Jamie Raskin, Pelosi Blast Trump During Heated Capitol Hill Showdown | WORLD NEWS | US NEWS

[00:00:00]Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous material on HR 9238.

[00:00:10]>> Without objection, >> yield myself such time as I may consume.

[00:00:13]>> The gentleman is recognized.

[00:00:14]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. FISA section 702 will expire on Friday. This bill extends the program until July 2nd. 702 program is critically important to our national security. More than 60% of our intelligence presented to the president, to the commander-in-chief every single day is derived from 702. Without the World Cup, excuse me, with the World Cup about to begin this week, we cannot be left without this critical tool every day. The 702 program helps us keep us safe here at home and advance our interest abroad. This temporary extension temporary extension will ensure that there is no disruption to the program while we find a path forward on reauthorization. I urge the members to support the bill and reserve our time.

[00:00:55]>> Gentleman from Ohio reserves. Gentleman from Maryland is recognized.

[00:01:01]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'll yield myself such time as I may consume.

[00:01:04]>> The gentleman is recognized.

[00:01:05]>> Thank you kindly. When we first met on the majority's confusion and disarray over FISA at 1:30 in the morning on April the 17th, we pointed out that the majority's language departed so sharply from the requirements of the fourth amendment in the constitution that for the very first time it would have authorized the government to use 702 to specifically and deliberately target and spy on the communications of American citizens. That midnight maneuver quickly collapsed as support melted away all across the body. And on unanimous consent, we agreed to a one-week extension to give the House leadership a chance to discuss and negotiate necessary reforms with their own members who had been ignored and bypassed in the process as well as with us. Speaker Johnson never once invited us to the table, never got in touch with us. One week later, congressional Republicans again failed to pass their own bill. I stood in this spot and we agreed to a one-time 45day extension as a gesture of legislative good faith to give the leadership a chance to meet with their own members who had been bypassed and with the Democratic side of the aisle which had been completely bypassed and to engage in good faith negotiations for serious FISA legislation.

[00:02:27]That means legislation that meets both the requirements of the constitution for the privacy rights of the people and the needs of our foreign policy and national security. Again, we never heard from the speaker. We never heard from his staff.

[00:02:41]They never came to talk to us. Now, we are here to consider a bill drafted, it looks like, at 4:33 p.m. about 1 hour ago, just to kick the can down the road one more time. For months, we've offered to work in good faith with our friends across the aisle, our colleagues in the Senate and the intelligence community to reauthorize 702 in a manner that preserves the necessary authority while protecting essential constitutional values and the privacy rights of the people. And despite this, again, Speaker Johnson has never once invited Democrats to the table. I know Speaker Johnson, we served together on the judiciary committee. We used to speak and interact freely but he has completely vanished in this process. We have an incredible shrinking constitution under Donald Trump and now we have an incredible shrinking speaker under Donald Trump.

[00:03:36]Look, our touchstone has been a fundamental principle at the core of the fourth amendment. A judge must come between the federal government and the private communications of American citizens. That's the meaning of the fourth amendment. The FBI has abused this powerful surveillance authority for decades. The FISA court has recently raised serious questions today about how section 702 is operating. Instead of implementing the modest self-administered guard rails Congress required as part of our 2024 reauthorization, the FBI appears to have been actively circumventing and violating those guardrails. We cannot trust Cash Patel not to violate FISA when he readily admits he queried some government databases to dig up dirt on journalists who dared to report about him and the government services he has uh made available to his girlfriend. Believe it or not, the administration's invitation to trust Cash Patel and Tulsi Gabbard, uh, which a majority of this body was not interested in, has now gotten even less enticing today. President Trump just appointed Bill Py as exact as acting director of national intelligence, making it even more obvious that he intends to use FISA to investigate, harass, and persecute his political opponents. Director PY has no national security experience. Zero.

[00:05:12]Zelch, none. He's famous in America for only three things. One, he vowed to engage in fisticuffs with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant when he was at Donald Trump Jr.'s uh club in Georgetown, the executive branch. two, he brought Palunteer into the Federal Housing uh finance agency where he was director to help him scour through Americans personal financial data looking for dirt on Trump's designated political enemies.

