committees. and we're going to talk about it. but first, let's talk about you and the path that led you to writing this book. you trained as a political scientist. when in your life did you first take an interest in politics, public affairs, governance, issues, and when in your life did that interest hit the point where you decided i think i want to do this for a career or profession. so i've always been interested in democratic institutions, how we can make them work better for people that they're meant to serve. i believe that anytime you have a of people together making decisions about how to govern themselves and resources, you have politics. and democratic institutions are at the center of a healthy political system. and they are central then to how groups of live and how organize and that why i think that it's so central as a topic. and i've decided to devote my career to studying it. and i think legislatures in particular are really central to the way in which societies come together and g

the committee concludes thatjohnson committee.ommittee concludes that johnson deliberately misled the and committee, breached confidence, impugned _ and committee, breached confidence, impugned the committee, thereby undermining the democratic process of the, _ undermining the democratic process of the, and — undermining the democratic process of the, and was complicit in the campaign — of the, and was complicit in the campaign ofabuse of the, and was complicit in the campaign of abuse and attempted intimidation of the committee. what of the _ intimidation of the committee. what of the prime minister's mantra of integrity. — of the prime minister's mantra of integrity, professionalism, and accountability at every level? not only must — accountability at every level? not only must this endorsed the report in full, _ only must this endorsed the report in full, we — only must this endorsed the report in full, we must recover the legal fees wasted on borisjohnson's lies, rescind _ fees wasted on borisjohnson's lies, rescind the — fees

is the new church committee. oh, god. and they are calling themselves heirs of frank church, which is kind of the opposite. but it shows degree to which the phrase the church committee has begun into. american political law as just a name for. any major effort to american abuses and scandals. and so i think that's know frank church has it's kind of like elvis he's had a good afterlife and people had forgotten him in the 1980s and 90 years and today the church committee has been revived in american history. i think something worth about any question, this report report is you want to come a stand? oh, yeah, so-called back to the earlier part of your history. there was this fascinating discussion. you just forgot to mention the anti-war movement, which also had something to do with ending the war in. yeah, yeah. and draft. right. but going back to the to your your description of church as someone who became radical, who was from idaho and became radicalized, did, did people around him did he talk to people around h

you commit to providing the committee with additional documents responsive to the committee's request by july 6th? >> i don't want to overstate my ability of the data certain that i'm confident we can work with you and staff to get you that information. >> okay. with that, i am going to yield five minutes. >> mr. charan, if i might. >> the gentleman from maryland. >> the speaker said we should be on the s floor by 3:25 and in te spirit of cooperation i said we could move forward. some members justt arrived and i normally wouldn't object to anybody having the chance to speak but i would ask that we be given the chance to go to the floor. >> my understanding is 4:00 is when the address begins. >> it begins at four, but as i said i thought the speaker told us to be there at 3:25. >> i appreciate you listening to the speaker on this occasion -- >> it's been tough to do this week, yesterday in particular was extremely tough. >> we will get you there. let me recognize the gentleman from new jersey and we will go from there and i will talk to thewi gentlelady as well. i think she has more qu

and this committee is on it. so, i am just optimistic about what you can do, working together, and what we would all like to do to help you. this is a happy little band of bipartisan friends. and we are here to help. and i think it was an inspired idea to have this hearing, to let us all hug each other again, thank you. >> excellent. mr. lobiondo? >> think you mister chairman, chairman turner and mr. himes for putting this together. it is an honor and pleasure to be here today, to share my inserts from serving on the house intelligence committee for the final eight years of my 24 year tenure in the united states congress. my time on the committee was certainly some of the most personally rewarding and professionally challenging of opportunities in my career of public service. it is the privilege to have been appointed to ic, to chair the cia subcommittee for a period of time. as you know, there are many aspects of serving on fc that we can't discuss beyond the walls of the scif. most americans will never know the

is the new church committee. oh, god. and they are calling themselves heirs of frank church, which is kind of the opposite. but it shows degree to which the phrase the church committee has begun into. american political law as just a name for. any major effort to american abuses and scandals. and so i think that's know frank church has it's kind of like elvis he's had a good afterlife and people had forgotten him in the 1980s and 90 years and today the church committee has been revived in american history. i think something worth about any question, this report report is you want to come a stand? oh, yeah, so-called back to the earlier part of your history. there was this fascinating discussion. you just forgot to mention the anti-war movement, which also had something to do with ending the war in. yeah, yeah. and draft. right. but going back to the to your your description of church as someone who became radical, who was from idaho and became radicalized, did, did people around him did he talk to people around h

