Senate Added a Section in the Government Continuing Resolution That Legalizes Senators to Extort the Federal Government

Nov 22, 2025 04:22 PM EST, Sat

January 6, 2021. Senator Lindsey Graham (T-SC). Congressional Record – After Order Was Restored

Trump and I have had a hell of a journey. I hate it being this way. Oh, my God, I hate it. From my point of view, he has been a consequential President. But today, the first thing you will see, all I can say is, count me out. Enough is enough. I tried to be helpful. But when the Wisconsin supreme court ruled 4 to 3 that they didn’t violate the Constitution of Wisconsin, I agreed with the three, but I accept the four. If Al Gore can accept 5 to 4 he is not President, I can accept Wisconsin 4 to 3. Pennsylvania went to the Second Circuit. So much for all the judges being in Trump’s pocket. They said: No, you are wrong. I accept the Pennsylvania Second Circuit that Trump’s lawsuit wasn’t right. Georgia, they said the secretary of state took the law in his own hands, and he changed the election laws unlawfully. A Federal judge said no. I accept the Federal judge, even though I don’t agree with it. Fraud. They say there is 66,000 people in Georgia under 18 voting. How many people believe that? I asked: Give me 10. I haven’t had one. They said 8,000 felons in prison in Arizona voted. Give me 10. I haven’t gotten one. Does that say there are problems in every election? I don’t buy this. Enough is enough. We got to end it. –

January 6 Amnesia

Senator Lindsey Graham (T-SC) has completely forgotten about what happened when [Trump](supporters stormed the Capitol to halt the transfer of power to the next administration.

Lindsey Graham (T-SC) claims that he intends to sue the hell out of government for “wiretapping” his cellphones. The subpoenas were issued in 2022 by Special Counsel Jack Smith in the 2020 election interference and January 6, 2022 insurrection to stop the certification of the Electoral College votes.

Senator Lindsey Graham (T-SC) contacted Georgia Secretary of State asking him to throw out Georgia mail-in votes.1

Graham Speaks on Arctic Frost at Press Conference with Colleagues

With apologies to Don Henly and Glenn Frye of The Eagles:

You can’t hide your Senate cries,
And your smile is just disguise.
Thought you’d cash in on the law,
But the House saw through it all.

Acting tough with Emmy flair,
Phones were seized, you shout unfair.
Bravo echoes through the hall,
But it’s taxpayers who foot it all.

Ex Post Facto

Sec. 213. (a) In general.—Section 10 of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2005 (2 U.S.C. 6628) is amended— of H. R. 5371 is in direct violation of the Constitution Article I. Section 9. Clause 3 No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

“Back To The Future” Paradox

Here is a simple explanation of ex post facto and why retroactive laws violate the Constitution and why it is impossible to legislate the past.

In 2022, you drove 55 MPH on a highway where the posted speed limit is 55 MPH. In 2025, the speed limit is changed to 45 MPH with the speed limit change retroactive to 2022. The government cannot write you a speeding ticket in 2025 when it was legal in 2022.

“Laws For Thee, But Not For Me”

In the The Hill video below, the hosts point out that Graham is more than happy for government to spy on citizens using Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) / Congress.gov / Library of Congress

Graham VOWS To SUE Over ‘ARCTIC FROST’; Maher CHALLENGES Patton Oswalt On Dems’ DIRECTION | RISING

About Rising:
Rising is a weekday morning show with bipartisan hosts that breaks the mold of morning TV by taking viewers inside the halls of Washington power like never before. The show leans into the day’s political cycle with cutting edge analysis from DC insiders who can predict what is going to happen. It also sets the day’s political agenda by breaking exclusive news with a team of scoop-driven reporters and demanding answers during interviews with the country’s most important political newsmaker

Full Phone Call: Trump Pressures Georgia Secretary of State To Recount Election Votes | NBC News

Then there’s the infamous recorded telephone call from Trump to Georgia Secretary of State, asking for 11,780 more votes.

@RalphHightower: I deleted a lot of text from H. R. 5371 (Enrolled-Bill) to keep just the relevant text.

