▶ 0:19:27e e
▶ 0:20:16yeah okay cool committee will come to order without objection the chair is authorized declare recess any time perer to committee rule 2 and house rule 11 Clause 2 the chairman May postpone further proced meetings uh today on the question of approving any measure or matter or adopting an amendment for which a recorded vote is ordered and now recognize the gentleman from North Carolina Mr Harris to lead us in Pledge of the United States of America
▶ 0:20:47to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible liy and justice for all I think the gentleman now re recognize uh pursuant to no excuse me I call up HR 1071 the the no censors on our Shores act for purposes of markup and move that the Committee reported favor to the house the clerk will report the bill hr10 71 to provide without objection the bill will be considered as read open for Amendment at any point the chair now recognizes
▶ 0:21:17the sponsor of the legislation the gentleman from California Mr Isa for an opening statement thank you Mr chairman when I came to Congress quite a few years ago I was fortunate enough to serve on the Foreign Affairs committee and as a rookie under chairman Henry Hyde I learned a lot one of them was in fact politics stops at the water's edge meaning of course within the borders we could be divided as Republicans and Democrats but beyond our borders
▶ 0:21:48we have to be United and we historically have been but times have change in some ways that part is still true what I mean by that is when a foreign Nation chooses or or causes the censorship or the denial of free speech or the First Amendment rights of an American through their policies abroad America stands
▶ 0:22:18United hard to believe that in fact we as a nation in the effort to export free speech and the ideas of freedom for more than 200 years seemingly are slipping backwards right now in Brazil in some of this legislation comes from that specific example but also in the European Union in the U UK and Australia in fact censorship of American
▶ 0:22:48citizens rights on public uh access media such as X and meta have in fact been systematic censured censored uh and in fact the cause of this bill came from when Elon Musk refused uh to take uh to take if you will the demands of Brazil and X was taken offline in an entire country
▶ 0:23:19the fact is we have seen censorship of what others want to have their free speech begin to happen that means that America expressing its own views in America or the views of Freedom around the world can no longer do that unless we stand up so my bill uh seeks to Simply say go ahead ignore the first amendment in your own country it's your right absolutely
▶ 0:23:49you can and and and if you want to shut down X meta Google any of them you want but don't expect to come to America under a US Visa don't expect to be in America and remain if in fact you are the perpetrator of that extinguishing of free speech in short we're not going Beyond The Waters Edge we do nothing to people abroad but when you come on our Shores We Stand
▶ 0:24:20United for the First Amendment for that reason this legislation very simply says that in fact denying the ability to remain here or to come here of someone who has participated in stifling Free Speech will in fact be the policy of our nation for that reason I want people to understand it's not who speech was denied it's that an American speech or an American organization speech was denied
▶ 0:24:50we seek in no way to influence someone's overseas activity other than to say we do export our belief in free access of all as a matter of fact I just came back from the Middle East where one of our greatest exports today is in fact helping uh Iranian dissidents circumvent the censorship that goes on in Iran so that there can be communication of those who object to that to
▶ 0:25:20totalitarian regime would we cave to that no and we should not cave to somebody simply because they say they're a democracy well in fact being a democracy except when it comes to American free speech with that Mr chairman I yield back chman yields back chair on recognizes the ranking member for an opening statement thank you Mr chairman um I I like Mr Ice's bill um in fact at first first blush it sounded like a
▶ 0:25:51great bill to me protecting the First Amendment rights of uh our citizens against foreign dictators and autocrats on a rampage against the First Amendment rights of our people and we know that there are a lot of those uh dictators and autocrats out there I thought immediately of the Wall Street Journal reporter Evan gersovitz uh who was charged in Russia on completely bogus Espionage charges and was sentenced to prison for 16 years um simply because he offended Vladimir Putin with his coverage and he was held for one year four
▶ 0:26:21months and three days before he was released in a prisoner exchange uh after a global protest so it sounded to me like a good idea to protect Evan gersovitz and other journalists today in a world filled with autocrats and political censors who always want to stifle people's speech uh in order to maintain their own grip on Power and like Mr Isa I grew up with the idea that uh partisan conflict stops at the water's edge and if a foreign government takes one of our citizens whether it's a journalist
▶ 0:26:51or a businessman or a traveler unlawfully because they don't like what that person is saying or what that person is writing then we must stand United as a country against them and I I spend a lot of time with the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission trying to get both Americans and foreigners uh out of prison for doing nothing other than expressing themselves reporting the news or practicing their religion and I invite colleagues who don't know about the work of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission named after one of our former colleagues uh
▶ 0:27:21to check it out because you can really uh help get people out of prison in a situation like this the problem is when I read the fine print of the bill I realized it wouldn't do anything for Evan gersovitz or indeed any other American journalist jailed by a foreign dictator or any American citizen who was imprisoned for protesting some kind of uh government tyranny abroad so um the bill is written very narrowly uh it would bar from admission to
▶ 0:27:52America foreign government officials who commit acts against a citizen who's within the United States that would violate the First Amendment if it was performed here by a US government official so um I think uh the I'm not as familiar with the Genesis of this bill I wasn't here when it was marked up last time I think it may uh relate to a conflict between Elon Musk and uh Supreme Court Justice in Brazil maybe that's how it got started but I would say
▶ 0:28:22that we if we're going to do this it shouldn't apply to one guy let's enlarge the principle um so that it applies to any American whose First Amendment rights are being threatened or violated by a foreign uh a foreign State a foreign uh autocrat so I will be introducing an amendment uh to that uh effect um I would say against both of us someone might say well there are certain things our first amendment protects that other countries don't protect for example
▶ 0:28:52the right under Buckley versus valo and citizens united people have a right to spend to the heavens uh in our campaign Finance system that might not be the law in France or Brazil I don't know if somebody should be banned permanently from our country for enforcing such a law but that seems like a uh not as big a deal if we were actually going to use this legislation to protect our people against uh censors and tyrants abroad so I'm interested in how Mr Isa might
▶ 0:29:22react to such an amendment and uh I thank you for the time Mr chairman I yield back gentleman yields back without objection all other opening statements will be included in the record of the chair now recognize the gentleman from California for the for the purpose of offering an amendment in the nature of a substitute the clerk will report the cler will report yep amendment in the nature of a substitute to hr1 071 offered by Mr without objection the amendment nature Subs will be considered as read and shall be considered base text for the purpose of the amendment the chair now recognize the gentleman from California to
▶ 0:29:52explain the amendment well the the amendment is is is technical in nature and but I want to take this opportunity to say that I appreciate the ranking members Amendment uh although I've just had a first blush at it uh I would say that as long as the parliamentarians don't think it exceeds the authority of this committee uh I'm certainly more than willing to incorporate uh I think the gentleman's uh not having been here when it was marked up the last time I just want to
▶ 0:30:23uh clarify that we did not do this for Elon musque the the fact that X got shut down starlink uh accounts for you know business there got shut down and it was done by a Judicial uh a judge basically was novel but on a regular basis we see this in uh in similar ways in Europe and all of these are democracies uh and different than uh the dictatorship of Putin
▶ 0:30:53but I think the gentleman's point is good uh that denying access to to people who stifle Free Speech around the world uh certainly is a consistent pattern and I I personally have no objection uh to expanding it I I think in fact uh perhaps uh it's the best way to uh to get Beyond looking at one example or a series of examples but I would say that uh there's a pattern that we're trying to brush back and we just the introduction of the bill last
▶ 0:31:23Congress had a positive effect on how Brazil looked at it but we have a long way to go with uh the European Union as the gentleman probably knows and I I'm I'm a little tongue and- cheek but you know it's a crime to speak ill of the king in England and we're okay with that but if you're here and uh you're on X or some other social media and you speak a little of the king one would think that they would respect the fact you don't if you do it on on British
▶ 0:31:53grounds that's a different story but when you do it uh and it simply spreads around the world and they choose to stifle it I have no problem if they choose to cut it off that's fine but I'm not going to let uh the officials who do it come to the United States because a Visa and I think the gentleman would agree a Visa is in fact a privilege not a right for people around the world um and uh I I would yield to the gentleman if he had any any uh comment so
▶ 0:32:23we could be expeditious with this yeah yeah that seems right to me uh I I suppose the question is um the the exercise of our what we would consider free speech and Free Press rights in another society and uh you know I would want to assert the universal right of the press to report the news you know even in an autocratic Society even if it's against their laws I in in other words I I think I I want to adopt the spirit of this legislation
▶ 0:32:54to say if we've got reporters who are covering new in a foreign country and then someone says well that's defamation of the king or the prince or whatever that we this legislation would cover a situation like that and say no you're going to be barred from America if you're imposing that kind of censorship on our reporters or our citizens well and I think it's important to note that in the markup in the last Congress there was a a question of would this for example uh
▶ 0:33:24ban or bar the pope from coming to the United States and so um that would be far too broad it's not uh we're not trying to say that uh the debatable arguments that go on around the world are automatically barred and so that's why uh uh it's you know it it is limited to foreign officials who while serving as government officials and a foreign government uh we we tried to in the
▶ 0:33:54amendment in form of substitute make sure that we made clear of that so uh but I do agreee with the gentleman that uh uh look we're we're trying to be narrow in this adding uh your language doesn't seem to uh offend the narrowness that we are simply targeting the question and by the way I think the important thing is the Administration has the ability to wave it's not an outright bar that under no circumstances can let's say a head of state who is
▶ 0:34:25uh guilty of it be barred uh that that that capability would still be there just as and and one of the best points was made in the last Congress delegates coming to the United Nations would not uh fall under fall under that because their visas by definition are different but I do think that we've come to Common Ground and I and I hope that we uh if there's any additional amendments we can be equally open to them and I with that I yield back Mr chairman gentleman yields back who seeks recognition
▶ 0:34:58uh the gentleman from New York is recognized thank you I have a question for the sponsor for Mr Isa I was just wondering uh are we going to have due process for people who we to whom we're going to deny a Visa in other words uh um we say they did seven prohibited conduct they say they didn't are we going to have some sort of judicial process to decide that if the gentleman yield in my years on Foreign Affairs uh in addition to obviously immigration here
▶ 0:35:28I've learned a kind of an interesting anomaly the answer is no sir um there is isn't due process for non us persons seeking to come to the United States there is Administrative process uh it's a little bit of a a black hole at Foggy Bottom and uh at the Department of Homeland Security and so on uh because people and and I'm sure the gentleman from New York knows that you know we do casework on on people who who say I wasn't let in
▶ 0:35:58and how or you know and just as uh global entry and all others the fact is that because it's not a right but a privilege uh people routinely get told yes or no uh most often they get told no because of a uh the quote likelihood of returning in other words they'll overstay but they don't get told that even when that's the case and uh in in my case work over the years as a member of Foreign Affairs um sometimes you
▶ 0:36:28have to sit down and go come on wink twice if it's if that's the reason uh so this is one of those cases in which the refusal would in fact give them an opportunity to bring forth some sort of an argument because they would be told that they were being refused on these grounds so in some ways it's more transparent than the general visa application but I appreciate the question the gentleman I yield back would the gentleman yield the gentl with the gentleman you
▶ 0:36:59yes thank you um I just wanted to affirm what uh Mr Isa said that in a case where somebody's applying that is an administrative process to to um deny the only concern I would raise is that this bill also has deportability standards and that is for somebody who is in the country and so that part uh completely agree having been through the process many times and worried about whether I was going to be a visa to come to this country
▶ 0:37:30um I know what that administrative process is but the part around deportability is actually something where we would apply or the question the the Mr nadler's question would apply in terms of due process um and if the gentleman from New York would further L yield um The Gentle ladies uh right that the the revocation of a Visa leading to deportation is in fact uh a process that has a little bit uh access because before someone leaves
▶ 0:38:00they can in fact file and to be honest they're in the US they can even go to the court uh and file so there is some uh more due process uh once you cross the the waterers Edge we put that in simply because it is certainly possible that we'll find people who are here uh who have these past activities uh I think back to as a Clevelander uh a uh a person who turned out to be one of the prison guards in
▶ 0:38:30the Holocaust uh who literally uh was found years later had been here for a very long time they went through revocation of his citizenship they went through the whole process and then deported him it took years yeah in this case we would suspect that it would be rare that somebody would be here under a green card and we'd found out that they were alleged to have stifled Free Speech but the gentle lady is right there would be due process in that case so this wouldn't be just somebody accused they would have access to
▶ 0:39:00the full because a lot of the bills that that we've been debating on the floor as you well know take a standard that is already the case making somebody deportable for example for a violent crime um that they've been convicted of and expands it to essentially say that if you're just accused of that crime then you're deportable well exactly is that what standard would apply in this well the St the standard for better or worse is the revocation of a uh a Visa
▶ 0:39:31uh the uh visas have a limited time anyway uh but I'll give you an example that that I I see regularly is people who are here who overstay uh most of them when faced with you've overstayed get out of here leave but the fact is some appeal and there is a due process nothing in this bill changes that uh and uh you know the only difference between being overseas and being here
▶ 0:40:01is when you're overseas you don't have access to the any federal court or any uh you know ability to adjudicate any other way once you're on us soil you do have those rights so but the general L is absolutely right to be concerned and we're not changing any of those standards well and hopefully the gentleman would speak up on some of these bills when we do change the standard because I think it is essential on us soil that we continue to have the due process that's so important and I agree with the gentle lady that that people who are in at one point lawfully in the country
▶ 0:40:31deserve full access to the courts if someone wants to change their status and I couldn't agree with the gentle lady Moore thank you I yield back thank you I yield back gentlemen yields back uh who think we're having some discussion up here uh with ranking member on on the potential Amendment who seeks recognition on the gentleman from Tennessee is recognized Mr ice if you yield I don't have any yeah I just curious yes of course the King which king are you referring to well in this case the king of England
▶ 0:41:02not Elvis Presley you know um I I happen to think that people uh disparage the king Elvis at their own Peril but there's no law protecting him but I would certainly never disparage the king from Memphis he is our King he is your king ouring our King The King who wants to follow that the gentleman from Washington is recognized
▶ 0:41:33uh thank you Mr chair I just want to uh lend my uh support to this this fine Bill and uh very proud to be a a co-sponsor you know free speech is under attack across the globe and and this measure uh sends a clear signal uh that America's not going to stand for it we're certainly not going to stand for it uh with American citizens uh I'd also point out that you know congress with the magnitsky ACT you know has stood up previous viously for uh abuses of Human Rights and sanctioned foreign actors uh when
▶ 0:42:03those have been under attack and and was a greater human right then the ability to speak uh speak freely so I I applaud the the prime sponsor and I'm very pleased to be a co-sponsor and uh urge the uh uh the members here to support this important uh piece of legislation thank you yield back gentleman yields back Mr chairman ranking members i' would like to introduce an amendment I have an amendment at the desk clerk
▶ 0:42:46report Amendment to the amendment and the objection Amendment will be considered as red the gentleman from uh Maryland is recognized to explain his Amendment thank you kindly Mr chairman uh the amendment extends the consequences in this bill to um PE to any official abroad who participates in the pretextual detention arrest prosecution incarceration execution or murder of US citizens who are just exercising their first amendment rights abroad uh
▶ 0:43:16the notable example and the the Genesis for this idea on my part um is American journalist Evan gersovitz who Vladimir Putin jailed on trumped up charges of Espionage because he didn't like what K kers Kitz had printed about him in the Wall Street Journal uh another example is the American Russian journalist ALU kicheva who ascends to six and a half years for pre for pretextual charges of spreading fake news about the Russian army uh fortunately both these journalists were brought home
▶ 0:43:47to America in a prisoner Exchange in the last Administration uh their convictions were nonetheless absurd completely pretextual in clear attempts to silence the speech of uh Americans who dared to write ill of what was taking place in Russia many jist have been jailed under false pretenses in countries like Russia China Iran and North Korea because they dared to criticize authoritarianism there so um but the theory
▶ 0:44:17of this amendment is just that if we're going to stand up for free speech around the world as we should um it should it should start with the people who are actually jailing our citizens who are reporters um or who are just being incarcerated for speaking up um and uh I I take it I hope it's consistent with the spirit of Mr is's legislation um some people are now raising constitutional questions about the whole thing uh and I guess my first instinct is Mr Ice's
▶ 0:44:47Instinct I'm not sure that it's a First Amendment issue since we're talking about uh admission to the country which is an a constitutional right but but I'm definitely I want to hear my colleagues on that question obviously we don't want to pass legislation that's unconstitutional but in any event I do Advance my Amendment and and I appreciate what M Mr is has said which is he sees this as a narrow addition to his original plan and with that I yield back would before the gentleman yields back could you yield
▶ 0:45:18um here's what I think would be best for this and and it it's in a tradition that uh we would agree not to move this to the floor without the inclusion of the basic premise of this amendment uh our parliamentarians everyone has the same potential concern which is we want to make sure that it's crafted so that it still keeps the basic premise which is US persons whether through social media or others including the Wall Street Journal and so on their
▶ 0:45:48actions are their First Amendment right any abridgment of that right which would include taking down their F their speech it would also include incarcerating them it would include any actions that uh either abridges their rights or Liberties or would stifle free speech by that that action you know they Putin doesn't lock that guy up because of him he locks it up because of a hundred others that might do the same that no won't do it so I believe we
▶ 0:46:19can very easily find and perhaps by the end of today uh the narrow the narrow language which is not much different than this we do have the concern that we don't want to have somebody say that you know some hypothetical scenario but I I think I'm a 100% supportive that to incarcerate somebody is AB bridging their first amendment rights when it's for what was in the Wall Street Journal and I think we can uh we can easily do that and again as long as the the narrow response
▶ 0:46:49is we deny them the Visa uh or revoke a Visa that I think it stays well within the the the limitation of the bill and for the ranking member we did this narrowly because we just want to brush back bad behavior I have to tell you I don't think it'll stop Putin one bit but it certainly will tell our allies that we are uh uh you know believe it strongly and that that policy uh should be taken
▶ 0:47:19seriously by everyone who wants to come to the United States including those who might work as henchmen of people like Putin gotcha if if you don't mind yielding to a question for me Mr Isa or a couple that have been raised with me as I've gone off in this new Direction here um what one is the question of adjudication of the qu of the question of whether someone has violated the First Amendment rights of an American in other words who is that someone at the Consular Office in a foreign country that will
▶ 0:47:49say we're going to deny you a Visa because you've engag in action is at the state department and I think the uh it's not complicated because we're not changing a complicated system the complicated system is yes there are a number of people in the process starting with a fairly Junior person at the desk sometimes interviewing who feels that they're being lied to it then goes back to the background checks which include for example allegations of money laundering allegations of drug dealing
▶ 0:48:20allegations all of those are pretty opaque uh and it's been part of our process for for many many many decades and uh when I worked with Henry Hyde he was both chairman of Judiciary and then chairman of Foreign Affairs um and he preserved that system as the chairman of Foreign Affairs after 911 because it was more likely to be fair to foreigners uh using foreign affairs people as the first line but I will tell you
▶ 0:48:50if you're denied you can continue to uh provide more information can ask for why but it's purely administrative and we're not changing that as a matter of fact I would say that if this legislation were not passed and if an Administration decided to include some of these as activity that they felt made somebody ineligible technically they could probably do it supon
▶ 0:49:21regard gentleman's time has expired if if the if the gentleman wants to continue the dialogue I'll recognize Mr is so you can yield if you had second question I seek recognition gentlem from California rec I yield to the gentlemen so so here's here's my other question and this is a an an argument against against myself here but the the thing that occurred I would never argue against um I always win those arguments um the so I was thinking of examples where First Amendment case law in America really is something of an outlier
▶ 0:49:51for the rest of the world and I started to think about campaign Finance um you know one of our citizens says I want to spend $50 million in the French election and that person's prevented from doing so because it violates their laws then is the adjudicating officer there banned from Coming to America because that would have violated the first actually that's beyond the scope of the bill for a reason we do not affect conduct overseas while
▶ 0:50:22you're overseas in other words when you go when you go past the water's edge if you're sitting if you're sitting in tran and you want to say speak ill of the Ayatollah it's not specifically uh within this bill this is us protected speech it is our our on our Waters so it does cover uh the Wall Street Journal it doesn't cover going to a protest in tran okay so then then the question was raised you know
▶ 0:50:52Germany because of its history you know has a particular uh approach to Nazi speech they've banned it since World War II they and they've banned you know openly Nazi political parties which obviously we don't under our first amendment but does that mean that that a US who goes to Germany and engages in pro-nazi speech could not be um you know
▶ 0:51:22arrested or censored there under their laws without the official Running a foul of our new legisl this would not cover their actions overseas there are a number of of laws that uh that cover actions of Americans even when they're overseas you might remember uh maybe early in your 10e the sex tourism bills that that became a global you could be prosecuted here for your Global activity in other countries around the world but that's not within the scope of this bill
▶ 0:51:53and and again uh I I kept it narrow because I wanted to make sure that we brushed back this tendency to mostly on social media which includes by the way all of our great uh journalism uh people because they all go out on that same uh pipeline U finding their their uh their actions literally disappearing in foreign countries uh and the like so that's that's why we we did
▶ 0:52:23it because we thought it was our ability as America in America to speak and to disseminate that around the world uh because that's what we did with radio free Europe that's what we've done for so long and to have anyone brush it back uh you know seems inappropriate look they have the ability to come and sue us here so it's not we're not eliminating their ability we're just saying you can't just decide that you're going to not let uh uh in the case of Brazil literally not let the revenues
▶ 0:52:53uh from starlink be collected because you don't like with with son X gotcha all right well that's clarifying for me um so but I don't know if you're prepared to say you'd like to accept the amendment if uh this I I'd like to accept the amendment the only thing I'd ask is that we do it by uh as as agreed language in other words the two parties simply make sure that the final words uh are are limited in in the scope that we've discussed
▶ 0:53:24but we're totally supportive gent y i uh okay if it's well I think it's oh sorry Daryl's time if would would the ranking member be willing to withdraw his Amendment we passed the legislation I think we got agreement amongst both parties for the legislation and we will pledge I will pledge we will not bring this to the floor until we've in some way addressed your Amendment either put it in the bill work work on the language and you offered as an amendment on the floor
▶ 0:53:54um I think CH or Mr Isa said it well we like the spirit of it we just want to make sure it fits within the narrow scope of what we're trying to and I'd like it to be in the bill when it goes to the floor I think we can get I think we can get there okay well if the gentleman will yield um I very much appreciate your openness to to uh possibly accepting it and are working on this language I know there there are a few other members who have amendments that that we want to hear and so um you know I'll continue to
▶ 0:54:25to follow that and I hope that if the legislation moves forward we can definitely work on okay and you know we can we can have people working behind the scenes even today I want done quickly withdraw your I and I will withdraw the amendment Mr chairman I I appreciate the amendment was withdrawn who seeks recognition G lady from Pennsylvania is recognized Mr chair I have an amendment at the desk uh the clerk will report Amendment to the amendment in the nature of objection the be considered as reserve
▶ 0:54:55a point of order ladies recognize to explain her amendment can you give me so the first amendment protects free speech and a free press it's among the founding principles of our nation and the addition of the Bill of Rights including the first amendment was essential to our Constitution's ratification and of course the principle that a free press is essential to our Civic life and must be free from suppression and coercion whether by a monarchy or other form of government that was Vindicated by the original Philadelphia
▶ 0:55:25lawyer Andrew Hamilton in the John Peter Zenger trial we know that a democracy only truly works when its citizens are properly informed but while our Republican colleagues have presented us with this unworkable legislation that they claim is about protecting Americans First Amendment rights they're ignoring the outright assault on the First Amendment that's currently coming from inside Donald Trump's White House Mr Isa mentioned that in some countries it's illegal to speak ill of
▶ 0:55:55the king and it appears that that's rapidly becoming the official policy of the Trump White House just yesterday the administration announced that it was seizing control of the White House Press Corps moving decisions about the Press pool away from the Independent journalist organization that has handled them for decades so our own domestic autocrat not a foreign King is trying to assert and free trying to freeze out those who would question or criticize his actions
▶ 0:56:25the admin Administration has weaponized the FCC to go after broadcasters like NBC PBS and NPR that produce content or have policies that the administration doesn't like they've had DC's us attorney referring to himself falsely as Donald Trump's attorney send threatening letters to members of Congress for criticizing Donald Trump's allies reporters have been evicted from their offices in federal buildings the White House has kicked the Associated Press out of the oval
▶ 0:56:56office in Air Force One because the outlet made an editorial decision to continue to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as it has been and continues to be known throughout the world for over four centuries and the president and his allies have brought frivolous lawsuits against news outlets like the De Moine register and various networks because the president didn't like their coverage or the results of their polls it's clear that free speech and Free Press are under attack by this Administration and its
▶ 0:57:26billionaire buddy Elon Musk they're using the power of the government and big Tech allies to promote their own lies and to punish or silence those who disagree if my colleagues across the aisle really want to protect the First Amendment as all patriotic Americans should they'd be outraged they'd speak out against what's going on because if we're going to Champion the First Amendment around the world we should be standing up for it here at home but so far all we're hearing from our Republican
▶ 0:57:56colleagues is crickets so my Amendment would address the recent attacks on the first amendment that I've outlined above if the majority thinks these actions don't constitute a tax on the First Amendment then they should go on the record and say so but I'd hope they would support my amendment to acknowledge these sorts of egregious violations for what they are I yield back lady yields back gentleman from California is recognized I appreciate the gentle lady's concern in this area and I
▶ 0:58:26I certainly support her five minutes of explaining her uh the Injustice that she feels is going on I will say it's it's certainly outside the scope the intention uh and the benefit of this bill it's certainly not outside the gentle lady offering a similar bill that addresses this specifically and I would encourage her to do that uh the uh gentlemen you yield for a quick question of course you said you appreciated my concern would you condemn those actions of restricting
▶ 0:58:57access to the White House by our news outlets I'm glad you asked that question and I'll I'll answer it this way I would do different things than our current president I would handle things differently uh I think each of us would be different but for the gentle lady uh look I fully appreciate that uh this committee under chairman Jordan has had a concern about weaponization of
▶ 0:59:27government and I believe that we should always hear and uh and amplify any time it appears as though any Administration is using any of its powers to um I uh I have a long history of uh of feeling like although it's a privilege to be one of the few that gets to be at the White House that we should be very careful to
▶ 0:59:58uh to not exclude the historical champions of that and so I would answer you by saying the Associated Press press has been a conduit for everyone for a long time and I would hope this gets resolved quickly because I don't believe that the Associated Press based on their past history um should not be at the table uh you know I knew the late Helen Thomas and I watched her after a generation
▶ 1:00:28of being the leader uh be be dismissed from uh her coverage of the White House she was a personal friend she yelled at me regularly over my politics but she was a personal friend and so yeah I do appreciate that on that particular example we should be very careful to change the mix of people who have access to those precious few slots that exist um and so I don't know that's as much empathy as you would like but it really
▶ 1:00:58is genuine um and I would say that the gentle lady has got a point and I would encourage her to hold us as accountable for weaponization in everything you do the same as we I think tried to hold the last Administration accountable for the same reason well I'll ask my staff to reach out and maybe we can work on gent I look forward to it gentle gentleman yields back gentleman from Florida is thank
▶ 1:01:28thank you Mr chairman um I was listening uh to uh chairman Isa uh talk eloquently quite frankly about weaponization and free speech and you know it's funny I'm I'm literally just reading a tweet from chair uh chairwoman Green from Georgia who denied my ability today to wave on to an oversight Committee hearing uh which has been standard practice uh on Doge as a as the first Democrat to join the Doge
▶ 1:01:58caucus uh because I believe government should become more efficient and should learn how to spend less money um and not only did she deny it she then took my letter requesting to come on tweeting it out saying she wasn't going to let me attend the hearing today on uh on foreign policy on foreign spending and I'm on the Foreign Affairs committee and so I was coming to talk about the repercussions of fighting China if we withdraw uh from the world
▶ 1:02:28and I know the Chairman's going to let me continue with my comments cuz he's a free speech Advocate um unlike chairwoman green and I was going to talk about how we can't fund the government anymore by CR because if we refunded by CR all the fraud waste and abuse that Doge says they found we would just refund all that fraud waste and abuse if we do it by CR and the American people voted against the status quo and so we can't continue government as the status quo and
▶ 1:02:59I voted against the budget last yesterday not because I'm not for uh decreasing taxes uh but because Thomas Massie who you know wears the debt Clock he's the Flav of flave of Congress walking around with a clock and and says we're going to add a trillion dollars to the deficit in one in three years a trillion dollars to the deficit in three and I trust Thomas on his numbers I mean he's definitely the numbers
