a when the senate adjourns on a motion offered pursuant to this subsection by the majority leader or his designee, the shall shall again stand adjourned pursuant to the first subsection of this concurrent resolution. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the concurrent resolution is agreed to and a motion to reconsider is laid on the table. without objection when the house adjourns today it shall adjourn to meet at 11:00 a.m. on friday, august 7 2015. unless it sooner has received a message from the senate transmitting its adoption of house condition current resolution 72 and which case the house shall stand adjourned pursuant to that concurrent resolution. the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives sir, this is to notify you formally pursuant to rule 8 of the rules of the house of representatives that i have been served with a grand jury subpoena for documents issued by the united states district court for the central district of illinois. after consultation with counsel, i will make the determinations requir

the impersonal -- appropriate congressional committees and leadership the agreement as defined in subsection h-one, including all related materials. subsection h-one specifies that this agreement includes -- and i quote the last part of this -- any additional materials related thereto, including annexes appendixes, compasses, site agreements, implemented materials, guidance, or other understandings, and any related agreements. i think that is clear that that is meant to be all encompassing. yet we discovered that there is a secret side agreement, which presumably compliments that contemplates the previous dimension of activities, which strikes many of us as a very important information to have and evaluating whether or not future activities are in violation of this agreement or not. now senator corker asks why you have not given us the documents. you said it was because we don't have the documents. knowing this statute, the intent of the statute, and that the letter of this law, why did you not insist that this essential to enforcement document be disclosed? >> senator thank you very much ,

bernie sanders is definitely appealing to a very specific subsection, fringe of the democrat party.ertainly not to minutes as a whole. >> that has nothing really to do with the main topic of talking about why people disrupted his rally. >> for the national coverage. to give it a national coverage. >> this is it. let's not make it more complicated. >> this is false framework. if national intention gives it impression it is national issue when bernie sanders is marginalized local candidate that appeals to oakland that is media issue. that is false front. >> except he is getting attention. >> attention, attention. >> so i would just think, we don't know how his story ends but it is not fair to make it seem like he just gets attention in a few cities. that is not right, tammy. jon: protesters got their attention as well, in a most unorthodox way. lynn sweet, tammy bruce. thank you. >> thank you. jenna: wisconsin judge set to decide if two teenaged girls charged with stabbing a class -- classmate will be charged as juveniles or adults with attempted murder. >>> illegal immigrant charged

transmit to the appropriate congressional committees and leadership the agreement as defined in subsectionding all related materials. subsection h-1 sayspecifies that this agreement includes any additional materials related thereto, including annexes, apen dick and any other related agreements. i think it's clear that's meant to be completely all encompassing. yet we discover that there's a secret side agreement between the iaea and iran which contemplates the previous dimensions of iranian activities which strikes many of us as a very, very important information to have to evaluate whether or not future activities is in violation of this agreement or not. senator corker asked why you haven't given us the document and if i understood you correctly you said it's because we don't have the documents. my question is knowing this statute, the intent of this statute and the letter of this law, why didn't you insist that this essential to enforcement document be disclosed? >> senator thank you very much for your question. as you point out, we don't have the document and the united states senate h

more receptive to believing that those issues are as important as the support and clause in sub subsection of terrorism and the fact of the penalty act in which they take several a year. >> but come i think part of it is organization on the part of the business community. i mean, think of the rise of the chamber of commerce and the job robert conrad did there in thinking what issues do we want to address in that supreme court of the united states and just looking back i was kind of pacing through cases the court was deciding in the 2005 term as opposed to now it seemed like the business issues that the court are getting has been kind of brought up better through the courts, the walmart case was like a huge and attractive case, i think from the business side. there are certain issues the business community has just been pushing kind of better than if you look at the 2005, term. there were some business issues there, but it seemed like it was more scattered and i don't know how much you attribute to the lawyers and how much you attribute to the court if that is an agenda the court has, but i

president shall transmit to the appropriate committees and leadership the agreement as 1.fined in subsection it specifies that this agreement includes, and i quote the last part of this, "any additional materials related thereto including annexes, appendices, side agreements, documents, guidance, understandings, and any related agreements." i think it is clear that is meant to be all encompassing. yet we discover there is a secret side agreement between the iaea and iran. strikes many of us as a very important information to have to evaluate whether or not future activities are in violation of this or not. senator corker asked why you have not given us the document. you said, because we don't have the document. my question is, knowing this statute, knowing the intent of the statute and the letter of this law, why didn't you insist that this is essential to enforcement document be disclosed? ms. sherman: senator, thank you for your question. we don't have the document and the senate has every single document that the united states government has. secondly, the reason we did not insist is beca

