tv U.S. House of Representatives Debate on Russia Investigation Documents... CSPAN June 29, 2018 12:28am-1:33am EDT
all they want to do is get up in the morning, get their families ready, pay their bills, have the possibility of a promotion or start that business that they want. and the internal workings of of whatnt, in the mesh is in this beltway, when you have a government agent the that does not want to do what they are supposed to do, it is time for congress to act, and that is what we are doing today. today republicans in the house are doing that. we are taking our oversight responsibility seriously. making sure that the government is acting appropriately to ensure that the american people, who we represent, have the answers that they deserve, one way or the other.
with that, i yield back the remainder of my time. i lies in support of a resolution that is about this institution. , it is look at this about the department of justice, giving documents to this institution so that they can conduct proper oversight. we have had months go by with where thoseuests, requests have been largely ignored by the department of justice. it is time that the american people actually have the transparent the that they deserve in being able to see the documents and let them judge for themselves what did or did not go on within the department of justice. lady justice should have a blindfold. not be meted out to those well-connected or well-financed.
it should be even on all regards. yield two i get to minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from ohio to speak on this. but have continued cannot be in order. the house will come to order. please remove your conversations from the floor. that includes back of the chambers. we will not continue until it is in order. the gentleman may proceed. minutes to the gentleman from ohio. >> thank you for yielding. this is really simple. about our branch of government, the legislative
branch getting the information that we are entitled to get to do our constitutional duty of oversight. we have requested information from the doj. we have issued subpoenas. we have caught them hiding information. they redacted it and tried to that they were friends with one of the five the court judges. know that the deputy attorney general threatened staff members on the house intelligence committee. this is really simple. is enough. give us the documents we are entitled to have. you have seven days to get your act together. when have you ever seen an agency where the top people who ran the clinton investigation have had this happen to them?
chief of staff has resigned. general counsel jim baker demoted and then left the fbi. peter struck demoted. he was escorted out of the fbi just days ago. when have you ever seen that happen? and they will not give us the information we are asking for. something is going on over there. needed.olution was enough is enough. give us the information so we can do our job and get answers for the american people. i support this resolution and encourage every single member of this body as an institution to vote for this. >> i think the gentleman and --erve the eight remainder remaining balance of my time. >> i yield myself as much time
as it may -- i may consume. this resolution of insistence is being rushed to the floor as an emergent the measure. the subject matter of this resolution is not among them. this resolution is wrong on the facts, wrong on the law, wrong in the rules and a dangerous precedent. is riddled with inaccuracies. taking this document at face many of theight sponsors delight in making them to the public. the subpoena issued, this peanut i was not issued in compliance with house rules. according to counselors with
whom we have consulted, likely cannot be enforced. to whichhe resolution congress is not entitled. to which the justice department cannot give us area to be clear, i firmly believe that when the committee asked for information, tied for the are information in almost every case. we are not entitled to information that goes to the core of the ongoing criminal investigation. this prohibition is both a ander of constitutional law a matter of basic fairness. it is wrong to reject -- inject politics into criminal proceedings. i suspect those sponsors already know this. they are asking for documents that they know they will probably never received. they likely view this a possible request as a win-win proposition.
if they somehow believe the department of justice into , thatg over materials information could be shared with the subject of the investigation , namely president trump. mayor giuliani has entered exactly that. that information would next be shared with anybody watching fox news. usehey do not, they will that fact to further smear the special counsel. and anyone else investigating the president. they even suggested impeaching the attorney general. that is patently ridiculous. real purpose of this resolution ando cast dispersions defame the special prosecutor,
special counsel and the people associated with him. finally, voting in this resolution today said they dangerous president -- precedent. that he or politics is more important than the facts -- that politics is more important than the facts. documents tod which we are not entitled. you can attack the character of lifelong public service like rosenstein and mueller. you can burn bridges with your colleagues to speed the resolution to the floor. you cannot stop the special counsel investigation. before members vote today, we must ask, when the special counsel work is complete, when the enormity of what he has been found -- what he has found has been laid bare, how will the
american people judge the house actions today? i urge my colleagues to oppose this reckless, dangerous measure and reserve the balance of my time. speaker.you, mr. i would make one comment. it is interesting when the gentleman opposite mr. speaker is talking about motives and what is designed by this, when we have not had a conversation about that. it is interesting when we talk about those very motives about an ongoing investigation. part of this request is asking for 10,000 pages of documents on it investigation that is already complete. i would think that we had the ability to get those from the department of justice, but i would recognize the gym and from oklahoma for two minutes. >> an old arizona farmer told me that when you put up a end, the to seens over the fence
how strong that fence is. if the fence is strong, you do not have that problem, but if it is a little loose in the wiring, the cow will get out. that is what has happened here. what has happened here is that we have had a loose fence. theave failed to demand requirements be met as we have requested. it is not bullying to request documents. it is not bullying to subpoena and use the right that we have to subpoena. not bullying anybody. i will tell you what the problem is. this resolution gets at the heart of it. it says we are going to give you enough to two weeks. that is rebuilding the fence a little bit. it is saying we have oversight authority.
