Four Texas Representatives Fail to Vote on Mayorkas Impeachment, Aligning with Democrats
Four Texas U.S. Representatives failed to cast their votes on H.Res.863, a resolution aiming to impeach Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security. The outcome of the vote has raised eyebrows as the absence of these representatives essentially aligned them with Democrats, preventing the resolution from advancing.
The four representatives in question are Dan Crenshaw (R. TX, District 2), Pat Fallon (R. TX, District 4), Sheila Jackson Lee (D. TX, District 18), and Roger Williams (R. TX District 25). The absence of these representatives during a crucial vote on the impeachment of Mayorkas has ignited speculation about their stance on the issue.
The Impeachment Resolution: H.Res.863
H.Res.863, a comprehensive document aimed at initiating the impeachment of Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security, sheds light on a series of grave allegations. Titled “Impeaching Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security, for high crimes and misdemeanors,” the resolution presents a meticulously crafted case against Mayorkas, accusing him of serious transgressions related to his duties as the head of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
The first focal point of the resolution is the alleged violation of the Secure Fence Act of 2006, a critical piece of legislation designed to bolster national security by mandating the maintenance of operational control over the entire international land and maritime borders of the United States. H.Res.863 contends that Mayorkas has willfully neglected this responsibility, permitting a breach of the nation’s borders that has resulted in an influx of approximately 10 million individuals. The resolution argues that this breach includes not only traditional illegal border crossers but also individuals involved in nefarious activities such as terrorism, human trafficking, and drug smuggling.
Furthermore, the resolution invokes the Guarantee Clause of the Constitution, specifically Article IV, Section 4, which obligates the federal government to ensure each state in the union a republican form of government and protection against invasion. H.Res.863 asserts that Mayorkas, in his capacity as Secretary of Homeland Security, has failed in upholding this constitutional duty by allowing what it characterizes as an invasion of 10 million individuals across the southern border. The resolution emphasizes that this ongoing invasion poses a direct national security threat to both the states and the citizens within them.
To bolster its case, H.Res.863 provides a detailed breakdown of the consequences of Mayorkas’s alleged failure to maintain control over the U.S. border. This includes staggering statistics such as encounters with individuals on terrorist watchlists, the alarming number of unaccompanied illegal children encountered at the southern border, and the tragic deaths of individuals attempting to cross. The resolution underscores the gravity of the situation by highlighting the presence of “special interest aliens” from countries associated with promoting terrorist activity, presenting a compelling argument that Mayorkas’s actions jeopardize the safety and security of the United States.
In essence, H.Res.863 paints a vivid picture of a Secretary of Homeland Security who, according to the resolution, has not only neglected his duties but has actively contributed to a scenario that undermines the nation’s security and violates constitutional mandates. The allegations put forth in this resolution serve as the foundation for the push to impeach Mayorkas, signaling a deeply contentious and consequential chapter in the ongoing debate surrounding immigration and national security policies.
Allegations Against Mayorkas
The allegations against Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas presented in H.Res.863 delve into a series of concerning statistics and trends that have unfolded since he assumed office as the Secretary of Homeland Security. These figures paint a troubling picture of what the resolution characterizes as a failure to uphold the fundamental responsibilities of the position, particularly in safeguarding the nation’s borders and protecting its citizens.
The resolution outlines a significant influx of illegal border crossers since Mayorkas took office, indicating a marked increase in individuals attempting to enter the United States unlawfully. This surge is depicted as a direct consequence of what the document alleges is Mayorkas’s failure to maintain operational control over the U.S. border, a duty mandated by the Secure Fence Act of 2006. The resolution contends that this influx not only includes typical undocumented migrants but also individuals associated with illicit activities such as terrorism, human trafficking, and drug smuggling.
Moreover, the resolution raises the alarm about encounters with individuals on terrorist watchlists at the southern border. This assertion implies a potential compromise of national security, suggesting that the lax border control policies under Mayorkas may have allowed individuals with links to terrorism to enter the country undetected.
The issue of missing unaccompanied children is brought to the forefront, underscoring the humanitarian and security concerns associated with the handling of minors at the border. The resolution emphasizes that a substantial number of unaccompanied children have gone missing, raising questions about the efficacy of the Department of Homeland Security’s protocols in ensuring the well-being and proper processing of vulnerable individuals.
