5333 private links
Jordan highlighted the Select Committee’s double standards in issuing partisan subpoenas exclusively to Republican lawmakers as opposed to Democrats, who are responsible for adequate security at the Capitol. While the Select Committee was ostensibly established to probe the Capitol security failures, Thompson has explicitly refused an inquiry into Pelosi’s culpability as the partisan probe absent of Republican appointees remains focused on retribution against political dissidents. //
Pelosi stands credibly accused of unilaterally delaying the National Guard’s preemptive deployment six times preceding the riot that day a year ago, but the speaker also ignored issues raised in a single hearing from the House Oversight Committee held a year and a half in advance.
https://thefederalist.com/2021/12/16/nancy-pelosi-owns-january-6/
“It is telling that the Select Committee has chosen only to target Republican Members with demands for testimony about January 6,” Jordan wrote Sunday. “I am aware of no effort by the Select Committee to solicit testimony from Speaker Pelosi, House Administration Chair Zoe Lofgren, or any other Democrat Members with responsibility for or oversight of the security posture at the Capitol complex on January 6.” //
Since its inception, the committee, born out of ashes of a failed congressional commission, has focused on punishing political dissidents as opposed to probing the Capitol riot with a legitimate legislative purpose. With no investigation into the security failures that led to several hours of turmoil, the committee has sought to conflate a peaceful White House protest with the violence that erupted at the Capitol before President Donald Trump had finished speaking.
In the process, the committee run by the same bad actors who perpetrated the Democrats’ prior hoaxes have fabricated evidence again, again, again, and again.
https://thefederalist.com/2021/02/19/failed-impeachment-saga-was-an-embarrassment-for-democrats/
As House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s January 6 Select Committee plans its colonoscopy-like partisan investigation, few have been held to account for the violent riots that laid waste to a once vibrant, dynamic Minneapolis and many other cities. According to the Major Cities Chiefs Association report in 2020, an estimated 574 violent riots took place in the weeks after Minneapolis burned, resulting in damage of up to $2 billion.
Pelosi made sure the capital was locked down and surrounded by the National Guard and coils of concertina wire, city leaders and governors left citizens at the mercy of thugs hurling Molotov cocktails, helpless as their homes and businesses burned to the ground.
America’s preeminent revisionist historian Nikole Hannah-Jones perfectly encapsulated the elitist mentality in a June 2020 CBS interview: “Violence is when an agent of the state kneels on a man’s neck until all of the life is leached out of his body. Destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence.” //
In his Tuesday op-ed, Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson wrote, “What happened last Jan. 6 was much bigger and more important than politics.” Of course it was, because it was about the elitist political and corporate media establishment. They continue to inflate the severity and lasting effects of the Jan. 6 riot because they have an outsized idea of their own influence and importance. The disparity of concern and reaction is telling: when their lives are inconvenienced, it’s a national disaster; when our lives are destroyed, they hand us a shovel.
Any suggestion of a threat to America’s credentialed class is presented as an affront to democracy and a sin equal to the worst treason in our nation’s history. Meanwhile, the destruction of dozens of cities and thousands of lives in middle America has been accepted as a necessary airing of grievances, a reactionary event in the name of social justice that inflicted pain on those who probably deserved it anyway.
It is an iteration of the divide between those who see themselves as rulers and the people over which they rule. It extends from the leftist media that needs to perpetuate democracy’s threat to fight off the ratings implosion since President Trump left office, to sanctimonious politicians who view the public as nothing more than the masked, faceless unwashed who should be grateful that the 2020 riots exposed their racist ways and now can correct them.
Meet Ray Epps: The Fed-Protected Provocateur Who Appears To Have Led The Very First 1/6 Attack On The U.S. Capitol //
The story of the mystery man, Ray Epps, featured in Rep. Massie’s video above is in fact far more shocking than even the good Congressman implies in the hearing. It’s a story so strange, and so scandalous at every turn, that it threatens to shatter the entire official narrative of the “Capitol Breach” and expose yet another dimension of proactive federal involvement in the so-called “insurrection” of January 6th.
