this committee is 170 years old. it's an institution that is worth nurturing, saving, and focusing on in terms of how we conduct our business inside and outside from a legal perspective, and also in terms of how we communicate with the public. we hope that the legal team has done its job the way we think we have done it. we believe, with your help, and without any, without a vote initial would not be able to achieve historic successes in the election this year, both of the courthouse and at the ballot box. i want to just enumerate a few things we're able to accomplish with a great team of people. i'm the least among them, andy lester and her team and outside counsel that we utilized put together a program that after 2020 all the lessons that we learn from that time about how to figure out election integrity to conduct safe and secure elections to make sure that every vote counted and that there was, we found those that were not abiding by the law, trying to steal an election. this is the most massive effort we've had

i was on an oversight committee, the house permanent select committee on intelligence. i think it gives me a neat perspective. i have the perspective of the executive branch in the legislative branch. i will confess that one of the things i was disappointed in was despite being on a congressional oversight committee over the intelligence community, there was so much intelligence i learned for the first time as a dni that i knew no member of congress was aware of. and i think that sort of speaks to my approach and understanding that i take seriously the obligation i will have to keep this committee and fully informed on intelligence issues. it is not that this committee or any intelligence or oversight committee needs to know everything, but you should at least know the topics. >> let's talk about that a little bit, congressman. the president gets his presidential daily brief every day. there is a very high standard for veracity of what is in that because he has to obviously make the most significant decisions that any human has to make. deploying our defense assets or t

government affairs committee was not the most desirable committee for members to be on. it was sort of a place where newer members, first term members, would would end up serving because more experienced, more senior members would want to be on higher profile committees. so the interesting thing about the makeup of the committee and particularly that permanent subcommittee, which did the actual investigations and held the hearings, was that was that all of them, except for one, were first term members, including mccarthy himself. he was still in his first term and at least one case mccarthy, who helped that member get elected in the first place. so everett dirksen was a first term senator from illinois. and mccarthy in 1952 had traveled to illinois and campaigned extensively for dirksen. so the bottom line is, is that these members were on this subcommittee. it was it became pretty quickly divided between the democrats and the republicans. the democrats were led by henry jackson, who was another first term member from jackson, was from washington state. and he and the ot

it created a joint committee which means members of both house and the senate and that committee looked into what happened before pearl harbor and why they were so unprepared and why the consequences of that attack were so devastating. i wanted to point out this item. this machine is called purple. it is one part of a machine created by the army signals intelligence service that was used to decrypt japanese diplomatic code in the months before and after the attack on pearl harbor. one of the things that was discovered during that investigation was purple. so congress discovered that america had cracked japanese code using purple and was decrypting japanese diplomatic messages. it was discovered that one of the messages sent hours before the attack pointed towards military action by japan. but the american crew was not able to decrypt it and send that information to the military commanders in hawaii in time for them to act on it before the attacks began. as a result of the information that congress discovered during the investigation, congress passed national security act of 1947. this a

about that in the committee and block the nominee until he met with members of the committee. i know senator king would do the same thing. democrats would do the same thing, we would not tolerate a nominee stiff-arming one side of the day dais. i was shocked my republican colleagues demonstrated they will just fine with that. i -- i -- this is my favorite committee in the senate. we work very cooperatively in a bipartisan way and that my republican colleagues are perfectly fine with us being disrespected because we happen to be democrats who are citizens elected us to serve in the united states senate is very, very shocking to me. one other point that i want to bring up. i've revealed much material that is in the record and that other senators can view for themselves, but i have to say in looking at the investigation record, which was exiled -- come piled -- compiled heartlandingly by the -- largely by the fbi, it was very, very weak. the fbi went out to do an investigation of mr. hegseth. the report was made available to the chair and ranking member. not to the members, we ha

