to ban congressional landmarks. in my written testimony i discussed each of these with my limited time now i will focus on the last decision the one to ban congressional earmarks. i believe one of the biggest mistakes they made, an exceeding spending authority, involved banning remarks. during the 2000 and culminating in the 2010 earmarks as were painted as a coveted for corruption. funding of needless projects, to support friends members and donors of congress. much of this was hyperbole, as earmarking was used by only a handful of members of the past. in response to those pieces, congress tried to get structure world. it puts frictions on what they could request, the acted unprecedented levels of transparency. that transparency allowed public oversight, to compliment congressional oversight. those rules imperfect but a step in the right direction, were deemed insufficient to sustain the practice, and politics rather than prudence, ultimately won the day. our legislators on both sides of the aisle,'s legislators wh

congressional oversight over president misconduct. professor jeremi suri and professor kathryn brownell talk about the impeachment, including current proceedings against president trump. the national history center hosted this event for members of congress, and their staff. >> ok, shall we get started? thank you for attending. a very timely events on a timely day. good morning, i am the direct of the national -- the director of the national history center, and i want to welcome you on this briefing of progression -- congressional oversight of presidential misconduct. this is an ongoing series that tongs historical perspective issues that congress is currently addressing. i should stress that the center is a strictly nonpartisan entity, and that the purpose of this program, and the others we do is not to advocate for any particular policies, but to provide historical context that can help inform policymakers and the public as they deal with difficult issues. toore handing this over james banner, i want to thank the support of the mello

less than 200 americans have received the congressional gold medal.first individual to receive this award was general george washington. today the first professional football player to win it grew up in the state of washington. i think steve has a lot in common with the father of our country. like washington, steve never quits and he inspires others to fight for a cause greater than yourself. president washington once said the harder the conflict, the greater the triumph. i'm sure, steve, you would tell us the same. als is a very difficult condition. it is a cruel disease that paralyzes the body. but those fighting als surely want us to know that this condition cannot take away their fighting spirit. it will never diminish their will and determination. though finding a cure may be difficult, the difficulty will only make the triumph of discovering one all the greater. with this incredible organization, team gleason, steve is leading the charge to making a difference in the lives of thousands of americans. so remember this, independence seemed like a d

i come from a congressional district -- natalie has been to my district. early in your career you worked in the congressional district i am from at a tv station. i represent the northwest corner of the state of illinois. in illinois we have 18 members of congress, 13 are democrats and five are republicans. 12 of the 13 are from chicagoland. i am the 13th. i am what is called a downstate illinois in. thes by the nature and makeup of downstate illinois is more rural and much more republican leaning. i served in a district that it hastrump won, moved 18 points from president obama to president trump in 2016. last year i won by 24 points. the biggest margin of any democrat in the country in a trump district. i share that background because this was the first year in the history of the democratic caucus where we had a competitive race to figure out who is going to chair the democratic campaign. i would argue that my colleagues wanted somebody in this position who understands how to win in the tough districts. we have one of the biggest freshman classes in about

the one to ban congressional earmarks. one of the most significant mistakes congress mainde involved in marks. during the elections, earmarks were painted as a coven for corruption, funding needless problem projects to support donf congress. ash of this was hyperbole earmarking was used only by a handful of members in the past to putgress chose tighter rules around the practice. that included restrictions on what members could request and for whom, the rules also enacted unprecedented levels of transparency in an effort to dissuade the bad acts that made headlines at the time. that allowed public oversight to complement congressional oversight. aose rules, imperfect, but step in the right direction, were deemed insufficient to sustain the practice and politics rather than prudence ultimately won the day. legislatures on both sides, who rarely agree on anything opposed the ban, recognizing this was a separation of powers issue that would weaken the legislative and strengthen the executive. they were right. legislato underst

congressional choices have led to an untenable scenario.his has happened in three ways, the breakdown in the appropriations process, the weakening of congressional oversight and the decision to ban earmarks. i discuss each of these. but in my limited time now i'll focus on the last decision, the one to ban earmarks. i believe one of the most significant mistakes congress made in ceding -- during the 2000s and culminating in the 2010 elections, earmarks were painted for corruption, a funding to benefit the friends, supporters and donors of members of congress. much of this was hyper boly as it was abused only by a handful of members in the past. but in response to those abuses congress chose to institute tighter rules. those rules included restrictions on what members could request and for whom. the rules also enacted unprecedented levels of transparency in an effort to dissuade members from engaging in bad acts that made headlines. that allowed public oversight to compliment congressional oversight. those rules imperfect but a step in the r

