X/@RepBoebert
The event of Representative Lauren Boebert’s patriotic Veterans Day tribute was not merely a trivial matter of acknowledging the military personnel but was immediately followed by a cascade of questions about her views on the release of papers related to Jeffrey Epstein, thus laying bare a big political pressure campaign running behind the scenes. The message of the Republican from Colorado was for the most part ignored while hundreds of comments were only about the news that Boebert was being pressured by the White House to withdraw her support for the transparency in the Epstein case. This event brings to light the continuing rifts in the Republican Party regarding how to approach the extremely sensitive probe into the networks of the convicted sex offender, a situation that has led other lawmakers like Jasmine Crockett to demand a full investigation.
Advertisement
Lauren Boebert had just posted a plain Veterans Day greeting while saying ‘The heroes who’ve worn our nation’s uniform are honored from the plains of Colorado’s 4th District to every corner of America. Your service is the reason we live free. Thank you for defending our freedom. God bless our veterans and God bless the USA!’ Along with the post was a picture of the American flag as is usually the case with such holiday messages from the elected officials.
However, the reaction was anything but ordinary. Almost immediately, a campaign calling for Boebert to stick to her guns regarding the release of Epstein’s documents seemed to have taken an organized form in the comments section. Users made comments about tactics being used in the political arena; and one person even said ‘Hearing trump called her to the white house to get her to drop the petition.’ Another comment simply stated ‘The Trump crew has Boebert at the White House right now trying to get her to give up on the Epstein files.’
The strength of the reactions led the people to feel that they were watching closely the position of the voters on the discharge petition that would facilitate the House voting on the release of Epstein-connected documents. One user put the result of the decision in moralistic terms, stating ‘Please do not let this administration pressure you into removing your name from the petition. We the people need representatives that actually care about making the world a better place and holding those who do evil responsible.’ The comment thus highlighted the more general concern for political interference in the investigation.
Some of the responses were really harsh. ‘You will be a hero @RepBoebert. Please don’t change your vote and let the victims of Jeffrey Epstein and his associates—no matter which political party they are in—be represented,’ another person wrote and emphasized the demand for transparency was bipartisan. The mention of political party seemed to imply that the network of Epstein had shrunk to include both major parties.
The writing style of many comments was indicative of the fact that the people replying considered this matter to be a pivotal one in Boebert’s political career. ‘Hopefully you have a spine and stay in the 218!’ one user remarked, referring to the number of signatures needed for a vote. Another user stated ‘If you withdraw your name you will be an accomplice,’ which suggested that the stakes were very high in her choice.
Some comments referred to the new news of White House meetings. ‘Did you meet with top WH and DOJ officials as the ABC report claims?’ one user asked, making specific references to media accounts that claimed Boebert and other Republicans were under pressure to support the administration. The inquiry effectively showed that constituents were getting the news from diverse sources.
The large number and similarity of the comments left no doubt that an organized movement was behind this to make Boebert take back her original decision. ‘Don’t you dare take your name off that discharge petition,’ was a frequent demand. At the same time, the term ‘discharge petition’ was constantly repeated, indicating that the respondents had a fairly good understanding of parliamentary procedure.
While the political pressure was clearly evident, some comments tried to associate the Veterans Day theme with the Epstein case. One user expressed this by saying, ‘Now follow up and honor all the Veterans by getting the #EpsteinTrumpFiles released. No matter if it hurts either party, just get the Truth out there,’ thereby establishing a link between the official purpose of the day and the ongoing political drama.
The whole controversy about the Epstein documents completely overshadowed Boebert’s Veterans Day tribute. Out of many comments, one was the only one that related to the holiday sentiment, and that one said, ‘Beautifully said. The courage and sacrifices of those who serve are the foundation of the freedoms we cherish today.’ The rest of the comments all referred to the political standoff regarding the release of documents.
Advertisement
This saga is a perfect example of how one contentious issue can dominate political discussion even on occasions which are supposed to be for bipartisan unity. Boebert’s effort to send a straightforward patriotic message resulted in a referendum on her willingness to withstand the administration’s pressure concerning the Epstein probe. The feedback made it clear that the constituents were very closely observing how their representatives handled this delicate matter, with advocates of transparency exerting significant