i was not on the committee at that time. i respect both committees. i have not seen the underlying intelligence tell me why there is a difference ofel opinion between the twowo committees. but i again very much appreciate volume four and the work this committee put in. and again i would reiterate the mostta important take away from that findings of both committees is that as russia continues to sow discord they have not been successfulss in changing the vos for the outcome of elections and we need to remain committed to making sure that does not happen in the future. click respectfully to me, to make that kind of assessment over going to prevent russia's further interference in 2020. if they have a clear preference for one candidate over another that would also alter how we counter those efforts. i really hope that you will spend the time and look at the underlying intelligence if you find you reach a conclusion that's different than the unanimous conclusion of the intelligence community or the unanimousmo conclusion of this committee here, i would ex

it's a committee that has been around since the beginning. it's a highly regarded committee. issues around energy and health care and telecom, telecommunications and technology. so, i was just happy to get on the committee, and then to be the chair and to be the first woman to chair this committee, was especially special for me. and i'm really proud of the work that we have been able to do in the 118th congress, during a time when so many have talked about the division and just how toxic things have become politically. this committee has continued to do our work. and we have been able to reach agreement on some really difficult but important bills. this committee has a reputation and a history, a culture of being a committee that attracts members on both sides of the aisle that remember we need to legislate, that is our job, that is how we do our work on behalf of the people. this congress, this is the committee that led on the bill that forces the divestiture of tiktok. that bill passed out of the committee unanimously, it was 50-0, which no one saw coming. we have lead on l

i have been on the armed services committee, i sit side by side with senator king on the committee since january 2013. i have now participated in confirmation for five secretary of defense, republicans and democratic nominees. mr. hegseth is the only one who refuse today meet with the democratic members of the committee save for the chairman jack reed. he met with the republican committee members, all of us were trying to set meetings with him as has been our norm so we could talk about these issues and ask him questions privately in our office. some of these matters are frankly probably better for private discussion than public discussion, but he stiff-armed every one of us except jack reed. now, in some ways, maybe it's not a surprise. this is an individual who's written books and articles where he said democrats are evil, democrats are the adversary, but if you're nominated to be secretary of defense for the pentagon it's a nonpolitical military, a civilian military that should not be politicized. if you begin the job saying i needn't even sit down and pay the respect of meetings with

members of the committee. i want to thank you for your serious consideration and attention to the constitutional responsibility of confirming high-ranking executive branch officials and it's an honor for me to participate with you by my peers here today. testify and sharing my profound support for the nomination of the audible john ratcliffe as the wreck of the central intelligence agency is something for which i'm deeply grateful. good national security decisions received from the combination of valid intelligence, information and consider judgment. and integrity is an indispensable imperative for intelligence. the best friend of national security. a national security is the singular unfortunately is a singular portfolio most allergic to the infection and the devalun results of inaccuracy and distortion. for high quality decision-making, sound intelligence, must never be diluted or contaminated by personal bias or political predisposition. john brac cliffs record of upholding the constitution and in forcing t

a important, legitimate committee? no question. the way he approached his his position as chair of the his commitment to being bipartisan. by all accounts, the work that was done by the staff and by the members behind the scenes in the investigation that led up to the hearings and during the hearings, it was really a very credible effort. and that all began with, in a ways, as i mentioned before, his stature as a war hero and his just demeanor and his strong and close relationships with many of his colleagues in the senate, including some very prominent republicans. he was very close to senator dole, who ultimately, of course, ran ran for president. that kind of those kind of relationships gave him the ability to to work closely. and that, i think, was the public recognize that because of the way these senators operated with each other in public and behind the scenes, applicants on the committee in both the house and senate feel that there was a bipartisan effort as well. i think so. during during the investigation and

it's not that this committee or any intelligence committee or any oversight committee in congress needs to know everything. but you should at least know the topics exist. sen. bennet: let's talk about that a little bit. the president gets his presidential daily brief every day. there's a very high standard for veracity, for what's in that. because he has to obviously make the most significant decisions that any human has to make. about deploying our defense assets or the other things that a president does. we don't have anything like that in congress and a lot of the time it seems like we're often, as you said, finding ourselves fishing around in headlines and in sort of less well organized intelligence materials, that we're providing with no assurance that it's a complete picture of anything. i wonder what your conclusion about that is and how -- what the obligation of the c.i.a. or any intelligence agency is with your leadership to be able to provide a fuller picture, the picture you're talking about, that a member of congress who is on these committees should tallly know, rather -- s

