Rep. Nancy Mace Make Motion To Subpoena Ilhan Omars Immigrartion Files!

James Kaufman, World News Report Today. Epic. Representative Nancy Mace calls to subpoena immigration records of Ilhan Omar. Representative Nancy Mace, Republican, South Carolina, officially moved to subpoena the long-hidden immigration records of Ilhan Omar and her alleged brother-husband, Ahmed Elmi, during a heated House Oversight Committee hearing investigating the massive Somalian-linked fraud networks that have bled Minnesota taxpayers dry under the failed leadership of Tim Walz, Mace didn't hold back. She zeroed in on the squad members' murky past, demanding transparency on allegations that have dodged Omar for years, that she committed radical marriage fraud to bypass U.S. immigration laws. I think that we're going to find out that she did, in fact, commit this fraud to bypass U.S. immigration laws. And I think that she should actually lose her citizenship, of course lose her position in Congress, and be sent packing. We don't really care where she goes. Of course, the Democrats immediately came to Ilhan's defense. They don't want those records released, no matter what. Let's listen, folks. It took me forever to find this. The committee will now proceed with the Mace motion to subpoena the Department of... I'll recognize Ms. Mace to explain her motion. Yes, this is to subpoena the immigration records of Ilhan Omar and her alleged brother, husband, and another husband whose names I cannot pronounce. The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is the principal oversight committee of the U.S. House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate any manner at any time under House Rule 10 and this particularly the legislative thing that this would inform would identify reforms regarding immigration fraud and denaturalization processes potential criminal liability, things that we need to address statutorily and legislatively Mr. Chairman, thank you. Thank you Chair recognizes Mr. Garcia to speak on the Mace Amendment Thank you Mr. Chairman, I do have an amendment to the motion made by representative mace state your amendment at the end of the motion i'd like to add pursuant to clause 2(k)(6) of house rule 11 the committee shall subpoena all documents and communications from the Department of Defense regarding the military service record of Representative Corey Mills of Florida. Amend: all documents, communications and contracts from the Department of Defense, Department of Justice of Interior, of Homeland Security and Department of State related to Representative Corey Mills of Florida and any business in which he or any relative has a financial or controlling interests including Packham Defense, Packham Solutions International LLC, ALS LLC and any documents and communications from the Department of Justice the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia, Ed Martin in his personal capacity and the White House regarding any communications around the February 2025 domestic violence incident in Washington DC involving Representative Corey Mills of Florida. And with that, Mr. Chairman like to be recognized to explain the amendment. Mr. Garcia amended the Mace motion. Does any other member seek recognition? I'd like to just comment on the motion. Go ahead. I'll recognize Garcia, then Mace. Go ahead. I just want to just begin by saying, broadly speaking on the initial motion, Congresswoman Omar is a proud member of this body and an American and as American as any member of this body. She's a public servant and a fighter for her constituents and she represents the American dream and I know I and House Democrats are honored and proud to support her and to serve with her. Congresswoman Ilhan Omar has endured horrific attacks her entire time in public office and we admire her courage. My motion requests documents on Corey Mills, a Republican from Florida, and I just want to note that this is not the best way of handling these types of issues and we are introducing this only because this this is being introduced on Representative Ilhan Omar and so we are forced to make this motion and this amendment uh to uh to Nancy Mace's the Representative Mace's Nancy Mace's motion and so with that I conclude gentleman yields back now chair recognizes Miss Mace to speak on the Garcia amendment to her motion thank you mr Mr. Chairman, and I support Mr. Representative Garcia's amendment, and you beat me to it. I was going to do this on the House Armed Services Committee, and I'm a little jealous that you beat me to it. Sunlight is the best disinfectant. It is the best sunshine, and if there are individuals I don't care about party, I don't care about affiliation, this needs to be getting, we need to get to the bottom of it and what's going on, and quite frankly, I don't think someone that allegedly is doing arms deals should be sitting on the Foreign Affairs Committee or the House Armed Services Committee, and If this is what gets to the bottom of what's happening over there, then I support it, and I support the amendment, and let's do it. You yield back. You yield to me. So I've had several members request information about trying to determine if Ms. Omar was involved in any of this Somali fraud and this and that. The thing that I've told people is the ethics committee is set up to do that. That's what the ethics committee's sole purpose is, is to investigate members. So we've got a motion by Mr. Garcia to amend Ms. Mace's motion. Both the amendment and the motion seek this committee to investigate sitting members of Congress. That's not something the Oversight Committee does, but we're a Democratic committee, and I'm not telling anybody in here how to vote. You vote however you want. But that's what the Ethics Committee role is. That's their jurisdiction. And I just wanted to state that. And, again, look, I'm for whatever. I'm for transparency. You all vote the way you want. This committee is wired. You're going to vote the way you want anyway. I don't think the ranking member can tell his