Reaffirming the House of Representatives' Commitment to the Orderly and Peaceful Transfer of Power Called for in the Constitution of the United States
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, I agree with my colleagues across the aisle. This should not be a partisan matter. We shouldn't have to be here today. But unfortunately, the Democrats decided to make this partisan.
I begged to be allowed to make an amendment because this is one slap at a man who has already made clear, yes, he wants to stop fraudulent voting and make sure that hadn't occurred, but he is going to abide by the will of the people. Yet, they refused to allow any amendments.
It says, it is resolved that the House of Representatives ``intends that there should be no disruptions by the President or any person in power to overturn. . . .'' They would not accept a friendly amendment, so it could be completely bipartisan, to say, ``or any candidate or anyone acting on a candidate's behalf,'' which would have included the President. Oh, no, we have to have a slap at the President.
As my friend Mr. Steube pointed out, it is not Republicans who have divided this country in refusing to accept results of the elections. No, you go back to 1860. November 6, 1860, Republican Abraham Lincoln is elected President by a big margin, and then States start seceding. They are not going to accept the results.
Abraham Lincoln was inaugurated. Back then, it was March 4, 1861. States were already seceding. We are not accepting the results. And they were, every one a Democrat, saying that we are not going to accept that Republican's election to President.
Then, what do we hear from Hillary Clinton? She has been quoted as saying that ``Joe Biden should not concede under any circumstances, because I think this is going to drag out.''
Go back 100 years, after the Democrats refused to accept the results of the election of 1860. In 1960, John F. Kennedy was elected, and I have confirmed again today with someone who worked closely with Nixon that he had information submitted to him that established that there was much wrongdoing in Chicago, Illinois, fraudulent voting schemes.
Despite what any others may think about Richard Nixon, he made the decision that the country could not stand that kind of divisiveness, so he refused to pursue the fraud of which he was told there was plenty of evidence in Chicago, Illinois. That is the way the Republicans have been.
Then, we hear more sanctimonious talk about George W. Bush, and then who contested the election? Well, Al Gore. He calls and concedes, and then he later calls and backs it up. Thank goodness he wasn't President when we needed a decisive leader.
But if you go through the chronology of Gore's defeat by President Bush--and a recount ultimately showed that he did lose. Gore did lose; Bush did win. But he was still contesting. He divided this Nation, refused to accept the results of the election, brought up some of the most ridiculous things from the butterfly ballot that kids in the fifth grade had no problem with. Oh, but it is unfair because they can't really understand it in that part of Florida. What an insult to those people in Florida.
If you look now at what the Democratic Party is saying about this election in response to President Trump saying, I just want to make sure that it is not fraudulent voting; it is fair voting. And as long as everything is legal and fair, you betcha, he will have a smooth transition of power. He would agree to that.
But if you look, as reported on August 2 of this year, buried near the end of Ben Smith's column is a report that ``Democrats have participated in a `war game' in which they considered several possible outcomes of the election. In one scenario, John Podesta, the former chair of Hillary Clinton's Presidential campaign and a leading figure in party circles, played former Vice President Joe Biden and refused to concede the election.''
Then later it was posted--much more recently, I guess, that is September 6: ``Democrats promise more violence if Joe Biden doesn't defeat Trump by a landslide in the 2020 election. Rosa Brooks, a leftist who writes for The Washington Post, penned a piece that stated her research showed that the only scenario in November that would stop the violence is if Biden wins in a landslide. That kind of attempt to manipulate the voters by intimidation will just make Americans vote for Trump.''
It was posted September 6 in the American Thinker. ``Democrats openly say that if Trump is reelected, they are going to redouble their 4 years of madness, with special emphasis on the last 3 months of open violence. Indeed, they are already planning to destabilize the election and to contest if Trump wins, in hopes of a violent coup.''
And as if there is not a God in Heaven, today of all days, when this that should have been bipartisan is brought to the floor to slam Donald Trump, we have newly released information out today that has been declassified. This report, on September 7, 2016: ``U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral to FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok regarding `U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's approval of a plan concerning U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private mail server.' ''
Then further, it came out today: ``A former senior intelligence official told saraacarter.com that it would make sense that Clinton's plans would be usurped by the Russia's GRU, its military intelligence, as well as Russia's FSB, its equivalent of the CIA, when former British spy Christopher Steele began peddling the Russians for information.''
``The real people colluding and conspiring with Russia were the Democrats, Hillary Clinton, and Fusion GPS,'' stated the source. ``It is the weaponization of the agencies and those like Clinton who built their private Idaho in the U.S. bureaucracy. They gave the keys to the kingdom to Russia to wreak chaos in our Nation for the past 4 years.''
Moreover, the information that came out today reveals that former CIA Director John Brennan allegedly knew of Clinton's plans and briefed President Obama on those plans in July 2016. It was the same month the FBI opened up the Crossfire Hurricane investigation against President Trump and his campaign--or candidate Trump and his campaign officials.
So, what a day, the day that more evidence comes out that it was Hillary Clinton's campaign, the DNC, and they were refusing to go along with the legal and fair election. Then, afterward, that whole conspiracy, the dossier was used to try to prevent a President from staying in office after sworn in, and we are supposed to vote now to come after President Trump and demand he be legal and lawful in leaving office.
He just wants fairness in the vote, and he will follow the will of the people. It is a real shame that my friends across the aisle wouldn't allow an amendment, so we could say to both sides: Follow the will of the people; have a proper transition of power.
But, no, they wouldn't go there.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT