congress and in the press. free traders fought back. in the middle was the nation's chief trade official, special trade representative william brock. you know, they came to us congress, and they said, "you got to protect us." congress started talking about passing a bill to hold imports to maybe half the present level at that time. we didn't like that because we felt it was the wrong answer. and once you protect something like that, you can't get rid of the protection. so we talked to the japanese, and we said, look, it takes five, six, seven years to re-tool to a completely new market demand. you can't just dream up a new car and put it out for sale. you have to design it, engineering, build new plants for it, build new machines to produce it. and that's a long-term process. and we suggested that it would be appreciated if they restrained for a limited period of time, three or four years. they did. schoumacher: voluntary or not, the restrictions took hold. japanese auto imports dropped by almost 8% in a year. thousands of auto workers were off unemployment and back on the job. happy ending? sure, if your livelihood depends on the auto industry. but if you'

used. congress said there has to be specific intent to inflict long-term pain and suffering -- what does congress mean by the specific intent. that is a higher standard than to say just the intent to do something. it's the difference -- one common sense way to explain it -- it's the difference between first-degree murder and second-degree murder -- the difference between cold-blooded calculated murder, and what most people get conflicted of, second-degree murder or homicide. this has to come up with waterboarding. you saw in the memos too. again we approve waterboarding , in limited circumstances. you look in the memos -- waterboarding does not cause long-term injury. you are not violating the outlaw. how do we try and figure this out? this is a hard question. can i point out that the statute, which you accurately quoted, that's all it says -- it does not contain any examples of what is prohibited, or what is permitted. in fact, i'm sure we all know, in 2005, congress passed an act that start to draw clear lines. one thing we did, we went out had thereto find out ever been medical issues with our

used. congress is there has to be the 10 to inflict and suffering -- what does congress mean by the specific intent. as a higher standard than to say just the intent to do something. the difference -- one explain it e way to -- it's the difference between first-degree murder and second-degree murder -- the difference between cold-blooded calculation murder, and what conflicted of, homicide. this has to come up with waterboarding. memos too. the we approve waterboarding in very specific circumstances. in the memos -- cause oarding does not long-term injury. because of that very high standard, you are not violating the law. how do we try and figure this out? this is a hard question. mayor plan, that statute, which you accurately quoted, that's all it says -- it does not of what is examples prohibited, or what is permitted. all know, 'm sure we congress passed an act that start to draw clear lines. thing we did, we went out to find -- has there ever been medical issues with officers who and have undergone waterboarding. this for y, we did waterboarding and not for other interrogation felt they

joining us tonight is senator david vittert a member several key committees including armed services and in the next congresshas just been announced that senator vittert will also be joining the judiciary committee. he is chair of the senate border security caucus. always good to have you with us. >> great to be with you, lou. thanks for the invite. lou: let's talk about what happened over the weekend in the sense that cruz and lee were slapped down pretty mightily by the senate on their efforts to hold the president accountable for that fiat. your thoughts on the fact that the president has not been actually in any significant way challenged by the house or the senate, this senate at least in his executive fiats? >> well, i think it is really a shame republicans split on that vote. a lot of folks split on sort of a technicality saying, well it was a constitutional point of order and the spending bill was not unconstitutional per se. the spending bills are unconstitutional in his actions. i think that is splitting hairs too finely. reality we are far more united against executive amnesty as that vote shows.

us. congress over seas it. there are internal checks within the executive branch. what we have seen is it is complete break down. there's no over site. there's no effective management. it's not just about torture but about everything we do that is covert on the war on terror or against isis or the war against anything. there's a bigger question what do do about those people who tortured, it's whether we have a system that can work when it comes to these secret activities who many believe are necessary for the national security. >> mark, a lot has been made about this report being used to radicalized people in the middle east, jihadist terrorists and the like. we know gitmo remains a flag around which some jihadist rally. do you think that this report will have, can have, the same effect. i mean obviously this is a developing situation but in terms of how terrorist networks operate can you see this being used as a tool? >> it certainly can be and it is impossible to say right now whether it will be. we have seen terrorist groups will try to jump on anything to rally

us in detroit. good to see you. thank you. >> as we said congress is set to vote on a government funding bill, but it could effect millions of retirees. david shuster up for ali velshi. thank you for visiting us. >> let's say you were in the construction industry, supermarkets or trucking, and you've been paid in a benefit plan, and you would have got then benefit plan because of collective bargaining. there are ten million americans who are expecting an amount in their pension each month. what congress has done is this pension is underfunded. it's due to run out in ten years. we're going to eliminate 40 years of law and allow the people who were on the hook for these pensions, to cut them by 50%. some folks are thinking i should be getting $4,000, now boom you get $2,000, and by the way there is nothing you can do about it because congress is closing the law that would enable you to sue the benefit plan. that's what's is at stake. >> will anyone take this out of the bill? >> this is an agreement between congressional leaders, and even people who ar

