Evidently, adding more Supreme Court judges, according to Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO), is terrorism, but not storming the United States Capitol to influence an election.
The freshman congresswoman tried to fuel her conservative base by condemning House Democrats’ bill to extend the Supreme Court, which was introduced on Thursday.
Boebert tweeted, “Packing the Supreme Court is an act of political terrorism.”
Democrats in Congress plan to present a bill to increase the size of The Supreme Court on Thursday, according to three congressional sources familiar with the bill.
The bill would increase the number of seats on the Supreme Court from nine to thirteen.
House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler, subcommittee Chair Hank Johnson, and first-term Rep. Mondaire Jones are leading the charge on the bill. Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts is leading the charge in the Senate.
While it is divisive even inside the Democratic Party (House Speaker Nancy Pelosi opposes it), Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), the chair of the House Judiciary Committee, pointed out on Thursday that it has occurred seven times in American history.
Boebert’s remark overlooked the fact that Republicans began court packing in 2016, when Mitch McConnell declined to consider Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland in the run-up to the presidency.
McConnell’s reasoning at the time was that people should choose the next justice, but he disregarded that in 2020, when Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, in order to push through Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination while Donald Trump was still in office.
Twitter users had a good time clarifying the concept of political terrorism to Boebert, who refused to shed light on those specifics or others when she posted her message.
Oliver Willis responded, “you literally tweeted out the movements of the speaker of the house during an armed attack on the us capitol.”
Zack Ford tweeted, “So you’re saying you know something about political terrorism?”
Duncan Smith paraphrased her tweet, “As a terrorist myself, let me tell you something:”
Martina Navratilova, the former tennis champion, replied, “So the GOP is a political terrorism party then?!?”
Rex Huppke replied, “Thank you for your input, lesser Marjorie Taylor Greene.”
(((DeanObeidallah))) replied, “This is my favorite parody account.”
Kyle Orland responded, “Now do refusing to vote on Merrick Garland.”
She accused the Democrat party of being “laser-focused on undermining our freedoms” earlier this month, prompting a flood of tweets from people thanking her for acknowledging the Republican Party’s damage to the nation.
Leadership Masters responded, “Hard to reconcile the elegant construct of the United States Government – the intelligence behind the three co-equal branches, with the coarse, repulsive idiocy of Lauren Boebert.”
Her April Fools’ Day post also earned her a lot of laughs. Boebert tweeted, “April Fool’s Day feels a bit less relevant this year given the foolishness that has gone on daily at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue since January 20th.”
Kaj-Erik Eriksen responded, “You’re a fool every day.”
But, it was Unstable_Genius who won the internet that day, “Reminder: Rep Lauren Boebert’s (R-CO-3) husband was arrested for showing his penis to minors in public. She herself has been arrested four times, and may have given tours of the Capitol to terrorists that later attacked Congress. This is what we are dealing with.”
She caused controversy in March when she tweeted a pro-gun message shortly after a mass shooting in her home state.
Last month, a lone gunman walked into a grocery store and opened fire. When the shooting stopped 10 were killed including a Boulder police officer.
Boebert claimed that there were “no gun laws” that would have stopped the gunman from carrying out the mass shooting.
Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa, 21, has been charged with 10 counts of first-degree murder and one count of attempted murder.
Alissa bought an assault weapon six days before the shooting. He was able to purchase the weapon because a court overruled a ban on assault rifles in the city of Boulder. The ruling came just 10 days before the shooting, and after a case was brought against the city by the National Rifle Association.
Boebert is a firearm advocate and owns a restaurant in Colorado called Shooters where servers open carry while waiting on customers, and she open carries in the Capital House chambers.
Boebert appeared to disregard the overruling of the city of Boulder’s ban on assault rifles while being interviewed by the press.
In her comments, she claimed that “there are no gun laws that would’ve stopped” the gunman aside from guns in a Twitter post, which accompanied her TV appearance.
“They [Democrats] don’t want to empower people to stop things like this, to give us the tools to stop things like this, and that’s guns,” Boebert stated.
She then added that she personally carried a firearm when shopping because “you don’t know if there’s going to be something like this that happens,” suggesting that those who had been caught up in the Boulder mass shooting could have done so.
Twitter user Sure, Qaren responded with, “You moved your slaughter weapon decorations. Also, you’re wrong. A law prohibiting him from buying an AR-15 would have stopped him from obtaining one last week. Love that you use his name, though, you didn’t use the Atlanta shooter’s name. Wonder why?”
“It’s not about gun confiscation. Why is there pushback for more comprehensive background checks with the @GOP? Thoughts and prayers aren’t working, so what is the harm in trying something different?” tweeted Charlie Huxby.
Martha Jane tweeted, “Not easily buying an AR may have kept him from killing 10. Handguns are for close range or require lots of training. Other rifle platforms don’t get follow-up shots or acquire multiple targets so easily. High volume killing is what the AR platform was invented for, and it shows.”
Others criticized Boebert for ignoring that Boulder did have restrictions on assault rifles until a court reversed the order, and “If that law was still in effect this would’ve never happened.”
The Federal Election Commission, a nonprofit watchdog group filed a complaint against Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), that requests an investigation into more than $20,000 in mileage reimbursements that she received during her campaign back in 2020.
Campaign for Accountability stated that Boebert and Mike McCauley, the treasurer of Lauren Boebert for Congress, appear to have violated FEC regulations may have violated FEC regulations by spending campaign funds for her personal purposes.
The issue surrounds two separate mileage reimbursements that Boebert received. The first reimbursement was made on March 31, 2020, in the amount of $1,059.62, and the second was filed on Nov. 11, for $21,199.52.
It’s the second payment that sent up red flags. The federal reimbursement rate is 57.5 cents per mile. Robert would have had to drive 36,868 miles in seven months to justify the amount she was reimbursed for. Just a note…the circumference of the earth is 24,850 miles.
Boebert’s campaigned failed to keep proper records and has not been able to provide any evidence to prove the miles traveled.
On January 6, 2021, Democratic lawmakers say they personally saw one Republican — Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado — with a “large” group in a tunnel connected to the Capitol days before the attempted insurrection that left four rioters and one police officer dead.
Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington has sent letters to the House Committee on Ethics and the Office of Congressional Ethics requesting they launch investigations into Boebert and two other Republican lawmakers. Jayapal cited accusations of the trio “instigating and aiding” the deadly Jan. 6 riot on the Capitol.
There have been calls for not only an ethic probe of her behavior, but the Justice Department has indicated that they are investigating all the activity from all the participants.
Meanwhile, responding to Boebert’s Twitter assertions has become a sport for opposing accounts, and by the looks of things, it will be an ongoing activity.