you need to comply with that oversight authority. we will rebuild the fence. i support this resolution. i will tell you what. i would enthusiastically support a resolution for contempt. there has not been compliance, nor has there been adequate reason given for noncompliance. so, i support this resolution 100% and i will be voting for it. i cosponsored it. we need to be holding the resolution in contempt because has body and its authority been held in contempt. i yield back. with that, i reserve the balance of my time. i now yield three minutes to the distinguished ranking member , the gentlelady from texas. >> recognized for three minutes.
let me thank my good friend from north carolina. i think the nation should understand that we have a start political difference. we have a stark legal difference. , but there is nothing that can undermine the rule of law in the truth. my good friend who spoke earlier wants to go to the extreme of law enforcement officers in contempt for doing their job. ofold in my hand the office inpector general, issued 2018. there are eons and eons of document. that the attorney there voluntarily. we have director ray them. even if there was a subpoena,
they have come and indicated that they canceled important trips to be here before the u.s. congress. i ask in that hearing, what was the reason for the emergency hearing? i do not know if my colleagues heard it. i cannot decipher any good cause of why we are thrown in there. the fact that we have had under the presidency of mr. trump almost two years. the judiciary committee has not answered one single inquiry offered by the democrats. we have not had one legitimate hearing on the russian collusion . to the results. i speak to the impact on the integrity of the election by the american people.
rush to continue to findings ofe the the inspector general and the investigators who indicated that they investigated this and found no criminal behavior. clinton'scretary email. i think it is public knowledge that the items she was being looked at for was the misuse of classified data. we do not want that to happen. she did not want it to happen. but she was cleared of any criminal intent or criminal actions by people that we would normally trust. i believe in oversight. i do not want scandal at the department. maybe somebody should ask the question about why the division
is understaffed and barely working. maybe somebody should ask why the trump administration switched from being supportive of anti-voter id laws that were discriminatory. this resolution is redundant. face.s in the it goes in the face of those already performing. speaker, the department of justice has already produced about 850,000 documents. from oversight and judiciary. they are complying. to are we taking a hammer something unnecessary. why are we not probing the individuals that are not appearing. is a resolution that has nothing to do with protecting the november 18 resolution.
it has nothing to do with reality. we need to go on to protect the united states of america. >> the reality of this is the very document that the gentleman from texas put up, that 500 page investigativeally conclusions based on 1.2 million documents of which this body has received less than 24,000 documents, pages of the same document that she mentioned. all we are asking for is for us, the legislative body and the american people to get the same documents department of justice has. i would like to recognize the gentleman from arizona, my good friend or two minutes.
i joined my colleagues in insisting that the department of justice fully comply with congress request for documents related to the potential. divertdone nothing but documents that are well within our rights to receive. it has been the mate -- rod rosenstein has been the major player in stonewalling congress. i stand here today, calling for transparency, answers and accountability to get to the truth. the american people deserve the accountability. forced to take it to the next level. contempt as the previous speakers has said.
