The president has taken action, we have seen the mexicans agree to take key steps that will help to alleviate the crisis, we still have to close the loopholes here in congress. We have to make sure that we take that responsibility seriously to keep our nation safe. Instead, the democrats are focused on Holding Hearings with people like john dean. Theyll be holding a hearing on the Green New Deal yet again and on government takeover of health care this week. While things at the border continue to get worse, while people across this nation continue to expect their elected representatives to be here to make sure that we are continuing to keep the economy growing, make sure we are seeing regulations continue to be rolled back, that we are continuing to focus on issues related to health care, jobs, the economy, and our National Security, the democrats are doing they basically got two pillars of six months in office, embracing socialism and impeaching this president. The republicans will continue to focus and work on making sure well get the message out. We understand the American People want real change, they want substance from their elected officials. Well make sure they understand what we are prepared to do for them. Our most important responsibilities and obligations we have as elected members of the house is to provide for the common defense. We will be marking up the National Defense authorization act this week. So we have asked the republican leader of the Armed Services committee, mr. Thornberry, to join us this morning to talk about the ndaa markup. Mr. Thorn bererry thanks, liz. Leader mccarthy and i were among those who had the opportunity to attend the 75th anniversary ceremonies at normandy for dday recently. In addition to thinking about the incredible acts of bravery of those folks who scaled the cliffs, i think all of us were mindful of all that has been built and accomplished since that time. And as liz says, this week in the house both in the Armed Services committee, with with our committee markup, and also on the floorer with the defense appropriations, we have the opportunity to build upon what those in normandy fought and sacrificed for. We have consistently had testimony in the Armed Services committee since 2017 that there needed to be three to 5 real growth in the Defense Budget through 2025 just to repair our militarier and to maintain our current position military and to maintain our current position verer suss russia and china. Neither the bill on the floor or the chairmans mark in the Armed ServicesCommittee Meets that mark. I will have an amendment to give members the opportunity to go up to the 3 real growth. Which is the same the senate is marking to. And i hope my colleagues will follow through. Another key can area for youall to Pay Attention to is the nuclear deterrent. All of us probably have gotten to the point where we take for granted that the United States has a strong Credible Nuclear Deterrent that prevents others from using Nuclear Weapons against us. Unfortunately in the bill before our committee tomorrow, there is a weakening of that deterrent. Again republicans will make the effort, hopefully with democratic support, to make sure that we have the full range of tools available, a Credible Nuclear Deterrent, all three legs of the triade, so necessary for keeping our country safe and free. Id like to turn it over to the distinguished republican whip, mr. Scalise. Mr. Scalise thank you, mac, thanks for your leadership on strengthening our military and fighting to make sure that our men and women in uniform have the tools that they need to do their job safely and effectively. I wish you well as you represent those views so importantly on the Armed Services committee. And i hope that we are able to see an ndaa come out that takes the politics out of weakening our military. Speaker pelosi has pushed to weaken our military. We need to strengthen our military and macs fought to do that, as well as the members of the committee. You are seeing on the floor again this week Speaker Pelosi wasting her majority on president ial harassment. Rather than focus on the priorities of the American People. When you go around the country, you dont hear people saying they want to continue going down this rat hole of witchhunting and impeachments. The drumbeat of impeachment is clear by the speaker. Last week she talked about putting the president in jail. You have Committee Chairmen talking about impeaching the president with no facts to do it. So they are on this witchhunt, search to find something as opposed to focusing on the problems of this country. There is a crisis at our borderer. The committee that deals, thats set with the jurisdiction of dealing with the crisis at the border is wasting all their time on impeachment instead. You have over nearly, 150,000 people crossing the border illegally per month. This number is a crisis. First of all i commend the president for getting an agreement with mexico. Just a few days ago. And a commitment where mexico has said they will put real troops on their southern border, which is where this tide and caravan of people coming over illegally are coming from. Mexicos stepping up to do more to secure their southern border so that we dont have as big of a crisis at our o southern border. But mexican officials have made it clear that the broken asylum laws in america are one of the big magnets that is bringing people in illegally, not just to america illegally, but through mexicos southern borderer illegally as well. So borderer illegally as well. We have to do more on those problems. I can call on Speaker Pelosi to i call on Speaker Pelosi to work with us. As opposed to this witchhunt and march to impeach. Ment again what President Trump has done is at least focused on the problem. I call on Speaker Pelosi and her team to bring a bill to the floor to deal with this crisis at the border to address the president s request for supplemental funding so that we can can properly address this serious week address this serious we can properly address this serious problem. Nd pass this usmca passed. That Speaker Pelosi needs to spend more time on. It will help our partners both on the north, canada and mexico want to get this done. Now the republican leader of the house, kevin mccarthy. Mr. Mccarthy thank you, steve. Good morning. I want to thank our republican leader on Armed Services, mac thornberry, one for his service. As mac mentioned we were on a bipartisan, bicameral codel over to normandy. Listening to the president , listening to president ma roan ma macron as well. When you look at that thome when talk to those veterans, prior to the ceremony there was a tent laying out there with some of the veterans there that day n this tent they have this glass wall, there were seven of the veterans sitting in a wheelchair looking out toward the ocean, seeing the beach. I turned to one to shake their hand and thank them for their service he looked at me and said i have not been back