. >> reporter: republicans are looking at using congress' spending power, republicans offer two-step approach to fund government and allow next year's g.o.p. control congress to devise a response to president obama's executive order on immigration, it would fund through september. that would allow new congress to revisit the issue. meanwhile on capitol hill, committees held a couple of hearing, examine the president's executive orders, republicans contend that the president is acting outside of his authority. authority. >> thank you rich. >> dow jones average at an all-time high, auto sales, ripping to levels not seen in over 10 years, cyber monday was a big hit. to nicole on floor of new york stock exchange. >> record day on wall street, dow hit lifetime high, closed up over 100 points, procter & gamble, unitedhealth, disney and cisco hit new highs. taser hit a new tie, president obama pledgeing over $260 million for law en forement to have wearible cameras, royal caribbean, new high there, entering into the s&p 500 after the close of trading, joining carnival crew, dreamworks under

us. congress is running out of time to pass a bill to fund the government. the current authorization expires tomorrow night. the bill on the table right now funds most of the government through next september, but it only funds the homeland security department through february 27th, and it contains a number of controversial policy provisions. al jazeera's political correspondent michael shure, there he is. michael, does funding homeland security for only a few months here mean we will see a battle over the president's immigration actions early next year? >> yes, it would guarantee that and it's why it's not an omnib omnibus. it is continuing bill that will take us through september of next year. you'll remember i told you this lame duck session is not going to be such a lame duck session. there is a lot going on right now. that part of it, that funding of the--the department of homeland security has everything to do with the president's executive action on immigration because it is the department of homeland security that will ultimately be in charge of enfo

use. congress still spends the money. perhaps because a member of influence wanted it in their district or there was some sort of special interest or pork reason to have it in there, even when the military didn't want it. and one such project is the abrams 1 tank. and we're cutting $120 million from this program which the army has said they don't want. the army has stated repeatedly . you talked about the big spending republican congress. it's spending more or less in discretionary spending in the last democratic majority. >> you talk about a big republican spending in congress. are they spending more or less than the last majority? >> we'd have to get the answer. >> i can give you the answer. it's a lot less. it's $165 billion less than when you had the majority in 2008 and discretionary spending alone. it's lower in defense spending as well. now, we can -- i don't disagree with my friend bringing important projects up to discuss, but the defense budget is down. the deficit is down from $1.4 trillion to under $500 billio

many of us in congress took the right message from the election, that it is time for us to come together to find areas of agreement and to govern like adults. apparently, president obama missed that message. to announce this executive order after his defeat at the polls displays shocking arrogance, and given how the white house and its allies in the media keep raising the specter of a shutdown or impeachment, it is clear that the president is attempting to or trying to goad congress into a fight rather than work with us in the difficult job of actually legislating. unlike president obama, i'm committed to making real progress toward implementing lasting immigration reform. i supported the senate's comprehensive immigration bill last year. even though the bill is far from perfect, i voted for it because i believe in working together to get something done on this vitally important issue. as i have long argued, the way to get real immigration reform back on track is not for the president to assist on his my way or the highway approach, either by trying to enact his preferred policy unilater

congress comes in. we'll hear from incoming tom price of georgia, the republican. he joins us to talk about fiscal issues and the 114th congress. and whether the budget committee has the authority to repeal or alter the affordable care act. here are some of the conversation. [video clip] who don't know, can you do something on the a photo care act to repeal it? >> as i mentioned, it was passed to the process of reconciliation. this is a give-and-take. it is a process that has to work through both the house and the senate, but also, the rules of both the house and the senate have to be adhered to. that we can le or improve eplace some things within obama care. whether or not we can repeal a e entire lot itself is point -- law itself is a point that is still under question. host: "newsmakers". you can see it tomorrow. that and other topics related to fiscal matters. am in the morning, and then again at 6:00 pm in the evening. petersburg, new hampshire. joining affairs patrick. caller: hi, how are you? host: i'm good, thank you. caller: i just want to say that president obama yea

