Episode 54 LIVE: Full Boebert – Firebrand with Matt Gaetz
|
Time
Text
Thank you.
Matt Gaetz was one of the very few members in the entire Congress who bothered to stand up against permanent Washington on behalf of his constituents.
Matt Gaetz right now, he's a problem in the Democratic Party.
He could cause a lot of hiccups in passing applause.
So we're going to keep running those stories to keep hurting him.
If you stand for the flag and kneel in prayer, if you want to build America up and not burn her to the ground, then welcome, my fellow patriots.
You are in the right place.
This is the movement for you.
You ever watch this guy on television?
It's like a machine.
Matt Gaetz.
I'm a canceled man in some corners of the internet.
Many days I'm a marked man in Congress, a wanted man by the deep state.
They aren't really coming for me.
They're coming for you.
I'm just in the way.
Welcome back to Firebrand.
We're broadcasting live out of my office on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., 1721 of the Longworth Building.
And I've got one of Congress's very best firebrands with me today, Lauren Boebert.
In just a moment, we're going to be breaking down the gun control legislation that the United States Senate is poised to adopt that we believe would be very harmful to most Americans.
But first, the latest in monkeypox.
William Shakespeare reminds us it's all in a name.
He'd be proud of the naming gymnastics recently endeavored by the World Health Organization.
The WHO has taken a break from the hard work of fear mongering about COVID and playing defense for the Chinese Communist Party to bring something urgent to our attention.
Time Magazine reports that the WHO is renaming monkeypox.
After concerns that the term is discriminatory, of course, monkeys everywhere are relieved.
But seriously, apparently 29 experts signed a letter calling for a speedy decision and the adoption of a new name.
They said that the reference to the virus being African is inaccurate and, of course, discriminatory.
They're referring to two types of monkeypox, the West African clade and the Congo Basin clade, aptly named because this is where the virus was found in populations of wild monkeys.
I know that'll shock you.
Seems like good names to me.
Naming viruses after regions in which they're found not only seems fair, but it's also rational.
It's common, too.
Remember the MERS virus?
It stands for Middle Eastern Respiratory Virus.
Ever heard of the West Nile virus?
I'll give you a guess as to where that might have come from.
Losing the plot because there's a worry about stigmatizing Africa is woke nonsense, not health policy.
Besides, it's good to remember where viruses come from.
The triggered scientist stated, quote, There's an interesting narrative in the media among many scientists that they're trying to link the present global outbreak to Africa or West Africa or Nigeria, close quote.
Just because a virus is named after the region in which it originates or is found naturally doesn't mean anyone is going to negatively discriminate against the inhabitants of that region.
Now, under certain circumstances, we may want travel bans or quarantines, other public health endeavors to stop people from going to high-risk areas and pretending that certain regions or groups are not more at risk actually impairs our public health response.
For instance, while most deaths have occurred in the Dominican Republic over monkeypox, I'm sorry, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, two very different things.
Where the virus may have originated, the WHO has admitted that the spread of monkeypox around the globe has largely been amongst the LGBTQ community, at least in the initial cases.
In May, Madrid's senior health official, Enrique Ruiz Esquerdo, said that authorities are investigating possible links between a recent gay pride event in the Canary Islands Which drew 80,000 people.
That's a lot of canaries.
And initial cases from a gay bathhouse in Madrid.
AIDSMap.com is a site dedicated to helping homosexual men avoid contacting AIDS and other diseases prevalent in their community.
And that website is reporting that monkeypox is spreading among gay men worldwide.
Hans Kludge, who's the regional director of the WHO in Europe, has warned that transmission can be boosted by the fact that most of the initial cases among gay men who sought treatment are presenting in sexual health clinics, suggesting The transmission may have been going on for some time.
The UK Health Security Agency chief's medical advisor, Susan Hopkins, said she's particularly been urging gay and bisexual men to look out for the symptoms of monkeypox, or whatever they're going to call it, noting that a notable proportion of the cases in the UK and Europe come from this group.
The same can be said for other Western countries.
It's not homophobia, just reality.
When groups like the World Health Organization change names and lie about origins, when they pretend that certain groups aren't disproportionately affected, they undermine our ability to fight and eradicate viruses and diseases.
They care more about a perceived offense than reality.
It's just woke public health.
They have that in common with the American left.
It's also corrupt and incompetent, fundamentally unserious.
