mr. lambert: the best explanation that i have heard is that this is all part of the power struggle. those in charge of the security services want to flexed their muscles and show that all of this -- all of these smiles and handshakes have not changed the fact that we are dealing with an enemy and we are going to treat these people as enemies and it is a reminder of who is in charge. the same thing happened under a previous president. there were these serial murders going on in tehran of intellectuals, translators anyone they did not like. the president and his ministers, so-called government, were powerless. they cannot do anything to stop it. the best i can tell is that it is a test of wills between the two sides. poor jason. a wonderful reporter, a wonderful young man. he is unfortunately the victim as are some of these other people. that, again, is one of those issues that we should be and have been discussing with the iranians and not let them off the hook on these things and i understand that when kerry and zerif met one-on-one, these came up. ms. slavin: there are important el

mr. lambert and ms. aham establishing a program official to develop anti-coming systems an amendment number 285 r-1 by mr. lamborn directing an assessment of the directed energy investor base. >> is there any further discussion on the en bloc amendments? gentlemen from colorado. >> mr. chairman, very briefly i have several here. i'm on this subcommittee but i want to mention one in particular. i've worked with representative graham on this. we both have bills, we wrapped it up into one dynamic that you see at the bottom of the page. tunneling is a huge issue people are trying to tunnel into israel. there were 30 tunnels after the last hostilities. at our southern border with tunneling for smuggling and other purposes. so this establishes a joint program for our two countries to work together. other countries could be brought in as well and technology to be developed to detect and defeat tunnels but this is something we can be proud of mr. chairman. i think everyone on this committee would wholeheartedly s

mrs. clinton in the state department. the court unfortunately did not find any obstruction of justice but judge lambert said this about ms.s participation in it. she called the loathsome and he further stated that she was responsible for the most critical error made in the attack at the entire fiasco. her actions were totally inadequate to address the problem. so in a sense that she was responsible for the failure to disclose to the investigators and the megan people about these e-mails, she had been highlighted for special calling out by a federal court judge back during the clinton years. back in 1990 -- i guess the whole scandal took place in the late '90s, and the courts ruling was a bit more recent but i can tell you she was under oath over the e-mail scandal back during the clinton administration. i don't think that's been well understood. so i disagree with the current administration official washington is a active in area of freedom of information act. we filed over 160 requests for instance with state department under the freedom of information act. we should approximately 20 times under the freedom of informatio