Skip to main content

tv   U.S. House of Representatives Debate on House Contempt Resolution  CSPAN  October 22, 2021 12:32am-1:41am EDT

12:32 am
of jesus and john wayne. the former tennessee governor discusses his book. and on afterwards, chair of the house intelligence committee talks about his book, midnight in washington, and recounts trump's first impeachment trial. watch book tv every sunday on c-span 2 or watch online at any time. >> the house today voted to find steve bannon in contempt of congress for refusing to comply with the subpoena regarding that january 6 attack. the vote was 229-202.
12:33 am
it will be sent to the justice department for further action. e the january 6 attack on united states capitol, i call up house report 117-152. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: house calendar number 39, house report 117-152, report to accompany resolution recommending that the house of representatives find steven k. bannon in contempt of congress for refusal to comply with a subpoena duly issued by a select committee to investigate the january 6 attack on the united states capitol. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 727 the report is considered read. for what purpose does the gentleman from mississippi seek recognition? mr. thompson: by direction of the select committee to investigate the january 6 attack on the united states capitol, i
12:34 am
call up house resolution 730 and ask for its immediate. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 730, resolution recommending that the house of representatives find steven k. bannon in contempt of congress for refusal to comply with a subpoena duly issued by the select committee to investigate the january 6 attack on the united states capitol. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 727, the resolution is considered read and shall be debatable for one hour equally divided among and controlled by the gentleman from mississippi, mr. thompson, the gentlelady from wyoming, ms. cheney, and an opponent or their respective designee. the gentleman from mississippi, mr. thompson, the gentlewoman from wyoming, ms. cheney, and the gentleman from alabama, each will control 20 minutes. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from mississippi. mr. thompson: thank you very
12:35 am
much. madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on this bush. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the speaker pro tempore: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. thompson: madam speaker. since speaker pelosi asked me to chair the january 6 select committee, i spent a lot of time thinking about the importance of what we are doing. the weight of it. the urgency. we need to give the american people answers about what happened. there needs to be swift accountability. but there are longer term considerations too, madam speaker. i'm a grandfather. and when i talk to my grandkids about that horrific attack on our democracy on january 6, my mind jumps ahead to the future in store for them. questions about whether american democracy as we know it now will
12:36 am
remain strong. whether it will withstand future tests. that's got to be the legacy of this committee's work. to be sure, we're going to ange questions about what happened on that day. but we also need to draw a road map for making sure our democracy remains strong tomorrow. we will work backwards at what happened and try to explain how and why the insurrection came about. but we will also look forward and generate recommendations for legislative policy and process changes that will help ensure that nothing like this ever happens again. and when we get to the end of this process and look back, we're going to ask ourselves, did we do everything in our power to uncover ect fact? did we use the tools at our disposal to get a full accounting? or did we get someone stand in
12:37 am
our way without facing consequences? did we learn what we needed to know for congress to forge legislation to help ensure we never experience another january 6 again? that's why we are taking up this resolution today, citing steve bannon with criminal contempt, and referring him for prosecution by the justice department. we didn't choose to be here. this isn't about punishing steve bannon. the select committee would prefer and frankly expect all witnesses to fully cooperate. but steve bannon has led us down this path by refusing to cooperate in any way with our investigation. we believe mr. bannon has information valuable to our probe. he was deeply involved in the so-called stop the steal campaign. he was reportedly in a war room meeting the day before the riot
12:38 am
and had been pressuring the former president to try to stop the counting of electoral college ballots. he warned that all hell would break loose on january 6. we believe he can help inform our inquiry as to how the riot came together and what it was intended to achieve. he's clearly an important witness. so we subpoenaed him. and unlike other witnesses, who have engaged and worked with our team to find a way to cooperate, mr. bannon told us he wouldn't comply because the former president told him not to. he hid behind vague and baseless claims of privilege. that's just not acceptable. the select committee told mr. bannon several times that he would face the consequences if he didn't change course. well, he didn't change course.
12:39 am
and his actions have brought us to this point. madam speaker, we need to make it clear that no person is above the law. we need to make -- take a stand for the integrity of the select committee's investigation and for the integrity of this body. what sort of precedent would it set for the house of representatives if we allow a witness to ignore us flat out without facing any kind of consequences? what message would it send to other witnesses in our investigation? i'm not willing to find out. i'm not willing to get to the end of the select committee's work and look back wishing we had done more to uncover all the facts. not when we know what's on the line. when we know that our democracy isn't yet out of danger. when we know that the forces that tried to overturn the
12:40 am
election persist in their assault on the rule of law. our investigation is going forward. we're hearing from witnesses, reviewing document, analyzing data. mr. bannon stands alone in his defiance and we will not stand for it. we will not allow anyone to derail our work because our work is too important. helping ensure that the future of american democracy is strong and sure -- and secure. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from wyoming. ms. cheney: madam speaker, a year ago today the election was still a couple of weeks off. we knew it would be a tight race. but most of us did not anticipate the president -- that president trump or any president, frankly, would ever simply reject the outcome of the vote. president trump had the right to challenge the outcome in our state and federal courts.