members of the committee. ., ~ , ., ., ., , committee.at was jonathan blake _ committee. thank you, that was jonathan blake looking - committee. thank you, that was jonathan blake looking at - committee. thank you, that was jonathan blake looking at some | committee. thank you, that was i jonathan blake looking at some of the detail that is in that excoriating report. it's worth remembering that what the committee was investigating is not whether borisjohnson was investigating is not whether boris johnson attended was investigating is not whether borisjohnson attended parties, it's whether he lied to parliament about what you knew about those parties and his involvement in them. that's why they have said that they believe that he deliberately misled parliament and that he knew he was doing so and that is the crucial finding in the report. but matthew, of course, this report doesn't seem to have changed many people's minds who had already made up their minds about borisjohnson. those who supported him before are still supporting him now. i

committee needs to continue?nd any other advice or thoughts that you might have for us, we welcome you here today and i recognize ranking member mr. haoeupls. mr. himes: thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you to our former colleagues for taking the time to be here today and to provide your expert teals. it's great to see all of you again. member. >> thank you, mister chairman. thank you to our former colleagues to take the time to be here today, to provide your expertise. it's great to see all of you again. all of you developed a tremendous amount of knowledge whil i say this all the time, the fact is that intelligence oversight is very, very hard. we all served on other committees where you have the assistance of an aggressive press, of nonprofits, of others who are scrutinizing the financial services industry. youe assistance of an aggressive press, nonprofits, others who are scrutinizing financial services industry, the carbon industry, all sorts of things. it is committee, quite often, it is just us and our s

i am turning to the specialized committee again.colleagues , amendment 401 of the southern woman , it was rejected by the committee. 402 amendment yuzhanina , please dear colleagues, in part, the funds for infrastructure, i.e. road construction, have already arrived and are in the state budget , the members of the budget committee do not object to this. tell me please. to all of you who are still in the hall right now, aren't you interested in the fact that 32 billion will now be used in an opaque manner without informing and without the support of the people's deputies who are responsible for the adoption of the state budget . therefore, i am asking once again. please review and support the transfer of these expenses exactly for providing the military with an additional reward, the second figure is 18 billion 517 million , again in the road fund, since it is a special fund, technically i transfer these funds to the state budget to of the general fund in order to reduce it and direct it to the support of the military, it is like ame

is the new church committee. oh, god. and they are calling themselves heirs of frank church, which is kind of the opposite. but it shows degree to which the phrase the church committee has begun into. american political law as just a name for. any major effort to american abuses and scandals. and so i think that's know frank church has it's kind of like elvis he's had a good afterlife and people had forgotten him in the 1980s and 90 years and today the church committee has been revived in american history. i think something worth about any question, this report report is you want to come a stand? oh, yeah, so-called back to the earlier part of your history. there was this fascinating discussion. you just forgot to mention the anti-war movement, which also had something to do with ending the war in. yeah, yeah. and draft. right. but going back to the to your your description of church as someone who became radical, who was from idaho and became radicalized, did, did people around him did he talk to people around h

committee's request by july 6? witness: i don't want to overstate my ability to commit by the date certain, but i am confident i can work with your staff to get you that information. chairman cline: ok. with that, i will yield five minutes -- congressperson: mr. chairman, if i might. chairman cline: the gentleman from maryland. congressperson: the speaker said we should be on the floor by 3:25. in the spirit of cooperation, i said we could move forward. i know that some members have just arrived, and i normally would not object to anybody having a chance to speak, but i would ask that we be given a chance to go to the floor. chairman cline: my understanding is 4:00 is when the address begins. congressperson: the address begins at 4:00, but i thought the speaker told us to be there at 3:25. chairman cline: i appreciate you listening to the speaker on this occasion. congressperson: it has been tough to do this week, i must say, yesterday in particular was really tough. chairman cline: we will get you there. let me re