so many more congressional seats coming into texas. so this is something we have to really think about. we're also competing as i mentioned earlier, there is a special election with a woman named eliz markowitz, a great candidate on january 28th. beto o'rourke did not win that seat but he came close. so as i said earlier, we're sending a staffer down. i'm heading down to door knock on saturday which is exciting and there has been a lot of national attention on this race. there has also been a texan, similar to the wave of resignations at the congressional level of the ballot at the state legislative levels and those republican open seats make it quite a bit easier for us to win and flip seats from red to blue. we only need nine seats as i said earlier at the house and beto o'rourke won every seat in the past so in addition to the markowitz seat that is up, we have nine more great targets to go after. democrats in texas made significant progress on this path flipping so many seats red to blue in the last cycle. the model used in virgini

balcerski: well, again, the congressional temperance society was the big surprise. that somehow this burgeoning national temperance movement was able to convince a series of politicians to take on what i thought at that time was a fairly early reform movement. by comparison, abolition which would become one of the most divisive issues politically in its period won't have proponents until the 1840's and by the 1850's. to imagine in the early 1830's with there was a group of congressman in favor of temperance was the greatest surprise. then try to think about politically what that meant. in the 1830's. what i have found was that perhaps it was 1/10 of the senate. it was a minority position. as compared to abolition, as compared to anti-slavery politics, temperance will decline. starts outperance strong, by the time of the civil war, they move on to prohibition politics but even that will decline after 1855. it's sort of like the movement i think is somewhat almost like a reforms likether slavery. asked you where members of congress would have a drink on capitol hill a

we got to pay for this, and we are not going to ay for it by losing a congressional office. that's easy. that's not the kind of unishment we are going to get for the way we are treating people. there's going to be a day of of this. for all knowing that people are withhold the you money. the chief executive officer of country knows what's going on and we, who are here in aware of what's being denied. for the chief andutive officer to send it it will be done, but it's not taking place. appear today, i rise because i love my country. love the people of puerto rico. they are americans, by the way, citizens, by the way. i love them and i refuse to on my watcho happen without my at least standing and calling it to the attention of the american public. responsibility,a and obligation to say something behavior, type of especially when there are 435 of about can do something it, have done something about it, but there's one person who to allow justice to be done. president, what is wrong you? yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: members re reminded to direct th

the current hostilities are not pursuant to a previously passed congressional authorization. 2001 authorization forli use of military force authorized military action against the perpetrators of the 911 attack. ironic is not a perpetrator of the 911 attack and there is no argument that they are covered by that authorization. there is a separate authorization in 2002, that is the most recent one that is been passed in authorized action to topple the eye rocky government saddam hussein. that guy is long gone. long gone and that does not aspermit a tax on ironic or the current iraqi leadership such as the individuals who were killed in the two sets of u.s. strikes. so with these two threshold questions meant, hostilities are underway as defined by the war powers act, and they are not subject to a previous authorization, we have now filed a resolution to get congress to reassert its congressional role. the resolution demands of the u.s. forces be withdrawn from hostilities against iran unless, unless congress affirmatively passes a declaration of war or authorization, or the unit

are you comfortable with the length of time between the strike and the congressional briefing? >> well, there isn't much that i'm comfortable about this situation, and i mean the briefing obviously was not given in advance to the leaders of the intelligence committees and foreign affairs committee, the gang of eight as they're called. there was no conferral as is kuft mary. we're working on the house side. i don't believe that's been finalized yet on our end. there's a lack of information, but that is kind of pattern and practice with this administration. it's not conferring with congress, not telling congressional leaders what's going on, and certainly not telling our allies either. that seems to be the trend.