▶ 1:03:29guy and so Mr chairman I I appreciate your work on free speech and weaponization but I I would tell you that you should probably talk to some of your members who are in charge of other committees so that we continue continue decorum and some Norms here that people when the rules allow you to wave on to a committee that those waivers are approved I yield back would the gentleman yield uh I would I I there were two members two former
▶ 1:03:59chairman of of oversight and I can say with certainty neither one of us ever failed to uh respect that ability to wave on you know we it's a tumultuous committee but it's one that always supported uh that and I apologize for what you experienced personally because I didn't go through any trauma but I I I I I I I I appreciate it I mean look I have no doubt that you know maybe chairman comr ran into her office and was like don't put mosquit
▶ 1:04:30on but like but but at the end of the day I I bring it up here because I'm I'm asking you to talk to your colleagues we we I don't think any members want a tradition where a committee allows this committee doesn't allow waivers right but where a committee does allow waivers uh we should continue that tradition we do allow wave within the sub committ do allow waivers here okay yeah we we just don't allow wave from outside the committee but look I I I I will speak and use all the uh persuasion I have with the gentle lady to
▶ 1:05:00prevent that in the future I I appreciate that uh Mr Isa thank you so much gentleman gentleman yields back who seeks recognition question is on the amendment uh from uh the gentle lady from uh Pennsylvania Pennsylvania um all those in favor oh she's already spoke on her amendment I think I think I think we're ready for the vote uh just tell oh okay right that's what I thought that's what I thought the question is on the amendment offered by The Gentle lady from Pennsylvania
▶ 1:05:31all those in favor say I I all those oppose no no in opinion of the chair the NOS have it roll call roll call being requested the clerk will call the roll Mr Jordan no Mr Jordan votes no Mr Isa Mr Isa votes no Mr Bigs Mr Bigs votes no Mr mlto Mr mlto votes no Mr Tiffany Mr Tiffany votes no Mr Massie Mr Mr Roy Mr Fitzgerald Mr Fitzgerald votes no Mr
▶ 1:06:01Klein Mr Klein votes no Mr Gooden Mr van Drew no Mr van Drew votes no Mr Nells Mr Nells votes no Mr Moore Mr Moore votes no Mr Kylie Miss Hagman Miss Lee no Miss Lee votes no Mr Hunt Mr Fry m Mr gothman Mr gothman votes no Mr not Mr Harris
▶ 1:06:31Mr Harris votes no Mr and Mr Schmidt no Mr Schmidt votes no Mr Gil Mr Gil votes no Mr bomgardner Mr bomgardner votes no Mr Rasin I Mr Raskin votes I Mr Nadler I Mr Nadler votes I miss Lofgren Mr Cohen Mr Cohen votes I Mr Johnson Mr swell
▶ 1:07:02Mr Lou Miss jaal Miss gal votes I Mr Korea Mr Korea votes I miss scandin I miss ganin votes I Mr nus Miss mcbath Miss Ross Miss Ross votes I miss ballant miss ballant votes I Mr Garcia Mr Garcia votes I Miss camer Dove hi Miss camer Dove votes I Mr mosz Mr mosz votes I Mr Goldman Mr
▶ 1:07:32Goldman votes I Crockett Mr Kylie Mr Kylie votes no gentleman from Missouri Mr H Mr and votes no gentleman from Kentucky Mr Massie Mr Massie votes no anyone who hasn't been
▶ 1:08:10recorded clerk report Mr chairman there are 12 eyes and 19 nose uh the amendment is not adopted who seeks recognition you guys got any more amendments any more amendments question occurs uh on the adoption of the amendment in the nature of a substitute this will be followed immediately by a vote uh on reporting the bill all those in favor of the um amendment in the nature of a substitute say I I
▶ 1:08:41those oppose noair the in the opinion of the chair of the eyes have it uh question is fa the sorry you guys have it am request is on favorably reporting the bill as amended all those in favor say I I those oppose no in the pin the chairs the eyes have it and the bill is ordered to be reported favorable to the house memb
▶ 1:09:11well have two days to submit views without objection the bill will be reported as a single Amendment the nature of a substitute incorporating all adopted amendments and staff is authorized to make Technical and changes um soon to notice I call up HR 875 to protect our communities from DUI act for purpose of markup and move the Committee reported favorably to the house the clerk will report the bill h87 without objection the bill will be bill will be considered as read and open for Amendment at any point
▶ 1:09:41the chair now recognize the gentleman from Alabama Mr Moore for an opening statement thank you Mr chairman every 45 minutes that is how often someone in the United States dies in a crash involving an alcohol impaired driver in 2022 alone there were 13 , 524 alcohol impaired driving fatalities in 2020 drunk driving crashes led to nearly 400,000 injuries those crashes don't discriminate the victim could be me could be you be one of any of our family members this
▶ 1:10:11issue hits close to home for me there was a newly wed couple from my hometown of Enterprise Alabama named Angel and Jeremy C I knew this couple personally Angel and Jeremy were riding a motorcycle together when out of nowhere an illegal alien under the influence of alcohol collided into the newlyweds with his pickup their lives were cut dramatically short tragedies like this are not uncommon across our country take Broomfield Colorado an example for example in December of 2023 an illegal alien killed a 46y
▶ 1:10:42old woman and her 16-year-old son when he drove his truck up to 100 mph ran into the victim's vehicle causing that to then crash into a tree despite having five previous DUI related convictions a Boulder County Judge sentenced this illegal alien to probation and community service and work release on December 8th 2023 in relation to the two of those convictions Just 4 days before the drunk driving crash killed that mother and her son
▶ 1:11:12or consider the case in Flor from Florida where just last month an illegal alien from Mexico was arrested in Florida for his third DUI after he hit and killed a kindergartener in Texas in December 24 an illegal alien killed a seven-year-old girl after he drove his after he drove drunk and crashed into her car or crashed into a car that was being driven by the girl's mother just months earlier ice had lifted a detainer which had previously lodged against this illegal alien after he was arrested
▶ 1:11:42for assaulting a family member in June of 2024 HR 875 makes Common Sense changes to immigration law to make an alien who is convicted of or who is admited to driving under the influence inadmissible it also makes an alien convicted of doing so removable in fact 59 Democrats voted for this in favor of this legislation when I brought it to the floor and of the house last February to our Democrat colleagues today we respond to the Mandate of the American people who just three months ago
▶ 1:12:12voted for Republicans to restore common sense in this country if you're a guest in this country and you drive drunk you should be removed from our country period drunk drivers are involved in 31% of all crash deaths in this country on average drunk driving killed roughly 11,000 people in the United States every year from 2012 2022 yet the immigration laws do not make aliens inadmissible or removable if they drive drunk and recklessly break our laws HR 875 changes that and creates safer streets and
▶ 1:12:42safer communities for all of us I urge my colleagues to support and protect our communities from the DUIs act and with that Mr chairman I'll yield back gentlemen yields back the ranking members recognized for an opening statement um thank you thank you Mr chairman and thank you to the gentleman for um his legislation we lose U more than 11,000 people every year to drunk drivers on the highway and it's an issue that's very close uh to my mind and my heart because I lost a beloved cousin of mine
▶ 1:13:12uh Wendy uh back when we were both in our 20s she was in the prime of her life she just graduated from brandise college and she was killed while riding a bicycle on the roadways of Florida um the the the driver of that car was a US citizen I suppose it doesn't make any difference um when I was a state senator Maryland we took on the power of the liquor Lobby to pass legislation to strengthen our DUI and reckless driving laws uh in our state and
▶ 1:13:43um I introduced legislation to compel the use of what's called an ignition interlock device which is basically a breathalyzer that's put in the car and to compel the use of the ignition interlock device for anybody who's been convicted of DUI um and um the the liquor Lobby and some of the the bars uh opposed it they said that's a pain every time you get in your car you've got to breathe into the the breathalizer yeah it's a pain but uh it doesn't
▶ 1:14:13quite compare to the pain of a mother or father or son or a daughter or brother or sister or a friend who loses somebody to a drunk driver this is not bumper cars you know this is the real thing so we passed that in Maryland and I was proud of that and I know my colleagues in Annapolis uh have continued to work on the issue I will never forget I was named legislator of the Year by Mothers Against Drunk Driving in 2016 so um this is important to me um the thing that shocked me was to
▶ 1:14:43find that there are big political forces uh in the states that are opposed to cracking down on DUI driving because they view any such legislation as an interference with the ability to promote alcohol culture and drinking culture um and it was shocking to me that it became a partisan issue uh in Annapolis except for colleagues who themselves had lost somebody in their family or lost a friend now I've seen some of the same Dynamic here in
▶ 1:15:13Congress for years we have had legislation introduced uh by members on both sides to encourage states to enact and enforce laws requiring the installation of the ignition interlock device for people who are convicted of drunk driving and I I'm a proud co-sponsor of that bill the ndwi ACT last Congress um alas there were no uh Republican members of this committee who joined us in that legislation I know representative
▶ 1:15:43Cohen has worked energetically on combating drunk and dangerous driving on the roads along with a number of other My Democratic colleagues the halt drunk driving Act was included in the bipartisan infrastructure bill um which again unfortunately um fell to partisan conflict and so it was rejected by all but one of the um GOP members of this panel so against that backdrop today's legislation um
▶ 1:16:14seems suspect to me because it doesn't confront the danger of drunk driving with serious public policy changes that is it doesn't deal comprehensively with the issue obviously the vast majority of drunk driving fatalities in America are caused by US citizens so this legislation seems to weaponize the problem to scapegoat immigrants it's not a serious attempt to reduce drunk driving on the roads a problem that's
▶ 1:16:44overwhelmingly about citizen drivers because overwhelmingly our roads are filled with citizen drivers nor does the bill do anything to repair our broken immigration system or secur the border so um we've got able and committed members on both sides of the aisle and if we want to make the road safer for everybody from drunk drivers let's get together and do it I will have lunch with whoever wants to do that let's plan that out now Congress can pass bipartisan comprehensive
▶ 1:17:15legislation to address drunk driving we can also pass bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform uh we reached a a tough deal in on the Senate side with President Biden last Congress to fortify our border with better technology more Personnel more Asylum judges increased funding um and then that was tanked as everybody knows so I I would suggest that's a much better way to go and I will yield back to you Mr chairman gentleman yields back to chair I'll recognize the gentleman from Alabama
▶ 1:17:45to offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute Mr chairman I appreciate it this really is just an amendment in technical nature I have Amendment at the desk clerk will report the amendment amendment in the nature of a sub objection Amendment the nature of substitute will be considered as read and shall be considered base text for the purposes of amendment the chair now recogniz a gentleman from Alabama to explain the amendment it just it doesn't change anything but the date Mr chairman so it doesn't change any substance of the bill with that I'll yield back gentleman yields back the gentleman
▶ 1:18:15from Texas Mr Nells is recognized yes sir I thank you I support uh my colleague Mr Moore on this issue you know serving as an old sheriff and Fort Bank County Texas we arrested a lot of people for drunk driving we threw a lot of people in jail some of them went to prison if they caused Serious bily injury or death to to the victims um this bill really just focuses nothing more on individuals that are here that are illegal and that are caught uh driving Under the Influence I can remember
▶ 1:18:45Miss Buu I'll never forget it her son was in my office and I had to explain to him why his mother was killed by an individ idual that was deported six previous times and one of the previous deportations was as a result of drunk driving so quite honestly Mr Moore if your bill would have been in effect years ago maybe Miss Buu would be here with us today so this is much needed legislation if you're going to come over here I just ask you to respect
▶ 1:19:15our damn laws respect our laws and if you're here illegally obviously you don't and then you want to come over here and harm possibly kill the American people you need to serve your time and as soon as you get released you need to be sent back to where you came from with that I yield back gentleman Yi's back the gentleman from California is recognized I think I think you were the first yeah gentleman from California thank you Mr chairman and first of all Mr Mo want to thank
▶ 1:19:45you for bringing up this legislation it's good to discuss driving under the influence in my district a number of years ago I got a phone call in the morning city of Orange a young lady American citizen under the ramed into a number of children in a school crosswalk 7 a.m.
▶ 1:20:10killed a number of them under the influence 7 in the morning she was partying all night got in her car in the morning killed a number of children so I I know we're debating here I don't think this is an issue of undocumented rather it's an issue of driving under the influence in country uh Mr Moore I was just going to say under crimes of moral turpitude you're already
▶ 1:20:41inadmissible and deportable in the United States and these crimes include murder manslaughter uh violent crimes sexual assault rape incense child abuse and embezzlement theft robbery fraud conspiracy money laundering drug offenses domestic violence spousal abuse animal cruelty animal fights and DUIs you're already
▶ 1:21:11inadmissible deportable to the US but I would say to you and I agree with you that driving Under the Influence is an issue we have to deal with continue to deal with in this country we have to stand a strong message not only to those who are here not as American citizens as immigrants but rather all Americans we have to send them a message no more DUIs
▶ 1:21:42and I think Congress needs to lead by example I'd like to see a bill that for example would say members of Congress who are convicted of a DUI are not eligible to serve US Congress let's lead example Mr sorry you can't do the time don't do the crime so Mr Mo I would say to
▶ 1:22:12you I'd love to work with you on public policy to address driving Under the Influence too many people have died horrifically because of foolish individuals drinking smoking pot getting behind the wheel and driving in our public streets this is not an issue of undocumented of immigrants rather it's a public issue that we need to continue to address with the gentleman yield of
▶ 1:22:42course I want to thank the distinguished gentleman from California for his remarks and I failed to say in my opening statements that indeed um as the gentleman points out that uh most DUI offenses are already uh grounds for removal because they are crimes of moral turpitude DUIs where the penalty is a year or more and where there's bodily harm hit and runs aggravated DUI and driving with knowledge of an invalid suspended or revoked license so
▶ 1:23:13uh what this legislation would do essentially is just make it mandatory upon uh even a first DUI offense where nobody is injured um you know I don't know that that makes our roads uh safer compared to for example uh a compulsory ignition interlock device rule for people who are actually convicted of drunk driving that really has worked dramatically in Maryland in any event to uh reduce drunk driving on our roads because it's a
▶ 1:23:43it's a tiny population that actually drives drunk most people just don't do it and they understand how antisocial it is but is a tiny population of people who have a drinking problem who keep doing it over over again so the ignition interlock device is installed in their car the breathalizer on their steering wheel so the car won't start until they breathe in and they pass the the breathalyzer test so that's a positive way to go and I I believe our colleague M Gul has an amendment that would actually
▶ 1:24:13um allow the nuances of this problem to be dealt with and I thank the gentleman for yielding and I yield back him want to say to the author this amendment Mr Moore I'd love to work with you on this very specific issue of DUIs under the influence in this great country no room for it thank you very much gentleman yields back gentleman from Arizona is recognized Mr chairman I have an amendment at the desk okay I'll reserve a point
▶ 1:24:43of order Mr chairman okay well you don't have the amendment the okay can we go somewhere else can you hold just a second yeah I'll hold uh the gentleman from Wisconsin Mr Tiffany is recognized on Tuesday January uh 30th 2024 at approximately 3:30 p.m.
▶ 1:25:04a Russ County sheriff's officer uh Deputy was dispatched to a motor vehicle accident on Highway 8 in Russ County which is in my district in northern Wisconsin the lady Smith Emergency Medical Services was dispatched fire Personnel advis that the operator of the semi was trapped within the cab of the vehicle the driver who is the loone doent occupant of the semi um I was identified as Steven nashom Steven nashal's condition appeared to be critical the deputy
▶ 1:25:34made contact with a male near the other vehicle involved in the crash Jorge Sanchez advised the deputy that he did not speak English the deputy uh observed Mr Sanchez swaying while standing in place his eyes were bloodshot and glossy and his face and eyelids appeared droopy the deputy detected Ed a strong odor of intoxicants the Deputy learned that Mr Sanchez driver's license status was revoked due to a prior
▶ 1:26:05ow Mr Sanchez agreed to a prelim preliminary breath test the test indicated a breath uh alcohol content of76 the uh in Wisconsin 08 is over the limit Mr Sanchez admitted he is not legally in the United States and he has not been in the United States for approximately three years which would be or had been in the US for approximately three years which is
▶ 1:26:392021 Mr chairman that gentleman um Steven nashom he died in that accident he leaves behind his family including three daughters this is part of the Carnage that illegal immigration and the invasion of Amer America over the last four years has brought to America and there's a tiny bit of the population that's dead as a result of it Mr nashom as I said leaves behind
▶ 1:27:12daughters as we've been saying for four years every State's a border state this happened in rural Northern Wisconsin about as far as you can get from the southern border I'd also point out a witness that we had here Mr Mr chairman Aon Rockwall from puke Wisconsin her family's part of the Carnage that came from illegal immigration here in America her son died of a fentanyl poisoning I would take you to Prairie de Sheen Wisconsin where a Venezuelan gang member
▶ 1:27:42brutally beat up a woman and her daughter just year after going on a crime spree in Madison of which DNE county has a um um is a sanctuary County here in the United States of America so I'm fully in support of Mr Moore's bill here I mean unfortunately we've had to take a rifle shot approach here in this committee to make
▶ 1:28:12the point to some on the other side and by the way thank you to the Democrats have who have supported these pieces of legislation as they've come forward but we've had to very specifically identify for the American people the Carnage that has been going on here in our country and this is just another one of those rifle shot bills that we've had to do that make it very clear of the Carnage that has happened in the United States of America over the last four years and I am
▶ 1:28:43grateful that um this committee I believe will be bringing we talked about we heard the term legislation um I very hopeful that we will do the same as we did last session when we passed hr2 out of this uh House of Representatives I hope we will do something similar to fix this problem that has been foed on the American people over the last four years which was probably
▶ 1:29:13the number one issue that people were voting on on November 5th because every state was a border state and I hope we will continue to bring legislation like this including much uh wider ranging legislation to fix the problem on the southern border that the Trump Administration has made clear they're going to do it but let's make sure it lasts for more than four years and it becomes statutory and it becomes statutory
▶ 1:29:43by being kicked off in just this committee the Judiciary Committee that knows the Carnage in America needs to end I fully support this bill and I yield back Mr chairman G's back I had I believe General lady from Washington and mine is an amendment uh at the desk uh okay yeah go ahead the general ladies recognize clerk report Amendment to the amendment
▶ 1:30:13in the nature objection amend be considered as read The Gentle lady from Washington's Rec Amendment reserve a point of order has been reserved by the gentleman from Arizona thank you Mr chairman my amendment is is straightforward and I think it would help address the unintended consequences of this bill I too appreciate the efforts that people are making on both sides of the aisle to address the issue of DUIs um but I am concerned about what this bill does and allows for it would allow uh
▶ 1:30:44my Amendment would allow judges to have discretion to consider mitigating factors before summarily ordering a lawful resident to be because this bill does involve lawful residents I take DUIs extremely seriously according to the National Highway tra uh traffic safety administration approximately 37 people die in drunk driving accidents per day in the United States and I think the ranking member and others on this committee have offered very powerful statements
▶ 1:31:15about why it's very important for us to do what we can to prevent driving Under the Influence but this bill is unfortunately I think um not a solution as written as the ranking member discussed in his statement many DUIs are already considered crimes involving moral turpitude and they are already grounds for removal or ad inadmissibility serious Public Safety threats are already deportable offenses under current law
▶ 1:31:45I worry that this bill seriously scapegoats legal immigrants who have long-standing Community presence and considerations and subjects them to very very harsh sentences without any judicial discretion to be clear this bill would make anyone convicted of a single misdemeanor DUI subject to deportation the issue here is that the bill has not at all considered how DUI
▶ 1:32:15statutes differ across the country in Arizona the DUI statute allows people to be charged with the DUI if they're intoxicated and have quote physical control of their vehicle I bring this up because in the ninth circuit in reviewing an appeal of a removal case for non-citizen charged under this law um it was found that the quote physical control language meant that under the statute and I quote one may be convicted under it for sitting in one's own car in one's own
▶ 1:32:46driveway with the key in the ignition and a bottle of beer in one's hand while the non-citizen in this case had been ordered deported because his conviction under the statute was considered a crime of moral turpitude the ninth circuit overturned that ruling because the actions covered by the statute could not all reasonably be seen as crimes involving moral turpitude as the court put it quote drunken driving is Despicable having physical control of a car while driving is not if this Bill had
▶ 1:33:16been enacted when the case had been decided the the case would never have actually made it to the ninth circuit because no judge judge would have the discretion to rule whether this so-called crime merited the very harsh sentence of deportation the bill would actually prevent in its current form judges from being able to decide if the punishment fits the crime and this case is just one example of over Brad DUI statutes there are many others that we can discuss
▶ 1:33:46I was recently taking a a refresher course on driving in order to get a discount on my insurance policy and I learned that my state is actually one of those same States Washington allows for the conviction of a misdemeanor DUI while not actually driving the vehicle and remember the case I discussed only made it to court because the prosecutors chose to bring those charges suggesting that prosecutors will indeed continue um to advance these minor
▶ 1:34:16DUI cases under these statutes individuals that are charged with DUIs for merely sleeping in their car would be penalized if you're trying to wait until because you get into the car and you realize that you should not be driving and you pull over on the side of the road and you sit behind the wheel you could actually be convicted so people have potentially made the conscious choice not to drive impaired but they end up punished and again to be clear we are talking about green card holders people
▶ 1:34:46who are legal permanent residents legal residents here in the United States who Republicans often say they claim to like and so we're putting their Fates on the line um so my Amendment says that immigration judges have the discretion to decide if a DUI conviction actually merits deportation by considering mitigating factors things like was anyone harmed does the has the person sought treatment for substance abuse after their DUI conviction
▶ 1:35:17which is what we want in the case of uh an illness or an addiction and the length of time that they were convicted of the DUI everyone deserves a second chance this amendment doesn't even require that it just allows judges to consider all of the factors of the case and give them discretion to consider offering Grace to someone who might deserve it and I hope that there might be support across the aisle to for this amendment I yield back gent lady yields back gentleman from Alabama is recognized
▶ 1:35:47thank you Mr chairman on its website just last year US Customs and board of protection clearly stated a single driving Under the Influence DUI conviction is not grounds to deny entry into the United States moreover the board of immigration appeals has held a simple DUI offense is not a crime involving moral turpitude that would make an alien removable from the United States time and time again the Democrats on this committee are dead set on watering down any bill that has a whiff of immigration enforcement if you ask the average American whether an alien in this
▶ 1:36:17country should be deported if an alien commits a DUI offense the average citizen would be dumbfounded to think that that isn't already in the law yet Democrats today would prefer that immigration judges and immigration officers engage in the complex legal analysis to determine whether a DUI offense is serious enough to Warrant alien being removed from the US or barred from entering the country in the first place despite the electoral defeat in November Democrats continue to reject just common sense we should we should not have to wait for an alien to kill someone or after
▶ 1:36:47their second or third or fourth DUI before we Deport them we don't need Empower immigration judges to ose open border enforcement agendas through such vast discretion statistics show by the time someone is arrested for a DUI folks that person has driven at least a dozen times drunk the only fact that we should be considered is whether an alen has admitted or been convicted of a DUI offence that simply makes sense I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment and without that Mr chairman will the gentleman y for yeah
▶ 1:37:17is it okay um thank you thank you for that the powerful statement um you know when when someone's killed by a drunk driver um the family would like to see the drunk driver the reckless driver the motorist who does this put away forever um and um then it raises the question when you think about it not from the standpoint of the victim's family but from the standpoint of the legislature well
▶ 1:37:47anybody who's driving drunk theoretically could be causing the exact same kind of uh trauma and pain and death so I I the question I want to ask you is should anybody leave aside their citizenship or their immigration St should anybody who is picked up on drunk driving the first time be sentenced to jail for a year or five years or 10 years because they theoretically could have killed somebody because
▶ 1:38:17the the legislation we're looking at would take a permanent resident in the country and say you're out we're going to Deport you even if nobody's hurt and it's just an honest question it's not a rhetorical question and I understand that Mr Rasin but we're simply trying to clarify here that we have people in this country who are here illegally or even if they're with a green car but if they're driving Under the Influence there needs to be some teeth in the law we don't need to just turn them Lo loose right no agree but should in other words should it be a deportable offense the first
▶ 1:38:48time if nobody's hurt I mean if they're hurt they should be out and they're out now and I guess and that's the question I I don't know the apply different standards to people who are here illegally all the time no but people here legally then cuz the Gent ladies Amendment the Gent I thank the gentlemen for yielding to me so the argument the nub of the argument from the other side is if someone brandishes a knife but doesn't stab you you can
▶ 1:39:18stay the studies are clear when I when I hear somebody say oh you know this it was just the first DUI it was innocuous nothing to it the studies are clear I'm going to I'm going to refer you to multiple studies to in just a minute but I'm going to give you this study the average person who gets a single DUI has coni has committed multiple DUI there there that the scientific evidence of
▶ 1:39:48that is clear that's clear and what you're saying is and and and and by the way um the the previous ranker to you said uh not too long ago whether someone has two or six or 20 convictions gentleman no big deal no no I'm I'm going to keep going thank you the gentleman who's asking to yield mentioned if you have a DUI you shouldn't be qualified to sit in Congress right or the senate or the Senate
▶ 1:40:18yeah right but but the bottom line is there are there are people in this Congress today who have a DUI but but ultimately when we get down to this the argument you're making is a single DUI unless there's contact with somebody that harms someone doesn't work that they should not be they should not be given this P this particular punishment gentleman yield and then I'll just tell you the APC case that you're talking about you're you're making it sound like an APC is someone who's
▶ 1:40:48pulled off the road is asleep in their vehicle trying to sleep it off that is not what an APC laws in Arizona or anywhere else in this country APC actual physical control actual physical control means you have actual ability to get that car going moving like that so it's keys in the ignition we've had people passed out in the middle of an intersection car running technically they're not driving you can't get them on a DUI you can get them on an actual physical
▶ 1:41:20control time expired gentl from Alabama yields back the gentleman from New York uh Mr Goldman's recognized M Goldman thank you Mr chairman uh I'll first yield to uh the gentle lady from California I I I actually disagreed with the ninth circuit's decision um and I agree with the gentleman uh from Arizona on the uh risk uh posed by someone in control of a vehicle while uh inebriated
▶ 1:41:51I I I don't think they I understand the Le legal decision but uh I disagree with the outcome but here's the question I have we don't we want to protect everyone from harm but you we also have our belief in the possibility of redemption and so if you have a legal permanent resident who had a DUI conviction 25 years ago went
▶ 1:42:21to AA and has recovered they would be removable under this bill so I do think one of the opportunities that the gentle ladies uh Amendment offers is to provide for uh the possibility of redemption because I think we all know people in our churches in our neighborhoods Even in our own family who have recovered from alcoholism and that's there needs to be that possibility
▶ 1:42:51especially for people who were legally here and I just wanted to make that observation and I yield back to the gentleman from New York uh thank you for yielding back I I this amendment raises I I think a narrow but very important flaw in the bill which is that it applies to lawful permanent residents yesterday we had a subcommittee hearing on the president's executive order on Birthright citizenship um which is flawed in many ways
▶ 1:43:22but it does distinguish between lawful permanent residents and those who are here legally but on visas and to say that a someone who has a green card uh if they are convicted of misdemeanor uh DUI should be deported is Draconian and is inconsistent with other uh other distinctions in
▶ 1:43:52bills and executive orders that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have supported if I think that the general L's Amendment addresses that issue uh very well by allowing even the lawful permanent resident to remain in the statute which I disagree with but at least giving a judge discretion if there is a situation like I just described which seems excessive and I think
▶ 1:44:22is not not what uh the bill is truly intended to address so I would ask uh my colleague from Alabama if he might consider either supporting this amendment uh which I think addresses it or at least addressing in some other way uh the fact that lawful permanent residents are included in this bill with the gentleman you I will yes um just to underscore your point uh somebody who is a
▶ 1:44:53permanent resident of the country a green card holder uh who has a DUI for the first time could be still um deported under the general ladies Amendment if there's an analysis that finds that that person causes continuing risks and harm um all all that the gentle ladies Amendment suggests is I understand it is that a court should be able to look at those different factors rather than say everybody who
▶ 1:45:23gets a DUI the first time is going to be deported and the reason that I posed the question to the gentleman from Alabama is because I was kind of on the other side of this issue when it came to US citizens when we were talking about whether people should be jailed the first time uh in Annapolis and there the partisan divide was different it was I think more of the Democrats who were saying yeah although not enough of them but the Republicans were saying absolutely not give everybody a break on the first DUI if if nobody's
▶ 1:45:53harmed if nobody's hurt by it and right now a permanent resident who does hurt somebody is going to be deported right so they hit and run or if there is harm to another person that person will be deported so we're talking about that discret category where it's a firsttime offender and nobody's hurt and I don't know if there's anybody here who would say that person should go to jail for a year or 5 years I don't know I'm somebody who would entertain that because I know what it means means to lose somebody
▶ 1:46:24in your family and you wouldn't be in a situation like that if there weren't people actually out there drunk driving all the time and I'm happy to yield back and thank you for your Indulgence Mr Goldman and I yield back to the chairman gentleman yields back gentleman from Arizona is recognized thank you Mr chairman so I I am confused by the arguments that are being presented here we all want Mercy we all want Redemption when we all understand Mercy we all understand Redemption you know what if you've committed a
▶ 1:46:54crime under this particular statutory provision chair like speaking the amendment you can you can go you can go and be seek Redemption and mercy in your home country and I and I wish you speed but also the other side has claimed that a DUI is a crime of moral ttitude they have we've we've heard that right and it is a crime of moral ttitude but they are not
▶ 1:47:24they're saying in this instance this crime of moral ttitude is unique and should not uh uh require removal but I'm just going to remind you that if even if you have a green card if you commit any of the crimes under this provision you're gone you are gone and this is should be no exception will the gentleman yield and so just may maybe if we've got time so so when I get back to the to