. >> reporter: republicans are looking at using congress' spending power, republicans offer two-steproach to fund government and allow next year's g.o.p. control congress to devise a response to president obama's executive order on immigration, it would fund thro

stay with us. .... . ... .... .... >> congress is preparing to scale back the first lady's school lunch manned aids. it requires more fruits, vegetables and whole grains and limit sodium and fat. making lunches healthier is expensive and some nutrition directors are lobbying for a break. the g.o.p. is pushing for a one-year waiver for schools to opt out. if they lost money on the meal program over a six-month per, they have that option. what do you think about this? a lot of kids as well are starving so they're spending all this money and the intentions are good. >> it is wasteful, sad, it's food as punishment. you're giving children a generation of eating disorders and its prisoners were served the stuff they're given in schools, i've got two girls in public school and i'll tell you it's not very attractive. prisoners would sue for violation of their basic civil rights and they would win. they would not have to eat this -- my favorite trend is kids posting pictures of their school lunches. i mean, the road to hell is paved with good intentions and nothing feels more like healthy than b

. >> this is a day for us to start thinking in congress as to what we should be doing, because the president has been pointed out, can take certain actions but it's really congress that drops the embargo and that moves towards dropping the embargo, and i think we should do that. >> i think i know the answer to this, but does congress actually act here and move the ball forward any further? >> no, congress as it is on all fronts for the president remains uncooperative and the hurdle that he can't get over. likewise with iran, he's going to need the congress to lift -- permanently lift any sanctions he's willing to roll back as part of a nuclear deal. in fact, the congress wants to go in the opposite direction, by and large, press for tougher sanctions and try to sync his nuclear talks if he can.

use of military force? >> right now the white house and congress haven't really -- neater one has submitted -- made it officialnow at least it doesn't look all that likely that there would be an official blanket aumf that would be passed, at least not any time this session. next congress when the republican controlled senate comes in, there will be a version of it that comes through congress and then the white house would potentially be on board. secretary kerry said the administration was pretty much on board with the wording of senator menendez's proposed aumf. but it's just not real high on the legislative agenda. there is a budget bill that finally came through last night. there's other stuff going on and this is not something that's been months in the making. there's not a real push to get this done right now. >> thank you so much for being with us on this wednesday. >> thank you. >> just ahead, a select group of moms want police accountability. today they come to capitol hill. no. it's called grid iq. the 4:51 is leaving at 4:51. ♪ they cut the power. it'll fix itself. power's back on. quick thinking tra

congress should either be. authorizing the use of force or not authorizing force. congress should not try to m micromanage a war through an authorization. so if the administration had provided military and intelligence witnesses and the chairman has already made a comment about your willingness to come forward but not having all of the abilities to answer all the questions, i would have asked how the limitation of the use of ground troops would impact the military's planning and the ability to respond to conditions on the ground. so since they are not here, i ask you, how do we ensure that any aumf continues to allow the u.s. to strike and destroy isis should it expand outside of any limitations, which may be included in an aumf that's being offered? >> well, that's precisely why we're trying to work out this question of the limitations. because i cant answer. >> you believe there should not be. limitations. >> i say we are prepared to embrace a clarification, a process by which there's an understanding of how we can balance these equities. it may require some kind

use. congress still spends the money.a member of influence wanted it in their district or there was some sort of special interest or pork reason to have it in there, even when the military didn't want it. and one such project is the cutting $120 million from this program which the army has said they don't want. the army has stated repeatedly upgrades are unnecessary. the administration doesn't include it in their funding proposal. the army has proposed freezing refurbishment until the m1-a3 variety becomes operational in 2017. general odierno testified back in 2012, quote, we don't need the tanks, end quote. and congress keeps doing it. they keep giving it to them. so this, i hope, which saves $120 million, supported by taxpayers for common sense, project and government oversight, i think would pass and would allow all of us to go back to our constituents and say, look, sometimes congress can get it right. we take the deficit seriously. and when there's a project that even the military leaders say they don't want, why wou