the congressional gold medal is awarded only to the most uncommon people who show incredible bravery, dedication and determination to advance their fields, their country and all humankind. steve is undoubtedly an uncommon person. from an early age, he was an uncommon athlete. in high school in spo can, steve won back-to-back league m.v.p. awards playing football. and went on to play both football and baseball at washington state university, my

no congressional authority. no approval for the air strikes.remains unclear who, if anyone, in congress was briefed about this. and of course, another large concern being the consequences of this action. we heard from democratic senator of connecticut, murphy. take a listen to this. he says, did america just assassinate, without any congressional authorization, the second-most powerful person in iran, knowing thi iningly setti potential national war? the house speaker has called for a briefing for all of congress to go over what happened. and we have heard from sources that say key officials on certain committees will be briefed later today. again, no word on what exactly that will look like. i want to offer a piece of context here. it's very important talking to the analysts. president trump is something that since 2016, said that he doesn't want to be in the middle east. he said he wants to withdraw troops. he's lamented the big footprint that the u.s. has had in the middle east. but now, a lot of analysts are concerned this is going to make

it's not conferring with congress, not telling congressional leaders what's

this is a big break with past history and tradition of congressional leadership, at a minimum, beingriefed on what the reason was and what the imminent threat was behind taking this drastic step. >> and ned pointing out that all the information they've been given is classified. meantime speaker pelosi says leading the charge of this resolution will be michigan congresswoman elissa slotkin. she was on "morning joe" a little earlier today. i want to play a little bit of that. >> every president, this one, past, future, all have the right to self-defense, always. they don't have to go to congress to deal with that. if we're under imminent threat, we should go. that's exactly why i want to know the basis of that. i have no problem with that. what i have a problem with is the larger conversation of where this leads. we've already started to see events turn that were largely predictable that could inadvertently lead us into a conflict. so shouldn't we have a conversation about that? i'm not trying to be secretary of state. i'm trying to understand if we as a nation should be having a conve

it's an honor to work as vice chair of the congressional caucus. and thank you for your long work on this which inspired me. it's great to be with my home state senator and senator gym brand. thank you. i want to make two points about why we are here. first, we are exercising our authority and our obligation to assert our power over going to war. second, we have to use all the tools in our toolbox. and the very biggest tool in our toolbox is the power of the purse. so that is why the congressional progressive caucus 100 member strong in the house of representatives, 40% of the democratic caucus has endorsed both representative kana's bill and representative lee's reveal of aoms of 2001 and 2002 and we are working closely with the leadership and hoping to bring that to the floor within the next week. we understand several things. number one, war is devastating. it is devastating. hundreds of thousands lose lives in the war in iraq. we know that's true. we know families are split, countries are destroyed and the impacts continue for years to come. wh

both the legislative maps and the congressional maps. and there's why there is so much power. >> the states are our first line of defense. with the gridlock that's in washington. washington absolutely ground a stop. the state serve sss a fire wall against the administration policies. we will obviously beat donald trump in 2020. we have to do that. but there's been huge progress in-state. as if you looks at the supreme court where we could lose rotections for roe and pre productive choice, the states have started to protect. the a.c.a. and some of them mental health. the affordable care about. the states have started to make sure that the controversial practice of lgbt conversion therapy has ended. in the statement. >> states like california, washington, oregon and states across the country join the paris climate accords. so the progress that we're seing in the state california has said. the trump administration punches once and we know they will punch again. they will absolutely build this fire wham. we're confidence and strong. we are b

later this week and the democrats are still angry with donald trump for failing to seek congressional approval for his actions in the middle east artie's kill of more . promise decision to kill iran's top general isn't exactly bringing peace and stability to the middle east as the world is on edge waiting to see how bad the fallout will be democrats have spoken up however the objection of the democrats isn't that kill got some solid money but that he did it without their permission the operation against solo money in iraq was conducted without specific authorization and any advance notification or consultation with congress there is usually the congressional consulting process it's both constitutionally required we see a gradual march to military action directly or indirectly with iran that has not been authorized by congress but they did actually have a chance to stop trump the recent $738000000000.00 defense spending bill could have included amendments that tied trump's hands and mandated he not carry out any attacks against iran no federal funds may be used for any use of military

does that require congressional sent -- congressional consent? yes, it does. and we had no indication from them that they might feel they needed to come to congress to get support for that action. it was deeply concerning today. >> the last thing i would say is that i think we all know that iran and soleimani's strategic objective in iraq has all along been to push out the united states, and reduce our influence in iraq. they have been very open about that for years. and our strike, what we did, actually is allowing iran, and in death, not in life, to be able to accomplish that objective. because we have already seen actions calling for the complete withdrawal of u.s. forces there is no doubt our position in iraq today is weaker than it was before. we are all seeing the results of that right now. reporter: can you explain why republicans [inaudible]

