ms. edwards, i'll let you conduct the rest of this meeting. ms. jackson lee: let me thank the gentleman from california and applaud the gentlelady for her early, early involvement in leadership on this issue. it was advocates like herself that allowed members of the judiciary committee, which i was a very young member, to be able to draw upon that advocacy and write the legislation at that time and did it with bipartisan support. chairman hyde was the chairman of the judiciary committee at that time and i distinctly remember, i was with senate members today, senate women members, who remember us coming down to the swamp on the senate side to support this law and its writing and it couldn't have been done without the many stories and many advocates like yourself. i'm delighted to serve on the judiciary committee on each and every re-authorization as it comes down. the sadness today to all of us is that we are not able to do this in a bipartisan manner. i will briefly recount, if i can, what it means to a woman and the enormous rang of ages and then

ms. edwards' questions, she and i kind of work as a team a lot of times. i want to enlarge a little bit on her questions and some of the answers that you have given. my dad was a firefighter in the smallest county in the state of texas, 254 counties, they were the smallest. and they had a fire department, one truck. the siren would go off at night, and everybody could hear it. i could hear it too. it would patriotic me up. my dad would get up and run all the way to the fire station because they wanted to be there before lightning and bridges got there, because the first one there got to drive the one truck they had. and there was always a race future there. when it was all over and they'd come home, i'd ask dad how did it go, well, we saved a lot is usually his answer. but it means a lot. and i have to rely on you. i guess administrator mitchell, i'll ask you, how does the united states fire administration, how do you support the rural fire departments? i have a lot of them in my fourth congressional district there. how do you support those? i guess the fu

ms. edwards. if are-of-there are members that wish additional opening statements your statements will be added to the record at this point. i'm like to troupe our witnesses. our first witness is chief ernest mitchell jr. from the federal emergency management agency in charge of the united states fire administration at the department of homeland security. next, dr. john paul jr., division director of fire analysis at the national par friction association. the doctor has been active in fire analysis and research for nearly 35 years. our third witness is chief jim critchley, chief critchley represents the tucson fire kept in my home state of arizona and currently serves as the president of the western chir chief's oh. sour final witness mr. kevin o'connor, assistant to the general president for the international association of firefighters. thank you again for, to our witnesses for being here today. as our witnesses should know, spoken testimony is limited to five minutes each, after all witnesses ha

ms. edwards. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you for this second round of questions. i want to go back to the issue of credentialing, because i recognize that, you know, we have a lot of local fire departments. firefighting is essentially a local activity. but we also have a number of circumstances, particularly in major disasters where we're calling on one jurisdiction to support another jurisdiction. and for me, this is where the question of credential comes forward, because i think it's really important for us to make sure that whomever is responding in whatever jurisdiction has the same capacities so that they kind of fit right into the program and are able to respond appropriately. so mr. o'connor, can you elaborate on the recommendation for credentialing and explain why you think it's important and then if chief mitchell could comment on the status, because i think mr. o'connor, in your testimony you indicated that there is some, you know, lagging because it's been in the hopper since 2006. >> yes. this was something that was brought forth after 9/11 and certain

ms. edwards. if there are members who wish to submit opening statements, they will be added to the record at this point. at this time, we'll proceed to hear from each of our witnesses in order. our first witness is chief ernest -- next we'll hear from dr. john hall jr., director of the national fire protection association. dr. hall has been active in fire able sis and fire research for nearly 35 years. our third witness is chief jim critchley. chief critchley represents the tucson fire department in my home state of arizona and also currently serves as the president of the western fire chiefs' association. our final witness is mr. kevin o'connor, assistant to the general president for the international association of fire tight -- firefighters. spoken testimony is limited to five minutes each. after all witnesses have spoken, members of the committee will have five minutes each to ask questions. i now recognize our first witness, the united states fired a morer, ernest mitchell. >> good morning, c

ms. edwards and john edwards arguments and difficulty in their marriage supports the defense theory sayingthis to cover up the affair from his wife rather than keeping the campaign from moving forward. >> reporter: that is the crux of the came, whether he accepted money to couch the campaign or the campaign didn't have anything to do with it. the prosecution expects to rest the case next week. joe johns, cnn, greensboro, north carolina. >>> thank you, joe. in convicted on all six felony counts, including conspiracy and making false statements, he could face up to 30 years in prison. more on this in the next hour. >>> remember drew peterson, the former illinois police officer charged with murder, he has been locked away more than a year, was back in court friday for allegedly killing his third wife, kathleen savio in 2004. she was found dead in the bathtub. her death was originally ruled an accidental drowning but prosecutors exhumed her body and reopened the case after peterson's fourth wife, stacy peterson, vanished in 2007. there is another twist to all this, friday's hearing comes after