▶ 1:47:54the studies that I'm I'm reviewing and I keep hearing you know if it's just if it's a firsttime DUI if FS a firsttime DUI and nobody was hurt you know they they ought to be okay we when when I they ought to be okay we we're going to let them stay in but but the bottom line is the studies are clear and I'll I'll just refer to one right here um it's called risk of alcohol impaired driving
▶ 1:48:24recidivism among first offenders and multiple offenders the studies are really clear one time the first time you're caught because that's what we're talking about this is the this isn't the first time you drove drunk and when we say drunk we think of someone's falling down but we're talking about the legal limit which has been defined in various States and the most common number is probably a point 8 but if you're at a
▶ 1:48:5405 something like 80 to 85% of the population is impaired to drive we're talking about divided attention that's what driving is requires D divided attention what is the impairment with an ' 05 is that your ability to control your divided attention is derogated that's what we're talking about we're part talking about somebody who is running the risk if they haven't caused an accident the first time they're arrested and convicted and by the
▶ 1:49:24way State a lot of states don't fully uh fully prosecute they're providing diversion programs and whatnot this study itself talks about the multitudes of times that an individual is driving impaired but has only been caught the one time that's the distinction that's a huge distinction um and and back when I was Prosecuting we we saw the same thing with whether it's burglaries or thefts or or uh the one that was less likely to be that way was a
▶ 1:49:54was obviously a homicide less likely to be CAU uh you know to have committed multiple homicides and then be arrested but with a DUI it's happening often um and would the gentleman yield for a quick question yeah Mr Korea asked you did first so so so uh let me just just finish this thought here the thought that I have is I'm I'm baffled by this notion that it's a crime of moral ttitude but somehow nobody's getting hurt here so we're going to let this go and I'm just telling
▶ 1:50:25you um there is there is far more to it than that I'm with I oppose this amendment and Mr Korea thank you Mr Bigs I just want to say that your example of somebody pulling a knife on somebody that's probably a felony that's not equivalent to what we're talking about no I look let let me tell you it depends on the state depends on it person years reclaim my time backa it back that is that is incorrect gent incorrect gentl that's incorrect
▶ 1:50:55statement gent for another from California I just wanted to make the point the Democrats U are not recognizing a distinction between legal immigrants and US citizens who drive drunk the difference is we're stuck with the US citizens who endanger our society and we have to deal with them yeah um we shouldn't have to deal with drunk drivers coming here from other countries you know whether you're here legally or illegally you are still a guest of this country and if you behave in a manner that places others in danger
▶ 1:51:25you need to leave I yield back and and I I I'll yield to to the gentleman from the rank than you kindly it sounds like you and I are sort of on the same side of the drunk driving issue because you know I was very tough on this but do you take the position that a US citizen who's picked up first time on DUI and I understand they've probably driven drunk many times before I mobilized all that data for my own arguments um but should that person be put in jail for 5 years or a year so would say it's kind of the equivalent of deporting someone
▶ 1:51:55who's been a permanent resident for 25 years I I would I would I would say your analogy is inapt it's apples to oranges but I would also say that in Arizona for instance you get an ' 05 you're going to jail you are going first offense you are going to jail time of the gentleman has expired the gentleman the gentleman from Georgia is recognized thank you Mr chairman I yeld to the general lady uh jaia Paul thank you thank you Mr Johnson I I wanted to address a number of issues and I want to thank the gentleman
▶ 1:52:26from New York Mr Goldman for his powerful statement I think it's important to look at the current situation and how this bill changes it so the current situation is that the following DUI offenses are all considered crimes of moral turpitude that is um where the maximum possible penalty is a year or more and where there is serious bodily harm hit and runs aggravated uis driving with knowledge of an invalid suspended or
▶ 1:52:56revoked license so I wanted to clear up that that is currently the law what this bill would do is it would expand that and say that somebody who was just with a single DUI where those circumstances don't apply so none of these terrible things have happened um would be given not even a a you know a get out of jail free card so to speak but would simply have a judge be able to consider
▶ 1:53:26the circumstances is this somebody who has lived here for 20 years is this somebody who has never had any kind of an offense before is this somebody who has an addiction an illness because addiction is an illness and I think we all know that and we all talk about it in different ways but somehow when it comes to this issue we don't want to talk about it that way and certainly when it comes to immigrants we don't necessarily want to talk about it in that way so my Amendment doesn't go
▶ 1:53:57as far as I would like because I actually agree with Mr Goldman's Point earlier but it at least gives the opportunity for Redemption as was so powerfully spoken about and the the issue of Second Chances can a judge an immigration judge at least consider whether the punishment fits the crime because I think what the ranking member was trying to get at with his with his example is that we do have some sense in our legal Criminal Justice
▶ 1:54:27System whether it works or not that there should be a punishment should fit the crime so if it's a if if somebody is killed that's a different uh set of you know um requirements in terms of punishment than if somebody is not harmed and so my Amendment just says can a judge consider those factors and cons and do that only for legal we're only talking about legal residents so this is not about undocumented because undocumented immigrants
▶ 1:54:57automatically are deportable for that offense so we're talking about legal residents here we're talking about a specific category of people where these considerations would be considered it doesn't mean that it's going to apply but we're giving the judge the ability to have a second to give a second chance to somebody so I wanted to clarify all of those things because I think it's really important it's not it's it's a very narrowly tailored Amendment and I think for those of us who feel like there
▶ 1:55:28has been a slingshot approach on immigration because there hasn't been broader immigration reform which as the ranking member of the immigration subcommittee is somebody who's worked on it for 20 years as somebody who is an immigrant myself has actually been through all the Visas and gotten citizenship I think that is really important I'd love to work with people on the other side who are genuinely committed to trying to reform the immigration system but to put penalties on legal residents who are here and who have
▶ 1:55:58a history of contribution to their churches to their neighborhood groups to their U communities and not and put a punishment on them that is so harsh that is deportation that leaves family members behind that may be US citizens that puts people in a position where they don't get a second chance when we do have you know we certain have members of Congress who have who have had DUIs and they've gotten second chances they get to serve in in the United States
▶ 1:56:28Congress I think this is a very narrowly tailored amendment that I hope the other side would support um and I I appreciate the consideration and and you know and am looking for um the the the folks on the other side of family values to be able to stand up and support this this ability well the gentlemen you I would it's my time to the gentleman from
▶ 1:56:58California thank you Mr Johnson Mr Moore if you have a guest that's been here 30 years yes he's a guest in this country a little bit different that's why judicial discretion it's probably something that will help us solve this but we don't know again if you want to work on something on DUI public policy love to work with you on that we've even had a president been convicted of a DUI who can't go to Canada unless he gets special permission so this is about
▶ 1:57:28DUI public policy sir thank you very much and I yield back to Mr Johnson Mr Johnson yields back uh the chair now recognizes a gentleman from Wisconsin Mr grman oh okay gentleman from Missouri yeah thank you Mr chairman you know Mr chairman I think it's it's clear that that being present in the United States legally
▶ 1:57:58is a privilege not a right and even though aliens are routinely arrested for and convicted of DUI they have they are rarely found admiss inadmissible or deportable um the and defining whether if an offense is an even whether it's an aggravated felony or or or or crime involving moral interet interpret is a complicated legal process and and aliens are rarely deported for for DUI in addition the board of immigration in the matter of Lopez Mesa held that a simple
▶ 1:58:29DUI defense is not a crime involving moral tpud so U the uh representative Moore's house resolution 875 makes it clear that D DUI which claims 13 more than 13,000 American lives a year is a ground for inadmissibility and deportable offense the problem with this amendment is that there are way too many soft on crime and soft on illegal immigration judges so giving those judges discretion to wave the requirements
▶ 1:58:59of this proposed law is in is inadvisable I strongly support the underlying bill I yield back gentleman yields back uh if it's okay we will we'll have a call the amendment vote I know we have several people want to speak on the legislation itself so the question occurs on the amendment uh from the G lady from Washington all those in favor say I I all those oppose no no opinion of the chair the eyes or excuse me the nose have it almost uh roll call being requested the clerk
▶ 1:59:29will call the roll Mr Jordan no Mr Jordan votes no Mr Isa Mr BS Mr Bigs votes no Mr mlto Mr ment votes no Mr Tiffany Mr Massie Mr Massie votes no Mr Roy Mr Roy votes no Mr Fitzgerald Mr Fitzgerald votes no Mr Klein Mr Klein votes no Mr Gooden Mr van Drew Mr van Drew votes no Mr Nells
▶ 1:59:59Mr Nels votes no Mr Moore Mr Moore votes no Mr Kylie Mr Kylie votes no Miss Hagman Miss Lee Miss Lee votes no Mr Hunt Mr Fry Mr grathan Mr grathan not Mr not votes
▶ 2:00:29no Mr Harris Mr and Mr and votes no Mr Schmidt Mr Gil Mr bomgardner Mr bomgardner votes no Mr Rasin Mr Rasin votes I Mr Nadler Mr Nadler votes I miss lren Mr Cohen Johnson Mr Johnson Mr Johnson votes I Mr
▶ 2:01:01swell Mr Lou Miss gal Miss gal VES I Mr kareah Mr Korea votes I miss scanland miss scanland votes I Mr nus Miss mcbath Miss Ross Miss ballant Miss ballant votes I Mr Garcia Mr Garcia votes I miss camer Dove Mr moscowitz Mr Goldman
▶ 2:01:31Mr Goldman votes I Crockett Mr Isa you're not recorded Mr Isa votes no Mr gin VES no
▶ 2:02:03Miss camer du votes I Mr chairman there are 10 10 eyes and 17 nose the amendment is not adopted uh chair now recognizes the gentleman from Arizona for an amendment an amendment at the desk clerk report
▶ 2:02:33Amendment to the amendment chairman I would reserve a point of order a point of order Reserve by gent from Maryland nature of a substitute to HR not objection Amendment uh will be considered as read the gentleman from Arizona is recognized to explain his Amendment yeah thank you Mr chairman Sergeant Brandon Mendoza of Mesa Arizona was killed in 2014 by an illegal alien who was driving the wrong way on the uh freeway uh while while the illegal alien
▶ 2:03:03was under the influence of alcohol he was legally impaired his blood alcohol content was three times the legal limit he had violent criminal record that went as far back as 1994 at the time Sergeant Mendoza was just off duty he had just completed his shift and he was on his way home when uh this uh this fellow the illegal alien was driving the wrong way on the freeway and hit offer officer M Doza who
▶ 2:03:33was riding his he was a motorcycle cop and he hit him on his motorcycle he was a 13-year police veteran and killed by someone who should never have been here and should never have been driving that day despite being convicted of multiple crimes over the years that individual was not deported and remained in the C country until that fateful day in 2014 this this um actually names this bill the following this act may be cited as the Jeremy and
▶ 2:04:03Angel SE and Sergeant Brandon Mendoza protect our communities from DUIs Act of 2025 I want to point out just a a couple others there was an illegal immigrant Honduras who was under the influence driving 100 Mil hour ran a red light and Jim the car Jimmy Chang was driving in and Jimmy Chang was 37 years old when he was killed between August and September of 2022 ice arrested 175
▶ 2:04:34individuals all with multiple DUI convictions of those that they arrested Juan Navaro Hernandez was arrested in 2019 had seven DUIs and had never been removed five additional illegal aliens were arrested recently for DUI including a one who had a felony DUI and one who had left the scene of an accident Mr chairman this this uh amendment is simple
▶ 2:05:04it's to recognize uh several people who have fallen at the hands of those who are illegally in the country who were driving under the influence and had killed them gentleman yields who seeks recognition I withdraw my point of order withdrawn point of orders withdrawn the chair now recognizes the well okay Mr chairman but but I'll just say simply I mean those are terrible
▶ 2:05:35cases I think that all of them if they were um serious crimes and felony DUIs are already covered by the law so I you know I'm not sure that the title fits exactly the meaning of the legislation but that that's all I want to say say about it and a your back chair now recognize a gentleman from California Mr Kylie thank you Mr chair uh so there's a suggestion from the ranking member that no one on our side supported the ignition uh interlock
▶ 2:06:05requirement which actually isn't true uh I did support that uh and uh I know that a number of my colleagues over here uh disagree with me on that particular issue I also wholeheartedly accept uh the premise that we need to do more about drunk driving to protect the thousands of people uh who are tragically killed uh on our roads every year uh but I fail to see how that premise leads to the conclusion that we ought to reject this legislation I don't see how that premise leads to the conclusion that
▶ 2:06:35we should take it easy on folks from other countries who drive drunk uh on our roads to the contrary uh our standards for who we allow in the country are one of the ways in which we determine and convey our values uh and uh this value is that if you want to uh come into the United States then you cannot recklessly turn your vehicle into a lethal weapon that can end people's lives in an instant and shatter entire
▶ 2:07:05families so this is a common sense measure I think it's why it passed the house with bipartisan support before uh it's why Canada has essentially the same policy as uh someone on the other side alluded to uh if you have a DUI you're not even allowed to go and and visit Canada and by the way as far as the hypothetical uh of you know your own citizens what the penalty ought to be uh they don't all go to jail on their first defense but they still have a standard that you can't even visit uh if you have a DUI uh so
▶ 2:07:35I think this is a common sense measure um I thank uh my uh friend from Alabama from from bringing it it will get bipartisan support on the floor and I hope it gets bipartisan support in this committee today will the gentleman yield uh sure um but I'm delighted to hear my friend from California supports ignition interlock device you were not on the bill so that I was just referring to co-sponsors of the bill and if you're planning to support it great and I I hope you will join that bill as a as a co-sponsor uh and you're also correct with your logic that
▶ 2:08:06um to uh support that does not imply that you don't support this legislation um I you know my position is exactly where uh the Gent lady from the state of Washington is which is that when we're talking about firsttime offenders uh who've not hurt anybody and they're permanent resident of the country it should go to a judge and they could be deported but perhaps not there's a whole constellation of factors we' want to look at which was always the
▶ 2:08:36argument that I heard from colleagues on both sides of the aisle but especially Republicans about US citizens on their first DUI that they shouldn't necessarily be sent to prison for that but work some other kind of arrangement out so I just hope that the fervor with with which people are expressing themselves about DUI by permanent residents will carry over to uh DUIs by US citizens thanks for yelding would the gentleman yield right here uh sure thank you um I just wanted to
▶ 2:09:06say that you know I've spoken with the bill sponsor I I I just appreciate if there's consideration being given to what I'm raising because I think that um this does have unintended consequences for a whole bunch of people across this country country who have been contributing in your communities in our communities and I think that we do have to continue to think about addiction of all kinds as as a as a disease as an illness and be
▶ 2:09:36able to ensure that we are making the punishment fit the crime and I just want to say again that deportation is an extremely harsh punishment it's merited in certain cases that's why we have crimes moral turpitude in the immigration La if I could reclaim my time just just to clarify so then for for both you and the ranking member you don't object to the the admissibility portions of the bill it's the deportability portions that you object to is that correct correct yes no
▶ 2:10:06I agree with that I yield back and my amendment makes it very clear by the way exactly what I'm talking about it's extremely narrowly crafted I yield back uh gentleman yields back gentleman from Kansas is recognized thank you Mr chairman and um I've appreciated the generally very thoughtful discussion on the broader issue of DUI and the particular issues of inadmissibility and deportability here I want to thank our colleague from Alabama Mr Moore for bringing this bill I'm very proud to be a co-sponsor of it
▶ 2:10:37and just as uh many of my colleagues have shared particular instances from their state I wanted to uh offer up why this is a matter of particular importance to me in the years that I had the opportunity to serve as attorney general for my state I believe I attended Ed every funeral of every law enforcement officer killed uh in the line of duty on our watch one of those was in September of 2016 a young man he was 44 it was Master Deputy Brandon Collins remember
▶ 2:11:07going to his funeral it was in a large auditorium at Mid americ Nazarene University in Johnson County Kansas Master Deputy Collins had been a cop for 21 years he was on patrol in South Johnson Cy on us69 Highway on the night of September the 11th uh 2016 which was a Sunday he was there after midnight so it was in the early morning hours it was dark he had pulled over a vehicle for um a tail light that wasn't operating a standard traffic stop there was a
▶ 2:11:37father a mother and their child in the car by all accounts uh he was having an appropriate and almost jovial appropriately jovial interaction with the folks he had stopped uh he walked back to his uh Cruiser which was parked behind that vehicle as a would be at a stop and then the folks who had been pulled over testified uh they heard a loud bang and the loud bang was the sound of a another vehicle uh driven by an illegal alien
▶ 2:12:08uh who was drunk his BAC was .16 he was returning from a party on the Missouri side of the state line to his home on the Kansas side um he had slammed at a high rate of speed into the back of um uh Master Deputy Collins uh police vehicle shoving it into the vehicle that had been stopped uh Brandon was killed the three people in that car were all injured uh ultimately that individual uh pled guilty to Reckless second deegree murder
▶ 2:12:38of uh our law enforcement officer and to three counts of aggravated battery was sentenced to I think ultimately around 12 years in the Kansas State Penitentiary and he'll be deported when he's done but here's the kicker uh he had a previous conviction for DUI in California in 2001 when he also was not supposed to have been in our country I've actually never gone and pulled those records I don't know if that was a felony conviction so somebody just filed up the paperwork and he should
▶ 2:13:08have been gone I don't know if it was a misdemeanor conviction under state law so perhaps it wouldn't have been covered I don't know if it was a misdemeanor conviction under some local jurisdiction's local code covering DUI so perhaps it wouldn't have been covered but here's what I know this bill makes sure all of that would have been covered and had this been law and had folks done their job in 2001 I would never have attended that funeral and master Deputy Collins's wife and their kids would still have their loved one
▶ 2:13:39this is the right thing to do and while there may be other right things to do that's not what we're talking about today hope we pass this Bill thank you well said gentleman yield is back uh the gentleman from New Jersey is recognized thank you Mr chairman I you know this goes gets filed under I just can't leave it alone so the ranking member mentioned the Senate Bill last year and I again every time it said I just I have to correct it that Senate bill that was supposedly so good
▶ 2:14:09never even got a senate vote that Senate bill that was supposedly so good didn't stop Catch and Release the Senate bill that was so good didn't rebuild the wall the Senate bill that was so good didn't expedite individuals back to their country immediately to country of origin the Senate bill that was so good didn't have title 42 and it codified and allowed up to 1.8 million illegal aliens to come into this country every year it was a bad Bill it's why it couldn't
▶ 2:14:40even get the votes in the Senate I don't care who the sponsors are quite frankly I don't care what party they are it was a bad Bill and that's why it never saw the light of day in the house secondly nobody's saying that Americans don't have issues with drinking and driving and I've always been supportive again I was a state senator I was a state assemblyman in New Jersey where we have some I think pretty good laws I was a sponsor of Michael's law I won't go into that about somebody who knew who lost their son
▶ 2:15:10and broke their hearts for their whole lives we get it that's not the issue here that's not the issue the standards are different for American citizens and illegal aliens they're supposed to be they should be they need to be they're not legal Americans they broke the law once I understand some of them don't have evil intention I understand some of them aren't bad people but they did break the law but we're not even dealing with those that are
▶ 2:15:40just here and broke the law we're dealing with the criminal element to some degree so whether you whatever the reason that you came here illegally if you break the law again we've done bills that went through this committee and went through the house and were signed Now by this president that said if you attack a police officer if you beat a police officer you're going to be detained get due process and deported if you steal from a store where you steal in general you're going to be detained
▶ 2:16:10deported you'll get your due process but you're going to leave and you should Americans are afforded certain rights and availabilities that that illegal people are so I don't understand I really don't the other side I don't understand there almost seems to be a perverse desire to protect and help people who are illegal more than legal immigrants more than Americans
▶ 2:16:40I don't get it will the gentleman get I will in a minute maybe the bottom line is why would you argue this they broke the law not once but twice and yeah it is slightly different and it doesn't mean that an American who makes a mistake or somebody who is here legally makes a mistake drinks and drives their first time that they should go to jail for 10 years no I also believe in forgiveness and there has to be different standards for what the violation is but the bottom line is
▶ 2:17:10here you broke the law you came here illegally you broke the law again you beat up a cop or you broke the law again and you drove drunk you're going to be deported I have a friend of mine that wants to get citizenship in Portugal dual citizenship you know what in the country of Portugal you have to be able to speak Portuguese before they'll give you citizenship in America now we're saying yeah we don't care you committed a crime it's okay we don't care you D drive drunk it's okay you kill somebody it's okay come on
▶ 2:17:41Americans are tired of it they're sick of it the gentlemen I support I support congressman's Moore's effort here it is a good effort and the Americans many Americans out there from every state in the Union who support what he's saying now who wanted me to yield right over here of New York I yield to the gentleman from New York thank you um I I I respect and appreciate very much the gentleman's comments um but they are not applicable to this law we're not talking about
▶ 2:18:11uh undocumented immigrants who commit drunk driving they are already immediately deportable what we are talking about here I will I reclaim my time for a moment I forgive me but just from we heard from the gentleman from Kansas that's not always accurate number one and we have to clarify that and if that's the issue let's clarify it and secondly in speaking with Mr Moore if further clarification of this bill is needed as we go along on a floor Amendment or whatever else that's
▶ 2:18:41possible too but the bottom line is it does apply to what I was saying I yield back to you again and the only other thing I would I would point out is what we're really talking about here is misdemeanor drunk driving that's what we're talking about that's what's not covered already by the Ina the Ina is covers pretty much all felony drunk driving and this bill would say that for misdemeanor drunk driving if you are a lawful permanent resident here you are removable and I I think you would get a lot of support
▶ 2:19:12if we narrowed it a little bit because that seems Draconian and unnecessary and against our own this is not just a Visa this is someone who is committed to living here and has gone through the whole process to get a green card we're just talking about misdemeanor Bui for responsibility for a green card I reclaim my time I yield back uh time is expired gentleman yields back question Mr chairman uh the gentleman from New York is recognized I I yeld to the other gentleman from New
▶ 2:19:42York um thank you i' I've uh finished I yeld back to my will the gentleman yeld I I certainly will thank you kindly um you know we may have arrived at the end of our destination here Mr chairman I'll just say um the um you know the the art of legislation is drawing distinctions and uh rhetorically I can understand um the
▶ 2:20:12profound impact of talking about either um just someone who is killed in a drunk driving accident regardless of who does it and I can understand the impact of talking about an undocumented person who gets in a car drunk and goes out and kills people but that's not what we're talking about we're talking about here permanent residents who don't hurt anybody who do it for the first time and I just find myself in the ironic position because I've been uh a champion
▶ 2:20:42of very tough DUI legislation and I continue to feel that way but always when it's raised of uh when the question is raised raised about DUI on the first offense when nobody's hurt that's when I always uh had the toughest time and I began to yield to people to say okay that's when you don't want people to go to jail for 5 years or 10 years and I think the argument that is being made on this side is simply let a judge sort that out to see whether the person is in
▶ 2:21:12fact a real danger this a gentleman from Arizona says whether there's a a history there that may not have uh resulted in an actual DUI whether that person uh was upset for whatever reason and got in a car and drove drunk but nobody was hurt and their fam's been here for 20 years or whatever so I think that that is just the line drawing exercise that legislation requires us uh to do and uh I do look forward to working
▶ 2:21:43with everybody on this committee for what I think we all would agree would be comprehensive legislation that will make the roads a lot safer with passage of legislation to favor the installation of compulsory ignition interlock devices for anybody regardless of their citizenship or immigration status who drives drunk on the first offense and I would hope that's something that everybody could agree to and I yield back to the gentleman thank you other than to say that I agree with the uh ranking member I yield back gentleman yields back
▶ 2:22:13the pending question is on the amendment by Mr Bigs to the amendment in the nature of a substitute uh all those in favor say I I I those oppos no no and the opinion of the chair the eyes have it um on adoption the question is on adoption of the amendment in the nature of a substitute this will be followed immediately by a vote on reporting the bill all those in favor say I I those oppos no and pin the chair the eyes have it in the amendment the nature of substitute is adopted the
▶ 2:22:43question is unfavorably reporting the bill as amended all those in favor say I I those oppose no opinion of the chair the eyes have it and the bill is ordered to well okay the bill is reported favorably to the house members will have two days to submit views without objection the bill reported as a single Amendment the nature of a substitute incorporating all adopted amendments and staff is authorized to make Technical and changes pursuant to notice I call up HR 176
▶ 2:23:13the no immigration benefits for Hamas terrorist act for purposes of markup and move the Committee reported favorably to the house the clerk will report the bill HR objection the bill will be considered as R and open for Amendment at any point the chair now recognized the subcommittee chairman the gentleman from California Mr mlto for an opening statement uh thank you Mr chairman Although our political differences these days are vast there are still some things we came together on in this committee during the last session and one of them was an enduring opposition to Hamas
▶ 2:23:43and the terrorism they Unleashed on innocent civilians in Israel a little over 500 days ago uh just last week the barbaric inhumanity of Hamas was revealed again in the maab and infuriating spectacle of returning the bodies of the beus family uh we last saw Sherry alive on October 7th 2023 she was seized terrified and sobbing begging for the lives of her two little boys as they were dragged into the hell on Earth that Hamas created
▶ 2:24:14last week their murdered bodies were returned as trophies uh and and later we learned in a final Act of cruelty that sher's body uh had been substituted for another uh you know we all came together on this committee last year and said that such monsters as these should never be admitted into our country never given Safe Haven on our soil and never tolerated when we find them HR 176 says that anyone associated with Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad in any capacity
▶ 2:24:44or anyone who assisted their terrorist activities in any form will not be allowed into this country under any circumstances will be immediately removed if we find them here and under no circumstances we will We allow them to receive any immigration benefit under our laws for reasons I find inexplicable the Senate couldn't be bothered to take up this bill in its last session hopefully they'll find the time this session under current law being a member of Hamas or being associated with its barbaric attack against
▶ 2:25:15Israel is not an explicit ground for inadmissibility or removability and that's just not good enough enough anyone who gave them support in any form should never be allowed into this country during the Biden years the number of known or suspected terrorists encountered at the southern border soared to 392 too many were allowed into this country how many more were among the 2 million known Goda ways is anybody's guess after the October 7th attacks
▶ 2:25:45director Ray warned that the FBI quote cannot and does not discount the Poss possibility that Hamas could exploit the conflict to call on their supporters to conduct attacks on our own soil end quote in the last month we recorded a 95% reduction in illegal border crossings thanks to president Trump's determination to protect our country and to secure our borders this bill will give them an additional tool to quickly remove dangerous foreign Nationals from our soil and it will make it impossible for future
▶ 2:26:15presidents to wave in these monsters to take residents in our uh this bill sends an important message around the world if you've associated with Hamas you will get no Comfort or quarter here you were Pura on grada in America and you should be in as you should be in any corner of the world that values peace Justice and and human dignity uh with that I urge adoption of the bill and I yield back gentleman yields
▶ 2:26:45back the ranking member is recognized for an opening statement thank you Mr chair chairman the uh terrorist atrocities committed by Hamas in Israel on October 7th and the subsequent devastating war in the region have been a colossal a colossal catastrophe for all of humanity we hope that a permanent ceasefire can be negotiated so that we'll see The Return of all the hostages to their families and an end to the gruesome violence and suffering in the coming weeks every week the world is watched with horror as Hamas has paraded emaciated
▶ 2:27:16hostages across the world stage forcing them to smile and wave while surrounded by terrorists hiding grimly behind masks with their guns we're happy to see families finally be able to embrace their loved ones some of whom were actually held captive for over a decade but we also mourn for all the families Israeli and Palestinian alike who will not be reunited in this lifetime the bius family weighs especially heavy on me our hearts were broken several times uh by the devastating loss of Shiri Ariel and cfir
▶ 2:27:46in the callousness with which Hamas treated their remains more than anything the images coming out of the region fill me with outrage outrage at Hamas for their brutal assault on Israeli civilians many of whom were actually strong advocates for peace uh for their attacks on Gins who dare speak against them and the tactics that put so many people In Harm's Way but also dismay at the miserable failure of leadership that got us to this point from the Trump administration's focus
▶ 2:28:17on the Abraham Accords which pointedly ignored the condition and fate of millions of desperate Palestinians to its plan now to engage in ethnic relocation of the Palestinians from Gaza to the Palestinian authorities ineffectual and corrupt governance to the Biden administration's inability to bring the parties to the table for an enduring ceasefire and to netanyahu's empowerment of extremists like uh ministers smotri and Ben gavier who repeatedly sabotaged peace deals in progress
▶ 2:28:47at every turn getting to adjust in lasting peace in the region will require the creative leadership and hard work of true Statesmen not the Casual cruelty of bullies who see ethnic cleansing as a solution to political conflict and a way to boost property values in the Middle East but we can all agree to advance this bill which passed the house with near unanimous support last Congress no one affiliated with Hamas nor anyone involved in the horrific attacks of October 7 should be admissible to the United States
▶ 2:29:17are eligible for any immigration benefits whatsoever that's an obvious political and moral principle this is however another missed opportunity for us to work across the io in a productive bipartisan manner Mr chairman it's my understanding that in the markup last Congress then ranking member nler pointed out that this is essentially a Visa sanctions bill for decades we've relied on pre-negotiated bipartisan and byic Camal text for every Visa sanctions bill as Mr nler noted and I'll observe again
▶ 2:29:48the legislation today departs from this practice by directly amending the Ina to impose Visa sanctions to put into perspective how unusual this is consider our response to 911 in the aftermath of that National catastrophe we revised our immigration laws to overhaul significant parts of the immigration system and we created the Department of Homeland Security yet even then we did not amend the Ina to specifically reference the events of 9/11 or to Bar the people involved in the planning or
▶ 2:30:18Commission of those attacks from ing or remaining in the United States and why because the laws we have in place already bar non-citizens who engage in terrorism or who are involved with terrorist groups from entering the United States and for those who happen to be here our laws allow us to remove them and prevent them from collecting any IM immigration so um under sections 212 a3b and a4b uh of 237 of the Ina any non-citizen
