secondly, in terms of making public those figures i have to go and get back to you. i am not certain to what extent they are publicized and if not why they would not be publicized. >> thank you, madam chairman. >> before i turn to start feinstein, i just want to comment. you have a long history on defending people on cruise ships. do you remember, there were some terrible incidents many years ago. >> absolutely. >> and you're to be congratulated. we freneed to protect the peopl who sail on the seas from pirates or other despicable behavior and we look forward to hearing for from you. >> thank you. >> senator hutchison who is going to be next yields to you so then we'll go to murkowski and hutchinson that way. okay? >> well, thank you. >> thank you very much. i wanted to take up where senator graham left off. and there has been an effort emanating out of the arms services committee to change the defense authorization bill to essentially put this country's detention policy under the laws of war. and under the laws of war, an individual can be held without charge or tri

secondly, as senator leahy indicated at the outset it was, of course, the attorneyholder, stevens case be dismissed with prejudice while he learned of a portion of the nondisclosure in this case. eric holder did not shirk from that responsibility.i know eric personally and professionally and have for years. likewise, deputy jim cole. likewise, the assistant attorney general of the criminal division, lanny brewer. they are menintegrity. and i do not believe the stevens case not withstanding that the public should labor under the notion that what happened in the stevens case happens as a matter of course. >> mr. schuelke, i agree with you that the attorney general is entitled to credit for after the fact in inthe charges. unfortunately, the damage to n senator stevens and to the adversarial system of justice had already been done and there's nothing that the attorney general or anyone else could do to undo it. and so i know you -- let me just ask in conclusion, since time is short here. in those instances where the character and integrity and professional responsibility of overcome their

secondly, i was very impressed by the three previous speakers. for the record, this committee is supposed to be a watchdog, not a lap dog. hopefully, we continue that tradition with the current makeup. for the record, dereliction of duty, abuse of power under the color of authority. let's put it this way, everybody knows that san francisco is a mountain to climb if you are trying to fix certain things. the only way you'll get it fixed is to put people on notice, so they cannot say they were not aware of it. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> i have no specific objection to the three priorities for the work plan. i do think it is good for the unit not to duplicate efforts. i had to other ideas that either could be audits or handled in another fashion. one is the law library. there has been recent activity to move them out of the memorial while the building is worked down. more recently, their downtown branch is slated to close in two weeks. they have some funding issues because of the -- a better understanding of what the city is required t

secondly, concerned about how the connector road would fit in with gerald avenue and other street work going on in that area, reconfiguring intersection. we are taking a good look at coordinating with the produce market and bring it back to the community in response. supervisor avalos: thank you. it could very well be that we have a choice between three options and recommendations. waxed particularly options of one in two, as three is not feasible. supervisor avalos: break. any other questions from the committee? we can go on to public comment. >> good morning, commissioners. i am with the san francisco bicycle coalition. i bring you bicycle route 11. it has been for decades, between multiple -- market street and the dog walked. so, of course, lets plan quickly for an excellent second street. this allocation will help the mta further, but we are looking forward to a better plan and project. and i should go forward looking -- look back on forward to facilitating public works and other agencies any -- supervisor avalos: thank you very much. any other members of the public? seeing no one,

and secondly, what's an appropriate size force after 2014? >> the president has said that after this summer and the surge forces are out, that we will continue to reduce our forces at a steady pace. those are his words. i think that's the right approach. there will be a lot of pressure not to reduce forces after the end of this summer but to leave them in place and have a steeper cliff. >> where is that pressure coming from? >> i think a number of our top military people probably would prefer not to have a steady pace after this. but that's kind of a -- you would expect that. that would be a normal press from our military who almost always would be more cautious in terms of reductions. in any event i think there is some pressure at least coming from some of our top military people. in that direction. but i would keep that steady pace as a way of putting pressure on the afghanistans to provide the security for their own people. this is working. there has been a significant shift of security responsibility to the afghan army which by the way is

and secondly before apac, there's a very clear set of understandings that the president lays out. and there was no reference to going back to the exact borders. i mean, it would be based on negotiation between israel and the palestinians. and it is anticipated that there would be a certain set of decisions that would have to take into account what has happened in the years since. but certainly from our perspective, looking at those speeches and looking at the reaction in israel, which was very positive to both of them together, and we obviously are pursuing with israel and the palestinians an effort to get the negotiations restarted. because there is no shortcut. we support the two-state solution. we want to see it negotiated by the parties themselves. and it's turned out to be quite challenging to do that for a variety of reasons. but our position remains the same. that any final status issue ultimately has to be decided by the parties. we and others can put forth suggestions, recommendations and ideas about what would work. but it's a negotiation. and the negotiation has to be r