H. R. 5371 (Enrolled-Bill) AT THE FIRST SESSION Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday, the third day of January, two thousand and twenty-five

Making continuing appropriations and extensions for fiscal year 2026, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. Short title.

This Act may be cited as the “Continuing Appropriations, Agriculture, Legislative Branch, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Extensions Act, 2026”.

SEC. 2. Table of contents.

DIVISION C—LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2026

Title I—Legislative Branch Title II—General Provisions

DIVISION C—Legislative Branch

Appropriations Act, 2026

TITLE I

LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

SENATE

TITLE II

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sec. 213. (a) In general.—Section 10 of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2005 (2 U.S.C. 6628) is amended—

(1) in subsection (a)—

(A) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through (7) as paragraphs (5) through (9), respectively;

(B) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3);

(C) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:

“(2) the term ‘covered data’ means any electronic mail or other electronic or data communication, other data (including metadata), or other information;”;

(D) by inserting after paragraph (3), as so redesignated, the following:

“(4) the term ‘legal process’ does not include a subpoena issued in accordance with the Rules of Procedure of the Select Committee on Ethics of the Senate;”;

(E) by striking paragraph (8), as so redesignated, and inserting the following:

“(8) the term ‘Senate data’, with respect to a Senate office—

“(A) means covered data of the Senate office; and

“(B) with respect to an individual described in paragraph (9) acting in a personal capacity, only means covered data that is transmitted, processed, or stored through the use of an electronic system established, maintained, or operated, or the use of electronic services provided, by—

“(i) a provider for the Senate office, if the Senate office or the Office of the SAA has notified the provider for a Senate office that the applicable device or account is a device or account of the Senate office; or

“(ii) the Office of the SAA or an officer, employee, or agent of the Office of the SAA, if the Senate office has notified the Office of the SAA that the applicable device or account is a device or account of the Senate office;”;

(F) in paragraph (9), as so redesignated—

(i) by inserting “(without regard to whether the Senator is acting in his or her official capacity, including acting in a personal capacity and acting through his or her campaign for elected office)” after “a Senator”;

(ii) by inserting “(whether acting in his or her personal or official capacity)” after “an officer of the Senate”; and

(iii) by striking the period at the end and inserting “(whether acting in his or her personal or official capacity); and”; and

(G) by adding at the end the following:

“(10) the term ‘target of a criminal investigation’ means a person—

“(A) as to whom the prosecutor or the grand jury has substantial evidence linking that person to the commission of a crime;

“(B) who, in the judgment of the prosecutor, is a putative defendant; and

“(C) whom the prosecutor, before the date of the acquisition, subpoena, search, accessing, or disclosure of the Senate data at issue, has formally designated as a target in official records, which shall not include any such designation that was made after such date that purports to be retroactive.”;

(2) by redesignating subsections (d) through (h) as subsections (e) through (i), respectively; and

(3) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:

“(c) Notification.—

“(1) BY PROVIDERS.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—If any provider for a Senate office receives any legal process seeking disclosure of Senate data of the Senate office that is transmitted, processed, or stored (whether temporarily or otherwise) through the use of an electronic system established, maintained, or operated, or the use of electronic services provided, in whole or in part, by the provider for a Senate office, the provider for a Senate office shall notify the Senate office and, unless specified otherwise by the Senate office, the Office of the SAA in writing.

“(B) NO LIMITATIONS ON NOTICE.—A provider for a Senate office shall not be barred from providing notice to a Senate office and the Office of the SAA under subparagraph (A) by operation of any court order, any statutory provision, any other provision of law, any rule of civil or criminal procedure, or any other rule, regulation, or policy.

“(C) LIMITATION ON LIABILITY.—A provider for a Senate office shall not be liable under any criminal or civil law for providing notice to a Senate office or the Office of the SAA under this paragraph.

“(2) BY SAA.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—If the Office of the SAA or any officer, employee, or agent of the Office of the SAA receives any legal process seeking disclosure of Senate data of a Senate office that is transmitted, processed, or stored (whether temporarily or otherwise) through the use of an electronic system established, maintained, or operated, or the use of electronic services provided, in whole or in part, by the Office of the SAA or the officer, employee, or agent of the Office of the SAA, the Office of the SAA or the officer, employee, or agent of the Office of the SAA shall notify a Senate office in writing.

