cheney, for motion. rep. cheney: i move that the committee favorably report to the house the committee's report on a revenue -- resolution recommending the house of representatives find it stephen k bannon and contempt of congress for refusal to comply with the subpoena duly issued by this of -- select committee to investigate the january 6 attack on the united states capitol as amended. mr. thompson: the question on the motion is favorably report to the house. those in favor say aye. those opposed no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. ms. cheney: i request a recorded vote. mr. thompson: a recorded vote is requested. the clerk will call the vote. clerk: ms. cheney. ms. lofgren. >> aye. mr. schiff. >>aye. clerk: mr. aguilar. mr. murphy. this to rest in. mr. raskin. mr. kinzinger, aye. mr. chairman, you are not recorded. mr. thompson: i vote aye. clerk: mr. chairman, aye. mr. thompson: the corporal report the vote. clerk: there are 9 ayes, zero nos. mr. thompson: the motion is agreed to. vice chair

cheney, what you make of the — recommendation.ke of the timing of— recommendation. cheney, what you make of the timing of this _ recommendation. cheney, what you make of the timing of this given - recommendation. cheney, what you make of the timing of this given the j make of the timing of this given the criticism some of the criticism last week around her visit to the hospital? nice and early to him a few days ahead of the summits. yes, “ournalists few days ahead of the summits. yes, journalists have _ few days ahead of the summits. yes, journalists have been _ few days ahead of the summits. is: journalists have been getting some warning. there was some debate whether or notjournalists should be, somejournalists whether or notjournalists should be, some journalists from some outlets gave the impression they were a bit put out i've not been briefed adequately that the queen had spent the night in hospital. i think maybe the palaces trying to show to be open with the press and honest. plenty of warning there. honestly commits one o

sorry, liz cheney.p in mind that liz cheney has not even seen the film she is so angry about, just the trailer. a minute and 42 seconds pulled from three full episodes. liz cheney is not waiting for the facts here. she knows were certain we have weapons of mass destruction, and she plans to invade. according to liz cheney, this show is dangerous. because we have dared to report on what actually happened on january 6th, this show is somehow, she says, betting violence. now if that argument sounds familiar, there is a reason it does appear that argument is a staple of those hysterical purple haired college activist you see yelling at people in viral videos. your speech is violence, they shout, our violence is speech. so in other words, burning down america's cities is a civil rights protest, shooting an unarmed female trump supporter to death is an act of courage, but objecting to racist propaganda being impose on your kids at school is terrorist, lock most parents up. that is the official position of the

cheney, for a motion. >> mr. that the committee favorably report to the house the committee's report on a resolution recommending that the house of representatives find steven k. bannon in contempt of congress for refusal to comply with a subpoena dually issued by the select committee to investigate the january-6th attack on the united states capitol as amended. >> the question on the motion is favorably report to the house. those in favor, say yea. >> yea. >> those opposed, no. an opinion of the chair is the yeas have it. >> mr. chairman, i request a recorded vote. >> a recorded vote is requested. the clerk will call the roll. >> ms. cheney? >> yea. >> ms. lofgren? >> yes. >> ms. lofgren? yea. >> mr. schiff? >> yea. >> mr. schiff. >> yea. >> mr. aguilar? >> mr. aguilar, yea. mrs. murphy? >> mrs. murphy, yea. mr. raskin? >> yea. >> mr. raskin, yea. mrs. lauraia? >> yea. mr. kinzinger? >> yea. >> mr. kinzinger yea. >> chair recorded. >> mr. chairman, you are not recorded. >> i vote yea. >> mr. chairman, yea. >> th