secondly, i thought the lady this afternoon during the noon hour spoke very briefly.gang up on a certain couple. we will make the odds a little more fair right now. where is the fairness? who do you really trust? we have the mayor that sacrificed his personal word of honor for political expediency. secondly, i would like to know what ever happened to their written -- the written allegations against a certain supervisor sitting right here. why is there a dead gay man -- which city -- the city ignore since his mysterious death in 1999. in san francisco, is ok to sacrifice one dead game man. i am predicting his case will become another stonewall, especially if certain leaders on the east coast will have a say as to why the leaders in san francisco turned their back on a dead gay man. thank you. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i am a member of americans for safe access, the nation's largest nonprofit advocacy organization on medical cannabis. i represent patients, dispensary owners, other advocates and we're here to ask you to protect and defen

secondly, i do not see how we could possibly fit with the-9. is the mission. colonel heights and so on. we have a vast freeway and -- on allegany and big rally between us. i am active with a group and my concern also is we have a supervisor who really does care and really does know about mclaren park, its problems, and its needs. our neighborhood would be most comfortable in d-tenn. -- taen. keep the portola together. >> i want to commend you on your valor in taking on one of san francisco's impossible tasks. i live at 79 pierce street. i have been a resident for 25 and if a resident of the lower pay. i am somewhat, torn it i thought it was a lot of logic to the earlier proposal that had all the hate included in district 5 by extending the border south to this avenue. that said, i think the most does not come to pass is to keep the core of the haight whole. to that extent, i support the comments made earlier about ensuring that the 55 live in a block become part -- be part of district 5. keeping the integrity of the lower heat as essential. in the time i have

secondly, we need corporations to pay their fair share of taxes. bank of america has 371 tax shelters. a number of them on the cayman islands. and have done everything they can to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. if you're going to get some of the benefits that come with being in a corporation in america, you need to have some responsibilities too. and third, bank of america and a lot of the banks invest in a lot of things that are bad for our country. bank of america is one of the lead financiers of predatory payday lending. these payday lenders charge 455% interest rates, largely target communities of color. the average $250 payday loan cost the borrower $750. so essentially, stripping wealth out of some of the poorest communities of our country. we need them out of that business. so those are three demands that we'll take to them at the shareholder meetings among others. >> so you're calling this shareholder spring? >> the larger effort this spring is called 99% spring. and within that, there are two key components. one is actually traini

secondly, to do a very conceptual level of design on the connector road as workable and demonstrate that to the community before going forward potentially the closing the access on clint -- clint -- quint. we have dates for funding to be conducted once we have done the design work. we are hoping to just present this to the community and get feedback on these options before we come back to the board of. that concludes -- board action, we are looking at the cac in may for board policy action. supervisor avalos: thank you. mr. flanagan briefly touched upon this project. there was concern from the public about talking about the deeper? >> this action, this work that we're doing is largely in response to concerns, one of which we heard being that there is some pressure to go forward with choosing a policy action sooner rather than later, as we do have a bridge that does need to be replaced and we need to learn more, if we go with closing this bridge, we need to be clear that the connector road option would work. one of the concerns that we heard was that we were doing this in the wrong order

secondly, and i am not a ceqa expert here, but the response to the ceqa section guidelines at 15262 says that a project involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions, which the agency board or commission has not approved, adopted, or funded, does not require the preparation of an 10th eir or negative declaration. but we did fund this study. outcome is not subject to an environmental report? i think those points were made earlier. it is also contained in the letter we received. i think -- i appreciate leaving the cnr documents in appendix c, the video simulation of the proposed project along the embarcadero. for me, it was rather revealing in many ways. it somehow more clearly showed to me the relationship of the entire project along the embarcadero and how this particular project comes right up to the property line. if you are viewing the video, most of the projects along there were sent back from the embarcadero itself. along the embarcadero, there should have been more breathing room. secondly, one of the views that the video showed where they stop and show

. >> and secondly, and he's not at that far behind in the the popular vote from santorum, and secondlyhe doesn't think that romney, because romney hasn't been able to overwelcome anybody in any one of the states, is accepted by conservatives in the-- in the party. >> right. >> and third, he thinks he can get to the convention, give a barn burner of a speech and people will say, wow, the messiah has arrived. it's crazy, but this is the only way i'm able to rationalize what he's doing. >> paul: if he can deny romney the majority of the delegates isn't it plausible that you could have a brokered convention where the gingrich coming out of the blue strategy could pre he veil? >> it's plausible in poker that if you draw to inside straight you can win a hand and possible that belmont college could win the ncaa. romney needs 1144 delegates and the plan is to keep him under a thousand. keep him about 150 dell grayingses away. >> so he wouldn't be able to cut easy deals? >> that's going to be very hard to do. we're pretty much finished with the south, other than louisiana and texas, moving into