[00:05:48]He and then finally he then used this AI enabled technology to create personal mortgage dossas on Adam Schiff, Leticia James, and Lisa Cook, who he then referred to the Department of Justice for felony criminal prosecutions. He engaged in criminal referrals. All three of these attempted prosecutions fortunately collapsed either at the Department of Justice or in federal court because they were so flimsy. But that's what he spends his time doing, trying to dig up dirt through this AI enabled technology on American citizens, including elected officials. So if you thought our civil liberties were safe with Tulsi Gabbard as the backs stop which was the last proposal you will love the idea of Bill Py being the guardian of our privacy and the protector of our civil liberties. Bill Py's appointment which has been derided not just in our party but by senators Thun Tillis and Cassidy to name just a few confirms our worst fears of the president's plans to abuse FISA section 702 for the purposes of domestic political surveillance harassment intimidation and persecution. Indeed, we know the FBI is currently abusing FISA based on the fisk opinion from March that remains inexplicably classified. Instead of implementing in good faith the modest reforms we passed two years ago, the FBI created a system to review Americans data in violation of the minimal self-administered self-p policing guardrails we required. We can say with some confidence that the FBI has no idea how many US person queries they ran last year, how many times they spied on the communications of American citizens, and we should be able to explain these serious deficiencies to our constituents. Look, if we allow the president to turn FISA into an instrument of domestic political control, we will be ignoring everything we've already learned about the long history of abuse of this program, which my friend Mr. Jordan has helped to bring to light. Past improper searches swept in members of Congress and staff of both parties, campaign activists and donors, and Black Lives Matter activists.

[00:08:10]President Trump certainly believes FISA provides the technology, the methodology, and opportunity to spy on political opponents. On April 10th, 2024, he posted, "Kill FISA. It was illegally used against me and many others. They spied on my campaign."

[00:08:27]"Kill FISA," he said. These allegations may or may not be true, but the president is certainly right that this program has been badly abused in the past. The major majority yet still shows no evidence of seeking to impose a judicial warrant requirement for queries of US citizens. They've shown no interest in building a probable cause requirement into the statute. We've seen no evidence that they want to impose any judicial oversight at all. Although that was the framer's major commitment that they wanted to make sure that there would be a judicial magistrate interposed between the government and the rights of the people. That is the meaning of the fourth amendment and we need to stand by that and we need a real process to make sure that we come up with real legislation that honors it. I reserve >> gentleman from Maryland reserves.

[00:09:18]Gentleman from Ohio is recognized.

[00:09:20]>> I think that might be the first time I heard the my friend and gentleman from Maryland agree with uh with the president um as he smiles. I will now recognize the uh the distinguished chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. Uh the the the gentleman from Arkansas, good friend, he's doing a great job uh for as much time as he may consume.

[00:09:39]>> Gentleman from Arkansas is recognized.

[00:09:42]>> Uh thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um here's what we know. We're in an elevated threat level with FIFA World Cup games beginning this week. America's 250th birthday and related celebrations coming up this summer. Iran and its proxies are targeting US military personnel daily.

[00:10:00]The 25th commemoration of September 11th terrorist attacks will be coming up. We know that FISA 702 is the most important foreign intelligence authority to detect and mitigate national security threats.

[00:10:12]This week the World Cup kicks off. 45 countries descend upon the United States for World Cup games, which just so happens to be the week that Democrats have actively chosen to disallow this critical national security tool from being renewed, to allow it to go dark.

[00:10:32]Democrats have chosen to compromise national security and the safety of Americans to play essentially political chicken with an essential national security tool.

[00:10:46]This is unserious, very dangerous behavior on the part of congressional Democrats.

[00:10:51]So, we're not talking about the policy.

[00:10:54]Instead, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are talking about personalities.

[00:10:59]They're concerned about personalities.

[00:11:01]They're not concerned about the policy and I know because they're really smart that they understand that the DNI has no 702 query authority.

[00:11:15]either they they know that to be true and yet continue on this personality conflict issue or they don't know that the DNI doesn't have 702 query authority. In either case, it's wrong. We're not debating the underlying policy here.

[00:11:35]We're debating personalities. And that's a real shame. Chuck Schumer, Hakee Jeff, and and Mark Warner are all members of the Gang of Eight. They've all been read into the threats as I have. They know the highest levels of national security threats above every other member of Congress and they're all willing to let this program go dark and subject the American people to all manner of threats that might materialize here in the absence of this program.