congress and t. the administration are working together. give us a chance to do that.stead, he went ahead unilaterally with this executive order which exceeds his authority. so now we have to respond in order to protect the constitutional responsibilities of the separate branches of asvernment as well as address what we think is a very bad s wh decision on his part. we'll do that as we've talked about, but we will also then move forward in a step by step approach, as i just described. >> if republicans in congress are unable to stop the president's executive action ane a republican takes the white house, do you agree or disagree with the president here?us >> what i'm saying is we're actually going to start next year before the next president comes in to not only block the president's action, but start ap step by step approach to address the illegal immigration in the right way so that should be well underway, i hope, before the new president comes in. will s, ins new president work with us instead of taking unilateral action. >> independent line. will, columbia, tennes

madam president, each one of us as members of congress is here for just one reason. we have been elected to represent and serve the american people. unfortunately, the twisted, tainted process that has produced this bill prevents all of us from carrying out this responsibility, and it threatens our obligation to do what's right for our men and women in uniform. as the title suggests, the national defense authorization act is supposed to be a relatively straightforward, largely noncontroversial bill. it is the primary legislative instrument for congress to exercise its constitutional power granted in article 1, section 8 of the constitution to provide for the common defense. but that's not what we're voting on today. that's not what we are considering in connection with this bill. this bill, the ndaa for 2015, is a legislative hodgepodge that includes those straightforward, noncontroversial items that almost all of us support, but also numerous other provisions that are entirely unrelated to national defense. most egregiously, the drafters secretly edit 68 unrelated bi

maybe there were mistakes being made, but it is especially useful when you consider that congress obtains much of its information from companies and organizations, organizations, many of them are constituents that have a vested interest. i remind you, of the five top lobbyists and spending, four of them are healthcare. to have another information source with a different incentive for producing information is useful. does news organizations are complements to, not substitutes to the kind of research at congressional support agencies do. other organizations, these are complements, not substitutes. because these news organizations will produce information to the congress and give them ideas on what could be investigated a greater depth than might be of some benefit to the congressional support agencies, to be asked questions that were raised by these news organizations to be investigated in greater depth. so my bottom line, not only a good thing but a a necessary thing that we will produce more meaningful information. we all believe that transparency is an interval part of reform, and i look

. >> first, to tell us what congress is expected to do next, kimberly. >> well, you know, it is hard to say what congress is expected to do. we heard from shortly after the intelligence committee re'sing this report on the heels of her statement. he spoke at length reminding not just members of the united states, but around the world it was in 1990, that they helped to draft and author the convention against torture. that it is in no case, and in no way justified whether it's a state of war, emergency, and yet this is exactly what we are finding from this report took place. in very brutal terms. so there was that opportunity, there was an opportunity again in 2008 to really bring about an end to rendition, or interrogation techniques but it was president obama who vetoed again. again, we saw an opportunity by the congress to close guantanamo bay, where many are being held. again that opportunity was passed what we have here in advance of this report, a lot of bickers back and forth, about why it should or shouldn't be released. around the word, but also now we have just arguing suppo

congress do that now. and i'm sure senator rubio would tell us that congress would not be willing to do that now. >> i think you have said this morning you don't believe congress would lift it. >> i yoebl. i think they struggle to get the votes to fund an embassy and i'll have something more to say of that in the coming year. beyond the release of the mr. gross. this goed goes beyond that. passengers of banking ties and commerce to cuba. the expansion of the remitens. expansion -- in exchange for all that cubans agree to release 53 political prisoners who would be right back in jail if they take up the cause of freedom again. more monitoring of the cuba's society. the same u.n. that did nothing when -- this is absurd. basically -- my interest in cuba is freedom and democracy. i think the cuban people have a right to choose any economic model they want. if they are free. the cuban government in exchange for all of these concessions that white house has now made has done nothing to advance democracy. no freedom of the press, no freedom of organization. there will be no elections. no democratic opening. nothin