Tragically, the resolution notes a significant number of deaths at the southern border, emphasizing the human toll of what it characterizes as an uncontrolled and chaotic situation. These fatalities, the resolution argues, are a direct consequence of Mayorkas’s alleged failure to secure the border effectively.
In addition to human-related concerns, the resolution spotlights the surge in fentanyl seizures at the border. Fentanyl, a potent synthetic opioid, is identified as the number one killer of Americans between the ages of 18 and 45, with a staggering daily death toll. The resolution contends that Mayorkas’s termination of border wall construction and implementation of policies like catch and release have facilitated the entry of illegal substances, exacerbating the fentanyl crisis and posing a severe threat to American lives.
By presenting these detailed statistics and connecting them to Mayorkas’s policy decisions, the resolution builds a case that underscores not only the alleged incompetence in border management but also the potential dangers posed to national security and public health under his leadership. This section of the resolution aims to highlight the tangible and far-reaching consequences of the Secretary’s actions, further strengthening the argument for his impeachment.
Failure to Vote: A Political Maneuver?
The vote on H.Res.863 saw 209 representatives in favor of referring the action to committee, 201 against, and 23 representatives abstaining from voting. Notably, 12 of the representatives who chose not to vote were Republicans, including the aforementioned Dan Crenshaw, Pat Fallon, and Roger Williams.
By abstaining from voting, these Texas representatives effectively aligned themselves with the Democrats, contributing to the failure of the impeachment resolution. The decision not to vote has sparked discussions about their motivations and positions on the impeachment of Mayorkas.
Representatives’ Contact Information
Representatives’ Contact Information and Call to Action:
- Pat Fallon (R. TX, District 4): (202) 225-6673
- Dan Crenshaw (R. TX, District 2): (202) 225-6565
- Sheila Jackson Lee (D. TX, District 18): (202) 225-3816
- Roger Williams (R. TX District 25): (202) 225-9896
As citizens exercise their right to engage in the democratic process, it is crucial for residents of Texas to actively voice their concerns to the representatives who serve them. The four U.S. Representatives in question—Dan Crenshaw (R. TX, District 2), Pat Fallon (R. TX, District 4), Sheila Jackson Lee (D. TX, District 18), and Roger Williams (R. TX District 25)—must be made aware of the disappointment and concerns of their constituents regarding their failure to vote on the impeachment resolution of Secretary Mayorkas.
To express your views and expectations, consider reaching out to these representatives through the contact information provided above. Respectfully communicate your disappointment with their absence during this critical vote and stress the importance of active representation in matters of national significance. Remind them that voters will be closely observing their actions, and their decisions will undoubtedly factor into considerations during the upcoming primary elections. Constructive engagement with elected officials is an integral aspect of a thriving democracy, and by expressing your thoughts, you contribute to holding representatives accountable for their actions. Your voice matters, and it is a powerful tool in shaping the direction of our democratic system.
Featured
SPLC’s Extremism Watchdog Is Now Facing Federal Fraud Charges
Montgomery, AL – The woman who spent years telling America which organizations were dangerous has now been arrested by the federal government in a fraud case involving secret payments, extremist informants, alleged shell companies and donor money.
Heidi Beirich, former director of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Project and former chief financial officer, was arrested Wednesday in California as the Justice Department’s criminal investigation into the SPLC widened. Beirich faces charges of wire fraud conspiracy, conspiracy to make false statements to a federally insured bank and conspiracy to conceal money laundering.
That’s quite a turn for someone whose professional career was built around exposing other people’s alleged extremism.
According to federal prosecutors, the case involves an SPLC informant identified in court documents as “F-9,” who operated inside the National Alliance, a white supremacist organization. The Justice Department alleges the SPLC secretly funneled approximately $1.2 million to F-9 over more than two decades as part of its intelligence-gathering operation.
The indictment does not name Beirich. Instead, it identifies a former senior SPLC employee as “Employee-2,” describing that person as someone who would later become director of the organization’s Intelligence Project. Multiple news organizations, including The Associated Press, have identified Employee-2 as Beirich. Her attorney, Michael Proctor, confirmed Wednesday that she had been charged in the federal case.
And the allegations get considerably stranger from there.