12:41 am
which have an appropriate and constitutional role in resolving election claims. but what he did thereafter has no precedent in our history. rerejected the court's rulings in dozens of cases including the rulings of judges president trump himself appointed. he rejected what his own department of justice officials told him over and over again, that they found no evidence of widespread fraud sufficient to overcome the election. he rejected the con cleugs of both the department of justice and the intelligence community. that the dominion voting machines had not secretly changed the election outcome. president trump had no factual or constitutional basis for his claims. and the lawyers he found who would carry his false claims forward have paid the consequences. rudy giuliani's license to practice law has been suspended and sydney powell has been sanctioned by a federal judge.
12:42 am
but donald trump persisted. attempting through every manner he could imagine to try to overturn the outcome of the election. and we all saw what happened. the people with who attacked this build having told us, on video, on social media, and now before the federal courts, exactly what motivated them. they believed what donald trump told them. that the election was stolen and that they needed to take action. today, madam speaker, we are here to address one witness, mr. i urge all americans to watch what mr. bannon said on his podcast on january 5 and 6. it is shocking and indefensible. he said, all hell is going to break loose. he said, quote, we are coming in right over the target. this is the point of attack. we have always -- this is the
12:43 am
point of attack we have always wanted. madam speaker, there are people in this chamber right now who were evacuated with me and with the rest of us on that day. during that attack. people who now seem to have forgotten the danger of the moment, the assault on the constitution, the assault on our congress. people who ewe will hear argue that there is simply no legislative purpose for this committee, for this investigation, or for this subpoena. in fact, there is no doubt that mr. bannon knows far more than what he said on the video. there is no doubt that all hell did break loose. just ask the scores of brave police officers who were injured that day protecting all of us. the american people deserve to hear his testimony. let me give you just four examples of the legislative purpose of this investigation.
12:44 am
first, the plot we are investigating involving mr. eastman, mr. giuliani, mr. bannon, president trump, and many others. their plot attempted to halt or delay our count of electoral votes and reverse the outcome of the 2020 election. the 1887 electoral count act is directly at issue. and our investigation will lead to recommendations to amend or reform that act. second, while the attack was under way, president trump knew it was happening. indeed, he may have been watching it all unfold on television. and yet he took no immediate action to stop it. this appears to be a supreme dereliction of duty by president trump. and we are evaluating whether our criminal laws should be
12:45 am
enhanced to apply more consequences to this type of behavior. third, we know from our investigation to date that president trump was pressuring the department of justice in late december, 2020, to support his false claims that the election was stolen. several brave and honorable trump appointees at the department flatly refused to go along with this fraud and threatened to resign. we are evaluating what, if any, additional laws may be required to prevent a future president from succeeding in any such effort. fourth, we know that president trump made efforts to persuade state election officials to, quote, find votes, to change the election outcome in his favor. we are evaluating whether this -- the criminal laws of the united states should be enhanced to make the penalty for this type of behavior even more severe. and if so, in what manner? mr. bannon's own public
12:46 am
statements make clear he knew what was going to happen before it did, and thus, he must have been aware of and may well have been involved in the planning of everything that played out on that day. the american people deserve to know what he knew and what he did. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana. >> i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, madam speaker. three months ago for the first time in the history of congress, speaker pelosi vetoed jim jordan and i from serving on the select committee to investigate january 6. not all firsts are worth celebrating. it was a shameful and divisive decision with real consequences. today, because of that decision, there is no committee conducting a legitimate investigation into january 6. congress is prohibited from
12:47 am
conducting criminal investigations, period. mr. banks: but that's exactly what the select committee is doing, conducting an illicit criminal investigation into american citizens. steve bannon was a private citizen before, after, and during january 6. so why is the select committee interested in steve bannon? it's simple. he's a democrat party bog boogieman. they're abusing their power to put him in jail. the committee claims they are seeking documents from mr. bonon because he helped, quote, construct and participated in the permitted and legal stop the steal rally. to date, the select committee has subpoenaed 11 other private citizens for organizing the stop
12:48 am
the steal rally. here in the land of the free, 12 american citizens are under congressional investigation for the sole crime of planning a legal political protest. never in the history of congress has a committee or a political party stooped so low. congress has no authority to conduct criminal investigations. congress can only issue subpoenas that serve a legislative purpose. the question that the committee must answer is -- why are they seeking information about a permitted political rally? what legislative purpose does that serve? is the committee considering laws to limit americans' right to political protest? it's clear that the select committee doesn't give a lick about congress' subpoena authority. does the committee share the same disdain for the first amendment?