it is very simple. comply with the law. do your job or get out. i support this resolution. with that, i yield back. i will reserve the balance of my time. time,ore i yield for the i have an inquiry. page 970 refers to a document from march 22. that thisnderstanding is defective because it's not comply with community rules. the chair shall provide a full copy of the proposed subpoena. the chair did provide me with a copy of a proposed subpoena on
march 19. the document was materially different than what was shared on march 19. my parliamentary inquiry is that whether these circumstances would have any bearing on consideration of this resolution and absent that, whether that effective nature would have any bearing on future attempts to force a supposed subpoena. is considering. the chair cannot separately comment. that is a matter of debate on the resolution. the house is currently resident -- considering 970. the chair cannot separately comment on proceedings. that is a matter of debate on the resolution. consentld ask unanimous
the copy of the letter that i sent. detailing the background containing the defective nature. i now yield. i now yield three minutes to the distinguished gentleman from tennessee, the ranking member of the constitution subcommittee. the member for the time. -- thank the member for the time. it is a theater of the absurd. it is an attempt to defeat justice that will go back and ask those activities involving russia and participants in the
2016 election that resulted in the election of donald trump. the fact is, there is a special counsel investigating that. one of the most distinguished americans ever, a purple heart recipient who went to the marines because one of his friends was killed and volunteered to go to vietnam, received a purple heart and other commendations. he pursued justice. he has dealt with some of the worst people in this world. it is a perfect calling for him to stand for the constitution and the rule of law, and investigate possible collusion with russia.
the campaign manager for president trump is in jail right now. bond, they could not count on him not to engage in it again, so she had to put him in jail. dykeman's,been in guilty pleas by people close to the president. the president is feeling the heat. acolytes are producing this ruse to make the american public think there is something wrong with our justice department and our special counsel. mueller, mr.r. rosenstein and mr. ray at the fbi. as we are here on this floor come the judiciary committee is having a sham.
republicans fighting republicans to get information because it is not republicans fighting republicans. it is republicans fighting for trump who has taken over this party. a party that once did for great people like ronald reagan, , andhower, george w. bush george h.w. bush. this is the theater of the absurd. these documents should not be turned over. it would reveal sources and it would imperil the investigation. bless the united states. i yield back the balance of my time and reiterate my oath to defend the constitution. i yield two minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from texas. >> recognized for two minutes.
>> the very thing my colleagues were arguing, and good men argued in the watergate days and it would have cap nixon in office. some people do not care about party as much as we do justice and the truth. is thathave found leading intelligence people and justice people were lying. we get more information that has been objected to, redacted, and said thist these guys was for national security? it turns out when we get the information, it was because it was embarrassing to the people objecting. oversight is absolutely critical. the last administration did not have enough oversight. they obstructed, they were able to drag things out so that we
never got to the bottom of things like fast and furious, when one of our own agents was killed. there were no answers. they are trying again. now we have this obligation to make sure that these documents that have been hidden are brought forward. , whowe have mr. rosenstein was involved in a russia investigation of russia trying to illegally get u.s. uranium. he worked with a guy named mueller to help in that investigation. forced a witness to sign a non-clone -- nondisclosure agreement. it is imperative that we bring these things out. we have too many people in the justice department. i watched one yesterday. i cannot get into what he said, but we know that is a lie, what he said. he must've said
straightfaced to his wife, a hundred times about there is nothing going on with me and ms. page. too good atgotten lying. we need to see what is the truth. the gentleman from new york is recognized. minutes toeld three the distinguished gentleman from inrgia, the ranking democrat the intellectual subcommittee. >> the jenin is recognized for three minutes. >> -- the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. >> a republican attempt to derail the mueller investigation. ladies and gentlemen, what we have today is a republican president who is under criminal investigation. we have a republican led house of representatives that is doing
its best as a cult following of the president to help him thwart the investigation. this is about passing a resolution that results in the justice department, which is the dutch conducting the investigation, to turn over documents that go to the heart of the investigation. why do they want the department of justice to turn over that documentation to them. --o that it can be leaked definition -- documentation to them? so that it can be leaked. so the president can do what it does what he does when it comes to being investigated criminally. what it all adds up to is politics trumping justice.
investigate an investigation that is ongoing. you wait until the investigation is over and then you judge investigation as to whether or not it was there. everything the republicans are doing here today is against justice. it is against the rule of law. it is against the constitution. it is against the america that we all hold dear. warpinga stretching, a of the power of the legislative branch. they are seeking to use their power to put their heavy song thumb and hand on the scales of justice.