Prosecutors allege Beirich and F-9 were romantically involved and shared a residence and two bank accounts. Between 2015 and 2021, roughly $140,000 in SPLC donor money allegedly flowed into those joint accounts. The indictment says that money accounted for about 66 percent of the deposits into the accounts and was used to pay the couple’s personal living expenses.
Federal prosecutors also allege that SPLC officials helped establish bank accounts using fictitious company names to disguise the source and purpose of payments to informants.
This wasn’t simply a matter of paying someone for information. According to the indictment, the government believes the financial arrangements were deliberately structured to conceal what was happening from banks and donors. The original federal indictment against the SPLC alleges that, between 2014 and 2023, the organization secretly funneled more than $3 million to people associated with violent extremist groups, including the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Nations and the National Socialist Party of America.
The SPLC itself was indicted in April on 11 counts involving wire fraud, false statements to a federally insured bank and conspiracy to commit concealment money laundering. The FBI investigated with assistance from IRS Criminal Investigation.
Beirich’s attorney has rejected the prosecution as politically motivated, saying that the justice system should not be used against political opponents. The SPLC has also maintained that its informant program was legitimate intelligence work designed to gather information about extremist organizations.
Beirich left the SPLC after leading its Intelligence Project from 2012 through 2019. She later co-founded the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism and continued to appear publicly as an expert on political extremism.
Business
Big Brother Just Leveled Up: If You Thought Flock Cameras Tracked Your Car, SignalTrace Tracks You
Your Town, USA – For years, Americans have debated the rapid expansion of automatic license plate reader (ALPR) systems like Flock Safety. Supporters argued the cameras simply photographed license plates visible from public roads. Critics warned they were quietly building a nationwide database of vehicle movements and violating the rights of every single American.
Now comes the next evolution.
Instead of merely tracking the vehicle, a new technology called SignalTrace™ is designed to identify and follow the person inside it by creating what its manufacturer calls a unique electronic fingerprint assembled from the wireless devices they carry and the electronic systems built into their vehicle.
If Flock Cameras know where your car has been, SignalTrace is designed to know where you have been—even if you change vehicles, remove your license plate, attempt to conceal your identity or just walk down the street.
Developed by Leonardo US Cyber and Security Solutions, LLC under its ELSAG brand, SignalTrace represents a significant expansion in surveillance technology. The system can combine traditional license plate recognition with passive radio-frequency collection to correlate dozens of electronic signals into a single profile that investigators can search historically or monitor in real time.
Beyond the License Plate
Traditional ALPR systems capture a photograph of a license plate along with the date, time, and location. SignalTrace expands that concept dramatically.
According to Leonardo’s product literature, the system installs sensors alongside existing ELSAG ALPR cameras (or it can operate independently) that continuously listen for publicly broadcast wireless signals emitted by nearby electronic devices.
Those signals are then correlated with nearby license plates.
Over time, the software learns which devices consistently travel together.
Instead of simply identifying a Toyota Camry with Texas plate ABC-1234, SignalTrace may recognize something far more specific:
- iPhone
- Apple Watch
- AirPods
- Vehicle tire pressure sensors
- Vehicle infotainment system
- Wi-Fi hotspot
- Bluetooth-enabled dashboard components
Collectively, those devices become what Leonardo calls an “electronic fingerprint.”
That fingerprint becomes associated with a particular vehicle, license plate, date, time, and location. Once established, investigators can potentially locate that same electronic fingerprint again—even if the vehicle’s plate changes or disappears.
How SignalTrace Works
Unlike wiretaps or cell-phone intercept devices, SignalTrace does not claim to capture communications. Instead, it passively listens for the electronic “handshakes” devices routinely broadcast into the air. According to Leonardo, the sensors detect publicly available radio-frequency identifiers from technologies.
The software then applies algorithms to identify groups of devices that repeatedly appear together across multiple locations and times. Leonardo describes this process as recognizing “convoys” of electronic devices. Those recurring combinations are linked to ALPR camera detections whenever a license plate is available.
All of the resulting information is stored within Leonardo’s ELSAG Enterprise Operations Center (EOC), allowing investigators to perform historical searches or monitor activity as new detections occur.