in states like texas, where they are gaining an additional congressional seat, one thing we are looking at is our ability to flip the texas statehouse from red to blue. we only need nine seats to flip texas. beto o'rourke won all of those seats last cycle. we have an upcoming special election in texas. it is not make or break to win the chamber, but if we flip it from red to blue, having a democrat holding the texas speaker's gavel gives us 80 -- seat at the table for redistricting. in 2010, republicans had this national strategy where they had an effort of flipping state legislatures and the idea was they wanted to get a 10 year control on the united states congress. now we are doing everything we can. we are better positioned than ever to flip state legislatures red to blue in advance of the 2021 congressional legislative redistricting. host: for those not involved in public -- politics, when you say flip, a slain what you mean. -- explain what you mean. guest: we have a national strategy to flip 13 states red to blue. the republicans have done a great effort to control legislative ch

this could be about congressional regulations, the houses hr1, the attempt to create a congressional, nationwide regulation that either incentivizes, or forces the states to engage in certain types of good practices. the second part is less effective, and has been less effective, and it has been through the courts. there are some constitutional limitations against regional discrimination, but the types of constitutional restrictions we would like to see, limitations on voter ideas, for example, those have not been successful. we have two possibilities of centralizing, and recording national norms. and the best thing we can do is probably spreading the norm of the importance of voting and allowing using the mechanisms of the say to continue to ratchet up the process of voting. it is a decentralized process. it is not always going to be perfectly lay near. you see states, particularly now, voting in issues. it is the norm my colleague calls strategic disenfranchisement. we are using this is a way of gaining political power. and it is utilized in a partisan way. it is not going to be per

a bill which would prevent any funds from being used for a war with iran without congressional approval. in the senate this bill has been cosponsored by senator schumer, leahy, and others. let me also say that i'm very pleased that the house leadership has committed to seeing that congresswoman lee's repeal of the 2002 iraq aumf both come up for votes and i look forward to working with them to get our legislation passed in the senate. when i look back upon american history, i remember the two most significant foreign policy mistakes our country made in the modern era. and those were the war in vietnam and the war in iraq. and let us be clear, we were led into both of those wars by a series of lies. the result, the war in vietnam cost us 59,000 american deaths and many others came home wounded in body and spirit. in fact, a whole generation, my generation, was devastated by that war. the casualties in vietnam, laos and cambodia are almost incalculable but they run into the millions of people. in 2002 and 2003, in terms of iraq, we were told over and over again that saddam hussein had wea

thank you for your service to the first congressional district of georgia, ms. gillis. congratulations on a retirement well deserved. . mr. speaker, i rise today to remember the life of mrs. claire frazier who passed away on december 23, 2019, at the age of 58, after a battle with cancer. she dedicated her life to serving her alma mater, young harris college. a member of the board of trustees for over a decade, she served on a number of different committees that impacted daily campus life, including committees on academic affairs, development, and student affairs. she also created the would he ford-frazier scholarship to help the young harris education be accessible as possible for deserving students. a testament to her work, the executive boardroom at the college is named in her honor and she won the susan b. harris award from the alumni association in 2008. similar to her generosity with the college, those who knew her remember that she was always the first person to offer help to someone in need. my thoughts and prayers will be with the family during this most diffic

the california democrat is also chair of the congressional black caucus.aren bass. ( cheers and applause ) ♪ >> trevor: welcome back to the show. >> thank you. thanks for having me. >> trevor: it has been a few years since you have been here and it's safe to say a few things have happened since you have been here. >> yes. >> trevor: life has changed dramatically for congressional black caucus specifically. >> yes. >> trevor: let's talk about the news of the day, iran. >> yes. >> trevor: this is one of the stories where many people are speculating as to what trump's true intentions were. >> right. >> trevor: a lot of people are saying this could be america getting into another war where a president does it on his own with no congressional approval as it's supposed to happen. what do you make of that especially as the trump administration is saying, no, this is linked to 9/11 and everything that happened before, it's not a new war. >> who knows? the problem is the president has lied more than 10,000 times since he's been in office, so how can we believe anyt

