Gaetz resigned last Wednesday shortly before the Ethics Committee was scheduled to release the investigation into allegations of the former representative engaging in sexual misconduct and illicit drug consumption. It remained unclear whether the committee’s report would be released, with Speaker Mike Johnson opposing the investigation’s publication.

“There was not an agreement by the committee to release the report,” Republican Rep. Michael Guest of Mississippi, the chair of the Ethics Committee, told reporters following a committee meeting Wednesday.

WATCH: Rep. Matt Gaetz responds on Tucker Carlson Tonight to allegations of sexual misconduct:

He says a former DOJ official named David McGee is trying to extort is family for money

He says that the FBI and DOJ have audio recordings that will prove his innocence. pic.twitter.com/J95AEFtxsr

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) March 31, 2021

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].

Congresswoman Nancy Mace is calling on her GOP colleagues to pass a resolution banning men from using women’s restrooms in the U.S. Capitol. She intends to file the resolution for inclusion in the House rules package.

“The sanctity of protecting women and standing up against the Left’s systematic erasure of biological women starts here in the nation’s Capitol,” she said.

According to Fox News:

The South Carolina Republican plans to introduce a measure “prohibiting Members, officers, and employees of the House from using single-sex facilities other than those corresponding to their biological sex, and for other purposes,” according to text previewed by Fox News Digital.

It comes just before the first openly transgender lawmaker, Rep.-elect Sarah McBride, D-Del., is set to join Congress in January.

House Republicans have previously changed rules on their side of Congress, such as when ex-Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., scuttled metal detectors outside the House chamber after winning the gavel from previous Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene expressed support for the sentiment Monday:

This is, of course making national news. McBride has been in the spotlight since 2012 when he first came out as trans while serving as the American University Student Body President.

As an interesting side note, recent stories and his Wikipedia page do not mention his birth name. We had to go back to the 12-year-old article to even know what his original name was.

Prior to the last budget funding showdown in March, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana, said in January that “any bill that does not secure the border is not acceptable.”

He also identified 64 examples of ways he says the Biden-Harris administration “worked to systematically undermine America’s border security.”

In February, House Republicans impeached Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas arguing he was derelict in his duty and violated the public trust by creating a border crisis. One month later, the majority of Republicans who voted to impeach him, passed a spending bill that funded programs he created they maintain are illegal.

While Americans complain about escalating crime caused by illegal border crossers who’ve inundated their communities, Congress funded the programs that brought them there – and are keeping them there – including DHS’ Shelter and Services Program grants funneling billions to primarily Democratic states, counties, cities as well as nonprofits.

Likewise, the U.S. Senate’s “strongest border security bill in history” the White House, Senate and House Democrats keep touting, co-authored by U.S. Sen. James Lankford, R-OK, allocated “an additional $1.4 billion in SSP funds, and provide additional needed tools and resources to respond to historic global migration,” DHS says – to fund caring for illegal border crossers released into the US.

DHS recently announced the latest round of SSP funding of $380 million—a drop in the bucket to overall spending authorized by Congress. This round “augments the $259.13 million in SSP grants that DHS distributed in April 2024 … which was authorized by Congress to support communities that are providing services to migrants,” DHS says.

The April DHS grant money was distributed after Congress in March passed a $1.2 trillion spending package to avoid a so-called government shutdown, despite Johnson’s and others’ claims, about requiring border security as a condition for passing it.

More than $780 million worth of SSP and the Emergency Food and Shelter Program – Humanitarian Awards grants were awarded in fiscal 2023 “which went to organizations and cities across the country,” DHS says. That’s after DHS awarded $640.9 million in fiscal 2024 “to enable non-federal entities to off-set allowable costs incurred for services associated with noncitizen migrant arrivals in their communities,” also authorized by Congress.

Here are examples of fiscal 2023 and fiscal 2024 grant recipients and the amounts they received.

