Skip to main content

tv   Key Capitol Hill Hearings  CSPAN  December 11, 2015 1:00pm-2:01pm EST

1:00 pm
1:01 pm
1:02 pm
1:03 pm
1:04 pm
1:05 pm
the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 256. the nays are 158. the conference report is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unfinished business is the question on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal, which the chair will put de novo. the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the journal stands approved.
1:06 pm
for what purpose does the gentleman from montana seek recognition? mr. zinke: i ask that my name be removed as co-sponsor of h.r. 1801. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir, this is to notify you pursuant to rule 8 of the rules of the house of representatives that i have received a subpoena issued in connection with court martial proceedings. after consultation with the office of general counsel regarding the subpoena i will make the determinations required under rule 8. signed sincerely, jackie speier, member of congress.
1:07 pm
1:08 pm
1:09 pm
the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the house will be in order.
1:10 pm
members, please take their conversations from the well and out of the aisles and in the back of the chamber. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to speak out of order for one minute for purposes of inquiring from the majority leader the schedule for the week to come. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. hoyer: i'm pleased to yield to my friend, the majority leader, mr. mccarthy. mr. mccarthy: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is correct. the house will be in order. members, please take their conversations off the floor.
1:11 pm
mr. mccarthy: before we get started, i'd like to discuss the matter of deep importance to the gentleman, myself, a dear friend, john stepacitic. he's a trusted aide for many years on this floor and he will be departing us. he wants to spend more time with his wife, kristen, and their new baby, lucy grace. and i'd like to thank him for his service to this country and the service to this conference and i know he's a good friend, also, to the gentleman across and i'd like to yield back to you. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman forr: ihank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, as we all know the public's perception, because that's what's covered most is the confrontation between the parties, the differences that we have. but one thing that is a reality
1:12 pm
that the public should feel good about is, a, they have extraordinarily good staffers. staffers who are committed to their country, to the house and to the american people. who do wonderful work and step is a wonderful, wonderful, positive participant who made this house a better place in which to work. who made the substance of what we did more understandable for members and he facilitated cooperation. he did not create confrontation. we wish him the best, of course, as he leaves the house of representatives like so many of our staffers do who go on to do better than most of us are doing, at least from a certain perspective. so i want to wish him the very, very best.
1:13 pm
i want to thank him on behalf of not only myself because he's a good friend but also on behalf of my staff with whom he worked very closely over the and i know they appreciate the relationship he had with them. i want to congratulate him and wish him good luck and great success. and i yield, again, to my friend, the majority leader. mr. mccarthy: i thank the gentleman for his kind words about him. let me get to the schedule. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. mr. speaker, no votes are expected in the house on monday. on tuesday the house will meet at noon for morning hour and 2:00 p.m. for legislative business. members are advised that first votes of the week are expected at 6:30 p.m. on wednesday, thursday and the remainder of the week, the house will meet at 9:00 a.m. for legislative business.
1:14 pm
mr. speaker, the house will consider a number of suspensions next week, a complete list of which will be announced by close of business today. mr. speaker, the house may also consider a bill to extend certain provisions of the tax code. additionally, i expect the house to consider an omnibus appropriation bill, and i yield back to the gentleman. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding. just to repeat. of course, the majority leader announced it yesterday and, again, today that we will not be having votes on monday. as the gentleman decided -- has the gentleman decided whether there will be a pro forma session yet on monday? i yield to my friend. mr. mccarthy: i thank the gentleman for yielding. we are still looking at that and i'll let the gentleman know as soon as possible. mr. hoyer: in any event, i thank the gentleman for that information. in any event, mr. speaker, the members, as the majority leader has indicated, will not be
1:15 pm
having votes until had -- at the earliest 6:30 on tuesday. my belief, mr. majority leader, that the balance of the week or such time as may be necessary in order to complete the work of this session of the congress will dictate the length of time that we go on the schedule, is that accurate? mr. mccarthy: the gentleman yields. yes, it's my intention that we will stay until we get our work done, but when we get our work done we will depart for the holiday season. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman. to further clarify, i know there has been some talk about c.r. that may be sufficient to get us into next year. . what i understand, it's our intention not to do that, but to complete the appropriations process and the funding of
1:16 pm
government for the balance of the year until september 30, next year. mr. mccarthy: i thank the gentleman for yielding. we just passed a c.r. moving into next wednesday. is our intention to have our work done and not pass any further c.r.'s. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for that information. i would say to him, i think he knows and i know although any of us are directly involved in the hour-to-hour negotiations going on. but negotiations still going on. i'm hopeful on both sides we can see that which is unacceptable to the other side and put that aside for a later day. the appropriations process is about funding government. the appropriations processes about keeping the government open and how best to serve the