never answer a congressional subpoena? he denies congress the right to any information necessary to challenge his power. would madison and hamilton and washington support for moving president let him do whatever he wants and brazenly had taken up nor any effort to investigate even when backed by subpoenas as the law requires him to obey? and to do all these questions is a resounding yes. before diving in i'd like to set the historical scene. the framers were wise and so they worried presidents would abuse their powers for personal gain. they fear that someday the president might mistake himself for a king whose decisions cannot be questioned whose conduct cannot be investigated whose power transcends the rule of law. such a would-be king would certainly think things like quote i have the right to do whatever it wants as president. he might believe that it is quote illegitimate for anyone to investigate him. of course not even the framers could have imagined the president would say these things out loud. the president with

munitions without congressional authorization.eader pelosi was asked, madam leader, you're saying that the president did not need authorization initially and still does not need any authorization from congress on libya? her answer was, quote, yes. she said, i believe the limited nature of this engagement allows the president to go forward. i'm satisfied the president has the authority he needs to go ahead. that logic should apply far more in the strike against soleimani to protect americans. i'm pleased the administration did not hesitate to take bold action given the high threat level. soleimani showed us through the embassy attack and the attacks on u.s. force that is he was serious about hurting -- forces that he was serious about hurting americans. our intelligence community saw his next plan coming together in our military under direction from our commander in chief acted. they saw the storm coming and they stopped it. i want to thank the president and the men and women of our intelligence community and the military for uphol

many of our legislative seats are underneath those congressional targets. our next target is arizona. in arizona there's a republican trifecta at this time but we made significant gains in the last election cycle. this was once a republican stronghold, rapidly turning blue. the last time we controlled the state senate was 1992. the last time we controlled the arizona state house was 1964. a long, long time ago. redistricting is a nonpartisan process by submission. republicans have tried to dismant that will in the sate. -- state. that's why we're so competitive in the state. we know we can win we are only two seats away in the state house three seats away in the senate. this is increasingly a presidential battleground, the hottest u.s. senate race. one of the hottest u.s. senate races in the country with mark kelly on the ballot there as well. certainly a very competitive electoral environment. it will allow us to run great campaigns, recruit great candidates to flip the arizona house red to blue. i also want to announce that we have made our earliest off-y

never answer a congressional subpoena? he denies congress the right to any information necessary to challenge his power. would madison and hamilton and washington support for moving president let him do whatever he wants and brazenly had taken up nor any effort to investigate even when backed by subpoenas as the law requires him to obey? and to do all these questions is a resounding yes. before diving in i'd like to set the historical scene. the framers were wise and so they worried presidents would abuse their powers for personal gain. they fear that someday the president might mistake himself for a king whose decisions cannot be questioned whose conduct cannot be investigated whose power transcends the rule of law. such a would-be king would certainly think things like quote i have the right to do whatever it wants as president. he might believe that it is quote illegitimate for anyone to investigate him. of course not even the framers could have imagined the president would say these things out loud. the president with

i want the ask you about congressional notification.we just had breaking news from adam schiff from the house side. he said that this is american action leading to iranian reaction. but how do you see that? because this, as i understand it, was american reaction to what soleimani had done for years and especially what the contractor and we have this intel that they were planning something else. >> first of all, schiff has lost all credibility and i don't think we should take his words seriously. democrats are criticizing the president now were eviscerating him for pulling troops out of syria, arguing that would be a gift to iran. so which is it? stand up to iran or not? the president has made the right call here in taking soleimani and others off the battlefield. this is a good day. i would encourage my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, can we lay down our partisan tribal warfare and celebrate the fact that we did a good thing here, this will restore our deterrent posture and fundamentally a defensive action against terrorists

and there was no congressional authority at all.g the concern over the revenge or the repercussions. i want to show you a tweet here from chris murphy from connecticut. he said, did america just assassinate the second-most powerful person in iran, knowingly set off a potential massive regional war? we know that speaker pelosi has called for an immediate briefing of congress. we heard that key aids up on capitol hill will be briefed later today. we'll keep our eye to the ground on what that will look like. this is a president that campaigned on getting our troops out of the middle east. experts are saying this is not going to help that cause. >> this is somebody that wanted to get out of wars. said that repeatedly. >>> if iran does choose to respond with force, israel would be one obvious target. in response to the killing, israel is assessing its security this morning. oren liebermann is live for us on the israel/lebanon border. oren? >> reporter: a security assessment that just wrapped up. that was with the idf chief of staff and s