The SSP grants are awarded in phases. One round in fiscal 2024, totaling $40.8 million, was awarded to:

• City/County of Denver, $5.9 million;
• District of Columbia, $2.7 million;
• City of Chicago, $3.8 million;
• Commonwealth of Massachusetts, nearly $4.9 million;
• NYC Office of Management and Budget, $20.4 million;
• City of Philadelphia over $3 million.
• That’s after $275 million was awarded to 55 recipients in the attached spreadsheet. Top recipients in one round of funding include:
• New York City’s Office of Management and Budget, $38.8 million;
• Pima County, Ariz., $21.8 million;
• Catholic Charities, Diocese of San Diego of $19.5 million;
• Maricopa County, $11.6 million, among others.

Democratic-led cities also received large payouts in one round of funding:

• Atlanta, $10.8 million;
• Chicago, $9.6 million;
• Denver, $5.8 million.

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts also cashed in, receiving nearly $7 million; the District of Columbia received $8.7 million; Illinois, $9.6 million, all in one round of funding.

Democratic controlled El Paso County has long received federal money to coordinate transporting illegal foreign nationals north to New York City, Chicago and Denver, The Center Square reported; Austin and San Antonio followed suit flying north “guests coming from the border,” to “proactively manage the flow of people” out of their cities.

These grants exclude others awarded through numerous other federal agencies, including FEMA, U.S. Health and Human Services and others.

Gov. Ron DeSantis, R-FL, U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie, R-KY, and several House Freedom Caucus members argue Congress has a constitutional requirement to stop funding the border crisis. DeSantis, a Freedom Caucus member when he served in Congress, has asked, “How many congressmen rail against Biden’s transgressions yet still vote to fund them?”

Massie said in January that “in March, when funding expires, we can put a rider in the next bill that says none of the money hereby appropriated can be used to countermand border security measures of the states.”

This didn’t happen. The majority of Republicans voted to keep spending taxpayer money on these programs. By July, a U.S. House Judiciary Committee report highlighted examples of how Congress was still funding the border crisis.

The film comes to mind as members of another group – formed by members of Congress and known as the “Squad” – seem to be experiencing a similar fate as their political lives, one-by-one, are being terminated.

The group initially consisted of four women who won congressional seats in the House in 2018. They included Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., and Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., who all banded together to form the far-left wing of their political party. Since then, they have been joined, in 2020, by Jamaal Bowman, D-N.Y., and Cori Bush, D-Mo., and, in 2022, by Greg Casar, D-Texas, Summer Lee, D-Pa., and Delia Ramirez, D-Ill.

The Squad, which boasted “Nine Little Progressives” by 2022, has repeatedly endorsed socialist policies that burden taxpayers with providing freebies, such as tuition-free college, for supporters. Their advocacy has also brought them into conflict with members of their own party who prefer to see these progressive policy beneficiaries put some skin into the game. Various Squad members have been supported by the Justice Democrats PAC and Democratic Socialists of America. Their appeal seems to be to a younger political generation.

But 2024 has not been kind to the Squad. In June’s Democratic primary election, Bowman became the first member to lose his seat to a more moderate candidate. Only two months later, a second Squad member, Bush, suffered a primary defeat as well.

Bush’s defeat was undoubtedly helped by her strong position against Israel in the Gaza war, which earned her opponent the financial support of the pro-Israel group AIPAC. Bush did not take her loss gracefully, threatening to work against AIPAC when she leaves Congress.

As a Squad member, Bush also naively promoted the effort to defund police, spending campaign funds to hire her own security. It will be interesting to see once she loses access to those funds if she will continue to hire private security or choose to rely on the diminished police coverage she helped promote for the rest of us. Bush also became the subject of a Department of Justice investigation in January for using those same funds to hire her own husband as part of her security team.

Just like fate took its toll in “Ten Little Indians” as group members were held accountable for their transgressions, so too are Squad members being held accountable for theirs. They have promoted outrageous policies that have negatively impacted the average citizen. Although Omar won her recent primary, we can only hope Minnesota voters in her district come to their senses for the general election.

Meanwhile, of the “Nine Little Progressives,” now there remain but seven. Like the last survivors in the film, we can take some comfort in knowing they are rightfully fearing for their political survival.

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].

Those multiple cases now are on appeal, or have been delayed by the Supreme Court’s ruling that presidents have much immunity for their actions in office, with lower courts now trying to sort out the details.