in fact play something that -- that -- that liz cheney said tonight. let's listen. >> in the words of many who participated in the january-6th attack, the violence that day was in direct response to president trump's repeated claims, from election night through january 6th, that he had won the election. the american people are entitled to mr. bannon's firsthand testimony about all of these relevant facts. but as the chairman noted, mr. bannon is refusing to provide it. >> you know, i mean, the courage that -- that she and adam kinzinger as well, you know, showed just by -- by doing this and i mean her words tonight. you know, it -- it's -- i mean, plenty of her republican colleagues know exactly what a farce the president's big lie is. and i -- i assume, are secretly horrified about what happened the day of the insurrection. but it's stunning to me that -- that so few of them have any kind of courage to actually stand up for the truth. >> well you know what's even more shocking? is that some of them were publicly terrified on january 7th, including lea

cheney: thank you very much. madam speaker, just outside this chamber, over the north door in stat war r wary hall -- statuary hall, the old house chamber, stands a statue of cleo, the muse of history. she's one of the oldest works of art in our capitol. she stands in a winged chariot. the chariot of time. and she takes notes in her book. reminding all of us that our words and our actions will be judged by history. history particularly will judge those of us in positions of public trust for what we are doing today. in the immediate aftermath of the attack, madam speaker, we all recognized how profoundly wrong january 6 was. my colleagues from -- my colleague from ohio, mr. jordan, who just suggested that we were here because we oppose president trump's policies seems to have forgotten that actually on january 6 he himself said, quote, what happened today is wrong. and is not what america is about. the next day mr. jordan said, what happened wednesday is a tragedy. everyone knows it's as wrong as wrong can be. and

that's liz cheney. all right? on the other hand, you have marjorie taylor greene who is somebody who engages in all sorts of dog whistle politics, conspiracy theories and i think cheney mentioned the jewish space lasers thing and their back and forth, but in all honesty, marjorie taylor greene on facebook was suggesting that wealthy jewish americans were using laser technology to cause fires in california for some financial incentive. i mean, it is a deranged anti-semitic conspiracy theory. and yet that is somebody with whom many republicans are siding. and there is a story in "the new york times" today, john martin reporting that one of mccarthy's acolytes, guy named jeff miller, very powerful and swampy lobbyist in washington, jeff miller is out there telling political groups, consulting firms, that they have to side with either cheney or mccarthy. you can't do both. you have to pick. kevin mccarthy has chosen the marjorie taylor greene direction, the maga direction, the donald trump direction, the election lie

liz cheney just said that in her floor remarks.y are attaching legislative purpose to this investigation to try to counteract that argument. jake, i have one other question for you as someone who's been covering the hill. you heard barbara wade talking about precedence. isn't precedent the thinking among republican leadership here in how they're advising their members to vote on this? are they not at all concerned if and when the shoe's on the other foot, if they should take back the house next year that having congressional subpoenas not being worth very much could come back in their face when they're trying to engage in oversight over the biden administration? >> they should. they should care about this because much of their majority, much of their power and agenda in a republican majority with at least two years of a democratic president and perhaps democratic senate is going to be oversight. we know that because they're saying it already. many republicans are saying it already. we know that from history. if you look back in 201

cheney called out her republican colleagues and specifically kevin mccarthy during her remarks. >> my colleagues in the republican party, the republican members of this body, have to understand, have to recognize that there's a moment when politics must stop if we want to defend and protect our institutions. a violent assault on the capitol to stop a constitutional process

what could mccarthy do for cheney?s like she's going to face a pretty significant primary test. >> oh, absolutely. just think about it. these two started off the year working in leadership together and now cheney is no longer in leadership. mccarthy is pretty actively, you know, speaking against her. he's called her a, quote, pelosi republican. she's whipped right back at him saying he's actively trying to disrupt the investigation. you know, with this political consultant rift, this continuing disintegration of their relationship, she's already lost a fund-raiser, "the new york times" reported, and so likely what could happen is mccarthy will, of course, support, you know, her primary challenger, and he at the end of the day really wants to be speaker of the house, right? that's the ultimate goal, and he knows that cheney will likely lob some sort of at least vocal opposition against him. >> yes, sarah. you've nailed it right here. this is fueled by mccarthy's die sire to boo -- desire to be a speaker for donald trump

