBI; the CIA and 
the IRS were added. This was all done after 13 Speaker votes at 10 
o'clock at night clearly in an attempt to win more votes.
  The people who are asking for these changes are the same people who 
want to investigate the people who are investigating them.
  This is really, really unprecedented. I don't know what the hell is 
going on here, but this isn't right. This isn't openness, and this 
isn't transparency.
  My friends talk about corruption. This is corruption. This is 
unacceptable. The American people ought to know it, and reasonable 
colleagues on the Republican side ought to say no to this.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the 
great State of Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry).
  Mr. PERRY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Oklahoma for yielding.
  My friends on the other side of the aisle are so concerned all the 
time about civil rights, having the majority for the last few years, 
they are not interested. They are not interested in what the American 
people or the little guy has been enduring every day when he comes home 
from a hard day's work. He watches the TV, and asks: How many more 
times do I have to say, huh, I told you so?
  We just had Social Security numbers of the targets of the so-called 
J6 investigation released to the public.
  Huh, I told you so. No surprise there.
  What about the school board association working in collaboration with 
the White House, working in collaboration with the White House and the 
Department of Justice to intimidate American citizens.
  Thirty miles from here, just a little drive from here, a young lady 
was raped. A schoolgirl was raped, and her father was concerned about 
her safety and had the gall to question the school board.
  And what does he get?
  Persecution and intimidation by his own Federal Government.
  I told you so. We all told you so.
  People on important committees in this institution lie on national TV 
over and over and over again with no consequence. They come home and 
say: Yeah, I told you so. That is not a big surprise here.
  The Federal Government is collaborating with Big Tech to silence 
Americans' voices.
  Where are their civil liberties?
  The Federal Government is collaborating with Big Tech and the health 
agencies to silence information that concerns the health of every 
single American citizen.
  Yeah, I told you so.
  How many more times?
  I ask the minority: How many more times do we have to say ``I told 
you so'' before you will recognize the overwhelming power and the abuse 
of power by this Federal Government? Will you ever do anything about 
it?
  Do you know when you want to do something about it?
  When you think you have the Presidency in 2024 and you try and regain 
this House, then you are going to be all into it investigating all your 
enemies.
  That is not what the Federal Government is supposed to be for. It is 
supposed to protect our civil rights, so we don't serve it but so that 
it serves us.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks 
to the Chair and not to other Members in the second person.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would say what the gentleman just said 
is terrible, but this committee has absolutely nothing to do with that.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Massie).
  Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma for 
yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, the very words expressed by those opposed to this 
committee demonstrate the dire need for this committee. We have gone 4 
years without oversight, and to quote Shakespeare, ``The lady doth 
protest too much, methinks.''
  Those who argue against transparency may have something to hide. So I 
listened very closely when I heard the former chairman of the 
Intelligence Committee give the reason that maybe we shouldn't ask for 
this information from the intelligence community.
  He said that the intelligence community after this committee may be 
reluctant to share information with Congress and that Congress needs to 
craft legislation.
  I would suggest if they are reluctant, then they are disqualified 
from holding

[[Page H142]]