lady justice has a blindfold on so that she cannot. what republicans are trying to theoday is to remove blindfold on lady justice, to let lady justice reveal an president to let this use lady justice as he has used within in the past. sanctity of the this nation. this is hurtful to our nation. i would ask my colleagues on the other side to please think about it. with that, i would heal back. >> -- i will yield back. >> members are reminded not to engage in personalities with the president. >> i would remind the speaker
and all those in this chamber today that this is about this very fundamental principle. this institution, being able to do oversight. since when is it not a good idea to have the documents from all agencies brought forth to this body, so the american people can judge for themselves? with that, i will yield three minutes to the gentleman from virginia. >> it is one of my great pleasures to educate young people. i find myself in an interesting position because the people i am educating are not that young. checks and balances anyone? we are entitled to whatever we ask from agencies. showingalso said we are that politics are bigger than the law.
the constitution is the law. this should have never come to this point. that we should need a resolution of the house of representatives -- should be compelled to give to us that which we are entitled? a symptom of a much greater disease. article one, section eight, necessary and proper clause. such entities and fund such entities. people votedwhere to compel the executive branch to do his job. two along party lines voted against having to be responsive to the checks and balances.
to be aould not need vote. have not read the constitution or do they not care. we have established the doj. they refuse the oversight like a petulant child. perhaps the time has come and that is the money. if president trump will not compel disclosure, if doj will not comply with the body that established the man fund them, perhaps it is time to dock this child's allowance. the power of the purse is ours. in a perfect world doj would never face sanctions. after the vote we just indicated -- after the vote we just witnessed, we do not live in a perfect world. can do their job or i and others of like mind can demand we begin to stop funding its child who flaunts ridiculous power in the face of those who understand the constitution and the citizens of the united states. is it arrogant, insubordinate,
and it should stop. is ruse of legality delightfully tap danced on by those who use the constitution when it suits. it is not the direction this country needs to go. our tomorrow is as prosperous as our yesterdays. mr. meadows: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: mr. chairman, mr. speaker, i now yield three minutes to the distinguished gentleman from maryland, the vice -- the vice ranking member of the judiciary committee, mr. raskin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. raskin: mr. speaker, thank you. as a member of the judiciary committee, and a professor of constitutional law, i rise against this uncommonly silly and unprecedented so-called resolution of insistence. we've already received hundreds of thousands of documents from the department of justice as yet now they want to subpoena information relating directly to
an ongoing criminal and counterintelligence investigation which the majority knows full well the department of justice cannot and will not release to us. and why are they doing it? well, presumably it's all to manufacture a constitutional crisis so somebody can get fired over there, so they can impeach rosenstein as they're talking about in the judiciary committee, so they can sack the attorney general, so they can get rid of mule ir. whatever. do your jobs. look what's going on in america. we have more than 2,000 kids that are separated from their families. their parents don't know where they are. let's do our job. let's reunify those kids with their parents. we saw the parkland massacre, we saw the las vegas massacre, we saw the massacre in san bernardino county. we have not had one hearing on the universal criminal and mental background check that's desired by 97% of the american people. not one hearing. and instead we're caught up in this nonsense because they can't get over hillary clinton's emails.