and in the nonstop congressional investigations that followed. including the attempted mueller redo by the house judiciary committee which the managers would apparently like to sneak in the back door here. the house managers may not like your style. you may not like his style, but one might argue that he is everything claret darrow said a defense lawyer must be, outrageous, irreverent, blasphemous, a rogue, a renegade. the fact is in the end after a two-year siege on the presidency, two inspector general reports and a $32 million special counsel investigation turns out rudy was spot on. seems to me if we are keeping score on who got it right on allegations of size of use, egregious misconduct at the highest level of the fbi, alleged collusion between the trump campaign and russia, and suppose it obstruction of justice in connection with the special counsel investigation the score is mayor giuliani four, mr. schiff zero. but in this trial in this moment, mr. giuliani is just a minor player. that shiny object designed to distract you. senators, i u

but he violated -- there was no congressional authorization to go into pakistan.t least here there's a congressional authorization for our forces to be on the ground and using military power. the president has clear authority under article 2 to act when our nation and our military is at risk. the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said, and i quote, the trigger for the drone strike that killed soleimani was clear, unambiguous intelligence, indicating a significant campaign of violence against the united states in the days, weeks and months and that the administration would have been culpabley negligent if it didn't act. these people understand one thing and it's strength. you'll recall that when president clinton pulled our forces out of somalia after we got the black eye on "black hawk down," bin laden cited that as proof that the americans run away, that they won't stand and fight. i've been to combat three times in this region of the world, twice in iraq and once in afghanistan. i've looked these individuals in the eye. it's strength that they understand. an

these soldiers are there under congressional authority.y are out there talking about that stuff. it's ridiculous. >> raymond: colonel, walid, congressman, thank you for being here. we'll see what iran does next and stay in touch. coming up, does nancy pelosi think she is the president? she and other dems are whining about no trump not getting permission to kill soleimani. but did he needed? congressman matt gaetz and lee zeldin fire back next. i am totally blind. and non-24 can make me show up too early... or too late. or make me feel like i'm not really "there." talk to your doctor, and call 844-234-2424. beyond the routine checkups. beyond the not-so-routine cases. comcast business is helping doctors provide care in whole new ways. all working with a new generation of technologies powered by our gig-speed network. because beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected. to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond. ♪ >> raymond: congressional democrats are furi

the gang of eight, congressional leadership is briefed on tensions with iran ahead of a wide every congressional briefing set to take place tomorrow. that is your backdrop with the dow down 120. good to be with you. i'm connell mcshane. melissa: i'm melissa francis. this is "after the bell." nasdaq also ending in negative territory. first, here is what is new at this hour. clearing a major hurdle. we are one step closer to a final senate vote on the usmca trade deal but will the push to schedule president trump's impeachment trial end up derailing progress in our nation's capitol? we are going to talk to senator chuck grassley, the chairman of the senate finance committee just moments from now. his own version of the electronic slide. oh, my goodness. elon musk sell operating a milestone for tesla in china. we don't need to see more of that dancing. is that dancing? i'm not sure that is what it is. man's best friend going to the robots. you're new favorite pet could be electronic. your interactions will help shape its personality. we'll have details later in the hour. connell: fox business team

these soldiers are there under congressional authority.y are out there talking about that stuff. it's ridiculous. >> raymond: colonel, walid, congressman, thank you for being here. we'll see what iran does next and stay in touch. coming up, does nancy pelosi think she is the president? she and other dems are whining about trump not getting permission to kill soleimani. but did he needed? congressman matt gaetz and lee zeldin fire back next. need? need? i am totally blind. and non-24 can throw my days and nights out of sync, keeping me from the things i love to do. talk to your doctor, and call 844-214-2424. ♪ >> raymond: congressional democrats are furious with president trump for not getting their permission to strike terrorist mastermind qassem soleimani. >> the operation against soleimani in iraq was conducted without authorization or advance notification or consultation with congress. i'm a member of the gang of eight, which is typically briefed in advance of operations of this levels, and it was not. >> raymond: congressman matt gaetz