here in 75 years. What a difference it looks like today. Past, no matter how partisan this body has become, has always found a way to make the ndaa bipartisan. This new socialist Democrat Party may have changed that. Im hopeful in watching this markup start tomorrow that they keep with tradition, to put their partisanship aside, they put the uniform on when they fall into that chamber. We do not want to see partisanship go into when it comes to our men and women who defends our freedom. Being prepared means we maybe never have to send men and women into a battle like they faced that day. Sunday before we went home we watched where the paratroopers dropped at 2 00 in the morning into a field they thought they could all land. Lo and behold, the intel did not tell them how deep the water was or the three days of fighting to secure a bridge to move people across to liberate france. Two of our very own members of congress jumped out of those planes, too, on that sunday. A republican and a democrat. I hope when we jump into the ndaa we have that same feeling and that same tradition that it will be bipartisan, that well keep the issues that divide us out and really put us in position of strength around the world for greater security. That is what we should be looking for this week, and im hopeful in this delegation that was bipartisan, bicameral, takes the feelings of what and the emotions we saw that day from all the crosses and the stars of david, from the names we did not know, that many fell on that single day, at we look for making sure theyre protected and our future generation. As we came back, they had a hearing in the Judiciary Committee. Chairman nadler is back to the same things that chairman nadler promised he would do when he campaigned for the job, when he campaigned for the job to get the votes of the democrats to become chairman of the committee, the number one thing he campaigned on that he would be the very best chairman of impeachment. But unfortunately, the Mueller Report did not turn out that he had hoped, but that had not stopped the path he wanted to go down. Who did he invite as his witness . John dean. John dean, the same individual thats tweeted more than 900 times against President Trump, the same individual who pled guilty, the same individual who accused every single republican president since his service in the administration that they were worse than watergate, a book he wrote on the brucks bush administration. An individual paid by cnn as their witness. I think at the same moment that they were having that hearing i wish he picked up his own paper the New York Times. The New York Times is not known for writing something that is on a conservative side. Theyre bent a little different than most would believe. But they had a second editorial, because i guess he did not read the first one they had written about the crisis along the border. That just last month alone, 144,000 people were apprehended illegally trying to cross the border. Now, what does that number mean . It means its the highest its been in 13 years. Those are just the people who were apprehended. They are the body of jurisdiction for our committee. Thats not what they were working on. Even though the New York Times wrote the second time the editorial. Let me use their words. Its time for congress to stop dithering a pass emergency funding to deal with this nightmare. Its not that the president has not requested this. Yes, hes requested it. Time and ago. But the democrats have ignored it. Whats most outrageous, mexico understands the crisis on the border, and mexico was able to work with President Trump to actually do something about it. It is only the democrats in congress who continue to ignore this problem, it continues to rise. Were on pace to have more than one Million People apprehended illegally crossing our border. Put that in perspective. I come from california. The largest population of any state in the nation. 12 of the entire nation lives in california. 9 capital city of california the capital city of california, sacramento, it will be twice the population of sacramento coming across that will be apprehended this year illegally. But the democrats continue to believe nothing is happenings. They are the only ones. Chairman nadler, who ran for chairman on the idea to impeach, but he ran for congress on the idea he can legislate, the jurisdiction of his committee should deal with this issue. This is what they should be having a hearing on. This is what they should be moving forward instead of what they hope to do with their own plan on the day that President Trump got elected. As we continue to move forward, well have appropriation bills on the floor in week. It will be interesting to see what the large number of new freshmen democrat socialist members, will they vote for appropriation bills . Will they read whats in it . Will they look is it their philosophy of whats moving forward . That will be an interesting debate when we go to the floor. It will be interesting to see how amendments that are offered. When you look to the last congress, there were more democrats offered than there were republicans. As of this date, this moment, i think the number is somewhere less than 20 of the amendments have been republican allowed on the floor. A much Different Congress with a much different intention with a much different majority thats now a socialist democrat majority. We have other work before us that we can work upon. Usmca, United Statesmexicocanada agreement. One that would make our country stronger, one that will have more jobs and improve our economy. Again, the only Thing Holding us back is the speaker of the house, nancy pelosi. She calls the bill up, it will pass. Their only question would be, they do not want to have the president to have a victory. But its not a victory for President Trump. Its a victory for america. I hope they look for americans before they look for politics. Lets open it up for questions. Yes, maam. Reporter democrats had an appropriations bill last night that supports congressional pay raises. What do you think about raising salaries for members of congress . Mr. Mccarthy twofold. I know when you talk of this subject, cola, cost of living increase, it invokes an impulsive emotion. I think its something we pause and look a its been more than 10 years in the process. I know the Current Study says the pay has decreased by 15 . I do not Want Congress at the end of the day to only be a place that millionaires serve. This should be a body of the people. And i think its something that should be looked at. Thats the mode people should take a pause and actually study it. The only thing that happens to the cost of living increase, it hasnt increased in 10 years, its also tied to the staff and to the security inside congress. I know the executive branch continue to go up in the last 10 years, but it brings a real staff within staff as well. Yes, maam. Reporter is the committee the appropriate place to address it or will you