The WHO should concern itself with combating and eradicating diseases and educating at-risk groups on how to avoid contraction.
Instead, they play politics.
Serious matters deserve serious attention, and the WHO sounds more like a board meeting of the local Young Democrats chapter instead of an international NGO dedicated to fight pathogens.
Trump was right to leave the WHO, and when he's president again in 2024, I think we should leave it again.
Trump's left people more than once, probably.
On to Ukraine.
On Wednesday, the White House released a statement that Joe Biden called President Vladimir Zelensky and vowed to provide an additional $1 billion in security assistance and another $225 million in humanitarian assistance.
I guess the $40 billion wasn't enough.
The time for a deal in this war to end it is definitely long past, and the United States should not be doing things that continue to further warfare.
About $350 million worth of weapons will come from existing U.S. stockpiles.
Why are we depleting our stockpiles?
We left metric tons of our weapons in Afghanistan, and now we're giving weapons away to the corrupt regimes in Europe with no accountability.
Who is running the show here?
I guarantee you this.
Mark my words.
We will have the Ukraine papers eventually leak, exposing this grift.
Billions of dollars unaccounted for, weapons missing, believed to be in the hands of corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs.
We literally have reports already that U.S.-made Javelin rocket launchers are being auctioned off on the dark web by Ukrainian nationals.
We continue to throw money and weapons into a war that was totally avoidable.
I'm joined now by Colorado's favorite daughter, Lauren Boebert.
Lauren, you have been a real stalwart against the U.S. becoming excessively entangled in this war in Ukraine.
What do you think about the breaking news that the Biden administration just thinks another billion in weapons and 225 million in humanitarian aid is enough?
We knew that this wouldn't stop.
We knew that they were going to continue to keep asking for more money.
That's all that they have as a solution.
Is to just throw money at a problem and think that it's going to go away.
We are not another billion dollars away from solving the world's problems.
We're not one piece of legislation away from fixing it.
We need a divine intervention in this country and we gotta get it back on track.
We need Trump policies back in place.
Number one, we need to secure our own borders before we continue to send all this money.
How many walls could we have built now with all the money that we've sent?
Oh, we had to beg.
We had to beg the rhinos to just get, like, to go from $1 billion to $1.7 billion on the wall.
Beg for our own country.
Right.
And then they have no problem, with almost no debate, sending $40 billion.
You know what this looks like?
There was someone who didn't get their payoff, and they needed another billion to grease the wheels.
Are people talking about this in Colorado?
People are very frustrated.
I mean, really, you look at Colorado right now.
The top three issues used to be water, water, water.
And now it's inflation, inflation, inflation.
And Washington, D.C. continues to just write blank checks to print money and spend this money that we do not have.
And inflation is continuing to rise.
People are paying the price for bad policies.
And I mean, we see this in legislation all the time.
We object to suspension bills that they want to pass by unanimous consent.
One week, those bills spent $350 million.
And they didn't want a single member of Congress voting on them.
Republicans even get frustrated when we vote on legislation here in the House of Representatives.
So the spending is impacting Americans all across our nation, every single one of us.
And of course, the gas prices and whatnot.
We're funding both sides of this war, Russia and Ukraine.
We get to pat ourselves on the back because, look, we sent Ukraine a couple bucks and, you know, feel really great about that.
But all the while, Purchasing oil from Russia.
Did Reagan understand how you beat Russia?
You do domestic energy production.
Increase it.
And then you blow them out of the water.
You build our military capabilities, not Afghanistan's, not Ukraine's.
You build our military capabilities, and then you turn on the engine of U.S. energy.
I mean, you've been an outspoken advocate for U.S. energy.
Why do you think the Biden administration is so against it?
I think all of this is by design.
I mean, we've seen...
So much.
Biden is bought by China.
I mean, we've seen 10% go into the big guy.
You know, we've seen the dealings with Hunter Biden and Ukraine.
I mean, this is a corrupt regime that we are under right now.
And America is suffering because of it.
I think all of this is intentional.
We've talked to Secretary Mayorkas.
He's been in front of different committees.
I've been with him in the The Border Security Caucus led by Congressman Andy Biggs from Arizona.
And he comes in there and says, hey, look, it's going to take 8 to 10 years to process these people.
They are intentionally overrunning our systems.
They want them to break.
They want them to fail.
President Trump had us energy independent.
We should be energy dominant right now, exporting freedom to these other countries.