12:49 am
i wouldn't put it past them. as we all know, the d.o.j. has a highly active criminal investigation into the january 6 attack. they made something like 600 arrests. as i said, very active. even hyperactive compared to the biden d.o.j.'s typical reaction to political violence. but the department of justice's investigation isn't comprehensive. there are still questions that only congress can answer. congress still has a role to play. but the select committee has completely abandoned that role. why else does the select committee want to hear from mr. bannon? because on january 5, mr. bannon warned that, quote, all hell was going to break loose tomorrow. so according to the select committee, no person could have predicted that violence might occur that day. according to the committee, that mr. bannon warned of violence on
12:50 am
the fifth is proof that, quote, mr. bannon had foreknowledge of the attack on the sixth. never mind that the f.b.i. said that it was coordinated or potential violence occurring weeks before the sixth. never mind that -- every america with internet access knew that violence was a possibility on january 6. the question the committee should be asking is this -- how did the united states capitol police, the d.c. metropolitan police, and the f.b.i. all have no clue that, quote, all hell was going to break loose? steve bannon, a private citizen, knew. so why didn't the capitol police have enough riot shields? why did it take multiple hours to deploy the national guard? these are worthwhile questions,
12:51 am
and congress has a duty to answer them. because january 6 was an enormous intelligence failure. there was a breakdown in security, a breakdown that was repeated on good friday when officer billy evans was brutally murdered. the issues that plagued the capitol police on january 6 have not been fixed. in fact, according to a capitol police whistleblower, the officers most responsible for the intelligence failure on the sixth were promoted by speaker pelosi's team. to be clear, the select committee is engaged in unconstitutional political investigation, a sham investigation conducted by a sham committee that refuses to answer real questions about what happened on january 6. the capitol was attacked, and instead of figuring out what went wrong, the committee
12:52 am
launched its own attack on congress' norms. the select committee's politicization of january 6 cuts both ways. the committee's inaction has made the capitol less secure, and the committee's actions have further separated congress from its constitutional roles. the american people and the united states capitol police deserve a real investigation into the sixth, and the select committee has abandoned them. i urge all of my colleagues to make the moral vote, do the right thing. i urge you to vote for the rule of law, for the institution of congress and against the select committee's dangerous abuse of congress' oversight authority. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from mississippi. mr. thompson: madam speaker, i heard the speaker opposing this amendment. we are not seeking actually
12:53 am
information from mr. bannon because of his opinions. we issued the subpoena because we believe he has knowledge of relevant facts that we need to discover. we are not violating anything, and certainly not mr. bannon's amendment rights. the only violation we can talk about is the violation of this building on january 6. and mr. bannon's claim that the election was stolen helped foment that attack. investigating that is also part of our charge. madam speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from wyoming. ms. cheney: thank you very much, madam speaker. madam speaker, i just wanted to correct the record. the gentleman from indiana said the f.b.i. found there was no coordination. that's just simply not true. the gentleman also said he is
12:54 am
not on the committee. he noted that the speaker had determined he wouldn't be on the committee. so i would like to introduce for the record a number of letters the gentleman from indiana has been sending to federal agencies dated september 16, 2021, for example, signing his name as the ranking member of the committee he's just informed the house he's not on and in fact is not on. i'd like to introduce those for the record. and now, madam speaker, i would like to yield to representative lofgren. the speaker pro tempore: how much time? ms. cheney: i'd like to yield three minutes, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for three minutes. ms. lofgren: thank you, madam speaker. i'd note that the gentleman from indiana is incorrect. we are not pursuing a law enforcement investigation. only the d.o.j. can do that. what we are doing is taking the steps that are provided for under the congressional contempt statute that's existed for many
12:55 am
decades. because the select committee's charge is to get to the bottom of what happened on january 6. who planned it? who paid for it? what was the intent? and what legislative steps can we recommend to remove future threats to our constitution? to do that, we need information, both documents and testimony, and to get that, we issue subpoenas. now, what is a subpoena? is it just a suggestion, a mere request, an encouragement to testify? nope. a subpoena is a writ issued by a government agency, in this case the congress, to compel testimony or production of evidence. when you get a subpoena, the law requires you to comply. if you think there may be some valid reason that excuses you from telling the truth under oath, you have to come in and make your case to the committee. steve bannon is the only person who's outright refused to engage with the committee. he thinks if he simply obstructs
12:56 am
congress by not showing up, he'll escape the consequences. but as theodore roosevelt said, no man is above the law and no man is below the law. if you get a subpoena, you can't hide behind vague, immaterial claims of privilege. the case makes it clear. judicial watch, nixon vs. g.s.a., the mcgann case. executive privilege is limited to immediate white house advisors on government policy. private citizens, extravagant claims, plotting with other private citizens, his status, according to the case, doesn't get executive privilege protection. he has no absolute immunity. america, what would happen if you received a subpoena from congress or a court? do you think you could get away with just saying, go fly a kite? you'd be held accountable. and so should mr. bannon be held to account for defying the law
12:57 am