If Revolver News’s previous reporting points to a proactive role of the federal government in relation to the conspiracy cases against Oath Keepers and Proud Boys, the Ray Epps story that follows suggests a similar, yet more egregious, explicit, direct and immediate degree of federal involvement in the breach of the Capitol itself. //
There is good reason why AG Garland ran from Massie’s question faster than he could find words — and why he couldn’t even keep eye contact as he was dodging Massie’s gaze.
After months of research, Revolver’s investigative reporting team can now reveal that Ray Epps appears to be among the primary orchestrators of the very first breach of the Capitol’s police barricades at 12:50pm on January 6. Epps appears to have led the “breach team” that committed the very first illegal acts on that fateful day. What’s more, Epps and his “breach team” did all their dirty work with 20 minutes still remaining in President Trump’s National Mall speech, and with the vast majority of Trump supporters still 30 minutes away from the Capitol.
Secondly, Revolver also determined, and will prove below, that the the FBI stealthily removed Ray Epps from its Capitol Violence Most Wanted List on July 1, just one day after Revolver exposed the inexplicable and puzzlesome FBI protection of known Epps associate and Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes. July 1 was also just one day after separate New York Times report amplified a glaring, falsifiable lie about Epps’s role in the events of January 6.
Lastly, Ray Epps appears to have worked alongside several individuals — many of them suspiciously unindicted — to carry out a breach of the police barricades that induced a subsequent flood of unsuspecting MAGA protesters to unwittingly trespass on Capitol restricted grounds and place themselves in legal jeopardy. //
In our previous reporting on FBI involvement in the events of January 6th, we have been careful to distinguish the case of “Federal foreknowledge” from that of “Federal incitement.”
The case of “mere” Federal foreknowledge of the so-called “siege on the Capitol” is bad enough, and amounts to a national scandal in its own right. Indeed, if elements of the federal government knew in advance of conspiracies to “siege the Capitol” or otherwise disrupt the Senate proceeding on 1/6, the natural question arises as to why they did nothing to stop it. Given that the government and their allies in the Regime media have framed 1/6 as a 9/11-caliber domestic terror event, the possibility that elements of the federal government knew about it in advance, and yet sat back and let it happen for political purposes, is incredibly damning. This would amount to nothing less than the government conspiring, for the most malicious of political reasons, to falsely cast tens of millions of law-abiding patriotic Americans as domestic terrorists.
Given the magnitude of its implications, it is well worth repeating that federal foreknowledge is a virtual certainty. Just weeks ago the New York Times itself begrudgingly acknowledged the presence of a Proud Boys militia member and informant who was texting his FBI handler thought the entire day on 1/6, as well as several days in advance. The Times notes that the presence of this informant, and likely many more, suggests that “federal law enforcement had a far greater visibility into the assault on the Capitol, even as it was taking place, than was previously known.”
One year after a mysterious hooded figure placed two explosives outside the Republican and Democrat national headquarters, federal investigators, corporate media, and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s Jan. 6 commission are mum about the premeditated act of violence.
What started as “one of the highest-priority investigations for the FBI and the Justice Department,” as noted by The Associated Press, was quickly usurped in the public eye by leftist coverage of the Capitol riot. Instead of focusing on why a suspect was caught on cameras lurking around the RNC and DNC buildings on the evening of Jan. 5, scrutiny of Jan. 6 has largely been focused on blaming Republicans and tens of thousands of peaceful protesters for the actions of hundreds of fools who vandalized the Capitol. //
Yet the lone example of a very clearly premeditated attempt at violence on Jan. 6 has been nearly completely wiped from the memory of the American public. The pipe bombs discovered at the RNC and DNC aren’t mentioned in the press’s “remembrance” coverage of the day, and the federal government has hardly offered any updates on the investigation since releasing footage of the suspect, who was covered head to toe in dark clothing. Even the Jan. 6 commission, which has gone to great lengths to obtain the phone records of private citizens, doesn’t seem interested in pursuing the person behind the explosives. //
This isn’t the first time important information about the events leading up to Jan. 6 has been masked by the media and the government. An explosive report from Revolver published in October detailed how Ray Epps, who was captured on video telling people to go into the Capitol, mysteriously disappeared from the FBI’s Capitol Violence Most Wanted List on July 1.
The FBI had previously plastered pictures of Epps’s face all over its Jan 6. wanted posters. Even The New York Times mentioned Epps’s actions. But Epps was never arrested nor indicted despite hundreds of others who were at the Capitol being charged with trespassing and other crimes.
When Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky later questioned Attorney General Merrick Garland about whether there were government agitators involved in the Capitol riot, the Biden appointee refused to answer.
Republicans are poised to sweep the midterms and wrest back control of both houses of Congress.
But the Democrats’ rulebook was written by Machiavelli, not the Marquess of Queensbury. They are brawlers who use scorched earth tactics to give themselves every electoral advantage. And their principal legal strategist is Marc Elias.
Elias served as general counsel to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and in that role was responsible for the hiring of Fusion GPS, the oppo-research firm that created the infamous “Steele dossier.” The false statements in the dossier were used to smear Donald Trump’s presidential campaign of colluding with the Russian government, and were used to justify the FBI’s spying on Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.
After Trump was elected, Democrats used the phony collusion narrative – enthusiastically promoted by the Democrats’ media allies – to sabotage the president’s agenda by subjecting him to a two-year investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller into the allegations of Russian collusion. Trump, of course, was ultimately exonerated by Mueller of collusion.
Elias next worked with the Democratic Party establishment to exploit the COVID-19 pandemic to change state election rules in the run-up to the 2020 election. He was the driving force behind 32 election-related lawsuits in 19 states that sought to overturn state election laws that protected against voter fraud – namely, Elias sought to expand mail-in voting, dilute signature verification and witness requirements, expand ballot harvesting by third parties, eliminate voter ID, and increase the number of ballot drop-box locations.
This year, following as it does the decennial census, Elias is spearheading dozens of legal challenges to various states’ redistricting efforts in an effort to generate Democrat-friendly maps for the next decade.
But these challenges will take years to sort out, and the Democrats are short on time.
Biden’s botched handling of COVID, the economy, the southern border, and the withdrawal from Afghanistan – not to mention his failure to get his legislative agenda across the finish line – doesn’t give Democrats much to run on in 2022.
Unable to meaningfully address the kitchen table issues concerning most voters, the Democrats instead are making the Jan. 6 riot the centerpiece of their campaign. As CNN put it, they are asking voters “to punish Republicans who have either aided Trump’s anti-Democratic maneuvers or stood idly by as his allies took hold of the party” that day.
And that’s where Elias comes in.
In his “prediction for 2022,” Elias tweeted that “before the midterm election, we will have a serious discussion about whether individual Republican House Members are disqualified by Section 3 of the 14th Amendment from serving in Congress.” //
Marc E. Elias
@marceelias
I am making clear that members of Congress who engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States are not eligible to serve in Congress.
The fact that this is so triggering to the GOP speaks volumes. https://twitter.com/dangainor/status/1473724106260496392
2:03 PM · Dec 22, 2021
Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment – also known as the Disqualification Clause – was added to the Fourteenth Amendment to disqualify former government officials who aided the cause of the Confederate states during the Civil War, //
To begin, while Elias’s tweet threatens “litigation” under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, courts don’t have jurisdiction to entertain such challenges. According to legal scholars, that section specifies “qualifications” for Members of Congress and the Senate, but under Article I, section 5, clause 1 of the Constitution, “each House shall be the Judge of the … Qualifications of its own Members.”
As Justice Scalia cogently wrote when he sat on the D.C. Circuit, that provision “states not merely that each House ‘may judge’ these matters, but that each House ‘shall be the Judge.’” Hence, the courts “simply lack jurisdiction” to adjudicate Disqualification Clause contests. //
Non-Justiciable Political Question
Even if courts have the judicial authority to adjudicate Disqualification Clause disputes, however, the question remains whether such power should be exercised.
In Baker v. Carr, the Supreme Court held that where the Constitution assigns an issue to the elected, or political, branches to resolve, the courts should not intrude.
This approach – known as the “political question” doctrine – is rooted in the separation of powers and applies here. //
Perhaps most significantly, ambiguities in the text of the Disqualification Clause call into question whether that clause even applies here.
Primary among them is whether the events of Jan. 6 constituted a “rebellion” or “insurrection” – hyperbolic labels that smack more of yellow journalism than legalistic accuracy. Indeed, of the more than 720 people who were arrested for participating in the events of Jan. 6, none were criminally charged with “Rebellion or Insurrection” under the federal criminal code.