and pensions committee on thursday. al on thursday kash patel will testify before the senate judiciy committee as he seeks to become fbi director. tulsi gabbard, will appear before the senate intelligence committee. watch this week live on the c-span networks or on c-span now our free mobile video app. also head over to c-span.org for scheduling information or to watch live or on-demand anytime. c-span, democracy unfiltered. >> the c-span bookshelves podcast feed makes it easy for you to listen to all of c-span's podcast that feature nonfiction books in one place so you can discover new authors and ideas. each week we are making it convenient for you to listen to multiple episodes with critically acclaimed authors discussing history, biography, current events and culture. from our signature programs about books, after words, booknotes+, and q&a. listen to c-span's bookshelf podcast feed today. you can find the feed and all of our podcasts on the free c-span now noble video app or wherever you get your podcasts, and on >

very productive committee. my hope is that we will get back to turning out legislation that works with the people, that we will appropriately authorize and review funds and programs. when we had a chance to meet two weeks ago, one of the programs are broader was founded in wilmington, delaware, but i think one of the highest federally appropriated dollar for actual impact programs in history -- there is more than 10,000 volunteers who deliver roughly 4 million hours a year of free business plan consulting. clients return $59 in tax revenue for every dollar appropriated. it needs to be reauthorized. we need to look at it to make sure it is operating well and there is accountability. would you support its reauthorization and work with me to achieve a bipartisan reauthorization if confirmed? ms. loeffler: i thank you for the time you shared in your office. i was also delighted to hear about your dad's sentiments. i agree. i look forward to working with you to review score, see how it can be made more robust and to

right good morning and welcome to our january 13th 2025 first rules committee meeting of the year. >> i'm supervisor walton, the chair for this meeting and i'm joined by supervisor chin as well as vice chair supervisor dorsey and we also have president menem in here with this this morning this morning's clerk is victor young and i would like to thank james kawana from s.f. gov tv for broadcasting today's meeting. >> mr. clerk, do we have any announcements? >> oh yes. public comment will be taken in each item on this agenda when your item of interest comes up in public comment is called please line up to speak on your right alternatively you may submit public comment in writing in either of the following ways email them to myself the rules committee clerk at visy o r y o u and at s.f. gov talk if you submit public comment via email it will be included as part of the file may also send your written comments by us mail to our office at city hall one dr. carlton be good place room 244 san francisco california 94102 please make sure the tenants are cell phones and electronic devices. docum

i was not on the committee at that time. i respect both committees. i have not seen the underlying intelligence tell me why there is a difference ofel opinion between the twowo committees. but i again very much appreciate volume four and the work this committee put in. and again i would reiterate the mostta important take away from that findings of both committees is that as russia continues to sow discord they have not been successfulss in changing the vos for the outcome of elections and we need to remain committed to making sure that does not happen in the future. click respectfully to me, to make that kind of assessment over going to prevent russia's further interference in 2020. if they have a clear preference for one candidate over another that would also alter how we counter those efforts. i really hope that you will spend the time and look at the underlying intelligence if you find you reach a conclusion that's different than the unanimous conclusion of the intelligence community or the unanimousmo conclusion of this committee here, i would ex

he serves on the house permanent select committee on intelligence, house judiciary committee, and. the house ethics committee prior to his service in congress, mr. ratcliffe was partner at a law firm. during his 10 year at the department of justice, he served as the first assistant u.s. attorney as the chief antiterrorism national security for the eastern district of texas, and then as the interim u.s. attorney for the eastern district of texas. during that time, mr. ratcliffe also served as mayor for the city of heath, texas. congressman ratcliffe received his undergraduate degree from the university of notre dame, received his law degree from southern methodist university. congressman, you have been asked to leave the intelligence community at a time appropriate that a profound threat and challenge. given your experience, we expect you will be the intelligence community with integrity, serve as a forceful advocate for the professionals in the ic, and ensure the intelligence enterprise operates lawfully, ethically, and morally. i can assure you this committee will continue to cond