enough. get over it. do your jobs. ladies and gentlemen, one of the gentleman from arizona said there's a loose fence in america. there is a loose fence. 15 u.s. intelligence agencies told us in january of 2017 that russian agents had engaged in the active murph campaigns to un-- measure of campaigns to undermine the election. they had a propaganda campaign to put poison on the internet through facebook and through other social media. they directly conducted a campaign of cyberespionage and sabotage against the democratic national committee and they tried to break into our election systems in more than 20 states. and what have they done with the loose fence? nothing. they helped to open the gates. that's what we should be talking about today, not this ludicrous, absurd resolution. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. meadows: thank you, mr. speaker. i would ask the speaker if he
would remind others that are in this well that if they're real concerned about family reunification, i have a bill, and the gentleman is certainly welcomed to come in and co-sponsor that bill to reunify, mr. speaker. with that i'd like to recognize my good friend, the gentleman from virginia, mr. griffith, for two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for two minutes. mr. griffith: i thank the gentleman, mr. speaker, and i appreciate the time. i would say that is a good bill and i am glad to have been an original co-sponsor with the gentleman from north carolina on the bill related to making sure that families are not separated. . the previous gentleman also said do our jobs. it's curious because as i understand it part of our job is to make sure that we're overseeing the federal government. our founding fathers created something that had never been created before, a checks and balance system. there was supposed to be a
natural tension between the various branches. and congress is supposed to be an equal branch with the power of oversight over the administrative branch to make sure they are following the laws and to make sure that they are meting out justice evenhandedly. that's what this resolution is about. but congress too often sits back and does not do anything. it just says, oh well, we can't get that information. we're so sorry. this resolution points out we have been patiently waiting for some of these documents for years. for months, for weeks, for the administrative branch of government to respond to its co-equal branch, the united states congress. do so. have refused to and i would submit that this is a very measured resolution. that it does not immediately call for holding somebody in
contempt or holding -- find somebody should be impeached. it says, instead, here's the deadline. what we're trying to seek here are the facts. if you are afraid of the facts, then, yeah, you stand up on the floor and you rail about all kinds of other issues. but the facts, the truth needs to come out for the american people. and so i would submit that this resolution is very reasonable. it ought to be passed a because if there is not a response -- passed because if there is not a response it is our duty to hold those who do not respond properly in contempt. mr. meadows: another 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional 30 seconds. mr. griffith: it is our duty to find and hold this congress those people who do not respond in contempt. and then to take their persons into possession and have them explain to a judge how it is they plan to purge themselves of that contempt. it is reasonable that we give
them notice before such action is taken. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i now yield four minutes to the distinguished ranking member of the intelligence committee, the gentleman from california, mr. schiff. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for four minutes. mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to this resolution. if this was oversight, i would be in strong support of any effort to seek production, but it is not. this is not oversight. it is collaboration with the executive masquerading as oversight. or if this is oversight, it is oversight of the most obsequious kind. it is oversight of how may we serve you, dear president. it is oversight that asks, what is your will, dear president? that says, we're not
worthy, dear president. it is oversight that says, we shall seek but you shall find, mr. president, because what we obtain we shall provide to your legal defense team or we shall selectively leak or misrepresent in your service. it is oversight in the nature of not desiring an outcome, not desiring the production of that worthy, dear documents but rather the production of a fight, the production of a pretext to give the dear president a pretext to fire rod rosenstein or bob mueller. i have served on the intelligence committee now for almost a decade. and while i cannot disclose the number of fisa applications during the course of those 10 years, i can can tell you the number of times that my republican colleagues have sought the underlying investigateor materials behind a specific fisa application. and that number is one. that case is this case.
and that case just happens, just happens to implicate our dear president. it is not that there are no areas that call out for oversight right now. there are too many to count. why is it that after sanctioning z.t.e. for violating iran sanctions and slighting north korea sanctions, the president abruptly changed course out of an ostensible concern for chinese jobs? is it because the chinese invested $500 million in a trump branded property? that is worthy of oversight. is the first family seeking to do business with gulf or other allies while making u.s. policy, is u.s. policy for sale? that is worthy of oversight? is the president seeking to raise postal rates on amazon to punish "the washington post" and suppress the freedom of press? that is worthy of oversight. but none of this is oversight.