these positions. If they have grown so big that they are no longer 
accountable to the branch of government that created them, that funds 
them, and that is responsible for their oversight, then they need to be 
hemmed in.
  I implore my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to populate 
this committee with serious Democrats. I know there are some over 
there. I have worked with them. We have cosponsored amendments on 
privacy over the past decade. Some of them have passed.
  Please populate it with serious Members.
  Please, to my colleagues on this side of the aisle, give us the 
resources we need to do this job.
  If I may rebut one thing that man said on the other side of the aisle 
about ongoing criminal investigations, he said that it is unprecedented 
that Congress would engage in an investigation that involves an ongoing 
criminal investigation.
  What was the January 6 Committee?
  This is not unprecedented. It is what you wasted millions of dollars 
on over the past 2 years.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of this rule and support for the 
committee that it will create.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would just say in response to the 
gentleman who said that he hopes that we populate this select committee 
with serious Democrats that he populate the committee with Republicans 
who did not ask for a pardon and who did not have their phones seized 
by the FBI.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Clyde).
  Mr. CLYDE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma for 
yielding.
  Last week, as I fought as one of the 20 conservative Members to 
secure victories for the American people by dismantling this 
institution's broken system and restoring this people's House as it 
should be, part of the status quo here in Washington, which we fought 
to change, is politicians making empty promises of government 
accountability.
  But believe me in this, Mr. Speaker, when we vowed accountability is 
coming, we meant it. Establishing the Select Subcommittee on the 
Weaponization of the Federal Government hands the House a powerful tool 
to uncover the two-tiered justice system that is rotting our Republic.
  It is no secret that alphabet agencies have been dangerously 
weaponized against the American people. As an alarming example, the FBI 
has coerced citizens to relinquish their Second Amendment rights and 
has used Big Tech companies as private-sector proxies to silence 
Americans' free speech.
  It is time to thoroughly investigate our Government agencies' 
atrocious behavior and abuse of power in disregarding and destroying 
America's precious freedoms, and this select subcommittee will have the 
teeth to do just that.
  I thank Speaker McCarthy and Chairman Cole for their invaluable 
support in bringing this resolution to the floor for a vote.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to join me in voting for 
this resolution so we may deliver transparency, answers, and, yes, 
accountability to the American people as we have promised.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record an article from 
The Hill titled: ``Perry won't agree to stay off new House committee 
investigating January 6 probes.''

                     [From The Hill, Jan. 8, 2023]

Perry Won't Agree To Stay Off New House Committee Investigating Jan. 6 
                                 Probes

                           (By Julia Mueller)

       Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) on Sunday wouldn't pledge to stay 
     off the possible new House committee that would investigate 
     probes into the Jan. 6, 2021, attack at the U.S. Capitol 
     despite being a subject of a Department of Justice (DOJ) 
     inquiry into the matter.
       ``Why should I be limited--why should anybody be limited--
     just because someone has made an accusation? Everybody in 
     America is innocent until proven guilty,'' Perry said on 
     ABC's ``This Week.''
       Host George Stephanopoulos pressed Perry, asking, ``Doesn't 
     that pose a conflict to you, since you're also part of the 
     investigation?''
       ``So, should everybody in Congress that disagrees with 
     somebody be barred from doing the oversight and investigative 
     powers that Congress has? That's our charge. And again, 
     that's appropriate for every single member, regardless of 
     what accusations are made. I get accused of things every 
     single day, as does every member that serves in the public 
     eye,'' Perry countered.
       Newly elected Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) has 
     indicated the Republican majority just sworn in plans to 
     review the work of the House select committee that last year 
     probed Jan. 6 and look into the federal investigations.
       DOJ investigations seized Perry's phone in connection with 
     the rioting, and obtained email exchanges between Perry and 
     former Trump attorney John Eastman, among others.
       Perry also introduced former President Trump to Jeffrey 
     Clark, whom Trump considered appointing as attorney general 
     in order to propagate his claims of election fraud during the 
     2020 presidential contest.