we did something on our committee. we started our planning retreat with three hours in which we brought in someone with expertise in conflict resolution and we just talked about it. we had an honest conversation about it which frankly i don't think has happened anywhere else in the united states house but it happened in our committee. at the start of this congress i sat down with everyone of the committee members and of the 11, 8 mentioned i am worried about how january 6 is going to play into the work of our committee but three years from now when you can agree on what to have dinner gets thrown back in your face. so i thought it was important that we should just have a conversation is a committee about it. so that brings me to the general point. i think we have to get better as a country about having to conversations about things that we don't have full agreement on. i had two things happen earlier that have last fall. and into the winter. first in my district, unfortunately there was an attack on a religious institu

a bipartisan committee. my friend richard burr who said we always kinda follow the truth. one of the things i was proud of , people would come in, they did not know whether the staffer was a democrat or republican. we were all looking out for the same thing. ms. gabbard, support and commend you for your service. but we have heard this morning taking from individuals advice on chemical attacks, not taking american intelligence community as we subsequently discovered had iffy ties, not enough due diligence. we heard on your trip to lebanon you are fully aware the folks were paid for the trip. had these relations and ties to the syrian party. i know i have asked you and i understand on the trip that you said you met with shia religious figures and you did not know who they were. i can understand that. although i can't understand shia religious figures that did not have ties to hezbollah. we can have a difference of opinion on tiktok. the chairman and i feel very strongly that it is a national security threat. o

this committee talked about standards. standards that we over time have seen eroded in certain duty positions, certain schools, certain places, which affects readiness, that is what i care about the most. readiness. so my comments -- time and time again to standards. >> your statement publicly have not been to that effect. after your nomination you did state to a group of reporters that you quote support all women snefshg our military today. they do a fantastic job across the globe including combat. so what i'm confused about, mr. hegseth, which is it? why should women in our military if you were the secretary of defense believe they would have a fair shot and equal opportunity to rise through the ranks if on the one hand you say that women are not competent and make our military less effective and on the other hand you say now that i've been nominated to be the secretary of defense i've changed my view on women in the military. what do you have to say to the almost 400,000 women who are serving today about your position o

committee. the u. s. senate returns and will continue work on more of president trump's cabinet nominees including doug burgum to be interior secretary and later chris right to the energy secretary. on c-span at three live at 9:30 a.m. eastern kash patel president trump's picked to lead the fbi will speak to senators about his nomination before the senate judiciary committee. these events all stream live on

and good afternoon and welcome to the meeting of the executive committee.dnesday, january 15th, 2025 i've called the meeting to order. i would ask our commission secretary monroe's dhaliwal to call the roll. >> president collins present vice president shio to present commissioner beltran present. commissioner cher is absent. commissioner shelby is absent. we have corm for today's meeting also for the record. director of cultural affairs ralph remington. deputy director of programs evan glenn. deputy director of finance and administration sara hallenbeck. and chief of staff alissa ventry are all in attendance. >> do we have any agenda changes? no agenda changes. but i would like to s i

i have been on this committee since 2011. i voted to confirm six nominees to be secretary of defense. two democratic and one republican. everyone of those nominees met with me and my democratic colleagues on this committee before the hearing. as you could imagine i was disappointed when no one ever followed up when we followed up with your office. do you understand that if you are confirmed to be secretary of defense you will have a responsibility to meet with all members of this committee, not just republicans? mr. hegseth: i very much appreciate and understand the traditionally bipartisan nature of this committee. national defense is not partisan. i look forward to working together with you and your colleagues on priorities facing this nation. sen. shaheen: one reason i wanted to meet with you was i thought it would be really helpful to better understand your views on women in the military. you made a number of surprising statements about women serving in the military. as recently as november 7, 2024 on the sean ryan show y