▶ 2:30:49engaged in ter activity or who's provided material support to terrorists or is a member or representative of a terrorist group is inadmissible and deportable so uh I I will support the legislation today I would ask once again um if the chairman would work with us to improve the legislation before it goes to the floor we want it to be as strong and effective as possible in general while adhering to the bipartisan Traditions that have long to find the work of the committee thank you Mr chairman I yeld back gent y's back and and we will certainly work with the uh ranking
▶ 2:31:19member and and the the minority uh on this legislation group of us had the opportunity last week to to spend a week in Israel and um as both the ranking member and the sponsor of the legislation indicated we we had heavy day we went to the the concert site where so many um Israelis were were killed and taken hostage we went to the kabut where they lost a fourth of the people who live there at that that farming Community um so we we can't I appreciate the gentleman bringing the bill
▶ 2:31:49forward is certainly certainly the right uh right approach um Mr chairman the chair now recognized the gentleman from California to offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute thank you Mr chairman I have an amendment at the desk cler will report the amendment amendment in the nature of a substitute to hr1 76 offered by Mr without objection Amendment substitute we consider as read and shall be considered base text for the purpose of the amendment the chair recogniz a gentleman from California explain the amendment this amendment simply makes a minor change to the short title it doesn't change the substance of the bill I'd urge support of it
▶ 2:32:20in the nature of a substitute to HR 176 uh think the gentleman gentleman from New York is recognized thank you Mr chairman um I I of course support this um and and I but I want to make a a broader Point um I think what we have seen over the last couple months as thankfully some hostages have been returned is that uh Hamas is not
▶ 2:32:50defeated and they have used the return of hostages uh as a spectacle uh that has drawn a lot of support from those who are not in Kamas fatigues in Gaza and they have used it to continue not only um their control and their power but also psychological warfare uh against Israel including by bringing two of the hostages to The
▶ 2:33:20Exchange to watch even though they were not released and I believe they thought they were going to be released that day so the the threat of Hamas is not over and uh this bill is just a a small way to address it but we cannot underscore the uh importance that not only the United States and Israel recognize the danger of the terrorist group
▶ 2:33:51Hamas uh but the rest of the world including the Arab states uh that both border Israel and Gaza but also uh make up the rest of the Middle East and there can be no peace in that region if Hamas still retains power uh we cannot lose sight of the threat that they pose that was exemplified so clearly on October 7th when they invaded Israel
▶ 2:34:21and brutally murdered uh 1,200 people as the chairman said many on kibuts in the South those people who live in those kibuts uh are probably the most liberal Israelis who worked the most with the Palestinians and it did not matter to this terrorist group uh and so the the conflict cannot end until the hostages are returned
▶ 2:34:52for sure uh but also until Hamas is neutralized and certainly I appreciate this Administration putting pressure uh in whatever way they can but there also needs to be pressure from uh those countries that are speaking with Hamas to include Egypt and Qatar and there needs to be broader pressure uh around the globe to uh neutral ize and eliminate Hamas
▶ 2:35:22so that we can rebuild Gaza uh as a independent entity Sovereign entity uh where people can live in peace and security next to Israel and so I appreciate the gentleman from California uh bringing this amendment I Echo the ranking members uh words and uh suggestion that we continue to work uh closely in a bipartisan way to
▶ 2:35:52address the issue of terrorism and I would just note one other uh aspect of terrorism which is that we have to have nonpartisan uh apolitical Department of Justice FBI and intelligence community in order to effectively combat terrorism if we cannot trust and
▶ 2:36:22those around the world cannot trust our intelligence community and our law enforcement agencies to uh protect information and protect intelligence from abroad then we are going to lose sources and methods we are going to lose intelligent sharing with our allies and we are going to make this country much less safe and make it much more open and acceptible to terrorist attacks so I applaud
▶ 2:36:53that we are pushing uh very aggressively against Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad but let's not forget that there are other terrorists out there who would want to come into this country and commit terrorist attacks that are often thwarted by the FBI and intelligence Community because of our Superior intelligence politicizing those agencies and those institutions will undermine mind our own National Security and I yield back gentleman
▶ 2:37:23yields back gentleman from New Jersey is uncharacteristically quick I believe I will be um first of all I agree with uh the gentleman from New York I think his points are well said and he stated it well I can't really state it any better I would say also when we talk about you know the Department of Justice the FBI and being sure that we're strong against terrorism um that's why in this Comm committee we exposed so much of what's happened over the years quite frankly
▶ 2:37:54in the last Administration and that's why we had a subcommittee hearing yesterday uh in oversight you know again exposing all that's happened over the years we cannot weaponize our department of justice we cannot politicize our department of justice we need an FBI a Department of Justice and a rule of law that is strong that is fair that is objective uh and of course that will help us and I believe that's what we're going to see now as we go forward and try to root
▶ 2:38:24out and Destroy Hamas and others like them a yiel back gentleman yields back uh gentleman from Texas to recognize uh I thank the chairman I thank the gentleman from California for his legislation it's important legislation um I would note that today if I I think I'm correct is 32 years to the date of the the uh World Trade Center bombing uh in 1993
▶ 2:38:55and I think uh obviously then eight years later the second attack on the World Trade Center resulted in a much worse result um but uh it's a sign again sitting here today 32 years later from that first bombing in which I believe six Americans were killed including an AM including a pregnant woman and I think thousand or so were injured and that was I think the first glimpse into what we were seeing in this in this current ERA of of
▶ 2:39:25terrorism that we then saw unfold from Hamas perpetrated against our friends in Israel in um October a year and a half ago um I I would note and I know we've got a sort of bipartisan uh feeling here about trying to move this forward uh but one thing I would respond to the gentleman from New York I was pleased that 45 of my Democrat colleagues joined in support of the bill that I introduced uh to sanction the international criminal court for its activities
▶ 2:39:55directed toward the prime minister of Israel prime minister Netanyahu uh which also would be able to be turned toward American men and women in uniform and American uh Representatives uh by Lawless body trying to uh you know put its own authority over Sovereign Nations defending themselves and engaging in in uh defense of their own Nation and that was what was occurring in this case so I was glad that 45 Democrats joined with with virtually all Republicans
▶ 2:40:26in sending that over to uh the Senate and unfortunately um for whatever reason the Democratic leader in the Senate uh mobilized the Democrats to oppose it when the majority leader Thun put it on the floor of the Senate I wish that the Congress had spoken with one voice when there's that much bipartisan support uh in solidarity uh and in defense of our own sovereignty uh fortunately that wasn't the case but I appreciate the gentleman from California putting this important bill forward with respect to Hamas um even though
▶ 2:40:56that they certainly we could um be able to uh you know have inadmissibility based on our uh proving up their connection to terrorist activity it is much cleaner and better to make it very clear that association with Hamas uh should result in inis in imiss ability in the United States um for both our safety and just frankly on principle I appreciate the gentl from California you back gent lady from Vermont recognize thank you Mr chair just briefly I want to associate myself for the remarks from um ranking member
▶ 2:41:26Rasin and also uh representative Goldman from New York I just want to add one thing that has been weighing on me since the um vote at the UN a few days ago in which the United States stood with our adversaries Russia and North Korea um on a vote regarding Ukraine and the way in which it involves what we're talking about here is my concerns about the safety of
▶ 2:41:57Israel and Security in the entire region and you had in January Russia signing a strategic partnership with Iran Iran is no friend to Israel I'm very very concerned that this strategic partnership involves AI Control of the internet and other cooperation between Russia and Iran and I know many of us on this committee care
▶ 2:42:27deeply about the Safety and Security of the state of Israel I am deeply concerned that this Administration has taken its eye off the ball in regard to what this would mean for Israel for us to move closer to Russia and North Korea thank you I yeld back gentle lady yields back to questions on the adoption of the amendment they of a substitute this will be followed uh immediately by a vote on reporting the bill all those in favor um say I all those oppose
▶ 2:42:57no inin the chair the eyes have it the amendment nature of Subs is adopted the question is unfavorably reporting the bill as amended all those in favor say I I those oppose no the eyes have it the bill is ordered to be reported favorably to the house members will have two days to submit views without objection the bill will be reported as a single Amendment the nature of a substitute incorporating all adopted amendments and staff is authorized to make technical and changes pursuant to notice I call up the authorization and oversight plan for the 119th Congress and move that the committee
▶ 2:43:27adopt the plan the clerk will report committee on the Judiciary objection the plan will be considered as read and open for Amendment at any point the chair now recognized is now recognized uh for an opening statement the authorization and oversight plan we are marking up today reflects a crucial role that our committee plays in the House of Representatives Congress is entrusted with the responsibility of conducting oversight to review the adequate and efficiency of the laws that govern this great country we have an important task in this committee our committee is charged with protecting the Constitution the Bill
▶ 2:43:58of Rights and the Liberties that the citizens of America enjoy that is a commitment that both sides of our committee share in recent years we have seen the federal government weaponized against the people that it's supposed to serve the very taxpayers who pay their bill have been weaponized government's been weaponized against them the White House pressured big tech companies to censor American speech online the Department of Justice was weaponized and redirected from its core law enforcement activities toward Prosecuting political opponents the FBI was used to Target the very Americans it's supposed to protect
▶ 2:44:29surveilled parents who spoke out a Schoolboard meeting said pro-life Catholics were extremists and sent confidential human sources to the capital on January 6 these issues should concern all Americans and this committee's jurisdiction over the First Amendment means we have a duty to investigate the committee also must examine instances of waste Fraud and Abuse in the agencies under our jurisdiction to ensure that they are responsible possible stewards taxpayer money Plan before us today sets out the committee's priorities on these and many other issues it is measured and ensures that the committee will meet the challenges
▶ 2:44:59facing Americans I know our Democrat colleagues may not agree with everything but I look forward to our discussion and we are happy to add any minority views which with uh with with that they want to submit to the plan and with that I would recognize the ranking member um Mr chairman thanks a lot um for this opportunity and I'm glad that Mr Nadler is still here for this conversation um regardless of which party was in leadership for many years the house Judiciary Committee as I understand it treated
▶ 2:45:29the adoption of our banal oversight plan as a bipartisan consensus agenda setting exercise where we would agree generally to the formal oversight jurisdiction of the committee if not necessarily to our later substantive evaluation of particular problems that we oversee um because the oversight plan does not necessarily bind our work in any way uh our practice has almost always been to work together to reach an agreement on language that we could adopt by unanimous consent
▶ 2:46:00there should be no problem with fulfilling our modest obligations under house rules by producing a responsible bipartisan oversight plan in Saving partisan battles for another day uh and I that strikes me as a decent and hopeful tradition alas for reasons still not clear to me Mr chairman um we are now set on a far more partisan path I know last Congress when you took over leadership of the committee for the first time in our practice or at least to the memory um of members and staff you offered an oversight plan
▶ 2:46:30much more like this which has a lot of uh partisan shots um when in the hope of correcting that mistake ranking member Nadler offered an amendment to bring us back to the more neutral text for the oversight plan that could have easily passed under chairman good lot or chairman Conor that was re Ed um again nothing in the oversight plan will limit your ability as chairman to set hearing topics as you see fit to call in the witnesses you want to conduct any in investigation you like
▶ 2:47:00so I'm not sure why we need to plunge the committee into a fight over needlessly partisan oversight plan which is a departure from our Traditions um this one is backward looking um I when I first read it I started thinking about The Rocky Horror Picture Show because it seems like we're doing the time warping again uh you know it's back to you know um this scandal from the Biden era that scandal from the Biden era okay um that invites my members to say
▶ 2:47:31no we should be doing oversight then if we're going to be picking out particular scandals what's going on today with the unlawful Federal uh funding freeze what's going on today with the Trump administration's assault on the article one powers of congress to spend money as we see fit what's going on today with The Purge of career prosecutors FBI agents and staff at the Department of Justice or the replacement of leadership of those agencies with Trump Loyalists and so on everybody wants to talk about the corrupt bargain
▶ 2:48:01with New York city mayor Adams in The Purge of seven Department of Justice lawyers including extremely conservative lawyers who clerked for justices like justice Scalia um rather than have the doj participate in the corrupt cover up of political corruption so we can go down that road we have a whole bunch of amendments lined up my first amendment is just to go back to the more objective anod description of what we're going to do but um you know everybody's got their
▶ 2:48:31goodies and sleeping bags and people can hang out and we can do that um but um you know the the the way it's written now makes it seem as if the biggest threat to America today is the Biden Harris Administration um and uh I flipped through the report which mentions uh Biden Harris 21 different times uh more than fentol Firearms federal judges mayor Adams Purge of January 6 prosecutors and FBI agents
▶ 2:49:02combined by a lot so um basically if we're going to be doing some political finger painting on the oversight plan then our members will be introducing a bunch of amendments but I will introduce one that could help us uh avoid that process um and uh you know I hope you could accept that Amendment and the members would be persuaded by it um if not then our colleagues will be invited to you know deal with our
▶ 2:49:32reaction to some baffling claims in this document like the baseless rhetoric about the politicization of criminal investigations and prosecutorial decisions in the Biden Administration where it was Trump appointed prosecutors like the hunter Biden special counsel David Weiss whose names have been dragged through the mud by our colleagues although neither Weiss nor any of the others he worked with were ever disbarred disciplined or even reprimanded for politicizing their work compare that to the disbarment or other Serious Bar discipline
▶ 2:50:03imposed on numerous Trump lawyers like Rudy Giuliani for repeatedly lying to the court or Kenneth chebo who lost his license and plad guilty to a felony count of conspiracy to file false documents John Eastman Jenna Ellis and on and on and on so we will get into that kind of partisan tit fortat if we insist on going forward with the text as as currently written um the current text ises not although it goes back to a lot of Hunter Biden stuff it does not mention
▶ 2:50:33the Scandal taking place with the Nullification of the criminal indictment adopted by a grand jury in New York against the mayor of New York for bribery conspiracy and a series of other corruption charges that's something that troubles a lot of our members I assume it troubles some members on your side or certainly it would if Joe Biden had done it but in any event we will talk about all of that stuff if we're moving from kind of the more General description of the subjects that we look into rather
▶ 2:51:04um you know if we move from that to uh basically partisan hits I think all of us by this time know the difference and I I hope you can entertain with some equinity that first amendment and if not we will have some other ones to offer I you'll back to you Mr chairman uh the gentlem Y's back I I would offer another alternative uh the the ranking members opening statement could be entered as minority views in the actual oversight plan and you just laid out all the concerns you have the things you want to talk about put that in the plan we can adopt the plan that'll be in
▶ 2:51:34there as minority views and we don't have to go through the Amendments that you indicated are going to be offered by your side um so there's there's that option which I think makes all the sense in the world that's why we have a thing called minority views in the oversight plan but if not we're happy to debate the Amendments that the gentleman and his uh his side bring up well Mr chairman I thank you for that unfortunately what I laid out was a tiny fraction of the objections that our members have and not in any sense exhaustive but I I appreciate the gesture there well I would argue that that what I laid
▶ 2:52:04out my opening statement was even a smaller tiny fraction because my opening my opening statement was much shorter than yours so we're offering you the longer bit that you can put in as minority views if not we will debate the Amendments and that's what the good Lord put us here for to do so uh the question now occur knows who seeks recognition gentle lady is recogn from North Carolina is recognized uh thank you Mr chairman and um I know we're going to get to some of these amendments and I hope that um the first amendment that the
▶ 2:52:34ranking member offers is accepted you know um this is a really committee and being a member of the House of Representatives and being a member of the legislative branch is really important and it we are at an unfortunate time in our history where the executive has no respect for the
▶ 2:53:05zero that goes to the foundation of what we are as a nation and our oversight responsibility should extend to the entire executive branch regardless of who the president is that is our job we swore an oath on the Constitution and part of that constitutional responsibility is to
▶ 2:53:36protect the right of the legislative branch to give oversight for excesses that the executive branch engages in not to pick sides to pick the American people this oversight plan is an insult to this body to this committee and to the Constitution and if we're not going to take those responsibili seriously
▶ 2:54:06there is something seriously wrong with this place so I will be supporting the ranking members Amendment first amendment I don't think we should be having partisan fights about oversight I think we should do our duty and uphold our Oaths of office and I yield will General lady yield for one I I yield to the ranking member I I want to thank you for that very trenchant statement you just made and
▶ 2:54:37um it just reminds me that the founders of the Constitution when you read The Federalist Papers were emphatic that they thought that members of each branch would stand up for themselves not based on political party but rather members of the house would stand up for the house and the Congress members of the Senate would stand up for the Congress the executive would zealously promote their views the Judiciary would stand up for the role of the Judiciary and at a time when our spending power
▶ 2:55:07is being nullified and trampled and courts are having to strike down what the executive branch is doing at a time when um departments and agencies we've created and we have the power to nullify if we want to are being hollowed out or destroyed by the executive branch it's very important to remember that we do have a responsibility as members of Congress to stand up for congress's powers and prerogatives completely aside from political party we can debate
▶ 2:55:37the substance of particular bills and so on but I would defend any legislation that we've done that is constitutional against an unconstitutional executive attack even if uh it hurts my political party because we have got to defend the prerogatives of Congress and I yield back thank you I'll just that is what people of country haveed us to they didn't El us microphone the people of
▶ 2:56:07this country elected us to represent them not to represent the executive and that is why we must must exercise our responsibilities regardless of party and in the best interests of the American people and I yield back gentle lady yields back the gentleman from New York is recognized thank you Mr chairman and I appreciate the uh eloquent words from
▶ 2:56:38my colleague from North Carolina and the ranking member uh you know as I read this plan um it looks like it was simply cut and pasted from 2022 um it's the same tired baseless stories uh baseless allegations but then the thing that really strikes me is a sentence in here that says the
▶ 2:57:08American people elected president Trump with a resounding mandate to transform how Washington works and it's consistent with what I've been hearing uh for the last two months which is that Donald Trump won the election and so therefore anything he wants to do was supported by the American people that's hogwash that is absolutely absurd there was no first of all there was no resounding mandate
▶ 2:57:38he got 49% of the vote and none of the Mandate was to transform how Washington works it may be partially to address way Fraud and Abuse to address the efficiency of government I mean that certainly came in behind in all the polling and exit polling the economy which he has not addressed in the least other than to increase inflation and to increase cost of eggs and to increase the cost of prescription
▶ 2:58:08drugs but this notion that this plan would not stand up for congress's authority what is happening right now is that the Republicans control the Senate the Republicans control the house and those senators and members of Congress are happily giving away all Authority and power
▶ 2:58:39to Donald Trump come they are sitting silently as Elon Musk with his $1 13 billion of government contracts uses whatever algorithm he has to identify keywords that he doesn't like and just starts cutting programs we all would love to address waste Fraud and Abuse we'd love to address government efficiency but you cannot sit here not a single one of
▶ 2:59:09my Republican colleagues can sit here and say you know what Elon Musk is cutting that you know it to be waste Fraud and Abuse you don't Nobody Does he doesn't even know if it's waste Fraud and Abuse because there's no investigation there's no evaluation instead he's just cutting and you all sit there letting some unelected billionaire get access
▶ 2:59:39to our personal identification information cut programs cut funding stop potentially stop funding I don't understand what on what planet do you stop the funding for a program and then investigate it why aren't you investigating it while it continues so the status quo can continue so that Americans who rely on money can continue
▶ 3:00:10to believe that they will have this money and in many cases that Congress appropriated and designated and obligated and they're stomping all over that down at 1600 Pennsylvania and there's isn't a single Republican member of Congress who's willing to stand up congress for us for congress just because Donald Trump has designated
▶ 3:00:41Elon Musk to do the work and you're either afraid that Donald Trump will support a primary opponent or you're afraid that Elon Musk will put $10 million into a primary opponent and so you happily turn over all of your own authority what is the point of being here why do you run for office why do you want to be elected to congress so that you can bend the knee to
▶ 3:01:11the executive so that you could bend the knee to Donald Trump there's no mandate for Congress hiding in a cave the Mandate is to address the issues that the American people are facing which is inflation which are high costs which is affordability and if you want to address waste frud and abuse we're happy to do it with you the right way by coming back to Congress and showing us what's wasteful what's fraudulent
▶ 3:01:41what's abuse so that we can vote as the owners of the power of the to make those decisions and I yield back gentleman yields back I would just respond he said none of the Mandate was to transform how Washington works I would argue that's exactly what the Mandate was President it was like President Trump was was Keeping a Secret from us he said we're going to establish Doge we're going to have Elon Musk run it we're going to try to identify waste Fraud and Abuse and we're going to deal with that and where there's a question about it Congress can weigh in the courts are certainly weighing in
▶ 3:02:12we've had decisions that were favorable to president Trump what's Congress been weighing in on we've had decisions that were favorable to president Trum Trump's position Elon mus position we've had decisions from courts that weren't well Mr chairman if you may yield for one question let me will the chairman let me let me I gave you extra time let me have a little more than the 40 seconds I've got oh I guess we're still running on your time well I I would just say this um we'll get the clock we'll get the we'll get the clock right now instead of helping us stop the ridiculous spending
▶ 3:02:42Democrats just want to keep attacking the guy exposing the ridiculous spending so I'd actually like to try to attack deal with the ridiculous spending which is something I think we'll probably do in the course of this Congress and certainly part certainly part of our oversight plan and what I said in my opening statement things we'd like to get answers too it's why we sent seven subpoenas two two uh days ago to the FBI um we'd like we still have concerns about what happened and this is the direct jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee dealing with the Department of Justice we
▶ 3:03:12still have concerns about why the Department of Justice wanted to investigate moms and dads showing up at Schoolboard meetings we still have concerns and we don't think we got all the information relative to the Richmond field office uh memorandum which said if you're a pro-life Catholic you're an extremist we still have concerns about a number of things that we want information and answers to questions that we that we have like the 26 confidential human sources who were there on January 6 2021 parliamentary inquiry so we're going to we're
▶ 3:03:43going to try to look at all that that's why we spell out in our plan um May relative to the Doge effort instead of helping us deal with the ridiculous spending all you guys seem to want to do is attack the guy who's exposing the ridiculous spending and with that may have a parliamentary inquiry gentleman can say there's inquiry it does the oversight plan include an investigation uh if the executive branch defies
▶ 3:04:13court orders you can read the plan draw your own conclusion and you can also do what I suggested a few minutes ago you can file your minority views where you lay out whatever you want to lay out and you can go longer than Mr raskins opening statement you can put all kinds of things in there so I take that as a no you read the plan yourself and you can reach your own your own uh conclusion who seeks who seeks recognition I have an amendment
▶ 3:04:43at the desk Mr chairman gentleman from Maryland's recognized the clerk will report the amendment Amendment to the committee on the Judiciary authorization will be considered as without objection be considered as read the gentleman from Maryland recognized to explain his Amendment all right this is the afor said aforementioned Amendment which is simply to go back to the Judiciary committee's tradition of articulating
▶ 3:05:13an oversight plan that states the general subject matters so it is innocuous it's anod it doesn't sound like Fox News it doesn't sound MSNBC uh there are not partisan hits on the other side um but perhaps it's too late in the day for this Mr chairman perhaps politics saturates everything even the oversight plan um I I will say um just in in response to your typically uh pungent
▶ 3:05:44and uh most recent provocation um that we are not upset about waste Fraud and Abuse we're afraid of the guy who's going after it I've got some problems with that statement okay uh what one statement what one problem with that statement is that the very first thing that Elon Musk uh and his um friend Donald Trump did the first week of the inauguration was to fire 17
▶ 3:06:14inspectors General these are the people whose job it is to farad out waste Fraud and Abuse in each department last year they saved us $91 billion in waste Fraud and Abuse I'm not sure Elon Musk has saved us $91 in waste Fraud and Abuse they're just sacking uh you know air traffic controllers they're sacking Food and Drug safety inspectors they're sacking uh us attor assistant us attorneys who worked on Prosecuting the
▶ 3:06:44January 6 cases they're trampling the Civil Service and they're firing people and then the next week they have to go back to try to find them again because they realize that we actually have a government and we have a need for federal workers they sacked a bunch of uh nuclear reactor safety inspectors and guards and then since they cut off their email access they couldn't find them the next week when they realized what they had done I mean this is just absurd and outrageous we've
▶ 3:07:15got an oversight committee I mean what um a telling critique it is of our own oversight committee that you say we need to create a fourth branch of government in Elon Musk nobody can seem to identify even what his job is but we need him to go out and start fing out waste Fraud and Abuse with a band of uh I don't know 30 or 40 workers I think 24 of them someone will get me the article just resigned saying this is not working his own workers within Doge
▶ 3:07:45resigned yesterday uh to say that it's not working so the whole country is in an uproar so I I will go back to the colleagues of my the comments of my colleague from New York about us having some institutional self-respect at this point they're trashing the Consumer Financial production Bureau we created that they reduced credit card late fees from $ 38 or $40 down to $8
▶ 3:08:15anybody want to overturn that and destroy that they reduced Bank overdraft fees from an average of $35 or $40 down to $5 anybody want to trash that the reason why we have a congress is so we can make decisions for our constituents about the public good not Elon Musk an immigrant by the way an undocumented immigrant for a long time but he was an immigrant from apartheid South Africa who came to our country on a
▶ 3:08:45college student visa left college and at that point was no longer in the country lawfully stayed and worked illegally until he was sponsored by his employer I'm glad we're a country with a big heart big enough to take in an undocumented immigrant like Elon Musk but he's showing uh some kind of gratitude for the hospitality of our country that he comes in like a bull in a china shop destroying everything that the US Congress has does has done and trampling the constitutional
▶ 3:09:16rights and the civil service right rights of tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of federal workers he sent out a message giving them a Godfather offer verbatim taken from the memo he sent to the people at Twitter when he took over Twitter telling them to hit reply in order to resign he asked 2 million American workers to resign and to take an 8mon paid vacation at the expense of the US taxpayers
▶ 3:09:46and as far as I he didn't consult the president he certainly didn't consult Congress and we're going to sit here on our hands and take that what an outrage what a scandal that is that the Congress of the United States would allow itself to be rolled in this way so that's what we're going to talk about Mr chairman because we no longer are going to have a nonpartisan objective oversight statement I go back uh gentlemen Yi's back who seeks recognition question is on the amendment
▶ 3:10:18G lady from North Carolina is recognized thank you I'd like to speak um in favor of the amendment because as I said in my initial remarks this amendment reflects what our responsibility is as members of the Judiciary Committee and members of the legislative branch and it shows no favor depending on who is in the executive branch it also makes sure that our US Department
▶ 3:10:48of Justice and we're we just had a turnover responds to the needs of the American people that is our job and this amendment reflects it thank you and I yield go the Gent lady you please he can I yield to the ranking M thank you first of all um I've got the exact information 21 Doge staffers resign saying they will not help dismantle Public Services these are people working working directly for Elon Musk as far as
▶ 3:11:18we can tell now last week the administration filed legal pleadings disavowing the suggestion that Elon Musk actually works for Doge and yesterday I think they they named someone who actually is running Toge what then is the role of Elon Musk he seems to be in charge of the situation and maybe one of our colleagues because they are in uh the same party with Elon Musk and Donald Trump could tell us what role he's playing
▶ 3:11:48but we don't understand that I he's not a Public Employee I'm sorry oh okay uh well I don't I I know very little about him I know that everybody in this room who works for the government has got to file ethics forms and do a financial filing Elon Musk has not done a financial filing so we know that he collects billions of dollars from the US government as a federal contractor uh I hope somebody gets me that
▶ 3:12:18article I think it just came out exactly how much he gets uh it's built on a $38 billion his it's the title here and I'll introduce this to the record from The Washington Post this morning Elon musk's business Empire is built on 38 billion dollar in Government funding so the guy that we have somehow without objection thank you kindly Mr chairman the the guy that we've somehow entrusted with the job of doing our job of oversight to fared out waste
▶ 3:12:48Fraud and Abuse um is himself collecting $38 billion in Government funding the person as the general lady from North Carolina says uh that we've usted with the private data of 300 million Americans in the country although the courts have moved in to stop that there are now 25 temporary restraining orders or or preliminary injunctions against the absolute lawlessness and Chaos Unleashed on the US government and the American people uh by Elon Musk so uh I
▶ 3:13:18so I would like to also introduce this one the 21 Doge staffers resigned saying they will not help dismantle Public Services uh Mr chairman that objection thank you kindly um well look uh the general lady from North Carolina refocuses us on the proper question here what's the role of Congress what's the role of the president right now the Congress is created an article one the first article of the Constitution it flows
▶ 3:13:49right out of the Preamble immediately after the Preamble which says we the people in order to form more perfect union establish justice ensure domestic tranquility provide for the common defense promote the general welfare and preserve to ourselves and our posterity the blessings of liberty do hereby ordain and establish the constitution of these United States of America the very next sentence establishes article one of the Constitution it says that the legislative power is vested in Congress then you get page after page after page of what
