garamendi and mr. turner, and would like to support the amendment because i don't think we should cancel all research and development on this technology. >> so now that the chairman -- >> i do yield back. >> we'll give it back to him, but sounds to me like there's enough question that maybe we don't want to move perhaps in the language that we have right here and come back to this and, you know, in a little bit. >> sorry, mr. chairman -- >> i'm sorry, we have like five people talking. whose time is it? >> mr. chairman, it's mine. >> it's mr. garamendi's time. do you wish to speak or yield to somebody? >> well, i've yielded to several people unknowingly, but i would like to do this. i think there's a need to hold this for a while. to i think follow what was suggested and that let's see if we can work out some language here that achieves the goal without flying before we buy. or buying before we fly, but we continue the research. >> got it. hold on a second. it's mr. lamborn's amendment, so -- >> right.

garamendi. the chair: the gentleman from alifornia is recognized. mr. garamendi: oh, my. we definitely need five hours. this is extraordinarily important. in fact, it is the united states that terminated its role in the i.n.f. treaty when president trump pulled out of the treaty. presumably russia is still in, although they are clearly violating the treaty. we lost whatever leverage there may have been. we're now in the midst of what i said a moment ago, one more stage of a nuclear arms race. all of us better take a deep breath here and begin some serious negotiations because this time it is extraordinarily dangerous. in addition to that, please understand that our allies, on whose land these missiles may be placed, are not in agreement that they should be placed there. so there really is no plan for the deployment, let alone exactly how these missiles would be done. and by the way, we clearly have alternative ways of delivering nuclear weapons, short range, long range, intercontinental ballistic missiles and most every other way, except no longer in a brief case or in a

i'll speak with democratic candidate amy klobuchar and congressman john garamendi and our correspondents will have full coverage. let's begin with our chief white house correspondent jim acosta. a member of the trump cabinet is under fire for his controversial actions in a previous job. what is the latest? >> reporter: he certainly is, wolf. president trump is stepping up to defend his labor secretary who is is facing calls to resign over his handling of the jeffrey epstein case. president said secretary alex acosta is doing a fantastic job. mr. trump also tried to distance himself from epstein in the oval office earlier today after once describing him alz a terrific guy. >> thank you very much -- >> reporter: tonight president trump appears to be standing by his embattled labor secretary alex acosta. at least for now. >> i can tell you that for two and a half years he's been just an excellent secretary of labor. he's done a fantastic job. >> reporter: the president appeared to diminish acosta's role as a federal prosecutor in 2008 plea agreement for jeffrey epstein who is facing new cha

. >> congressman garamendi, thank you for coming in. >> thank you. >>> up next, top democrats are demanding the resignation of alex acosta who has a u.s. attorney oversaw a plea deal for jeffrey epstein. more than a decade ago. i'll speak with presidential candidate amy klobuchar next. we run right into these crises, and we do not leave until normalcy is restored. we'd been working for days on a site

tank you. >>> joining us now, democratic congressman john garamendi of california. he's a member of the house armed services committee. thanks for coming in. >> good to be here. >> on the alex acosta, the labor secretary, do you believe he should resign because of what he did or didn't do more than a decade ago when he was the u.s. attorney in south florida. >> never should have been appointed. he had a bad record even before he was confirmed. we knew much of this and now we know more. he ought to be fired. >> what if he doesn't resign and what if the president decides not to fire him, let's him stay on the job. what happens then? >> i think this grounds for impeachment. he could be impeached with every other federal employee and his record is terrible and what he did in that case is unconscionable and why did he do it. that question has not been answered. why did he allow this guy to get away with a horrible crime. >> there were about eight democratic senators who voted to confirm him as secretary of labor. you think they did a major blunder? >> they made a mistake

garamendi, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. garamendi: mr. speaker, i tot put this placard up here emphasize what our democratic caucus is attempting to do. we have a program called for the people. and we're trying to deal with the issues of health care across this nation. and we know, as do basically the entire american public, that health care is in many cases not affordable. so how can we deal with this? well, one way is to deal with the cost of prescription medicines. and we have a program, we've actually voted it off the floor and it's off in the senate where it will linger as the grim reaper, senator mcconnell, kills legislation that would be for the people. so this is one example of many that we democrats are trying to address. back in 2010, we addressed this issue, at least in part, with the affordable care act. which was promptly called obamacare by our republican colleagues at that time. and they campaigned against it and ultimately succeeded in winning the house in the 2010 election. and then spent 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 201

garamendi: thank you, madam speaker. given all of the talk that's going on and the investigations and questions about deficits and the like, i thought it would be useful today to start this discussion, which i will spend most of the afternoon or the evening talking about, american manufacturing. but i often want to start these discussions with some sense of value. what's our goal? what are we trying to accomplish here? i keep going back to f.d.r. at the height of the great depression, he said the test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much, it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little. and so last week, the house of representatives, the democrats, that is, and maybe just a few republicans, voted to increase the minimum wage across this nation. so that over the next five years the minimum wage would rise from i guess just over $7 an hour to $15 an hour. not a jump immediately. but over time. increase it. why did we do that? we're for the people. that's our goal.