1:17 pm
american people. i'm hopeful that will not get success in vent our coming to an agreement on which issues on which there are significant policy differences and which can be argued on another day in another bill, but will not undermine the completion of the appropriations process. and i presume the majority leader hopes that as well and hopefully over the next few hours, really, next couple of days we'll work on that because if we don't, we are going to be here on the 17, 18, 19, 20, to get our work done. is that accurate, mr. leader? mr. mccarthy: i thank the gentleman for yielding. and it is our intention to get an omnibus done in a bipartisan manner and that's what the negotiations are going on now
1:18 pm
and let's hope we can finish by next week. mr. hoyer: only thing i would add, mr. speaker, is there is also a fax extender bill that's -- tax extender bill that is being discussed. some of the items that members on both sides of the aisle believe are appropriate and necessary to help grow our economy and create jobs, which has support on both sides of the aisle. but it is clear that the extender bill, as i understand it is a bill that can be very, very large, as large as $800 billion in unpaid tax cuts, which from our perspective on our side in the house of representatives will substantially exacerbate our deficit, will undermine our
1:19 pm
viability of getting tax reform done in the next session or in the years to come. we think therefore it would be far preferable to have pending, getting tax reform done hopefully next year if we can do so in a bipartisan fashion. e senate passed a a two-year bill and one year look back to 2014 and one year look forward to 2016. i think we could get a bipartisan vote for that. i don't know where the negotiations are on that bill, but i would like to inform the majority leader as he probably knows privately that we have great concerns on this side of the aisle of the bill being discussed and the impact it will have on our deficit, on discretionary spending and our opportunity to pass a major, needed and bipartisan
1:20 pm
expectation of doing of doing a major tax reform so our tax system is simpler, fairer, producing the revenue that we need, buttles making sure the american people -- but also making sure the american people have a much simpler system. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. mccarthy: when the house adjourns today it meet on tuesday, where it shall convene at morning hour debate and 2:00 p.m. for legislative business. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.
1:21 pm
the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> mr. speaker, the horrific attacks in san bernandino underscore the pressing need to defeat isis and radical islamic extremism. instead of trying to fix his failed policies which contributed to the rise of isis in the first place, the president is attempting to divert and distract the american people by leveraging this tragedy to announce his plans to issue an should have order on gun control. the white house called the scombern attack an incident of gun violence. mr. speaker, it was terrorism and i refuse to let this president use acts of terrorism as a means to try another end
1:22 pm
run around this congress. earlier this year i stood up against the administration's policyed ban and got the rescinded. i'm standing up against the latest attack on our constitutional gun rights in this country because this administration refuses to take terrorism seriously, the american people will need their second amendment rights more than ever before. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? >> permission to address the ouse for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. speier: while many around the world are watching the climate talks in paris, some are my constituents on the san francisco peninsula are watching the pacific ocean. that's because unusually warm
1:23 pm
climate and water has led to a record toxic algae bloom that contaminates the crabs. r critical crab fishery is closed and our fishermen are suffering. one said, quote, if you had asked me six months ago about crab, i would have told you we are going to feed our families and send our kids to college and i'm not just talking about junior college. if they want to go to princeton, crab can make this happen with my work ethic. this situation is a new one. this was light getting the legs pulled out from under you. if my republican colleagues are wondering if climate damage is real or if it's affecting real people, i encourage them to see the dock, fishing boats and pots in my district. climate damage is wiping out
1:24 pm
people's livelihood. we cannot let this become the new normal. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields. he house will be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: permission to address the house for one minute and resize and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker, i rise to detail a report from the congressional budget office released this month that says the affordable care act will lead to a reduction of work hours equivalent to two million jobs over the next decade. the key reason for the work reduction according to the c.b.o. is health care subsidies which are tied to income, rising effective tax rates for americans and disincentive for people seeking promotions or higher-paying jobs. it points to tax increases and
1:25 pm
penalties as a reason for the work reduction and the employer mandate on those companies with more than 50 employees. the house and senate passed legislation that we repeal key parts of the affordable care act, including the employer mandate. unfortunately president obama has pledged to veto it. we can't allow this to become a reality. i will work with my colleagues to improve our nation's health care system and revitalize economic growth and jobs. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. schiff: i rise to pray tribute toll cameron gallagher who served as a military fellow in my office advising me on defense and policy issues.