try to address it in upcoming appropriations package . Mr. Mccarthy if i was in the majority i could tell you why it would address but its something i am not. Modernization will be recommendings they will give back. Two different appropriations you can address it in. You can address it in leg branch. Its my understanding the democrats want to address it in Financial Services appropriations. Its not even coming up at this time. Yes, maam. Reporter many republicans have criticized what the democrats are doing today as it relates to the vote of the barr and mcgahn, calling it a dangerous precedent. Can you tell us exactly whats dangerous about it . Is it not a good thing theyre enforcing congress subpoena power, in a sense . Mr. Mccarthy its Something Congress has never done before. Its not about enforcing subpoena is power. What theyre doing is taking power away from congress and putting it into a group of five people. With three democrats and two republicans. Its called the bipartisan legislative advisory committee. What happens is, any future subpoena they can go directly to Court WithoutCongress Even voting on it. The history of congress at any time this came forward, it didnt matter what controversial issue it was, from doma to obamacare, others, all of congress voted on it. What the democrat majority is doing is theyre trying to get to impeefment without having their impeachment without having their members vote on it. They are trying to have their members not take a difficult vote. Court would have to ask a question does the power of Congress Really lie on just three people, the speaker of the house, nancy pelosi, steny hoyer, and clyburn . Because thats in essence what happens today. If it passes, we will release the power of congress into those individuals to determine what happens. Whatever subpoena into the future. This has never happened in congress before. This, again, is a concern that i have of this new socialist democrat majority, taking power away from what members of congress, which means is represented across this country. Last question. Reporter cnn. What is your reaction of amash leaving the Freedom Caucus . [indiscernible] mr. Mccarthy justin amash, i guess, decided to leave the Freedom Caucus. Justin amash for a long time, if you watch his voting record, and i said this before, i just watched the other day, there was a motion to recommit. There was one republican who voted with nancy pelosi. Not unusual to me, because it was justin amash. Justin amash, when it was on the floor to vote for makinging the Mueller Report making the Mueller Report public, didnt vote yes on it. Justin amash can determine his own future, but i think in a philosophical basis hes probably in a different place than the majority of all us. Thank you. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] House Republican leadership from about an hour ago after their morning Conference Meeting here in the u. S. Capitol. We are live here on cspan. The house returns at noon eastern and within the hour we expect debate to begin on the resolution. Well show you democrats briefing from this morning momentarily. Thats the resolution, House Resolution 430. Specifically it would give the attorney general william barr, seek information, subpoena the Judiciary Committee to subpoena the attorney general for the entire unredacted Mueller Report. Also seek public testimony of former white House Counsel don mcgahn. More broadly, though, the resolution does this. It reinforces the authority under house rules that empowers Committee Chairs to enforce sps. There are a number of subpoenas. There are a number of committees, including oversight, that will take up subpoenas on the Trump Administration. It sets up the potential of, if the resolution is passed, that the Trump Administration could commit an Impeachable Offense if they dont comply with a court order. We will see debate coming up this afternoon. Rule debate as we said in about an hour or so. First votes at 1 30 eastern. Wrapping this up with a final vote somewhere around 3 00 eastern this afternoon. House subpoenas are not an unusual thing. They happened several times in recent history, including 2014 with the lois learner subpoena dealing with taxexempt groups. The attorney general under the obama administration, the investigation into the a. T. F. Fast and fewer russ documents. Going back to the bush white house, george w. Bush white house and bush officials, josh bolten, Harriet Miers and recent examples of house subpoenas. We will have live coverage of the house when they come back in at noon eastern. Talking about the democrats this morning, heather covers the democrats for politico and she tweets this so what happens after todays contempt vote . The chairman, jerry nadler, told reporters earlier he wants to take the attorney general to court as soon as possible. Hakeem jeffries, the conference chair, had a different take. Quote, if they, the d. O. J. , continue to cooperate with us, i would expect we will not race to the courthouse. Of course, yesterday, chairman nadler announced that the d. O. J. Is indeed cooperating. Going to provide some additional documents that injury eye nadler had requested back in late may, including witness notes and testimony from witnesses, but not the entire unredacted Mueller Report. Lets hear what democratic leadership has to say about the debate coming up today in the house. Reporter there is conclusion for americans about impeachment inquiry, what youre doing, civil contempt, congressional intent, can you tell us what the resolution does today for for people . Mr. Jeffries its a civil contempt resolution that will authorize the house of representatives to go into court, to enforce the subpoenas that have been issued, both to the attorney general and to don mcgahn, that they have at least in part defied. We are of the view that no Single Person in the United States of america is above the law. The president is not above the law. The socalled attorney general is not above the law. The treasury secretary is not above the law. The commerce secretary is not above the law. The former white House Counsel is not above the law. We are going to use every available means at our disposal to enforce our right as a separate and coequal branch of government to hold the potentially lawless administration accountable. We are taking a meaningful step in that direction today. I also expect that chairman nadler will continue his series of hearings on obstruction of justice that began yesterday and will continue those hearings and include an exploration on potential abuses of power as well as the culture of corruption that appears to ist at 1600 pennsylvania avenue. We are going to legislate and investigate. And that is obvious just from what the Judiciary Committee is doing this hike. With the hearing yesterday that they had on with john dean and other legal experts trying to get the facts out to the American People. Ms. Clark and analysis as we see this coverup continue from the