regarding this subpoena. to defend the rule of law, we must vote yes on this resolution. and i yield back the balance of my time to the gentlelady. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from indiana. mr. banks: madam speaker, no one has said that the select committee doesn't have a legislative purpose. let's be very clear. there's important work that frankly we wish they were doing. like answering why this campus was left unprotected and what we are doing to keep it from happening again. that hasn't happened yet. what we are saying is that the subpoenas that have so far been issued do not ask for information that would meet any legitimate legislative purpose. with that, madam speaker, i yield to my colleague from great state of illinois, mr. davis. the speaker pro tempore: for what amount of time, please? mr. banks: as much time as he may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. davis: thank you, madam speaker. thank you to my friend and
12:58 am
colleague from indiana, mr. banks. i can tell you when i got elected to serve in this body almost nine years ago, i didn't expect to be standing here today to talk about such an important issue. i spent 16 years as a congressional staffer, working for a member of congress who i looked up to and who respected this institution for what it was and what it meant to our country. and when i came to congress to serve with him, i had the utmost respect for this institution at the same time. that's why i wanted to be part of the house administration committee, because i wanted to make this congress and this house work better, act in a much more bipartisan manner, make sure that we protect those who are on this campus but also at the same time protect those who protect us. and madam speaker, we are now
12:59 am
months and months in -- months and months post-january 6. my many conversations with u.s. capitol police officers and those who work on this campus, they have the same concerns i have. the question they ask is -- why were we so unprotected on january 6? and what has changed since then? getting to the bottom of those questions should be the top priority for all of us in this house. there are serious security vulnerabilities that have not been addressed by this house in 11 months after january 6, and this is what the majority has decided to spend its time on, holding the private citizen, who wasn't even part of the administration at the time, in contempt for refusing to comply with house democrats' subpoena. this is after more than 600 people have been arrested for
1:00 am
their role in the tragedies we saw on january 6. . when i got the article, i would like to submit for the record, madam speaker, a reuters article that talks about senior officials stating at the f.b.i. that there was no organized evident to overthrow the government on january 6. i will submit it once i get a copy of that. i did not bring it with me. our job, again, is to secure this capitol. we have never seen a breach like the one we saw that day. it's our responsibility to make sure it doesn't happen again. but that hasn't been done under the leadership of this house. we have had two independent reports regarding january 6. one bipartisan report in the senate. another one commissioned by the speaker herself. that came out in march. these have never been acted on. but this is what the select
1:01 am
committee has been working on? the capitol police i.g. has released seven reports related to january 6, making recommendations on what is needed to secure this capitol. to my disappointment the majority has not acted in a meaningful way to ensure all 103i.g. findings are implemented. these reports have all told us what the problems are and the recommendations on how to fix them. the congress, us, have failed to even debate these changes, let alone act on them. we know massive changes to intel, perimeter protection, training, leadership structure, decisionmaking processes, and many, many more needed. neither the select committee nor the committee on house administration seem at all interested in ensuring these changes are made. the committee on house administration, which has oversight of security, hasn't held a single hearing since
1:02 am
august 5, with no upcoming hearings scheduled according to the majority's website. the select committee right now as we see is just purely focused on political subpoenas. without objection i'd like to introduce these articles into the record, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. banks -- mr. davis: additionally some of the questions from that day still remain unanswered. i'm waiting for the speak of the house to answer a letter i sent back in february to ask why the national guard request by then police chief were denied. why was the speaker's office anti-speaker involved -- and the speaker involved in eventually approving the request? why the house sergeant at arms has refused to comply with rest -- preservation and production request from my office. we have many more questions about why the capitol was so unprepared that day. our top priority should be ensuring or capitol is never as vulnerable as it was on january
1:03 am
6. but this majority has done absolutely nothing to make the security changes needed to make this capitol safe. madam speaker, we must do better we have not fixed the institutional problems with our security apparatus that led to the lack of preparation, the danger that our brave officers were put in on that day, and any other possible day like that in the future. that's a failure of leadership. we must fix the problems that led to the terrible security posture here, and i will tell you after witnessing what we saw a few different days in security postures that this house was put into a couple of other days since january 6, and i urge you to talk to the brave officers
1:04 am
that stand around these buildings and protect all of us every day. ask them the same question i do. ask them if we have put them in a better better position -- better position than they mr. on january 5. the answer out of every single officer i ask that question to is, no. what is stopping this house from fixing the problems? it's a lack of will. it's a lack of focusing on the true issues that led for them to be put in a dangerous spot on january 5. instead, we are talking politics. it's wrong. and we must do better. i have said time and time again and i stand willing to work with my democrat colleagues to make this house, this capitol safer for everyone. instead, it's all about political points like the one being scored today. i'm disappointed, you can tell.
1:05 am
my frustration will continue to boil over until we are in the position to fix the problems i have laid out and we know exist. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from mississippi. mr. thompson: madam speaker, in response to the gentleman from illinois' statement, the first hearing of the select committee we actually held an interview four officers -- interviewed four officers who put their lives on the line defending all of us who work here in this body. i assure you my directions to the committee have always been, we'll look at all the facts and circumstances surrounding what occurred. we are genuinely interested in getting to the facts. we are working to get the answers.