the willard hotel is mentioned by representative cheney in her remarks yesterday. january 5th is the day that trump and his allies pushed democracy to the brink, coordinating from just steps from the white house in a hotel suite, rudy giuliani, jason miller, steve bannon, talking by phone with the president, who is pressuring pence over at the white house, talking to lawmakers, coordinating the message with conservative allies. this was the day, the eve of the insurrection, to try to make it all happen, to put it in motion. and bannon, in our reporting, is in that room. what this committee clearly wants to figure out, under oath, what was being said specifically by trump to this car room at the willard. what was being done? they issued a statement in pence's name late ate night saying pence agreed to push the election to the house. pence did not. there are so many looming questions on why what happened on the th gets put into notion. if you want to answer that you need to know what was said by the people at the willard hotel and by the president sitting across the

>> it was a strong statement, it was a great statement and representative cheney, vice chair cheney has been an amazing colleague to work with an the issues. she's not going to be shy about calling it like she sees it. we'll continue to follow the leadership of her and the chairman as we guide through this process. we're in uncharted territory here. we know that. we have a duty and obligation to find out the truth. that's all we've said we want. we don't bring any joy and the chairman talked about this. we don't bring joy about taking this step. we hope people compile. we hope they feel the patriotic duty to compile with the lawful subpoena but if they don't, there have to be consequences and we promised the american people we would get to the bottom of what happened on january 6th. this is the next step to do that. >> how can you get to the bottom of it without sending a subpoena to donald trump? >> well, we're going to take one step at a time. and so this is where we are today. upon every interview we take, we'll continue to learn more details and we will unlock more issues that we wi

do you think liz cheney may have changed some minds? >> i know we got at least two votes. we've got liz's vote and adam king zinger's vote. we had 10 to impeachment donald trump and more than three times as many for the original bipartisan commission that was unfortunately blocked by republican leaders in the house and the senate. that was a beautiful moving, stirring speech. i told liz afterwards, and it is a question of basic political morality and ethics. i think anybody who has not really drunk the kool aid here understands that trump's big lie is completely contrary to the facts. joe biden beat him by more than 7 million votes, 306-232 in the electoral college and 61 federal and state court case brought by donald trump refuted all of his claims of electoral corruption and electoral fraud. so we have a meticulous documentary record across the country how all of those things are lies. as you know, don, even when they concocted that project in arizona, their own people came back and said joe biden even got a few more votes than originally we thought to begin with. so we'

and representative cheney, vice chair cheney has been an amazing colleague to work with on these issues. she is not going to be shy about calling it like she sees it. and so we are going to continue to follow the leadership of her and the chairman as we guide through this process, we are on uncharted territory, we know that. but we have a duty and an obligation to find out the truth. that is all we said we want. we did not bring any choice and the chairman talked about this. we don't bring joy around taking the step. we hope that people comply. we hope that they feel as patriotic as we in order to comply with a lawful subpoena. but if they don't, there have to be consequences. and we promised the american people that we will get to the bottom of what happened on january six. this is the next step in order to do that. >> how can you get to the bottom of it without sending a subpoena to donald trump? >> well we are going to take one step at a time. this is where we are today. upon every interview that we take, we are going to continue to learn more details and we will unlock more issues t

taylor green calling cheney a joke. that kind of interaction -- you couldn't fathom that happening ten years ago. it's really gotten to a real low at this point. i also just want the note there is a lot of news coming in here, jamie herrera butler has also now voted in support of going forward with -- you know, turning over bannon to the contempt resolution. not necessarily surprising, another republican moderate who has had some issues with how kevin mccarthy, the leader of republicans has been leading that chamber. >> let's stop on that, anna palmer. she became a really important witness in the impeachment trial. over in the senate she released a statement and really i think was one of the first to put her name to what she understood kevin mccarthy had communicated about during the insurrection. so much of what liz cheney has communicated about kevin mccarthy's importance as a witness. and list cheney has gone so far as to say he should be subpoenaed, if he doesn't testify it is about those communications that took pl