The sensors are not limited to highways. Leonardo says they can also be deployed in:
- Shopping centers
- Malls
- Stadiums
- Event venues
- Rail stations
- Parking facilities
- Virtually anywhere people gather
That greatly expands surveillance beyond traditional roadway cameras.
What Devices Can It Detect?
Perhaps the most striking aspect of SignalTrace is the sheer number of electronic devices that may contribute to a person’s digital fingerprint. Leonardo’s documentation lists several categories.
Bluetooth Devices
Nearly everyone carries Bluetooth-enabled electronics. These include:
- Smartphones
- Smartwatches
- Fitness trackers
- Wireless earbuds
- Wireless headphones
Wi-Fi Devices
The system can also detect Wi-Fi sources such as:
- Smartphones
- Tablets
- Laptops
- Vehicle Wi-Fi hotspots
Vehicle Electronics
Modern vehicles constantly broadcast signals from numerous onboard systems. SignalTrace can associate identifiers from:
- Tire Pressure Monitoring System (TPMS) sensors
- Vehicle safety systems
- Security sensors
- Infotainment systems
RFID Devices
Radio-frequency identification tags also become part of the picture. Examples include:
- Employee key cards
- Asset tracking tags
- Warehouse pallet transmitters
- Pet microchips
- Toll Tags
Individually, many of these identifiers may not uniquely identify someone. Together, however, they become remarkably distinctive. A phone alone may be common.
A phone plus a smartwatch, wireless earbuds, vehicle TPMS sensors, infotainment system, and Wi-Fi hotspot traveling together every morning creates an electronic signature that is far more difficult to confuse with someone else’s.
An Electronic Fingerprint
Leonardo openly markets this capability. Rather than relying upon one device, SignalTrace builds a composite identity. Imagine two identical pickup trucks.
Their license plates differ. Their owners both carry iPhones. Traditional ALPR systems distinguish them only by plate. But SignalTrace instead recognizes that one truck consistently travels with:
- Phone A
- Apple Watch A
- AirPods A
- TPMS Set A
- Infotainment System A
The other truck carries:
- Phone B
- Samsung Galaxy Watch
- Bose headphones
- TPMS Set B
- Vehicle hotspot B
Those collections become unique fingerprints. Even if one owner changes license plates—or drives another vehicle while carrying the same electronics—the fingerprint may remain recognizable.
In effect, investigators are no longer simply tracking a vehicle. They’re tracking the collection of electronic devices that travels with a person.
Law Enforcement Benefits
Leonardo promotes SignalTrace as an investigative force multiplier. Among its advertised capabilities:
- Integrates directly with existing ELSAG ALPR infrastructure.
- Identifies suspects through recurring electronic signatures.
- Recognizes vehicles using electronic fingerprints.
- Detects movement patterns and recurring travel.
- Identifies convoys.
- Assists investigations involving gangs.
- Supports human trafficking investigations.
- Expands surveillance beyond fixed ALPR locations.
- Enables both real-time monitoring and historical searches.
The company says sensors can be added to existing deployments, reducing implementation costs for agencies already operating ELSAG license plate readers.
Leonardo Says It’s Privacy Respecting
Leonardo argues SignalTrace remains privacy conscious because it captures only publicly broadcast signals. According to the company, the system:
- Does not decrypt communications.
- Does not intercept phone calls.
- Does not read text messages.
- Does not capture email contents.
- Does not access files stored on devices.
Instead, it collects only identifiers that devices voluntarily transmit over public radio frequencies. Leonardo compares the process to photographing a visible license plate on a public road.
From the company’s perspective, it is simply observing information already being broadcast into public space.
Privacy Advocates See Something Different
Privacy organizations and technology researchers have expressed far greater concern.
Critics argue SignalTrace fundamentally changes what ALPR systems are capable of doing. Instead of merely documenting where a vehicle traveled, they contend the technology enables persistent tracking of individuals through the electronic devices they carry every day.
Several researchers note that while modern smartphones increasingly randomize Bluetooth and Wi-Fi MAC addresses to reduce tracking, not every broadcast identifier is randomized.
Vehicle tire pressure monitoring systems, for example, often transmit fixed identifiers.
Likewise, combining multiple partially stable identifiers into one composite fingerprint may overcome many of the privacy protections built into individual devices. In other words, even if one identifier changes periodically, the surrounding collection of devices may remain recognizable.