Needless to say, a local judge’s demand that Trump spend weeks sitting in his courtroom to hear wild claims about old misdemeanors that now are felonies because the prosecutor said so interfered significantly with Trump’s ability to campaign as he would choose.

Further, another judge demanded hundreds of millions of dollars in penalties from Trump in a “fraud” case in which there were no victims, nobody lost money, there were no unpaid loans and indeed the banks involved wanted to do more business with Trump.

Prosecutors in other cases repeatedly have demanded to go to trial before the election, as that would further impede Trump’s campaign, and might even see him sentenced before the vote.

But now Congress will be taking a look at a plan to block such election interference.

It is U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., who has proposed legislation that would put a halt to election interference schemes by state officials and bureaucrats who launch politicized civil or criminal cases.

The Florida Capitol Star said, “The Prevention of Election Interference Act of 2024 would bar the sentencing of presidential candidates in court 120 days before a presidential election. It also would prevent the candidate from being sentenced 60 days after a presidential election.”

Gaetz said, “Presidential candidates should have the right to campaign without interference, regardless of their party affiliation! Over the past two years, state officials and unelected bureaucrats have been keeping President Trump tied up in court with dubious charges, hindering his ability to campaign nationwide.”

His succinct plan says, “No State, or any officer or instrumentality thereof, may impose or carry out a sentence for a State criminal offense committed by a major party candidate during the covered time period.

“During the covered time period, a major party candidate may submit an application to a State or Federal court of jurisdiction demonstrating that such sentence described under subsection (a) may interfere with the campaign activities of the major party candidate. Upon receipt of an application under subsection (a), the State or Federal court of jurisdiction shall amend a sentence relating to the major party candidate, including by staying the sentence for the duration of the covered period or vacating such sentence.”

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].

SUPPORT TRUTHFUL JOURNALISM. MAKE A DONATION TO THE NONPROFIT WND NEWS CENTER. THANK YOU!

This article was originally published by the WND News Center.

At the time, those 57 lawmakers voting against the bill represented a cohort of Republicans who were already skeptical of the U.S. strategy for the Russia-Ukraine conflict and frustrated by the lack of debate in Congress and oversight of taxpayer money.

Today, that number has doubled. There are now more Republicans in the House opposed to additional Ukraine funding than those who support it.

Even so, the latest Ukraine funding bill—totaling $60 billion—was approved Saturday with a 311-112 vote with the unanimous support of Democrats. All 112 lawmakers voting against the bill were Republicans. By comparison, 101 Republicans voted in favor of the bill.

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., who voted against the $40 billion Ukraine bill in May 2022, was a notable exception. He championed the Ukraine measure Saturday as part of a four-bill foreign aid package that totals $95 billion.

“I’d rather send bullets to Ukraine than American boys,” Johnson told Newsmax. “We don’t want to have boots on the ground, and we can prevent that by allowing them to hold Putin at bay.”

The Swamp is too drunk on power to realize that this scene has become the symbol of everything that’s wrong in DC.

They fund other countries, but don’t protect our border.

They wave foreign flags and wear them on their lapels, but don’t protect our border.

And some shroud… pic.twitter.com/9twwhVAEfD

— Kevin Roberts (@KevinRobertsTX) April 21, 2024

In addition to the Ukraine funding ($60.84 billion), lawmakers also approved separate bills for Israel ($26.38 billion); the Indo-Pacific ($8.12 billion); and the 21st Century Peace Through Strength Act, a bill that would impose more sanctions on China, Iran, and Russia. They also adopted a measure requiring TikTok’s parent company to sever ties with the Communist Chinese government or cease operations within the United States.

With the full package of bills expected to pass the Senate in the coming days, it will mark the fifth time Congress has approved funding to help Ukraine.

Saturday’s vote, however, was the first by a Republican-led House. The four previous measures were adopted in 2022 when Democrats led the chamber and Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., was calling the shots.

The previous four funding bills provided a total of approximately $113 billion to Ukraine, averaging about $900 per American household. The number could really be as high as $125 billion, according to information Sen. JD Vance, R-Ohio, and other lawmakers obtained from the White House’s Office of Management and Budget.