▶ 3:14:19congress's powers are in Article 1 Section 8 the power to regulate commerce nationally and internationally the the power to declare war which is a congressional power the power to coin currency naturalization you name it and even in Article 1 Section 8 Clause 18 the all other powers necessary and proper to the execution of the foregoing Powers then you get to article two right four short paragraphs one of them is all about how you impeach a president
▶ 3:14:49for treason bribery and other high crimes misdemeanors sometimes colleagues will say we're a co-equal branch really first of all co-equal is not even a word that's like extremely unique that's not a word are we an equal Branch I don't think so we had a revolution against a king and a monarch the framers were very suspicious of what one individual what one mad king could do if that if they thought they were smarter than everybody else the core job of the executive is to take care that the laws are Faithfully executed
▶ 3:15:19not trashed I yield back to you gentleman yields back the chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona with with the gentleman yield second if you yes yes I'll yield I just want to make one quick point the uh ranking member mentioned the the term private data or the words private data um I think it's worth noting that yesterday we discovered that this Mr Charles Little John went to the got a contract with the IRS with the express purpose of leaking taxpayer
▶ 3:15:50information and goal was to leak the return of President Trump uh and in doing that actually 45,000 either businesses or individuals data was breached and leaked in violation of 6103 so um there are concern certainly about private data but it it happened in the Biden Administration with the guy who went there with the goal of going after president Trump's tax return um so I think I think we got to be concerned
▶ 3:16:20about all Mr what should happen to someone who takes the private data of US citizens from a government this guy he was only charged with one count even 45,000 individuals and business enties individuals had their data made public in violation of the law what should happen to someone like that so I think I'd like to reclaim my time it's actually not my time I apologize hey thank i' like to get a word and edgewise on my time no it's okay um so I do think it is
▶ 3:16:50a bit Rich um that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle a couple of you have focused your at least a portion of your objection of the plan um on separation of powers issues is I I I I am all about separation of powers and and this business this notion this business of three coequal branches of government that's that's not what the founders intended
▶ 3:17:20this branch is meant to be the most powerful branch and within this this legislative branch it is this this body the house that's meant to be the more powerful of the two so I do I but I do find it really all an almost laughable argument to hear from my my my friends on the other side of the aisle their beef about the executive branch and and and some of some of your
▶ 3:17:50arguments may hit the mark may may maybe they hit the mark maybe there there you might find a an overextension now but uh in the executive branch maybe you don't because I think you're all over you guys have have this uh kind of shotgun approach uh on your on your position but but here's the thing that I find incredibly laughable for decades for decades we've watched the expansion of the Executive
▶ 3:18:21Branch the executive branch has grown like tosy didn't matter whether it was D's or RS in this Branch they didn't they didn't step into the breach and say enough is enough and because largely because um when one's political party has the executive branch yeah you're a little bit less you're a little bit uh more generous sharing or delegating power but here's
▶ 3:18:52deal I know this because I have introduced many bills to R try to reign in executive both when there was been an r in the office when there's been a D in the office but almost unanimously and almost universally and almost without any kind of reflection on any attempt to actually re in the executive branch my colleagues across the aisle uh reign in the
▶ 3:19:22executive branch my colleagues across the aisle have voted against my efforts well I and so here and and I find it kind of odd that that the rationale that you have against this plan that's out there is because it doesn't do what you want it to do with regard to the trumpet Administration well I I I think I have to defer to the
▶ 3:19:52the chairman I think he's right on this one you guys have listed so many things that you have a beef with with the with the the current Administration put that in your Minority Report go ahead and do it but by golly don't sit here and lecture us about your your sanctimonious self-righteous opposition to the expansion of the administrative State or the executive branch which are one and the same ostensibly one and the same and tell us that
▶ 3:20:23that you're really beefed about that because history will demonstrate you haven't really cared too much and recent history as well why I just had a bill that went to the floor two weeks ago every Democrat voted against it it was a bill dealing with the regulations and and uh providing relief to it you guys didn't care about that at all so don't don't be here today making us
▶ 3:20:53laugh with your position you'll thank gentl from Arizona who seeks recognition Mr chairman gentleman from New York thank you Mr chairman uh the Trump Administration and and and what it's done presents Us in my opinion with the greatest challenge to the Constitution of the United States since 1861 when there was absolute nullification uh and and Rebellion what do we have with the Trump Administration they're disobeying the laws
▶ 3:21:24musk is not an appointed official he is not uh confirmed by the Senate and yet he has given the authority to destroy agencies established by Congress the United States agency for International Development was established by Congress in 1961 it was authorized Appropriations were made and yet Elon Musk says we're putting it through the wood chipper
▶ 3:21:54rip usaid and all the money stops and the food is riding on the peers in Africa instead of being given to people who are starving not to mention our farmers who suddenly aren't selling food and that's just one example another example all the agents who were assigned not chose to but were assigned to investigate uh January 6th the
▶ 3:22:25Insurrection instigated by the by Mr Trump against the election of the United States they are all being fired why because they did their jobs they didn't volunteer by the way for for their jobs they were assigned to their jobs and yet we are seeing the the systematic disparagement of law the systematic destruction of Congress Appropriations power the systematic uh destruction
▶ 3:22:55of the uh Senate's uh confirmation Power by having unelected officials have all this power and then you look at the justice department I I talked about the justice department but all the people who are being fired at all the uh local uh offices around the country because they are true to their jobs because they are true to their Oaths
▶ 3:23:26this is the real threat that we face now and what do we see from this committee are we investigating are we looking at this threat no we're looking at what happened in the last Administration well let me give you some information about the last Administration it's over there's nothing we can do about what happened what we have to deal with is What's Happening Now what's happening in the future what we can affect
▶ 3:23:57now if we want to write historical reviews of the last Administration if that's the job of Congress I don't know that's fine have objection but our real job is to govern this country now to see that the president obeys his duty to see that the laws are Faithfully executed which he's clearly not doing will the gentleman yel I will yeld thank you Mr nler for those eloquent remarks you know not only are
▶ 3:24:27colleagues letting Elon Musk and Donald Trump presumably get away with the usurpation of congressional power when the courts strike it down as they've done in numerous cases they moov to impeach the judges so we've had courts come out and say that no you can't take it everybody's data from the Department of Treasury no you can't violate the rights of workers at at the agency of International Development and so what do you think about this attack on article three power
▶ 3:24:57well I was I was coming to that and we we have the vice president of the United States saying that the president can ignore judicial orders that the vice president is saying that the law essentially is what the President says it is because he doesn't have to obey presidential orders with he doesn't have to no he doesn't have to obey judicial orders no it is the core since 1803 we've recognized that the law
▶ 3:25:28is emphatically the duty of the Judiciary to declare what the law is and now we have an Administration that says no and if the president or when the president perhaps disobeys a court order as the vice president said he could do then we have no remedy at all then we have no uh Republic and for the 16 seconds I have left I'll yield thanks oh you're going to yield you're not going to yield I did oh yeah my I guess my question and
▶ 3:25:58now in six seconds is this when you say um you you should yield to the Court's opinion is that like with student loan repayments and that type of thing all I I I don't know about the student loan repayments the the ad can rical question ending the all I know is that in this country the courts declare what the law is and the executive must obey it all right gentleman's time expired who seeks recognition
▶ 3:26:28on the amendment question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Maryland those in favor say I I those opposed I'd like a recorded vote on that please the clerk will call the RO Jordan Mr Isa Mr BS Mr BS Mr BS votes no Mr mlto Mr Mento
▶ 3:26:59votes no Mr Tiffany Mr Massie Mr Roy Mr Roy votes no Mr Fitzgerald Mr Fitzgerald votes no Mr Klein Mr Gooden Mr van Drew Mr van Drew votes no Nells Mr Moore Mr Moore votes no Mr Kylie Miss Hagman Miss Lee Mr
▶ 3:27:30Hunt Mr Fry Mr gothman Mr gothman votes no Mr not Mr not votes no Mr Harris Mr Harris votes no Mr and Mr votes no Mr Schmidt Mr Gil Mr Gil votes no Mr bomb Gardner Mr Rasin hi Mr Rasin votes I Mr Nadler hi Mr Nadler votes I miss
▶ 3:28:01lofam Mr Cohen Mr Johnson Mr sell Mr Lou Mr Lou votes I miss jaul Mr kareah Miss scanland Miss scanland votes I Mr nus Miss mcbath Miss Ross Miss Ross votes I miss ballant miss ballant votes I Mr Garcia Mr Garcia votes
▶ 3:28:31I miss camer Dove Miss camer Dove votes I Mr moscowitz Mr Goldman Miss Crockett Mr Isa votes
▶ 3:29:09no the cler report Mr chairman there are eight eyes and 12 nose the is not adopted who seeks recognition gentleman from New York Mr chairman I have an amendment at the desk clerk will report the amendment Amendment to the committee on the Judiciary authorization and oversight plan for the 119th Congress offered by Mr nodler on page eight without
▶ 3:29:39objection the amendment will be considered as red gentleman is recognized all thank you Mr chairman Mr I almost feel sorry for this Republican majority for two years they did nothing but launch baseless investigations and attacks on the Biden Administration in a desperate and ultimately failed effort to impeach Joe Biden and now with President Biden no longer in office and Donald Trump in the White House they clearly have no positive agenda for governing and certainly no appetite for Meaningful oversight
▶ 3:30:10so what are they to do they have been reduced to looking backwards with a hopelessly partisan oversight plan plan that rehashes the T the same tired conspiracy theories and false narratives about the Biden Administration that dominated this committees last Congress in so doing they have shown themselves to be willfully blind to the ever multiplying scandals now enveloping the department of justice under the Trump Administration my Amendment would shine a light on just one of the many stunning acts of corruption we have seen in the opening days
▶ 3:30:40of this new Administration it would call on the committee to examine the Trump administration's decision to overrule a grand jury the US attorney for the southern district of New York and Senior officials at the public Integrity section of the Department of Justice in order to strike a corrupt bargain with New York's mayor Eric Adams who is charged by a unanimous grand jury with five felony counts of criminal bribery and soliciting illegal contributions every person no matter who they are is guaranteed due
▶ 3:31:10process and is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law but mayor Adams tried to S shortcircuit this process rather than take his case to court he took it to maral Lago and lo and behold shortly therea the justice department moved to dismiss the charges against him and said they were doing so not because they were convinced that they did not have a case but because they were convinced that they could bend the mayor to their political will in exchange for dropping the charges in return for dismissing the case against him
▶ 3:31:41the administration expects the mayor to help carry out president Trump's extreme immigration enforcement policies notably when they sought to dismiss the charges they reserved the right to file them again holding a sort of damic over the mayor holding him on a short leash if he is not sufficiently loyal and compliant indeed Tom Hol in the administration's bordar joined the mayor on Fox News recently and threatened and I quote if he doesn't come through I'll be back in New York City and we won't be sitting on a couch
▶ 3:32:11I'll be in I'll be in his office up his butt saying where the hell is the agreement we came to close quote the corrupt quid pro quo could not be any clearer it is happening before our eyes on National Television but where is the Republican majority still blinded by their unwavering loyalty to Donald Trump no matter what scandals unfold daily if our Republican colleagues are unable to see the corrupt bargain over the Adams prosecution for what it is at least some dedicated prosecutors who
▶ 3:32:41are more loyal to their oath of office than to Donald Trump took a stand against this improper deal several career prosecutors courageously resigned in protest after being ordered to drop the prosecution rather than going along with this bargain they were led by interim us attorney Danielle Sasson who is a former clerk for justice Scalia and a federalist Society member is certainly no liberal she was joined by the cas's lead prosecutor Hagen scotton another Bonafide conservative who clerked
▶ 3:33:11for chief justice Roberts and Justice Kavanaugh when he served on a lower court in his resignation letter scotton wrote quote I expect you will eventually find someone who is enough of a fool or enough of a coward to file your motion but it was never going to be me close quote sadly he was right Amo B the acting attorney Deputy attorney general filed such a motion last week the case is now in the judge's hands but this committee must act as well to perform our constitutionally required oversight function
▶ 3:33:42and to examine the details of this corrupt bargain Mr chairman I understand that Republicans yearned for a simpler time when their political opponent was in the white house and they could spend their time inventing false scandals to investigate while the country was being governed by a responsible Administration but there is a new reality and the new Administration and they can no longer hide their heads in the sand just weeks into the Trump Administration crisis after crisis is unfolding the Department of Justice and across the government and the country
▶ 3:34:12needs Congress to be a check and balance but this majority refuses to take its oversight responsibility seriously if they want to examine quote the politicization of criminal investigations and prosecutorial decisions close quote as they claim their oversight plan they will Begin by shining a light on the Adams prosecution as this amendment does I urge all members to support this amendment and I yield back the balance of my time um thank the Gent from the New York uh he of course he
▶ 3:34:42of course is free to put any of those remarks into to the minority views uh and would suggest that you do so the gentleman from New Jersey of course he's free to do that but he doesn't want to do it because they want to play this out it's political again we've gone through it before look at the shiny object really don't look at the matters at hand it is Rich to me it is Rich that the other side will say you know why are we looking back at well first of all anybody that knows anything about history you have to understand your
▶ 3:35:12past to know where you are now now anybody that knows anything about what's happened unfortunately in this government over the past four years knows that we never want to do that again we literally almost lost our America it is nothing less than that think of what went on think of what happened with the IRS how it was weaponized the Department of Justice how it was weaponized the Attorney General's office how it was weaponized the FBI how it was weaponized Facebook how
▶ 3:35:43it was used for censorship and this isn't n just this committee that uncovered it why did we do don't feel sorry for what we did you should feel good about what we did because this committee was integral in finding out and exposing and detailing all that was so wrong we're losing our freedom of speech you were getting in trouble for what you believed we had you know I I just it's unbelievable and it isn't just the Catholic Church issue with the FBI that was just one big issue traditional
▶ 3:36:13Roman Catholic churches it wasn't just what happened with fisa literally millions of times it was misused it wasn't what just happened with the IRS it is it's everything and everybody if you disagreed if you didn't want to go along and if you weren't in the ingroup the in group was the president his son the cabal of people around him amazing how they slow walked that case you want to talk about IRS you want to talk about something that's wrong looking at records
▶ 3:36:43how about we take a look at what happened with Hunter Biden after the president of the United States Joe Biden promised absolutely that he would never give his son a pardon of course he pardoned him and we talk about some pardons that President Trump did there was over 8,000 pardons given by this past President Joe Biden what happened to America was awful so we're going to detail some of that and we are going to talk about some of that again and we're going to talk about how to
▶ 3:37:13prevent it so it never everen happens in our future again but besides doing that besides doing that we need to make sure that the committee and it's the right thing to do both sides can have their voice hear what and say what they want to say and they're heard and that was the purpose I guess of of what we're going through now but they could have done that in the in the report they could put that all in as the minority Viewpoint so we're playing this out we're playing
▶ 3:37:43it out for politics we're playing playing it out they're playing out to look good they're playing it out to appeal to their base and that's fine but let's call it what it is but don't talk about how things aren't good now everything's out in the open now whether you like it or you don't like it but what happened be before behind closed doors to good people in secret was awful and as I said before and I don't I do not exaggerate it literally was almost the loss
▶ 3:38:14of the United States of America with that I yield back Mr chairman gentleman yields back re members recognized thank you very much Mr chairman uh I rise in very strong favor of the amendment from the distinguished gentleman from New York he says that he wants the language included um in our oversight plan to focus on the Trump administration's decision to overrule a grand jury the US attorney for the southern district of
▶ 3:38:44New York in senior officials at the public Integrity section at the Department of Justice in order to strike a corrupt bargain with an elected official charged with taking bribes and other illegal benefits from foreign Nationals how can the Judiciary uh Committee of the United States House of Representatives not look at that in other words we've got a grand jury indictment a unanimous grand jury indictment in New York against a
▶ 3:39:14high in public official for bribery conspiracy collecting other illegal benefits and then the when it's about to go to trial the Department of Justice itself orders that the US attorney in the southern district get the subpoena uh quashed get the grand jury indictment uh quashed and withdraw its investigation when it found there was probable cause
▶ 3:39:45to believe all these crimes had taken place and the grand jury as a matter of law had to have found that there was probable cause to believe that all these crimes had taken place and there's a 50 uh Page Plus indictment that went out in that case and the grandury uh insist the the uh the attorney general or the deputy attorney general Mr boet insists that all of it be killed okay now here's the extraordinary part
▶ 3:40:15the the US attorney for the southern district of New York no says I won't do it I would rather leave my job than to participate in something so corrupt as a deal to crush a corruption prosecution of a public official I won't do it and especially because I know why they're doing it because the president had a visit from that corrupt official or allegedly corrupt official in which he said I'll play on your team I'll do what you want me
▶ 3:40:45to do politically and then the president said fine we'll withdraw the indictment oh but guess what we'll withdraw it without prejudice without prejudice meaning we can reinstate it and then as the distinguished gentleman from New York quotes you've got uh the Mr homman the the director of the border the borders are Homeland Security saying yeah and if you don't keep up your end of the agreement you don't keep up your side of this corrupt bargain that the whole world
▶ 3:41:15looking at now then we're going to be quote up your butt to go and enforce the agreement so guess who resigns Republican colleagues I hope your ears will perk up for this one guess who resigns the United States Attorney for the southern district of New York Miss Danielle Sassoon a career member of the Federalist Society she clerked for Scalia Justice Scalia who I've heard our distinguished chairman quote many times over the years so so she said said
▶ 3:41:45hell no I'm not going to do this then they go to the next guy a decorated veteran himself a republican also a federalist Society uh activist he clerks check this one out for both justices Chief uh Chief Justice John Roberts and and Kavanagh when he was a an appeals court judge he clerked for Kavanaugh and Roberts and he said you've got to find a fool or a coward to go
▶ 3:42:16and crush this indictment a fool or a coward and he quit and then five other people were forced out in outrageous abuse of judicial process at the Department of Justice and these guys don't even want us to look at it no hearing suddenly they strike a demure silence no they want us to go back and talk I don't know is it Hillary's emails or it's Hunter Biden's laptop uh maybe we can get Marg Taylor green to bring us some
▶ 3:42:46dirty pictures that she found on it I I don't know this is a crisis in the justice system that this is taking place an absolute crisis that this is going on and it is a manifest illustration of the corruption that now pervades the executive branch of government they are firing assistant us attorneys Civil Service lawyers prosecutors just because they worked on the January 6th prosec ution and were assigned
▶ 3:43:16to do so they asked for a Roundup of FBI agents my friend Mr Jordan talks about a memo that was sent by the last attorney general they didn't even mention parents or mothers and fathers he's still talking about that five years later they're asking for the names of all of the FBI agents who worked on the January 6 investigation I yield back to you Mr chairman gentleman yields back who seeks recognition gentleman from Missouri is recognized thank thank you Mr President
▶ 3:43:46Mr chairman my colle my colleague from New York referred to quote desperate attacks against Joe Biden does he even hear what he's saying the libus liist bogus Russian collusion hoax two utterly bogus impeachments against President Trump that he himself led the charge on 88 criminal charges in for Democrat control jurisdictions 34 felony
▶ 3:44:17accounts on a highly contrived case in a venue where the president could not get a fair trial by a politically motivated prosecutor and judge ruthless censorship by the president by Democrat aligned or coerced social media a SWAT raid on the president's home in maral Lago oh desperate attacks against Joe Biden desperate attacks against Joe Biden why do we talk about the hunter will be in order
▶ 3:44:48why do we talk about the hunter laptop because the hunter laptop and many many many other facts suggest that the first family may well have been on the take from the Chinese Communist Party Poor Joe Biden desperate attacks against Joe Biden so uh I uh I I think we should look in the mirror when we start um start criticizing the work of this committee and Mr chairman I yield back yields back the
▶ 3:45:19question is on adoption of the amendment from the gentleman from New York um all those in favor say I I those oppos no no in the opinion of the chair the NOS have it gentleman from New York's asked for a recorded vote the clerk call the rooll Mr Jordan nope Mr Jordan votes no Mr Isa Mr Bigs Mr Bigs votes no Mr ment talk Mr mclen talk votes no Mr
▶ 3:45:49Tiffany Mr Massie Mr Roy Mr Fitzgerald Mr Fitzgerald votes no Mr Klein Mr Gooden Mr van Drew no Mr van Drew votes no Mr Nells Mr Moore Mr Moore votes no Mr Kylie M Mr Kylie votes no Miss Hagman Miss Lee Mr Hunt Mr Fry Mr
▶ 3:46:19gothman Mr gothman votes no Mr not Mr Harris Mr and no Mr and votes no Mr Schmidt Mr Schmidt votes no Mr Gil Mr bomb Gardner Mr rosin yes Mr Rasin votes yes Mr nodler I Mr nodler votes I miss Lofgren Mr Cohen Johnson
▶ 3:46:49Mr swell Mr Lou Mr Lou votes I miss jaal miss jaul votes I Mr Korea I Mr Korea votes I miss scanland miss scanland votes I Mr nigus Miss mcbath Miss Ross I miss Ross votes I miss ballant I miss ballant votes I Mr Garcia Mr Garcia votes I miss camer Dove I miss camer
▶ 3:47:19Dove votes I Mr moscowitz Mr Goldman Miss Crockett I miss Crockett v i Mr Isa votes no
▶ 3:47:51report Mr chairman there are 11 eyes and 11 nose amendment is not adopted who seeks who seeks recognition gentle lady from Pennsylvania is recognize Mr chairman I have an amendment at the desk cck report Amendment to the committee on OB will be considered as red and the Gent lady from Pennsylvania
▶ 3:48:21is recognized to uh explain her Amendment thank you um I've reviewed the oversight plan proposed by the Republican majority and find that it has some obvious but perhaps unsurprising omissions uh to the oversight plan for this term which it is our constitutional duty to undertake because nowhere is President Trump's evasion of account ability and his desire to weaponize the government for vengeance and to promote unquestioned loyalty
▶ 3:48:52nowhere is it more clear than in what's happening at the Department of Justice the Trump doj has already fired hundreds of career prosecutors and FBI agents simply for doing their jobs the same jobs that doj attorneys have been doing without fear or favor for over a century regardless of which party is in power shamefully as this amendment makes clear the White House has specifically targeted thousands of Veteran agents and FBI
▶ 3:49:23employees who helped investigate identify and arrest the people who violently attacked this building the US capital on January 6th and attacked hundreds of Law Enforcement Officers this is a clear attack on the rule of law to punish the people who were trying to enforce the rule of law and therefore it attacks the found of our country not satisfied with threatening these Law Enforcement Officers with firing the president has put his seal of approval on political violence
▶ 3:49:53so long as it supports him by pardoning more than a thousand of his supporters who' already been convicted or pled guilty for their rules in that assault on our constitution so ultimately these actions undermine morale and capacity among our federal law enforcement officers threatening their ability to protect our communities and to respond to threats the American people deserve a justice department that's Guided by the rule of law and the public good not political whims or Petty Vengeance and I think all of
▶ 3:50:24this deserves oversight action by this committee I would hope that my Republican colleagues can agree on these basic Democratic and constitutional principles and I would ask them to support my amendment to add this much needed oversight to the committee's agenda I yield back gent lady yields back who seeks recognition I would just point out that again the proper placement of this amendment language is in uh in the plan is in the section uh where the minority gets to express their views and their viewpoints
▶ 3:50:54um that would be appropriate and I've said that now multiple times with that I would yield back question occurs on the amendment from the gentle lady from Pennsylvania all those in favor say I I those oppose no no in in opinion of the chair the NOS have it um General lady request a record a vote the cler call the RO Mr Jordan no Mr Jordan votes no Mr Isa Mr BS Mr BS votes no
▶ 3:51:24Mr Mento Mr ment votes no Mr Tiffany Mr Massie Mr Roy no Mr Roy votes no Mr Fitzgerald Mr Fitzgerald votes no Mr Klein Mr Gooden Mr van Drew no Mr vandrew votes no Mr Nells Moore Mr Kylie Miss Hegman Miss Lee
▶ 3:51:55Mr Hunt Mr Fry Mr grathan Mr grathan votes no Mr not Mr not votes no Mr Harris Mr and no Mr and votes no Mr Schmidt Mr Schmidt votes no Mr Gil Mr bomgardner Mr Rasin I Mr Rasin votes I Mr nodler I Mr nodler votes I miss
▶ 3:52:26Lofgren Mr Cohen Mr Johnson Mr swall Mr Lou Mr Lou votes I miss jaipal Mr CA Mr CA votes I miss gandin I miss ganin votes I Mr nigus Miss mcbath Miss Ross Miss Ross votes I miss ballant miss ballant votes I Mr Garcia
▶ 3:52:57Mr Garcia votes I miss CA gdv hi Miss camer du votes I Mr moscowitz Mr Goldman Miss Crockett I miss Crockett I miss Hegman you are not recorded Miss Hagman votes no Mr Isa votes no clerk
▶ 3:53:32report Mr chairman there are 10 eyes and 12 NOS amendment is not adopted who recognition gentle lady from Vermont is recognized thank you Mr chair I have an amendment at the desk cler a report Amendment to the committee on the Judiciary
▶ 3:54:03OB be considered as red um the general a from bont recognized to explain the amendment thank you Mr chair I have an amendment at the desk as I said today we're considering uh the Republican majority's plan for an essential uh function of Congress conducting oversight it's one of the jobs of this committee we should be all over the corruption in this current Administration right now but the plan offered by the chair uh I believe is deeply flawed I'm offering
▶ 3:54:33an amendment to bring the oversight plan more in line with its purpose which is in fact congressional oversight of the Trump Administration Elon Musk a senior White House official the world's richest man and a prolific Internet troll is actively suppressing speech and promoting white nationalist propaganda on the platform he owns and actively controls and let's be clear Elon Musk is in many ways
▶ 3:55:03right now acting as president and he also controls media as a congress we are asleep at the wheel if we do not in investigate Elon Musk special government employee musk uses his own social media platform to promote anti-Semitism and anti-immigrant content we have so many examples of this attack and discredit journalists and the media and silence critics by suspending users
▶ 3:55:34with whom he disagrees this is a man who claims to believe in the purest form of free speech unless of course it contradicts something that he said and while we're at it I believe this committee should really use its time to investigate what is happening in the White House Press Room the Trump Administration has banned journalists from the AP because of a disagreement over what to call the Gulf
▶ 3:56:05Mexico this stupid Petty small issue is getting in the way of something we all how dear I would hope which is a free Free Press Trump then made the unprecedented move to take over the responsibility of deciding who gets into the room a role that is previously reserved again for the free press and the president is controlling which reporters get
▶ 3:56:37access and it is a you know let's just be clear when you are controlling who gets access when are you we're controlling who gets to report this is part of a slide into authoritarianism it's in fact straight out of Putin's Playbook so now only friendly reporters to the president will get to report on the president's propaganda it seems like this is extremely right
▶ 3:57:07for an investigation into government censorship I would hope that my Republican colleagues who have talked so passionately about the dangers of government censorship through tech companies would join me in supporting this amendment I cannot see a planer violation of the First Amendment and I believe it is our duty on this committee to investigate I yield back General lady yields back I would just add access to the media he's the most
▶ 3:57:37media accessible president maybe in certainly my lifetime I don't I will stand and do a press conference for hours like the idea that he's not somehow he's hurting the Press it's I just I just fail to see that argument but I would have a question for the G's Amendment it say says page eight uh strike collusion between the Biden Harris Administration and big Tech to censor political speech uh are you arguing that that that didn't place I believe that the most important thing right now in this
▶ 3:58:07moment I I do not believe that took place I should put that out front but I believe in this moment you don't think that happened I do not so the the letter that Mark Zuckerberg wrote this committee he was lying to us that's a question he wrot a letter I cannot I cannot speak for I cannot the letter was I mean very news people you were talking about the letter was all over the news he wrote us a letter last summer and said the Biden Administration pressured us to censor we did it we're sorry we're
▶ 3:58:37not going to do it again and they've subsequently changed their policy so I'm asking do you you you said you didn't think that happened he admitted it happened the compy runs the compy lady y I will no it's not your time it's my time oh I will not then turns out I can't yield no the gentleman yield you you can't yield I'll be happy to yield to the to the for I just want to point out that what uh Mr um Zucker Zu Zuckerberg uh was saying was censorship
▶ 3:59:07in fact was factchecking that's right which he decided to that meta would longer do factchecking especially in an era when we have a President Who Lies incessantly is essential I he back it's it's I think it's interesting they got rid of the fact Checker because the fact Checker always turned out to be factchecking and stopping real speech that's protected under the First Amendment so uh again uh the proper place absolutely first of all you
▶ 3:59:37said you didn't you want to strike the language that's that's true and you want to add in this other language the proper place for this as I've said again multiple times is to put it in the minority views which will be part of the oversight plan but for some reason that doesn't seem to be good enough for y will the chairman yield yeah sure U just uh uh to pursue this point for a moment this this claim that this was factchecking wasn't this a suppression of uh New York Post reporting back
▶ 4:00:08on the genuiness of the hunter Biden laptop which which included the most incriminating evidence against a president uh involving family influence pedaling that I think has ever been produced and it turned out to be true so what they were actually doing was suppressing facts not checking them suppressing facts and and and doing violation to the first amendment in free speech rights of Americans um who seeks recognition
▶ 4:00:38gentle lady uh Miss Crockett is recognized thank you so much Mr chair it's so interesting to me that um we all swear an oath to the Constitution and we say that we take that oath seriously but when it comes into actually doing something that looks like preserving that oath or looks like preserving the Constitution we get a little wobbly and I'm not really understanding what's going on freedom of press doesn't look like kicking out the Washington Post
▶ 4:01:09or or actually The Huffington Post has been kicked out we know that the Associated Press has been kicked out and now the Washington Post is not going to allow for op ads in any way if for some reason they criticize the sitting president of the United States what this is starting to feel like is a a smaller version of Russia and I am trying to tell you that that we are nothing like Russia we are not supposed to be like Russia
▶ 4:01:39but that is what we've got going on and I'm sorry I I know that some of my colleagues still struggle with answering the question of who won the election in 2020 and you may have felt the way when you had social media checking people and saying no Trump did not win the election in 2020 that is absolutely factual and unfortunately because some people got all riled up because they believ the lies they ended up getting locked up because
▶ 4:02:09they decided that they were going to believe the lies they ended up at the capital on January 6th and they were trying to tear this thing apart because they felt like their country was falling apart in front of their eyes because for whatever reason there were people in power that were pedling a lie about the election we also know and some of y'all may still say it say that Co was a hoax Co wasn't a hoax tell that to the over a million people that