1:26 pm
he has worked in the congressionally aceon office. cameron's service will now take him and his family to colorado, where he will serve as a battalion executive officer in the fourth combat aviation brigade. he represents the best. intelligent and dedicated. he is an optimism midst that he sent me trash talk emails before the stanford football game. cameron, we'll miss having you here in congress and wish you c.c. and henry all the best in your new assignment and don't forget the schiff hotel california policy, you can check out any time you want but you can never leave. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does gentleman seek recognition?
1:27 pm
without objection. >> mr. speaker, we need more mining engineers. approximately 70% of the mining industries technical leaders will reach retirement age over the next 10, 15 years. almost all current faculty members will need to be replaced by the coming decade. and our federal agencies, there is a dangerous lack of employees with the necessary technical expertise to carry out the essential duties such as permitting and inspection. mr. hardy: this is irresponsible and can have catastrophic consequences like we saw on the gold king mine disaster. in order to sustain our nation's mining schools, we need to ensure federal funding is made available for faculty to conduct more research and better educate the next generation of mineral sciencists and engineers and can be done by using the existing
1:28 pm
funding streams. my bill, the mining schools enhancement act will accomplish this goal. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? without objection, recognized for one minute. >> manchester, illinois, april 24, 2013, brit andy lynn york, 23 years old. brantsly jack ralston, one year old. fort hood texas, april 2, 2014, sergeant first class daniel m. ferguson, 39 years old. staff sergeant timothy owens, 38, sergeant carlos rodriguez, 7, kwlum bus, ohio, june 14, 2015, michael ballor. daniel sharp, 36, angela
1:29 pm
harrison, 35. tiaja nelson, 18. sa mereajuly 26, 2013, biscotti. gallanos, 33.fier sylvia perez. 2015. valley, march 13, thomas -- the chair: gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? mr. yoho: i ask unanimous consent to dress the house tore one minute and extend and revise. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. yoho: i rise to congratulate the trenton tigers for the
1:30 pm
florida 1-a football championship. and young men entered 14-0 broke the clock this is a feat that has never been down before. it defeated port st. joe and gives the tigers the second championship in three years and impressive achievement cannot be accomplished without hard work and dedication. the hard work of a two-a day practice schedule and hard work of individual team members playing as one and hard work of a coaching staff to guide the team to victory. i congratulate andrew thomas and his staff in coaching these young men. coach thomas' leadership has not been unnoticed. he has been named coach of the year. thanks for carrying on your great winning tradition and continuing to make the town of
1:31 pm
trenton, florida, proud of our young athletes and i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. are there further requests for one-minute speeches? the chair lays before the following request. the clerk: leaves of absence for mr. defassio of today, mr. gene green of texas for today and mr. westmoreland -- defazio for today, mr. gene green of texas for today and mr. westmoreland for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the requests are granted. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2015, the entleman from texas, mr. gohmert, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee for the
1:32 pm
majority speaker. mr. gohmert: we heard what is proposed as a commonsense fix to our second amendment and that is, ok, surely you can agree that anyone on the no-fly list should not be able to walk in and buy a gun. we've had friends across the aisle that pointed out that, like the times square bomber, she said, you know, he could have gone in and bought a gun. i'm told now that that's not actually the case. that he specifically could not have, but he was going to blow up new york's times square. he didn't need a gun. he was going to blow people up. but a lot of us, when we first hear, well, shouldn't that be a no-brainer? if you're on the no-fly list you shouldn't be able to buy a gun. but then when you find out that the no-fly list is composed of
1:33 pm
names -- and we can't even get a number, even ballpark number. is it 47,000, is it 470,000, is it 700,000, it is over a million? and then when you find out you can't actually find any specific criteria for getting on the no-fly list, then you realize, the no-fly list is basically anybody this dministration says needs to be harassed or looked at further. as i was leaving london a year ago after speaking to some groups in london, a man that as head of that little area of whatever their t.s.a. is there at london airport came up, said, congressman, i know who
1:34 pm
you are and i'm really, really sorry but apparently your homeland security department indicates you need to be thoroughly searched personally and your bags. really sorry. so anyway, for those people that say, no administration would ever be into political revenge, you can look at some of the groups that the i.r.s. went after. most of the -- in fact, a huge majority of rank and file federal workers and homeland security and the i.r.s., they would never dream of doing the kind of things that lois lerner and her hacks did, but they used the power of government to go after political enemies. and nobody will ever be able to say specifically how much it helped president obama in 2012 to prevent conservative groups
1:35 pm
