 China is poisoning America's children, poisoning our teenagers, poisoning our young people. How long are you going to let this go on? Congresswoman, let me assure you that we're not letting it go on. We are fighting this. No, I reclaim my time. You're a liar. You are letting this go on and the numbers prove it. So in making a ruling on this, it's pretty clear that the rules state you can't impugn someone's character, identifying or calling someone a liar is unacceptable in this committee. And I make the ruling that we strike those words. Sorry, just a point of order, legitimate question. You're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Did you move to take the words down or to strike them, Mr. Thompson? Sorry, I just stepped in. Yeah, take them down. So that's what we did. Yeah. My understanding is if words are taken down, that means that the member can no longer speak in whatever the proceeding is that those words were said. Personal inquiry, point of personal inquiry. There's no such thing. Just stand by just a second. House, when we strike, it does terminate the time of the individual who is speaking. So the gentle lady is no longer recognized. The chair now recognizes Mr. Ivy, I believe. Can I make a point of inquiry? Mr. Chairman. You can. So the ruling was that because she used the word liar, that was taken down, which I agree with. Yes. But accusing the statement of fact is very similar to the posters that Mr. There's no statement of fact. There's no statement of fact. There's no statement of fact. There's no basis for the statement. We're not here to debate this, okay? And the ruling was made by the chair that these previous words were not against the rules of clause one and clause four of rule 17. But to tell someone that they are a liar is, it's pretty clear in the rules. That ridiculousness took place at a House Homeland Security Committee hearing where Marjorie Taylor Greene violated rules prohibiting members from impugning the character of witnesses. And as you saw, she called Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas a liar. And because she did that and broke the rules, basically it forced the committee's chairman, Mark Greene, a Republican, to bar her from speaking for the rest of the hearing. Now, the drama did not end there because other Republicans are pretty much tired of her bullshit and they're speaking out against her. CNN reporter Melanie Zanona reports, a source close to chairman Mark Greene said he was furious with Marjorie Taylor Greene's behavior and planned to privately reprimand her and also said he'd encouraged McCarthy to remove her from the committee if she did that again. So yeah, based on that, it seems as if he's a little bit mad at her. Now, it's not just the chairman who's irritated by Marjorie Taylor Greene's antics. It's other Republicans who are also on the committee because they feel like she's making it more difficult for them to be productive and do actual work because she keeps grandstanding in an attempt to go viral. CNN reports, GOP lawmakers on the committee speaking on the condition of anonymity told CNN that Greene's behavior was an unnecessary distraction and complained that they had to waste valuable hearing time over the dust-up. Representative Tony Gonzalez of Texas who called Greene a friend that he hosted in his district said the incident was unfortunate and supported the chairman's decision to silence her. I really love that last line there. You know, she's a friend, but I think that the decision to force her to shut the fuck up for the rest of the hearing was good. It's just beautiful. You love to see it, right? Now she accused her Republican colleagues of doing the bidding of Democrats because that's what she always says about Republicans who disagree with her. And she apparently tattled on them to Daddy McCarthy and he is apparently siding with her, although according to her, Greene told CNN on Thursday, she was surprised and angered over the incident and said she already spoke to McCarthy, quote, he agreed with me. Greene said indicating the speaker believed she shouldn't have been silenced. She also said McCarthy would never agree to pulling her off the committee. Speaker McCarthy is never going to let that happen, she said. I love that Republicans always have a Daddy that they have to go run back to if one of them steps out of line or does something. But Mark Greene, the committee chair, he said that he also spoke to McCarthy and he's saying that Marjorie Greene is misrepresenting his position because he doesn't actually agree with Greene as she insists he does. Greene defended his decision to silence the Congresswoman telling CNN Thursday, her comments were a clear violation of the rules, but he also seemed to refute that McCarthy agreed with Greene's contention that she shouldn't have been silenced, quote, I had a conversation that was maybe a little different with him, Greene said, asked if the speaker agreed with his decision to silence Greene, the chairman said, we really didn't get into the details of it. Yeah, now it's impossible to know what McCarthy actually thinks because we're talking about people who are compulsive liars here, but given that the chairman told CNN that she's not going to be losing her committee seat, well, that means that he softened his stance because he reportedly was trying to get her removed from the committee. So this indicates to me that McCarthy is indeed siding with Marjorie Taylor Greene in this particular dispute, but regardless of who's telling the truth, the mere fact that they're arguing is great in my opinion. So I say, let him fight. Now, at that same hearing, I'd be remiss to not point out that prior to her getting barred from speaking for the rest of the hearing, she also went viral for a different exchange that she had with a Democratic congressman. I'm also concerned about people on this committee and their own anti-police rhetoric. This is a defund the FBI campaign effort. That was quite entertaining from someone that had a sexual relationship with a Chinese spy, and everyone knows it. I moved to take our words down. Completely inappropriate. Yeah, stand by just a second while we research the rule. Give me just a second. The chair recognizes the gentle lady from Georgia and asks if she would like to retract those words. No, I will not. Listen, I can't stand Eric Swalwell, and I'm certainly not going to defend him, especially when he's going on to fucking back the blue argument, but he attacked her first, so you might think that it's fair game, right? And that's true, but the difference is that he simply shared her own words whereas she made an allegation based purely on speculation. So in 2020, we learned that a Chinese spy targeted several California politicians, including Representative Swalwell, and she reportedly helped him fundraise for his 2014 campaign, and it wasn't like he was accused of any wrongdoing, but some people thought that his response was a little bit sussy because he refused to discuss specific details about his relationship with her, and because he was being a little bit too conspicuously coy, Republicans implied that there must be something else going on there, but Republicans here, they basically made these accusations in bad faith because Swalwell accused Donald Trump of being a Russian agent with insufficient evidence, so I guess to kind of give him a taste of his own medicine, some Republicans accused him of having an affair with the Chinese spy when there's really no evidence for that. Now, the reason why we're talking about this exchange was because it led to another disruption where Marjorie Green made an accusation and it forced them to research the rules and they had to ask her for a retraction, which she did not retract, and all of this is part of the reason why Republicans are irritated with her, right? Because everything that she does continuously detracts from the work that people on the panel want to do, including Republicans, like they wanna get things done, right? They wanna showboat, they wanna grandstand a little bit too, and if she's the one who's sucking up all the energy and constantly stealing the spotlight, will it prevents them from getting their names out there or just like being productive at all? But in the end, I don't think that this is going to lead to Marjorie Taylor Green being removed from the committee, but if it does cause more GOP in-fighting, then it's still a win for American democracy at the end of the day.