▶ 4:02:39died under Donald Trump's first watch it wasn't a ho folks so no I do believe that it was okay in fact I do believe that it was ethically right for social media to check people because you had people that didn't know anything about science and decided that they were going to put out whatever lies or propaganda or conspiracy theories they wanted to and people died at some point in time we have to evaluate
▶ 4:03:09what is factual and I know that facts hurt y'all and and I just wish we could get on the same page but we do know during the presidential election that the president would not go and participate in anything if fact checking was going to be a part of it because he didn't want to be fact checked we know that the vice president got upset in his vice presidential debate when he was fact checked it used to be a time in this country that we as members of
▶ 4:03:40Congress or elected officials thought that it was okay to just tell the truth instead we're pushing conspiracy theories and some of them are killing people it's the same thing that we have coming out of Doge it's the reason that people are dying it's the reason that farmers are losing their Farms because we continue to Pedal conspiracy theories it is time for us to say Mr President guess what Russia invaded Ukraine can we can we at least agree on that one facts
▶ 4:04:10matter y'all this is literally potentially put putting us into an international crisis we may be heading towards the next World War because we have a president that wants to Pal around with Putin and wants to do everything to make him feel good including lying about who invaded who Mr chair I I got a minute left but I really want to yield to any of my colleagues and ask them if they will say today very basically that when it came down
▶ 4:04:40to the war in Ukraine that it was not Ukraine that invaded Russia it was the other way around is there anybody in here that has enough courage to say that Russia invaded Ukraine you can have my time and this is yet the problem this is the problem that is not infringing upon Free Speech will the general lady yield I will yield to the right thank you Miss Crockett to be clear your challenge I think was across the aisle because I think every member on your side of the aisle agrees with the obvious fact
▶ 4:05:11that Vladimir Putin ordered the filthy blood The imperialistic Invasion uh of Ukraine and in fact at the time Donald Trump as president never denied it in fact he praised it he said it was quote an act of Genius when Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine so I I would hope some of our colleagues would would consent to at least that historical Point since we think history is so important there are people who want to relive that in our oversight
▶ 4:05:42report and there and last is the problem the time of the gentle ladies expired the gentleman from California is recognized I'd yield to the chairman I just wanted to make a point we we talk gent previous speaker talked about factual information we've talked about factchecking fact checking you know what you know what factchecking is truly supposed to be in this country the First Amendment not some expert who can sit on the and look at posts and tweets and different things and say oh that's not factual take it down that's
▶ 4:06:12not how it factchecking is the first amendment someone says something stupid and that happens every day in this Congress someone says something crazy someone says something that's not quite true not quite accurate you know what the fact check is someone says something else and you have debate that's what we do in this committee every day and this is the committee who's supposed to protect that fundamental fact real factchecking is the first amendment our Supreme Court has been clear about that you don't like certain speech the best speech for wrong speech is more speech
▶ 4:06:42the best speech for false speech is true speech that's how it works you have a debate and you trust we the people to figure it out not some expert who's going to fact check every tweet every post and we saw this in the Biden Administration we're seeing it in Europe now we're seeing it in Brazil that was the first bill we dealt with from from the gentleman from California his good legislation that we all agreed on we're going to work on and put a good bill on the floor so that's that's the key that's what we and we know it happened
▶ 4:07:13because again we had the guy who runs one of the biggest companies in the world most successful tech companies in the world tell us it happened we had on the third day of the Biden Administration an email from the White House to Twitter saying take down this tweet ASAP the government telling a business to take down a tweet and the Tweet ironically was from RFK Jr who was going to be running for president against the guy in the white house so he was saying take down the speech of my opponent
▶ 4:07:44that's not how it's supposed to work in this country that's what we're concerned about that's why it's in our oversight plan and if you want additional things to look at again put them in your viewpoints we're happy to accept them we'll take everything Mr Rasin has said today everything the G lady from Texas said today we'll take everything the Democrats said you want put all that in your plan put it in your plan that's fine that's how it works but no that's not good enough that's not good enough I yield back to the gentleman from California I I think the gentleman and back to the point of uh what chairman was saying
▶ 4:08:15we have two plans not one plan we have the majority plan which is the committee's plan the minority uh report or opinion reflects additional items asked for and this committee does have a long history of when appropriate granting minority days minority hearings or in every case including a minority witness uh when when it's not like it was with the obviously with the judge on a specific spefic item but we do that so that both
▶ 4:08:45opinions are heard and uh I applaud that tradition I will say that the one thing uh that uh was originally said by the general lady that I have to take Umbridge with there's no such thing as settled science the fact is a fact is that there are often multiple competing ideas that each claims as a fact the chairman said rightfully so the best fact check is the other opinion
▶ 4:09:16being heard and documented in a way in which people may judge the authenticity of it uh the gentle lady Miss Crockett said you know well you know Co killed millions and so there's an undeniable fact when we were here in the midst of that beginning crisis and Dr fouchi hid the fact that it came from a lab in China hid the fact that he had paid for gain of fun function and and caused us to believe a lot
▶ 4:09:46of other things some of which turned out to be true some of which turned out not to be true uh and maybe some more will be discovered that will modify what I just said but freedom of speech is about never having to accept that the Earth is flat or that Asia was discovered by uh Christopher Columbus we have the ability to continue to have discussion and we should do it our oversight plan absolutely
▶ 4:10:16lives up to that expectation that's why I'll support it Mr chairman I yield uh I I appreciate the gentleman ying a second time I I would just point out the gentem brought up the the co and and in s of the gentleman from California I would argue almost everything he told us turned out to be false not not just where it come from not just gain a function issue not just the fact that it was our tax dollars used at that location where it came from but everything else he told us he actually told us that people who got the vaccine couldn't get the virus wrong on that he told us people who got the vaccine couldn't transmit the virus wrong on that he told us
▶ 4:10:47mask work wrong on that he told us this is the first virus in history where there's no such thing as natural immunity wrong on that almost everything he told us and if you questioned it you got censored by the previous administration what we're saying is no let the debate happen let the we're not saying you can't say the wrong things Dr fouchy but what we are saying is don't don't censor the people who disagree with you because that's how America works and Mr chairman everything you just said if you had said it when you said it in real time was in fact taken down or ratcheted down
▶ 4:11:17I yield back exactly um gentleman from Maryland is recognized Mr chairman thank you very much I'm um inspired by your first amendment passion uh you are the I knew you would be you you are the the John Stewart Mill of the House of Representatives and the the voler of Congress and you you put me in the the mood of justice brandise but I want to ask stop there no I I got to keep going a little bit because I I have to know whether or not your first amendment passion and principles
▶ 4:11:47which I take to be completely true and I've always known that about you extend to one citizen named Donald Trump now let's talk about Donald Trump for a second okay he is after all I think the president of the United States um and check this out okay uh everybody in this room who's sitting on this side of the Das is a politician okay we have people say stuff about us and say stuff about our Rivals and our opponents
▶ 4:12:17all the time I don't know if there's anybody here who's ever sued anybody in politics for liable or defamation I'm taking that no I imagine a lot of us have felt like have you I'll be curious to hear about that later Mr Isa um but the vast majority of us don't sue people even when we feel really aggrieved by the mean things that people say and yet Donald Trump Donald Trump gets to be president of unit States and suddenly he decides uh he
▶ 4:12:47doesn't like Jim Jordan's approach which is the answer to bad speech is good speech the answer to false speech is true speech the answer to nonsense is the dialectics of expression that's the spirit of the First Amendment well check this one out Donald Trump personally suing CBS for 20 oh no not 20 million2 billion the president of the United States is suing CBS for $20 billion why what did they say about
▶ 4:13:17him did they lie about him did they defame him no it has nothing to do with him it has to do with the way he thinks they unfairly edited a video conversation with KLA Harris he said that the way the video looked in the commercial for 60 minutes was different from the way she appeared the president of the United States is suing them for $20 billion and ordering the FCC
▶ 4:13:48which is part of the US government and under his unitary executive Theory reporting directly to him like a monarch he's ordered them to go out and CBS and meantime his close friend is trying to take over Paramount um and so he's of course completely entangled on the business side that's not the first time he did it to ABC with George stepan Stephanopoulos which
▶ 4:14:18settled a suit for him for I think that one was $15 million the president of the United States is shaking down the media would you guys really be so silent and taciturn about this if it was Joe Biden doing that honestly I'm just waiting for one person to answer me honestly about it would you guys be okay if Joe Biden had been the one who had who had said destroy a grand jury subpoena against the Democratic mayor of New York
▶ 4:14:48for corruption would you be okay with that but suddenly because it's Donald Trump you don't want to do oversight on it it's the most amazing thing in the world and there are young people watching and this is the US government and we're going to be silent with all of these attacks on the First Amendment where the president is saying I don't like the words you use I want you to say Gulf of America not Gulf of Mexico Associated Press is now B hand from this room I'm kicking you out I mean come on this is the United States of America
▶ 4:15:18will any of my friends over there all of whom understand and love the First Amendment say it should apply even against the president of the United States and I know you voted for him and you'd vote for him again if the Constitution changes and so on but leaving all that aside does the First Amendment not apply to him so I I I find that we are in an astonishing situation the right now will the ranker I would gladly yield to the G lady from Texas I'm I'm just you brought up the Gulf of Mexico and you know I just left and
▶ 4:15:49I was talking about facts versus fiction I'm curious to know do y'all agree that it's the Gulf of Mexico can can we say that that's a fact are any of y'all willing to say that it's a Gulf of Mexico instead of Gulf of America well but reclaiming my time reclaiming my time I would say uh that that these days that's a matter of opinion it's a matter of fact from the standpoint of objective sources but if people want to say it that's great I would never kick them out of the room for saying something different
▶ 4:16:19but that's what's happening with Donald Trump he's kicking people out of the room and punishing them subordinating their role as press because they're not complying with his orders that's not the first amendment I yield back Mr chairman gentleman yields back gentleman from uh Arizona is recognized for enous consent yes Mr chairman I would like to uh uh submit for the record this um rather ironically uh titled document
▶ 4:16:49actually put out by the Associated Press um it's a little old it's a little dated but I just do think it's ironic anyway nonetheless appropo for today it's called report Obama brings chilling effect on journalism that objection uh uh the gentleman from uh gentleman from new jerseyy is recognized thank you chairman I'm trying I am trying to be quiet um I I just can't do it man I couldn't do it didn't do it so much
▶ 4:17:19first of all let's just go over some of the things that were mentioned real quickly here Ukraine Ukraine let's really remember what happened Ukraine Joe Biden was President Russia was making noise saying that they were going to and they did were moving some troops moving some equipment into the borders of Ukraine Joe Biden said it was a minor incursion no worries nothing to see there it was that weakness that created the mess and the war the horrible tragedy that exists now it was the weakness
▶ 4:17:49of a president who didn't deal with an issue headon that happened before it happened when President Trump was the president in the previous administration before Biden and he absolutely made it clear you do that and you got big trouble on your hands mid East Iran we empowered Iran the literally which is the evil empire empowered it catered to it did anything we could to coo didn't do anything to
▶ 4:18:20stand up to it and tell them they better damn well cut it out unfroze their assets so now we ended up with a war in the m midd east a weak Administration and a weak president and then we talk about factchecking that was the other thing that came up let me tell you somebody's facts over there in reality or censorship then that whatever you say everybody should have an equal voice and everybody should be heard I got to tell you man I just remember from things I've said meetings I've
▶ 4:18:50been at speeches I've given when it's covered by some of the Legacy Media it's just not what you hear and it's not what you see because the reality that the Legacy Media CBS NBC ABC uh the New York Times Washington Post they're not telling it as it is you're not getting both sides so of of course when you have a press Corps in the White House you want to give a chance to some of those who never get heard
▶ 4:19:20other than Americans are thirsting to hear the truth why the hell do you think people aren't watching ABC CBS NBC and reading these newspapers anymore because they know it wasn't the truth they know it wasn't the real deal they know they weren't here in the real story and you know what it even applies to things that we know from the good work that was done in this committee remember Russian collusion man I remember Russian collusion all over the media every TV station
▶ 4:19:50they all had the same script the newspapers they all had the same script the magazines whatever media it was and it wasn't true the damn thing wasn't true but when it came out in an objective report the Durham report that it wasn't true somehow you never heard about that it was never heard it was cricket man nobody talked about it the truth is that the FBI paid a guy Igor danchenko a bad International actor
▶ 4:20:21hundreds of thousand dollars hundreds of thousands of dollars to lie he did his job he lied he did his job before the election and then of course now admits that he lied and the FBI is embarrassed and apologized but you don't hear that boy we don't hear it you don't hear it now you didn't hear it then so of course we want to have other voices in the in the White House you want to hear it all you want to hear the conservatives you want to hear the Liberals you want to hear the middle
▶ 4:20:51of the rotors factchecking hey you know factchecking how come there wasn't factchecking when the 51 former Intel officers said that the laptop was non-existent there was no such thing man that was all over the news I remember watching TV reading seeing it everywhere hearing it everywhere 514 former Intel officers said that it wasn't true and damn it it was true and Co in some cases and you know what
▶ 4:21:21I'm one of the few there's a few of us here that said up I was trained in medicine I'm a dentist went to nine years of school including a residency a lot of what happened in covid was wrong the way we dealt with it is wrong our children have still been helped back that were should have been in school during those years was wrong some of the treatments were wrong that it came from a wet weat meat market in Wuhan was wrong was a lie
▶ 4:21:52factchecking man real factchecking I guess would be a good thing but let the people decide let them hear both points of you let them hear the debate like we're doing today and then let them make their mind up and you know why that's why Americans more than ever they're looking at podcasts they're getting online they're looking at x they're looking at whatever it is liberal conservative everything in between because they know what was supposed to be truthful what was supposed to be fact indeed was often fiction and was
▶ 4:22:22a lie and they're tired of it and everybody should be tired of it I yield back gentleman yields back question occurs on the amendment from the gentle lady from Vermont all those in favor say I I those oppose no no opinion of the chair the NOS have it recorded vote please uh recorded vote being requested the clerk will call the roll Mr Jordan no Mr Jordan votes no Mr Isa Mr Isa votes no Mr Bigs Mr Bigs votes no
▶ 4:22:52Mr ment talk Mr Tiffany Mr Massie Mr Massie votes no Mr Roy Mr Roy votes no Mr Fitzgerald Mr Klein Mr Gooden Mr vanre M Mr vanre votes no Mr Nells Mr Moore Mr Kylie Miss hagaman Miss Hegman votes
▶ 4:23:22no Lee Mr Hunt Mr Fry Mr grathan Mr grathan votes no Mr not Mr Harris Mr and Mr Schmidt Mr Schmidt votes no Mr Gil Mr bomgar Gardner Mr Rasin I Mr Rasin votes I Mr nodler Mr nodler votes I miss Lofgren
▶ 4:23:52Mr Cohen Mr Johnson I Mr Johnson votes I Mr swell Mr Lou Miss jaipal Miss jaal votes I Mr kareah Miss scanlin Miss scanland votes I Mr nus Miss mcbath Miss Ross Miss Ross votes I miss ballant miss ballant votes I Mr Garcia Mr Garcia votes I miss camer Dove
▶ 4:24:23Miss camer Dove votes I Mr moscowitz Mr Goldman Miss Crockett I miss Crockett votes I Mr chairman how am I recorded gentleman from Missouri Mr and you're not recorded votes no Mr and votes no
▶ 4:24:53clerk report Mr chairman there are 10 eyes and 10 nose the amendment is not adopted seeks recognition gentleman from George is recognized uh Mr chairman I have an amendment at the T report Amendment to the authorization objection be considered as R uh the gentleman from Georgia's recognized explain his Amendment thank you uh Mr chairman I would uh before explaining my amendment I would uh
▶ 4:25:23like to remind my uh colleagues that there is a Commandment that I learned growing up as a child in the home going to Presbyterian church and it was that thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor in other words words it it's wrong to lie and there is truth uh and sometimes the truth is uh hidden but the search for the truth is certainly
▶ 4:25:54worthy of discussion but when you're simply trying to obscure the truth parading as you are spilling spinning truth which you know is not truth which you know is deceptive is wrong and um but I have an amendment which I would like to uh on page nine strike quote the unwarranted attacks on and threats on the Supreme Court end quote and replace it
▶ 4:26:25with this language the need for an enforcable code of ethics at the Supreme Court and threats of impeachment removal and physical violence against federal judges who rule against the Trump Administration in ongoing litigation as a ranking member of the subcommittee on courts intellectual property artificial intelligence and the internet I'm invested in maintaining the integrity and safety of our judicial system
▶ 4:26:55as Alexander Hamilton wrote In The Federalist Papers quote the Judiciary has no influence over either the sword or the purse end quote so it's essential that our judges and justices hold themselves to the high standards that will in gender public trust it's also essential that we protect judges ability to rule according to the law even when that angers the president democracy can only continue if
▶ 4:27:25we respect the rule of law and ensure the Court's ability to rule without fear or favor which is why I offer this amendment some on the other side of the aisle have dismissed my calls for an enforceable code of ethics at the Supreme Court they view it as an unwarranted attack on the independence of the court but when fewer than half of Americans have a favorable opinion of the Court we have a problem one piece of fixing that problem is to
▶ 4:27:55require as we have the authority to do and indeed the responsibility of doing is to require that the Supreme Court Justices follow a code of conduct that is at least as strict as every other federal judge so that the public can trust that they are ruling according to the law rather than ruling in a way that benefits those who have purchased uh luxury RVs and send them on uh
▶ 4:28:26luxury vacations yearly and hunting trips to exclusive Resorts the American people don't want those kinds of justices making decisions on Ultimate issues that impact their lives my Amendment also o calls for investigations into threats of impeachment removal and physical violence against federal judges who rule against the Trump Administration in ongoing litigation just this week representative
▶ 4:28:56ogles introduced an impeachment resolution against a federal judge who had the temerity to rule against the Trump Administration and earlier this month representative crane introduced articles of impeachment against another federal judge who temporarily blocked co-president musk's Jo Doge uh organization from rifling through the treasury Department payment system this filing articles of impeachment
▶ 4:29:26to uh terrorize and um and uh intimidate federal judges is wrong and it needs to end it's dangerous and the courts serve as a check on the the other branches of government and they should not be subjected to um Terror and intimidation as members of this uh as members of uh the opposite caucus
▶ 4:29:57um are trying to do and so to make sure that uh we investigate those uh offenses uh that's why I offer this amendment and I hope that it's it is acceptable uh to my friends on the other side of the aisle and with that I will uh yield back gentleman yields back uh it is not acceptable to your friends on this side of the aisle uh the um again I think the proper place for the language that the gentleman wishes to insert is in the minority
▶ 4:30:28views um who seeks recognition question is on the I'm sorry General a from Texas is recognized you know it's interesting because I feel like I keep going back to elementary school and a lot of conversations that are taking place to basically educate people on the fact that we have three co-equal branches of government and right now when many of us say that we're in a constitutional crisis it is because we feel as if the executive branch is being enriched
▶ 4:30:58of power that it should not be enriched in and part of that consolidation is power of power is because unfortunately so many colleagues on the other side of the aisle seem to have pledged more loyalty to Trump than they did to the Constitution but here it is we're three co-equal branches of government the last time I checked we have an Ethics that we are to be held to we have a process a due process um Whenever there is a
▶ 4:31:28concern about our ethics in the house there is a Code of Ethics that the Senate has to deal with and so why it is and and the Judiciary as a whole it's the Supreme Court that is lacking and here's here's the reality the tables can turn any day this is what I want you to imagine imagine that Planned Parenthood I know how y'all love Planned Parenthood Planned Parenthood says you know what judge let me come
▶ 4:31:59pick you up so they pick you up on the Planned Parenthood plane it's pink with Planned Parenthood all over it and they take you on these fancy trips and the next thing you know there is a case that comes before The Supreme Court and it has to do with whether or not a woman should not be a part of the handmaid's tail and should have a right to choose what she does with her body but nevertheless all of a sudden we see that there's this link between
▶ 4:32:29the justices that vote for this particular case and the justices that ended up on that Planned Parenthood plane now I'm guessing if that happened that y'all will be in an uproar but I could be wrong and so what I'm trying to say is that what has been proposed is actually what we should be doing in this Congress this isn't about politics it shouldn't be about politics it shouldn't be about party it should be about what is right and wrong that is what ethics is in the first place ethics is what's
▶ 4:32:59right and what's wrong and so if we have to be behold in to ethics and if every other branch of government has some kind of Ethics why is it that the highest court in the land would not have a level of Ethics that they had to abide by to make sure that we could all trust the decisions that were coming out of our high court these are decisions that literally change lives some people lose their lives some people lose their rights
▶ 4:33:29some people gain their rights we should have trust in the s in the system and right now people don't trust us because it's like we turn a blind eye when it's our side this shouldn't be about our side ethics should be something that we all say you know what ethics are good when we look at Elon Musk and we're talking about the fact that he has conflicts of interest that would go to ethics we should all have concerns about this this is the only
▶ 4:34:00thing that this that Hank is trying to do with this amendment and guess what it wouldn't just apply to the Republican appointees it would apply equally to the Democratic appointees as well and I will yield who the ranker thank you very much uh Miss Crockett for for those comments and I want to pick up with where you left off when you said it shouldn't be a partisan thing and you know I was thinking about this terrible situation that we've got with uh mayor Adams and the Department of Justice dismissing a
▶ 4:34:30grand jury indictment now we could be taking the partisan instinctual position on our side of that and say wait that's a Democratic mayor who's being charged with bribery and conspiracy and Corruption charges don't talk about it just let this dirty deal go through let's be silent about the corrupt bargain I've not heard a single Democrat say that not heard a single Democrat and yet our colleagues are willing to be completely silent about this corrupt bargain
▶ 4:35:00this dirty deal because the Republicans are running the Department of Justice but it's the Department of Justice and we're the Judiciary Committee and we're supposed to be standing up for the objective principles of the rule of law as the gentle lady was saying we've got the opportunity here with that because it's bipartisan corruption that's being fostered by a Republican president and doj and a Democratic mayor and those defending we have the opportunity to clarify
▶ 4:35:31the country for the country that we stand up for the rule of law together thank you for yielding I yield back to the G lady time of the G lady has expired the gentleman from Arizona is recognized Mr chairman I just have a a UC gentlemen uh can say this uh unanimous consent request yes thank you this is uh from Newsweek Schumer telling Brett kavel he'll pay the price for row uh where he said in there you won't you won't know what hits you if
▶ 4:36:01you go forward with these awful decisions and those threats that he made not objection gentle lady from Wyoming is recognized just a couple of points to make here uh contrary to what the proponent of this particular Amendment states the courts do not serve as a check on the other branches of government they serve to interpret the law we are a co-equal branch of government with the uh the courts and the uh executive branch uh one other thing is that the federal court
▶ 4:36:31system is the third branch of government and we do not have the Constitutional authority to dictate the ethical rules that the Supreme Court follows any more than that the Supreme Court would have the constitutional authority to dictate our ethical rules with that I yield back well said generally yields back um I think we we can go twice with it since you're the ranking member you get you get to recognize twice actually I don't think I've been recognized that was Yi of time but but let's let M iul go first
▶ 4:37:02uh thank you I I rise in support of this amendment from Mr Johnson we've both done a lot of work on Supreme Court ethics and transparency and um in the proposed oversight plan my Republican colleagues are claiming that there are quote unwarranted attacks on the Supreme Court I just want to make the point that these are not unwarranted attacks I think Americans across the country would be shocked absolutely shocked to know that the highest court of the land is the only
▶ 4:37:32court that has no enforceable ethic standard I think most Americans think that the Supreme Court has an enforceable standard of ethics and I think we need to let people know that that is not the case it is a well-documented crisis that we have right now justices Thomas and Alo have run a foul of the ethical standards that I think the American people expect from them and expect that they are being held accountable to and I'll just touch on a few facts regarding Justice
▶ 4:38:02Clarence Thomas the justice for years has accepted trips from GOP Mega donor and developer harlon Crow including on his private jet his super yacht without disclosing them on financial disclosures as Federal Law requires I I actually think that's lying on your federal disclosures Crow has also paid two years of tuition for the Justice's Grand nephew whom the justice has
▶ 4:38:32custody of so that the grand nephew can attend to private schools and these payments similarly were not disclosed the justice also sold a string of properties in Savannah Georgia to Crow in 2014 including the home where his mother still lives this again was not disclosed the Justice attended at least two donor Summits for the cotch Network and uh the coch brothers and participated in a dinner with
▶ 4:39:03highlevel donors without disclosing his appearance at the Summits or a private jet trip that he took to and from the me in 2018 I could go on and on but I do think the American people do not like corruption they don't like conflicts of interest they want to know that if a Justice is on the Supreme Court the highest court of the land that that Justice is not being bought and paid for by a whole bunch of donors that appear before the Justice in a number of
▶ 4:39:33varied suits and I think that the idea that we would have an enforcable Ethics standard for the Supreme Court is one that I bet the vast vast majority of the American people would agree with so I don't think it's beyond the scope to say if the justices themselves refuse to even put into place an Ethics standard that is enforcable by an outside enforcer then we need to in Congress uh make sure that that happens now
▶ 4:40:03I also would say I'm confused by the previous speaker on the other side's statement that um I don't want to misquote her but my understanding was that she said that that the judicial system is not a check I didn't understand that because in my reading and I think every fifth grader knows this there are three branches of government and those are the checks and balances the Congress has specific article one Powers the Congress
▶ 4:40:33has specific checks on us as well the judicial branch is a check on Congress and I think the American people expect that these three branches of government will interact in a way that provides certainty to the American people that their interests are being protected that none of us is exceeding our authorities and that there are checks and balances built in the only problem with the checks and balances as I'm seeing it right now and it goes back to the Free Speech
▶ 4:41:04conversation we were having in the previous Amendment it goes back to a number of things that are happening with the funding freezes and the um illegal appropriation of authorities around funding which are congressional authorities article one powers that we have to authorize and appropriate funding that cannot be taken away by the executive the challenge is the founding fathers were great but they weren't completely all knowing they they actually expected that people on both sides of the aisle
▶ 4:41:34would stand up for those powers and for those checks and balances they did not expect people in Congress to so easily give away Article 1 Powers because a president tells them to they didn't expect that there would be all of these instances where people would defend behavior that is that is corrupt and is unethical they thought that we would all stand up for some of these basic premises so I support this amendment and uh commend
▶ 4:42:04the the my colleague from Georgia for offering it I yield back gentlemen gentl lady yields back gentleman from New Jersey thank you Mr chairman just quickly um the ranking member referred to he didn't use these words I'm going to use these words almost the purity of the democratic party in that um it is criticizing Eric Adams uh who was a Democrat mayor of the city of New York you I just want to give my viewpoint I would maintain that criticism began when
▶ 4:42:34Eric Adams uh as he did over months really started to criticize what was happening to his City with illegal immigration what was happening again in other ways and expressed real concern about some of the immigration issues what it was doing to the kids in school and a whole lot of other issues I would maintain that if Eric Adams was doing that with a Democratic president it probably wouldn't have been a problem at all and I also think of Elon Musk Elon Musk was a Democrat
▶ 4:43:04hero he was the electric car guy charging stations everywhere you know the whole bit and you you know it used to be it's not true anymore but it used to be if you saw somebody driving one of his vehicles around you figured they were probably a Democrat now I admit that's changed so I don't know if you know forgive me to the ranking member but if it's a purity thing or if it's just more of a practical Thing Once individuals start working with or are
▶ 4:43:34part of uh the Republican party or republican Administration or agree with some Republican value then they no longer have value and they are no longer good people with that I yield back gentlemen yield I yield to yes to the chairman I thank the gentleman for yielding again I just want to look at the amendment itself because this is I think a pattern in the Amendments from our friends on the other side they they talk about what they want to insert into the oversight plan but I think now at least a couple of amendments
▶ 4:44:04maybe all of them yeah they all they all start with striking language we have in the plan and so I again I would ask the question they want to strike on page nine the unwarranted attacks and on and threats on the Supreme Court and I would ask the question do they not think there were attacks on the Supreme Court would the gentleman yield be happy to yield yes certainly U well it's it's Mr vre's time but Mr VRE yield to the gentleman okay yeah the the um language that I seek to replace would pretty
▶ 4:44:34much essentially include uh the same language it's just uh restated in my language uh which would include also on on top of physical violence against federal judges uh well let yeah it it would include uh the need for an enforceable code of ethics at the Supreme Court as part of this uh committee's uh oversight responsibilities I think it's a legitimate place
▶ 4:45:05to add that language and the only question is whether or not my folks will on the other side will accept that language well that but that's not I'd be willing to leave uh the language that I seek to streak to strike in if you would agree to add two points the language that uh I'm offering two points uh first question was do you believe there have been unwarranted attacks on the Supreme Court does anyone not believe that that's happened I mean there was an assassination attempt on justice cavanal so we know that's happened