speaker boehner recently said that the republican party was off taking a nap somewhere. if that is so, then despite the best efforts of our capable ranking member, elijah cummings, the government reform committee that should be doing this oversight is in the midst of the deepest slumber. wake up, my colleagues, and do your jobs. wake up and end this duplicity attack on the department of justice and the f.b.i. and our special counsel because this is surely not oversight. it is not what oversight looks like. but it is what an attack on the rule of law looks like. it is what happens when we whittle away our democracy one piece by terrible piece. when this chapter of our history is written, it will condemn the actions of a
president who little understands or respects the institutions of our democracy. but it will reserve some of the harshest criticism for this congress that enabled him. this congress that new its -- knew its responsibility but failed to live up to it. wake up republican party, wake up my colleagues. the country needs you. may i have an additional 30 seconds. mr. nadler: an additional minute. mr. schiff: i thank the gentleman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one additional minute. mr. schiff: wake up, my colleagues. true oversight when the president occupies the same party as the mr. schiff: wake up, my colleagues. majority in congress requires that majority to put country over party. is incan'tible of principle
of party over everything else. wake up my colleagues and do your jobs. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york reserves. gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. meadows: mr. speaker, that's exactly what we're trying to do. we're trying to do our job. and the gentleman opposite makes an eloquent speech about doing our job of proper oversight. i can tell you i have served on the oversight committee for six years. and in that six years not only have we been tenacious in getting documents, but we have so had a responsive dialogue back and forth with many in the executive branch. at what point do you do oversight if you can't get the very documents that we request? my friends opposite many times will talk about getting documents when it serves a particular political purpose that they want to espouse. and yet when we're talking about the fundamentals of this country, lady justice and
meting out justice without any favoritism, indeed, that's why we need the documents. that's why we're trying to do our job. and that's why this resolution is so critical. with that i will recognize the gentleman from georgia, my good friend, mr. hice, for three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for three minutes. mr. highs: thank you, mr. speaker. i deeply -- mr. ce: thank you, speaker. i deeply appreciate my friend fromar forwarding me the opportunity to speak. find it interesting that those on the other side have an empty argument, their answer is to yell loud and rail on mr. speaker. i deeply appreciate my friend i unrelated to that which we're currently discussing. mr. speaker, our founders made it very clear when they drafted the constitution that we have a system of government that keeps each branch accountable. -- accountable to the constitution and rule of law. for nearly 18 months now the department of justice has attempted to shield itself from the legislative branch, our duty to conduct oversight.
that is and ought to be both alarming and it is absolutely unacceptable. mr. speaker, we know clearly from the i.g. report here cree rently text after text, email after email that that there were a number of of -- email that there were a number of f.b.i. agents who were extremely biased against the trump administration, the trump candidacy, and in favor of hillary clinton. we know that bias existed. we also know many of them were willing to use their position, their status to try to influence the election. these are things that we know. and we as a legislative body have not only the responsibility to do oversight, but we've got to have the information in order to do that oversight. that's what this resolution is all about. i think it's important for all of us to come back to the
understanding, realization that oversight is necessary to prevent corruption. that's what this is all about. the american people not just the members of congress, we have the right to get answers to the questions that are before us. this is all for the purpose of preventing corruption that may exist and to prevent it from going further. this resolution is a clear message to the department of justice that the u.s. house of representatives, we're determined to get the documents that have been requested. even a single page from these missing documents could be critical to the overall congressional investigation that's under way. it's all necessary. there are irrefutable facts, mr. speaker. the department of justice is accountable to congress.
another fact, they are hiding documents. they are refusing to cooperate. we have even beyond that now the chilling reports that the deputy attorney general personally threatened staff members on the intel committee. this is unacceptable. so under this resolution the full house --full force of the house is being brought to light. mr. speaker, we've got to get to the bottom of this. i thank the gentleman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina reserves. gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: i now yield one minute to the distinguished democratic leader of the house, ms. pelosi. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for one minute. ms. pelosi: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding. i thank him for his extraordinary leadership and articulating what is right, what honors our oath of office to protect and defend the constitution of the united states, the separate -- separation of power contained therein, and the integrity of
our judicial system. i thank our distinguished ranking member of the intelligence committee, mr. schiff, for his leadership, his courage, and his beautiful and inspirational statement this morning. full fact but also full of values. mr. speaker, i rise today not only as leader but also as one who has served on the intelligence committee as a member, as a ranking member, and as ex-afisho since the early 1990's. can i can say while i have seen a lot in that time i have never seen anything that has stooped so low on the part of the republicans as what they are doing today. it is -- it's as if they said, you take an oath of office to the constitution, we took an ath of office to donald trump. it's shocking. and many of them are lawyers, i don't know how they justify or reconcile that. so it is with great dismay that