Once the new $60 billion is added to the total, taxpayers will be on the hook for more foreign aid to Ukraine at a time when they are struggling to afford gas, groceries, and rent.

Republicans objecting to the latest Ukraine funding bill cited a variety of reasons for their opposition, although a dominant theme had to do with the failure to secure any meaningful changes to President Joe Biden’s handling of the U.S. border crisis and instead making foreign aid a higher priority.

But other questions remain about Ukraine and its notorious reputation for corruption.

Writing for The Hill last week, Heritage Foundation President Dr. Kevin Roberts noted that concerns conservatives began raising two years ago are now proving correct, including a failure to track military weapons supplied to Ukraine and embarrassing Pentagon accounting errors.

“Ukraine’s minister of defense was fired for questions around military graft. Billions in U.S. aid have flowed to economic aid rather than lethal weapons,” Roberts wrote. “More importantly, then as now, President Biden has presented no coherent strategy or plan for victory or peace in Ukraine to the American people, who are gradually losing patience with the bloody stalemate his administration has created.”

The $95 billion bill doesn’t have to pass.

It takes only 41 senators stop it.

There are 49 Republicans in the Senate—more than enough.

Where do your senators stand?

Please like and share if you agree that 41 Senate Republicans should unite to stop the $95 billion aid package. https://t.co/BVDCK45GB6

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) April 21, 2024

Two years ago, when the $40 billion foreign aid bill reached the Senate, 11 Republican senators voted against the Ukraine measure. This time, the foreign aid package will include money for Ukraine, Israel, the Indo-Pacific, and other legislation included by the House, so determining if there will be a similar result to the House vote might be difficult to assess.

Still, the evolving outlook toward Ukraine reflects a changing mindset among conservatives about U.S. foreign policy. The implications of continuing to fund a foreign war, particularly in times of economic strain at home, will no doubt continue to animate conservatives and divide Republican lawmakers.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) warned about the hidden provision on X, stating that lobbyists will receive $15 million in taxpayer funds to unleash the electronic tracking grid on the nation’s meat-producing cows and bison.

As stated directly from the omnibus, the agreement “directs the Department to continue to provide the tags and related infrastructure needed to comply with the Federal Animal Disease Traceability rule (9 CFR 86), including no less than $15,000,000 for electronic identification (EID) tags and related infrastructure needed for stakeholders to comply with the proposed rule, ‘Use of Electronic Identification Eartags as Official Identification in Cattle and Bison’ (88 FR 3320), should that rule be finalized.”

None of this, warned Rep. Massie is legal. And yet, the near-total apathy of the American people these days means these kinds of things are easily passable without so much as a peep from the wider constituency.

“No law authorizes this!” Rep. Massie wrote on X.

“It will be used by the GREEN agenda to limit beef production, and by the corporate meat oligopoly to DOMINATE small ranchers.”

(Related: Back in 2021 at the height of the Wuhan coronavirus [COVID-19] “pandemic,” Rep. Massie called for everyone at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC] to be fired for lying about the nature of the so-called “virus.”)

Attorney Tom Renz warns electronic tracking of cattle will unleash universal GMO “vaccines” on food supply

What Rep. Massie means by the “green” agenda is that this little ear tag scheme is merely a front to further dig into the American meat supply in order to crush it, paving the way for synthetic “meat,” bugs, and other “climate-friendly” replacements to flood the market instead.

One of just a few in Congress, or anywhere, calling out the scheme, Rep. Massie deserves credit for keeping the American public abreast of these latest developments, even if most people seemingly do not care what happens to their food supply.

“It’s important to make sure similar nonsense isn’t occurring at state and local levels,” warned an X account called “Justin George” (@jdgeorge94) about the plot.

Even more ominous was a warning that attorney Thomas Renz put in response to Rep. Massie’s tweet about the implications of the electronic ear tag scheme on food safety.

“It will also be used to ensure the introduction of genetics modifying vaccines on a universal basis into the food supply,” Renz wrote about the scheme. “This is not just about limiting beef output … it’s about ensuring the beef available has mRNA vaccines in it.”