munitions without congressional authorization. leader pelosi was asked, madam leader, you're saying that the president did not need authorization initially and still does not need any authorization from congress on libya? her answer was, quote, yes. she said, i believe the limited nature of this engagement allows the president to go forward. i'm satisfied the president has the authority he needs to go ahead. that logic should apply far more in the strike against soleimani to protect americans. i'm pleased the administration did not hesitate to take bold action given the high threat level. soleimani showed us through the embassy attack and the attacks on u.s. force that is he was serious about hurting -- forces that he was serious about hurting americans. our intelligence community saw his next plan coming together in our military under direction from our commander in chief acted. they saw the storm coming and they stopped it. i want to thank the president and the men and women of our intelligence community and the military for uph

he did not brief the congressional leadership prior to taking out anwar al-awlaki in yemen.is: he never said it is because i don't trust them to lead. >> this is standard procedure. as soon as soleimani was taken off the battlefield the "gang of eight" was notified, intelligence committees and key leaders in congress were notified. i participated in the number of those calls. and we had a very long briefing as you referenced at top of your show. 75 minutes with all the members of congress both house and senate. so we think we met our obligations notifying congress. we think we're consistent with the obama administration, bush administration, clinton administration. chris: specifically, is there reason to believe that if that information had been given to adam schiff, he would have leaked it? >> look i think there is always a concern when you have an operation that is this sensitive, lives of our servicemen and women are in danger as we go after a leading terrorist, you have to be extraordinarily careful with that information no matter who it is. chris: finally as you know th

he has rejected congressional scrutiny and put off a number of democrats.now hat in hand saying help me. they're using the leverage they have over him now. whether he wants that transfer of secret service bad enough to give in on this demand, i guess we have to wait and see. >> david fahrenthold, thank you for spending time with us. mnuchin, again, because it's all relative, right, you cover politics and compared to attorney general barr and others, but he is the guy who has been a human shield for donald trump's secret and shady business dealings as president. >> and all through the russia investigation as well when we were trying to get answers about his tax returns which may or may not be quite illuminating. he has fought that. he has total control over that unless we go through a very lengthy court process. let's also highlight some of the amazing numbers david had in there. $1.3 million per visit to mar-a-lago? >> unbelievable. >> we're not mathematicians but this is a lot of money going into trump's pocket from the u.s. government. it's a circular --

democrats are still angry with trump's middle east decision making mainly because he didn't get congressional approval this killam open explains they had the chance but voted against. the promise decision to kill iran's top general isn't exactly bringing peace and stability to the middle east as the world is on edge waiting to see how bad the fallout will be democrats have spoken up however the objection of the democrats isn't that trump killed got some solid money but that he did it without their permission the operation against the money in iraq was conducted without specific authorization and any advance notification or consultation with congress there is usually a congressional consulting process it's both constitutionally required we see a gradual march to military action directly or indirectly with iran that has not been authorized by congress but they did actually have a chance to stop trump the recent $738000000000.00 defense spending bill could have included amendments that tied trump's hands and mandated he not carry out any attacks against iran no federal funds may be used for any

such a wholesale obstruction of congressional impeachment has never before occurred in our democracy. and it represents one of the most blatant efforts of a cover-up in history. if not remedied by his conviction in the senate and removal from office, president trump's abuse of his office and obstruction of congress will permanently alter the balance of power among the branches of government, inviting future presidents to operate as if they are also beyond the reach of accountability, congressional oversight, and the law. on the basis of this egregious misconduct, the house of representatives returned to articles of impeachment against the president, first charging president trump corruptly abused the powers of the presidency toe in the upcoming presidential election for his personal political benefit. and second, president trump obstructed and impeachment inquiry into that abuse of power in order to cover up his misconduct. the house did not take this extraordinarily -- extraordinary stuff lately. as we will discuss, impeachment exists for cases of which the conduct of the president r

leaders before a sensitive raid on usama bin laden, he did not brief the congressional leaders prior to taking out in yemen. >> chris: but not just because they don't trust them to lead. >> just as he was taken off the battlefield, the intelligence committees and key leaders in congress were notified. i participated in a number of those calls we had a very long briefing you mentioned at the top of your show, 75 minutes with all the members of congress both house and senate so we have met our obligations and we are also very consistent with what the obama administration and bush administration and clinton administration. >> chris: is there reason to avleakedthat that information >> i think there is always a concern when you have an operation that is the sensitive as we go after leading terrorist coming of to be extreme a careful no matter who it is. >> chris: finally, the house has voted to limit the president's war powers. the senate is working on that. under what circumstances with the administration feel it had to go to congress to get approval for action against ir iran? >> i thin