we have provided to the committee, mr. chairman, and i know you're going to share on the record statement after on the record statement from people who have served with me, worked with me at fox news, concern vets, vets for freedom, you name it, from the top of the chain to the bottom. who will say, i treat them with respect, with kindness, with dignity. that's men, that's women, that's black, that's white. that's every background. i have prided myself as a leader of respecting people, being professional. that is the balance of mine. i'm not a perfect person, as has been acknowledged, say, by the grace of god, by jesus and jenny. i'm not a perfect person, but redemption is real. and god forged me in ways that i know i'm prepared for, and i'm honored by the people standing and sitting behind me. and i look forward to leading this pentagon on behalf of the warfighters. >> thank you, mr. hegseth. and frankly, i'm sure there are millions of americans watching who would would agree that that they've experienced that same sort o

what a disgrace to this committee to have this committee of impeachment simply take from other entities and rubber stamping. you see why do the things matter about fact witnesses, because by the way, just a couple of months the dem the contracts got all sort of dressed up, we are going to have due process, protection for the president and good fairness throughout this. this is the only committee in which the president would even have a possibility but no offense to you, the law professors, the pat has nothing to ask you. you're not going to provide anything he can't read and his attorneys have nothing else. put witnesses in here that are fact witness who is can be actually cross-examined, that's fairness. this is a sham. you know what i also see here is quotes like this. there must narrowly be impeachment, such impeachment will provide divisiveness and call legitimacy the american institutions. the american people are watching, you have the votes, you may have the muscle but not national consensus and will go down no infamy in the history of the nation. how about this one? i think the k

, what do you make of the legacy of that committee? is it challenging for now now to go-- do you think it was pointless? was it worth it? >> on the contrary, i think was invaluable and historically a landmark moment on a bipartisan basis we had a congressional committee that was devoted to one task and we conducted and lived our oaths of office to stand up for the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic and we were not going to allow a political hatchet job to take place. we were not going to allow the truth to be swept under the rug and we didn't. again, anybody who's got any particular factual contradictions of points in the january 6th report should come forward because nobody has. >> it's quite remarkable, actually, as trump continuously over the last couple of years said it's all lies, all made up, it's a fraud. he has never contested a single material allegation from the committee's work or the january 6th case that smith brought. i want to transition to the judiciary committee now. you're going to be taking on a ne

new and so is the committee staff and there is currently no senate insurance committee chair. person who was arguably the most experienced and the most qualified for that role, well, embroiled in a federal investigation. >> reporter: common ground is hard to come by, but the moderate democrat is known for finding common ground between democrats and republicans. and as they watched the choir from her county district perform in the capitol rotunda. and when they were finished, she gave them a civic lesson and she got one of her own. >> reporter: how concerned should californians be that we don't have an insurance chair and we're facing the largest insurance had disaster in our state's history? >> and right now we're in the process of getting that filled. >> reporter: rubio was the senate committee chair for the past six years. >> they will come to order. >> reporter: as of wednesday, the insurance committee is the only one in the entire legislature without a chair. >> how common is it to appoint them without a chair? >> it is unprecedented. normally all the chairs and the vice c

this committee should give ms. bondi the same benefit of the doubt that this committee gave to attorney general garland. president trump has selected a nominee whose qualifications speak for themselves. ms. bondi made history in 2010 as the first woman to be elected florida attorney general. she held that role for eight years and was comfortably reelected by the people of florida to a second term. eight years of service as attorney general of the third-largest date in the nation -- state in the nation is excellent preparation for the role of u.s. attorney general. as florida attorney general, ms. bondi was a number of the florida cabinet, chief legal officer of the state, and lead a large agency that tangibly impacted people's lives. by all accounts, ms. bondi handled her responsibilities well. as the florida attorney general, ms. bondi achieved numerous successes. she engaged in key initiatives to fight human trafficking, counter the opioid epidemic, and protect consumers and protect the citizens of florida from v

many of out committee before, this will be familiar to you.ybody else this is new i covered this material you might remember in the orientation. it is sort of these other 4 highlights of those priorities the first, is to center on equity focusing on racial equity. given that the need's assessment helped layout this is a racial exclusion housing is a racial exclusion problem. the second is to credit data driven intervention this are alined with the factor this is we know contribute to homelessness. so creating programs creating solution catharsis targeting those exact the exact factors that drive people in homelessness. the third, is to a housing first model. to always prioritize housing as we think about large are solutions. and then lastly, of course, not guilty condition text of ocoh the funding sources, tht city leverages to mitigate homelessness. to mixture myself the funds and find way its sort of leverage ocoh funds to add to the city's over all capacity. and so, on the next slide, i laid out the guiding questions? that help talk directl