[00:12:08]It's an abdication of their constitutional responsibilities. It's it's shameful is what it is for gang of eight members who understand what's at stake, who have been read in at the highest levels, who understand the importance of 702, who know that 60% of the presidential daily brief is derived from 702 for them to say no because they don't like the individual in question who doesn't even have DN uh um 702 query authority.

[00:12:38]So, let's go ahead and take this program hostage to make a political point because they don't like President Trump either. That's what this has devolved into. It's an absolute shame. If this authority lapses starting on Saturday, we move into uncharted territory. It's unclear how providers will respond to statutory expiration, especially the lapse in liability protection and how uncertain um this will impact foreign intelligence um that's critical for policy and security decisions. Once this authoration authorization expires, the clock starts ticking. The implications get worse every single day.

[00:13:15]While the 702 database would remain available to search, the data in that database will become increasingly out ofd with the potential of provider non-compliance with orders litigation by providers or outside groups and even reticence by agency personnel to continue implementing an expired authority for fear of personal liability.

[00:13:35]Enough is enough. All right, let's just get past the personalities if we can recognize the need to take care of the people in this country to secure our country. That's one of the things that we're supposed to do in this institution is to protect the American people. So, let's do that.

[00:13:54]Take the personality pot shots offline because if you want to do that, we've got plenty of material to work with.

[00:14:00]But let's just focus on the policy here.

[00:14:02]Get this done and move forward. And with that, I yield the balance of my time.

[00:14:06]>> Gentleman from Arkansas yields.

[00:14:08]Gentleman from Ohio reserves. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized.

[00:14:12]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don't know what personality pot shots the distinguished gentleman is referring to.

[00:14:17]Of course, that's against the rules of the House, and if you think you have an objection, you should go ahead and object based on personalities. I haven't heard a single one mentioned. In any event, uh when section 702 of FISA sunsets on June 12th, if that's the will of the majority, the government surveillance activities will continue unchanged. Everything that's already been uh authorized and certified is already in motion and current FISA authorizations will continue unaffected at least through March 17th, 2027. In any event, uh I I know that the gentleman said that we're approaching the the 250th anniversary of the country. Yeah, that's something we've known about for 250 years and the majority has known for many months about this deadline and can't seem to get it together. And we uh don't have the opportunity to help them because they will not reach out to us and talk to us about it. I restate our commitment to try to help them get through this, but we're not going to continue to kick the road down uh kick the can down the road with them uh indefinitely. I'm going to yield two minutes to the very distinguished uh gentleman from Kentucky uh Mr. Massie who's a great champion of the Constitution and civil liberties.

[00:15:29]>> Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this clean reauthorization of a unconstitutional program that's being used to spy on Americans without warrants. This would be the third temporary clean extension of this unconstitutional program. And I find myself on the unfortunate opposition to the chairman of the committee uh of jurisdiction, the distinguished gentleman from Ohio. I'm going to read some of his quotes from last year. This is an article in the Washington Post that he so eloquently wrote. One year from now, Republicans and Democrats in Congress will have a chance to reaffirm our commitment to the Constitution and better protect the Americans from warrantless government surveillance.

[00:16:11]This will be one of the most important debates we will have this Congress. And it's vital that we begin working now to protect Americans constitutional rights.

[00:16:19]He goes on to say, "Our fidelity must always be to the Constitution. The Fourth Amendment is one of the foundations of American civil liberties.

[00:16:27]It is part of what makes our country great and makes us the envy of the world. We must continue to protect and enhance it. Passing a warrant requirement for section 702 will do just that. He goes on to tweet later or earlier than that. The same people who spied on President Trump's campaign are now fighting against the warrant requirement in the new FISA bill. Makes you wonder.

[00:16:51]So, I find myself disagreeing with the chairman in this debate, but agreeing vehemently with him last year and the year before when he pointed out this program is unconstitutional and there's only one way to fix it. Require warrants, judicial warrants. And we saw the president's administration tweet this week that we shouldn't trust these liberal judges in Washington DC to hamstring the secretary of defense.

[00:17:14]Well, that's not what we're talking about. Number one, we're not talking about a constraint on the Secretary of Defense. we are talking about or secretary of war. We are talking about a constraint on the FBI to spy on Americans. And we're not talking about liberal judges. Eight of the 11 foreign intelligence surveillance court judges were appointed by Republicans. And by the way, most of them aren't even in DC.