but liz cheney, congresswoman liz cheney republican had this reaction to, as she said, millions of americans have been sold a fraud, that the election was stolen, republicans have a duty to tell the american people, that this is not true. perpetuating the big lie, is an attack on the core of our constitutional republic. and professor, there is liz cheney saying republicans have a duty, she's using that value language, have a duty, and as a republican herself, she is showing that they are failing in that duty. >> she's absolutely. ray i can't believe i'm saying, i agree with his, cheney but she's absolutely right. and it has everything to do with the fact that these sorts of claims are all about delegitimizing, the electoral process. by deepening distrust. by setting the stage for folk to call into question the outcomes that they disagree with. and i think it's really important, as we talk about the role of the democratic party here. we have to say, at least i have to say, that the third way of response, may not be adequate. that tentativeness, the tentative way in which the democratic party

and i will examine the, the evidence cheney's folks sent over a script for him to read. and he thought it was completely over the top. it was every bit of questionable and ambiguous evidence. they had all put in the worst possible light and pal and his team went over to the, to the cia and sat there for several days. i mean, they, i had about 2 weeks to organize this whole thing and, and cut it back a lot. and pile, i think felt like he had done due diligence. he had come up with the speech for which the. ready evidence was very solid, and he went to the security council and he gave this speech, and i didn't convince too many europeans who were against it, particularly france, that was running the security council at the time. but it did by and large, convincing american public. editorial writers across a country, people who work at been very opposed. mary mcgrory, great liberal column as for the washington post. the next day wrote a column and said, well, i was against this. i didn't believe the bush administration, but i do believe colon pell. and if paul says it must

he was not part of this group noticed the vulcans who were basically rumsfeld cheney condi rice. ah, paul wolf, a wits. and so power came began as an outlier. and his role was very different than it had been when he was a general. he was the diplomat. ah, he was not in the pentagon. he was not making military strategy. so as the bush administration started to in the summer of 2002 started to make its plan for invading iraq. he went to bush and he said, look, you know, i've looked at the plan for this. i don't think it's right. i don't think you have enough troops and i don't think you should do it unless you have support, not only the american public, but from our allies, excuse me, to do it. and so he, he did persuade bush to take it to the united nations, to the security council and tried to get, try to get support where, where cow was not very successful. the bridge certainly were on board but, but not many others were none of the none of the big players in the european in the european alliance except for britain at that point. and so they, they were worried they. busy they wa

at that point, cheney said something unintelligible. greenery applied, you are a joke, liz.ich cheney responded green was the joke and asked whether she needed to be focusing on her quote anti-semitic space lasers, according to a source familiar with the conversation who told axios what was said. greenery applied she never said that, the thing about the space lasers. earlier today raskin had this to say. watch. >> i thought that liz, who is about the best mannered and best-poised person in the house of representatives, my just walk away. but i was impressed that she gave as good as she got. i will leave it to liz to talk about whatever it is she said. but seemed the me like the theme of marjorie taylor green's comments was that liz cheney betrayed trump and the republican party. and the theme of liz's comments were that marjorie taylor green was, shall we say a bit eccentric. >> being kind. the riff within the gop is playing out behind the scenes as well. "new york times" is reporting a move by mccarthy's camp to hamstring cheney's re-election efforts. quote, the house minor

there's going to be time set aside for cheney to make her arguments.to make his arguments, but there's also time for an opponent of the bill because this doesn't specifically fall along republican and democrat lines with cheney and kinsinger serving. she made it clear it was time for her republican colleagues to step up and recognize the issues and fallout from the january 6th attacks and particularly the role that the former president trump played. >> the people who attacked this building told us, continue to tell us on video, on social media, and now before the federal courts, exactly what motivated them. they believed what donald trump said. that the election was stolen and that they needed to take action. and i think it's critically important for us to recognize and understand how the language that the president, president trump continues to use to this day sparked what we saw happen on the 6th. >> and even though this vote passed in the select and rules committee today, it's expected to go along partisan lines tomorrow. in fact, republican leaders

