Opposition to this nomination by president obama. But if you look at what republicans have been saying it is clear they are going to use this as a stage for a referendum on president obama and on her predecessor, should she be confirmed and that is eric holder. They are going to hit her and try to figure out what we are goals, her ideas, and whether she will support the policies put forth by eric holder and president obama. We will see fireworks from the likes of senator ted cruz he is on this panel. His wing man is there as well. You are going to see her attack her on that issue as well as things like voter id laws republicans accuse the administration of lax enforcement on those. But she is an individual who has been endorsed by everybody from the former mayor of new york city. And she has been confirmed twice already by the senate. She has done two stints as a u. S. Attorney. Now serving as the u. S. Attorney for southern new york. And that brings up another interesting point del, a
Good morning. I welcome everyone to this very very important hearing. Before we start id like to state a few things. These are some ground rules, pretty much the same as what former chairman and my friend senator leahy and others have done stated in the past. I want everyone to be able to watch the hearing without obstruction. If people stand up and block the view of those behind them, or speak out of turn, its not fair or considerate to others. So officers would then remove those individuals. I know that theres a lot to protest regarding this administrations policies, but this isnt the time or place to do it. Before i turn to our Opening Statements, i wanted to go over a couple of housekeeping items and explain how were going to proceed. Senator leahy and i will give our Opening Statements. Then i will call on senators schumer and gillibrand to introduce the nominee. Following miss lynchs opening remarks well begin with the first round of questions, in which each senator will have ten
With us on washington journal tomorrow. Now president obamas pick to be the next attorney general Loretta Lynch testifies at her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary committee from earlier today. [indiscernible] good morning. I welcome everyone to this very, very important hearing. Very important hearing. Before we start id like to state a few things. These are some ground rules, pretty much the same as what former chairman and my friend senator leahy and others have done stated in the past. I want everyone to be able to watch the hearing without obstruction. If people stand up and block the view of those behind them, or speak out of turn, its not fair or considerate to others. So officers would then remove those individuals. I know that theres a lot to protest regarding this administrations policies, but this isnt the time or place to do it. Before i turn to our Opening Statements, i wanted to go over a couple of housekeeping items and explain how were going to proceed. Se
The problem with where the Net Neutrality issue has gone is it is not focused on the substance, which there is a lot of consensus around. It is focused on the Legal Authority to drop to adopt rules. Our concern is they are going to undo a regulatory status now for over a decade. On cspan two. The Senate Judiciary committee recently held a confirmation hearing her attorney general nominee Loretta Lynch. She serves as the u. S. Attorney for the Eastern District of new york. She would replace current attorney general eric holder who has been with the Obama Administration since 2009. She would also be the first africanamerican woman to head the Justice Department. At this hearing she answered questions about immigration criminal sentencing, and cyber security, among many other topics. This portion is 4. 5 hours. Good morning. Before we start id like to state a few things. These are some ground rules, pretty much the same as what former chairman and my friend senator leahy and others have d
Would authorize that, nor am i aware of a policy seeking authorization to do that. If could you share more information with me . My question is about the constitutional limits on the federal governments power. Attorney general holder repeatedly declined to answer the question about whether it is constitutional for a drone to use lethal force against an american citizen on u. S. Soil if that individual doesnt pose imminent threat. Now, let me be clear, i think the answer to this is very easy. My question to you is, is it constitutional for the federal government to do so . Senator, i think with respect to the use of lethal force by any means, one would always want to look at the Law Enforcement issues involved there. And certainly if could you provide more context there i could place it in the scope of a case or an issue that i might have familiarity with. It is in the nature of a hypothetical. But you are certainly aware that the federal government is currently using drone strikes over