ms. edwards' mother was fighting the cancer that eventually took her life.e now to analyze attorneys kimberly guilfoyle author also the author of the big new thriller eyes of justice. all right, wiehl. she didn't take the stand today, she was supposed to but she didn't. this is basically the defense wants kate edwards on the stand to say what a good guy. >> humanize him. >> bill: what a good guy the dad is? >> that's a major stretch but she is his daughter. she has been sitting behind him this whole trial. i know. >> bill: the prosecutor is going to come in and say are you kidding me? >> right but they have to be careful. the prosecution can't be too hard on her. >> bill: she attacked her. they have to raise questions about why would you say your father is a quality individual when this happened? >> why is the defense putting her on? she really has nothing relevant to say to whether or not. >> bill: to bolster edwards in the eyes of the jury that is he not what he is. >> character witness? that's not really what's at issue here. whether he knew that that cam

ms. edwards' mother was fighting the cancer that eventually took her life.ere now to analyze attorneys kimberly guilfoyle author also the author of the big new thriller eyes of justice. all right, wiehl. she didn't take the stand today, she was supposed to but she didn't. this is basically the defense wants kate edwards on the stand to say what a good guy. >> humanize him. >> bill: what a good guy the dad is? >> that's a major stretch but she is his daughter. she has been sitting behind him this whole trial. i know. >> bill: the prosecutor is going to come in and say are you kidding me? >> right but they have to be careful. the prosecution can't be too hard on her. >> bill: she attacked her. they have to raise questions about why would you say your father is a quality individual when this happened? >> why is the defense putting her on? she really has nothing relevant to say to whether or not. >> bill: to bolster edwards in the eyes of the jury that is he not what he is. >> character witness? that's not really what's at issue here. whether he knew that that c

ms. edwards. >> thank you mr. chairman for this second round of questions. i want to go back to the issue of credentials because i recognize we have a lot of local fire departments, fire fighting is essentially a local activity, but we also have a number of circumstances, particularly major disasters that we are calling on, you know, one jurisdiction to support another the jurisdiction and for me this is for the question comes forward, because i think it's really important to would ever jurisdiction has the same capacity so that they can kind of fit right into the program and are able to respond appropriately. so, mr. o'connor, can you elaborate on the recommendation for the credentials and explain why you think it's important and if chief mitchell could comment on the status, because i think mr. o'connor, in your testimony you indicated that there's some, you know, lagging because it's been in the hopper since 2006 tariffs too this was something the was brought force after line 11 and certainly katrina, and you have actually articulated a very well. i don't

ms. edwards: thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from california reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady rise? ms. ros-lehtinen: i yield myself such time as i may consume. some may put forth the argument that this resolution undermines and threatens the ongoing p-5 plus one negotiations. well, the truth is, mr. speaker, that the iranian regime is using these negotiations as a way to buy time and continue enrichment without any additional sanctions. time and again, the united states has come to the table with iran, made concessions -- made concession after concession and left with nothing in return. in one example last month, the los angeles times reported that u.s. officials are now willing to let iran continue enriching iranian even though multiple u.n. security council resolutions demand that iran immediately halt uranium enrichment. today's "new york times" reports, iran sees success in staaling nuclear issues. it states, iranees -- iran's norkses team may be less intred in reaching a

ms. edwards: i ask permission to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. edwards: once again republicans are going to pass a budget reconciliation to give tax breaks to the wealthiest americans, big oil, and companies that ship american jobs overseas. in the center on budget and policy priorities says that this tea party budget that gives away $3 trillion would provide those making over $1 million a year with an average tax cut of $394,000 a year. how do the republicans pay for this little bonus? that's right, mr. speaker, they do it by ending the medicare guarantee, by balancing their budget on the backs of the middle class, and america's most vulnerable, our seniors, women, and children. it means that 326,000 women will lose breast cancer screenings. 300,000 fewer children will be without health insurance. and 1.7 million seniors are going to go without meal on wheels. this tea party budget is an embarrassment. i have to tell you we can all do better. democrats know that because we support a bal

