mr. nadler: mr. chairman, i claim the time nopsition -- time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. nadler: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, this amendment requires the comptroller general to include an estimate of a rule's effect on inflation in the congressional review report. i oppose this amendment because it requires an estimate of rules on inflation, which would require the comptroller general to speculate based on limited evidence how rules that likely have little to do with the economy would effect inflation. the g.a.o. has already reported to congress that they would be unable to assess the rule's impact on the economy with the limited information available. and in any case, the 15 days provided for major rule reports do not allow for the g.a.o. to make a determination on a rule, even if they had the necessary information. adding more requirement, when they lack the necessary time and information to provide a concrete answer, will not heighten the e

mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i rise in strong opposition to this resolution. which would ignore the considered judgment of the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives and make stabilizing brace as favorite tool of mass shooters widely available without a background check. today is one of those clarifying moments when the priorities of the republican majority are in clear display. instead of taking up legislation to reduce gun violence in america, they are here advancing a bill to ensure more deadly weapons are in the hands of mass shooters in this country. what a disgrace. mr. speaker, gun violence continues to take the lives of more than 100 americans every day. it changes how safe we feel in our schools and in our houses of worship. it reduces vibrant cities to somber headlines. it takes their loved ones, old and young, and leaves us with another anniversary of lives cu

mr. nadler: i have the right to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman again is recognized to close. mrs. hageman: this is a very simple amendment that says to the extent that guidance documents are before the court for interpretation, courts must apply de novo review rather than defer to the agency interpretation of that guidance. very simple. something that's appropriate. and ensures we are following our constitutional separation of powers. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: the gentlelady is accurate as to what sopra would do. and for all the reasons i stated before, it's a terrible bill. as terrible as reins is. not going to repeat those arguments. as to this amendment, i don't have to practice law recently. i know how to read the bill. there are lawyers on my staff who know how to read a bill. and we know, as i said before, that courts don't enforce guidance. there is no such thing. guidance issued by agencies tells th

mr. nadler: mr.er, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i rise in strong opposition to this resolution. which would ignore the considered judgment of the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives and make stabilizing brace as favorite tool of mass shooters widely available without a background check. today is one of those clarifying moments when the priorities of the republican majority are in clear display. instead of taking up legislation to reduce gun violence in america, they are here advancing a bill to ensure more deadly weapons are in the hands of mass shooters in this country. what a disgrace. mr. speaker, gun violence continues to take the lives of more than 100 americans every day. it changes how safe we feel in our schools and in our houses of worship. it reduces vibrant cities to somber headlines. it takes their loved ones, old and young, and leaves us with another anniversary of lives cut shor

mr. nadler: mr. speaker. the chair: the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: mr. chairman, at the appropriate time we will offer a motion to recommit this bill to committee. house rule is permitted we would offer the motion with an important amendment to the bill. the amendment would ensure like vulnerable groups like veterans would not be harmed by the politicization and delay of rules under the reins act. it will harm everyone, we must at least ensure those who served in our armed forces are not further harmed by this legislation. at the appropriate time will i ask unanimous consent to enter this amendment into the record. mr. chairman, this legislation is just the latest effort by republicans to dismantle and destroy the regulatory process. the process that protects our health and safety each and every day. regulations ensure we have clean air to breath, clean water to drink, and safe food to eat. they ensure children's toys and cribs are saivment medications are safe and defective. that the plane

mr. nadler: no. mr. mcgovern: that's the thing, no amount of oversight, responsible oversight or regulation can be tolerated because the nra basically says no. they call the shots here. you want your money, you have got to vote the way we want you to vote. in the united states, we keep hearing that the problem of gun violence, the reason we have so many murders by guns is because of mental health. that's what our republican colleagues are telling us. the united states is the only country in the world where we have these mass shootings day after day, week after week. it is a slander on the american people to say that our people are 75 times as mentally ill as those in canada or england or germany or any other country. it is really kind of ironic, especially after the gentleman from texas' comments about the debt ceiling and all the controversy generated by the extreme members of the republican congress over the debt and deficit, and we have to make sure that we are not spending any more money. i'm looking

mr. nadler of new york, thank you, mr. chairman. today's is an important opportunity to commemorate rate the tulsa greenwood race massacre of 1921 and to consider what legal and policy measures might enacted to compensate the survivors, their descendants and tulsa's greater black community. nearly 100 years ago in what the latest in john hope franklin described as a firestorm of hatred, violence, it is perhaps unequaled in the peacetime history of the united states. a white mob looted and destroyed nearly 40 square blocks of tulsa's greenwood district, a segregated, yet vibrant black enclave whose prosperous businesses made it known across the country as the black wall street. reportedly, 5 to 10000 strong mob destroyed. many those businesses, along with the district's hospitals, churches and private homes, leaving almost 9000 greenwood residents homeless, according to a 2001 report by the oklahoma state. by an oklahoma state to study the massacre. one can one credible contemporary source estimated the death toll of 300 people far h

mr. nadler: mr.hairman, today we are considering a bill that would require both houses of congress to vote to approve and for the president to sign a motion of approval for any major rule in progress from our executive branch. we are considering this bill just a week after a splinter group of the far-right republicans voted down a rule and held our legislative calendar hostage all to prove a point about a debt ceiling that already has passed congress and has been signed by the president. even before this radical move, i had no doubt that the reins act would grind to a halt the most impactful actions by our reg regulatory state. but now seeing what a handful of members will do to make a point, i am certain we can't let this bad legislation move forward. the reins act would put our constituents in harm's way. even if the underlying policy behind the reins act was a good idea, which it emphatically is not, i would argue against it because it is unconstitutional. by allowing a regulation to be blocked fr