1:06 am
that's why we are on the floor today to get answers from steve bannon about what he knew, what he did, leading up to january 6. also, the gentleman from indiana, i'm glad he finally agreed that the select committee has a legitimate legislative purpose. that's why we are here today pursuing that legislative purpose. i'm happy that the record will reflect his comments. with that, madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from florida, mrs. murphy, a valued member of the select committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. miss mrs. murphy: -- mrs. murphy: madam speaker, i rise in support of this resolution to refer steven bannon to the department of just tis for prosecution to the contempt of congress. it didn't have to be this way. mr. bannon, a self-professed
1:07 am
patriot could have done the patriotic thing and cooperated with our bipartisan committee. if mr. bannon is proud of the role he played in connection with january 6, he should be eager to tell his side of the story. and instead, he's acting like man who has something to hide. our committee seeks only the truth. that is our legal charge and our moral obligation. we cannot let any individual impede our inquiry. we will not tolerate mr. bannon's evasion. why must we be so unrelenting in our pursuit of truth? because on january 6, the greatest nation on earth came under attack. this attack wasn't carried out by officials in beijing, moscow, or tehran, or foreign terrorists, even. it was an attack conducted by our fellow citizens. regular americans who were radicalized because they believed outrageous lies said to them by other americans in positions of power and influence. the attack was launched against
1:08 am
the seat and symbol of our republic, it was designed to disrupt the certification of the presidential election results, to defy the will of the voters. this was no peaceful protest in a proud american tradition. it was violent and vicious. members of the mob wielded weapons. they called for the death of the vice president. they hunted members of congress. they caused severe harm to law enforcement officers. and the real disservice to the police comes from those who want to whitewash the violence of january 6 and pretend that the riot of that day was anything short of the violent attack it was. aimed at derailing the peaceful transfer of power. america's not just a place. it's an idea. and on january 6, there was an attack on the very idea of america. i believe that patriots of all political stripes should want to protect our capitol, this country, and her constitution. our committee will make a full kght of what happened. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired.
1:09 am
the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlelady from wyoming. ms. cheney: i'd like to yield three minutes to the gentleman from california, mr. aguilar. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. aguilar: i thank the vice chair for yielding. like many of my colleagues, i was right here on the house floor when the violent mob attacked our capitol. i saw those doors shaking. nearly overrun with rioters attempting to enter. i saw my colleagues shed their jackets and roll up their sleeves preparing for the eventuality. and i saw capitol police acting quickly and thoughtfully to conduct a successful evacuation of members from this chamber. their actions undoubtedly saved lives. what we didn't know at the time was that on the steps of the capitol were the capitol and the metro p.d. officers engaging in brutal hand-to-hand combat. officer michael fanone told us he was grabbed, beaten, and taized.
1:10 am
all while being called a traitor. to this country. this is what officers dealt with to defend our democracy. some lost their lives. many are still living with both the physical wounds and trauma they suffered that day. this is what our officers dealt with to defend democracy. officer harry dunn told us more than six months later, january 6 still isn't over for me. these officers are heroes. i want to thank the chair and the vice chair for their leadership in making our first hearing directly from those heroes in their own words. we wanted to hear and make sure that all of our colleagues and this country heard firsthand what we experienced on the ground that day. we asked them to explain the violence they had to endure to protect our democratic process. and in return they made one simple request, to get to the bottom of this. they want answers, quite frankly
1:11 am
they deserve answers. so far both the metro p.d. and capitol police have been excellent allies in this investigation. they have cooperated, shared their stories, and expertise, and provided us with key evidence and accounts of the violence they endured that day. and we owe it to them to see this investigation through. the vote we take today is a crucial step toward removing a roadblock in our investigation. we owe it to every officer who put their life on the line that day and every day to protect us here in the capitol. we owe them answers. and this committee intends to get to those answers by all means necessary. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on this resolution. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana. mr. banks: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from mississippi. mr. thompson: madam speaker, i yield three minutes to the gentleman from illinois, mr. kinzinger, an iraq and
1:12 am
afghanistan air force veteran. and a lieutenant colonel in the air national guard. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. kinzinger: i thank the chairman for yielding. let me just say first, madam speaker, as a republican, don't let my side use the security posture as the strawman argument in this. the reality is that's the equivalent of blaming the victim of a crime for the crime. and while it is important, that's not what we are here to talk about today. madam speaker, voting on a criminal contempt resolution is not the position we hoped to be in, but steve bannon went out of his way to earn this resolution before us and now we must approve it. mr. bannon's willful disregard for the select committee's subpoena demonstrates his utter contempt for the american people's right to know how the attacks on january 6 came about. he's advanced a ludicrous legal argue in support of his decision not to cooperate or comply. a decision that defies the rule
1:13 am
of law and rejects the will of the american people. mr. bannon's reported actions put him near the center of the investigation into the events surrounding january 6. his own words strongly suggest that the actions of the mob that stormed the capitol and invaded this very chamber came as no surprise to him. he and a few others were by all accounts involved in planning that day's events and encouraged by those who attacked the capitol. our officers and our democracy. i have no doubt that mr. bannon's scorn for our subpoena is real. but no one, and i repeat, no one is above the law. and we need to hear from him. as a select committee's contempt report states, it was mr. bannon who on january 5 predicted with chilling accuracy, quote, all hell is going to break loose tomorrow. on his radio show that day he stated, quote, it's not going to happen like you think it's going to happen. ok. it's going to be quite extraordinarily different. all i can say is, strap in.