edwards. the mere fact of ms.lking into the court is -- it was just too risky for the defense to -- after they have gone to all the trouble and effort to refocus the jury to bring her in. and apparently she had nothing particularly substantive to add to the defense and so they opted to leave the record where it was, and go forward, and put this case in the hands of defense counsel to argue to the jury to acquit john edwards. >> let's jump back to andrew young and the option that's on the table to call him back to the stand, correct? >> reporter: they did indicate today that unless they could work out a stipulation they would recall him. the critical part of the testimony in this case is the sex tape. there's been evidence that andrew young apparently tried to sell the sex tape. what we understand is that the parties were trying to work out and see whether they could enter into a stipulation that would address that issue for the jury and as i stepped out of the courtroom to do this interview, they were discussing t

this was long after she had been officially dismissed sphrt edwards' campaign. davis testified ms. hunter and she and senator edwards were very much in love. i told her did i not care about this, i was focused on the campaign. next day edwards called to the hotel room where he denied the affair and said quote hunter was crazy. everyone agrees there was an expensive coverup in the end what's important is how jurors interpret it. listen. >> do they see this affair being covered up as part of edward's presidential aspiration or a person who wants to preserve his family and marriage and is lying about that. >> professor freed land says essentially the defense and prosecution are using separate frames for the same picture, shep. >> shepard: this has to be more than just sleaze because being sleazy is not against the wall. what's the prosecution doing to show it's more than that? >> that's right. today they tried to establish that the intent behind rachel bunny melon's lavish contributions were to help edwards get elected not just to hide a private affair. they question the interior decor

edwards ms. hunter, and on the photo, i love you, john. and in her only statement since the affair was exposed, she seems to support the defense team's argument, that edwards was more focused on hiding his affair from his wife, than the voters. >> do you think he was more afraid of elizabeth finding out for the rest of us? >> elizabeth. >> reporter: in this risque photo spread, hunter claimed to be in the dark about the $725,000 funneled through heiress bunny mellon, to andrew young. i had no idea. he told me he received two small checks. we don't know what rielle hunter will talk about when she gets here. we'll probably get more juicy information about the affair. but this is not about the affair. it's about the money. how much does she know about the money? how much does john edwards know about the money? and if the prosecution doesn't come up with enough evidence and proof, than john edwards will walk. and so far, they haven't done it yet. >>> we're going to talk about rielle hunter in a moment. but john edwards seemed to be upbeat. he w

davis said he, edwards, and donor fred baron were on baron's jet when baron said the press wasn't going to find ms. hunter because of the way he was moving her around. i asked him to stop talking. i didn't want to be aware of this. davis said he stopped talking and that edwards said nothing. >> as damaging to edwards because it shows he knew what was going on. >> the government alleged that money spent by baron and another donor to hide hunter amounting to illegal campaign contributions, a charge edwards denies. lisa myers, nbc news, greensboro, north carolina. >>> and there was this today from the presidential campaign trail. mitt romney picked up the endorsement of yet another former rival. congresswoman michele bachmann. while she was still vying for the gop nomination herself, she called romney's massachusetts health care package, quote, a deal breaker for conservatives and said he couldn't beat president obama, but today, she threw her support behind romney as the party comes together, calling the choice in november between him and the president, quote, very easy. >>> up next, as we continue

to highlight edwards' willingness to lie, prosecutors closed their case last week by playing our "nightline" interview with him. >> a report has been published that the baby of ms >> not true. not true. >> reporter: the defense argues edwards tried to hide his affair to spare his wife humiliation, not to save his campaign. we learned the judge will instruct the jury that the prosecution does not have to prove that attempting to protect his campaign was the only reason for the cover-up. just that it was more than a side benefit. that jury, nine men and seven women from central north carolina which includes the town where edwards grew up. they are solidly middle class. >> the government always wants people who are sort of -- people that follow the law. >> reporter: the jury is racially balanced. six african-americans, possibly a strategy by the defense. >> defense went out of their way to talk about john edwards' strong commitment to poverty, to his attending martin luther king celebrations. and so, i won't say pandering, but at least making sure the jury knew. >> reporter: today lawyers on both sides will give their closing arguments. they will get about two hou