[00:17:37]And with that, with that, I I yield back to the U distinguished gentleman and appreciate.

[00:17:43]>> Gentleman from Kentucky yields back.

[00:17:44]Gentleman from Maryland.

[00:17:46]>> Well, but we thank you for your trenchant uh remarks. The gentleman for his trenchant remarks and we will reserve.

[00:17:52]>> Gentleman reserves. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized.

[00:17:55]>> Uh thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would just point out to the gentleman from Kentucky that's not the question today. The question today is can we go another what is it? 3 weeks, 21 days and try to figure out what makes sense on protecting the privacy rights of Americans. That's a simple question. I don't think three weeks is too much to ask. For goodness sake, this program's been around forever. We did 56 reforms to it just two years ago.

[00:18:18]I think the question probably just can we go another three weeks and figure it out and maybe have those discussions that the ranking member was talking about. I know he and I have talked about what makes sense. So that's the question in front of us. Uh with that I would yield to the distinguished member from Georgia who's on the intelligence committee and a host of other important committees here in the Congress as much time as he may consume.

[00:18:39]>> Gentleman from Georgia is recognized. I want to I want to thank the gentleman from Ohio and and I want the American citizens to know that uh as was said earlier, April 17th with hundreds of people on the floor of the House of Representatives, we did by UC adopt a oneweek extension.

[00:18:58]That was true. And then uh we did a 45day extension and now we're asking yes for a 21-day extension. And sometimes things take longer than we would like for them to. But I I want to defend my friend who was attacked by um the gentleman from Maryland, Tulsi Gabbard.

[00:19:25]You know, Tulsi was the vice chair of the Democratic National Committee.

[00:19:30]She was the vice chair.

[00:19:33]She was elected unanimously to that position as the vice chair of the Democratic National Committee and she maintained friendships because everybody knew she was a serious member of Congress up to and until she became an appointee of President Trump as DNI and then all of a sudden everything I've heard from Democrats about her has been bad. She was elected unanimously to the vice chair position of the DNC.

[00:20:02]She's a good woman and she cares about this country and you should show her a little more respect than you do.

[00:20:08]I want the American citizens, if you're watching this, to know. Very simple.

[00:20:13]There's a lot going on in the world.

[00:20:18]Say who what you want to about it with Iran. The bottom line is the risks are elevated. The risks are elevated.

[00:20:26]Some of us think the president did the right thing and I realize some of you think he did the wrong thing, but the risks are elevated. We've got the World Cup that's about to happen. Thousands and thousands of people coming into this country.

[00:20:39]Some of which actually want to do us harm. And you know who's going to be making sure that we keep the ones out of this country that want to do us harm?

[00:20:48]It's going to be Customs and Border Protection checking checking statuses when they come in through the border.

[00:20:55]And I'm glad that we got that funded.

[00:20:57]But I want to I want to leave you with this. If you're watching this, we as the Republicans in the House, we too are disappointed that we have not gotten to a resolution after the oneweek extension, after the 45day extension.

[00:21:13]And we're simply asking for another 21-day extension to make sure that this authority does not expire. And with that, Mr. Speaker, I would just ask that we abide by common sense and the rule that we first do no harm by taking down a valuable national security tool that the United States of America needs.

[00:21:39]With that, I yield remainder.

[00:21:42]>> Gentleman from Georgia yields. Uh members are reminded to direct the remarks to the chair. Gentleman from Ohio is recognized. We reserve.

[00:21:53]>> The gentleman from Ohio reserves.

[00:21:54]Gentleman from Maryland is recognized.

[00:21:57]>> Um, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, let me let me just say we gave the majority an extra week.

[00:22:05]We supported that unanimous consent.

[00:22:07]Every member of this body supported that. They never consulted us. They never talked to us despite all kinds of promises to do so. I had uh GOP colleagues telling me on the judiciary committee they were never consulted.

[00:22:18]Nobody ever talked to them about it.

[00:22:20]Then we gave them 45 days. They said they just needed 45 days and they would definitely talk to us. We'd be be able to meet uh a month and a half. We heard nothing from them. We've been begging them to sit down because I believe there is a robust bipartisan majority in this house to support the needed reforms and making sure that we interpose the voice of a judge before the personal communications of American citizens are invaded by the government. And I think that we've got a vast majority on that side, but nobody from leadership seems to be talking to anybody who's concerned about this. So now they say, "Oh, well, just give us another week." No, we're not interested in that. We've given you lots of time and you're not consulting us and you're not negotiating good faith. So maybe the threat that we're not going to support you will finally get you guys serious about it. I'm happy to yield uh a minute to the very distinguished gentleoman from the state of Washington, Miss Jaipal. Gentle age recognized for one minute.