cheney, for her leadership and partnership. there is no doubt in my mind that history will record her courage in stark relief. history will record what we all do today. we can be on the wrong side or the wrong side. i urge all my colleagues to make this vote. i yield back. >> pursuant to the rule, the previous question is ordered on the resolution. the question is on adoption of the resolution. all in favor say aye. >> aye. >> opposed, no. >> no. >> the ayes have it. >> madam speaker, i request a recorded vote. >> pursuant to section 3-s of house resolution 8, the yeas and nays are ordered. proceed to your electrical device. >> you've been listening there to the debate among house members of whether or not to basically hold steve bannon responsible for defying a subpoena, and you heard interesting arguments, i would say, from both sides. they are now going to vote on this. and i just thought it was really interesting to hear the republicans who seem to be kind of using the strategy of diversion to talk about anything but steve

when congresswoman marjorie taylor greene literally tried to pick a fight with both raskin and liz cheney. yeah, we'll talk about it. but we begin "the reidout" with progress that will impact millions of working class americans. it sounds like democrats are finally getting close to the finish line delivering the build back better agenda but the questions we all need answers to, what exactly will be in there and will it include what was promised? vice president kamala harris travelled to the boogie down today and in the bronx and visited to promote administration's plans. >> this right now is a moment that will not last. it is a particular moment of incredible opportunity and a moment to transform our nation. in this moment, we have an opportunity to build an economy that works for working families. >> and last night president biden seemed to appear hopeful that it would actually get done. take a listen. >> we're down to four or five issues i won't negotiate on national television. >> we would be interesting in hearing if you want. >> i know. all kidding aside, i think we can get there. >>

i want to very quickly also get into what liz cheney said.publicans i think was interesting. she said to her fellow republicans, you know in your hearts that what happened on january 6th was profoundly wrong. you know there is no evidence of widespread election fraud sufficient to overturn the election. you know the dominion voting machines were not corrupted. you know those claims are false. yet trump repeats them almost daily. and she urged republicans to really look to their consciences and understand the severe consequences of going along with what donald trump did. she also laid out a pretty strong prosectorial case against steve bannon saying that it was clear he had direct communications with donald trump, that the communications between them appeared to have been direct, that he knew what was coming, that he knew what was going to happen on january 6th, and, therefore, he has direct evidence to give to this committee and she all but demanded he give it. we have a short time. glenn kirschner, that last prosecution there, your thoughts?

. >> cheney very aggressive on two points. first, this one about what she thinks bannon could offer. here's exhibit a for her. >> all hell is going to break loose tomorrow. just understand this. all hell is going to break loose tomorrow. it's not going to happen like you think it's going to happen, okay? it's going to be quite extraordinarily different. and all i can say is strap in. the war room, a poposse, you ha made this happen, so strap in. >> cheney also dropped something that i have not heard offered up yet in this situation. listen to this. >> mr. bannon's and mr. trump's privilege arguments do, however, appear to reveal one thing. they suggest that president trump was personally involved in the planning and execution of january 6. and this committee will get to the bottom of that. >> that means that trump and bannon -- because, remember, even if there were a privilege here, and there isn't, bannon can't exercise it, trump can exercise it. so cheney's argument is that trying to get the privilege is proof that you have

it's something both thompson and cheney cited numerous times. clip quickly. >> all hell is going to break loose tomorrow. just understand this. all hell is going to break loose tomorrow. it's not going to happen like you think it's going to happen, okay? it's going to be quite extraordinarily different. all i can say is strap in. the war room posse, you have made this happen and tomorrow it's game day. so strap in. >> reporter: the committee has talked about this often and why they believe it is so important to hear what bannon knew about the planning leading to january 6th, what was going on in the war room that they established at the willard hotel that was meeting on january 5th and january 6th. that's why they believe it is so important for him to come before the committee to answer these questions. kate, what we'll see play out in the rules committee in a few minutes and tomorrow, on the floor of the house, is a divided congress, with republicans siding with bannon and trump trying to block this contempt claim and democrats pushing it forwa

