Harriet Hageman
speaker
110 appearances
4 recordings
3 series
first heard Mar 2025
last heard 4 Feb
Harriet Hageman’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.
Trend
recordings per month · last 12 monthsRecordings per month over the last 12 months — 3 in all, peaking in Feb 2026 with 1.
Appearances
That's exactly right. And keep in mind the 16th and 17th amendments came about during that period of time. Being the one giving the federal government the authority to do an income tax. and then also basically excluding the state from government on the federal level by taking away our two senators being appointed by states and just being voted on by just like our congresses.
That was never intended. The House of Representatives was to represent the people. The Senate was to represent the states. And then you have the executive branch that represented the executive branch, the president, the federal government. And when they changed that with that amendment, it fundamentally changed the relationship between the states and the federal government.
Well, again, we as legislators, we need to become better as practitioners. So really, a lot of the power comes from what's called the Administrative Procedure Act that was adopted in 1946. And it has largely remained unchanged in the intervening 80 years. But it's under the Administrative Procedure Act that these agencies have adopted, have
have gotten the power for the rulemaking for example and it again is expanded in a way that is so far beyond even what FDR ever could have imagined. I'll give you an example of how these administrative agencies work to expand their own authority without Congress ever stepping in.
And I'm going to say this, Congress has largely abdicated its responsibility for legislating, and that's what I'm fighting to bring back. We've got great people in the House right now, and we're all working towards that. Our senators are as well. I should say the Republicans are. We're working towards administrative reform, exactly what I'm talking about.
But under the Clean Water Act, the EPA only has jurisdiction of navigable waters of the United States, right? Navigable waters of the United States, the Mississippi, the Missouri, those kinds of big bodies of water. I represented an irrigation or a farmer one time. who had moved an irrigation ditch on his property.
The EPA came in and sued him, and they claimed that irrigation ditch was a navigable water of the United States, and he had to have a 404 permit to move that ditch. When we finally went to trial, that case took six years. When we finally went to trial, he was facing penalties of almost $65 million, because at that time, EPA could impose penalties of $37,500 a day. It's now up to $68,000 a day.
Well, we as Congress have given that kind of power to an administrative agency Of course they're going to abuse it. They abuse it every day because it increases their power. It allows them more authority. It allows them to take control of more things. And so when you've got people in these agencies who really are anti-humanist, this is the way that they further their agenda.
After a two-week trial, I won that lawsuit. But I had a jury of our peers, and I won that case. But my client spent a million dollars on attorney's fees and costs defending himself against a rogue agency. That's what we have to rein in and make sure never happens again.
As an attorney, I've encountered the California Coastal Commission before. And again, that is one of those agencies that has become very totalitarian in its viewpoint of the world. And I'll go back again to these fires. Over 50% of the fires in Southern California are started either by arson or homeless, or maybe it's a combination of both.
And I know that there's also some issues associated with fires related to power lines. But the fact is that what happened in November was largely a man-made disaster because they want the California Coastal Commission and the various so-called environmental agencies out there will not allow the clearing of the brush.
Under the 2001 roadless rule that was put in place by Bill Clinton, denied access, management, and use to 58.5 million acres of National Forest Service lands. These are all really bad policies that end up destroying our environment And yet it's the environmentalists that push forward with them.
But then we eventually have to pick up the pieces and then deal with the consequences of those terrible decisions. Because, again, they will not consider opportunity costs when they adopt these sweeping, sweeping, sweeping declarations of how they're going to allow us to use our property. It really does need to change.
So one of the things that they've done is they've so corrupted the climate data that it's essentially unusable at this period in time. And most of their work is being done by the models, which is garbage in, garbage out. They're computer models. So what do I mean by destroying the climate data? They homogenize between two weather stations.
So you might have a weather station that has a 100-year history of out in a field which has not been changed. And when they go gather that data, they can demonstrate, we can demonstrate that there's no trend line in that data. You're not seeing increased warming or decreased temperatures. What you're seeing is variability, which is called weather.
But the stations that they manipulate, so let's say there was a station out east of Denver 40 years ago. Well, now we have DIA. That weather station may still exist, but it is now being affected by what's often referred to as the urban heat index or other types of development around that. So they need to adjust that data. But instead of adjusting the temperatures down to account for
all of this development in industrial activity around it, they actually increase the temperature using that data. So what they've done, and they talked about it in all of the emails with the East Anglian University, they manipulate the data. They're not using raw data and saying,
You can look at a weather station that has been unimpacted by man, essentially, and what you'll see is that there is no warming trend. What you'll see is variability called weather. So we know that they're manipulating the data. We know they're manipulating the temperature. NOAA has satellite data, temperature data. They won't share it. They also won't tell us how they're manipulating the data.
It's a black box. They won't tell us how they make these adjustments. But if you watch their data, if you watch their ticker tape, if you will, you can watch it happen in real time. This is what they're doing. We are being manipulated to the tune of trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars worldwide. And much of it is based upon manipulated data.
all of the above, and look at the money. Do you think that if I'm not a scientist, I'm an attorney, but you, let's say that you were going to publish a paper about how they've manipulated the data. Are you going to get a grant from the university or the EPA or the, there are so many agencies involved.
Showing 61–80 of 110 · page 4 of 6
← Previous
Next →