however, all of us in congress have a responsibility, and there is an opportunity for all of us to step up and help this desperate situation. over the last seven years, it's been a battle to have america honor its obligations by effectively implementing this special immigrant visa program authorized by congress to help those who helped us to escape. we are seeing the results of many on this floor who encouraged the state department to more aggressively implement the special immigration visa program. the afghan program went from an embarrassing 32 visas for all of 2012 to an average of 400 each month this year. this is due to enhanced oversight and pressure and cooperation from congress. the program is now functioning at a level that almost allows us to keep our promises to our allies. one thing we all can do is to join me and my colleague, adam kinzinger, who has been a tireless champion for justice for these afghan and iraqi nationals in directing a letter to our friends on the appropriations committee asking that they, like last year, authorize urgently needed afghan s.i.v.'s in the e

congress should be authorizing the use of force or not. congress should not try to micromanage a war through an authorization. the administration had provided military and intelligence witnesses and the chairman has made a comment about your willingness to come forward but not having all the abilities to ask -- answer all the questions i would ask how the use of ground troops would impact the ability to respond to conditions on the ground. how do we ensure that any could respond. >> that is why we are trying to work out this question in the limitations. >> you believe there should not be limitations. a we are prepared to embrace clarification by which there is an understanding of how we can balance these equities. it may require some kind of restraint which would not abrogate the commander in chief responsibilities. ahink example, what about non-u.s. hostage or prisoner? that might be a situation. you can run through all kinds of things here. we're trying to preclude sending restraint messages to folks we're trying to defeat and degrade and

we don't have any current members of congress with us because our purpose here this afternoon is slightly different. >> they are napping. >> they are not. our purpose today is what we are going to talk about today, which is what the next congress does is as important on how and why it doesn't. and what it needs to be involved to be part of congress to be the legislative branch in today's political cultural milieu. slightly, background in 1932 something happened in american government and the history of american government. that was the election of franklin delano roosevelt. with that election, a decisive shift began underway of power accruing to the executive branch from the other two competing branches. as you all know, the three-branch system -- legislative, judicial, and -- were seen by the founding fathers as a set of countervailing interests in the terms of discussion and the ways that government and a self-governing republic such as the united states would take place. more power began to accrue to the executive branch. the argument being that the executive branch and its agents -- h

those of us who were in congress in 2001 never envisioned that that authorization would still be utilized today the way it was utilized in 30 separate military operations. we were interested in going after those who attacked our country on september 11th. it was not the only piece of legislation that was passed during that period of time. we passed to give our civil authorities the intelligence tools they need the patriot act. fortunately we put sunsets on the patriot act. as a result that's been refined over the years including most recently. if we did not have that sunset i dare say it would have been difficult for us to come together as to how we can make sure we have the contemporary tools we need in order to fight the terrorists in this country. we all acknowledge that we are going to need tools against terrorists including our military operations. but we should refine it to meet the current needs. that's our responsibilities as congress. and that's why a three-year period for refining the isil campaign militarily as well as our war against terrorists is not om appropriate i think it

. >>> the clock is ticking, a dame duck president and congressman elect joins us next on what the >>> congress back on capitol hill today leaving themselves just ten days to pass a funding bill before the government runs out of money again. joining us tonight is congress women marcia blackman from tennessee and senator election james langford of oklahoma. welcome to you both. let's start with you congress woman. you've got some sizable work ahead of you here in short order. what are you going to do? >> what we're going to do is continue to do what the house has done and that is to present the senate with options, plenty of them. i think most likely what you're going to see our funding package look like is a hybrid of a cr and omni bus where some things would be covered in an omni bus mechanic similar but in a cr which gives us a second bite of the apple if you will over the security provisions and dealing with immigration so that we can come back early next year and address those differently and be ready to take some action. so we're looking forward to bringing it forward and putting it on the

the point that there is no obligation for congress to act just because the president says-- >> but they have acted. they passed 1952. it was amended to give us the to the department of homeland security. it said that the homeland security has discretion. there is a law. it is not a blank slate. it exists. it's a statutory claim. congress has a very easy way to respond. change the law. they have other actions. they could cut off spending but the easiest is legislation. >> quickly, professor howell. >> i think that congress has options. congress can overturn and amend. they have lots of options post talk. it is also clear, though, these congressional limits are in play because obama is not getting everything that he wants. it's quite clear if he has his druthers that he would go farther than he currently is. when we think about how healthy legislative checks are, we should also look at how much the president is getting as a function of what he would like. >> we'll be back with more inside story after this short break. over the last century has the freedom of movement of the president, the assumption of power seen in executive action waxed and