▶ 4:45:35after the after the leak something's never happened in the history of the Court the leak of the do's opinion but to the gentleman's point that his language would cover what you're trying to take out of our language that's just not accurate cuz when you read it it says the need of enforceable code of ethics which Miss Hegman address and threats of impeachment removal and physical violence against federal judges then you have the qualifying language who rule against the Trump Administration ongoing litigation Mr chairman it's not about it's not your time it's it's gentleman from he yied to me no he didn't he yielded to me
▶ 4:46:05so you you you have the qualifying language in there so you're getting rid of what we know no happened unwarranted attacks on the Supreme Court where they were someone tried to assassinate Justice Kavanaugh they we all remember they had to have all kinds of security protection around our Supreme Court justices in the aftermath of the leak of the do's opinion so that's why we have the language in there if you want this language does which does not cover what we have in ours if you want in yours you want that language in the plan
▶ 4:46:35put it in your minority views again we've I said that I think I've said that maybe 10 times today because that's the appropriate uh place to put it with that I yield back to the gentleman from New Jersey gentleman yields back gentleman from you go to California gentleman from California is recognized uh thank you chairman and I'll yield to the gentleman from Georgia thank you uh uh Congressman uh I would gladly um delete from my Amendment
▶ 4:47:06the scratching out of the language that is in the um majority um uh language and just simply offer to add the language um that I have offered as uh a way of moving us forward and so the question then becomes whether or not uh my friends on the other side of the aisle want to bind themselves to look at the need for a binding Supreme Court
▶ 4:47:36code of conduct with an enforcement mechanism that that's that's what the question becomes is that an acceptable uh amendment to my amendment that would uh cause my colleagues on the other side of the AIS to support it and uh reclaiming and if not why not yeah uh I'll yield yes go to my ranking member uh we have in the past as you know we've had things related to
▶ 4:48:07uh the court and it is fully within our subcommittee's plan to have a a ongoing and a thorough review of the overall state of the ethics honor and accuracy of the Court which would clearly include the question of Judges that have been disciplined haven't been disciplined should be disciplined and so on and I'm happy to work with you thoroughly on that because I believe every Congress we should look at that and the question of oversight and as you know
▶ 4:48:37in the last Congress we actually created a better mandate for the court reporting their financial disclosures one that we General lady and I are very proud that we we said look we're only asking them to have the same level of transparency that the other two branches have and they have acquiesced to that so I look forward to working with you on it I I think there is a lot to do about striking versus non striking if you have things like this
▶ 4:49:07that you want to make sure we look at put them please put them in your plan or at least tell me and if they fit within the plan we will do them well reclaiming uh to the exent that I can uh you know it's better to have the language actually in the majority's uh uh language because then it uh gives it it's it's something that you will not ignore as you will ignore what we write in our proposal and so
▶ 4:49:38um just for the sake of insuring ing good governance and um and fair play as we move forward I'm just simply asking that we include that language and actually Embark upon a um a uh oversight of a need uh that is glaring to protect our uh third branch of government from itself actually because the longer that they proceed without a code of conduct and the longer that corruption continues
▶ 4:50:08to infect the court as it has uh the worse it gets in terms of the public confidence and Trust the erosion of it that's bad for our democracy and so this is a um Good Sense good faith effort to protect our democracy and I hope that my friends on the other side would accept my offer to leave their language in but simply add our language uh uh and uh and with that
▶ 4:50:38I owe you back sure reclaiming my time I I support the gentleman's uh Amendment but I also support the amendment to the amendment because I don't think any of us here want it to appear that we don't condemn violence against judges whether it's a republican appointed judge or a democratically appointed judge what Justice Kavanaugh went through is wrong he shouldn't have had to go through that his family should not have been subjected to that and likewise for many of my colleagues some of them who are here who receive death threats
▶ 4:51:09every day because of doing their job but I think what Mr Johnson is saying is that the American people For the First Time In Our Lifetime have dramatically lost faith in the courts and they have abused the right to police themselves they're not policing themselves and when you see justices who have spouses who went to a rally on January 6 and organized a rally on January 6 and then that Justice is hearing a case about January 6 that betrays their oath to recuse
▶ 4:51:39when they have a conflict of interest and then of course the trips that were just referenced uh by my colleague Miss chipul so I think we're being reasonable here uh and I support the gentleman's Amendment to the amendment and yield back to the chairman gentleman yields back the ranking members recognize and I'll go to Tennessee Okay um wait wait wait waitless R members recognize Mr chairman thank you very much um I want to speak in really strong favor of
▶ 4:52:09uh the gentleman from Georgia 's Amendment before I do I just want to respond to my friend from New Jersey who I think uh taxed me with only opposing corruption in my party if the person is some kind of policy apostate or heretic um and I could mobilize a number of uh I think reputations of that um one comes from your State uh Senator Menendez is someone who I don't think was any kind of policy apostate from the Democratic party but when
▶ 4:52:39he was indicted I took a very strong position that he should leave office so I just don't think it's true that everybody around here is a partisan robot whether they're in the Democratic party or the Republican party or both or either at different times I think that there are people who try to stand on Principle as much as they can I'll give you another example I know a lot of people on my side of the aisle and a lot of people on your side of the aisle voted to um expelled George Santos before he was either uh given the benefit of
▶ 4:53:09due process a criminal conviction or before he went through our uh civil process here of ethics and I voted no and I spoke strongly against that regardless of the fact that you know that was a chance to score party points so uh maybe we'll get to know each other better and you'll think a little more highly of of me than that but look the the gentleman from Georgia has raised a profoundly important Point here again this is the United States House of Representatives Judiciary Committee we have a
▶ 4:53:40crisis ethics at the Supreme Court that's acknowledged by huge majorities of the American people and people on both sides of the aisle they don't have a binding ethics plan the highest court in the land has the lowest ethical standards and so we can get into the specific individuals uh if we need to do that you know it uh I think um uh a couple of my colleagues talked about Justice Thomas who had uh taken uh luxury trips all over the world uh Island
▶ 4:54:10hop on a yacht with his friend uh harlon Crow he received a high-end motor coach that was originally part of a loan of $267,000 from another millionaire or billionaire friend that got forgiven as a loan this is a high-end motor coach that had uh a kitchen a dining room and a bedroom inside of it I can't even quite picture that but in any event um he didn't pay anything on it or maybe he paid for the first few months and then he stopped paying and they forgave
▶ 4:54:40the loan for $267,000 and it was never reported on his taxes as a gift and every lawyer on this committee indeed everybody on this committee knows that a an unpaid forgiven loan becomes a a gift which becomes income to you that's got to be reported but in any event the point isn't this or that member in their various entanglements it's that there's no process by which people can raise ethics violations on the part of the Supreme Court
▶ 4:55:10and Mr Johnson has been singing this tune for a long time now that the Supreme Court needs to have an A binding ethics plan at least as strong as United States district court judges at least as strong as United States appeals court judges in fact how many of us come from states where there is a binding ethics plan for the highest members of the judges on our state Supreme Courts all of us do all of us come from States like that so that's the kind of thing that really should
▶ 4:55:40be bringing us together in this time of like utter ethical moral political and constitutional danger and collapse that's going on let's restore standards let's improve our standards so we can deal with the crisis of our day and I don't know if Mr Johnson needed any more time oh miss Crockett always available I I yield my time to the general lady from Texas no you know what you you always spark so many things in my mind that's the professor in you for sure um um but
▶ 4:56:11I will say that when I think back to law school I think about the conversations that we had about Lady Justice being blind and the one thing that I would challenge my colleagues to is I thought about what you said about George Santos but I would say if you put these issues on paper and didn't put a name didn't put a party where would you stand because at the end of the day I can guarantee you if someone gave me $267,000 as the lives have been
▶ 4:56:41floating around that I somehow now have an extra $9 million lingering around and an extra three you know cribs this is not factual but this is on X of course because that's what they do is they put out lies in order to disparage people but I'm saying if I somehow had an extra almost $300,000 and y'all found out that somebody let's say George Soros because y'all love to throw his name and stuff George Soros gave me an extra $300,000 y'all would kick me out of
▶ 4:57:11Congress that's just the bottom line so my deal is if you would kick me out of Congress for it then you should take issue with it so maybe what we should start doing is looking at the scenarios and removing the names and removing the political affiliation to determine whether or not there is an ethical issue because it shouldn't be an ethical issue if it's only one of us the time the time of the gentleman has expired gentleman from California is recognized and I'll come to Mr chairman I'll be brief it is interesting that we're having this expansive debate
▶ 4:57:41on something that could simply be added to the minority views and we've already said we would participate in a hearing related to this and an expansive at the subcommittee but I have to look at my colleague the ranking member and and laugh a little you brought up Bob bendeez he was censured by the Senate who then returned him as the chairman of a powerful very powerful committee the Foreign Affairs committee where he was able to extort
▶ 4:58:11from two other countries in betrayal of his own country and no the Senate with all of that process that we're talking about the they have to have ethics and an Ethics Committee the Senate did nothing essentially until you know he was on his way out they let him continue to vote they let him continue to be they only took him away from his chairmanship after he was formally charged which by the way was years after the crime and
▶ 4:58:41their awareness that he was under investigation so allegations uh about the high court I'm sorry uh I take Umbridge that we do it better I take Umbridge that somehow we've got the answer here because we haven't certainly the Senate hasn't shown it and I just want to add one more thing uh the general lady from Wyoming will be back here shortly but she said something short and succinct and Prof found and
▶ 4:59:11I'll I'll summarize it in my limited ability compared to her constitutional scholar uh type capability we are limited by the Constitution and our founding fathers for a reason we are limited to being three branches who balance each other based on specific rules one of them is the right to impeach members of the other two branches and remove them from office which we have done 15 times in history to federal
▶ 4:59:42judges we have that ability to do that on our own accord and we have done it we do not have the ability to threaten them with prosecution to harass them with uh with rules that they must have and ethic standards that we demand they have and remember this is the high court this is our peers it's not 670 Lower Court judges it's nine
▶ 5:00:12judges our founding fathers wisely set up a number originally seven now nine for the court the president originally won still one us a fraction of 435 today 435 we are balanced in a way in which the Constitution very clearly says what our ability to oversee the others are and their ability to oversee us I don't get up every day saying boy I'll tell
▶ 5:00:42you that Constitution was per perfect I don't even get up every day saying all 25 of those uh amend 27 of those amendments were perfect particularly the 27th I take Umbridge with the fact is we should as the committee of the Constitution recognize that we can't necessarily change it yes we can make some statutes yes we can encourage the court yes we can even use our funding to help encourage them to do certain things
▶ 5:01:13cameras in the courtroom to give better access things like that which are projects that I've worked on but I do think when we're looking at oversight what I offer to the ranking member and I stand behind is transparency in an honor honest way of events of of all of history but particularly the last two to four years so that we can have that evaluation the only guidance I would give that I've heard here today that I did take Umbridge with I am
▶ 5:01:43personally tired of the attacks on one or another justices if we want to have the court do certain things including establish written guidelines or establish process that we think would be better we're not going to do it by attacking a member of the Court most of the members of the Court rally and both parties rally behind that as unfair for our branch to stand in Judgment of the other Branch unless we do so
▶ 5:02:13under the Constitution so I took a lot of time to say let's move on to the next subject I believe that this has had a good hearing and I hope that the uh my ranking member on the subcommittee will put this in the minority request knowing that I will hold a hearing I yield back gentleman yields back gentleman from Tennesse is recognized thank you Mr chair I think I left when we were talking about DWI good time to have left wasn't it but then I tuned in
▶ 5:02:43and I saw y'all were talking about some issues and I strike the last word it's basically a request I was going to make to the chairman uh two weeks ago give or take I wrote Christine Nome and I asked her to let me know how many people who had been deported were guilty of or had an indices that they were guilty of murder child sexual offenses or rape which is what the administration has said they were going to go after and Christie said we're going after the worst of the worst and I asked
▶ 5:03:13for her to let her know how many people that have been deported were of that class where they had been picked up because I find it kind of hard to believe that people that committed rape or child sexual offenses are murder or not in jail if we knew that they'd done it they'd be charged I doubt they'd be put on bond or very few of them would so would you have written there would you join me in a letter to because it's immigration's under our committee criminal laws under committee and try to get for the education of this committee and it would have
▶ 5:03:43been relevant I think the DWI maybe too what offenses the people that are being deported have committed where they've been arrested so we know if they were arrested taken out of jail they were in a jail you know they weren't really a risk to us but if they were out there on bond which is rare but maybe so but where they how many of them are have committed those kind of crimes that's distinguish from just the people that are being deported yeah gentleman get us the letter we'll take a look at it thank you thank you Jim appreciate and otherwise I support Mr Johnson's recommendation and I understand
▶ 5:04:13what Mr ice was saying I could take all my time to go against six of the justices but I won't do that would the gentleman yield for would the gentleman yield asking sure would the gentleman yield uh I don't even need my happy birthday by the way thank you oh wow happy birthday um what a lovely way to spend it yeah uh could have been done a lot sooner there Mr Goldman I would just I would merely just want to point out that this is an apolitical nonpartisan
▶ 5:04:44recommendation to investigate ethics uh of a group that includes Republican appointees Democratic appointees and will forever include appointees of both parties so there this would apply to Democrats just like it would apply to Republicans uh and that it is therefore on its face uh nonpartisan and so we may have examples
▶ 5:05:14that dig into partisan issues but all we're talking about is a binding ethics code that exists for us it exists for all other federal judges to exist for the highest court in the land and I yield back gentleman yields back I I think I still have the floor that's I'm sorry I I yield to Mr Johnson the drummer from Atlanta thank you uh uh uh um Mr chairman or Mr ranking member I'd ask the
▶ 5:05:44uh chairman of the full committee whether or not he would accept my offer to amend my uh amendment to in uh to state as follows on page nine after the language that you have in there which is the unwarranted attacks on and threats on the Supreme Court to Simply add the following and the need for an enforceable code of
▶ 5:06:14ethics at the Supreme Court and threats of impeachment removal and physical violence against federal judges who rule against the Trump Administration in ongoing legis uh litigation uh would the uh chair be willing to accept uh my uh amendment to my Amendment no well then in that case I would ask for unanimous consent to uh accomplish the same objective
▶ 5:06:45wait unanimous consent to what change to to change the uh language oh you want to change the language in the amendment and then we'll still we can debate that and still have a vote on that so if you want to you want to change the language uh you're going to take get rid of strike and put in after so the the amendment will now read on page nine after the unwarned tax on and threats on the Supreme Court insert the uh insert the following the need for you still have the focus on the Trump Administration but yeah you can change that we're still I'm still going to encourage our team to
▶ 5:07:15vote against it all right I want to Y to Mr van Drew well then I'll I'll just leave it uh you just leave yeah well look like I said we like many of us have said multiple times put it into minority views and and that's fine you can you can structure it however you want ignore it from there well uh we we don't always ignore minority views uh but sometimes we do yeah the time I think I feel that the same mine will suffer the same fate as
▶ 5:07:45all of the others that I'm aware of let let it be known that I tried to yield to Mr van Drew but time eluded me okay the uh time time of the gentleman has expired uh the question occurs on the amendment from the gentleman from Georgia all those in favor say I I those oppos no no in the opinion the chair the NOS have it and the amendment is not adopted I'd ask for a recorded for request a recorded vote the clerk call the rooll Mr Jordan no Mr Jordan votes no Mr Isa Mr Isa
▶ 5:08:15votes no Mr BS Mr Bigs votes no Mr mlen talk Mr Tiffany Mr Massie Mr Roy Mr Roy votes no Mr Fitzgerald Mr Fitzgerald votes no Mr Klein Mr Gooden Mr van Drew Mr van Drew votes no Mr NS Moore Mr Kylie Miss Hegman
▶ 5:08:46Miss Lee Mr Hunt Mr Fry Mr gothman Mr not Mr Harris Mr and Mr and votes no Mr Schmidt Mr Gil Mr schmi votes no Mr Gil Mr bom gner Mr Rasin I Mr Rasin votes I Mr nodler I Mr nodler
▶ 5:09:16votes I miss lren Mr Cohen Mr Cohen votes I Mr Johnson I Mr Johnson votes I Mr swell Mr swallow votes I Mr Lou Miss jaal Miss jaal votes I Mr CA Mr CA votes I miss scanland miss scanland votes I Mr nus mcbath Miss Ross Miss Ross votes I miss ballant miss
▶ 5:09:46ballant votes I Mr Garcia Miss camer Dove Miss camer Dove I Mr Garcia votes I Mr moscowitz Mr mosz votes I Mr Goldman Mr Goldman votes I miss Crockett Miss Crockett votes I
▶ 5:10:19only got a few more um and we need to get we need to get some members here I think we got um no don't can you give us the early returns Mr
▶ 5:10:57chairman Mr Gail votes no was Gil you got him okay we're doing this again next week we have to notice that to you guys you don't
▶ 5:11:27have to notice it until Monday we generally get a friendly phone G we're doing another markup next week um forget what's on the calendar we just went over yesterday but I I kind of forget what's I don't think it's what do you mean by
▶ 5:11:59exactly parliamentary inquiry I couldn't hear parliamentary I think we're at pending bu pending vote pending business um so when that's concluded I'll be happy to entertain your parliamentary inquiry how long is business pending pinned a long time it's been my
▶ 5:12:44how we doing is Ella on the phone and we're gonna need more than
▶ 5:13:38e e
▶ 5:14:26Mr bomb Gardner votes
▶ 5:15:07e e
▶ 5:16:07Mr Lou you're not recorded Mr Le votes I Madam clerk what is the unofficial
▶ 5:16:37tally e
▶ 5:17:29Mr Kylie votes no they're not coming Mr chairman no matter how much you call them they're not coming I think we should call the vote call the vote right now Mr chairman it's just let let regular order preside in the great jimm Jordan's Committee of Judiciary let's have some smiling at me
▶ 5:18:21is that time Mr chairman e
▶ 5:19:25Mr Harris Mr Harris votes no e
▶ 5:20:16moscowitz do you happen to have a tally 1610 or no 1611 12 1612 16 meaning Democrats we winning you know you know as the president said it's that L that comes
▶ 5:20:46and now now it seems like they may steal the steal the vote seems like it's about to be stolen yeah I know is those late stop the steal Ste stop the
▶ 5:21:36how's the gentlemen from Texas Mr Mr Gooden votes no
▶ 5:22:31everybody got up at the same time Mr Tiffany votes no Mr nus you are not recorded yes Mr nus votes yes Miss K marar du you're recorded as
▶ 5:23:07yes e
▶ 5:24:01Mr mclen talk votes
▶ 5:27:37e e
▶ 5:28:26Mr not Mr not votes no e
▶ 5:29:28Mr Fry you're not recorded Mr Fry votes Mr chairman there are 17 eyes and 17 nose the amendment is not adopted committee committee will come to order who seeks recognition give us one second to get organized here we're trying to wrap
▶ 5:29:59things up we got one more Amendment or we going to this bill just the have one more Amendment but okay we're trying to pick could be more we have we have many more amendments prepared if you'd like to see more we have a whole menu of options all right all right all right we'll do one more Amendment because then we get everybody out time for 4 o00 is that when they're call can we tell Ella that people need to stay because we're going to wind up pretty quick okay gentle
▶ 5:30:29from gentle lady from committee will come to order gentle lady from California is recognized no you did not but you tied thank you Mr chair um and ranking member I offer an amendment relevant to uh the oversight of uh the administr oh sorry I have an amendment at the desk clerk will report Amendment to the committee on the Judiciary without objection the amendment will be considered as read The Gentle ladies uh recognize to explain her Amendment
▶ 5:30:59yes thank you again for that uh I am offering an amendment relevant to the oversight of the administration because this Administration has been doing a lot already and I don't even think we're two months in so I certainly think that this oversight plan should include oversight of This president's Administration and and why wouldn't it unless my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are afraid and if Republicans are afraid of this President and Elon Musk and all that
▶ 5:31:29they are doing then I think it's only fair that you all say that to the American people and let the American people know who they have an office and what they are working with in their elected members of Congress that's why we have Town Halls that's why we're out talking to our members and and talking to our constituents so this amendment focuses on one of the president's very first acts his pardoning of the January insurrectionists because
▶ 5:32:00among other things this committee is supposed to administer jurisdiction over how we interpret apply and respect the law and law enforcement is part of the law we know that on January 6th hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of individuals showed up at the capital and they were not peaceful they were not respecting of the building the institution and they certainly were not respecting of the law and they did not model how American citizens should behave individuals
▶ 5:32:30punched killed shoved members of the Capitol Police they sprayed law enforcement with pepper spray stomped on their heads struck them with a metal crutch and broken pieces of furniture and in fact members of the Capo police of law enforcement were killed and last I checked it is against the law to assault Andor kill a member of law enforcement if those things happen the penalties are stiff and the offenses are punishable by more time in prison
▶ 5:33:00and in fact in Washington DC where the capital is located where this incident happened assaulting a police officer carries an enhanced penalty meaning if you assault a law enforcement officer you can face a harsher punishment compared to a regular assault charge with the potential for a felony conviction in up to 10 years in prison if the assault causes serious bodily injury or creates a grave risk of significant harm to the officer so regardless of what a president does
▶ 5:33:30and a president certainly has the right to Pardon this body should at the very least discuss the acts and then stand up and cond demn violence against law enforcement or not don't do it and say why but say something cuz real talk you're the only ones not talking about these Pardons and acting as if the behavior that precipitated the charges and subsequent arrests were okay and if that is a fact then you are also saying that this is condonable behavior in which every other American can engage and
▶ 5:34:01the American people want to know if you're saying that as I said these individuals who attacked and killed members of law enforcement Capitol Police were pardoned by the president and a family member of one of the fallen officers said the pardons were a betrayal of decency some might say that those actions desecrate the honor and memory of those heroic and honorable Capitol police officers people who protect this body and the visitors who enter this space every day so I am offering this amendment
▶ 5:34:31because I think our Capitol police officers deserve our respect and for us to stand up and say we back them I think we owe it to all of law enforcement to say that the Carnage that happened on that day to our Capital police is not okay and at the very least talk about it because the majority of the American people 83% do not support those Pardons and deserve to see where this committee stands and uh I hope you all will join me in
▶ 5:35:02supporting this amendment gent gent lady yields back uh uh okay thank you yes I thought were you yielding to the gentleman from Florida do you no that's fine M gent yields back recognize a gentleman from uh Wisconsin uh thank you Mr chairman I mean I the discussion about pardon power is um under the exclusive authority of the President right
▶ 5:35:32so when President Biden issued Broad in the preemptive pardons to his family members for over 10 years I'm just trying to make a slight point on this um the pardons that President Biden issued were obviously unusually Broad and extended to uh any offenses or in the case of uh Hunter of which if you sat through the depositions it's just um it's kind of unbelievable that this happened the way it
▶ 5:36:02did but I I just want to make the point that unlike president Trump's pardons which were issued after legal proed proceedings had played out President Biden's pardons allowed his allies to kind of evade the full judicial system and I think that gets lost on uh the difference between the Biden Pardons and and what president Trump did even if you don't fully agree with everyone that was pardoned um after looking at some of their records later uh should have been pardoned
▶ 5:36:32it was done in proper sequence you will the gentleman yield for a quick question friendly question I would um it's not exactly the case that we have nothing to do with pardons for example it's against the law to sell a pardon um so there there's certain things around the pardon but your general point is correct that it's within the president's power but would you concede that a president's power to Pardon um for a particular offense does not mean that that defendant
▶ 5:37:02is then by definition free for all other offenses well I think it would go back to whether or not you think that each one of the defendants that ultimately uh was uh run through the legal system uh had an opportunity to defend themselves right and had the uh ability to to actually um um have due process offered right gotcha so just just to be clear like if someone had
▶ 5:37:32to process they were convicted of a particular crime say uh trespass of the capital and their pardon for that crime that should not extend to other crimes like a murder or a rape that took place that had nothing to do with January 6th I would agree with that okay thank you very much I you back to you uh gentleman ne's back who seeks recognition Mr gentleman from California and then we'll come to gentleman from Florida gentle from California
▶ 5:38:03direct Matthew huddle I want you to think about the name name Matthew huddle just last month after being pardoned by Donald Trump for his conduct on January 6th where he had picked up racked up was arrested for four separate cases after January 6 this guy tries to pull a gun on a police officer in
▶ 5:38:33Indiana thank God the officer is alive and defended himself and Mr huddle is not but what do you think was going through the mind of Mr huddle as he was pulled over by a police officer what do you think he was thinking he was thinking I got pardoned I'm Invincible you can't touch me president said that if I commit violence or I'm with people who commit violence
▶ 5:39:04it's okay so he tried to shoot a cop that cop almost didn't go home that day because Mr huddle was on the streets so what this amendment is saying is shouldn't we track the people who were released 1500 people many of them who committed violent acts many of them who have since been arrested for child pornography one of them was arrested at the capital just a couple days ago and you know what if you want to compare to the gentleman from Wisconsin the Biden pardons
▶ 5:39:34to the Trump pardons I'll I'll put those lists next to each other and see who reoffends I'll take bet I'm going to bet and I'll bet it all that you're going to see more of the Trump pardons back in custody because of this sense of invincibility that the president has bestowed upon them and by the way the Department of Justice also said just this week that one of the January 6 individuals whose home was searched and explosives and weapons were found that he
▶ 5:40:04can't be charged with those because they're connected essentially as fruit of the poisonous tree of what was done for January 6 so this is a pardon that goes beyond just what they did on that day we have allowed the most dangerous people who attacked our Capital back into our community by the way a man who would release 1,500 of the most dangerous people who committed crimes on his behalf will also seek to lock up, 1500 of his most vocal opponents
▶ 5:40:34that's the kind of mindset somebody like that has but I just want to ask my colleagues cuz many of you were with us on the floor on January 6th I see many of you over there who were many of you ran as we were told to leave the floor and we listened to the instructions of the Capitol Police who were in the chamber and you heard the on the door outside and we didn't know what the hell was out there we saw the chairs
▶ 5:41:05stacked up in the Press and we finally were allowed to leave some of us had gas masks on some of us were carrying the gas mask I remember Ruben gigo telling all of us because we didn't know what the hell to do with the gas mask how to put it on because he had served in theater I saw heroic members on your side who had served in theater pushing a desk against the back doors of chamber we were all one team that day
▶ 5:41:35we were Team America and we knew what team the riers were on and when we got to that safe location and in the hours after when we went back to the floor you thanked the Capitol Police we thanked the Capitol Police because we knew what they did day and now imagine how they feel when they have to stand guard as they did last week for a proud boys rally that was on the same grounds
▶ 5:42:06where those same proud boys viciously and violently attack them so the very least we could do together is we thank them that day is to tell them we're going to track the people who were released we still think you're Heroes we still think that what you did that day is probably the bravest thing you'll ever do in your life and probably one of the bravest acts any of us will ever be a part of and witness to that's what this amendment seeks to do I hope we all
▶ 5:42:36can pass this amendment and I hope we can all look the Capitol Police in the eyes when we leave today and go to the floor and know that we still have their back and I yield back uh gentleman yields back gentleman from um Florida is recognized um thank you Mr chairman uh and and thank you for the for the amendment U Miss K longer do and and thank you representative swall for for that um reminder but I I'm confused I
▶ 5:43:06and if you want to answer either of you want to answer me I'm confused I we were told it was a perfect day was it was it a perfect day still doesn't feel perfect no no but we were also told that they were just getting a tour and got like lost while on the while on their tour we we were told that there were no guns there right no guns nobody had any guns the police had guns but nobody in the crowd had guns um very minor incidents with police
▶ 5:43:37we were also told um but I like this quote this this is this is my favorite one that came out from all of that if you committed violence on that day you shouldn't be pardoned and who said that the current Vice President of the United States JD Vance I yield back gentleman yields back the gentleman from California is recognized well Mr chairman um you know I agree that the the events of January 6
▶ 5:44:07were an Abomination there were violent acts committed that day there were people uh well I myself saw a capital police officer with a serious eye injury being led away as I made my way back to the office but let's be entirely honest about what happened it it was not an Insurrection it was a riot uh it disrupted one of the core constitutional functions of this government the counting of the electoral vote but the government wasn't moments away from being overthrown
▶ 5:44:38by a lunatic wearing Viking horns the moment that the last of these Yus was kicked out of this building we returned and completed our work now there were some who should have had the book thrown at them for vandalism for assault and for disrupting proceedings but the vast majority of the crowd hurt nobody uh broke nothing and sincerely thought they were merely peacefully exercising their right to protest
▶ 5:45:08I wish that President Trump had been more Discerning when he extended pardons to those who perpetrated actual crimes but I also wish that President Biden had been more Discerning in Prosecuting people who merely were there as president Trump said to peacefully and respectfully Express themselves to their elected representatives I I think the Democrats would have far more credibility on this issue if they had made these distinctions and if they had insisted that those who
▶ 5:45:38burned our cities to the ground during the George Floyd riots were treated with the the same uh ferocity uh as uh so many were in the January 6th Riot yield back gentlemen Yi's back I think I got um I'll go to the ranking member the ranking members recognize and we'll go to Mission G thank you Mr chairman and I thank the gentleman from California for not denying that um it was the proud boys the oathkeepers the 3% or the various white
▶ 5:46:09supremacist uh and white nationalist groups that came to storm the capital at the Beast of Donald Trump who said be there will be wild it was not antifa despite what some of our colleagues have said it was not a tourist visit although if it was that might explain why American tourists aren't that popular these days uh and it was not the FBI and it was not the FBI okay so I appreciate that I was a little surprised to hear the word Discerning in the same sentence as Donald Trump wish that he'd been a little bit more Discerning in what he'd
▶ 5:46:39said yeah I wish he'd been a little more Discerning when he said you got to go and fight and fight like hell and if you don't you want to have a country anymore I wish he'd been a little bit more Discerning when he set out a uh a tweet uh at when he knew that the capital had been overrun and his own vice president was fleeing uh with his Entourage when he said Mike Pence did not have the courage to do what needed to be done I wish he'd been a little more Discerning about that he was pretty discer the next day when he said you know