members how to vote, and I can't tell my members how to vote. I'm just telling you that's what the ethics committee's sole purpose in life is. So, just stating that. Mr. Chairman, on a point of order. Mr. Chairman. Which one do we want to? Mr. Lynch. Okay. Mr. Chairman, I believe you're correct in your assessment that that is not something within our jurisdiction that would mean that that motion would be out of order not not subject to a vote and let's do this anyway even though it's not within our jurisdiction that that's a jurisdiction of another committee and we normally and regularly refer matters that are not within our jurisdiction to other committees and that's how that should be handled sir that's my my thought the the previous chairman of the i'm going to respond to mr lynch's inquiry the previous chairwoman of the committee from new york remind me maloney she said the oversight committee has jurisdiction over anything and everything and uh i kind of tend to believe that but now the ethics committee has primary jurisdiction there's no question about that now do we have secondary jurisdiction possibly probably whatever i'm not mr chairman under Rule 10, we have the ability. We have full oversight of the U.S. House of Representatives. We can do pretty much what we want in this committee, but I just want to make it very clear so we don't start going down this road or this committee will just turn into investigating other members, whoever's in control. That's what the ethics committee set up to do. And I'm not, look, Ms. Mace, you can file any motion you want, and Mr. Garcia can file any motion. If someone married their brother to commit immigration fraud, we should find out. that's what this committee can do. I understand. Let's not defame members of Congress. Mr. Chairman, I just want to add to you, I just want to agree, first of all, I think oversight Democrats, we don't believe either of these motions should be discussed. This is not the place to be going after members in this way. If there's a concern about a member, it should be at the ethics committee. But if members on the majority are going to go after members in our caucus, us, we're going to do the same. And so if the Republican majority wants to remove this amendment or vote this amendment down completely, we would join you on that. But what we're not going to do is allow the attack on one of our members. And I'm not defending or opposing, I'm just saying that's what the ethics committee is supposed to do. This is what we do up here. We just protect each other and protect our own and nobody ever gets held accountable for anything up here. That's what this whole thing is BS. It goes to the Ethics Committee. Chair recognizes. We're going to vote on this. Everybody's going to vote on this. We're going to vote on this because there's been a motion amendment. We're going to vote on the amendment and the motion. I'm just saying that's what the Ethics Committee is supposed to do. Chair recognizes Mr. Perry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are a few times that myself and Mr. Lynch agree on things. I think he would admit that, as I have. But on this occasion, I feel he is correct. And while this committee may have the jurisdiction to do all manner of things, I think this is a dangerous precedent to set. The Ethics Committee, they're so afraid that they're cleaning up themselves. That's what's going on here. It was so funny that Mace loved the amendment. And I do, too. Transparency is the only way. these people are so afraid hey you have one democrat you have one republican we need transparency with both of them hopefully they vote yes he is set up specifically for this task and i i empathize with representative mace that it seems like there is no accountability over and over again and maybe in the case of representative omar and representative mills i might even feel that way but we have a process here for a reason and the ethics committee is set up the way it is for a reason so that there is equal representation in a place that is hyper partisan over the smallest of things and so that there is a due process where american citizens individuals in this body and serving members are treated fairly that's why we have that committee and if we're going to run members through a partisan committee which all the other ones are set up to be so i i think that that's going to be something that we might enjoy the outcome of at the moment but will not enjoy the outcome at some future time when we're in the minority and so on this occasion i agree with mr lynch and i would encourage the chair um to to to uh render this motion out of order and with my remaining time i i would cede some time to Mr. Lynch, I thank the gentleman and he's he's correct, we we don't agree that often but i i respect the gentleman uh the the other piece is this is that anyone of the pub anyone in the public can make an allegation at any of any member here for any reason political or personal or otherwise and if we're going to debate allegations from the public against members on this committee then you are just exposed to whatever anyone throws at you and all you got to do is spend about one minute on social media and and let's look into you guys and quit looking into bs it's time we see some transparency this is epic while y'all try to cover your butts that can be tossed against any member and then what the general lady is saying is that we want to debate the the merits and the the veracity of those allegations against us here in an open committee rather than having it go to the ethics committee who will they just want the documents that's it those can be handed to the ethics committee quit trying to cover your ass you'll fart allegations and then if they are bring something before the entire body but but we open every member now and in the future to terrible exposure to your reputation if you're going to handle every single allegation here in open public regardless of how credible that allegation against a member might be i just think