many of us in the congress know for awhile that using the type of torture does not real actionable intelligence. in fact, it gives you bad information. people will do anything sometimes to stay alive. it's not the right information. and many of us here who have studied this, who have followed this understand that. and so it really is important for the american people to understand and this report will give us some glimpse of the fact that torture really doesn't work. and more importantly, it puts our military and our embassy mission folks who are in other countries who get taken captive at a higher risk that they will be tortured than because we have done the same thing. >> congresswoman loretta sanchez of new york. thank you so much for your time today. -- >> of california. >> california. i'm sorry. i'm from california i should have remembered that. >> let's bring in our "newsnation" panel today in new york not california. good day to you. richard, i want to start with you. you know, how real are these concerns that have been voiced about more violence that u.s. embassies and u.s. interests ab

us. the incoming senate has an opportunity to restore a greater measure of bipartisan compromise by revisiting one of the most contentious issues that we face, one that we struggled with at the beginning of this congress and that's the senate rules. i believe the excessive use of the filibuster to obstruct confirmation of president obama's nominees was damaging to the senate and to the nation. any president, democrat or republican, should have the ability to choose his or her team. but the senate majority eliminated obstructions to presidential nominations through the use of the nuclear option, effectively accomplishing a rules change outside the rules, a method i could not support. in doing so, a precedent was established that the majority could effectively change the rules as it wished by overruling the chair and the parliamentarian. that precedent will not serve the country well in the future. because it leaves the minority with no protection, diminishing the unique role of the united states senate. i hope the senate next year considers reversing that precedent while simultaneousl simultaneously -- and i emphasize "simultaneously" -- amending the rules so as to assure a president's ability to fulfi

members of congress from both parties, including members who still serve on this committee, wrote to then attorney general janet reno and asked her to issue specific instructions to guide in the use of prosecutorial discretion and several years later, congress in the homeland security act specifically directed the director of homeland security to enact national immigration enforcement policies and priorities. that's precisely what secretary johnson has done. now to the family fairness program, which serves as an important historical precursor to the deferreded action for parental -- was announced at a 1987 hearing and it offered protection from deportation to certain spouses and children who were legalized in the 1986 act, when the program was expanded under george h.w. bush in 1990, the ins commissioner estimated that as many as 5 million people will be protected from deported. i heard the chairman's comment about pinocchio and "the washington post," but i would like to ask for unanimous consent to put into the record, first the decision memo that announced the family fairness policy, dated february 8, 1990 where the department estimates that the family fairness policy provides

we are now going to hear from our dear beloved sister who represents us in the congress.e worked with marion barry. the student nonviolent coordinating committee. she has been a soldier for justice and righteousness in the congress and in our nation. has served the district for a ny number of years and has done such a great job. it is automatic. it when it comes time for her to take her place again on the congress, there is a seat. please receive and welcome the congresswoman as she comes. come on, d.c. [applause] >> thank you, reverend wilson. members of congress, all of you who have served have had the privilege of serving as mayors district of columbia, as members of the city council, public officials from all over the country and the world, reverend, clergy, friends of marion barry jr. all, i offer my love and condolences yet again to my good friend. cora berry and to christopher. i have been asked to speak about marion barry, whom i first met when we were both on the student nonviolent coordinating committee. or snic. speaking about marion, a son of the civil rights

congress. now, some of us must disagree with that, but it's the constitution. >> just a brief comment. justice jackson said that president's power is at its lowest when he's acting contrary to the express or implied will of congress. the implied will of congress if not the express is not to act in this area, at least not yet. his power should be at the lowest. justice jackson or justice frank fort in that opinion also said that we're not dealing with a situation where there is a temporary emergency and the president is acting until he can persuade congress to act that ends on its own. >> thank you. >> neither one of those statements was discussed in the olc opinion. >> let me say this. you know, the question has been asked and i think it's answered in the question. can the president create, amend, suspend or ignore an act of congress? i think the answer is right there, an act of congress. >> i would also point out -- >> and the answer is no. >> one of the many grievances was the king's propensity to suspend or disregard the lawful enactments of parliament. and so it really goes back to