white house. And at the same time, today, the Judiciary Committee is looking into big tech and is there a need to look at big tech from an antitrust perspective. We are going to continue to prioritize the for the People Agenda every single day and at the same time do what we have to do. As the chairman said, to make sure nobody is above the law and that the facts are getting out to the American People. Reporter for congresswoman clark, a lot of people in our profession and in the Political Class have been waiting for lings aucus progressive to cause headaches to the speaker. The Hyde Amendment was an excellent amendment for that to occur and it doesnt seem to be. Why is that . Ms. Clark let me be clear on the Hyde Amendment. I would repeal it tomorrow, and i think that is overwhelmingly the feeling of our caucus, which is being prochoice, understanding how reproductive freedoms are to the economic wellbeing to women in this country. But at this point, with the senate that is leading with obstruction, with a white house that seems hellbent on turning the clock back on women in this country, we felt that the Hyde Amendment was going to become a focal point that could collapse everything in the laborh bill that is so good for american families. And we need to do two things. We need to keep speaking out about the Hyde Amendment, and its effect on lowincome women. And what it does to deny access to fundamental health care for women in this country. And at the same time work hard to make sure that we are electing people who understand that womens rights, Womens Health care isnt up for grabs. That niece are Constitutional Rights and that they are fundamental to what were fighting for. But at this point, to make sure we got those appropriation bills with all the things they do for american families. It was, you know, agreed upon that had to be our course at this particular point in our nations history and where we are with the makeup of congress and the white house to make sure those bills got passed. Reporter you have riders preventing money for the border wall. [indiscernible] how likely will shutdown in september mr. Jeffries it was a reckless shutdown that had donald trump engaged in an unconditional surrender. We didnt give him a dime to do it because it was irresponsible he was trying to hold the American People hostage for his medieval border wall. We will expect he will not go down that reckless course again. And House Democrats are going to continue to function, continue to legislate, continue to appropriate, continue to investigate, and continue to litigate as weve done successfully in the article 3 federal court system. At some point were going to get tired of all the winning because thats what we have been doing. Not donald trump who apparently has been throwing temper tantrums because he has no meaningful legislative accomplishments. That said, as katherine indicated, we are willing to work with donald trump to lower the high price of lifesaving prescription drugs and we are willing to work with donald trump to fix our crumbling infrastructure. We simply need him to come back to the negotiating table. Reporter i have a few questions if you dont mind. You mentioned the hearing yesterday. T seems folks are saying mr. Jeffries its my understanding there are going negotiations between leaderhour and leader mccarthy about the leader hoyer and leader mccarthy about the costofliving adjustment which is not the pay increase. We dont have the capacity to increase our pay in the 116th congress that were in right now. This would simply be a costofliving adjustment that has been suspended, as i understand it, over the last 10 years. If were going to proceed, we will proceed in a bipartisan way. And if we dont proceed in a bipartisan way, we will see no costofliving adjustment. With respect to the hearing yesterday, it was simply the beginning of a process of exploring the obstruction of justice that bob mueller 22 mented in his report and monthlong investigation. Its my view that bob mueller should testify publicly before the American People sooner rather than later. That is the view of the overwhelming majority of the House Democratic caucus. He spent 22 months conducting an incredibly important investigation. There were three conclusions. Russia attacked our democracy and interfered with our election for the sole purpose of artificially placing donald trump at 1600 pennsylvania avenue. The Trump Campaign welcomed that cooperation. Donald trump and others appear to have obstructed justice in connection with the investigation that was being conducted as it relates to the attack on our democracy. Those are three serious conclusions. Bob mueller has a duty to the American People to bring those conclusions to life in public testimony before the United States congress. Reporter after you pass this resolution this afternoon and you have the power to go to courts, how quickly do democrats plan to do that . Will we see it immediately . Yesterday the d. O. J. Cooperating with chairman nadler. Is there a sense you will allow them more time to do similar to do similar things and share some of these documents, or do you expect a mad rush to the courts . Mr. Jeffries the timeline will depend whether the d. O. J. Continues to cooperate with our legitimate article 1 powers of oversight and investigation. And we began to see yesterday in the face of the possibility of either a criminal contempt citation or proceeding with inherent contempt that they began to see things differently all of a sudden. If they continue to cooperate with us, i would expect we would not race to the courthouse. And with respect to don mcgahn, well see. Seems to me that mr. Mcgahn is in a particularly vulnerable situation as a private citizen. He should either begin to cooperate pleadly or face the conis he cooperate immediately or face the contempt matter that will be voted out of the house of representatives today. Reporter getting back to rachels question. Do you support [indiscernible] mr. Jeffries its my view we should proceed with caution as it relates to bob muellers testimony in part because, as you know, the law requires us to try to find an accommodation thats reasonable with the recal cistrant witness. Hes a war hero, has indicated he has reluctance about his public testimony. So were working through that reluctance right now. I think chairman nadler is doing the responsible thing by not jumping to a subpoena because ultimately if we have to fight this out in court, we need to demonstrate that weve been reasonable in our approach to him. I think to date, weve been more than reasonable. Thank you, everyone. Part of the democratic leadership briefing from this morning. You can see all of it later in our program schedule. Well also have it for you at cspan. Org. The house returning in under 35 minutes at noon eastern. Well have it live, of course, here on cspan. Very early on in the next hour, theyll begin the process, debating the rule for the resolution, the one