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I would advise my friend that I am prepared to 
close whenever he is.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, the American people want us to roll up our sleeves and 
get to work. They want us to make progress and deliver results that 
help them in their day-to-day lives.
  They don't need Congress to bend and break to the will of MAGA 
extremists, and they definitely don't need us to push crazy conspiracy 
theories and go on witch hunts to settle political scores.
  My friends in their rules package gutted the Office of Congressional 
Ethics, and here they are with this new subcommittee which threatens 
our safety, our security, and our freedom.
  It is an unprecedented attack on our Nation's law enforcement 
agencies, our justice system, and our intelligence community.
  Mr. Speaker, I would just say to my colleagues who spoke before about 
the intelligence oversight, we have an entire Select Committee on 
Intelligence that has oversight responsibilities on those matters. I am 
sorry the gentleman who spoke doesn't have confidence in whom the 
Republicans are going to propose as chair.
  This committee is deranged. It is a bad idea, and it will go down in 
history as one of the worst committees that a Congress has ever put 
forward. It will be in the same category as the Joseph McCarthy 
Committee on Un-American Activities or the Benghazi Committee which now 
Speaker McCarthy admitted was an attempt to try to take down Secretary 
Clinton.
  But here is the deal, and here is what it is all about: There are six 
on the other side of the aisle who asked for a pardon from President 
Trump. They did his dirty work, but Trump left them hanging. He did not 
give them a pardon. So now they are effectively trying to pardon 
themselves with the creation of this select committee.
  This is unconscionable. It is so blatant. Again, the changes that 
were made to give them the ability to pardon themselves were done after 
the 13th Speaker vote in the dead of night to try to win their votes 
over.
  This is not the way this Congress should run. This is not the way 
Republicans or Democrats, or any majority should behave. People should 
be ashamed of themselves that this is in the rules package and that 
this is what my friends are pushing right now.
  We are better than this. We should not be going down this road. My 
friends said that they want to combat inflation and that they want to 
make the lives of the American people better. Let's focus on those 
things. Let's focus on areas that actually improve the lives of the 
American people. This is a colossal waste of time. But even worse, it 
is to me the epitome of what corruption is all about.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  In closing, Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this 
resolution creating the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the 
Federal Government.
  In the 1970s it was apparent from revelations in the popular press 
that the American intelligence community had committed abuses as part 
of their activities. In response, Congress created the Church Committee 
which investigated these abuses and brought them into the light.

[[Page H143]]

  Today, it is again apparent that the Federal Government has been 
weaponized for political purposes. Like the Church Committee--which 
this subcommittee is modeled on--the Select Subcommittee on the 
Weaponization of the Federal Government will investigate the abuse of 
Americans' civil liberties and bring them into the light. I am 
confident that this subcommittee will do the American people a great 
service. They deserve to have confidence in their government, and that 
confidence starts with ensuring that the vast powers of the executive 
branch are not abused.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to vote ``yes'' on the resolution, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H. 
Res. 12, a dangerous resolution whose passage would Establish a Select 
Committee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government or, more 
accurately, a subcommittee that would threaten our nations safety, 
security, and freedom.
  MAGA Republicans love to hide behind the idea that they are pushing 
an agenda that would help the American people, but let's see this for 
what it truly is, a blatant assault on our democracy, our law 
enforcement agencies, our justice system, and our intelligence 
community, and an attempt to shield the twice-impeached former 
president from ongoing investigations being conducted by the Department 
of Justice.
  The establishment of this subcommittee would give Republicans the 
ability to investigate any agency that ``can collect information or 
otherwise investigate citizens of the United States'' and gives the 
most right-wing members of the Republican party access to confidential 
documents solely intended for the members of the Permanent Select 
Committee on Intelligence.
  This gross misuse of power will have dangerous implications and 
unintended consequences and could potentially expose general operations 
of our national security infrastructure which will put American lives 
at risk.
  The passage of this resolution would also give MAGA Republicans the 
ability to interfere in ongoing criminal investigations including those 
investigating the extremist insurrectionists who lead the brutal attack 
on this institution two years ago.
  In this country, no one is above the law, and to suggest that some 
people should be, because they don't agree with the force of the law 
being applied to their activities, is contrary to the very fabric of 
fairness, justice and equality that America was founded on.
  This is a blatant attempt by House GOP members to stifle the federal 
government's investigatory powers, claiming that conservatives are 
being prosecuted and silenced.
  The new Select Subcommittee comes as federal agencies such as the 
Department of Justice are investigating the GOP and its allies in 
multiple criminal investigations.
  Members of the Republican party have been on press tours announcing 
this new subcommittee and have laid out their agenda, but how would 
this subcommittee help the American people in anyway?
  For a party that claims to be pro-law enforcement, the Republican 
party is now getting ready to undermine the hard work of our law 
enforcement and surveillance agencies.
  Mr. Speaker what really is the intent here? I can tell you what I 
think it is. It is a back door effort to handcuff the current 
administration in their normal and usual course of operations.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to oppose this dangerous and a 
completely irresponsible Resolution that will put the lives of 
Americans at risk and is a political stunt to further advance their 
dangerous conspiracy theories.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 5, the previous 
question is ordered on the resolution.
  The question is on adoption of the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________