1:14 am
you made this happen. and tomorrow it's game day. so strap in. let's get ready. it was mr. bannon who is recorded as saying, quote, it's all converging and now we are on the point of attack tomorrow. mr. bannon said these things publicly as a private citizen, someone deeply involved with stop the steal movement, he said them nearly three years after leaving his job at the white house. mr. bannon was also reportedly among the small group of trump confidants assembled at the willard hotel to stop or delay the january 6 count. is it any wonder the select committee needs to hear from him? that we want to see related materials that he has. furthermore, does anyone really believe mr. bannon's actions are covered by a blanket, no questions add clinton administration the executive privilege, one the former president hasn't made. madam speaker steve bannon is a key witness to the probe, he has yet to say or produce anything
1:15 am
in response to the subpoena, and his assertion of executive privilege is far-fetched in the extreme and not his to make. i urge my colleagues to join me to support the contempt resolution. i yield back.. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from wyoming. ms. cheney: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from maryland, mr. raskin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. raskin: thank you, madam speaker. today, donald trump said the insurrection took place on november 3. no, mr. trump, i'm sorry, that is an election and election validated by federal courts and eight judges nominated to the bench by president trump and all the way up to the united statessupreme court rejecting electoral fraud and corruption. we know an insurrection when we see one because we lived through
1:16 am
one. under the banner of this continuing and deranged big lie, the stop the steal movement brought down the violent insurrection against this congress in an attempted coupe against vice president pence and interrupted the counting of electoral votes in american history because the worst attack on congress and injured and wounded more than 140 police officers. capitol officers, metro police officers and others breaking their nosees, breaking their next, breaking their arms, breaking their legs, their hearts and their spirit. we are investigating the attack on american democracy because we are americans. we are investigating the attack on congress by domestic enemies of our constitution because we are sworn to do so by our oath of office. and now, the big lie has become
1:17 am
a big coverup after being impeached twice by the house, after losing in 61 different courts, after seeing a 57-43 vote against him in the u.s. senate in the most sweeping bipartisan senate conviction vote in american history, trump is trying to get people like steve ban not not to testify. and in america, when you are subpoenaed to testify in court or in congress, you show up, period. you can invoke your 5th amendment privilege if think you committed a crime. you can claim executive privilege if you think you are the president of the united states but cannot blow off a subpoena in america. you cannot sit on your couch and defy the people's representatives in congress.
1:18 am
we must enforce the rule of law and must do it. if you act deliberately with smearing contempt to the american people and their representatives, we will hold you in contempt. we will get to the truth of the violent assault on america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana. mr. banks: you don't have to look far aabsurdity what is happening. politico just reported moments ago that the capitol police whistleblowers is telling politico that they have not been contacted by the january 6 committee. the capitol police whistleblower. he said that the united states capitol police deserves more scrutiny than it has gotten so far and he would talk to investigators if they reach out to him and the select committee has not reached out to the whistle phroer, yet today we are
1:19 am
holding a private citizen in contempt, an unprecedented action by the sham committee. and i yield to my colleague, mr. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. gaetz: why are we here on the floor of the house of representatives listening to the democrats and socialists and republican puppets reviewing steve bannon's podcast maybe they had a reconciliation bill to help the american people. we are not here because of democracy. save me the algator tears. they assaulted our democracy under the specter of the russian hoax. they didn't give a damn when our country was being engulfed in the riots of 2020 and not about congressional process. if it was about congressional process, democrats would be doing what they were doing in
1:20 am
other cases, they would go to court. why they haven't gone to court like for the deutch bank or the don mcgahn matter, because in each of those circumstances they did not prevail in court. the courts realize the their claims were overly broad. we are enduring this politics and because they can't build back better and decided to build back meaner. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from mississippi. mr. thompson: thank you, madam speaker, just for the record, the gentlemanfrom indiana referenced the whistleblower. we have not talked to the whistle phroer but talked to the whistleblower's lawyer and we are doing our work. so clearly, his quote in
1:21 am
politico, i want to get the record straight. i yield 2 1/2 minutes to the the gentlewoman from virginia, mrs. luria, who served two decades in the navy and was among the first women to serve in the navy's tphaoupbg collar program. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs.luria: to support and defend the constitution of the united states against all enemies foreign and domestic, we reafffirmed that oath on january 3, yet only three days later, this body was assaulted while carrying out the peaceful transfer of power, the hallmark of our democracy. i took that oath at 17 years old and entered the naval academy. i put my life on the line, a foundation that was shaken but not broken on january 6. mr. bannon, a former naval
1:22 am
officer like me understood this oath and took it multiple times and served his country, i don't know what happened between the time lieutenant bannon left the navy and today and what forces corrupted his understanding of the oath. mr. panon has been given the opportunity to provide information relative to the work of our committee but he has not complied. but truly, this is larger than mr. bannon and larger than this investigation and larger than the tragic and horrific events of january 6. it is a test of that oath. to my colleagues who choose to vote against enforcing the subpoena, you are saying to all future men and women who are called before this body that they can ignore a subpoena from congress without consequence. you can make that choice today, but that will be a vote to abdicate the power of the