committee, so called help committee, but i served on the ageing committee for years, and then had a chance to be both the top democrat and then the chairman of the committee, and i just decided with a great staff helping me to make the ageing committee the committee that does a lot of disability work or examines issues that are related to or relevant to people with disabilities. and part of that work over the years, led to the passage of the able act, which is legislation that created a new provision in the tax code that allowed families to save for a disability in the same way you save for higher education. so in essence, the equivalent of a 529 plan for people with disabilities. so a young child could be the beneficiary of savings by his or her parents, so you could build a savings account over the life of that child so when they became an adult, if they wanted to go to an institution of higher education, or if they needed money to get to work, bus care, assistive technology, al of these different expenses in the lives of a person with a disability, so we passed that, and now hund

and over the last decade, i've served on the house armed services committee, the intelligence committee, the house education and work force committee, and i'm proud to be the longest serving woman on both the armed services and intelligence committees. on these national security committees, i've legislated on a number of critical issues ranging from military readiness, emerging technologies like artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and cybersecurity to missile defense. i've worked to enhance american intelligence capabilities, strengthen our alliances and partnerships, and deter our adversaries. on the education committee, i've been the leader in combating anti-semitism in higher education. my oversight work led to the most viewed testimony in the history of congress. this hearing with university presidents was heard around the world and viewed billions of times. because it exposed the anti-semitic rot in colleges and universities and was a watershed moment in american higher education. when discussing this nomination with president trump, the president shared with me that he see

we will now move on to committee reports beginning with the resolutions committee. i would like to ask market cars and national committee met from kansas and resolutions committee chair for a report. >> thank you, chairman walden. i appreciate you telling me the opportunity to serve as chair of this resolutions committee. in the midwest region previously with richer for it and hope do as well as richard on behalf of the rnc. pursuant to rule 1082 of the rules of the republican party the standing committee resolutions that yesterday. mr. chairman, the sponsor to submit resolutions elected to withdraw their submissions and, therefore, the committee does not have any resolutions to report out today. >> thank you. i would now like to recognize christine, national committeewoman for pennsylvania and a budget committee chairwoman for the purposes of giving a budget committee report. >> good morning. the budget committee met yesterday. we reviewed all of our activities for the past cycle. we delivered on our transparency. we had to back additional committees we created ove

we've had this committee on january 6, there republican committee that looked into january 6. if they're going to be another january 6 committee and the 118th congress? guest: i'm not sure that there will be, although we do know that trump has made it clear he plans even on day one to pardon some of the people who participated in the attack on the capitol who have been met with the law and who are in prison, some of them. there is a chance that there is some kind of investigation on that side of. we know that republicans want to dig into have a january 6 fallout went and how people have those investigations played out, but we also know that many republicans are trying to move past january 6 entirely, that is kind of their line when you asked him about it, they are looking forward, not to the past. at least for now i expect january 6 not to be a topic. host: less than 10 minutes left this morning. first time on since you wrote the story back in december about the senate, about a bipartisan border deal. what have been the developments in what is the deal? guest: we know for sure

this is before the senate finance committee. i have gotten questions from people asking why the finance committee, if this is a health position. among the numerous agencies that hhs oversees it includes the centers for medicare and medicaid services. a large portion of the budget. looks like senators here are getting in their places for the start of this hearing. this is a colossal job and the senators want to make sure robert f kennedy junior is ready to take it on. he wants to dispel misunderstandings with his position. they want clarification on vaccines, abortion and some of the financials that he has incurred with the work he has done at law firms that have gone after vaccine makers. there is a lot of that we'll be hearing today, questioning on statements he has made in the past that's part of the issue in some ways of being such a political celebrity, being a health celebrity, being somebody from such a prominent family. a long history of things you have stated in the public sphere so we're expecting that there will be quo