it delved into a shouting match on some level between the three of them and liz cheney actually calling marjorie taylor greene a joke and bringing up the fact that she had talked about jewish space lasers at one point, a claim that greene very much denies. so this shows the acrimony on capitol hill. a lot of tension, especially when it comes to issues like what happened on january 6th. >> it is a fact that marjorie taylor greene posted on facebook a crazy accusation that a number of notable jewish americans -- this is all an insane anti-semitic conspiracy theory but jewish americans had control of some sort of laser and were causing forest fires to profit or something. that's just a fact. she did do that. >> yes. >> ryan nobles, thank you. >>> attorney general merrick garland will have to make the ultimate decision about whether or not to prosecute steve bannon. jessica schneider joins us live. it is rare for the department of justice to prosecute somebody for not complying with the subpoena. how do you think this process will play out and should democrats be managing expectations here

they were liz cheney and adam kinsinger. peter myer. john catco of new york, who you may remember, he initially negotiated the bipartisan deal to investigate the insurrection that was then sort of rejected by republican leadership. anthony gonzalez of ohio. once an up and coming republican who is retiring. he said largely because of the maga hordes and jamie herrera butler of washington. all of whom voted to impeach donald trump last year over the insurrection. two other votes. nancy mace of south carolina and brian fitzpatrick of pennsylvania also voted yes today. interestingly, the brother of former vice president, mike pence, who you may recall was the subject of the hang mike pence chants and had to flee for his safety on january 6th, his brother did not vote. the vast majority of republican members of the house, 202 of them, voted to allow steve bannon to skirt. jim banks of indiana issued this call an hour before the vote. >> the select committee is engaged in an unconstitutional, political investigation. a sham investigation. con

you mentioned congresswoman liz cheney and adam kinzinger. also representatives meyer, gonzalez, simpson, upton, catco, and mace all voting in the affirmative. those eight votes along with the democratic majority assuring that this criminal contempt referral will pass. >> thank you very much. >> steve bannon, a long-time adviser of former president donald trump and the man who predicted this on the day before january 6th -- >> all hell is going to break loose tomorrow. >> reporter: -- is now in a legal predicament. the house of representatives set to refer him to the department of justice for criminal contempt of congress because he has refused to comply with the subpoena of the january 6th select committee. >> on january 5th steve bannon said on his podcast that all hell is going to break loose tomorrow. he promised something unprecedented, unforeseen, and told everybody to buckle up or fasten on or whatever. i mean, you tell me. >> reporter: the vote now triggers a process in the hands of the department of justice. they will decide if banno

liz cheney suggests it's easy to see why president trump is fighting the january 6th committee. stay with us. ♪ ♪ do you know what the future holds? people were afraid i was contagious. i felt gross. it was kind of a shock after i started cosentyx. four years clear. real people with psoriasis look and feel better with cosentyx. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting, get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections —some serious— and the lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms, or if you've had a vaccine or plan to. tell your doctor if your crohn's disease symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. learn more at cosentyx.com. don't like surprises? [ watch vibrates ] proactive notifications from fidelity keep you tuned in all day long. so when something happens that could affect your portfolio, you can act quickly. that's decision tech, only from fidelity. >>> mr. bannon's and mr. trump's privilege arguments do, however, appear to reveal one thing. they suggest that president t