tax status their cleared through the i.r.s., but they did prevent a lot of groups from being able to form. and if you don't have the clearance from the i.r.s., then you can't bring contributions in together to organize and do like many of the unions do that get federal money. these groups were not going to get federal money. they were going to get contributions. but the more we see about the abuses within this administration, the more clear it is, whether it was a democrat or republican administration, the last thing you would ever want to do is ll a president, an administration, you just list anybody on a list. there's no requirement as to specifics, as to why, you just put anybody on a list that you have concerns about and they
1:36 pm
ill never be able to buy a gun . you can keep them from flying if you want to. you just list them on the list. you don't have to tell congress. you don't have to tell anybody else. just put people you are not happy with on a list and say you have concerns about them and they'll never be able to buy a gun. before we go ripping away people's constitutional second amendment rights or any other rights, including what should be a right to get on a plane and fly, unless you're a threat, we do not need to have an obscure process, where nobody can identify the specifics that gets you on the no-fly list or, in this case, as people are proposing, the no-gun list, just let an administration list them, we
1:37 pm
have got to do a lot more soul searching in america. because as we've seen, there are so many groups and individuals that were listed as unindicted but co-conspirators in the biggest terror financing trial in american history, the holy land foundation trial, and we found out that a group that called itself charitable and got clearance from the i.r.s. and doesn't really know or -- they don't really say where their money comes from, when the f.b.i. drilled down and found out, saw where it was going, they were able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the five principals in the holy land foundation trial were guilty of financing terrorism. and they -- there were many people, many groups listed as
1:38 pm
co-conspirators. some like the islamic society imam h america of which -- is that -- isna was trying -- a group, care, wanted their name off the list. if there was mo evidence to -- if there was no evidence to ties of the holy land foundation trial, the judge would have signed the order but the district judge and the fifth circuit court of appeals looked at the evidence and said, there's plenty of evidence to show that these groups, like the islamic society of north america, principals in these groups, they are affiliated with -- there's evidence to show they are co-conspirators with these terrorist financing people. so they would not allow their names to be removed from the
1:39 pm
pleadings. they remained in the pleadings, but unfortunately for those of us who want justice in america, for -- justice in america for those who would want justice in america, eric holder became attorney general after the conviction in the bush administration in late 2008, and under his guidance, they never pursued those people that the district -- federal district court and the court of appeals said there's plenty of evidence to support that these people are part of the terror financing network. they never pursued them. ajid, out imam all all dulles muslim society, adams, they called them, the secretary of security was out there last week and applauding their efforts and thanking imam, as the white house has thanked him. he helped the president with at
1:40 pm
least one speech. that was the one the president delivered while netanyahu was on the way over here and wrongly said that everybody involved, including israel, borders. the pre-1967 since that was so factually wrong, when the president stated it publicly, you can't help but feel like and since he advised him on the speech, was there in the intersanket up of the state department in that extremely secure setting when the president delivered his speech. he was even asked for an interview about the speech immediately afterwards, you know there were people tied to people that this administration shouldn't use as advisors that this administration is using as advisors. so anyway, there is a reason that america has become extremely skeptical about what they're told. d when this administration
1:41 pm
says, just list anybody they want to, as they currently can, on the no-fly list and they won't be able to buy a gun and that will stop terrorism, well, it wouldn't have stopped the pipe bombs that farook and his fiancee, wife, whatever she was, terrorist, female put nion had built and together and also, the president keeps pushing for better background checks and there's a great article from dr. john r. lott jr., december 3. dr. lott has had positions at the university of chicago, yale university, stanford, ucla, wharton and rice, was the chief economist at the united states senate, commissioned in 1988-1989. this guy's an expert when it comes to guns and gun laws, and
1:42 pm
he had an article that made clear that -- and it's dated december 3. made clear, the national review online, that there's nothing at all that president obama or loretta lynch had proposed that would have stopped the 14 people being killed and 21 injured out in san bernardino. and in fact, there's nothing that this president proposed in the light of violence in colorado that would have changed the shooting in colorado. and in fact, if you go back to the prior shooting in california -- in colorado, we know that the gunman went by at least a couple theaters that were closer to him because
1:43 pm