i can tell you mister garamendi was pissed. what would it take to shock me?n hour, a week, weeks, how long would it take to shock me? i can't tell you -- this is white is not fair. the chairman said we had classified briefings, not one of you, this committee has not had briefings in the committee. on the nuclear weapons component. this committee, and individually, most of us have not. the deployment of nuclear weapons, if we had a committee briefing, have committee briefing with missiles -- how long it takes a briefing on how long it takes for the low yield that everybody who wants to do this, you're instantly available and available today. i wrote the words down, it is not true. no one has had the classified briefing of what would we do with these. it is a battle plan, where people have planned, if this happens we will do this, we should review all that. it is not fair for all the people who were new without these classified briefings, and contrary to what people in the committee made in the opposite. i yield back. mister mac thornberry. >> i am concerned ab

garamendi and mr. cooper and the chairman can't tell you well how long does it take before the other weapons are deployed? in a nonclassified basis, well, it's not immediate, it's not the same. it's the reason i offered the previous amendment let them certify there's no other option. we'd have to go classified for you to know and you'd be shocked how long it takes. now why is that relevant? back to the things that you would require that you know as that person sitting in the forum when running for office. the bbc recently did a program on world war iii and you know how they started it? they started it with russian nuking one of our aircraft carriers with a low yield nuclear weapon. all right? now let's think how long is it going to take the united states to respond to a low yield nuclear weapon to one of our aircraft carriers in a proportionate response if you vote to ban this weapon. how long? and if there's a nuclear exchange we don't have to worry about the issue of like we're going to reveal where

garamendi: i rise in support of this legislation. it's a good piece of legislation and i thank chairman smith and ranking member thornberry and my colleague, mr. lamborn, working with our committee. we worked with members to ensure that the bill addresses four priority areas affecting our military. first we asked the question, is the military ready for climate change? it is not. in the last 12 months, storms have devastated cam lg union and this will accelerate and enhance readiness by requiring the department of defense to plan for and respond to the threat that climate change poses to military facilities. second, the bill includes a number of bipartisan provisions aimed at addressing with the management and oversight of military housing for families. third, the bill authorizes additional funding and includes provision go to mitigate contaminated water from compounds used in military installations. the bill upholds the committee's responsibility to conduct oversight of and provide support for military training, maintenance and infra

ironically to john garamendi, who is now a member of congress as well.ost by three percentage points. he got elected to lieutenant governor and then left in the middle of his term. i guess it was not as satisfying as he hoped it would be. he came and joined me in congress. brian: when did you run for this seat in congress, and when did you win? rep. speier: i had no intentions of ever coming back to congress. after i lost for lieutenant governor, i went to work in a law firm in san francisco. and then i had my -- one of my campaign consultants, on his own, because he was so disappointed that i had not won lieutenant governor's race, he had done all my polling, he did a poll that showed if i were head-to-head with congressman tom lantos, that i would beat him. i thought, "well, i'm not going to do that." but i want to know if he was ever going to retire -- he had been in congress for almost 30 years. we were going to meet and talk, but before that happened, he announced he was not going to run for reelection. i decided to run. he endorsed me. a month late

take a listen to your democratic colleague congressman john garamendi defending the president's decision ivanka as a key adviser and diplomat. >> he could choose his advisers. and he needs to have people that he could trust and if ivanka is that person, that's okay. >> do you agree, congressman? >> with all due respect to my colleague, john, i don't think the american taxpayer should subsidize family trips to the east asia for the trump family to bolster ivanka and jared's resume. this is not a joke and right now this administration is treating our foreign policy as exactly like that. and you know what, i'm not shocked because this is what we get when we have a foreign policy crafted by insecure overly hawkish jingo liftic draft dodgers and we have to reframe american foreign policy and i have not seen it yet and continue to push for that. >> democratic congressman max rose from new york. thank you for your time. >>> why taxpayer funded security agents for pompeo feels like uber eats with guns. a cnn exclusive, next. is is not. it's a revolution in sleep. the sleep number 360 smart bed i

let's bring in representative john garamendi. thank you for joining us.itial thoughts when you heard it happened. >> i was disgusted and frightened for america that the president of the united states would call out four dully elected members of congress and basically all of them minorities and tell them they have to leave the united states. it is reprehensible. dangerous, it has to stop. because it is not just these four people that he is picking up on. he is bullying and he is calling out americans all across this nation who may be muslim, who may be black, who may be immigrants. it has got to stop. it is dangerous. >> heather: he says it's about the issues and policy sglao. that's not true. if he didn't talk about the issues. what he talked about is these women. these women of color, one of whom is an immigrant. her family fled somalia, one of the most dangerous places in the world and wound up in a refugee camp in kenya and able to immigrate to america and in america she excelled. she went to school. she raised a family. and she was elected. >> heather