And, you know, they're choosing to not build pipelines, to not build refineries, and to not produce America's energy.
As the Biden regime is so willing to send billions of dollars in weapons to Ukraine, they seem to be really enthusiastic about taking rights away from law-abiding gun owners in this country.
Congresswoman Boebert is the co-chair of the Second Amendment Conference.
She brought the heat on the floor of the House of Representatives recently on the issue of gun rights.
Take a listen.
We're not going to send police to protect you.
You won't be able to protect yourself.
It's all rogue.
This is a lawless administration that we are serving under, and I would implore the Senate To not compromise on the American citizens' rights.
And I would like to just note that the 10 that we have heard of who are considering siding with these people who would limit the liberties and freedoms of American citizens are either not coming back to the Senate, they're retiring, or they're not up for re-election.
And I think that that is very, very telling.
And I will not give an inch of the Second Amendment, of the rights of the people to keep and bear arms, to protect themselves, especially when cries from this chamber are calling to defund law enforcement and our southern border is wide open, allowing the cartel to send whatever they want through those borders without any added security.
Joe Biden wants to disarm you and then invite MS-13 to live next door.
And Congresswoman Boebert, in that speech, you laid out the risk that Republican senators present to the Second Amendment.
How are you assessing the framework that has now been endorsed by Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, many members of the Republican leadership?
Even my senator, Marco Rubio, has endorsed the framework.
Why should this concern gun owners?
Because any step to infringe on our Second Amendment rights is a step too far.
It's an inch too far.
I've seen this in Colorado.
Colorado used to be one of the most gun-friendly states in America.
And under Democrat rule, our rights are stripped from us.
And it started with magazine capacity limits.
They wanted to reduce the amount of ammunition that we could carry in our magazines.
And they have not stopped there.
And this is not going to stop these tragedies that we are seeing.
If it were to stop them, then cities like Chicago, New York, they would look safer than Mayberry.
Because they have these strict gun control laws that are already on the books.
So let's enforce the laws that are already on the books.
We don't need to add new legislation.
We're hearing sheriffs in Canada saying, you know, the...
The egregious things that they are passing there with handguns and limiting those and making them illegal, this is not going to stop crime because then the handguns are illegal and they're only in the hands of criminals.
By definition, criminals do not obey the law.
So by layering on another law, this does not solve any of the problems.
We can harden our schools.
We can make our community safer.
We can start by not defunding the police.
We can do many things, but adding more legislation is not a part of the answer.
I don't want to reduce Age restrictions, or increase, excuse me, age restrictions.
I don't want to add more regulations on how you have to store your firearm, how much ammunition you can have.
All of this is...
Too far.
Absolutely too far.
So the principal feature of the Senate legislation is a grant program to encourage states to enact red flag laws.
And to me, that's just using the federal taxpayer to bribe states to violate people's rights.
John Cornyn in the Senate, Republican from Texas, recently said, well, this doesn't mean we're for red flag laws.
It just means we're providing resources for them.
What would be your response?
If you're providing the funding for it, then you're absolutely for it.
You do not fund something that you are not in support of.
I do not fund abortions, not willingly anyway.
I mean, we have federal taxes that go to some of this stuff.
But, you know, you do not advocate for something to be paid for by American tax dollars if you do not support them.
Red flag laws are very, very Dangerous for American citizens.
And just like everything else we see with these three-letter agencies, I believe that it will be weaponized against conservatives.
They are already doing this.
They're calling moms and dads domestic terrorists for showing up to school board meetings.
And now we're going to have more red flag laws across our country?
I mean, this is very dangerous.
You think that the very people that are now trying to pass new domestic extremism authorities, the very people that are trying to use anti-terrorism authorities against MAGA, might try to red flag their MAGA neighbor Over politics, not over danger.
I mean, you know, I wouldn't put it past them.
People in Florida are worried about that.
We've seen it used 8,000 times in Florida.
I don't think we stopped 8,000 school shooters.
I think this became a part of marital disputes, neighbor disputes, business disputes, and your Second Amendment rights just shouldn't be up for negotiation over something like that.
Right, especially when you do not have the right to due process, when you don't have the right to face your accuser, when it's a judge determining your mental stability rather than a mental health professional.
We have Baker Act laws.
In Colorado, there's a 72-hour hold.
If you are a danger to yourself or to others, you have mandatorily have to go into a center for 72 hours and have a mental health evaluation.