borisjohnson committee recommended boris johnson quit committee recommended borisjohnson quit as an mp, he labelled the report as a kangaroo court, and the select committee recommended he faced a 90 day suspension and have his parliamentary pass taken away. so the mps have been debating now since lipm, and they will or will not vote on that later this evening. i think it's fair to say that over the last couple of hours, most of the mps speaking have very much been in favour of approving that report which essentially said that boris johnson misled parliament when he made a series of statements about parties which happened during lockdown. 0ne parties which happened during lockdown. one of his most prominent supporters though, jacob rees—mogg, has been talking and there was an interesting back—and—forth between him and harriet harman, the chair of the privileges select committee, and this is when mr rees—mogg brought up some critical comments that she had made on borisjohnson�*s remarks ahead of taking over, let's take a listen. i ahead of taking over, let's take a listen. ., , _, _ l

my advice _ that committee do their duty. my advice to— that committee do their duty.ers, is having had the _ and honourable members, is having had the committee carry out the work we asked _ had the committee carry out the work we asked them to do, is to read the report _ we asked them to do, is to read the report it _ we asked them to do, is to read the report it is— we asked them to do, is to read the report. it is to make their own judgments about it. and take the task that — judgments about it. and take the task that is our pledge to do seriously— task that is our pledge to do seriously and soberly. and then —— and members should use their own judgment _ and members should use their own judgment on that. i can confirm that the motion — judgment on that. i can confirm that the motion before us will be without trouble, _ the motion before us will be without trouble, it— the motion before us will be without trouble, it will be amendable, and it is house — trouble, it will be amendable, and it is house business. and so i am expecting — it is house business. and so i a

it's not a labour committee. the committee's committee. and the committee's testston— committee. him. but he has. i mean, those who love him. but he has. t tt— those who love him. but he has. t tt you— those who love him. but he has. i mean, if you look— those who love him. but he has. i mean, if you look at— those who love him. but he has. i mean, if you look at the- i mean, if you look at the teat— i mean, if you look at the tetatt ot— i mean, if you look at the detail of the— i mean, if you look at the detail of the report that we i mean, i've not— detail of the report that we i mean, i've not read the whole tntng— mean, i've not read the whole tntng1 tut— mean, i've not read the whole thing, but what— mean, i've not read the whole thing, but what we've seen so fart— thing, but what we've seen so tar1 t— thing, but what we've seen so tar1 t rnean— thing, but what we've seen so far, i mean, it's— thing, but what we've seen so far, i mean, it's absolutely . far, i mean, it's absolutely. tot— far, i mean, it's absolutely. tot onty— far, i mean, it's absolutely. not only mislead p

committee, was a committee of parliamentor in this case quasi judicial or in this case quasi judicial process. and what is the issue here? and i quote from the judgment. the contention is that there was a real danger or reasonable apprehension or suspicion that lord hoffmann might have been biased. that is to say, it is alleged that there is an appearance of bias not actual bias. the fundamental principle is that a man may not be a judge in his own cause. this principle as developed by the courts has two very similar but not identical implications. first, it may be applied literally. if a judge is in fact a party to litigation or has a financial or proprietary interest, then he is indeed sitting as a judge in his own cause. in that case the mere fact he is a party to the action or has a financial interest in its outcome is sufficient to cause his automatic disqualification. the second application of the principle is where a judge is not a party to the suit and does not have a financial interest in its outcome but in some oth

719 amendment secretary of the committee on national security and defense please committee meeting please immediately in the car please i am contacting you i am sure that you will respond there is an opportunity to answer now you found out about the meeting of the committee on national security and defense, you are the secretary. suggest this, i think we should get it out . a member of the committee on national security, defense and intelligence. i think no one will object. she made maximum efforts to prepare the draft law for the second reading. after the meeting of the working group , a meeting of the committee will be held immediately and the draft bill will be brought up for consideration. at the request of deputy goncharenko and upon e-e confirmation in the editorial office in which it was taken into account by the committee, i ask you to vote for 256, the decision was adopted to correct the accrual in the editorial office of the committee, amendment number 720, please oleksiy oleksiyovych, do you work for mykola tyshchenko? i offer you, too, to the important transport committee. wel