i see this -- them doing violence to this body, to this constitution, to this judicial system -- judiciary system and this country. they are so curious about priing into a legal case, but -- prying into a legal case, but they don't have the faintest interest in looking into what russians did to disrupt our elections. not one hearing, nothing. no oversight, nothing. why is that? is that? and now they are saying they must -- they have a right to know this, that, and the other thing. they have no right to do that. so i'm going to not take up any more time. i said my peace on this. but i do want to acknowledge that mr. schumer and i, as well as mr. schiff and senator warner, the ranking member on the senate side, sent a letter to honorable rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, and
christopher wray, the director of the f.b.i., saying to it them, please, please do not yield on any of this. your role in preserving the integrity and most importantly our justice system has become ever more vital. i yield back my time -- first of all, i urge a no vote. i hope that some republicans will to what is right and urge a no vote on this. this is taking us into very dangerous territory. if the democrats were in power i'd say the same thing. we wouldn't want to have this access, you shouldn't have this access. if you're honoring your oath of office to donald trump, vote yes. if you're honoring your oath of office to the constitution of the united states, vote no
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is rick niced. >> obviously the gentlewoman from california lays out an unbelievable claim that this is the hest of low that's ever been seen in this body. i find that just remarkable that that statement could even be made. the other issue is, we're not asking for any special counsel documents. mr. meadows: we're not asking for sources and methods. we're asking for the district of columbia yumes that we have a right as this body to see, transparency is a good thing. mr. speaker. transparency is what the american people deserve. and when we're talking about what it will do and what it will not do, yes, when we get these documents, we believe that it will do away with this whole fiasco of what they call the russian trump collusion because there wasn't any. mr. speaker, i am glad to yield three minutes to the gentleman from ohio, my good friend, mr.
davis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. davis: thank you, mr. speaker. i will applaud former speaker pelosi for her consistency. she seems to uniformly supported the executive branch, ignoring subpoenas, perhaps destroying evidence and failing to comply with the rule of the house. with the subpoena being issued by the house with the important precedent of the constitution. so this really isn't about the russia investigation or the specifics of this case. mr. davidson: frankly, i find it appalling that attorney general sessions would ignore these activities in the department of justice. the reality is, this is a question of shall the executive branch comply with a legislative from the -- from the legislative branch. the content well, don't know what the contents are, they've been redacted, they're being withheld. this has gone on for a long time. if we are to keep our republic,
the principle has to be resolved where the legislative branch being co-equal shall have act stose this information. not just a pri ledged few, not a few that keep it withheld from the rest of the body, but the whole body. since last year, the perm nevent select committee on intelligence has investigated potential abuses of the fisa system, the foreign intelligence surveyance act by the department of justice. and our intelligence community. previously, our colleague, mr. schiff, was a strong supporter for fisa reform and proposed numerous bills. that's where our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are not consistent. fisa has been abused. we've seen one of the most play blaytant examples of that with the activities and things that have already been made public. which has led to this line of inquiry. americans should be concerned that the federal government may abuse its capacity to gather foreign intelligence by spying on our fellow americans.
without serious reforms to fisa, the fourth amendment will exist as nothing more than a distant memory or a notation with an ast risk except in these cases. the resolution insists that the department of justice fully comply with requests, including subpoenas of the house intelligence and judiciary committees relating to potential violations of the foreign intelligence surveillance act. unless we support and defend our constitution, we will not keep our republic. we will further embolden and embower -- empower the executive branch and weaken our country. this will will help reform fisa, help defend our constitution. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from new york is ecognized. mr. engel: i'm prepared to close if the other side is. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized.
mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i'm not going to repeat what i said before. i will summarize, the request being made here is for information that the department of justice cannot provide because it relates to an on fwoing criminal investigation and because some of it would identify informants. the motive is probably simply to provide a means of embarrassing and defaming the special prosecutor and the people associated with him in the department. i'll read from a letter that the deputy attorney general sent to senator grassley and to the speaker of the house. yesterday. he quotes the following, quote, throughout american history, wise legislators have worked
with department officials to limit oversight requests in order to respect the department's duty to protect national security, preserve personal privacy and insulate investigations from the appearance of interference. for instance, the department sent a letter to a house committee chair in 2000 describing the department's policies on responding to congressional oversight requests. the letter explained, i'm now quoting from the 2000 letter, such inquiries inescapably create the risk of the public and courts to perceive undue influence over law enforcement and litigation decisions. such inquishries also seek information in other. the end of the quote from the 2000 letter this eletter quotes president ronald reagan who wrote that, quote a tradition of accommodation should continue as the primary means of resan franciscoing -- resolving conflict tweens the branches.
