Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-AZ-08) announced on Friday that her congressional committee will be questioning Anthony Fauci for the first time ever next month.
The hearing is scheduled to take place before the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic for 14 hours over the course of two days: Jan. 8 and 9, 2024. Each day will consist of seven hours of uninterrupted, transcribed testimony. Additionally, Fauci will be made to appear at another public hearing before the subcommittee at a later date yet to be announced.
“Dr. Fauci will finally be answering the American people,” said Lesko.
🚨 STAY TUNED: JANUARY 8th and 9th for 14 HOURS of testimony!
In their announcement of Fauci’s hearing, the subcommittee issued an X thread highlighting some of Fauci’s “most egregious pandemic-era failures.” The subcommittee cited Fauci’s attempt to push the “Proximal Origin” theory published through mainstream media to disprove the Wuhan, China lab leak theory; Fauci’s awareness of the dangers of the gain-of-function research that resulted in COVID-19 prior to the pandemic, and his inaction to stop it; Fauci’s recent admission that COVID-19 vaccine mandates were a coercion tactic; and Fauci’s quick reversal on mask efficacy early on in the pandemic.
Dr. Fauci prompted the drafting of the now infamous “Proximal Origin” publication in an attempt to disprove the COVID-19 lab leak theory.
Then, he cited "Proximal Origin" from the White House and slid the paper to members of the press.
— Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic (@COVIDSelect) November 30, 2023
In a recently surfaced interview, Dr. Fauci admits that COVID-19 vaccine mandates were used as a coercion tactic:
“It’s been proven that when you make it difficult for people in their lives, they lose their ideological bulls**t, and they get vaccinated.” pic.twitter.com/iBzmsvdQ41
— Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic (@COVIDSelect) November 30, 2023
Dr. Fauci's flip-flopping public guidance about masks harmed Americans' trust in their health authorities.
In February 2020, Dr. Fauci said, "there is no reason to be walking around with a mask."
— Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic (@COVIDSelect) November 30, 2023
“[Fauci’s] upcoming testimonies will aid [our] ongoing effort to hold American public health officials accountable for pandemic-era failures,” stated the subcommittee.
The subcommittee, formed in 2020 under the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, consists of Lesko along with Republican Reps. Brad Wenstrup, chairman (OH-02), Nicole Malliotakis (NY-11), Mariannette Miller-Meeks (IA-01), Michael Cloud (TX-27), John Joyce (PA-13), Marjorie Taylor Greene (GA-14), Ronny Jackson (TX-13), and Rich McCormick (GA-06); and Democratic Reps. Raul Ruiz (D-CA-25), Debbie Dingell (MI-06), Kweisi Mfume (MD-07), Deborah Ross (NC-02), Robert Garcia (CA-42), Ami Bera (CA-06), and Jill Tokuda (HI-02).
One of the key focuses of the committee has concerned pinpointing the origins of COVID-19. Committee hearings and evidence point to the Wuhan Institute of Virology and its taxpayer-funded gain-of-function research as the source of the virus, bolstered by proof of government health leaders’ relationship to EcoHealth Alliance, the nonprofit research organization that funded the research.
EcoHealth Alliance used American tax dollars to conduct Gain-of-Function research in Wuhan.
In July, the select subcommittee held a hearing to discuss the Proximal Origin theory, a zoonotic proposal that the virus jumped from animals to humans in the nearby wet markets. The subcommittee found that Fauci and former National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Francis Collins were behind drafting, publishing, and promoting the Proximal Origin theory, and that the theory lacked outside proof or verification.
The University of Arizona (UArizona) has continued to defend the Proximal Origin theory. Michael Worobey, head of the Ecology & Evolutionary Biology Department, maintains that COVID-19 originated in the Huanan Seafood Market, though his research acknowledged that a significant percentage of the first COVID-19 patients neither worked or shopped there, and that the researchers never tested market animals purportedly linked to the initial outbreak.
The Wuhan lab is less than nine miles from the wet market.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-AZ-08) announced Tuesday that she won’t be seeking re-election in 2024.
In a press release, Lesko cited family as her main reason for retiring from the job.