that would empower the Judiciary Committee, the house Judiciary Committee chair, jerry nadler, to seek subpoenas to take the attorney general in federal court, civil, federal court to sue them, in particular, in this case, the entire unredacted Mueller Report. Also seeking the public testimony of don mcgahn. More broadly, this measure would reinforce the authority under house rules, existing house rules that house Committee Chairs can go to federal court and seek Civil Enforcement of subpoenas when authorized by the fivemember bipartisan legal advisory group. This is a process that was set up in 1992. The resolution today reinforcing that process. It could come to play in another committee, the Oversight Committee of the house, Elijah Cummings is the chair, and saying yesterday that committee tomorrow will begin the process of debating the contempt citations against the attorney general and against the commerce secretary, wilbur ross, for an entire different thing. Its the 2020 census. That would come up tomorrow on the committee. On that, alanna abramson, who covers it for Time Magazine tweeted this. Steny hoyer talked to representative cummings last night and said, hes, quote, comfortable where they are in investigations. He also says that reporting on divisions in congress on impeachment are not accurate and clarifies its division of opinion. We expect the house to come in at noon eastern. We will have it live for you of course. As other briefings come up between now and then well try to get those to you as well. In the meantime, want to show you a portion of our discussion on washington journal this morning on congressional oversight versus executive authority. Guest well, sure. I guess to start, one of the fundamental jobs of congress is to do oversight over the executive branch, to make sure in a democracy that people are happy with the work the executive is doing. From time to time, congress is dissatisfied with cooperation it gets from the executive branch and so one of the things weve seen particularly really in the last decade or so is Congress Going to court on occasion to try to get help in enforcing its subpoenas. Host irv, why not hold a formal contempt vote, why not take this route . Guest i think they are not mutually exclusive. In the case where Civil Enforcement has been pursued in the courts, its bebeen preceded by contempt votes by the house. And the notion is that the house has a number of options when someone violates a subpoena, refuses to appear. The house could actually arrest the individual, could send out the sergeant at arms aided by the Capitol Police and put them somewhere in the capitol. I think it would be cruel and unusual punishment to put them in the snack bar. They could arrest them. People have recognized that was used in the 19th and early 20th centuries but hasnt been used since the early 20th century. The second is to defer it to the department of justice for prosecution which is what happens when a private citizen is in contempt of the congress. But obviously if its part of the administration and theyre being advised by the department of justice, they are not likely to prosecute. That uses them to hold them in contempt and go to court to get an order that compels them to comply with that. If they fail to comply with the court order, then they can be held in contempt of court and they can be arrested by the u. S. Marshal which is a serious matter one one that would have been approved by a court. In these matters where the administration has refused to comply with the subpoena, theres a legal issue thats involved. The administration claims that theres immunity for a high white house officials from a congressional subpoena. Theres no merit to that argument, but there is a legal argument. When theres a legal divide between the executive branch and the house, its appropriate to go to court to get a resolution of that legal issue. And so thats why the resort to the courts is appropriate in that particular circumstance. Host again, the step thats taking place today, its h. Res. 430. It will be on the house floor this afternoon. Authorizing Committee Chairs to pursue civil action and enforcement of their subpoenas in federal court. And well be covering that on the house floor and throughout the day here on cspan. If that passes, if this process starts to go through the federal courts, what will be the role of the general counsel in that process, the general counsel for the house of representatives . Guest well, the general counsel usually is the litigating lawyer for the house. On occasion, the house has hired outside counsel to help and thats a possibility here as well. He general counsels office is the direct of that litigation. The general counsel of the house has been around for only 40, 50 years. Before that the department of justice typically represented the house and congress when it had litigation issues. Then, over time you had this growing sense that the department of justice is, of course, an executive branch entity and might be looking out for executive branch interests instead of congressional interests. So both the house and senate developed their own general counsel offices. Guest i think it is an inherent responsibility of the legislative branch to conduct oversight rover all government operations. Including the executive branch, including the jew drishary. I think there are multiple reasons for it. One of them is the obligation to inform the public. There is a duty to inform that the house has. And, of course, to get information to inform, as well as get information to legislate, you have to have the subpoena power and the supreme ourt has repeatedly upheld that notion its in the inherit power of the legislature to subpoena witnesses and documents in order to get information necessary to fulfill the legislative function and these subpoenas e enforceable and they apply to everyone. Host your job in the general counsels office, do you agree with that read whag the constitution says about legislative oversight . Guest i do. I dont think thats particularly controversial. There is a real value in congressional oversight in terms of informing the public and also for congress to be able to do its job. One of the fundamental things that congress does is and in e, obviously order to legislate Congress Needs to be informed. The Supreme Court has said repeatedly congress naturally wont know all that it needs to know just of its own devices and so it needs to be able to ask other people, it needs to be able to compel other folks for information to support its legislative work. And not just legislative work but all the other work it does. In the senate, they may need particular information to go about deciding whether to conform a nominee. Obviously impeachment gets talked about these days and thats a function of congress. In order to inform itself on those issues it needs to gather information. All the function that congress has. Guest i want to make one thing clear. You said i was appointed by