“Do the Country a Service—Resign”: Thompson Unloads on Kristi Noem

The Erosion of Accountability: A Department Under Fire

The halls of Congress are no stranger to heated exchanges, but the recent hearing before the House Committee on Homeland Security felt less like a policy debate and more like a formal indictment of a department in crisis. With Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) Director Joe Kent in the crosshairs, the testimony revealed a startling narrative of alleged lawlessness, financial impropriety, and a systemic breakdown of constitutional oversight.

At the center of the firestorm is a simple but devastating premise: you cannot enforce the law by breaking it.

A Seat Left Empty: The Missing FBI Director

Perhaps the loudest statement made during the hearing was made by an empty chair. Kash Patel, the Trump administration’s pick to lead the FBI, was conspicuously absent. While Secretary Noem and Director Kent sat before the committee, Patel’s absence drew sharp rebukes from Democratic lawmakers.

Ranking Member Bennie Thompson didn’t mince words, suggesting that Patel was “too busy spending taxpayer dollars flying to his girlfriend’s concert on the FBI’s jet” to answer to the American people. This isn’t just a snub to a committee; it’s a rupture in the tradition of congressional oversight. Historically, the heads of the DHS, NCTC, and FBI appear together to provide a unified front on national security. By skipping the hearing, Patel has signaled a disregard for the legislative branch that many find chilling.

The Cost of Self-Promotion

One of the most granular—and arguably most offensive—allegations raised involves the “blank check” supposedly handed to the DHS in recent budget cycles. While American families struggle with an affordability crisis, the hearing revealed that Secretary Noem’s department has been making questionable financial choices:

$220 Million: Allegedly awarded in contracts to “friends” to film the Secretary on what critics call a 2028 campaign trail.

$200 Million: Used to purchase new private jets while cyber-security programs for hospitals and schools remain underfunded.

Housing Scandals: Claims that the Secretary is living rent-free in taxpayer-owned property intended for military leaders.

When we talk about “Homeland Security,” we are talking about the protection of our power grid, our synagogues, and our schools. When millions are diverted into “commercials” and private luxury, the security of the homeland becomes a secondary concern to the brand of the individual in charge.

The Human Cost of “Extreme Agendas”

The most harrowing portion of the transcript deals with the Department’s immigration enforcement. While the administration touts a “secure border,” the methods described by the committee tell a story of “terrorized, beaten, and detained” citizens.

The testimony included accounts of:

Illegal Deportations: Shipping individuals to El Salvador and South Sudan in violation of federal court orders and Department of Justice counsel.

Harm to Citizens: Reports of U.S. citizens—including children with cancer and pregnant women—being detained and mistreated because agents “did not believe” they were Americans.

Physical Force: Allegations of DHS agents using pepper spray and physical violence against clergy and military veterans.

These aren’t just administrative errors; they are fundamental violations of Due Process. The Fourth and Fifth Amendments do not vanish because an administration wants to project “strength” on the evening news.

The Breakdown of Norms

The data provided during the hearing paints a grim picture of how oversight has withered. In the first year of the Biden administration, DHS officials made 28 appearances before the committee. Under the current Trump administration, they have appeared only three times. Secretary Noem herself has appeared only twice—fewer than her predecessor, Alejandro Mayorkas, whom Republicans once lambasted for “hiding” from Congress.

Oversight is the “check” in our system of checks and balances. When letters go unanswered and subpoenas are treated as suggestions, the executive branch ceases to be a partner in governance and begins to operate as a law unto itself.

Conclusion: A Demand for Resignation

The hearing ended with a singular, forceful demand: Resign. Whether Secretary Noem heeds this call remains to be seen, but the testimony has laid bare a department that appears to have lost its way. When a government agency prioritizes self-promotion over protection, and rhetoric over the rule of law, it doesn’t just make America “less safe”—it fundamentally changes what it means to be an American.

The question for the public is no longer just about border policy or cyber-security. It is about whether we still believe that the law applies to those who wear the badge and hold the gavel. Accountability isn’t a partisan luxury; it is the bedrock of a functioning democracy.

Would you like me to analyze the specific legal statutes (like the Alien Enemies Act) mentioned in these recent DHS proceedings?