1:23 am
legislative branch in which you are elected to serve. that would be a vote to support and defend the constitution. the consequences of that vote won't be limited to this investigation and this subpoena alone. your vote will be give serious long-lasting damage to congress. and that in turn will do serious damage to our country which we all love dearly. we ask our men and women in uniform to go forget every day to protect us, protect this republic and our form of government and i'm asking you to protect our democracy. and i yield back the remainder of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from wyoming. ms. cheney: i reserve. mr. banks: i yield to
1:24 am
mr. jordan. mr. jordan: we have seen the worst 10 months. went from chaos to violent crime and stable prices turn into inflation and the respect around the world has turned into the debacle from the exit in afghanistan and peace in the middle east to thousands of rockets being fired on our friend and ally israel and now the spectacle of the president of the united states begging opec to increase production. what scares me most what democrats are doing to freedom. every right we enjoy under the first amendment has been assaulted. you are right to practice your faith and a full congregation can't assemble, every single one has been attacked. we just learned in the judiciary committee from the attorney
1:25 am
general, attorney general, national school board association last month, september 29 sent a letter to the president of the united states asking f.b.i. to get involved in school board matters and the f.b.i. issued a memo to do that. this is the attorney general's memo. there has been a disturbing rise. we asked him the simple question. what is the data, what is the review? guess what his answer what was? he said the letter from a political organization. and now they are going to target parents at school board meetings and we have the january 6 committee issuing subpoena after subpoena. names on an application asking for permission to hold a rally. individuals exercising their right asked the government and the government granted them permission and these people
1:26 am
whose name are going to be deposed for these guys. here's what they are asking them. we want to know who were the speakers were and how were they selected and any kpaoupb occasions these people who put their names on the permit and any member of congress you talked to. wow! your right to pegs your government. that's why they are subpoenaing these people. this is scary where they want to go. these questions and discussions and contents, sounds like what the i.r.s. did 10 years ago. and do you pray before the start of your meeting and we saw what they did to people what the people did years ago. preservation letters to all the carriers and companies to preserve every call, every email, every text. think about that, every call,
1:27 am
someone who made, according to news reports, calls to your spouse, your mom, preserve it all. this is what has been reported. now steve bannon. now steve bannon. mr. bannon is a target of the investigation, quote, his efforts to plan political activity, that's the standard. you are involved in political activity, they are going to investigate you. we know this is what about. this is about getting at president trump. try to stop president trump before he was even elected with the russian investigation, tried to remove president trump from office twice while he was in office and tried to do that and now trying to get him after the fact after he has left all because he cut taxes and greatest economy in the history,
1:28 am
lowest unemployment all because he built the wall and put the embassy in jerusalem and americans got their christmas presents on time. the reuters story said this, the f.b.i. has found no evidence that people around him were not in charge. no evidence of a coordinated plan. they are going to drag these 11 people in for depositions with subpoenas because they are so determined to get their political enemies. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from mississippi. mr. thompson: madam chair, the vice chair of the committee put in the record the fact that the f.b.i. and the department ofjustice declared no such thing
1:29 am
in january 6. the assertion that they somehow conducted an investigation is just not true. madam speaker, i yield three minutes to the gentleman from california, mr. schiff, the distinguished chairman of the house intelligence committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. schiff: we are here this afternoon to test the proposition as old as the country's founding, are we a nation of laws? we are here because one man has decided that we are only a nation of men and rich and powerful men need not follow the law and the question that we must confront is nothing less than this, is he right? are some people now truly above the law, be holden to nothing and no one and without consequence. congress is investigating the worst attack on our capitol and made worse that it was carried out by our own people, people
1:30 am
who had been misled to believe that our election was stolen and now violence was now justified, people who are still being misled by a dangerous lie that may lead to more bloodshed. this isn't a we were here. we heard the doors breaking. the glass shattering. the cries outside the chamber. we saw the bloody results. the officers injured. and those who died. and in the wake of the horrors of that day, a day in which the capitol police put their lives on the line to defend our democracy, it falls on us to defend that same democracy albeit at far less risk to ourselves. the founders intended that am ambition should be made to check ambition. if we fail to uphold congress' power to compel information, then we cease to be a co-equal branch of government. unable to perform our oversight
1:31 am
or check any abuses of executive power. take away a court's power to subpoena witnesses, and it fails to be a court. take away the congress' ability to do the same, and it fails to be a congress. becoming instead a mere play thing for a corrupt executive. do not believe for one moment that if we fail to hold steve bannon accountable that he will be the exception. he will become the rule. not a rule of law. but the misrule of men. either we are all equal before the law or none of us is. this is the essence of our democracy. and as lincoln said, whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from wyoming. ms. cheney: could i inquire how much time is remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from wyoming has 5 1/2 minutes.