committee. secondly, oce referrals carry no extra weight meaning the ethics can he does not have to consider any of their referrals. third, at the ethics committee does not decide to investigate a complaint at that oce refers, the committee starts from scratch and does not even use any of oce's materials. despite having congress in his name, oce only has jurisdiction to investigate the house of representatives. the senate does not have a corresponding entity. this calls into question the senate does not need a similar entity, what value does oce add to transparency and accountability that the house at the many does not already provide? -- health -- house ethics committee does not provide? let me be clear. i support transparency and accountability. i believe all of congress should be held to the highest ethical standards, but also have confidence in my colleagues on the ethics committee. in the 15th here's of its existence, has not have any oversight. the goal of this hearing is to establish form

he deliberately misled the committee.breached their confidence by saying out loud what was in there were boards and that he was complicit in a competing of abuse and intimidation of the committee. >> look at what else the committee had to say. the frequency with which he closed his mind to the truth. and it said some of mr. johnson's denial was in explanations was so disingenuous that they were deliberate attempts to mislead. shouting at boris johnson because he said no to an interview. heut out a written statement instead claiming the art his rubbish, a lie, absurd, and complete tripe. and he said i do not have the slightest contempt for parliament or for the important work that should be done by the privileges committee. it is for the people of this country to decide who sits in parliament, not. harmon. >> you've been there and seen it with your own eyes. >> he claims she was prejudice from the outset. the report says its members were informed by the facts. >> jacob was knighted by johnson what did he make of the report

clearly, privileges committee, it isjust a committee, they have decided to take a stand _ committee,one of the key pillars— that we uphold one of the key pillars of— that we uphold one of the key pillars of parliamentary democracy, that is— pillars of parliamentary democracy, that is part — pillars of parliamentary democracy, that is part of the ability to scrutinise the executive, and that means— scrutinise the executive, and that means that executives must not scrutinise — means that executives must not scrutinise the house. i think what people _ scrutinise the house. i think what people will— scrutinise the house. i think what people will then be looking to is how mps— people will then be looking to is how mps react to this. our conservative mps looking at this, do they decide, yes, we want to rally behind _ they decide, yes, we want to rally behind the — they decide, yes, we want to rally behind the committee, the full conservative members on the committee who wrote the sanctions, or do— committee who wrote the sanctions, or do we _ committee who wrote the sanctions, or do we act

the committee concludes thatjohnson committee. the committee concludes that johnson deliberately

dear colleagues, representatives of the legal committee on legal policy issues. please, because such a claim is serious . puts it for confirmation , amendment number 146, please vote for 237, the decision was made, the amendment remains taken into account. to our deputy chairman of the verkhovna rada, she also has amendments , she also has the right to speak, please. i would like to draw your attention to my amendment number 85, it is the first time in this legislation that it introduces such a concept for vacations. as a rehabilitation vacation, it applies, of course, to all military personnel of our defenders about the fact that they have the opportunity to receive a rehabilitation leave to undergo rehabilitation while preserving their financial and material situation, but to my surprise this amendment was rejected by the committee or the working group, moreover, the body of this amendment came from the authorship of the working group and the committee. i would like to draw your attention to the fact that this is a matter of professional ethics and principles f

committee, there were four members , i did not have time for us, and the committee's vote was preliminary and one of the members announced that it is popular due to independence, come to the club for a letter. esteghlal should announce to afc and pay attention to the sanctions the cruel situation of the country is going on, so do what you are used to. from that side, according to iran's football, it has many demands in afc and fifa , and again because of these sanctions, football is taken away. in football, what is happening is that esteghlal's documents have not been approved by the appeals committee, and this esteghlal club has no chance to be able to participate in the asian champions league as one of the singers of our country, while esteghlal club has not yet officially announced it. mr. hassan roshan is a respectable veteran or is he in touch with us by phone. hello, i am polite to you, the good people of iran . saadat malash should do it on time regarding the number of stramachoni and at the same time, he should have uploaded documents on time to get it, and i am sorry for the appe