Renz responded to Rep. Massie further by offering to speak with him directly about the details of all this, emphasizing surety in his understanding of the long-term plan.

“We need to pass an omnibus that outlaws omnibuses,” joked another about how ridiculous this all is.

“This is exactly why we need single-item spending bills,” wrote another, further joking with a play on words blending the word communism with omnibus. “No more (c)omnibus.”

All this constant fighting over the climate, the food supply, and other pertinent issues is exhausting, wrote another, which is why increasingly more people seem to support the idea of splitting up the country into two separate entities.

“No wonder why people are asking for a national divorce to split this country up,” one wrote. “Give them their green new deal, illegals, crime and drag shows and let the people on planet sane have the rest of the country!”

The anti-beef brigades have been unleashed to rid the world of “climate-polluting” beef. Find out more about what they are up to at GreenTyranny.news.

Sources for this article include:

• Twitter.com
• NaturalNews.com

The House committee’s report, titled “The FBI’s Breach of Religious Freedom: The Weaponization of Law Enforcement Against Catholic Americans,” details how the FBI “abused its counterterrorism tools” to target Catholics. But there are some key issues that Capitol Hill—and most media—missed completely.

The FBI stigmatized a vast number of United States citizens as potential “radical traditional Catholic” terrorists based upon the existence of one criminal case involving a man who self-described as such a Catholic. The FBI’s version of the facts, detailed in an “intelligence note,” describes a man who likely suffers from mental illness—hardly a cross section of the Catholic population.

The most shocking aspect of this, one that largely escaped public attention, is that the FBI memo states the subject wasn’t even Catholic. He was taking catechism lessons in the hopes of becoming a baptized Catholic, but he was neither baptized nor confirmed.

The FBI never explained what “threat” the agency sought to “mitigate” by targeting Catholics. The intelligence note offers no history or example of political violence associated with conservative Catholics who prefer the Latin Mass. It simply asserts, baselessly, that they pose a threat as potentially violent domestic terrorists.

Moreover, the FBI’s denigration of Catholics is not limited to Latin Mass worshippers. Rather, the bureau appears to have issues with the Catholic faith in general. The “intelligence note” laments a purported “intelligence gap” when seeking to identify factors leading to violence, “which may include increased religiosity and/or adherence to extreme religious teachings.”

Hence, the FBI literally claims that increasing one’s religiosity makes one a greater domestic terrorist threat.

The FBI never bothered to explain precisely what tenets of Catholicism or “extreme religious teachings” of the Catholic Church lead to political violence because, of course, there are none. Adherents of the faith who embrace extreme Catholic religiosity tend to become nuns in the streets of Calcutta.

The House Judiciary Committee also fails to address the most fundamental issue posed by the FBI’s abuse of Catholics’ civil liberties. The FBI labeled an amorphous and impossibly ill-defined faith community as potential terrorists without pointing to a single historical or current example of a “radical-traditionalist Catholic” associated with any form of political violence, the preeminent and unnegotiable element required by the domestic terrorism statute (18 U.S.C. § 2331).

No political violence = no domestic terrorism. Contrast this to the Black Lives Matter riots that engulfed the United States in the summer of 2020. The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project filed a federal lawsuit to force the FBI to provide evidence that the government conducted any investigation of BLM during that season of political violence and domestic terrorism. To date, the bureau has produced no such evidence.

In the pre-woke FBI, it took more than simply labeling a U.S. citizen as a potential domestic terrorist to open an investigation. Back then, the bureau was required first to show that an individual sought to engage in criminally violent or life-threatening acts to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or government.

Today’s FBI, however, blissfully bypasses the most fundamental elements of the domestic terrorism violation when it comes to labeling large swaths of peaceful, law-abiding citizens (non-Catholics as well as Catholics) as potential terrorists. According to the Judiciary Committee report, the FBI’s targets are Americans who dare hold such disfavored political viewpoints as “pro-life, pro-family” and “support the biological basis for sex and gender distinction.”

