House Republican Calls for Congress to Cut Millions From Federal Intel, Law Enforcement Agency Budgets

Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-Wyo.) Rep. Harriet Hageman (Republican from Wyoming) asked her party on March 2 for a reduction in the funding of intelligence agencies to support their ongoing investigations into weaponization of federal law enforcement.

Hageman was joined by Rep. Kat Cammack (R-Fla.) at a discussion at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in National Harbor, Maryland, to discuss how Republicans should respond to ongoing concerns about the weaponization of federal law enforcement.

The House Select Subcommittee of the Weaponization of Federal Government is a GOP-led committee that investigates potential rights violations by the Department of Justice (DOJ) of President Joe Biden.

Although these issues date all the back to Biden’s presidential tenure, Republicans are gaining momentum in their investigation in the recent months.

House Republicans released a 1,050-page document in November report Detailing whistleblower information from FBI agents.

Since then the House majority approved the creation by the House Select Subcommittee of the Weaponization Federal Government. held its inaugural hearing On February 9.

Hageman calls for her party to make use of its power as a purse in order to keep fighting federal weaponization. Hageman urged her party members to reconsider budget cuts in the hundreds or thousands of millions of dollars needed to restore constitutional compliance for law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

“Sunshine is the best disinfectant, and the truth is [that] these agencies now believe they’re in charge,” Hageman started.

According to her, the problem is more serious than just a lack of a remedy. “double standard,” Many Republicans will agree with this. Hageman stated that Republicans need to emphasize the fact that it isn’t. “a violation of the core principles this country was founded on.”

“Governments fail when you have an unequal justice system,” Hageman continued. “You treat one segment of society one way and another segment of society another way, eventually you lose your ability to work together and to have a cohesive government, to have a cohesive society.

“So it’s incredibly important that we challenge—well it isn’t just, ‘Oh look, where are you going after this, it’s not fair that you treat Donald Trump differently,'” Hageman said. “Every three year old knows you must treat everyone the same. We have an Equal Protection Clause, which is found in the Fifth Amendment of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

Hageman said that many of the DOJ’s decisions, it seems, have been politically motivated.

“This is what we need to do: We must call out the Department of Justice for being the truth. They are engaging in deceitful politics again in violation of their oath of office. [which] These were the people who took.”

Hageman added, “It is necessary to identify names.”

Omnibus Bill

She made a reference to the $1.7 trillion which at the end of the 117th Congress was quickly passed by the lame-duck Democrat-held House and the evenly-split U.S. Senate. The passage of this bill, Hageman suggested, will help to enable further abuses by law enforcement in the federal government as it absolved intel agencies of the need to petition Congress for more money.

The spending bill was able to pass after Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) made a backroom deal with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), giving Democrats the votes to pass the measure. Though they were frustrated by the passage of the bill, there was little House Republicans could do to stop it after it won McConnell’s support.

Hageman told the crowd that the effect of this, in part, was to make it easier for federal law enforcement agencies to continue to violate American liberties.

Cammack also weighed in, explaining that the goal of intel agency heads when testifying to Congress is usually to run out the clock. She referenced a Senate Judiciary Hearing the other day, during which Attorney General Merrick Garland gave his first testimony to the 118th Congress.

Garland spoke slowly, Cammack contended, on purpose.

“Members of Congress … have a small amount of time—sometimes five minutes, sometimes 10 minutes—to ask their questions,” Cammack said. “Therefore, the people [lawmakers are] They are trying to kill the clock by questioning.”

The two lawmakers referenced several instances of abuses, including federal law enforcement’s alleged collusion with Big Tech. Cammack further referenced the case of crisis pregnancy centers, which have faced a spurt of left-wing radical violence for their inherent, often faith-based opposition to abortion.

Federal law enforcement agencies have told Congress that part of the difficulty in finding these perpetrators is that the crimes are often committed at night, a position which both Hageman. and Cammack dismissed.

Hageman was then asked how Congress could respond to ensure Americans’ rights were being protected.

“It is possible only with the help of our purses.” Hageman replied. “We are angry for many reasons about the Omnibus Spending Bill, which was voted by 18 Republicans. [who] Should be held responsible.” She was met with a roar of boos after mentioning the Republicans who helped pass the nearly $2 trillion package.

Hageman continued: “Dec’s Omnibus Spending Bill basically limit what Congress can do to fund some agencies and funding them.”

“One reason is [intel agencies] are flipping their hand at us is, ‘Hey, we got our money, we don’t necessarily need to come in and talk to you,'” Hageman said.

Hageman added that there is no reason intel agencies should be using any taxpayer funds for anything targeting First Amendment rights. To this end, she called for Republicans to cut funding from intelligence and federal law enforcement agencies by tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to rectify the rights violations.

“It sounds like I am a broken record. They violate the First Amendment to U.S. Constitution. Anything To affect our ability speak or hear.” Hageman said. “We are allowed to do both.

“So it is using the power of the purse—if they have the money to do that, if they have tens of millions or hundreds of millions, then our next budget is gonna make sure they don’t have any of that,” Hageman spoke.