those were not gun-free zones and there were likely people in the theater who had guns who would have stopped the shooter before he killed and shot as many people as he did. and when it comes to oregon, they have very strict gun control laws. and there is nothing the president or the justice department proposed that would have prevented the shooting at the community college in oregon. those are places that the gun laws are already as strict or stricter than what the president is asking be applied everywhere else. o it just seems disingenuous for anyone to say, we need gun control laws like in california so that we can stop the violence when it didn't stop the very violence they're using as an excuse to take away
1:44 pm
people's second amendment rights. i commend that great article by john lott. when it comes to the syrian refugees, most people in america have figured out, this has to be stopped because we don't know who's coming in. and i mentioned it here on the floor before, mr. speaker, last week and previously that we had information -- i had information that isis had probably taken over areas where ere were printing facilities so they probably print passports that we would not know if this were legitimate or not. and as this administration keeps saying, we need to bomb assad out of existence, or at least try to take him out, well, assad is not very favorable toward giving this administration all of his criminal records, passport records about the people of
1:45 pm
syria. we have no idea who these people are. and god bless director of f.b.i. comey. he comes in more than once and says, yes, we will vet them. but you have to understand, even though we'll do the best vetting we possibly can, we have nothing to impon. with -- to go on. had fingerprints from i.e.d.'s and the official records from the iraqi government that could help tell us with someone coming from iraq was the person they said they were, were they a threat, a danger, and even with all of that, a couple of guys get to kentucky and been there a couple of years and one of them was certainly a terrorist whose ngerprints were on an i.e.d.
1:46 pm
that exploded in iraq. and if you can't catch a terrorist that you let into kentucky and you had his fingerprints and compared them and didn't show up initially, then how much worse will it be -- how many more terrorists will you let into america from -- within the syrian refugees. and it's also been disclosed this week what many of us in america knew already, it was only common sense that people who have sworn they want to destroy our country, kill as many americans and jews and israelis as possible, that they would use this refugee crisis, not to get into israel because they are very protective, thank god, but to get into western europe and get into the united states. and now we know that's the facts. and most americans i have talked
1:47 pm
to, i think in my telephone town hall, about 90% of the people in east texas of the thousands on the call, they indicated about 90% were concerned that we couldn't properly vet the syrian refugees good enough and that we needed to pause and hold up and wait until we had more information. that's just common sense. then we also -- there was an wheree dated november 16, it was pointed out, the five-year cost to american taxpayers of resettling a single middle eastern refugee is to be more than $64,000 compared with ,300.figures indicated $5
1:48 pm
so for every person we arrogantly think, gee, we should bring that person into america as mark points out, actually that's a bit immoral because if we weren't so arrogant to think we could get them into america, we could save 12 of them in their native region. they say three million to four million coming out of syria, out of that area, gee, they need to come to the united states and yet saudi arabia has three million -- accommodations for three million. so many people have seen photographs of the massive tent area. five days out of 365, during the pilgrimage to mecca, kitchen and
1:49 pm
bathroom facilities. if they could take care of the three million, make those available, we could work something out to take care of the people that come in for five days in the hodge. that that would be a better solution than this administration forcing syrian refugees that cannot be properly vetted, into this country. and then i was told last night that actually the female terrorist in san bernandino was using a name that certainly would not have been given to her at birth. and that if we had people that were allowed to study radical islam, the tenets of this belief, as this one person said, she had actually a guy's name and for anyone who has spent
1:50 pm
their adult life studying radical islam like this administration for seven years has not allowed f.b.i., intelligence agencies, state department, justice department -- they purge their records of anything that offended terror and unindicted co-conspirator to finance terrorism. when this unindicted co-conspirator, care, it was purged from this administration's training records. as it was pointed out, when you spend so many years of your adulthood studying this, for her to have proper screening by somebody that had studied radical islam, you would had asked the question, when did you get this name? this clearly was not given to you at birth. he said it would be like an
1:51 pm
american going into europe and someone there saying, now, come on, your name is not george washington. it wasn't given to you at birth. when did you get it? when you find out that the madrasas and the places she had been to. you have to get to further questioning which should be red flags all over somebody's record like that. we had the information available that this administration didn't prevent it from being used to properly screen radical islamists. but before you can properly screen radical islamists, you have to admit that there is a thing called radical islam. for terling glick writes "the jerusalem post" and beautiful lady and she pointed
1:52 pm
out the problem with former president bush's position, that we are not at war with islam and then this administration is taking and running it with to extremes. they failed to acknowledge that there is pluralism within islam, saying that if it's bad, it could not possibly be part of islam, is ridiculous. and what that does to moderate muslims, who don't want radical islamists governing them and cutting their hands off, horse whipping or stoning them to death, they would like to live in peace without worryying about a tyrannical leader, we do them a disservice by not pointing out that radical islam is an element of islam and it is a fact and
1:53 pm
therefore moderates are left to say nothing, because if they say this is an element of islam we have to stand up against, then they come up against the wrong-headed positions of the obama administration. we can help moderate muslims stand up and a few have been doing for a long time, stand up against radical islam and say, as god bless him the president of egypt as he stood and talked to imams said we have to get our islam back from the radicals. we have to stand up against them. nd the regime in the administration over in egypt, i have talked to -- i don't know if i'm still the only member of congress that has met with the
1:54 pm
director of intelligence. we have a very informative meeting for a couple of hours, but they don't understand why this administration appears to be helping radical islam and standing against the moderates, like the president of egypt, like the 30 million of the 90 million egyptian people that went to the street a couple of years ago, wow, that was such a huge deal. there's never been a group that big in the history of the world go to the steets of streets of their country and demand a peaceful regime change. but because we helped the people with the constitution, did not contain an impeachment provision. there was no where else to peacebly remove a president who was violating their own constitution over and over than
1:55 pm
to go to the streets as they did. pope over there told me how deeply it was to see moderate muslims, christians, jews, secularists as a part of that 30 million and so many coming up to the pope saying, we are so sorry for the way you have been treated. has this administration given nyack laids whatsoever to the egyptian people -- given any accolades whatsoever to the egyptian people. it says in the constitution that when the muslim brotherhood, dical islam, they put muslim brotherhood on their terrorist watch list. that administration puts them on
1:56 pm
the terrorist watch list, when the muslim brotherhood or any like-minded radical islamist group builds down a church, we will rebuild it with government funds. people of egypt deserve at least n atta boy and what was this administration response? we are going to hold up sending helicopters, jets and tanks and now that the muslim brotherhood, this terrorist organization is not in control, we aren't going to send you anything. the egyptian president said does your president not understand that we use apache helicopters to keep the suez canal open. it was a slap in the face to our muslim friends there. when this president didn't go
1:57 pm
and 40 other leaders went, he didn't send the vice president. didn't send anybody from washington to say congratulations egypt, since moderate muslims are in control in egypt, they have done something earth shaking. they dug another lane, a second lane in the sue ezz canal -- sues canal. countries said wow. it was embarrassing to me last year in egypt as people were know, was your country excited when we got the second lane dug to the suez canal? and the mainstream media hardly reported anything about it. it was a free people standing up
1:58 pm
and doing something monumental and since it wasn't done by radical islamists, this administration chose not to give it any credibility. we got the report hours ago -- here's an article from victoria taft. after the latest paris terror attack, french president hollande said he would go after those who pulled off the mass circulation. know we know what he meant by that. the french have kicked in the doors on 2,235 homes and taken people into custody or placed them on house arrest in the a sleepy french town, just 18 miles from paris. french police went to the local it was closed down by
1:59 pm
police on the 2nd of december. in subsequent raids, the prefect propaganda and videos had been seized. a.f.p. reported the locations of the raids were not given. both isis and al qaeda add hear to the radical teachings. radicals use mosques or other home-based unpermitted mosques to stockpile weapons. it was reported that just in the last 15 days, the french had uncovered about a third of the illegal weapons they normally recover in an entire year just from these mosque areas and the homes that they've raided.
2:00 pm
now i have concerns, serious concerns when i see homes in this numbers being raided. the french do not have our protections under our bill of rights. they don't have nearly the protections we do. i don't want this many homes busted into. i don't want mosques raided unless there is probable cause to believe there is a problem, that they have committed a crime. you get warrants for those things. same with the home. same with somebody's internet. same with the bank records. yet this administration is using the consumer finance protection bureau to do what nobody in american history, any administration has done before, and that is go get people's bank records whether or not they want gee, we want they claim, to be able to watch so if somebody gets messed around with a bank, we can go after

13 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on