We already have this in place.
And these red flag laws, they will be abused.
They are being abused.
Even in one of my counties in my district, there were two red flag laws that came up, smaller area, rural.
But there were two that came up and he said, no, this is completely bogus.
You are using this in the wrong manner.
And he was able to stop those.
So I'm grateful for the sheriffs that are standing up and recognizing what the Constitution does to protect our rights.
It doesn't grant us rights.
It doesn't give us those rights, but it certainly protects them.
Are you saying that if this bill were to become law, and right now it looks like it will become law, that we're actually going to have to rely on local sheriffs in some places saying, I'm not going to go enforce this.
I'm not going to go take someone's guns away because my state government got bribed to do so by Washington.
Yes, and that's what we should have been doing for a really long time now when it comes to the pandemic and the overreach that we saw from the federal government with this Fauci-funded Chinese virus.
That punished Americans.
We should have been relying on our local sheriffs to take a stand and say, not on my watch, not in my county.
This is where local control matters the most.
We're talking to Lauren Boebert, the co-chair of the Second Amendment Caucus here in Washington, D.C. We're breaking down the Senate legislation that we're both very concerned about.
Beyond red flag laws, there's also...
The development and resourcing of federal databases so that if something happens in one state, that information is accessible nationwide.
And I was having a conversation with a judiciary Republican yesterday who said, well, gosh, I mean, isn't this what we would be for, using technology to allow law enforcement to communicate better?
And I'm just a little skeptical of federal databases because I've seen how they've been used.
How do you view that proposal?
Exactly like you were leading into.
I'm not in support of more federal databases.
I mean, look at the ATF. The ATF, they weren't even supposed to be keeping record of the firearms sales, and there's more than a billion of them.
Alcohol, tobacco, and firearms is just what we call a good Friday night in Florida's first congressional district.
But you're right, they already are exceeding their existing authorities, and so granting them new authorities could really be a slippery slope.
Yes, I do not trust the federal government.
And I think that there are plenty of Americans who don't as well.
So I do not want to grow the federal government.
I do not want to give them more authority.
And certainly I do not want to fund that growth and authority to take the rights away from American citizens.
We are here to secure their rights.
And that really is what's most important.
That's what motivated me to get up here.
Not because I want to be a part of government, but because I want to secure the people's rights.
Sports Fan 22 on Getter says, shall not be infringed.
I agree with Rep Boebert, and we're seeing that sentiment expressed across all of our comment platforms.
You are the co-chair of the Second Amendment Caucus, and you've done something very interesting in the minority.
You haven't just played defense against some of these bad proposals.
You've been out there highlighting some of the legislation to vindicate the Second Amendment.
Talk about some of those bills and your leadership of the caucus to make sure that people know about them.
Yeah, so Congressman Michael Cloud, he had a bill to come in and expose the ATF and to abolish this database that they had that's keeping a record of all firearm sales in the United States.
And so we highlight these good pieces of legislation to put them forward.
Congressman Thomas Massey is my co-chair of the Second Amendment Caucus, and he has a bill that would end Our schools being gun-free zones.
We have to do that.
That is how you start to secure our schools.
Should Republicans be campaigning on that now?
Oh my goodness, yes.
Gun-free zones are deadly.
This has been proven time and time again.
Chicago is deadly.
This is a gun-free city, but only the criminals have guns.
Anytime you have a mass shooting, it is in a gun-free zone because there is not an armed citizen to neutralize the threat.
Where there is a lawful citizen present that is armed, they are able to neutralize that threat, and the death count goes from an average of 13 down to 2. The first victim and the shooter himself.
That is real data and it's data that saves lives.
Yes.
In Florida, we have a sentinel program that allows school districts, if they so choose, to have special training for former military, former law enforcement people, Who are experts at some of these matters.
Would Colorado be a place that that could help as a school hardening tactic?
Yes, so what we have, we have an organization called Faster Colorado, and they actually work with our school districts to train and certify and arm teachers.
So it's really a great program.
The school district can decide if they want to allow their teachers to carry in these schools.
There's a wonderful little loophole in Colorado law that allows them to do that.
So if the school district so chooses, they connect with Faster Colorado and the teachers are very well armed and certified and they begin to carry in those schools to protect our children, which is much more effective than hiding behind a desk.
End gun-free zones, make schools a hard target, empower local sheriffs.