congress yet. president obama is already threatening to use the power of the bill that hasn't made it to his death yet. doug luzader is live in washington. what are you hearing? >> good morning. pew research named the past congress the second least productive in modern history. will the next one be even better? the president's political strategy for 2015 needs to be just say no. we are hearing from the white house congressional republicans about to assume full control of congress in a new day. next year he expects to use his veto pen quite a bit. >> there will be areas we disagree. i haven't used the veto pen very often since i have been in office because legislation was blocked from the senate even when the republicans took over the house. now i suspect there will be some i have to pull that pen out. >> the president would be served when if he extended an olive branch and left the veto pen in his pocket. >> they will repeal all or part of obamacare. >> doug luzader live for us. thank you, doug. >>> australian officials on the hunt for a shark that killed a 17-year-old boy. he was speering when a g

in closing, it's my hope that congress will use this action as a starting point to legislate permanent fixes to our nation's immigration system and further improve our border security. mr. chairman, i am willing to work with you throughout the remainder of this congress and the next congress to make these legislative changes happen. and i yield back. >> i thank the ranking member. we are pleased here to today secretary jeh johnson back to the committee. as always, we may not agree on all the issues but we do so with civility. and mr. johnson, as many of you know, has a distinguished record, both at the department of defense and at the department of justice. and we appreciate your service for the department of homeland security. and with that, you are recognized for an opening statement. >> thank you, chairman mccall, ma ranking member thompson, committee members here. let me begin by saying in the same vein as the chairman's remarks, we won't always agree, we have not always agreed, but i do appreciate the friendship and the collegiality that we enjoy between individual members of this

two month, demonstrators have been protesting the choice to use a pro-china panel to determine candidates in 2017. those protests in hock congressbc's mandy drury, co-host of "street signs," joins us. >> you're right, you were showing those pictures of the protesters again in hong kong. it did weigh very heavily on the hong kong market. was down about 2.8%. you've got that plus also chinese manufacturing declining. certainly something which could hold back wall street because china is the world's second largest economy, right, and we just can't do all the heavy lifting here in the united states. so you've got the u.s. markets contending with that. plus, falling oil. it kind of is in panic mode. we're looking for a floor in those oil prices after the decision to not cut production due to falling prices. it's naturally going to weigh on u.s. energy stocks. and elsewhere, you know shopping, big deal right. i don't know whether you got out there and braved the crowds. but the crowds weren't as bad as last year. black friday is not what some retailersed an hoped. we got some early numbers from the national retail federation suggest m

congress. we're honored to have -- toe have a conversation about the magna carta and it's legal legacy. term is a very big day for us here at the library of congress and in particular the staff of the law library, for three years we have been planning -- magna carta the exhibition is the beginning for the library to celebrate the 800th anyone of magna carta which will take place next year. as i know many of you know, the centerpiece for the library of congress exhibition will be the magnificent lincoln, king john magna carta which is graciously loaned to us from the library from lincoln cathedral in lincoln, england. it's one of the four exemplify indications of magna carta that -- tomorrow the exhibition opens and it also allows us to celebrate the 75th anniversary of the first time that the king john, lincoln king john magna carta was on display here at the library of congress. some of you may know that in november of 1939, the lincoln magna carta was entrusted to the library of congress and then put on display. but it was entrusted to us for safekeeping at the very beginning of world war ii. so our exhibition ups

us. congress has a job to do also. >> if the internet's down in north korea, they have limited internet capability. but say it's down. a lot of people will suspect the united states did this, given the fact that the president said the u.s. will respond, it will be proportionate. the u.s. might not necessarily announce what it's doing. what's your sense if in fact the internet is down in north korea, was the united states behind it? >> wolf, i'm not going to comment on that. we'll let the public know what happens after we do the attack. we don't tell people that we're going to come and hold them accountable, what we're going to do until we finish. we have different agencies in our government coming together who will make a recommendation to the president, our commander in chief. then we will act and we have to make sure we do it the right way. we are going to be a standard for the world on how we deal with destructive attacks. it's just not about north korea. it's about terrorists. it's about isis hiring hackers to do these type of things. so we have to do this right. it's got to be strong but it's