Perhaps the clearest indication that the FBI itself knows it has ventured into constitutionally impermissible territory is its flippant use of a “First Amendment caveat.” The wordy exercise in psychological projection is worth reading in full, especially as this caveat is relied upon in similar exercises elsewhere:

Potential criminality exhibited by certain members of a group referenced herein does not negate nor is it a comment on the constitutional rights of the group itself or its members to exercise their rights under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The FBI does not investigate, collect, or maintain information on U.S. persons solely for the purpose of monitoring activities protected by the First Amendment.

Obviously, the First Amendment implications of labeling an entire mainstream religious group are top of mind for in-house FBI lawyers. That should have been a cause for pause as opposed to further activity and laughable legalese.

Also, notice the looseness of the term “potential criminality.” The bureau now needs not rely on actual evidence of past criminality to determine threat levels. The standard now appears to be speech alone.

As the FBI continues to invent a new alphabet soup of terminological groupings, such as Radical Traditional Catholics and Racially Motivated Violent Extremist, and to open investigations for activities such as sporting Gadsden or Betsy Ross flags, the agency has reached apex weaponization as an ideological entity as opposed to a crime-fighting one.

Weaponized Modus Operandi

Today’s FBI routinely opens domestic terrorism investigations targeting Americans who never have demonstrated any propensity toward political violence.

These civil liberty violations occur not merely because of inept or corrupt FBI leadership. Ideologically weaponized FBI employees at all levels gravitate toward FBI units, such as domestic terrorism squads, that allow them to indulge their political ideology. Working drugs or health care fraud apparently lacks that satisfying special sauce that working politically charged violations bring for the ideological agent. To such weaponized employees, political dissent in and of itself constitutes a threat to their preferred social order.

This is why virtually all FACE Act prosecutions target pro-lifers, while countless attacks on pro-life pregnancy centers and Catholic churches go uninvestigated.

This is why the FBI pointed long arms at pro-life activist Mark Houck’s terrified children.

This is why geriatric grandmothers who committed misdemeanor trespass at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, have taken FBI investigative priority over child predators and spies.

This is why a Republican internet prankster was sentenced to seven months in prison (the case is now on appeal) for posting a social media meme joking that Democrat votes might be texted while a Democrat who posted the identical meme suggesting Republican votes might be texted never was bothered by law enforcement.

Even in cases that don’t result in criminal prosecution, the FBI’s legally questionable activities can have a punitive effect on law-abiding Americans.

Keep in mind that the FBI’s anti-Catholic intelligence note was uploaded to the FBI’s databases under domestic terrorism file number 266H-RH-2893090. Anyone mentioned in this context case could fall prey to financial ruin in legal fees and soul-crushing anxiety as a result of this baseless domestic terrorism case. Even if they are spared financial and emotional devastation, being falsely labeled as a terrorist in the FBI databases is a grotesque abuse of federal authority—with malicious negative consequences.

When a person noted under that domestic terrorism file number is the subject of a background check in seeking federal employment or to purchase a firearm, or seeks any other form of public benefit that requires an FBI check, it will be noted that his or her identity has been identified in a domestic terrorism case.

This will require additional scrutiny, potentially extended bureaucratic delays, and possible denial of entitled government benefits. The person’s business may be denied contracts without explanation or subjected to unending IRS audits, and may even find himself and employees subject to law enforcement screenings at airports.

The Way Forward

One of the first questions that comes to mind is why it took almost a year for a report from Congress to largely rearticulate what already had been known.

The purpose of congressional oversight is to inform legislation and fix problems that have been identified. Now that the House Judiciary Committee has finished its investigation and released its report, what meaningful accountability measures are being taken to address these abuses? Who has been held accountable? What has changed at the FBI as a result?

Lawmakers don’t seem to understand the urgency. A constitutional republic cannot stand without an even-handed rule of law. If lawmakers fail to deweaponize the FBI, the republic may not survive our generation.

Congress should embrace its oversight responsibilities and force an immediate audit of the genesis of all current FBI domestic terrorism cases. What percentage of cases target conservatives? How many cases involve the targeting of persons who never have demonstrated any propensity to engage in political violence?

Most importantly, who in the FBI is responsible for the bureau’s stomping on the civil liberties of peaceful political dissidents (in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 241), and when will he, she, or they be held accountable?