Absolutely.
That strikes me as a lot better than national databases and bribing states to violate people's laws, but this legislation is coming.
I mean, we see it developing very quickly in the Senate.
What would be your message to gun owners to be able to resist this?
Yes.
First of all, call your representatives, call your senators, and make sure that they hear your voice because that matters.
We get phone calls in my office every day, and we keep record of these phone calls, the types of calls, the people who are for something or oppose another thing.
And so it really does matter to call them, because I'll tell you what, I'll tell you who is calling these senators right now.
Big donors, lobbyists.
They are calling these senators, and they need to be hearing from you, the electric.
They need to be hearing from the people who actually hired them and sent them, and they need to know exactly how the American people feel about these laws.
With people so under siege, I think it will be demoralizing to America if now they have to face gun control while crime is increasing, while our borders become a turnstile.
I think it could really affect the American psyche.
And, you know, nobody in Washington wants to talk about the root cause of this stuff.
Nobody wants to talk about...
No, they're still trying to figure out the root cause of the border.
Right.
They can't figure that out.
Right.
And now they're saying that...
And, I mean, you know, to me, these lockdowns really impacted people's mental health, especially adolescents.
I mean, I see so many folks who...
You almost want to wake them up out of the lockdown mentality.
I mean, are we going to look back 10 years from now and say, gosh, these lockdowns actually increased violence among young people, potentially even school shootings?
I think you and I are saying that now.
We don't have to wait 10 years to say, look at the impact that these lockdowns have.
We said them three weeks into this.
We said, OK, we did our 15 days.
Slow the spread.
We've done our time.
Let's open back up.
And there were states like Colorado who stayed shut down.
And this was absolutely dangerous to our children.
And so much more in the American psyche.
Yeah, I mean, stopping the lockdowns will do a lot more to stop school shootings than taking guns away from law-abiding Americans.
Yes.
That may be a hot take.
It's my take.
And I really think we did a lot of harm to this country.
Where can people go to find out more about the legislation that you're highlighting and the Second Amendment Caucus?
Yeah, so a lot of the legislation that I have is on my website, bober.house.gov.
And we need to talk Congressman Thomas Massey into getting us a Twitter for the Second Amendment Caucus.
Maybe I just need to take the reins on that one.
If you and Massey ran a Second Amendment Twitter account, it would get banned in like the first 72 hours of it being open because it would be a fountainhead for freedom.
Congresswoman Boebert also serves on the Natural Resources Committee, and Democrats passed a bill off the floor of the House this week that spent $12.7 billion during the budget window on land acquisitions.
What should people know about that bill?
Well, first of all, this bill, it allows states to tax hunting.
This is just more spending.
This is nothing that actually protects wildlife conservation.
This grows what they call restoration projects, but it's really not.
It's really a hands-off approach.
So serving on the Natural Resources Committee, I fight these battles on a regular basis.
These not-in-my-backyard extremists are fine with outsourcing energy production to our enemies, to our adversaries.
In other countries, having 40,000 children mine with their bare hands for cobalt in the Congo, in these China-owned Cobalt mines.
And then we buy solar panels from China and feel great about ourselves.
But these are the extremists that I'm having to fight on a regular basis, and now they want to spend another $12.7 billion.
And it's mandatory spending.
Mandatory spending.
That's a Washington term, but just so people understand what that means.
That means whether the need's out there or not, and whether anybody approves it in the future or not, that money goes out the door every year.
And it just seems like it removes logic and reason from conservation.
Right.
It absolutely does, because it is just spending that doesn't need to occur.
And we're not doing anything to actually manage our land.
So I have some forestry legislation that allows us to go in and actually manage our lands.
And it's not a hands-off approach.
We have six billion dead standing trees in the western United States.
They're all creating this massive tinderbox.
And in Colorado, we had three of the largest wildfires on record in 2020. And those were in my district in Colorado, in the third district.
Now just one of those wildfires emits more carbon emissions than every vehicle running in the state of Colorado 24-7 for an entire year.
But at the altar of climate change, so many of these leftists, these extremists, want to say, do not touch anything.
We need to reduce carbon emissions.
You need to buy an electric vehicle.
It needs to be all wind, all solar.
And they don't allow us to actually be good stewards of our land.
We should all just go back to Fred Flintstone.
Yabba-dabba-doo.
Yabba-dabba.
Kicking it down the road.