congress, or others, i will not respond any of those people. >> one of these guys should break rank and talk about with the cia did wrong. that would be useful. by the weekend, congress will probably pass a big old cromnibus. it is a catch all spending bill that adds up to -- to paraphrase dr. evil -- $1 trillion. this is a grab bag of special interest giveaways and some serious policy trying to get smuggled through customs with any much debate. it includes money for the hawaii cultural center, sculptural garden, amenities, compensation for livestock killed by wolves longer hours for truckers limits on contract with companies with overseas tax addresses, fewer rules for protecting small birds, other stuff, then finally money for f 35 fighters the pentagon doesn't even want. is this is usual or something worse? >> $1.4 million for this agriculture center. $52,000 for a tattoo removal parlor in california. an indoor rain forest. then the nevada school district for curricular development to study marriott sheet music. i can find things this ridiculous and every spending bill -- to study mariachi music. >> we thought we had stopped this. stop sm

because congress authorized the use of military force against these terrorists shortly after they attacked us on september the 11th, 2001, detention within a military framework is often the best means of collecting valuable intelligence to prevent further terrorist attacks while ensuring that they remain on the sidelines for the duration of the conflict. now, there are fundamental failures of the administration in the war against terrorism. first, when the president announced the closing of the detention facility at guantanamo in january of 2009, he left our nation without a clear policy for detaining and interrogating suspected terrorists. without such a policy, including one that identifies a facility for holding terrorists that are captured outside of afghanistan, the intelligence community's ability to conduct ongoing intelligence operations have been severely limited. second and even more alarming is the ill-advised release of these gitmo detainees back to the battlefields from which they came. i would suggest to the senator from new hampshire that we are doing material harm to our na

us to congress.to know that the honorable marcia fudge has made it clear that we will take up legislation to bring about change in the way policing takes place in this country. [applause] we have bobby scott, who has just not the piece of legislation through congress that will again require the reporting of death at the hands , thee constabulary do police. we want to make sure congress gets an annual report on what is happening. that is not enough. pendinghave legislation , which will require body across on peace officers the length and breadth of the country, because we understand that although body cameras don't make all the difference, it will make a difference when we can see what happened to people like garner.rte without the camera, he would be like michael brown. pass legislation for body cameras. not enough. we must give the justice department the additional authority so that it can investigate every one of these questionable shootings. we must take it to the federal government so that we can

their $2 trillion spending bill, theure is the first step toward gop control in the next congress, karen travers brings us up to date at the nation's capital. >> congress is facing a major deadline, the house is poised to pass a $1.1 trillion bill to fund the government, if the bill doesn't pass the government would shut down but john boehner promises to get in down. but like everything in washington, it's not without controversy, there is something in this 1600 page bill for both republicans and democrats to dislike. boehner acknowledged there was a lot in this bill and it took a lot to put it together. >> members are finding a way to get their legislation across the finish line. that means cramming in some surprising items, including chopping away at the national school lunch standards advocated by the first lady and blocking washington, d.c.'s new initiative legalizing the recreational use of marijuana and weakening some wall street regulations put in place by a congressional overhaul. >> we need to stand and fight this give away to the most powerful banks in this country. >> members from both parties

help us understand what's happening here. >> reporter: this is the congress that just will not go away. last night, harry reid, as leader of the senate wanted to hold a procedural vote to fund the government and then go home for christmas which they could have done by early next week but some republicans balked and said, well, fine, if you want to vote on that, we want an up-down vote on president obama's executive order on immigration. harry reid said, no, here we are on saturday set up for a slate of votes at noon here. harry reid will put together votes on nominations the president wants to see filled. the reason they're doing that now come january republicans will take control of the chamber and it will be a lot harder to get those things done. it has set up a fight that will take us through the weekend and into next week. c-span junkies are not going to have to watch reruns this

in closing, it's my hope that congress will use this action as a starting point to legislate permanent fixes to our nation's immigration system and further improve our border security. mr. chairman, i am willing to work with you throughout the remainder of this congress and the next congress to make these legislative changes happen. and i yield back. >> i thank the ranking member. we are pleased here to today secretary jeh johnson back to the committee. as always, we may not agree on all the issues, but we do so with civility. and mr. johnson, as many of you know, has a distinguished record, both at the department of defense and at the department of justice. and we appreciate your service for the department of homeland security. and with that, you are recognized for an opening statement. >> thank you, chairman mccall, ranking member thompson, committee members here. let me begin by saying in the same vein as the chairman's remarks, we won't always agree, we have not always agreed, but i do appreciate the friendship and the collegiality that we enjoy between individual members of this c