If you haven’t checked the weather recently in Washington DC, the nation’s capital is currently getting a healthy dose of snow. Some places have already gotten 6 inches, and there’s more coming as the day drags on. //
It’s very likely the federal government will shut down for the rest of the week.
So why do I care so much about the weather in DC? Because this snowfall could throw a big wrench into the Democrat plan to “commemorate” January 6th at the Capitol Building. As RedState has reported, multiple events are planned with CNN hosting. Those include a speech by the President of the United States.
Will all that happen if no one can drive to get to the Capitol? No doubt, CNN will do in-studio coverage regardless, but some of the politicians who were set to speak could be stuck doing Zoom hits instead of getting their visual on the Capitol steps. Further, it won’t be much of a commemoration if no one else can even show up for the live event. Lastly, if the next bout of snow arrives even a few hours earlier on Thursday than expected (currently forecast for the afternoon), it could disrupt things even more.
I know others think January 6th was like 9/11 on steroids, but I find this entire thing incredibly humorous. The first major snowfall of the year just so happens to cause major headaches for Democrats as they hope to make political hay? You love to see it.
Fourteen Republican House members led by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia demanded Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser terminate Deputy Warden Kathleen Landerkin of the D.C. Correctional Treatment Facility. Landerkin is overseeing the pre-trial detention of Jan. 6 Capitol riot defendants.
In the letter sent Thursday, Greene railed the warden for running a “two-tier justice system” based on a recent congressional visit from the Georgia lawmaker with Texas Rep. Louis Gohmert, who also endorsed Landerkin’s termination.
“January 6 defendants were treated categorically different from the remainder of the prison population,” they wrote, referencing testimony from the accused that claimed “months of solitary confinement, verbal abuse (e.g., called ‘white supremacists’), harassment, beatings from guards, denial of basic medical care, religious services, communion, nutritious diet, and access to attorneys.”
While most of these inmates have no prior history and have yet to be convicted of any crime,” lawmakers added, “Landerkin is allowing them to be treated as subhuman.” Greene published her findings from the November visit in a 28-page eyewitness report titled, “Unusually Cruel” on Dec. 7.
The defense had previously raised two issues.
The first is that the prosecution improperly infringed on Kyle Rittenhouse’s constitutional right to remain silent when, during questioning, ADA Thomas Binger tried to suggest that Rittenhouse hadn’t made a comment until he was able to hear everyone else testify. That caused fireworks with the judge admonishing the prosecutor and saying he was on the line and maybe over it.
The second issue was that the prosecution had tried to introduce evidence that the judge had already ruled they could not introduce. The judge had also admonished the prosecutor over that, saying that he didn’t believe the prosecution when Binger claimed that he didn’t think the judge’s ruling applied to the evidence he, Binger, was trying to introduce. The judge chastised Binger, saying “Don’t get brazen with me,” “I don’t believe you,” and “There’d better not being another incident.”
Now, in a formal filing for a motion for mistrial with prejudice that they made on Monday, the defense mentions those issues but also raises another — that the prosecution withheld evidence from defense. The defense argues that on November 5, the prosecution turned over a compressed version of a drone video that had been taken on that day showing some of the incident of Rittenhouse running into the lot with Joseph Rosenbaum chasing him and then the shooting. Meanwhile, the defense is saying that the prosecution had a clearer version of the video that they did not provide until after both sides were finished presenting their cases. //
‘The problem is the prosecution gave the defense a compressed version of the video. What that means is the video provided to the defense was not as clear as the video kept by the state.’
The motion goes onto explain that the file size of the defense video is just 3.6MB while the prosecution’s is 11.2MB.
there was no violent rush. Rather, men in black opened up the doors and people strolled in, mingling, taking selfies, and generally appearing to pose no real threat. //
Then there’s the issue of the black-clad men who opened the doors in what looked like a very organized, planned-out fashion. As Tucker Carlson pointed out last night, it’s rather convenient that 500+ people have been arrested but that we don’t know who those men are. //
We know who random grandmas who took selfies are, but we are to believe the feds just have no idea who the men are who opened the doors? Why are they not dressed like everyone else? Why do they seem to know exactly where to go and what to do? Why are they not stopped by the people already in the Capitol, who I assume are USCP officers? When the doors are opened, the people walking in almost seem surprised and confused. There was clearly no grand plan here by insurrectionists. Rather, it certainly looks like those who opened the doors were separate from the protest. //
And while the narrative for a long time on the right was that these were Antifa operatives, that was always the wrong assumption, in my opinion. It always made much more sense that the men in black were federal agents, FBI or otherwise. Remember, this is the same FBI that essentially orchestrated the Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping attempt. It’s the same FBI that had more agents at last week’s “Justice for January 6th” rally than there were actually protesters.