it was actually dick cheney who had, who had suggested jenny, with the defense secretary at the time suggested power, which required power to jump over several other 4 start generals. he was the most junior at the time and, and then there he was. and of course then the persian gulf war came out, which is where empower, really became known to the american people. you know, he was the guy standing at the saw at the press conferences every day. he was the guy speaking, crisp, military language, all of which he learned in military schools, where he excelled in briefing, which is actually a skill right now. the terri, like another dimension of, of secretary powell was his time overseeing and working on conflicts. and so one of these was the 1st iraq war, and then you had later the 2nd iraq war during the 1st iraq war on the team with president george h. w bush. he was a, he was largely a hero of that along with other other general sort of looking at it and then pulling out us forces. when then later, the 2nd a walk war came in after 911. and you know, the debate in 2003 doors, w bush brou

host: do you agree with congresswoman liz cheney? guest: i gree with the end of it, i hope to never see what happened on january 6 happen again. i hope we never see the riots we saw last year happen in the sense that the violence, the destruction, the hurting of fellow citizens ever happens again. i think we should have our voices heard. i think that's what makes america so amazing and unique but i don't think that violence is r the answer. i don't think destruction of public property or private property is ever acceptable. i think if we're going to call out one, we call out the other. we cant say one thing is bad and not the other. the second thing i'll say is i think it's inappropriate for congresswoman cheney to ascribe motives and thoughts into what her fellow members believe or don't believe. i don't propose to suggest to know what's in her heart or what her beliefs are. i think it's inappropriate, and too often we see thait in washington, here's what you must think or must believe. i don't know what everyone believes or thinks.

but even though he objected to it, and he told bush and rumsfeld and cheney, vice president cheney, youave got to allow diplomacy to work. he was constantly pushing for diplomacy, yet when it came time for him to be pushed into it, he stepped into the ranks and he did go forth and give the briefing. later, he actually said "people will never trust me again,." delano: during that speech, he spoke about weapons of destruction in iraq, and given that that speech shaped u.s. foreign policy for two decades or so, how damaging was it to his career? >> the speech did not so much damage his career as secretary of state, and i will get to that in a minute, but it did, once we got into iraq. first off, let me say this -- we had no legal reason to go into iraq. saddam was not a good person. i dealt with him later when i was operations chief for task force 134, detention operations. said dam was not a good person. but he did maintain a fine balance of power between iraq and iran, and as long as he stayed in power, then we were going to have stability in the middle east. that invasion ended up causi

chairman thompson, a democrat, sat side by side with vice chair cheney, a republican, two people who never voted for the same presidential candidates in their lives. two people who disagree at virtually every issue. they agreed on this. on defending the constitution and rule of law. let's follow their example, mr. speaker. i sat across the dais from congresswoman cheney for years when she was on the rules committee when the republicans were in charge. we were polar opposites. but yesterday i couldn't have agreed with her more. not as a democrat, but as an american. i don't give a damn if you are a democrat or republican and i don't care if you like donald trump or not. matters like this are about something more than petty partisanship. so i urge my colleagues, let's put our country before our party. let's put defending our democracy before defending donald trump. let's support this rule and the underlying measure not as democrats or republicans but as public servants much as members of congress dedicated to preserving american democracy and the rule of law. that is what is at stake h

philadelphia or the wayne county canvassing board in michigan, there are a number of individuals, liz cheney, adam kinzinger, who stood up and did the right thing. but you have different people in those jobs or weaker people in those jobs and you do have an election successfully overturned and that is what donald trump tried to do as his own justice department officials told durbin's committee. >> you mentioned grassley and the idea that he was a man of integrity and perhaps when you see him now you don't have that same impression. it is a theme, though, jake, we have seen with a number of republicans and there is this line right now that we keep hearing from a number of them, including mike pence, that, you know, what is with this focus on january 6th? it is just, you know, critics of president trump sort of overblowing one day. what is the effect of that?