this the members of this committee have. i would say that with regard to the attack on medicaid that we just heard, that was a false attack. it's been proven false overnight. the medicaid portal is operating efficiently today and was never intended to be shut down. >> would the gentleman yield? since he's mentioned my name, there was a significant amount of time yesterday where there was bedlam across the country. i hope it's being corrected, but there were problems all through the day. >> there certainly. >> were attacks yesterday. the problem has been clarified and the medicaid portal is fully operational as we speak. mr. kennedy, before i turn the time over to you to share your opening statement, i would like to give you a brief introduction. the son of senator robert f kennedy and nephew of president john f kennedy, robert kennedy jr, has been an advocate for consumers since 1985. after graduating from harvard university, mr. kennedy studied at the london school of economics and received his law degree from the universit

committee failed.-- that house republican committee failed. and another in 2018 that president trump killed. i was part of a bipartisan deal that was significant for the border that president trump killed. the notion that democratic senators are for open borders and allowing illegal aliens to vote is a fantasy, and so i really appreciate the opportunity to meet with you, but now i have questions about if you fall for that fantasy, i will have to ponder that. >> we are very proud that on the house side we passed hr 2, the most significant border security package that chuck shumer failed to bring up in the senate. that would return the effective policies of president trump. the american people voted loudly and clearly when it came to securing our borders and the failings of the past four years. i'm not going to apologize for my commitment to securing the border when i represent a significant part of the u.s., a major sector where we had a skyrocketing of a legals -- of illegals crossing there. on the iss

what a disgrace to this committee to have the committee of impeachment simply take from other entities and rubber-stamp it. you see, why do the things that i say matter about fact witnesses and actually hearing and actually having us a due process? because, by the way, just a couple of months ago, the democrats got all sort of dressed up, if you would, and says, we're going to have due process protection for the president and good fairness throughout this. this is the only committee in which the president would even have a possibility. but no offense to you, the law professors. the president has nothing to ask you. you're not going to provide anything he can't read, and his attorneys have nothing to ask. put witnesses in here that can be fact witnesses who can be actually cross-examined. that's fairness, and every attorney on this panel knows that. this is a sham. but you know what i also see here is quotes like this, "there must never be a narrowly voted impeachment or an impeachment supported by one of our major political parties or imposed by another. such an impeachment will produc

i didn't think by committee colleagues on armed services committee with a disrespected us.i will say to all of my republican colleagues here if there's ever a nominee by any comedent who refuses to meet with you when you're on the committee of your station overseeing that nominee, i will publicly raise hell on your behalf. nominees should meet with the committee's just as representative stefanik did and representative stefanik while have a question about some of the campaign rhetoric amuck when asked about it because that's in the past, i do priest at the fact you were courteous, informed, civilnf and candid in meeting with me.in i told you i two concerns, engagement and western hemisphere. you've convinced me you were nominated for this position not toge disengage but to engage ani appreciate that. in fact, you wanted this position and you wouldn't have wanted otherwise and that's great. on the western hemisphere you go to be working with the secretary of state we approved unanimously, , senator rubio. senator rubio talk at some length about a number of topics on america a

this committee and the senate nato _ this committee and the senate nato observer— this committee andat point repeatedly and - nato observer group is made that point repeatedly and we| that point repeatedly and we are now _ that point repeatedly and we are now up _ that point repeatedly and we are now up to— that point repeatedly and we are now up to 23— that point repeatedly and we are now up to 23 of- that point repeatedly and we are now up to 23 of the - that point repeatedly and we are now up to 23 of the 32 i that point repeatedly and we i are now up to 23 of the 32 nato patients— are now up to 23 of the 32 nato patients who _ are now up to 23 of the 32 nato patients who are _ are now up to 23 of the 32 nato patients who are meeting - are now up to 23 of the 32 nato patients who are meeting their| patients who are meeting their 2% of— patients who are meeting their 2% of gdp, _ patients who are meeting their 2% of gdp, and— patients who are meeting their 2% of gdp, and we _ patients who are meeting their 2% of gdp, and we have - patients who are meeting their 2% of gdp, and we ha