Sparks flew between members of the House Weaponization Committee Thursday over cross-examining witnesses.
House Republicans on the committee presented two witnesses at the hearing to provide testimony on President Joe Biden’s administration’s alleged influence over social media companies. Democratic Massachusetts Rep. Stephen Lynch confronted Republican Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, the Weaponization Committee chairman, over dismissing witnesses without questioning their alleged “outlandish” statements.
“These two witnesses presented evidence that I believe in part is false, and I would like the opportunity to cross-examine these witnesses—” Lynch said.
Jordan said Lynch and the Democrats will get a chance to cross-examine the upcoming witnesses. Lynch then claimed against Republican Louisiana Rep. Mike Johnson was claiming his time. Jordan granted the time to Johnson, who argued that Democratic Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin did not allow Republicans to cross-examine witnesses who allegedly presented “salacious” content.
Johnson’s statement led to another uproar, as Democrats defended Raskin against his remark. Democratic Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz said Raskin held a member panel unlike the current hearing. (RELATED: ‘Ridiculous Statements’: Reps. Jim Jordan, Stacey Plaskett Clash Over Twitter Files)
Lynch then called to “strike the testimony” presented by Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry and Republican Missouri Sen. Eric Schmitt.
“You mean you want to censor it?” Johnson asked.
“I want to strike it,” Lynch said. “If we aren’t able to probe the veracity of their statements, the truthfulness of their statements.”
“You will be given your five minutes here when we get to the five minute question,” Jordan said.
“They’re not here! We won’t be able to ask, they scurried away with your complicity!” Lynch said. “They refuse to defend. In a country of 330 million people, you couldn’t find two people to defend their statements. That’s pretty disgraceful!”
Lynch then moved to adjourn the hearing over the incident, calling the inability to cross-examine a “mockery and a disgrace.”
“I move to adjourn. This is a mockery and a disgrace and it’s shameful,” he said. “There’s a motion on the floor to adjourn and it is not debatable. If you don’t know the rules of the committee, then talk to your parliamentarian!”