Why has the federal government been trying so hard to keep surveillance footage of January 6th under wraps? We may have an answer to that question if a set of newly released videos are any indication.
A judge ordered the videos be released against the wishes of the government prosecutors who claimed doing so would undermine national security. Of course, that makes no sense, and what’s on the videos runs counter to the chosen narrative.
Behold, the event that has been compared to the Civil War by the President of the United States.
If you can’t watch the video, what you’ll see are open doors/windows and people casually walking in. There’s no mad rush, no violence, no weapons, and certainly no organized insurrection. Instead, people mingle, take selfies, and snap pictures of the surrounding architecture. Yes, it’s trespassing and that’s illegal, but what’s on that video is a far cry from the vast threat we’ve been assured was present that day. Does it look like Congressional members were about to be murdered?
Where do things go from here? They go nowhere. There is no massive “right-wing” threat. There will be no redux of January 6th. Democrats are going to have to compete in 2022 on their own merits, and boy, do their merits suck. The feds can keep poking and prodding, hoping to stoke a reaction that provides fodder, but it seems no one is up for taking the bait. Thus, you end up with today’s laughable scene.
This country has real problems. People gathering to protest is not one of them. And let’s not forget that while the feds were wasting masses of men and resources to stand around at a non-violent rally, the Southern border is quite literally being invaded due to a lack of law enforcement personnel. That’s the idiocy of our government perfectly illustrated.
As we reported earlier, there were more police and media than demonstrators at the Justice for J6 rally in DC today. //
These guys were so obvious that a lot of people had fun mocking them — the coordinated shirts, shorts, watches, and sunglasses. Also, what looked like possible guns in their pockets. //
But it’s hilarious that even the participant allegedly arrested for a gun was actually law enforcement of some sort. So many feds, they’re arresting each other.
Fed-a-palooza.
Many say the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol riot is one of America’s darkest episodes. Others say the nationwide protests last summer over George Floyd’s murder were worse. Here’s data about both — you decide.
Another widely peddled media hoax has been shot to pieces as Reuters reveals that the FBI has “scant evidence” that there was any forward planning to overthrow the U.S. government on January 6th. //
The news confirms The National Pulse’s reporting from January 11th, and raises questions about the government’s power grab and abuse of authority using January 6th as pretext. //
Reuters reported Friday morning:
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclusive-fbi-finds-scant-evidence-us-capitol-attack-was-coordinated-sources-2021-08-20/
The news blows apart the media’s narrative over the past eight months, and should refocus attention on the fact that Speaker Nancy Pelosi and D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser refused support in advance of the peaceful Trump rally at the White House earlier that day.
President Trump is known to have cleared the way for 10,000 National Guard troops, in advance of the event, in order to keep the peace.
https://thenationalpulse.com/breaking/capitol-authorities-knew-of-riot-on-jan-6th/
https://thenationalpulse.com/breaking/trump-capitol-natl-guard-request/
Yossi Gestetner
@YossiGestetner
Jan 6th was the worst attack on the Capitol since 1812? Odd because in 1954, five congressmen were wounded on the floor when 4 terrorists opened fire from the visitor area. (Prez Carter later commuted/reduced the sentences.)
https://blogs.loc.gov/headlinesandheroes/2020/05/1954-shooting-at-the-u-s-capitol/ //
A lot of things happened on January 6th. What did not happen is a hitman directly ordering people to attack the Capitol, in this case, Donald Trump. During his speech, Trump specifically asked people to peacefully protest. That some of the protesters didn’t is ultimately on them for choosing not to listen. We have agency in this country, and people are responsible for their own actions.