mr. nadler give comments that were not prepared by his staff.so i don't know if he believes that or just his staff that writes up these talking points for him. but there was no acknowledgment of the malfeasance by the fbi today, they don't want to talk about the report, but things unrelated to the report, they want to talk about russia and donald trump, but not the malfeasance of the fbi that ran amuck during this time, during the clinton-trump campaign, i'm so grateful to mr. durham for coming before us. what i have come to learn since coming to congress, if you are speaking the truth and it does not fit the democratic narrative, then democrats are going to pounce on the messenger and that's what they did today. >> john: we will see what comes of this, congressman lance gooden, thank you so much. coming up new at 2:00, the u.s. coast guard giving an update moments ago in the missing titanic submersible, and saying they have heard sounds and banging noises from the search area for a second straight day now. we will speak with rear admiral john m

mr. nadler: mr. speaker, on that i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 220. the nays are 211. the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that when the house adjourn today it adjourn to meet at 2 p.m. tomorrow. and further with the house adjourn on that day it adjourn to meet on tuesday, june 20, 202

mr. ranking member nadler, called your report an exercise of and ethical ambiguity, mr. lieu called you a partisan hack. however, it seems that they are taking issue not so much with the conclusions of your report, as those of mr. mueller's report. which concluded the investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign, conspired or coordinated with the russian government, in its election interference activities. that conclusion, directly contradicted statements made on the record, by those representatives. for example, mr. schiff, in 2017, 2018, the statement he made such, as the russians offered help the campaign accepted help, the russians gave help, and the president made full use of that help. that is pretty damning. he also, said it's clear evidence on the issue of collusion, he said i think there's plenty of evidence of conclusion pollution, or a conspiracy, in plain sight. it -- to the gentleman yield? >> are those statements -- well the gentleman yields? >> no. >> mr. durham, are those statements ordered? >> i do not believe so. >> mr. nadler stat

mr. lu have attacked two great ranking member nadler called report a political exercise ambiguity mrn hackt seems they're taking issue not so much with the conclusions ofor your report isa mr. bowles report which include the investigation didey not establish members of a truck campaigns conspired with the russia interference. it direct would contradict his statement made on the record by those represented. in example mr. schiff 2017 -- 2018 made statements such as the russians offered help, campaign accepted helper the russians gave help the present made full use ofsc the help on that it's pretty damning also says is t clear evidence of the issue of collusion. there's plenty of evidence of collusion or conspiracy in plain sight. >> examine yields for. >> intradermal those statements supported by the question. >> will gemini yield? >> no. mr. durham are those supported by the muellerer report? >> i do not believe so. >> mr. nadler stated it's clear the, campaign concluded was a lt of evidence about the question was the president about mr. nether also so there's obviously collusion. mr. durh

mr. ranking member nadler, called your report an exercise of and ethical ambiguity, mr. lieu called you a partisan hack. however, it seems that they are taking issue not so much with the conclusions of your report, as those of mr. mueller's report. which concluded the investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign, conspired or coordinated with the russian government, in its election interference activities. that conclusion, directly contradicted statements made on the record, by those representatives. for example, mr. schiff, in 2017, 2018, the statement he made such, as the russians offered help the campaign accepted help, the russians gave help, and the president made full use of that help. that is pretty damning. he also, said it's clear evidence on the issue of collusion, he said i think there's plenty of evidence of conclusion pollution, or a conspiracy, in plain sight. it -- to the gentleman yield? >> are those statements -- we gentleman yields? >> no. >> mr. durham, are those statements ordered? >> i do not believe so. >> mr. nadler stated it'

nadler now. thank you for coming on the programme. mr; coming on the programme.on the programme. my pleasure, i think! what - coming on the programme. my pleasure, i think! what is - coming on the programme. my pleasure, i think! what is your| pleasure, i think! what is your reaction to _ pleasure, i think! what is your reaction to what _ pleasure, i think! what is your reaction to what has _ pleasure, i think! what is your reaction to what hasjust - pleasure, i think! what is your - reaction to what hasjust happened? reaction to what has just happened? i think it is highly regretful. this together with the announcement earlier from together with the announcement earlierfrom nadine dorries, and these are obviously, we are analysing these in real time, so don't know all of the circumstances that have provoked either of these announcements, although we do seem to have more information in a boris johnson's ques, based on what you have just read. johnson's ques, based on what you havejust read. —— borisjohnson's quotes. i want to take into account that there are obvi

because i want to play this sound bite from gerald nadler mainly because it's kind of pre positives truss and i want your response on the other side. watch. >> mr. durham never found what he was looking for, he cannot dispute a single conclusion in the mueller report. he cannot prove a magnificent deep state conspiracy and cannot say that the fbi investigation into the trump's campaign many ties to russia never should have happened. >> trace: i say pre positives truss because it's dishonest he knows crossfire hurricane was bogus. >> ranking member nadler unfortunately started this year off saying we were imagining a border crisis. so you take these things with a grain of salt. here you have a 300 page report that if you read it outlines very clearly how biassed the fbi leadership was. all the things laid out succinctly the guardrails that were not followed, the protocols ignored, the inability to corroborate evidence or interview key witnesses. he talks about this very clearly. and if ranking member nadler had read the report he would have seen those things, too. >> trace: yeah. i want to bring this up because before adam schiff was rebuked tod

mr. nadler: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, yeas and nays are ordered members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 221. the nays are 210. the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. pursuant to house resolution 495 and rule 18, the chair declares the committee in the whole house on the state of the union for further consideration of h.r. 1640. will the gentlewoman from new york, kindly take the chair. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for further consideration of the