1:32 am
the gentleman from mississippi has two minutes. and the gentleman from indiana has no time remaining. ms. cheney: i'm prepared to close then, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. cheney: thank you very much. madam speaker, just outside this chamber, over the north door in stat war r wary hall -- statuary hall, the old house chamber, stands a statue of cleo, the muse of history. she's one of the oldest works of art in our capitol. she stands in a winged chariot. the chariot of time. and she takes notes in her book. reminding all of us that our words and our actions will be judged by history. history particularly will judge those of us in positions of public trust for what we are doing today. in the immediate aftermath of the attack, madam speaker, we all recognized how profoundly
1:33 am
wrong january 6 was. my colleagues from -- my colleague from ohio, mr. jordan, who just suggested that we were here because we oppose president trump's policies seems to have forgotten that actually on january 6 he himself said, quote, what happened today is wrong. and is not what america is about. the next day mr. jordan said, what happened wednesday is a tragedy. everyone knows it's as wrong as wrong can be. and today, madam speaker, the former president suggested that the violence was justified. my colleagues in the republican party, the republican members of this body, have to understand, have to recognize there is a moment when politics must stop if we want to defend and protect our institutions. a violent assault on the capitol to stop a constitutional process of counting electoral votes is that moment.
1:34 am
they all knew that on that day. in fact, the minority leader himself stood in this chamber and said, quote, the president bears responsibility for wednesday's attack on congress by mob rioters. he should immediately denounce the mob when he saw what was unfolding. mr. mccarthy was right then. the president bears responsibility. we need to know what happened, this body must have the ability to understand what caused the attack, to understand who was responsible, and to take legislative action to ensure that it never happens again. madam speaker, i urge my colleagues to support this motion for contempt for mr. steve bannon. i urge them to do so because it is right, it is morally right, it is actually right, and it is all of our duty. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from mississippi. mr. thompson: thank you very
1:35 am
much, madam speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. thompson: over the last hour we have heard a lot about what we are not debating today. the select committee's charged with investigating a deadly attack on the seat of our democracy and making recommendations to ensure it never happens again. i can't think of anything more serious. but many of our colleagues would rather talk about anything else. i think i know why. i think they are performing for an audience of one. i do, however, want to commend my colleagues on the select committee for laying out clearly why the house must fight mr. bannon for contempt. if our investigation is to succeed, if the house's constitutional authority to investigate and legislate is to remain robust, then we cannot let this man flout the laws with immunity. the select committee's made up of people of character, of
1:36 am
profound commitment to public service, and our constitution. they elevate the committee's work. i especially want to thank and acknowledge our vice chair, ms. cheney, for her leadership and partnership. there is no doubt in my mind that history will record her courage in stark relief. history will record all of what we do here today. we can be on the right side or the wrong side. i urge all my colleagues to remember that as we cast this vote, madam speaker, >> non-republicans joined every democrat voting in favor, those
1:37 am
republicans included liz cheney of wyoming, adam can endure -- kinsinger, nancy mace of south carolina, joan paso of new york. fitzpatrick of pennsylvania and representative fred upton. the resolution now heads to the justice department, which will decide whether to prosecute mr. bannon. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. provided by these television companies and more, including cox. >> cox is committed to providing eligible families access to internet. bridging the digital divide. cox, bringing us closer. >> cox supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy.
1:38 am
>> coming up friday on c-span, at 9 a.m. -- 9:00 eastern -- at 9:00 on c-span two, the center for strategic and international sites hosts a step -- a discussion on economic competition between the u.s. and china. ♪ >> sunday night on q&a, california superior court judge takes a critical look at our legal system and offers suggestions on how to improve it. her latest book, her honor, mandatory minimum sentencing, racial bias and jury selection and police reform. >> police officers not
1:39 am
interested in the fact you did not have your traffic signal on. they are not interested, but they need to engage in conversation, maybe search her car. the u.s. supreme court has said that is fine. you can make these kinds of stops, it does not matter that is not what you are interested in. i think what has to change is the very nature of policing and we need to take that out of policing, police should be used to investigate crimes and help prevent crimes, i think traffic stops are a major problem. they disproportionately focus on people of color. sunday night at eight eastern -- 8:00 eastern on q&a. you can listen to podcasts on our new c-span now app. ♪
1:40 am
>> c-span, on the core accessories. there's something for every c-span fan, every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. shop now at >> house speaker nancy pelosi talked about the subpoena against steve bannon shortly before the house voted to hold him in contempt of congress. she also gave an update on negotiations over the democrat's budget reconciliation bill. >>


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on