issues are as important as the subordinate to the subordinate to the subordinate clause in some subsectionthe anti-terrorism and effective death penalty act which they take several a year for reasons that completely mystify me. >> i think part of it is just organization on the business community. think of the rise of the chamber of commerce and the job that robin conrad did there thinking what kinds of issues do we want to be addressing in the states' courts of appeals. the kinds of cases the court was deciding in the 2005 term, it seems like the issues that the court are are getting have been kind of brought up better through the courts, you know? the walmart case was, like, a huge and attractive case, i think, from the business side. i think there are certain issues that, you know, the business community has been pushing kind of better than if you look at the 2005 and 2006 terms, you know, there were some business issues there, but it seems like it was more scatter shot. and i don't know how much you attribute to the lawyers and to the court if that's some part of an agenda that some mem

that the issues are as important as the subordinate to the subordinate to this board cause of some subsection on terrorism that affects the death penalty act for which they take struggle a year. >> part of it is just organization on the part of the business community. think of the price of the chamber of commerce and the job that robin conrad did think it will can issues we want to be addressing in the courts of appeal and the state supreme court and the supreme court of the united states and is looking back i was kind of paging through with the cases the court was decided in the 2510 as opposed to now and it seems like it is a species the court are getting have been brought up better through the court, the wal-mart case was like a huge and attractive case i think, visits i get to our certain issues that is doing has just been pushing kind of better than if you look at the 2005 -- 2006 terms there were six terms there was a business issue basilicas were scattershot. i don't know how much you attribute to the lawyers or to the court if that some part of an agenda some members of the court have

agreements the president shall transmit to the appropriate committees and leadership as defined in subsection h one including all related materials. thatction h-1 specifies this agreement includes, and i quote the last part. any additional materials related thereto, including annexes, appendices, documents and guided technical or other understandings and any related agreements. i think it is clear that is meant to be completely all-encompassing. and yet we discovered there is a secret side agreement between the iaea and iran which contemplates the previous agreements of military activities which strikes all of us is very important information to have to evaluate whether or not future activities are in violation of this agreement or not. senator corker asked why you have not given us the document and if i understood correctly it is because we do not have the documents. my question is, knowing the intent of the statute and the letter of the law, why didn't you insist that this is essential to enforcement document be disclosed? >> thank you for your question. as you point out we do not have the

and we add a line 4 on lines 7 and 8 for the purposes of the subsection 39 additional october participates shall not include persons with an agreement for less than 30 days and adding the roommate doesn't mean that roommate can be a constantly shifting short-term rentee. i would like to make a motion to amend. >> second. this is for the amendment you just spoke of? i will second that amendment -- that motion, i mean. without objection, this amendment -- this motion passes. [ gavel ] >> thank you. i know most folks have left, but i want to thank everyone who came out. there was over two hours' of public testimony just demonstrating what an important issue this is. and you know, just the many different stories that even i had not heard already, but also the immense fear that exists amongst our tenants. i want to recognize our small property owners who came out as well. and i know that we have some folks who need to understand their rights, as well as how the system works? i'm also sympathetic to some of the stories that were brought up. we were very careful in drafting this ordinance to real

and we add a line 4 on lines 7 and 8 for the purposes of the subsection 39 additional october participates shall not include persons with an agreement for less than 30 days and adding the roommate doesn't mean that roommate can be a constantly shifting short-term rentee. i would like to make a motion to amend. >> second. this is for the amendment you just spoke of? i will second that amendment -- that motion, i mean. without objection, this amendment -- this motion passes. [ gavel ] >> thank you. i know most folks have left, but i want to thank everyone who came out. there was over two hours' of public testimony just demonstrating what an important issue this is. and you know, just the many different stories that even i had not heard already, but also the immense fear that exists amongst our tenants. i want to recognize our small property owners who came out as well. and i know that we have some folks who need to understand their rights, as well as how the system works? i'm also sympathetic to some of the stories that were brought up. we were very careful in drafting this ordinance to real

code clearly states, and i quote -- "in research carried out under subsection a of this section, human fetal tissue may be used only if the intending -- attending physician with respect to obtaining the tissue from the woman involved makes a statement made in writing and signed by the physician declaring that no alteration of the timing, method or procedures used to terminate the pregnancy was made solely for the purposes of obtaining the tissue." close quote. a video released on july 21 2015 details a planned parenthood doctor discussing using less crunchy abortion technique to get more whole specimens. let me repeat the law. a doctor must certify that no alteration of the timing, method or procedures used to terminate the pregnancy was made solely for the purposes of obtaining the tissue. senators can reach their own conclusions. i think the truth is pretty self-evident and i believe that the law and these videos speak for themselves. mr. president, i would like to address another important point. this legislation is not an attack on women's health. to the contrary, as a mother and a