that has been set up, a cross—party committee, set “p set up, a cross—party committee, set up by parliament guess if ou had a witchhunt against him? well, i guess if you had a scale _ witchhunt against him? well, i guess if you had a scale of— witchhunt against him? well, i guess if you had a scale of usual _ witchhunt against him? well, i guess if you had a scale of usual where - if you had a scale of usual where zero is usual and 100 was immensely unusual, this would be closer to the 100 mark. again, it is what mr johnson because my critics would see as the... it is kind of a witchhunt. essentially what this committee has been saying, the mps on this committee felt they needed extra protection, security, in case they were attacked, presumably, by members of the public were very unhappy and had taken boris johnson's side. because he had labelled them as a kangaroo court. in other words, they are accusing, i mean, you have to sort of pinch yourself to get around this, but essentially this committee are accusing the former prime minister, accusing the former prime minister, a former prime mi

of imam khomeini's relief committee. hello, good morning. it is very delicious, or what is the sacrifice, for what purposes is it on the agenda of the relief committee, and no, i congratulate hazrat ali and the dear people of islamic iran on eid al-adha in advance. in fact, to discuss people's sacrifice and donation sacrificial meats will be done among the needy. this year, like last year , it will be done from jamkaran holy mosque with video and live communication with the centers of the provinces and then the cities throughout the country. all over the country, for the sake of the health and happiness of imam zaman , may god hasten his blessed life, inshallah, the slaughtering and the ritual sacrifice will be done at the same time, and the sacrifice will be happy and it will be done. how many years did it last last year? this year, mr. hosseini, a very beautiful thing is happening . sahle mosque in iraq still it will be established there as well, on the same basis, in fact, the discussion of the mirror of the slaughter

how can you possibly do that as a committee?— that as a committee?t is i soppose one _ that as a committee? that is i soppose one of _ that as a committee? that is i suppose one of the _ that as a committee? that is i suppose one of the things - that as a committee? that is i | suppose one of the things that that as a committee? that is i - suppose one of the things that boris johnson has been saying. that he may have misled parliament, but not deliberately. going back to, again, the oversight that this committee has in a match like this, if the rule of law is to be obeyed, if procedures, institutions are to be respected, then surely, there is no reason for boris johnson respected, then surely, there is no reason for borisjohnson to be making the sort of attacks that he has been making?— making the sort of attacks that he has been making? remember, this is not the rule — has been making? remember, this is not the rule of _ has been making? remember, this is not the rule of law, _ has been making? remember, this is not the rule of law, this _ has been

members of the committee. if that is politics. it is open to us, within this chamber to accuse within the bounds of good order of saying things that we disagree with them outside this chamber, freedom of speech is paramount. we are allowed to say what we like, the house has historically tried to call people to the bar, indeed, in past times and even imprisons people and it made the house look ridiculous when he was called to that bar of the house because he had set in the sunday express that members were fiddling, it was notjohn who looked ridiculous, but the house, and we must defend the right and freedom of speech, if politicians cannot cope with criticism from the wonder what on earth they are doing with a political career. i have one final question from annex one section seven where it says that sue gray's report was not important in this case. well, it seems to me when witnesses come from sue gray's report, it is odd then to say that her report is not important and it might also be interesting to know in

on the committee. section 702 of the permits targeted of foreigners outside the u.s. [background noises] >> if you can begin to have your seats. i would like to call to order this hearing and the select committee onon intelligence. this is an unusual hearing for us. it is exciting. in the back room it sounded like it was a reception because i was so excited to see their friends and reconnect. that was happening on a social level never going to reconnect on a professional level. one thing we know for each of you is you have an incredible career in congress incredible career national security and on this committee. we do not want to lose your resident expertise. and we believe you work on a bipartisan basis and we are certainly all about getting this back to working on a bipartisan basis for going to you today to get your advice. issues you see you think we focused on issues you think this committee is using the work we have been doing should either continue, or modify in a way we are undertaking. went t

boris johnson and his supporters call committee and | his supporters call committee and say, well, ones being hypocritical. we have this back and forth. i being hypocritical. we have this back and forth.— being hypocritical. we have this back and forth. i guess there is a different issue _ back and forth. i guess there is a different issue here _ back and forth. i guess there is a different issue here about - different issue here about journalism. to talk about the electorate, first, i think it was all was going to be the case that you are going to have to responses to this report. you are going to have those... it is important to state this, there is a very large minority of people in this country who still think an old boris. their reaction to this report was always going to be, well, it is a stitch up. who cares, it is a stitch up, they are out to get him. then there is a chunk of the population, a larger chunk, which is thinking, how did ever think that the sky was fit for high office? how did the conservative party ever going him as leader? and, well the country ever recover from