Privacy advocates argue that this transforms anonymous radio emissions into something much closer to a persistent personal identifier.
Current Deployment
As of mid-2026, Leonardo is actively marketing SignalTrace and promoting it as an enhancement for existing ELSAG ALPR customers.
Public documentation indicates the sensors are intended to integrate with existing deployments, although no specific police department or municipality has publicly confirmed an operational deployment.
The underlying technology received a U.S. patent in March 2024 and was previously marketed in related forms under the name EOC Plus.
The Bigger Question
Supporters will argue SignalTrace is simply another investigative tool—one that relies only upon publicly available radio signals rather than private communications.
Critics see something far more consequential.
For decades, the debate centered on whether government should be able to track where your vehicle travels. SignalTrace moves beyond the automobile. It creates a persistent electronic identity assembled from the devices most Americans carry every day.
For decades, this author has maintained that there is no technology that exists, that the government will not eventually use against its own citizens.
Featured
Fauci Takes the Fifth, Democrats Rush to His Defense While Sidestepping His Own Pandemic Diary
Washington, D.C. — One of the most recognizable faces of the COVID-19 pandemic sat before a U.S. Senate committee Wednesday, raised no dramatic objections, launched no fiery defense of his decisions, and then declined to answer lawmakers’ questions by invoking the Fifth Amendment. It was a moment that instantly became one of the defining political images of the post-pandemic era.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, appeared under subpoena before the Republican-led Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee after being called by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. Rather than respond to questions about his role during the pandemic, Fauci told the committee he was following the advice of counsel and would invoke his constitutional right against self-incrimination.
The hearing quickly became a familiar partisan clash.
Paul argued that Fauci should answer questions surrounding government funding for research connected to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, shifting public statements regarding COVID-19’s origins, and decisions that shaped federal pandemic policy. Democrats, led by Ranking Member Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., countered that the hearing was little more than political theater designed to relitigate the pandemic instead of addressing current national security concerns.
But amid hours of defending Fauci’s reputation, Democratic members largely avoided discussing one subject that has increasingly drawn attention in recent days: Fauci’s own pandemic diary.
Before Wednesday’s hearing, Paul released more than 1,000 pages of Fauci’s government-maintained diary covering key periods of the pandemic. The senator argued that the private entries reveal inconsistencies between Fauci’s internal assessments and his public messaging during COVID-19.
[ Read and Download the Diary Here ]
Paul wrote on X that Fauci’s diary showed “what he wrote privately and what he told the country are two different stories.“
Some entries reportedly document uncertainty during the earliest weeks of the outbreak, uncertainty that many scientists shared as information rapidly evolved. Portions of those same observations had previously appeared in Fauci’s 2024 memoir and public interviews, according to the Associated Press. Other critics argue the diary raises additional questions deserving public examination.
Yet during Wednesday’s hearing, Democratic senators spent little time addressing the contents of the diary itself. Instead, much of their defense centered on Fauci’s decades of public service and repeated assertions that there is no credible evidence proving he committed criminal wrongdoing.
Scientists and public health officials likewise defended Fauci ahead of the hearing. More than 150 infectious disease experts signed a public letter rejecting accusations against him and urging Congress to end what they characterized as political attacks. Fauci has consistently denied misleading Congress and has maintained that the available scientific evidence favors a natural origin for COVID-19 rather than a laboratory leak.
Paul, however, has argued the hearing was necessary because Congress still has unanswered questions. He also noted that invoking the Fifth Amendment prevents lawmakers from obtaining sworn testimony that could either confirm or refute allegations surrounding Fauci’s public statements.
Fauci’s attorney, David Schertler, called Paul’s accusations “false and disgraceful” and said they would consider legal options in response.
The hearing also unfolded against an unusual legal backdrop. Former President Joe Biden previously granted Fauci a presidential pardon covering potential federal offenses tied to his government service, though legal scholars have noted that such pardons do not shield a witness from future perjury or contempt allegations arising from new testimony. That reality made Fauci’s decision to invoke the Fifth all the more politically significant, regardless of the legal reasons offered by his attorneys.
Whether Republicans ultimately pursue a contempt referral remains uncertain.
What is certain is that Wednesday’s hearing added another chapter to one of the most divisive political debates in modern American history.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login