“(B) NO LIMITATIONS ON NOTICE.—The Office of the SAA and any officer, employee, or agent of the Office of the SAA shall not be barred from providing notice to a Senate office under subparagraph (A) by operation of any court order, any statutory provision, any other provision of law, any rule of civil or criminal procedure, or any other rule, regulation, or policy.

“(C) LIMITATION ON LIABILITY.—The Office of the SAA and any officer, employee, or agent of the Office of the SAA shall not be liable under any criminal or civil law for providing notice to a Senate office under this paragraph.

“(3) SPECIAL RULE FOR TARGET AND NON-TARGET INVESTIGATIONS.—

“(A) TARGET INVESTIGATIONS.—

“(i) IN GENERAL.—If a Senator is a target of a criminal investigation, a court may, upon application by the United States, issue an order delaying the notice required under this subsection with respect to an acquisition, subpoena, search, accessing, or disclosure of Senate data in connection with such investigation for a period of not more than 60 days if the court determines that there is reason to believe that providing notice would—

“(I) endanger the life or physical safety of any person;

“(II) result in flight from prosecution;

“(III) result in destruction of or tampering with evidence;

“(IV) result in intimidation of potential witnesses; or

“(V) otherwise seriously jeopardize an investigation or unduly delay a trial.

“(ii) RENEWAL.—The court may renew such an order for additional periods of not more than 60 days each, if the court makes a renewed determination under clause (i).

“(B) ALL OTHER INVESTIGATIONS.—For any investigation in which a Senator is not a target of a criminal investigation, the notice requirements under this subsection shall apply without delay.

“(d) Private cause of action.—

“(1) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection:

“(A) INSTANCE.—The term ‘instance’, with respect to a violation of this section, means each discrete act constituting a violation of this section, including each individual—

“(i) device, account, record, or communication channel subject to collection in a manner in violation of this section;

“(ii) nondisclosure order or judicial sealing order sought, maintained, or obtained; or

“(iii) search conducted.

“(B) VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION.—The term ‘violation of this section’ means—

“(i) the seeking, maintaining, or obtaining of a nondisclosure order or judicial sealing order to prevent notification of a Senator, a Senate office, or the Office of the SAA as required under subsection (c); or

“(ii) Senate data was acquired, subpoenaed, searched, accessed, or disclosed pursuant to a search, seizure, or demand for information without notice being provided as required under subsection (c).

“(2) CAUSE OF ACTION.—Any Senator whose Senate data, or the Senate data of whose Senate office, has been acquired, subpoenaed, searched, accessed, or disclosed in violation of this section may bring a civil action against the United States if the violation was committed by an officer, employee, or agent of the United States or of any Federal department or agency.

“(3) RELIEF.—

“(A) IN GENERAL.—If a Senator prevails on a claim under this subsection, the court shall award—

“(i) for each instance of a violation of this section, the greater of statutory damages of $500,000 or the amount of actual damages;

“(ii) reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of litigation; and

“(iii) such injunctive or declaratory relief as may be appropriate.

“(B) PRELIMINARY RELIEF.—Upon motion by a Senator, a court may award such preliminary injunctive relief as the court determines appropriate with respect to a claim under this subsection.

“(4) LIMITATIONS AND IMMUNITY.—

“(A) PERIOD OF LIMITATIONS.—A civil action under this subsection may not be commenced later than 5 years after the applicable Senator first obtains actual notice of the violation of this section.

“(B) NO IMMUNITY DEFENSE.—No officer, employee, or agent of the United States or of any Federal department or agency shall be entitled to assert any form of absolute or qualified immunity as a defense to liability under this subsection.

“(5) WAIVER OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY.—The United States expressly waives sovereign immunity with respect to actions brought under this subsection.

“(6) AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE FOR TARGET INVESTIGATIONS.—It shall be an affirmative defense to an action under this subsection if the United States establishes that each of the following requirements are met:

“(A) At the time the Senate data was acquired, subpoenaed, searched, accessed, or disclosed, the Senator bringing the action was a target of a criminal investigation.