“I want to spend more time with my husband, my 94-year-old mother, my three children, and my five grandchildren,” said Lesko. “Spending, on average, three weeks out of every month away from my family and traveling back and forth to Washington, D.C. almost every weekend is difficult.”
Lesko also cited the increased difficulty of passing legislation, declaring the nation’s capital to be broken.
Lesko assumed office in 2018, succeeding the retired former Rep. Trent Franks in a special election. Of the 102 bills she introduced, two became law.
One was HR 6400, which directed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to submit to the congressional homeland security and tax committees a threat and operational analysis of U.S. air, land, and sea ports of entry.
The other law was HR 6016, naming a U.S. Postal Service facility in Surprise as the “Marc Lee Memorial Post Office Building.”
The Heritage Foundation, one of the biggest conservative activist organizations, rates Lesko at a 100 percent conservative voting record. Lesko is a member of the House Freedom Caucus.
Lesko will serve through the end of her term in 2025.
As one of her recent major acts in Congress, Lesko has backed Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH-04) in the contentious House Speaker race. Jordan failed a second time to receive enough votes for the speakership on Wednesday.
22 voted against Jordan: Reps. Don Bacon (NE), Vern Buchanan (FL), Ken Buck (CO), Lori Chavez-Ramer (OR), Anthony D’Esposito (NY), Mario Diaz-Balart (FL), Jake Ellzy (FL), Drew Ferguson (GA), Andrew Garbarino (NY), Carlos Gimenez (FL), Tony Gonzales (TX), Kay Granger (TX), John James (MI), Mike Kelly (PA), Jennifer Kiggans (VA), Nick LaLota (NY), Michael Lawler (NY), Mariannette Miller-Meeks (IA), John Rutherford (FL), Michael Simpson (ID), Pete Stauber (MN), and Steve Womack (AR).
All Democrats voted for their minority leader, New York Rep. Hakeem Jeffries.
I voted for @Jim_jordan yesterday in the GOP conference and plan to vote for him next week if Jim decides to take the vote to the House floor. https://t.co/xazOa9pSnY
Several hours after Lesko issued her announcement, Republican attorney general candidate Abe Hamadeh announced his candidacy to replace Lesko. Hamadeh cited former President and 2024 presidential candidate Donald Trump as his main reason for running.
“President Trump is under attack,” said Hamadeh. “He needs back up — and I’m ready to help him Make America Great Again.”
Our country is in desperate need of courageous fighters, and that’s why I’m proud to announce I’m running for Congress in Arizona’s 8th District.
Arizona lawmakers mostly split along party lines in their votes last Friday on the continuing resolution that averted a government shutdown.
Freshman Rep. Juan Ciscomani (R-AZ-03) was the only Republican to join his Democratic colleagues — Reps. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ-03), Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ-07), and Greg Stanton (D-AZ-04) — in voting for the continuing resolution. Both Sens. Mark Kelly and Kyrsten Sinema voted for it as well.
Reps. Andy Biggs (R-AZ-05), Eli Crane (R-AZ-02), Paul Gosar (R-AZ-09), and Debbie Lesko (R-AZ-08) all voted against the resolution.
Ciscomani said that the avoidance of a shutdown was of greater concern than a future financial burden.
Today I supported a temporary funding package to keep our government open. Plain & simple: this was not my first, second, or even third choice. In my first nine months in Congress, I have seen just how broken Washington is and nothing sums it up quite like the last few weeks.…
The resolution notably omitted funding for Ukraine. However, the House approved a separate bill sending another $300 million to the country and establishing an Office of the Special Inspector General for Ukraine Assistance.
Ciscomani, Gallego, Grijalva, Lesko, Schweikert, and Stanton all voted for that bill. Biggs, Crane, and Gosar voted against it.
In a statement, Gosar said that the U.S. shouldn’t issue any more funding for the proxy war. The federal government has sent over $100 billion to Ukraine. Gosar said the federal government should be advancing its own national security interest by securing the border.
“The southern border is under a sustained attack and invasion. Over eight million illegal aliens have entered the country,” said Gosar. “Rather than sending another dime to Ukraine, we should put our country first by increasing the pay of our brave service members right here in the United States.”
Following his “no” vote, Biggs declared that he would oppose the re-election of California Rep. Kevin McCarthy as House Speaker, citing the approved continuing resolution.