it's bad for the for the institution and there's another process that has worked in the past thank you i yield i yield back to the gentleman and i yield Mr. Chairman who's got the floor i would argue that the other process has never worked in the past and y'all are never punished and there is no transparency and you're full of crap what are you afraid they're going to get you for something or the many things that you've done i don't disagree with what miss mace is trying to do i don't disagree with what mr garcia is trying to do and i don't know i have no idea what the ethics committee is doing on either of these but i i think it's disappointing that miss omar wasn't here for the minnesota somali hearing i mean that's something i think she she should have attended i think uh mills should you know answer questions on the house floor i think they they both there are a lot of questions american people have for both of all right so i'm just saying that's what the ethics committee mr chair did you just refer to the Somali hearing? Mr. Chairman, as long as we're having a colloquy... A hearing on Minnesota fraud and the oil purchase. Somalians committed billions of dollars of fraud. It was a Somali hearing. Somali fraud. There was Somali fraud. There were lots of Somali fraud allegations today. Mr. Chairman, if we can continue our colloquy, you're the chairman of the committee, and you can make a ruling. Now, we might disagree with the ruling of the chair, but I would tell you it is my position and my recommendation, humbly and respectfully to the chair that the chair should render this motion invalid and and if we want to challenge the ruling of the chair then we can do that and have a vote on that but i think this is of substance enough and import enough that we treat it with the gravity that mr lynch and others have suggested not only in this circumstance feeling the same way you do and In total honesty, quite honestly, the same way that Representative Mace does about whether this has been adjudicated appropriately or intimely or what have you, the point is, is this the place, is this the process to do those things? And I would agree with my colleagues on either side of the aisle that this is not the place to do what's being implied here in this motion. And to answer your question on ruling the chair, you asked the question. That was what Mr. Lynch started with. we can vote on whatever we want in consulting with with the parliamentarian we can vote for this we can do this i'm just saying that's what the ethics I understand, Mr. Lynch, are you Chair recognized Mr. Lynch. Thank you, let me and I think I think we may have there's a I understand, first I want to also um associate myself with the comments that were just made and I particularly with Representative Lynch, I think again this is not the appropriate place for this and we have filed It's funny how he filed a secondary motion to expose the Republican, and Mace was all for it. He said that if y'all will just vote with us and vote in both towns, no one will be exposed. Substitute motion because of the main motion that was filed. What I'd like to do at this time is I'm going to withdraw my motion and instead do a motion to table the Mace motion. uh and if that motion does not pass successfully then I will bring my substitute motion on Representative Mills back to the floor but now this now we have an opportunity with this additional amendment, I'm withdrawing the Mills amendment and my new, my new motion amendment is to table the initial Mace motion, I hope everyone votes yes on that, anything to keep the information from the public, right? Everyone out here deserves to know if she committed immigration fraud you little piece of garbage that solves the issues that a majority of us are trying to solve and we can move on to the next item, so that is the new motion so Mr. Garcia made a motion to table that's not debatable, Mr. Chairman, I do have a question, it's it's not debatable, I'm sorry But state your request. You're a good member. I just have a question. Do it quick because it's not debatable, but he would go ahead. Well, this is not about the motion to table. It's about under the Ethics Committee, if they find evidence against a member, they can make recommendations for censure, for removal. If we were to conduct something like that here, What power does this committee have? Is it the same power as the Ethics Committee? I really agree with Mr. Perry and Mr. Lynch that this might be a bridge too far. And if we're going to do this, then we need to... All these old farts are so afraid of transparency, they're going to table the motion. What a bunch of jackasses. We need to know what the consequences are. how far does this go other than just you know a public trial how about complete transparency to the public period oh I yield back all right so all those in favor of the motion to table signify by saying aye aye all those opposed say no in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it the motion to table is agreed to is there any other business which needs to come before the committee oh the print okay chair recognize Mr. Higgins then we'll recognize those slime balls squash the motion to pull Ilhan Omar's immigration records because they were so afraid of all the crimes that they've all committed coming to light through such transparency i'm going to make sure that every one of them is cc'd on this video. God bless you guys. We're the people that they work for. We're the ones who need to see these documents. We don't care what any of these people think. Period. If Mills is selling arms to another country, we need to know he's out of there. If Ilhan is an illegal alien we need to know period we don't table this the democrats are just such slime balls and it looks like most of the republicans are as well god bless you guys i hope y'all watched all the way through to see how our government really works please give us a thumbs up share and subscribe if you haven't and always remember anything's possible bizarro world