“(B) A Federal judge issued an order authorizing a delay of notice to the Senator under subsection (c)(3)(A), based on written findings meeting the requirements of such subsection.

“(C) The United States complied with the order described in subparagraph (B), including that the delay of notice did not exceed the period authorized by the court.

“(D) Any related subpoena of, warrant relating to, or access to Senate data was carried out strictly within the temporal and subject-matter scope authorized by the order, if any, authorizing the subpoena, warrant, or access.

“(7) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to—

“(A) limit or impair the constitutional protections afforded to Members of Congress, including to protections under article I, section 6, clause 1 of the Constitution of the United States (commonly known as the ‘Speech or Debate Clause’); or

“(B) restrict the authority of the Senate or any Senate office to intervene in or defend against any legal process seeking disclosure of Senate data.”.

(b) Limited retroactive applicability.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The amendments made by this section shall apply to any acquisition, subpoena, search, accessing, or disclosure of Senate data (as defined in section 10(a) of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2005 (2 U.S.C. 6628(a)), as amended by this section), and to any failure to disclose such an acquisition, subpoena, search, accessing, or disclosure, occurring on or after January 1, 2022.

(2) PERIOD OF LIMITATIONS.—

(A) DEFINITION.—In this paragraph, the term “violation of section 10” has the meaning given the term “violation of this section” in subsection (d) of section 10 of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2005 (2 U.S.C. 6628), as added by this section.

(B) PERIOD.—With respect to any violation of section 10 with respect to which the applicable Senator first obtained actual notice of the violation of section 10 before the date of enactment of this Act, a civil action under subsection (d) of section 10 of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2005 (2 U.S.C. 6628), as added by this section, may not be commenced later than 5 years after the date of enactment of this Act.

This division may be cited as the “Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2026”.

January 6, 2021 Footage

LIVE COVERAGE | Mob storms the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6th 2021

Streamed live on Jan 6, 2021 Protesters pressed past police and broke into the U.S. Capitol as Congress met in a joint session on Jan. 6 to count each state’s electoral votes and confirm President-elect Joe Biden as the winner. As many as three dozen congressional Republicans were expected to launch a final challenge to the results of the 2020 presidential election.

It has become routine after recent elections for House lawmakers on the losing side to put up a symbolic fight over the results, which they can do under an 1880s law governing the process. It has been less common for senators to join them, but this time a dozen will. Sens. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) will lead the challenge of the votes and call for an “emergency audit” to investigate baseless fraud allegations.

The Post’s Libby Casey will anchor live coverage, featuring reporters Aaron Blake, Rhonda Colvin, James Hohmann and Amber Phillips. Read more: https://wapo.st/3ohQZCg. Read more: https://wapo.st/3ohQZCg. Subscribe to The Washington Post on YouTube: https://wapo.st/2QOdcqK

Day of Rage: How Trump Supporters Took the U.S. Capitol | Visual Investigations

The New York Times 4.9M subscribers

Jul 1, 2021 The Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was perhaps the most widely documented act of political violence in history. The New York Times obtained, analyzed and mapped out thousands of cellphone videos, police bodycam recordings and internal police audio to provide the most complete picture to date of what happened — and why. Our Oscar-shortlisted documentary “Day of Rage” charts in chilling detail how the peaceful transition of power was disrupted by rioters who stormed a seemingly impenetrable seat of government.

The team behind “Day of Rage” will release scenes and other reporting that were left on the cutting room floor on the film’s Twitter account, @dayofrage.

Sign up for our Visual Investigations newsletter: https://nyti.ms/3xhj7dE

Subscribe: http://bit.ly/U8Ys7n More from The New York Times Video: http://nytimes.com/video

Whether it’s reporting on conflicts abroad and political divisions at home, or covering the latest style trends and scientific developments, New York Times video journalists provide a revealing and unforgettable view of the world. It’s all the news that’s fit to watch.

  1. Georgia official says Graham asked him about tossing ballots / AP News

    By KATE BRUMBACK
    Published 2:01 PM EST, November 16, 2020 ↩

Related Posts