Last November, I ran for House Speaker because I feared that Kevin McCarthy would not rein in federal spending and take on Democrats.
As seen by his latest CR, these fears are now reality.
Biggs criticized the leadership-approved continuing resolution as a maintenance of unsustainable spending levels established by President Joe Biden, former House Speaker and Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA-11), and Senate President Chuck Schumer (D-NY).
Instead of siding with his own party today, Kevin McCarthy sided with 209 Democrats to push through a continuing resolution that maintains the Biden-Pelosi-Schumer spending levels and policies.
Crane said that the approval of any continuing resolutions at this point was reckless. He blamed continuing resolutions as a major part of the $33 trillion debt burdening the country.
Congress is doing future generations of Arizonans a huge disservice by governing through these reckless CRs.
Crane further reflected on the continuing resolution with some levity on Monday.
“I’m heartened to see that Congress is getting serious now that we’ve avoided a shutdown for another 45 days,” said Crane. “Tonight, we will take critical steps to fix the national debt by considering legislation to rename some post offices.”
I’m heartened to see that Congress is getting serious now that we’ve avoided a shutdown for another 45 days.
Tonight, we will take critical steps to fix the national debt by considering legislation to rename some post offices.
However, Democrats viewed the government shutdown as a worse alternative to worsening the national debt.
Gallego did criticize the fact that the continuing resolution became an option in the very last moments possible.
Today, I joined a bipartisan group of my colleagues to avert a government shutdown, but let’s be clear – we should never have had to wait to the 11th hour to make this happen.
As Congress continues to debate funding over the next month, I’ll keep fighting for Arizona.
Stanton blamed “MAGA extremists” for nearly causing a government shutdown. He expressed dissatisfaction with the bill’s omission of even more funding for Ukraine on top of the $300 million he voted for in the separate bill passed Friday, as well as border security.
Today I joined Republicans & Democrats to avert a government shutdown.
This short-term bill is far from perfect. It leaves out critical funding to secure our border and support for Ukraine—I will continue to fight for these Arizona priorities.
Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-AZ-08) is questioning why the Capitol wasn’t secured during the Jan. 6, 2021 breach.
Lesko posed the question in response to an interview aired last month by former Fox News host Tucker Carlson on his newer, independent show platformed by X (formerly known as Twitter). Tucker interviewed the Capitol Police Chief at the time of the Jan. 6 breach of the Capitol, Steven Sund. Fox News never aired the original interview with Carlson, which occurred in April.
“Why wasn’t [the] Capitol secured on Jan. 6?” asked Lesko. “Tell all from Capitol Chief of Police…”
🚨MUST WATCH: Why wasn't Capitol secured on Jan. 6? Tell all from Capitol Chief of Police… https://t.co/wAU6lgcW6q
In an interview just shy of an hour long, Sund painted a picture of intentional neglect to properly secure the Capitol by federal intelligence, Congress, and military leadership.
U.S. Capitol Police has its own intelligence agency, Intelligence Agency Intelligence Coordination Division (IIACD), which coordinates with other intelligence agencies. Sund said that all intelligence he received indicated that the planned Jan. 6 protest would be “just like the other MAGA rallies” that occurred in November and December, with “limited skirmishes” involving Antifa and Black Lives Matter (BLM).
However, Sund said the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the military had intelligence not received by Capitol Police, such as planned attacks on Congress and violence against police officers.
Federal reports assessing the government preparation and response to the Jan. 6 breach are linked below, and arranged in order from oldest to newest:
Sund said neither the FBI or DHS put out a single official document specific to Jan. 6, which he said was unusual. Sund reported that normally one or both agencies would issue briefings addressing anticipated dangers, such as a Joint Intelligence Bulletin (JIB). None were issued ahead of the incident, as noted by the Senate Rules Committee. It was only after the attack that the intelligence agencies issued a JIB about potential future attacks inspired by the Jan. 6 events.
The GAO put together a timeline of open source data that government agencies collected concerning planned attacks on the Capitol months prior to Jan. 6.