. ( laughter and applause ) cheney has been a vocal opponent of the former president.t and refused to participate in the big lie that he won the election. which might be why, on the big screens at the rally, the former president showed this meme of liz cheney with george w. bush's face: that is pathetic. the former president has been kicked off of social media so he's been reduced to an old man, traveling from town to town, explaining memes in person. ( as old man ) you see, the young man is walking down the street with his girlfriend. the man represents you, and the girlfriend represents getting eight hours of sleep. but the man is looking at another woman walking the other way, who represents reading the wikipedia page for the mary kate and ashley movie "billboard dad" at 3:00 am. it's an allegory about the human condition in the information age. anyway, i'll be in peoria on thursday to talk about a lady who just tried kombucha. what her face does will surprise you. ( cheers and applause ) they know the kombucha one. they know the long walk-- >> jon: yes. >> stephen:

nine republicans including liz cheney joining all the democrats in the house to refer steve bannon to the justice department for prosecution over his refusal to obey a subpoena from the january 6 investigation. now, as to whether or not the justice department is actually going to put him on trial, we really don't know. the dc u.s. attorney could decide not to. the d.c. u.s. attorney could convene a grand jury, present evidence to the grand jury and let the grand jury decide whether or not an indictment against mr. bannon is warranted. one other option, i believe, don't hold me to this if this doesn't turn out to be the case, but i believe, based on my understanding of how these things work, based on the type of charge this would theoretically be against mr. f bannon, i believe that the d.c. u.s. attorney also has the option to just draw up the without going to a grand jury at all, which is yet another way to approach this. regardless of how the u.s. attorney's office decides to handle this, though, we really won't know anything about that process until it's done, until a charge is bro

stepping back from the personalities involved, the drama, the list cheney drama particularly in terms of the sacrifice she's made, how it's changed the way she's viewed in her party, that she's taken the stance. if you step back from that drama and personalities, the discreet question of whether or not steve bannon is going to have to go on trial for this, it matters in its own right. it does matter if the new normal is that you are a trump ally don't have to respond to subpoenas. you might remember steve bannon previously blew off other subpoenas from a committee investigating russia's involvement in the 2016 election, years ago. he blew off those subpoenas from congress as well and republicans at the time over interest at the time decided they let him low off the subpoenas with no consequences, apparently because he was close to trump and didn't want to bother donald trump about it. that can't be the way it's left, right? it matters whether or not he feels safe defying the law here. as congressman adam schiff said today, in the debate before the vote, if steve bannon is allowed to g

liz cheney, republican congresswoman, who has been an outlyer in her party, i think it's safe to say, relating to matters about donald trump fired back at steve scalise after that moment we just saw. >> yeah, she did, hallie. it's clear parties are divided on the former president, but the anti-trump component of the party is getting smaller and smaller and smaller as the days go on. liz cheney is the leader of that anti-trump contingent, and after representative scalise said that on fox news sunday yesterday, she took to twitter and put out her own statement saying the republicans have a duty to tell the american people that this is not true. she's talking about the election lies. perpetuating the big lie is an attack on the core of our constitutional republic. but, hallie, it's clear that republicans, as they get closer and closer to the midterm elections, have made a choice. and that choice is they need the former president, or they cannot upset the former president if they want to succeed and win their elections. you saw senator grassley, as you mentioned, at that rally in iowa wit

so she turned her attention to liz cheney.ought liz, who is about the best mannered and best poised person in the house of representatives might just walk away. i was impressed she gave as good as she got. i'll leave it to liz to talk about whatever it is she said. it seemed to me the theme of marjorie taylor greene's comments was that liz cheney betrayed president trump and the republican party. and the theme of liz's comments were marjorie taylor greene was, shall we say, a bit eccentric. >> she referenced the jewish space laser theory about wildfires and marjorie taylor greene responded to that? >> it seemed like there was some history to the conversation they were having. it may have had to do with some of marjorie taylor greene's postings online. i couldn't hear. it kept going for a little while. i was behind them. look, marjorie taylor greene freedom caucus faction has been eroding the level of discourse we have in the house of representatives and the congress. it's very hard to know what to do. whether you just walk awa