ms-13 gang. they were shot when driving home from a picnic. edward ramos was convicted wednesday and he said he mistook them for rival gang members. they were married to 22 years. the boys were 16 and 20. daniel found about it from the police officers. he said tony and mike were dead, and i was like this can't be happening. and i thought why me? what did i do to deserve this? >> we protected her identity because she and her two surviving children are now in the federal witness protection program. they are afraid of gang retaliation. we posted her interview and our exclusive jailhouse interview with edward ramos on our website. >>> investigators are sifting through tips from all over the country generated by last night's episode of america's most wanted. was it about missing teenager sierra lamar in morgue began hill. abc7 news reporter has a message from sierra lamar's mother. >> this is a mother's day message marlene lamar said she wrote for her two daughters, but especially her 15-year-old sierra. >> i'm reaching out to sierra, letting her know tha

prosecution saying yesterday to one of its witnesses, christina reynolds, a former edwards' staffer, wanted to know about ms. the prosecution said: harris: rachel, why is this key to know? >> well, i think that what they're trying to show is that they were concerned that she would effect the actual presidential election. but the bottom line is i feel like every time i hear something about this case, we're casting sleazy, the musical. i don't know how i like less. [laughter] no, seriously. it's like nobody's likable, and the jury's not going to like anybody in this case. but the prosecution trying to show what a bad person john edwards is doesn't necessarily make it a beyond reasonable doubt case of campaign finance reform law violations. they need to show beyond a reasonable doubt that but for the presidential election, he would not have wanted to coffer up this affair -- cover up this affair. i don't know about you, but i certainly know men who don't need to be running for president who do everything they can to cover up their affair. harris: yeah. >> so this is a very, very interesting thing. i think it's

recalled a conversation with edwards and donor fred barron in late 2007, when the media was looking for hunter. davis testified that barron said, the press wasn't going to find mshunter because of the way he was moving her around. davis said, i asked him to stop talking. i didn't want to be aware of this. edwards, he testified, said nothing. >> it's damaging to john edwards because it shows that he knew what was going on. >> reporter: back on the stand today, the decorator for heiress bunny mellon. brian huffman, who also served as middleman for $725,000 of the cover-up money provided by mellon. huffman regaled the court with stories of mellon's estate, and private jets, and how she falsely labeled the checks as payment for outrageously expensive furniture. >> he said that bunny mellon called it the furniture business. in his testimony seemed to indicate that they were having some fun with it. >> reporter: huffman said he knew the money was to help edwards with a personal problem, but had no idea it was being used to conceal an affair. the government alleges the funds amounted to illegal campaign contributions which edwards denies. ann? >> all right. lisa myers

ms. norton who has been one of our leaders, but also representative connelly, donna edwards, chris van hollen and frank wolf. i thank my dear friend from washington state for her leadership on this and my colleague and fellow washington area representative, we're a team on this, and i want to thank ms. norton for her extraordinary leadership. not only for the district of columbia, but of our region and on so many important issues to this country and i thank her for yielding and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady from washington state is recognized. ms. herrera beutler: i continue to reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from washington reserves her time. the gentlelady from the district of columbia, ms. norton. ms. norton: i appreciate, mr. speaker, the bipartisanship of this bill, to my good friend, the minority whip from maryland, i can only say the championship that your own district brought back is enough to make us think that our area teams might one day have a championship. we

edwards acknowledged knowing that a wealthy donor was secretly supporting his pregnant mistress rielle hunter. the prosecution is expected to wrap up its case by tomorrow though it's still unclear whether msher big trial news. closing arguments are set to begin later this morning in the murder case against jennifer hudson's former brother-in-law. attorneys for william balfour rested their case yesterday after calling two police detectives as witnesses. balfour is charged with killing hudson's mother, brother and her 7-year-old nephew. we were talking about this before we went on the air. the defense, their case lasted 30 minutes. prosecutors spent two weeks putting their side of the case. so that's not a white flag, what is? >> i didn't understand that. typically when you have someone on trial, really for their life and for their liberty -- >> triple murder. >> a triple murder. you want to see some sort of aggressive defense mounted. i thought going into the trial the prosecution didn't have a slam dunk case. very little forensic evidence. jurors like that csi effect. missing fingerprints and blood evidence. but 30-minute defense, i say -- >> two weeks versus 30 minutes. i don't know -- i