Speaker Pelosi which is true. The house general counsel is a nonpartisan position. It represents the institution of the house and it represents members, both republican and democrat in any matter in which their official position is complicated. And so when i was there i represented a number of republicans on issues that they had. Legal issues they were sued by third parties. We defended them. If they were sued in connection ith their official duties. In pursuing these matters in court its carrying out the institutional prerogatives of the house. Host is there a more conservative way of having a more liberal day of doing that . Is there no sort of daylight of a general counsel being appointed under a democrat or republican . Guest i think they would come up with similar approaches to, you know, obviously you could be a more conservative or more liberal, more progressive. Guest you come up with similar approaches. The function is to protect the institution of the house. The constitution was set up to have checks and balances. There is a tension that exists that was intended between the legislative branch and executive branch. When the executive branch is disregarding the legislative branch, its incumbent upon the house to protect its interests. Therefore, the house general counsel is protecting the interests of the house as an institutional matter to take it to court and resolve legal issues and get information the house needs. Host is there a point where oversight can cross the line into harassment or fishing expeditions . These terms that we hear . Guest there can be a line, obviously, but its a far and remote line. There is a presumption that congress is acting within its official prerogatives. The courts respect that. Unless it is blatantly clear that there is no legitimate legislative purpose, no legitimate oversight purpose, subpoenas need to be nforced. There are presumptions issued in the regular court of business. Host do you agree . Guest i do agree in terms of the legal matter. Does congress have the power to demand certain information . They have a very broad power to do that. Anything that could be relevant to their legislative work is something they can demand. Theres a separate question about what they should demand. We are seeing that play out to some degree now with President Trump insisting that special counsel mueller seemed to do a lot of work for a lot of time with a lot of witnesses on certain subjects. Isnt that enough . Democrats rightfully are saying we have the power to continue to ask questions. Republicans are saying you may have that power, but its not a ood use of resources, its a waste of time. Some republicans are making the argument that congress has the power to do this i agree with mr. Nathan on that. Congress certainly does have the power to do that. Host William Pittard and irvin nathan, we are talking about ongressional oversight and the work of the general counsel of the house. Thats part of todays washington journal program. Of course, you can see the entire Program Online at cspan. Org. In about 20 minutes, the u. S. House will gavel in for legislative work at noon eastern. The main focus of today is the House Resolution, h. Res. 430, a resolution that would allow the chairman of the Judiciary Committee to pursue legal action, civil legal action against the attorney general and former white House Counsel don mcgahn. Specifically, seeking the unredacted robert Mueller Report, and seeking the public testimony of don mcgahn. More broadly would empower Committee Chairs, house Committee Chairs to pursue legal action against the Trump Administration with approval of the bipartisan house legal advisory group, created in 1992. The timeline for this everyones debate which think looks Something Like this. The house will gavel in at noon eastern, as we mentioned, and theyll begin debate shortly thereafter on the rule for todays debate. That covers, by the way, because youll hear some of this, it covers the beginning of the appropriations process for fiscal year 2020. Theyll include in part of the appropriations rule. But most of the focus early in the afternoon will be focused on the resolution. We expect the initial vote on the rule itself somewhere around 1 30 eastern with final votes somewhere between 3 00 and 3 30 eastern. We will have all of that live. In case you missed any of it, we will have it for you begin tonight at 8 00 eastern here on again tonight at 8 00 eastern here on cspan. We want to remind you, too, a tweet here from barbara mcquaid, former u. S. Attorney. She testified yesterday before the Judiciary Committee. This was the hearing they had yesterday with john dean and others. She was one of the witnesses. Her take on this is, its clear america has not read the Mueller Report. People still gasp when they hear about conduct described in it. Mueller always intended for us to read the eightpage summaries. Read them all here. We have a link to that Mueller Report online. Particularly for today, we have link to the resolution itself that the house will take up. If you look at congressional chronicle at cspan. Org, youll find it there. Mcquade was a witness in a hearing held by the Judiciary Committee. Jerry nadler, the chair, doug collins the Ranking Member, on Lessons Learned from the Mueller Report. There are more hearings ahead. Well show you some of the opening of yesterdays hearing as we wait for the house to come in. Mr. Nadlr just over two years ago, special counsel Robert Mueller was charged with conducting a full and thorough investigation of the russian governments efforts to interfere in the 2016 president ial election, unquote. Including examination of, quote, any links and or coordination between the russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of president donald trump. And any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation, closed quote. He concluded in his own words, quote, russia Intelligence Officers who were part of the Russian Military launched a concerted attack on our political system. Those offices used sophisticated cyber techniques to hack into computers and networks used by the Clinton Campaign you. They stole private information and then released information to fake Online Identities and through the organization wicky leeks. We now wikileaks. We know they timed their interference to harm the candidacy of secretary clinton and to benefit the Trump Campaign. Separately, the special counsel concluded russian entities, quote, engaged in a social media operation where russian citizens pose as americans in order to interfere in the election, closed quote. Using Fake Identities on social media platforms like facebook and twitter, these on are a tiffs planned rallies in favor of the president and spread lies about secretary clinton made to look like legitimate media. Again, these activities represent a direct attack on our democratic process. With respect to these two, specific with respect to these two specific operations by the russian government, the special counsel did not find sufficient evidence to charge Trump Campaign officials with conspiracy against the United States. He did, however, document at least 171 contacts between members of the Trump Campaign and Transition Team and the russian government. 