It's a shame because I know Colorado is such a beautiful state.
Florida is a beautiful state.
We want our constituents to be able to enjoy the environment.
But these leftist policies seem to constrain our enjoyment and seem to actually put our environment at risk, like you said, with the wildfires more than usual.
So we hope that bill also does not pass in the Senate.
Right.
Lauren, you're in your first term in Congress, and one of the reasons I knew you'd be very successful here and you're leading on energy, you're leading on firearms, is because you're very authentic.
I think we get the same version of you in Washington that your constituents get, that your family gets.
You know, just being in your first term, what is your perception of this place?
Oh gosh.
So I think everybody knows this place kind of sucks, which is unfortunate because it could be really wonderful.
There's so much history here, but the people who are in charge are destroying the very values that created our nation.
Why is everyone so damn fake in this town?
That's what I can't figure out.
You're like a real person.
I'm radically me.
Right, right.
But it just seems like everyone's performing for donors, lobbyists, special interests.
Well, maybe that's it.
I don't have those donor meetings when I'm here in Washington, D.C. I'm fine with actually legislating while we're in Washington, D.C. rather than bribing donors and making shady deals with donors.
And so I think that's an important part to recognize as being a representative of the people, that you're not a representative of the lobbyists.
It's the people back home that matter.
And so I get out of here as quick as I can.
I'll be on an airplane today to get back home, to get to my people.
But you were talking about earlier, you know, rather than being on defense all the time, I go on offense.
And that is what we need to be doing in the minority.
We do have tools.
We could have had victories to bring back to our district.
And thankfully, we have had a couple of victories even, and I'll get to those.
But look at the NDAA, for example.
When that first came to the House, how many Republicans were saying, ah, don't worry about it.
The Senate will fix it.
Oh, no, we're not going to make any deals.
We're not going to take out this department to counter extremism.
We're not going to take out drafting our daughters.
We're not going to take out red flag laws.
You know, we had Colorado land grabs in the bill.
And they're like, eh, don't worry about it.
The Senate will fix it.
I think it was 38 Democrats voted against that.
Republicans in the House had the authority to bring home victories.
We would say, no, we are not voting on this legislation until it is right.
Instead, they wanted to kick the can.
Well, I don't work in the Senate.
I work in the House.
And so, voted against that legislation here, was very loud about it, got on the offense about it, and telling the people what was in this so they could know And then had to go back and work with senators to actually get some of this stuff out before it came back to the House.
But that's one example that we could have had real victories immediately.
But then also, look at the Disinformation Governance Board and the Department of Homeland Security.
We got really loud about this and got on the front lines, and now that Orwellian Ministry of Truth is paused.
It's shut down.
Nina Jankiewicz resigned.
But wait, there are some Republicans who say when we take power, we can actually do deals with the Biden administration, we can work with them, we can moderate Joe Biden, that that ought to be the goal of being in the majority.
I believe we ought to turn every committee into an oversight committee.
Absolutely.
In natural resources where you serve, don't you think there'd be a lot of opportunity for us to expose this corrupt regime to our people?
Absolutely.
Yes, we need to have that congressional oversight over the Department of Interior, over Secretary Haaland.
You know, she was a one-term congresswoman and then was appointed to this, I mean, based on race, you know, not on qualifications.
And I mean, this is something that's so frustrating to the American people.
Our ethnicity, our background, this definitely should not be something that disqualifies anybody, but it should not be a quantifier to get to a position.
Just because I'm a female doesn't make me eligible to serve any more than a male does.
And so we need to have oversight on what's going on.
The money that is being spent, we need to have oversight over the border, over what happened in Afghanistan.
We're arming Taliban.
We've armed Ukraine.
Democrats were saying, hey, Ukraine needs guns.
Give them money.
And now we're disarming Americans.
But all of this is completely backwards.
And you are right.
every single committee needs to have this oversight jurisdiction, this authority to subpoena people to bring them in and get real answers for the American people.
We aren't going to be able to work with Joe Biden.
Joe Biden can't even work with Joe Biden.
He has to ask permission from his staff.
He's not even allowed in the real Oval Office.
He's in a fake White House set, for goodness sake.
I think we'll leave it there.
Thank you all so much for joining.
Thank you to Congresswoman Boebert, co-chair of the Second Amendment Caucus, leading on energy, leading on natural resources, and certainly one of our very best firebrands.