Besides, there’s precious little evidence there was any intent to carry out a real “hit” that day. Those that entered the Capitol had ample opportunity to cause bodily harm to people inside and they didn’t. That includes police officers who stood in the hallways telling crowds to stay back. That the officers did that is commendable, but the reality is that they could have been easily overrun. That they weren’t is evidence that the crowds were merely looking to cause a scene, and that’s exactly what happened.
According to a study of 68 cities by the Major Cities Chiefs Association, in the summer of 2020, there were at least 574 protests that involved acts of violence, including assaults on police officers, looting and arson. More than 2,000 police officers sustained injuries in the line of duty. Should congress investigate the 2020 violent protests that occurred in these cities?
66% said yes, they should, 21% said no and 13% said they weren’t sure. By comparison, only 49% said they supported Pelosi’s investigatory Committee. So two-thirds want the BLM/Antifa investigated for the full year of rioting, killing, and assaulting people, far more than support Pelosi’s investigation.
People across political parties and minorities were in support of a BLM/Antifa investigation.
The climate change group showed up in Washington D.C. and then blocked all ten entrances to the White House, sitting in roads and taking over guard shacks. This was done as part of a demand to include a “civilian climate corps” in the recent infrastructure deal, which is a favorite pet project of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. //
Did you get that? If you are a left-wing activist trespassing on federal property in order to make demands of Congress, you not only don’t go to jail, you get let free the same day without so much as a ticket for your troubles (or if they were ticketed, they aren’t saying). And yes, despite a lot of the media’s framing, almost everyone arrested on January 6th only committed the grand crime of misdemeanor trespassing according to the DOJ itself. //
This kind of thing is dangerous because it means the DOJ can arbitrarily decide to come down on whomever they want based on their politics. We saw plenty of examples of that during the Trump era. But it’s also harmful to every other institution in our government. No open-minded individual can see this stuff and trust that any bureaucracy is going to operate fairly if they have the “wrong views.”
Observers have recently commented that the January 6 criminal cases are being treated differently from other cases, often, referring to criminal cases arising from Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests and/or Antifa riots. The difficulty in making that comparison is that those cases are often not similar to the January 6 cases in ways that the law considers relevant to the question of equal treatment. For example, the BLM and Antifa cases are often being pursued in state courts by state prosecutors, which operate very differently from federal prosecutors and federal courts. Or the types of charges or the specific conduct of the defendants is different from the January 6 defendants. Those differences make the claim of disparate treatment relatively easy to brush off.
However, the claim of unequal treatment is, in fact, legitimate. A comparison of the January 6 cases to other federal cases involving the same kind of conduct demonstrates that the January 6 cases are being treated significantly more harshly by DOJ and the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office.
This article is the first of three in a series demonstrating that that the government has been and is, in fact, treating the January 6 cases more harshly in terms of the charges brought, requests for detention of the defendants pending trial, disposition of the charges, and sentencing demands.
What this means is that the Democrat Justice Department intends to continue to file criminal charges against EVERY PERSON who entered the Capitol on January 6 when they can verify the identities of the persons captured on videotape.
EVERY PERSON.
That means that anyone who attended the January 6 protest and went inside the Capitol, but has not yet been charged, will wake up every morning until the statute of limitations expires and wonder, “Will today be the day the Democrat Justice Department arrests me because I protested the election of Joe Biden?” //
the heavy-handed policy of “no exceptions” which is being followed only ensures that the damage to the country created by political divisions which exist will only get worse. It is a statement by the Biden Administration that it intends to criminalize to the greatest extent allowed by law the sentiment following the 2020 election that the outcome was not legitimate.
More significantly, it is a legitimate basis upon which the segment of the population who politically oppose the Biden Administration can reasonably claim the Administration is employing the criminal justice system to delegitimize that political opposition by declaring it to be based in criminality.
“Maybe this is their job. Maybe they’re paid to do it,” Boebert said in an interview with the Washington Examiner on Saturday. “You see this from extreme leftist progressives because either this is their job, either they are paid to do it, or they have nothing better to do, they’re sitting at home collecting a check, and this is their life.”
“I mean, I don’t have time for that,” the Republican lawmaker said. “You don’t see conservatives doing things like this because we have families to take care of, we have jobs to work at, we have communities to grow. And that’s our focus — not to destroy, but to build.”