On Jan. 5, the day before the attack, Sund said he had a conference call with then-chief of police at the Metropolitan Police Department, Robert Contee; then-assistant director of the FBI Washington Field Office, Steve D’Antuono; then-commander of the Army Military District of Washington, Omar Jones; then-commanding general of the D.C. National Guard, William Walker. Sund said not one person on the call expressed concerns about any threats of violence at the Capitol. DHS was absent from the call.
A Senate committee report released in July revealed that intelligence agencies repeatedly ignored planned threats of violence concerning Jan. 6. Some of those threats were addressed in emails to D’Antuono leading up to the attack. Yet, Sund said D’Antuono said nothing about those warnings.
Sund said that he wasn’t the only police chief in the dark, citing Contee as another leader who didn’t receive notifications on potential dangers, like the Norfolk memo. That Situational Information Report (SIR) from the Norfolk division of the FBI warned of the potential for violence in connection to the planned Jan. 6 rally. Wray told the Senate Judiciary Committee that he never read the memo.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley and Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller discussed locking down the city and revoking permits on Capitol Hill, according to Sund. Sund said he never received requests to revoke the permits, though that was under his purview.
“Instead, on Jan. 4, what does Miller do? He puts out a memo restricting the National Guard from carrying various weapons, any weapons, any civil disobedience equipment that would be utilized for the very demonstrations or violence that he sees coming. It just doesn’t make any sense,” said Sund. “When I was calling begging for assistance on Jan. 6, they weren’t allowed to respond at first.”
Sund said the CPB denied him federal resources twice due to “optics” and “because the intelligence didn’t support” his requests. The CPB included Paul Irving, House Sergeant of Arms, who responded directly to former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Mike Stenger, Senate Sergeant of Arms, who responded directly to Minority Senate Leader Mitch McConnell, at the time.
“Even when we’re under attack, I have to go to those same two people to request the National Guard to be brought in,” said Sund.
The third and final member of the CPB is the Architect of the Capitol. From 2020 until February, that was Brett Blanton. President Joe Biden fired Blanton in February over extensive allegations of misconduct detailed in an inspector general report last year. Blanton told investigators that wasn’t at the Capitol on Jan. 6 because he was working remotely that day; Blanton further stated that neither he nor his staff spoke with Capitol Police about a request for an emergency declaration or National Guard support in advance of the Capitol breach.
Sund recounted the key timeline of that fateful day.
According to Sund, there were at least 150-180 National Guard members in the Capitol at law enforcement’s disposal, many within eyesight of the Capitol. The Capitol was breached at 12:53; by 12:55, Sundcalled the Washington, D.C. police department and spoke with Jeff Carroll for help. At 12:58, he called Sergeant Arms asking for additional assistance from the military. Irving said he would “run it up the chain,” implying Pelosi. The law allows Irving to make the decision himself in an emergency situation, such as that which occurred Jan. 6.
Stenger also deferred to Irving when Sund called. Over the next 71 minutes, Sund reported calling 32 people for help, including 17 police agencies. 11 of those calls were follow-up calls to Irving. After all that time, Irving finally issued approval for federal assistance.
We know that the President of the United States incited this insurrection – this armed rebellion – against our American democracy. He must go. pic.twitter.com/pIxOv2hOQv
Irving testified to the Senate in 2021 that he disagreed with Sund’s recollection. Sund said that testimony almost didn’t happen. When the Senate initially issued its call for testimony, it reportedly asked for only current security employees — which would’ve excluded Irving, Stenger, and Sund. Those three men were at the top of the security apparatus on Jan. 6. It wasn’t until Sund contacted the rules committee to ask to testify that the three men were included.
To date, Irving has never explained why it took him 71 minutes to obtain permission to deploy federal assistance that day. He resigned promptly after Jan. 6, and he is retired according to his LinkedIn, where he was last active at least seven months ago. Stenger passed away last June.
Pelosi, the head of Irving’s chain of command, was exempted from congressional inquiries into Jan. 6; Rep. Bennie Thompson effectively said that there was no need to look into Pelosi.
“Bennie Thompson said there is only one request: Nancy Pelosi is off limits…Shouldn't the very first question be, why was the Capitol so ill-prepared that day?" – @GOPLeader on Pelosi's illegitimate partisan witch-hunt👇 pic.twitter.com/xTKBH9txw2
The day after the Jan. 6 incident, there appeared to be a lockstep effort to assign blame for the Capitol invasion on Sund.