and secondly, if there is a lesson to be learned here, should this lesson be written into the law so that the faceless criminal defendant who may not get a senate judiciary committee hearing has the same protection. >> first, senator, there have been -- as my report describes, had judge sullivan issued a clear and unequivocal order that the prosecutors produce all brady and giglio material, there would have been a crime committed, criminal contempt with respect to those episodes described in our report as to which we concluded the conduct was intentional. beyond that, there's footnote in our report which says that we offer no opinion as to whether or not a prosecution or obstruction of justice might lie, because that's noth as a matter of fact, the power wouldawyer investigator appointed by the court from bringing such a charge. >> i'm sorry to interrupt you, but what you're saying is unless there is an express violation of a court order, that you do not believe a prosecution for obstruction of justice would lie? >> no, that's not what i'm saying. >> please clarify it. >> in the abse

secondly, i thought the lady this afternoon during the noon hour spoke very briefly.gang up on a certain couple. we will make the odds a little more fair right now. where is the fairness? who do you really trust? we have the mayor that sacrificed his personal word of honor for political expediency. secondly, i would like to know what ever happened to their written -- the written allegations against a certain supervisor sitting right here. why is there a

secondly, i don't believe any of this. i think adrian is cursed to only play adrian. the guy needs work. the "entourage" movie is the only thing happening. he probably got a picture of obama at a stupid celebrity thing. he put it on his facebook page for one reason and one reason only. adrian needs to get laid. >> his come on-line is, i am the guy from "entourage" and now it is, i am the guy that used to be on" entourage." this came from a long line of presidents who made cameos. zachary taylor made a cameo on " golden girls." james polk played the younger brother in "wild, wild west." >> you are absolutely right. one time i walked into a best buy and opened a microwave and bush was staring and spinning around the little thing saying, this is amazing. >> it is a joke you can return to. >> i feel like i physicalled it. like i fixed it. it could set off further culture are whats. "entourage" celebrates a lifestyle in which you want to go out and have sex or smoke a dubie. should a president actually bring the office of the presidency into that kind of a -- >> that's fai

. >> secondly the types of people that came from cuba, were people who were kind -- who were in the ruling class and they were fleeing fiddle castro, so that's exact opposite that the rest of the population faces. >> so you are making a hugely important point here which is rubio voice may or may not translate to other pieces of the latino community. how would a marco rubio play in the traditional swing, midwest says michigan ohio, pennsylvania, two out of three of which mitt romney would have to win does rubio helps him in those states? >> i don't think he helps him or necessarily hurts him either. people will see him from up from your bootstraps kind of guy whether he is or not. he will write his story that way. so i don't think it will play that much there. they are going to go for colorado and new mexico and florida. don't forget that florida is an important state too. so places like that he might be able to help them slightly, because notwithstanding what i said earlier, he is going to get more of the latino vote than say, vice president joe arpeo is. it's at least saying we at least c

secondly, when it comes to human trafficking in alaska, as you point out we have persons working hoard on that with state and local law enforcement, believe it is a priority, and any young woman or for that matter young man's life that can be saved in terms of working with local law enforcement to address this, we certainly want to be a participant and driver of that. >> i appreciate that. thank you, director. thank you, madam chairman. >> senator hutchison. >> thank you, madam chairman. just to add one more question to lisa's line, and i think she has taken the lead on this and properly so, but i do commend the fbi agent who came forward, who just couldn't sit back and let a person be accused, go through a trial, lose an election and then all based on very bad misconduct on the part of the agencies that we look to for complete integrity, which would be the department of justice, the prosecutors and the fbi. there were others that were implicated with the fbi in some of the alleged misconduct, and my question to you is, what are you doing to deal with the allegations which i assume wil

secondly, defense has sgichb at the well already. if you remember secretary of defense gates came up with $78 billion in cuts from the defense budget. and that is for the most part left alone. they didn't go back and troo i to put that money in. they're also accepting sensually for next year a flat budget on defense. and thereafter, the ryan budget would go up to about 2.5% of spending for defense increases. so i think if you look at it all storg, i think it's fair to say that the ryan budget puts back in about half of the defense spending that would have been cut by obama. >> it would limit the discret n discretionary funding for the epa. you write about this corporate cronyism. explain. >> what republicans see now rather than sticking it to business, what happens is that there's this toxic relationship between big business and big government and we saw this. for example, in energy. a lot of green jobs fundings where money was given that weren't financial any, you know, able to hold on to their place in the market. and instead, it w