and the purpose of the committee. host: i want to remind viewers if you would like to call in it is the 50th anniversary of the senate hearings in washington dc our phone lines are by region. eastern/central timezones, 202-748-8000. mountain/pacific timezones, 202-748-8001. you can text and interact via social media. i want you to talk about how it was made up, who was working the and the rationship. guest: this committee has potential to be politically very revelations that may come out of the course of t investigation may be politically explosive. we have a senate controlled by democrats that will b investigating republican president. senators are deeply concerned that the investigati cannot be partisan. the people assigned tthe committee should not be seeking some kinof political or partisan advantage. by having this big platform. the senate leadership works carefully to establish the makeup of the committee. they -- the really smart choice majority leader mansfield make some assigned the tax chairmanship to senato

the country and the relief committee prepared and provided the infrastructure the aid committee does not look at it like raising livestock where it gets money, there are only a bunch of people who are old and able to work or have special disabilities. there is an issue that is actually theorizing when a leader of the egyptian revolution, the imam, who is within the framework of a the desire for transformation is a big message in the 20th century, and a revolution that is much , much wider than, for example, the great french revolution that happened in 1789 or the revolution that happened in russia in 1917 in the 20th century and had many effects and consequences . and he uses it in literature the theorizing that he does, at the same time that this is eastern and not western, and at the same time he considers the class of the oppressed above all this , what is the place of this issue of imam hadi in the literature of the imam , who showed that the imam and the rulings he issued really it shows a prominent place in these thoughts for us, but there is a flaw before speaking that it is o

this committee was a cross—party committee, there were tory members on that committee.nson did attack. ~ ., , on that committee. who boris johnson did attack. ~ . , ., did attack. i think that is a point worth making- _ did attack. i think that is a point worth making. this _ did attack. i think that is a point worth making. this is _ did attack. i think that is a point worth making. this is not - did attack. i think that is a point worth making. this is not a - did attack. i think that is a point l worth making. this is not a labour report. harriet harman, who is a labour mp, is the chair, but are more tory mps labour mp, is the chair, but are more tory mp5 on it than not. where the report is divisive is, number one, borisjohnson, yes, to say he thinks it is a like the idea that he deliberately misled parliament, saying he did not realise at the time he was breaking the rules. the report finds that unbelievable. it says... also, ithink report finds that unbelievable. it says... also, i think amongst mps who do still want to back boris johnson. they are not the majority

committee with onty— this committee, a committee with onty oowon— this committee, a committee with only have anyway. right. look let's have a look of the other look through some of the other things they've they've things that they've they've they've boris they've found against boris johnson here. you've got deliberately johnson here. you've got deliberatecommons. that'sthe house of commons. so that's the bit where you've got to get in his mind, deliberately misleading same misleading the committee same same confidence. this misleading the committee same saworrying confidence. this misleading the committee same saworrying for confidence. this misleading the committee same saworrying for me �*ifidence. this misleading the committee same saworrying for me actually this misleading the committee same saworrying for me actually gets misleading the committee same saw0isinister r me actually gets misleading the committee same saw0isinister breachingilly gets quite sinister breaching confidence, impugning the committee thereby committee and thereby undermining the democratic process house being

of the committee get up and actually speak about it.e putting a basic of the committee's po5ition. harman will be putting a basic of the committee's position. i don't know if she's going to respond to anything as a tax bori5john5on ha5 anything as a tax bori5john5on has made on her, accu5ing her of bias because she tweeted thing5 ahead of taking up this chairmanship about him and about his conduct in parliament, we don't know whether she will address those orju5t 5tick she will address those orju5t stick to the reports, but put the concerns here have been that certainly they have felt i had been threats made around the committee and lobbying for the committee that wouldn't nece55arily happen if there was a different parliamentary proce55 nece55arily happen if there was a different parliamentary process and there's likely to be another report coming out 5pecifically there's likely to be another report coming out specifically to address that. to white or going get a glass of water, at you'll we did a lot of talking today! that'5 of water,