Pelosi called for Sund’s resignation, and falsely claimed that Sund hadn’t contacted her since the Capitol invasion. Yet, Sund spoke with Pelosi on the evening of Jan. 6.
Then, the intelligence agencies told mainstream media outlets through anonymous sources that Capitol Police turned down federal resources in the days leading up to Jan. 6.
Sund resigned after the Jan. 6 incident; in January, Sund released a memoir, “Courage Under fire: Under Siege and Outnumbered 58 to 1 on January 6,” detailing the events of that day.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
On Thursday, Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-AZ-08) introduced a resolution to protect women by preventing gender ideology from redefining biological sex.
Lesko was joined in the resolution by Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS), titling it the “Women’s Bill of Rights.” In a press release, Lesko declared that the resolution would not only protect but affirm the importance of women.
“Now more than ever, we must protect women’s rights and combat the left’s attempts to erase women,” stated Lesko.
The resolution would define “sex” as a person’s biological sex from birth, “female” as an individual whose biological reproductive system is developed to fertilize their ova, “woman” and “girl” as human females, and “man” and “boy” as human males. The resolution also would declare that “equal” doesn’t mean “same” or “identical,” and that “separate” didn’t indicate inherent inequality.
With these definitions, the resolution would require schools and all levels and divisions of government to identify subjects of data gathering as either male or female at birth, such as for public health, crime, and economic data. It also would make all policies and laws distinguishing sexes subject to intermediate constitutional scrutiny, a test employed by courts to determine the constitutionality of a statute that negatively impacts certain protected classes. Statutes pass scrutiny if they further an important government interest and employ means of accomplishing that interest that are substantially related to that interest.
Further, the resolution would warrant discrimination in certain circumstances.
“There are legitimate reasons to distinguish between the sexes with respect to athletics, prisons or other detention facilities, domestic violence shelters, rape crisis centers, locker rooms, restrooms, and other areas where biology, safety, and/or privacy are implicated,” stated the resolution.
Lesko and Hyde-Smith first introduced the resolution last May, in the 117th Congress. It was referred to the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties Subcommittee last November, but never made it any further. During a press conference last year, Lesko argued that the necessity of her resolution proved that the country has gone “to hell in a handbasket.”
“The world is totally upside down when I have to introduce legislation to define a woman versus a man,” said Lesko. “More and more often our colleagues on the left are trying to erase women.”
Today at the @RepublicanStudy’s press conference, I spoke about the Women’s Bill of Rights that I introduced to stand up for the rights of women and ensure our safety. Watch my remarks below: pic.twitter.com/AcvQI2Om3i
— Congresswoman Debbie Lesko (@RepDLesko) May 19, 2022
That version of the Women’s Bill of Rights was included in the Republican Study Committee (RSC) Family Policy Agenda ahead of the midterm elections. The agenda issued over 80 recommendations to better align the GOP with its goal of advancing families’ interests, focusing on child protections, increased economic power for working families, additional parental rights, increased flexibility to child care, elimination of policies discouraging family formation, incentives to work, school choice, higher education reforms, foster care and adoption reforms, and abortion abolition.
I’m pleased that my Women’s Bill of Rights was included in the @RepublicanStudy’s Family Policy Agenda. Republicans are fighting to stop the left from erasing women and to strengthen America’s families to secure a better future for our nation! https://t.co/UD8yXOo6nM
The RSC was established 50 years ago for the purpose of coordinating research efforts by conservative congressmen.
Lesko and Hyde-Smith were assisted in crafting the resolution by the Independent Women’s Law Center and Independent Women’s Voice, two related women’s advocacy organizations.
Thank you to @SenHydeSmith for reintroducing a resolution in the Senate that would establish a Women's Bill of Rights to reaffirm legal protections afforded to women under Federal law!
Independent Women’s Law Center Director Jennifer Braceras said that rooting out sex discrimination won’t be possible without proper definitions of biological sex.
“We can’t fight sex discrimination if we can’t agree on what it means to be a woman. And we can’t collect accurate data regarding public health, medicine, education, crime, and the economic status of women if we redefine sex to mean ‘gender identity,’” said Braceras.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
