three people, in texas that number is 11.7, in louisiana, it s 20. these numbers does matter. we were talking about the u.s. air force and their failure to put this information in the database. in texas you can buy guns with no background check. there are loopholes that includes department of defense but it also includes just our laws and who is required to get a background check and when. we need to fix the background check systems in a lot of different ways. you brought up the air force, now there s a dod investigation. that s the other argument you hear, from advocates who don t want any changes. they say look, there are existing laws they just need to
case, i don t think a guy like this obviously is ignoring laws about murder is going to be restricted by some new gun law. i don t think it would have changed anything. what would have changed something is if somebody had been in the building who could have shot back immediately. that sounds like common sense to me. there does seem to be a problem with the background checks this is what the fbi said earlier. for the four purchases that he made, they did the required checks and there was no prohibitive information in the systems that we checked that said he could not have purchased that firearm. there are three checks conducted one is of ncis, one is a criminal history check and the other is on the nick system itself. so in all three of those data bases there was no information that said it was prohibitive for that man to get the firearm. the argument is enforce the laws which are on the books. would this be a chance to make
have been prevented this person from legally having a firearm. and under texas law, someone who commits a nonviolent act is prohibited from having a firearm. doesed surprise does it surprise you that this information wasn t on the national registry? anderson, i m going to take the air force at their word in a statement that they released that this was a glitch or mistake, and this wasn t a syst systemic problem. that information should have been given to the fbi as part of the national criminal background check services. that s basically the database. that s the firewall that shows someone who submitted a felony, or a whole host of other things
what we keep getting are bits and pieces of information but what we can glean now from what s transpired is that this company is charging the u.s. taxpayer maybe as much as 30 or 40% more than what would go as normal rates to do repairs in this kind of disaster recovery. so we should cancel it and get a fair deal for u.s. citizens and u.s. taxpayers. every dollar that we spend in puerto rico is going to be dear so we shouldn t be overpaying. the governor there today wants to make the process as transparent as possible. is that the issue for you as well, trans pirntcy and how this contract was awarded. we want to continue to investigate how they got contract and language in the contract and why we would ever expect to pay 30 to 40% more
also an attorney. he wants us to weigh in on the fact that somehow grand jury testimony was leaked. that is a violation of federal law as far as i know. i would assume he s directing that to the oversight company on trying to hold maybe a hearing or committee meeting investigating that. i m certain that they want to look into whether or not mueller is doing the job he needs to do and whether he s fair and impartial. i think that s what s maybe coming to light here. i can only speculate because i don t have access to the type of information that that committee has access to because i m not on it. but certainly would be following the news and our chairman trey gowdy is capable and competent prosecutor. so i m sure he s in fact, today trey gowdy as you mentioned, he weighed in and said he s one of the few republicans who thinks special counsel robert mueller should not resign and believes he s apolitical and impartial where