At the beginning of the year, this and much more was what Americans were promised. They were promised a full-scope investigation into the FBI and other weaponized agencies that would stop the weaponization. This effort, to be funded at the same levels as the House’s select committee on Jan. 6, was to be supported by a committee modeled after the Church committee of the 1970s, a massive undertaking that examined abuses across the intelligence community.

In launching that committee, Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said:

We want to focus on that because we want it all to stop. We want the double standard to stop. This idea that if you’re a pro-life activist, you’re gonna get your door kicked in, you’re gonna get arrested and handcuffed in front of your seven kids and your spouse for simply praying in front of an abortion clinic and telling the guy who was harassing your son to knock it off.

You’re gonna 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 [Supreme Court’s] Dobbs opinion, oh, no problem there. Americans are sick and tired of it. And what we want, we don’t want to go after anyone. We just want it to stop. And we want to respect the First Amendment to the Constitution that the greatest country in the world has.

That’s what this committee is all about. And that’s what we’re going to focus on. That’s what we’re going to do.

I agreed then, and I agree now. The weaponization of federal law enforcement for partisan purposes is an existential threat to freedom. It needs to stop if we hope to pass along any semblance of America to the next generation.

But vague standards and constant cable news appearances aren’t an adequate measure of success. The only real standard is whether Congress actually deweaponizes the FBI and the other intelligence agencies. And so far, the agencies have skated this entire Congress without any real investigations.

The truth is, this job always has been too big for one existing committee or person. That’s why no real reform efforts are underway, and the FBI continues apace, fully funded and with no accountability. Indeed, the bureau is being rewarded with a massive new headquarters the size of the Pentagon.

Lawmakers have wasted enough time failing to prioritize deweaponization. Americans can’t afford to let them waste more time by failing to unite and make changes. And change is certainly what voters expected in 2022 when they flipped control of the House to the GOP.

Congress already has the information it needs to begin deweaponization efforts immediately. History will judge this Congress by that simple measure, not by its analysis and rhetoric regarding the problem.

RINO Congressman Patrick McHenry is about to cash in. As chair of the powerful House Financial Services Committee, he has the connections necessary to land an 8-figure job after he leaves office. He’s making it official soon, according to Axios.

Any chance that he might stay in Congress melted away when his buddy, Kevin McCarthy, was ousted from his position as Speaker of the House. With no more leverage over the Chair, McHenry’s future was sealed.

Here’s the writeup from Discern Reporter generated by corporate media reports:

House Financial Services Chairman Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) is expected to announce that he will not seek re-election, according to three GOP lawmakers who confirmed the news to Axios.

McHenry, a North Carolina Republican first elected to his seat in 2004, has played a significant role in policy decisions and conference leadership. He notably served three weeks as interim Speaker during the search for a replacement for former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif) in October.

As a key negotiator, McHenry has been involved in shaping important pieces of legislation, including the debt ceiling deal earlier this year. He also served as the chief deputy whip for House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, overseeing many whip duties while the Louisiana Republican recovered from injuries sustained in the 2017 congressional baseball shooting.

It’s worth noting that McHenry was set to term out of his chairmanship at the end of the current term. Several lawmakers speculated that his departure was likely, anticipating that he would receive multiple lucrative job offers due to his position on the committee.

The announcement of McHenry’s exit is expected to trigger a race for the coveted chairmanship and is a source of concern for some within the Republican party, as retirements could impact their ability to retain the majority.

Sound off about this news on The Liberty Daily Substack.

Image by Brookings Institute via Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 DEED.

The latest attempt to prove he’s a liar and generally bad person came from a much-ballyhooed Twitter “investigation” in which Democrat Carlos Turnbull discovered Johnson wears an $18,000 Rolex. Except he doesn’t.

The post has had over a million views. Hopefully some of those people viewing it noticed the Community Notes added to the post:

As the Community Notes says, that’s not an $18,000 Rolex on Johnson’s wrist. It’s a $50 Fossil. Oops.

Speaker Johnson has a large enough hill to climb as he tries to balance running the broken House of Representatives while still staying true to his conservative principles. With idiots like Carlos Turnbull smearing him, his job is even harder.