16 Trump Campaign officials unknown to have direct communications are known to have direct communications with russian agents. They exchanged phone calls and held facetoface meetings with russian oligarching and even some of the hackers the special counsel used working to sway the election. There can be no question that Congress Must investigate this direct attack and our democratic process. I believe that Ranking Member collins agrees that we must do so without delay. In a letter he sent last month, he urged the committee to call Robert Mueller to testify. During the memorial day recess, if necessary. Both for the sake of transparency and, quote, for the American Public to learn the full contours of the special counsels investigation, closed quote. In letter he sent last week, the Ranking Member, again, asked us to examine, quote, the threat russia and other nefarious actors may continue to play in our elections, closed quote. Over the course of the coming weeks, the committee will do just that. Well examine the effects of foreign influence on our elections. I hope we will hear testimony from the special counsel as well. The country cannot hope to understand the russian governments attacks on our democratic system if we do not also investigate who stood to benefit from that attack and the extent to which the Trump Campaign may have welcomed it. Similarly, we cannot fully understand the special counsels work without also discussing President Trumps repeated attempts to undermine it. In his report, the special counsel describes 10 separate incidents in which the president attempted to change the scope or direction of the investigation or to end it altogether. At one point, President Trump ordered white House Counsel don mcgahn to fire the special counsel. Later, he asked mcgahn to write a letter stating the incident never happened. Mcgahn said hed rather resign. At different stages, he asked attorney general Jeff Sessions himself and quote, step the investigation away from the president s conduct. Of course, the president s public statements about this investigation before and after before and after the results of the Mueller Report are at best at odds with the evidence laid out in the report itself. There can be no question that this committee must investigate this behavior as well. Todays hearing is the first in a series of hearings designed to unpack the work of the special counsel and related matters. We have a responsibility to do this work, to follow the facts where they lead, to make recommendations to the whole house as circumstances warrant, and to craft legislation to make certain no president , democrat or republican, can ever act in this way begin. Our Witnesses Today include three former federal prosecutors each of whom has considerable experience weighing the kind of evidence laid out by the special counsel in his report and in his indictments of 34 individuals, including President Trumps National Security advisor, his campaign manager, his Deputy Campaign manager, and his personal attorney. Our panel also includes mr. John dean, who served as white House Counsel to president nixon and who became a critical itness for prosecutors and congressional investigators. We will rely on the expertise of these witnesses to help draw our own conclusions about the findings of the special counsel and other evidence before us today. We will do so mindful of the house rules that prevent us from making inappropriate personal references to the president , to members of this committee, and to other members of congress. But the rules of decorum in the house of representatives are a shield, not a sword. The rules are designed to focus the debate on the facts and the law and can therefore help us discuss the findings of the special counsel with the seriousness they deserve. The rules are not, however an opportunity to avoid discussing serious allegations of misconduct altogether. I know that the Ranking Member and i disagree on any number of topics including on what conclusions we should draw from the facts laid out by the special counsel. For example, in his last letter he argued that President Trump has been, quote, independent vate vindicated, unquote. I cannot agree with that conclusion. Neither, i believe, could the special counsel given his insistence his report, quote, does not exonerate the president , closed quote. I also know the Ranking Member and i agree on the serious of the attack on our elections. And that we must Work Together to make it more difficult for any president to ignore the danger that presented itself in 2016. That work continues in this hearing room today. And it continues at the department of justice later this afternoon where this committee will begin to review some of the documents that attorney general barr previously denied us. I am pleased we reached agreement to review some of the evidence underlying the Mueller Report, including interview notes, firsthand accounts of misconduct and other Critical Evidence and that this material will be made available without delay to members of the committee on both sides of the aisle. As a result, i see no need to resort to the criminal contempt statute to enforce april 19 subpoena, at least for now, so long as the department upholds its end of the bargain. It does not extend to the full scope of our request for the full Mueller Report including grand jury information, nor does it extend to our demand of don mcgahn a key fact witness, testify before this committee. Our work will, therefore, continue tomorrow on the house floor when we consider chairman mcgoverns resolution to authorize this committee to enforce its subpoena to civil litigation. It is my expectation that as a result of this authorization, mr. Mcgahn will testify before here before long. Between now and then, we still have an obligation to investigate the deeply troubling evidence outlined by the special counsel. T merely the portions that implicate russian nationals but the entire report, including the volume that lays out some of the president s troubling behavior. The committees work is serious. We should delay it no further. We should conduct ourselves in a manner thats consistent with the rules of the house and worthy of this chamber. And even if we cannot agree to draw the same conclusions from the evidence, we should at least proceed with the common understanding. We were attacked. We were attacked by a foreign adversary. President Trumps Campaign took full advantage of the attack when it came. The descriptions of obstruction of justice in volume 2 go to the heart of our legal system. If we can agree on this common set of factors as our starting place and agree to follow the facts and the law where they take us, i believe we can make