regardless of whether a request made by letter or subpoena, an ves a mandate to reach agreement. it is not required that the department is required to risk damage to reputation, put cases and lives and risk and invite political interference by opening sensitive files to congressional staff without restriction. close quote from the letter from deputy attorney general rosenstein. that's exactly what these requests would do. they would risk damage to reputation. put lives -- cases and lives at risk. already two people two informants have had their identities outed. and invite political interference by opening sensitive files to congressional staff without restriction. we ought to let the special counsel complete his work without hindrance.
we ought to see whatever the special counsel finds resm act to it as appropriate. perhaps hold hearings into the findings. when we see that. all we know about the special counsel so far, unlike all the allegations against him and his investigation, it's a witch hunt, it's this, it's that. all we ealy know is there are 20 indictments, five guilty pleas and there have been no leaks so you can't say anything about then investigation other than in this time period they've already gotten 20 indictments, five guilty pleas, including some of the closest people to the president and his administration and his campaign. we'll see where it gos from there these requests are an intent to -- an attempt to sabotage the investigation and we should not go along with it. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. meadows: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from new york, mr. zeldin. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. zeldin: i rise in strong support of h.res. 970. i'd like -- i'd like to thank my colleagues, congressman meadows and jim jordan from conversations with members of the justice department i've been impressed with their feedback of how high morale has gone over the last year and a half because they're able to do their jobs again. you were seeing prosecution numbers and certain metrics in different u.s. attorney offices going down. their hands with were being tied behind their back. we talked about the military hands tied behind their backs. we saw our justice department, f.b.i., with their hands tied behind their backs, their morale is going up. i'm not going to subscribe to those in this chamber to those in this chamber and this country who want to restrict and oppose this president on anything and everything. my top priority, when i see misconduct at the highest levels of the department of justice and
f.b.i., i, as a member of congress, taking my oath seriously, i demand answers. it's about transparency and accountability. i have a 12-page resolution that we introduced, house resolution 907. it's up to 33 co-sponsors. what's interesting about this resolution is 12 pages, outlining and detailing misconduct, calling for a second special counsel. not one person has been able to poke any hole in a single bullet in the entire document. why have a problem with it when those in the justice department say they can't provide a document because it risks national security. you read the document and it doesn't risk national security but it might cause embarrassment to somebody in the d.o.j. or f.b.i. i don't like it when you see a resulting in an american being spied on. it's about justice. transparency, accountability. mark meadows have been leading the fight to to the get more
documents. we have an oversight function and i do not subscribe to those in this chamber who want to oppose, obstruct, impeach. that's not the path forward. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: i think i've made the case clear. i think mr. zeldin has added nothing to the debate i have to refute, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. meadows: i thank the gentleman opposite for his impassioned arguments and debate on this issue. i thank all of those who have come to the floor today to stand up for this institution. this institution's right to provide proper oversight and conduct it according to the constitution. but more importantly, for good transparency. transparency is a good thing and i think it is high time that we do it. for eight months, mr. speaker, we have made a request of the department of justice.
they have not fully complied. on march 22, 99 days ago, we sent a subpoena giving them 14 days, they did not comply. two weeks ago, the speaker of the house actually reached out and said you have another week. they did not comply. this is our last attempt to give them the benefit of the doubt that they have nothing to hide. they need to start acting like it, mr. speaker. with that, i yield back the balance of my time and i encourage a yes vote. >> c-span's "washington journal," live with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up friday morning, march janice and his attorney discuss the high court's ruling this week. and an author talks about his new book, which examines the tactics and rationale behind
russia's interference in the 2016 election. be sure to watch c-span's washington journal, live it and :00 eastern friday morning. join the discussion. coming up friday on the c-span 12:30, on c-span at journalists review the supreme court term. 3:30, chief justice john roberts will speak at the judicial conference at the fourth circuit. at nine :00 a.m., a discussion about recently imposed steel and aluminum tariffs and at noon, a discussion about legal challenges facing immigrants. >> next, a review of the supreme court's latest term and the retirement of justice anthony kennedy. the president's future nominee and how it might affect the balance of the bench. the american by constitution society. it is about an hour and 40 minutes.