and secondly, it's outside the political process. and, you know, there's responsibility here that falls on both sides for some of these programs in terms of we continue to read about the political influence directing things the wrong way. for instance, stepping out of this field into another, i remember talking to the head of nih and he said if congress wouldn't direct how we allocate our money, we could be making breakthroughs in life threatening illnesses that are very, very close but congress keeps telling us, no, you have to put the money somewhere else. it's just -- i'm afraid part of the beast here that exists from a political standpoint in terms of our thinking that we are responding to constituent requests or whatever that we have a better ability to direct where the funds go than the private sector does. and that's where i think we get in trouble. my time's expired. i just didn't really come to preach. you do come out of the private sector. i think you're evaluation of this is important for us to hear. >> senator, may i ask

secondly, we reduce our short-term deficit by several hundred billion dollars and continue to ensure declines. and finally, we ensure that this model occurs with a reform of the tax code. we hear when we go home every week that we want simplicity, we want fairness, we want competitiveness. on the individual side, we reduce the brackets from 6 to 2, 10 and 25%. we also eliminate the something that is blatantly unfair to americans across the nation. on the corporate side, we ensure competitiveness with the rest of the world. we reduce the rate down to 25%. and we shift to a territorial system. something i believe has bipartisan support in this committee and wind the congress. we need to act now to ensure that our country a long-term economic crisis. and i think we go a long way in this budget proposal to ensure thd yield back the balance of my time. >> i thank theye from new hampshire and i yield two minutes of time to the gentleman from georgia. >> i thank the ge chairman for all his hard work on this budget, i thank the whole team for this work. this budget is really about choices. t

secondly. democrats have demonstrateed that it's a great bill that if passed and signed into law by the president would have a big impact on how this is all--how these all operate. third, the big difference in this election is that on the republican side they look at the system, and they say yeah, that's how a campaigns ought to operate. but on the flip side there are leaders fighting against this, and the president of the united states is for reform where individuals can't have the outside impact that you've seen them have in this race. >> there is nobody to their knowledge who might want to succeed in president in the year year 2016 who goes to him and says, wait a minute, you found the universal solvent and the unbeatable weapon, don't destroy it. i need it in 2016. >> well, for starters, i don't--i don't have a crystal ball. i don't know who is going to run and win in 2016. secondly, i think the president's commitment to reform has been made pretty clear. he has pushed for campaign finance

secondly, as he indicated, a very robust defensive capability. should these weapons be used, general thurman and his forces, together with the south koreans have a good defensive capability to deal with the consequences if these were to be used. and to complement both of these and to really enhance that deterrent capability is as constant operational readiness of our forces in the theater. so this is what the department of defense brings to bear against this. but i have to agree with you. north korea is an outlier today in the world. the president was just in seoul over the last couple of days with a nuclear security summit. over 50 of the world's leaders were there, and everybody is getting aboard to eliminate weapons of mass destruction and to decrease that danger. again, north korea san outlier. so in addition to what we're doing, the department of defense, we're also supporting a broader international diplomacy, nonproliferation efforts to try to deal with that threat. >> great. appreciate what you're doing. very, very important. thanks so mu

process too but i don't think all protest is inherently good and i think you have to have a point secondly this idea that the right is being snarky towards this is you know you had a lot of this from the president that it's somehow cynical to oppose big government plans or views that differ from your own in terms of occupy wall street. time magazine it's slightly misleading to say they gave it to the occupy wall street they gave it to the protester a nebulous an abstract form in large part because of the arab spring where people are actually fighting for something which is serious and important and has a name but the idea that this is comparable to the american civil rights movement i think i think the phrase massive protest was used this was not a massive protest and this civil rights movement was marked out because after having protested there was the civil rights act and then a series of pieces of legislation which changed the country how the civil rights act purely consisted of marches it wouldn't actually done anything and the difference here is that no one has achieved in. levy's mee

secondly, i worry about the a symmetric capabilities that the north koreans have, whether it be with special operations, forces, or the introduction of kim bio and in cyber. those are some of the things that i worry about. i think we're postured very well to re pell in an attack. [ inaudible ] mr. chairman, i yield back. >> thank you. mr. pilazzo. >> thank you, mr. chairman. like to thank our witness for thank you, mr. chairman. i'd like to thank our witness for being here this morning. testifying. i had to spend most of my -- this committee and another committee where i'm chairman of space and aeronautics. so i haven't been able to follow the entire line of questioning. but i do want to, well, first of all, i am sure chairman whitman talked about his paycom visit. i was a part of that when we did that in this past august. and it was a wonderful trip and the republic of korea was on there. one of our common denominators of concern was if we moved our posture. maybe retreating or just falling back a little too far for their general welfare that then they would have to deal do whatever