a great deal of progress in this hearing today. I thank the panel for being here today, and i look forward to your testimony. Before we proceed further, i want to note for the record that the gentlelady from pennsylvania, ms. Dean, is unable to be with us today due to a death in the family. She very much wanted to participate in todays hearing and i did not want anyone to misinterpret her absence. It is now my pleasure to recognize the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee, the gentleman from georgia, mr. Collins, for his opening statement. Mr. Collins i would extend my thoughts and prayers to ms. Dean as well. I am a little under a year, in fact, will be unyear from losing my mother. For all of us we go through that and its an expression of love. However, i will come to this hearing today and say we are continuing i appreciate the chairmans understanding. I appreciate the chairman outlying a great deal conclusion from the Mueller Investigation, that was the foreign interference in the russian part of this. What is amazing, though, and i agree with the chairmans assessment of being attacked and that something weve known the russians were always a part for some of us we have been talking about the russians for a long time. But its about priorities. The question of priorities is if we were attacked, as the chairman just said, then the priorities should go to the battlefield on attack and not run by the side show to hear from the commentators. We should actually go to the one that the mr. Mueller actually said was we have a problem here, were showing you. Using these indictments. How can we firm up our elections . Ow can we do away with foreign interference . The chairman is showing the priorities. The priorities from november, 2016, it appears who got elected president. And we thought the Mueller Investigation would solve that for us and it really did not, even after a lot of discussion. Were going to hear a lot about that today. And the discussion that we have. But he goes back to priorities and priorities are bringing what we focus on and how we focus on it. If you look at the Witnesses Today and you discuss what was actually just went on for a while, we are not bringing russia front and center. We are not bringing the threats to our election front and center. Although i appreciate the chairman reading my letters i sent to him and what we could be working on. I am wanting to move forward there. However, he here we come with some folks who are great folks. You are wonderful on tv. I can catch your testimony on tv. In fact, i could, by the way, this morning. I am a republican. I believe that you use everything you got to do as much business as you want and generate as much to work for yourself but i dont think its the priority of this committee who are not part of this pontificating on things you can do on tv like all of us get a chance to do occasionally but not here on a hearing. The russian priority issue. It was brought up and one of our candidates talked about russia being a threat and mr. Obama said the 1980s are asking for their Foreign Policy back. Guess what, this committee is now hearing from the 1970s and they want their star witness back. In fact, its very difficult for one of the witnesses here today for many of us who could trace the distrust in Government Back to the witness here today. The 1970s star of obstruction. In fact, ill take it a little bit further. For those that have been looking into this for a while and wondering how we get tarted here and discussing the corrupt of mccabe, comey, others, how we actually got started here, i believe they have the godfather here today, mr. Dean. In fact, probably had a picture of how do we use the governmental resources to interfere in other peoples campaigns. Mr. Dean is the godfather. They may have had a picture of you. Knowing how you do it. And that is here today, again, to talk about a president that obviously you dont like. And interview in ways that you have pled guilty to. I appreciate your right to be here. I appreciate your right to share it anywhere else. But dont appreciate the fact that here we are again with priorities in this committee turned upside down. It is interesting to me and i applaud the chairman for finally getting accommodation process under the department of justice that he could had a long time ago. Im glad we got it there. Maybe we can move forward. Maybe put this committee in order. But i will just go back and say i will ask my chairman on who we do agree on things. Hopefully tomorrow we will have a bill we can agree on. The 9 11 bill. But while we continue this part, asking opinions from commentators, promoting their agendas, my question is this at the end of the day, for these not here, theyre here commenting on a report, i go back to what the chairman asked and said, we well, we may get there. I said, we hope i think the exact words a moment ago hope. This committee is obsessed with a document which they could talk to the author and we seem to not want to go there. Were hot and heavy to get everybody else here but not go there because at the end of the day the Mueller Report despite his standing up statements stated, there was no collusion, which is where it started. There was no charged obstruction. Here we are again today, here e are looking at it as we go forward. Why . Because there is an obsession. Theres another election around the corner. That other election is simply being played out here, how can we damage the president , because we dont like the cards we got to run for reelection on with the economy and other things happening. So mr. Chairman, were here again. I believe the priorities are wrong. But you called the priorities. So now let the show begin. I yield back. The opening part to yesterdays house Judiciary Committee hearing on Lessons Learned from the Mueller Report. All of that hearing is at cspan. Org. Just type house judiciary in the search box to find it. The house is coming back momentarily. Just a quick note, you may have heard the chair, jerry nadler, the aagreement with the department of justice that would allow some of the material from the Mueller Report, witness statements and witness notes to be released to the Judiciary Committee. The house proceeding, however, not with a criminal contempt but a civil process by which the Judiciary Committee chair and other house judiciary chairs can get material from the fralks. In from the Trump Administration. In particular, from the attorney general, from william barr, and looking for the unredacted Mueller Report. Also seeking the public testimony of former white House Counsel don mcgahn. Theyll come in in just a moment or two. Theyll debate for an hour the rule for that. Well see initial first votes about 1 30 eastern with a final resolution coming up between 3 00 and 3 30 eastern this afternoon. Just a quick note, we will reair all of todays debate from the house floor tonight 8 00 eastern here on cspan. Well take you now to the house floor here on cspan