▶ 5:47:09that he uh denounced what had taken place as uh an atrocity and that the people would be held responsible but then he wasn't very Discerning when he began to back off of all of that and begin to say these people were Heroes and political prisoners like Alexi nalni and Alexander soljan niten and Nelson Mandela and when he said they were hostages like the people held by Hamas a hostage of somebody who's been uh kidnapped and abducted by a terrorist or criminal
▶ 5:47:39group and held for ransom and he was just a little uh undiscerning when he described these people who had every benefit of American due process and American right to counsel and the right to testify if they want to uh when uh he described them as hostages what an Abomination as the gentleman says what an Abomination it was indeed but look we um have the opportunity now to actually deal with one of the major issues
▶ 5:48:10that is arising right now because of this nightmare and it is that there are people who were uh arrested and prosecuted and convicted for their crimes on January 6 who are now getting off of other crimes because of the pardon that they received from Donald Trump they are being released from jail from prosecution by the Department of Justice for other crimes that they committed that were worse crimes
▶ 5:48:40than what they committed on January 6 I'm going to introduce for the record an article uh Department of Justice says Trump's January 6th pardon covers Man convicted of possessing hand grenades classified information that's in Politico that objection February 25th well uh they went to arrest him for what was the relatively mild crime at the time of just uh trespassing uh into the US W capital and not leaving the capital uh this is Jeremy Brown but when
▶ 5:49:11they got to his house what do you know what do they find well not just hand grenades but an illegal modified uh assault weapon an AR-15 assault off shotgun and classified reports that he had taken from the Army when he left the Army okay so all of those things added up to a 7year criminal sentence when he was prosecuted for those things but now the Department of Justice says that he should be immediately released based on President Donald Trump's
▶ 5:49:41Mass pardon of the people which included his pardon for trespassing at the capital now I would hope that the gentleman from California the gentleman from Wisconsin would agree with me that is a matter squarely within the jurisdiction of the Judiciary Committee whether people should be able to be released by the Department of Justice for offenses completely unrelated to January 6th because they were pardoned for things that happened on January 6th
▶ 5:50:11and what what a dangerous principle that is I mean it's it's uh will it lead to the creation of a private militia of people who owe their freedom to the president of the United States these foot soldiers who are willing to do anything for the president and the Department of Justice because they seem to have a clean slate including for crimes that had nothing to do with with January 6 is that something we should look into I think we should I commend the Gent
▶ 5:50:41lady from California for bringing this amendment forward that is absolutely something we need to examine because there's lots of other offenses that we've determined out there with these people child pornography domestic violence other arms charges do we really want to give people a get out of jail free card because they went to work for Donald Trump's uh orders and invocations on January 6 2021 I yield back gentleman Yi's back question well that's right Mr nus was up gentleman
▶ 5:51:12from Colorado is recognized I think that I think the chairman and I have great respect for my colleague uh from California and I I suppose if he's willing to indulge me in a cqu I just might ask him and give him an opportunity kind of clarify for me I is it your position that what happen on January 6th was not an affront to our constitution on the contrary I think it was a terrible affront I've
▶ 5:51:42called an Abomination it disrupted one of the most important constitutional functions of our government uh and we should not tolerate that and the people that were uh uh responsible for assaulting our officers uh the people who are responsible for vandalizing this sacred building uh should be have the book thrown at them I've said that all along and I think it was a mistake for the president not not not to differentiate between those people and the vast majority
▶ 5:52:12of of people who I said broke nothing hurt nobody and simply thought they were uh uh exercising their first amendment rights so given that why object to a simple amendment that simply seeks to probe as an oversight matter the very thing that you purport to disagree with I mean your your point right you've called the president president Trump's pardon yes well that that that but the pardon is I would hope you would support this particular
▶ 5:52:42Amendment if that were the case the pardon is the exclusive prerogative of the executive under our constitution I see well and and I do believe in that separation of powers I I would simply say uh Mr mclintoch again I I have great respect for you but I I don't know how you can make that argument in a straightforward way to make the case that disagree with these Pardons and you believe that they shouldn't have been granted but you object to a mere
▶ 5:53:13investigation or any kind of oversight by this particular we have no authority to investigate the exclusive prerogative of the executive let me uh in a moment Mr chairman I just but I'm enjoying my my colle with Mr mlto would you describe what happened on January 6th Mr mcclint talk as an attack on our capital I would describe it as a riot as a riot okay I'm going to read to you a tweet or an X whatever that they call it these days
▶ 5:53:43from January 6th 2021 at 4m. quote the attack on the capital strikes at the most sacred Act of our democracy the peaceful transfer of power it is an outrage and a threat to our most principles as a free people that's from your Twitter account yeah I don't I don't gain say a word of that and well I you you called it a riot I don't you denied
▶ 5:54:14it was an attack a few moments ago I don't these are your words or at least whoever you know posted these from your account four years ago in the throws of that particular day when we were all on the floor as Mr I was outraged from it I'm still outraged by the uh the the people who uh uh broke our laws who were violent who vandalized our building uh but we have to recognize that that was a relatively small group compared with a large number of people who
▶ 5:54:44who came here simply thinking that they were exercising their right to to protest well let me let me uh just distinguish this point because again that sounds very different than the way in which many members have characterized January 6th in the past you're making this distinction with respect to individuals who committed violence or didn't commit violence I'll read you another statement what happened here on January 6th was an affront to our Constitution and National Disgrace
▶ 5:55:14those who entered the capital with the intent to disrupt the counting of electoral votes deserve to be denounced by their fellow citizens and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law exactly that's your well that sounds very different than what you just said that there were a couple violent but the vast majority well hold on those who broke into the those who broke into the chambers of the house those who disrupt who came here intending to disrupt our proceedings I have no sympathy for but I don't think that describes the vast majority of the
▶ 5:55:45people the gentleman from Colorado I thank the chairman the vast majority of those individuals again the broad way in which you framed it in your statement in July of 2022 a year later that any individual who disrupted the proceedings or attempted to disrupt who intended to disrupt electoral procedures ought to be fully prosecuted under the law and I still believe that and I believe that the par of those people SS what you're saying today
▶ 5:56:15Mr MCL I yield back I know my time is gentleman yields back gentem lady from Texas is recognized thank you so much and I am going to join my other colleagues and say simply thank you to the gentleman California because earlier we had a conversation about facts and the reality is that out of all your colleagues on that side you are the only one that is courageous enough
▶ 5:56:45to actually say these are the facts whether you like what happened hate what happened agree that it should have happened the facts are the facts that's what happened and so I appreciate you because I think one of the things that we're getting frustrated about on this side is that there seems to be an attack on facts so that when people put out fiction that people will get drawn to that so I appreciate you for not reimagining what happened as a
▶ 5:57:15beautiful day that was just a tour but I I will disagree with you to this extent when you originally opened you said that it wasn't an Insurrection and in my mind I initially was like it it absolutely was an Insurrection and so if I read the definition from Google it says a violent Uprising against an authority or government call it what you like but it fits the definition of an Insurrection and
▶ 5:57:46the other thing that I'll disagree with you about is you talked about um having issue with the way that Joe Biden prosecuted them I do want to clarify for the American people if you are watching right now that the president of the United States at least historically how our presidents operated the doj was separ and you didn't have you know attorneys that work for the doj saying that they are the president's attorney instead of the people's attorney but that's where we are now it wasn't the president of the
▶ 5:58:16United States that actually prosecuted anyone it was his Department of Justice I will say that but I decided that I would go in because it seemed like you felt like there was a heavy hand for a lot of people so literally I just decided to look this up because I did not know the numbers we've talked a lot about the fact that there's been 1 1500 pardons but we've never really kind of dug into the numbers so January 6th of this year there was an article that was put out that laid out and this is from PBS
▶ 5:58:47where it talks about kind of where the trials stood so I'm assuming on 20th this number probably is still very much valid there were 1,020 people that entered pleas of guilty so regardless of what anybody thinks of the criminal justice system as somebody who did criminal defense these defendants stood in front of a judge and said yes I am entering a plea of guilty and
▶ 5:59:17they have to say voluntarily and freely before they can get through a plea if a defendant ever says that it's not voluntary or it's not freely then the judge rejects the polia so that's number one so a th20 of them did that there were approximately 250 defendants that went to trial and it resulted in guilty pleas they either went to a trial by jury or a trial by judge but they were given an opportunity to decide
▶ 5:59:48if they wanted a jury trial or a trial by the court and they went through their due process in that way I will tell you that if I go back a little bit further because I did not have the numbers from this article if I go back just about three more months before this article came out it's said of all these P that we've heard of 255 were for 255 out of 1500 does not sound
▶ 6:00:19heavy-handed that means the other people most likely enter pleas for misdemeanor they only when the people that still should be behind bars are the people that did what Eric talked about the people that Enrique whatever his name is y'all know his name and will the J yield real quick quick question for you okay in your experience as a lawyer someone who defended people what's a lawyer's obligation if someone says no no I didn't really do this I can't plead guilty we are not allowed to
▶ 6:00:49plead that person out you can literally have your bar card snatched from you it is unethical to enter a plea and a defendant can get out of that plea if they say that they told us that they didn't do it and we told them to plead any anyway then that could actually be our bar card but the last thing that I was going to say about Enrique is they let him out he should still be behind bars because then he went and he harassed officer our former officer
▶ 6:01:19fenon just the other day because he feels like he can do whatever he wants to because he's now going to be Lawless like the rest of these 1500 people and when we talk about being safe in our communities this is what we're talking about we should not be letting criminals just roam the street after they've gone through the process thank you Mr chair I appreciate you time of gent expired Shield's back the gentleman from uh can we talk on this chman U Mr Massie can you uh grab some time
▶ 6:01:49for us I'd like to yield my time to Mr Fitzgerald I think the gentlemen I I mean that's the point though that these individuals did go through the system and some of them were found guilty and they were incarcerated and they spent days months years in jail and then the president had the ability to Pardon them and we're kind of lost in a discussion about back and forth on j6 now January 6th but
▶ 6:02:19you know that was the point I was trying to make I guess at the onset was uh President Biden did not do that the the and the preemptive pardon I would love to know what the ranking member thinks about the preemptive Pardons and I believe that he was even one because that is egregious and quite honestly we have no idea how that's going to end up but but guaranteed if Hunter Biden breaks the law again
▶ 6:02:50which probably a pretty good chance it's going to happen at some point then we'll we be able to see what presidential pardons are all about right that that'll be the real gauge I yield back I yield back m m yield gentleman yields back the gentleman from Georgia and then we'll come to Vermont uh gentle from Georgia recognized thank you uh Mr chairman uh I rise in uh strong support of the amendment offered by
▶ 6:03:20my colleague uh congresswoman klea Dove which seeks to um take the uh Republicans on the committee out of an embarrassing situation uh where they have proposed to use this committee's jurisdiction to look into quote uh unprecedented and aggressive law enforcement tactics
▶ 6:03:50against political opponents of the Biden Harris Administration as if there had been any and she simply uh wanting to replace that with uh something that is important to the American people I mean president Trump ran for election uh Pro promising and pledging to make our community safer and what he has done uh first uh minutes in office
▶ 6:04:21uh to Pardon uh more than 1,500 unrepentant and unre habilitated criminals back into our communities he's actually made us safe that is something that our committee should be looking into the fact of the matter is these uh more than unrepentant and unre habilitated criminals are even more
▶ 6:04:52radicalized than they were when they went in they have committed offenses against the Constitution and against the laws of uh of this country then they have seen a man elected who was able to escape himself and once he gets in position to relieve them of accountability he does so and so now they feel like
▶ 6:05:22they can do just about anything now Mr chairman I expect that with the State of the Union Address coming up next week the there's going to be be a lot of invitations extended to a lot of oathkeepers threers and proud boys to be in the gallery to cheer on uh the man who pardoned them the man who Exempted them
▶ 6:05:52from accountability for their illegal acts the the man who would say to them that it's okay for you to use violence to accomplish political objectives that I have and I'm going to Pardon you if you do that I'll pardon you again uh with my power I'll be here for four years so it's scary uh the kind of situation that um has been put Upon Us
▶ 6:06:22by this blanket pardon 600 of those individuals pardoned were convicted of assaulting Capitol Hill police officers and now our officers are going to be looking dead in the faces of the perpetrators who exacted uh such punishment upon them on January 6th four years ago they're going to be facing that and so the least that we can do
▶ 6:06:53uh as a committee is to um use our power and authority in a just way to look at the impact of those parts and to perhaps out of that will come uh some ability to protect ourselves from the danger that has been Unleashed on our communities and um Mr the gentleman oh I'll gladly yield to the gentlemen thank you Mr Johnson um I just a postcript to your
▶ 6:07:24your comments um the the founders of the Constitution discussed pardons of insurrectionists as a possibly impeachable offense because you can see the danger of a president incites people Insurrection uh and then you know it fails but then their pardon for it you can see how that creates a huge danger for the Republic Insurrection instantly is not some kind of um peripheral issue in the constitution in half different places
▶ 6:07:54Insurrection or its equivalent is condemned and specifically opposed by the the founders uh you know treason of course the only place where criminal offense is defined in the Constitution consists of leving arms against the Union right in article one uh Section 8 Congress has the power to summon the militias of the states in order to quote repel invasions and suppress insurrections insurrections is a very big deal in the minds of the framers uh coming out of Shay's Rebellion thank you for yielding
▶ 6:08:25thank you and uh with these folks now being reconstituted to exact harm upon the American people it's time for us to investigate the impact of of that part and so I support the gentle lady's Amendment and with that I yield back gentlemen yields back I would just point out that as as the me gentleman from Wisconsin and California have stated the pardon power is exclusive to the to the president he gets to do it you guys didn't like some of the pardons president Trump did we had concerns with the pardons
▶ 6:08:55President Biden did but nowhere in our plan do we talk about what President Biden did with the pardon power even though we got real concerns with things that he did particularly with his family when he told us one thing and then wound up doing just the opposite and applied it to not just Hunter Biden but to all others but that's not in our plan but what is in our plan is the language you want to strike the use of unprecedented and aggressive law enforcement tactics against political opponents of the Biden Harris Administration or just policies that they didn't agree with and I remember
▶ 6:09:26in this room when we had the lawyer for malanowski where the ATF went to his house supposedly because he sold six firearms that he wasn't supposed to sell went to his house by the way Brian malinowski was the highest paid Municipal Employee in Little Rock Arkansas ran the Bill and Hillary Clinton airport FBI had been surveilling this guy ATF excuse me had been surveilling this guy for several weeks they could have went to his house to execute a search warrant the week before but he wasn't home so they said we're going to
▶ 6:09:56wait we want to go pre-dawn raid on his home while he's there a guy who's in the gun hobbyist gun business for goodness sake how crazy can you be and of course what happened something terrible they show up put tape on the doorbell Cam and 53 seconds later Brian malinowski is shot in the head but Mr chairman he was political opponent though of the Biden Administration shot in the head later passes away we want to look at why would you do why not just do the simple thing it's a
▶ 6:10:26search warrant why not go to the airport where he's there say Mr malanowski we're here from ATF we want to go to your house with you call your wife so no one gets injured we'll go do the search warrant no no no they got to come in gun blazing cover up the the doorbell Cam and do that so we think that's worthy of understanding why would they operate in that fashion will the gentleman Yi that's all we're saying that's all we're saying this is not about pardon will the gentleman yield be happy to yield yeah I mean what proof do you have that that gentleman Mr malinowski was a political
▶ 6:10:56opponent of the Biden I'm not saying it was I'm just pointing out the aggressive tactics that we see from law enforcement and the the policy issue relative to Firearms is is the underlying issue here I think of I think of what happened to Mark Hal those are the kind of things we want to look at and was it driven by politics was it driven by policy certainly not the power of the pardon power which rests solely with the president of the United States and like I said we disagreed with how President Biden handled it you obviously disagree with how president Trump
▶ 6:11:26handled it but it's a it's a power that the executive has that the president has solely who seeks recognition the general lady from from Washington oh no that's right Vermont then Washington thank you Mr chair and I I will try to be be brief I know we've been here for a long time um I I do support this amendment and I want to just um talk about why it's so important that we we do look at what happened
▶ 6:11:57with the um 1500 as as it says in in this amendment repentant criminals back into our communities when we in the 118th Congress those of us who were freshmen coming in the 118th we were the first class that came in after January 6th and when we were assigned to our hotel we
▶ 6:12:27had security guards everywhere Capital police everywhere multiple police officers on every floor of the Hotel a huge presence in the lobby and during that time I got to know a lot of those police officers because they were there around the clock you went out of your room in the middle of the night they were there you went down in the morning to get a cup of coffee they were there and I can tell you we owe them so much more than they are
▶ 6:13:00and when I talked to them about what it feels feels like now to be in the service of all of us and not hear strong voices in support of them and instead they hear silence it really impacts their ability to do their job I mean that as a on a human level as a personal
▶ 6:13:31level it impacts them every day to show up to defend to defend all of us and to hear silence across the aisle about what they went through the other thing I want to say just briefly is last week A bunch of us did Town Hall meetings back home heard from a lot of constituents cross the aisle I did did one in a a really small town
▶ 6:14:01in Vermont was packed packed audience cross the political spectrum and one of the was do you feel safe serving as a member of Congress right now and my answer was an honest one I said in speaking with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle I said I think most of us do not feel safe serving now and I think that should
▶ 6:14:31I think that should matter to us because I think we want people to serve we want people to stand up for the Constitution and the rule of law and what does it say that people who are currently serving do not feel safe in that work and I can tell you what it felt like for me walking around the day after the Pardons and seeing those folks not just walking the halls of Congress but Court in
▶ 6:15:01the coffee shop in the basement of Longworth the people who protect us deserve better than we are giving I yeld back would I will yeld to you thank you kindly I I want to add to what you just said by that some of our colleagues said they would gladly give tours to the released and pardoned January 6 insurrectionist of course I'm not sure they need tours they probably still have the maps that they use the first time but in any event I would like to offer
▶ 6:15:31a tour to anybody on this committee especially of Arlington National Cemetery in the grave of officer briyan snik who was viciously attacked sprayed in the face uh with be mace and other chemicals experienced two strokes and then died the next day on January 7th then the next time Miss snik is in town I've stayed in touch with officer sik's family next time Mrs snik is in town I'd love to go over to Arlington National Cemetery with anybody um uh
▶ 6:16:02anybody in congress who is Tempted By Any of the stories that this is um you know some kind of leftwing conspiracy theory or FBI plot or something like that so I I thank the general lady for yielding yield back to you I suppose she's yielding back to you General yields back the the uh General from Washington has recognized thank you Mr chairman I um support this amendment and I just want to talk about some of what some of us are feeling
▶ 6:16:32I think that's that's what you're hearing but o what it means for the country and the scope of this committee's jurisdiction this is not actually just about pardon power this is about how we as a country deal with the worst assault on the United States capital since the War of 1812 and I think that when you think about it in that context there are multiple effects on the country and
▶ 6:17:02our ability to have democracy on our ability to ensure law enforcement is able to do their work which is something that our colleagues across the aisle constantly brandish as a specialty of theirs as if we don't care about law enforcement um but also about how the average person thinks about the accountability for this kind of dramatic incursion on our democracy
▶ 6:17:33and so when I think about this I think about look I was trapped in the gallery on January 6th and I was one of the last members of Congress to make it out of the gallery and um many of us had uh um issues that we had to deal with over the years in terms of our personal safety as as Miss ballant has suggested when I came out of the gallery when I was finally allowed to leave which was long after everybody else on the floor was off
▶ 6:18:04I literally was in the last group we've actually reconstructed the timeline because we couldn't get out because they were pounding as Mr swell said on the doors and we were not able to get out trapped we were trapped in the gallery and when we came out there were Capitol police officers surrounding a semicircle of insurrectionists on the ground face down with their arms over their heads legs spade and the assault rifles that they were carrying with them the weapons that they were carrying
▶ 6:18:35that is what we were confronting that day and so when the entire country saw that unfolding my kids saw me on television I think I was we had TV reporters right behind me so mine was one of the first faces on television trapped in that Gallery unable to move as a member of Congress going there to do my job of certifying the election despite the sitting president disputing that the election
▶ 6:19:05had actually been won by the person who won it and in that moment as everybody Across America sees what happened on that day and the reactions of good people like Mr Mento and others in the moment saying this is an attack on our constitution it's an attack on our democracy it cannot stand good people that day who said that on both sides of the AL because we all experienced it no matter who tries to
▶ 6:19:35it there is then an impact on the American Psyche on the American ability to process whether law enforcement means anything or not whether the Constitution means anything or not whether we should have free and fair elections or not whether the person in office should be peacefully power after an election and in turn it has them believe that there is absolutely
▶ 6:20:05no accountability whatsoever and it becomes just a personal choice about whether the party in power wants to prosecute certain things or not we might go out hard after immigrants who are here even if they're legal for something that they've done but you know what we're okay with people who want to attack law enforcement and all of us on both sides of the aisle in this place that is supposed to be about the peaceful transfer of power that's
▶ 6:20:36what we were here to do that day is our jobs now you think about the effect also on law enforcement the people that are here every day to defend us and the dishonor and disrespect to them of what we do when we refuse to acknowledge what happened on that day we refuse to say this is absolutely wrong
▶ 6:21:06president Trump I know you may have the power to Pardon but this is wrong what you did is wrong I can count on one hand the number of Republicans who have said that and when you do that you also disregard the people who protect us every day and I'll give you one other small example here which is that we Congress under Republicans have refused to put up a plaque that was authorized in the 2020 2 spending law for
▶ 6:21:36a permanent location on the west front by March of 2023 to honor the law enforcement officials the capitol police officers who were injured and who died and who protected us on that day what disrespect is that and in the committee of the Judiciary I would argue that it is well within our jurisdiction our scope to question question I know Mr chairman but I'm going to take just a second more because to question the
▶ 6:22:06ability of us to actually have the right to qu to to look at this and to look at the impacts on the judicial system on the con constitution on our democracy I justed Mr I hope we would accept this amendment and yes you know what we sat here for a long time while you didn't have the votes on the last Amendment so I'm going to take another 10 seconds say chairman we would all agree that is all
▶ 6:22:38rules very generous with the time I you extra minute I'd move to strike there's nothing to strike you want to be recognized sure Ive to be recognized uh okay the uh can you go quickly because I would like to actually have a vote and then we got to vote on the overall Plan G from Pennsylvania is recognized thank you do you need more time Miss Gul I deal to Miss J all right thank you Mr chairman I usually listen to you and yield back on
▶ 6:23:08time but I know you do we've had a good working relationship and I appreciate the gentle ladies worked on FIS and other issues where we work together so recognize I appreciate I just want to emphasize that it is not out of the question for this committee to understand the impact of that fateful day and to actually question what the what the effect is on our criminal justice system on our consti ution on our democracy by accepting and if you want to change some
▶ 6:23:38of the words in this amendment maybe miss cam Doug would be interested in that so that it so that it is clear what we're doing we should be looking at what happened on that day we should be looking at who was pardoned we should be looking at the impacts on these same offenders these repeat offenders that are now attacking law and these the the the overall effect on our country I I have to tell you because Miss Ganon has been
▶ 6:24:08so kind as to yield me time that the idea of being in the chamber again with proud boys who assaulted and killed and led law enforcement tried to assault us killed law enforcement and are there now celebrating because the guy that wanted to to not transfer power p y in the face of a free and fair election pardoned them that's
▶ 6:24:39painful to me Mr chairman that is really painful to me and I think it is painful to every American across the country I happened to be watching a reel and I saw Robert dairo who I really like being interviewed by Steven colar and Steven colar asked him who's your Heroes and first he said Marlon Brando but then he said the capitol police officers the men and women who defended the capital during that
▶ 6:25:09Insurrection on January 6th and he looked pained that they have not been that they haven't been even respected and he named the police officers Harry Dunn Michael fenon he went through and named them the American people are watching this this is within our jurisdiction Mr chairman and I believe you as a strong chairman of the Judiciary Committee should put into our oversight plan we should look at the impacts on this how many of these people
▶ 6:25:39that have been pardoned have already committed violent attacks again because they feel immune because Donald Trump is going to protect them no matter what are you okay with that anybody on your side good people over there are you okay with that Mr chairman I I just can't believe that so I hope we will keep this in some form in our oversight plan so that we can show in a bipartisan way that we are not going to let the worst assault on the United States capital since
▶ 6:26:09the War of 1812 go by without the Judiciary Committee even blinking an eye at what's happening I yeld back to G lady and lady thank you and I wholeheartedly endorse your remarks I would also yield to miss Crockett thank you so much uh really briefly here's the deal I actually accept the fact that we can't change what the pardon power looks like I I accept that but one of the things that has been brought up routinely and maybe you don't experience it on
▶ 6:26:39your side of the aisle is the threats there legitimately needs to be a threat assessment we need it document it because honestly we don't get enough protection as members of Congress right now unless you're one of the top people that sit in Congress you don't have protection for you while people are sending you death threats or sending death threats to our colleagues or sending people over and assaulting
▶ 6:27:10our staffers in District it would probably be helpful if we had the documentation to back this up and maybe be able to show House admin or anybody else that is interested in extending the funds that are needed to actually keep us safe so that we can do our jobs because right now it seems like these guys feel like they have a license to harass and kill and do whatever and honestly this embold it's not just them it's everybody else
▶ 6:27:40so I think that we should be digging in and I think that it should be able to inform whether or not we have other parameters that we can explore to keep all members of Congress safe whether you're a democrat or a republican I'll yield to the ranker uh look I'm I'm sorry we couldn't have done this in uh just an objective summary what we're going to do but on the other hand I think it's been a a very fruitful and creative session today thank you for your Indulgence Mr chairman
▶ 6:28:11Mr VRE 30 seconds I agree with you we need more protection I don't agree with all the stuff you say but believe it or not people on this side of the aisle I've have had some horrific death threats actually some people are in jail really bad folks we do need more protection it's something that leadership should deal with for all the members question occur question occurs on the amendment from the Gent lady from California all in favor say I I those opposed no no uh the ruling the in the pin of the chair the NOS have it
▶ 6:28:42call roll call being requested to CL call the RO Mr Jordan no Mr Jordan votes no Mr Isa Mr BS Mr Mento Mr Mento votes no Mr Tiffany Mr Tiffany votes no Mr Massie Mr Massie votes no Mr Roy Mr Fitzgerald Mr Fitzgerald votes no Mr Klein Mr Klein votes no Mr good Mr Good votes no Mr van Drew Mr van Drew votes no Mr Nells Mr Moore
▶ 6:29:13Mr Kylie Mr Kylie votes no Miss Hagman Miss Lee Mr Hunt Mr Fry Mr grathan you say what Mr gothman votes no I know I'm just saying Mr not Mr not votes no Mr Harris Mr Mr Harris votes no Mr and Mr and votes no Mr Schmidt Mr Gil Mr Gil votes no Mr bomgardner
▶ 6:29:44Mr bomgardner votes no Mr Rasin I Mr Rasin votes I Mr Nadler I Mr Nadler votes I miss Lofgren Mr Cohen Mr Johnson Mr Johnson votes I Mr swell Mr swell votes I Mr Lou Miss jaipal Miss jaipal votes I Mr Korea Miss scandin Miss scanland votes I Mr
▶ 6:30:14nus Mr nus votes I miss mcbath Miss Ross Miss Ross votes I miss ballant miss ballant votes I Mr Garcia Mr Garcia votes I miss coger Dove yes of course miss cam lager Dove votes I Mr moscowitz Mr Goldman Miss Crockett Miss Crockett votes I Mr Bigs votes no Mr Fry votes
▶ 6:30:46no cler report one more vote Mr chairman there are 12 eyes 17 knows the amendment is not adopted the question is now on adopting the overall oversight plan all those in favor say I I those oppose no no opinion opinion of the chairs the eyes have it and the
▶ 6:31:16plan is adopted members will have two dates submit views can we have record recorded vote being requested clerk will call the rooll Mr Jordan yes Mr Jordan votes yes Mr Isa yes Mr Isa votes yes Mr Bigs Mr Bigs votes yes Mr mlto Mr M Clint talk votes I Mr Tiffany Mr Tiffany votes I Mr Massie Mr Massie votes I Mr Roy Mr Fitzgerald Mr Klein Mr Klein votes I Mr Gooden
▶ 6:31:46Mr Gooden votes I Mr van Drew Mr vandrew votes I Mr Nells Mr Moore Mr Kylie Mr Kylie votes I miss Hegman Miss Lee Hunt Mr Fry Mr Fry votes I Mr gothman Mr gothman votes I Mr not Mr not votes I Mr Harris I Mr Harris
▶ 6:32:17votes I Mr and I Mr and votes I Mr Schmidt thanks guys Mr Gil Mr Gil votes I Mr bomgardner Mr bomgardner votes I Mr Rasin no Mr Rasin votes no Mr Nadler no Mr Nadler votes no Lofgren Mr Cohen Mr Johnson Mr Johnson votes no Mr swell Mr swell votes no Mr
▶ 6:32:48Lou Miss jaul Miss Jaa votes no Mr kareah Miss ganin Miss ganin votes no Mr nus Mr nus votes no Miss MCB Miss Ross Miss Ross votes no Miss ballant Miss ballant votes no Mr Garcia Mr Garcia votes no Miss camer Dove Miss camer Dove votes no Mr
▶ 6:33:18moscowitz Mr Goldman Miss Crockett no Miss Crockett no cck a report Mr Lou Mr Lou you are not recorded Mr Lou votes no CL
▶ 6:33:50report Mr chairman there are 17 eyes and 13 NOS the eyes have it the plan is adopted members will have two days submit views without objection staff is authorized to make Technical and conforming changes that concludes the committee's business for the today the meeting is adjourned right than