[00:23:18]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Republicans called us up at the last minute to do yet another short-term extension of FISA, and this is just a sham. It's been months now, and we've done multiple short-term extensions. I voted against the last one because I knew that there was not actually going to be a reform proposal put on the table because suddenly even the bipartisan members, including my good friend, the chairman, who has been with us for these reforms in the past, suddenly have decided that they're just going to bow down to what Donald Trump wants. And Donald Trump doesn't want any reforms. We know what the American people want. They want a warrant requirement. That is a bipartisan position. If you put a warrant requirement on the floor right now, it would pass. And maybe the president would have to veto it, but it would pass. And people would see that the Congress of the United States is standing up for the privacy rights of Americans that are guaranteed in our Constitution. This is not about national security versus constitutional rights.

[00:24:24]This is about how we do both together.

[00:24:26]Can I have another minute? And I grant the gentle lady an extra 30 seconds.

[00:24:30]>> Gentle ladies recognized.

[00:24:31]>> This is about how we do both. And we can do that because what Americans have said over and over again is no more secret searches of Americans private communications. They want their basic right to privacy respected. And there is a path to get there. And the chairman has been on our side. We got so close just a couple of years ago. We could have gotten it done. We didn't get it done then. But we can get it done now.

[00:24:56]But it requires saying no to Donald Trump. It requires saying no. Don't you can't put Bill Py in as the ODNI because this guy is not to be trusted with any of our information. Vote no on this extension time. Bill reform package passed. I yield back.

[00:25:15]Gentleman from Maryland reserves.

[00:25:18]Gentleman from Ohio is recognized.

[00:25:20]>> And and we reserve. Mr. uh Mr. Speaker, the >> gentleman reserve. Gentleman from Maryland is recognized.

[00:25:27]Um the the gentle lady from California, the distinguished speaker alumni, Miss Pelosi is recognized for one minute.

[00:25:35]>> The distinguished lady from California is recognized for one minute.

[00:25:38]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I rise with a degree of sadness because I was present at the birth of this legislation and I was for 30 years. 30 years either a member of the committee or gang a ranking member on the committee or gang of eight for 30 years. So I bring extensive intelligence experience to this discussion and it was with following 911 with great care that we worked in a bipartisan legislation to put together the legislation to advance uh what we're talking about here today initiative. But what we see here now and when in that legislation we established the office of the DNI the director of national intelligence and it had certain standards. There is a director of national talent shall be appointed by the president with the advice of Gaza Senate. The individual nominated shall have extensive national security experience. He shall serve as the head of the intelligence community, act as a principal adviser of the president uh and national security council, homeland security and the rest.

[00:26:53]>> I the gentle lady an additional 30 seconds.

[00:26:55]>> Thank you. We have a situation and I have list from the legislation of the criteria establishing him and what do we have from the president? Somebody who has no judgment on intelligence matters.

[00:27:11]What an insult to our brave intelligence community who serve us so well to protect the American people to put somebody in there. So if you want us to vote for FISA and you have Patel at FBI and what's his name? PY as DNI py Patel equals no on this FISA legislation. It can be done if there is an intention to do it right. I yield back.

[00:27:38]>> And we gentle lady yields. Gentleman from Maryland reserves.

[00:27:42]>> Gentleman from Ohio is recognized.

[00:27:44]>> Uh we reserve, Mr. Speaker.

[00:27:46]>> Gentleman reserves. Gentleman from Maryland is recognized.

[00:27:48]>> I yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Connecticut. The ranking member of the intelligence committee, Mr. >> Gentleman's recognized for two minutes.

[00:27:56]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank uh my friend, the gentleman from Maryland.

[00:27:59]I rise very sadly tonight in opposition to this legislation. I have spent hundreds of hours negotiating this, including with the ranking member of judiciary, my friends on the Republican side, reauthorization after reauthorization. I've got the scars to show for how much work has been done.

[00:28:17]And here we are on the verge of a great deal. The Senate has a bill that reauthorizes FISA and puts in stronger safeguards than the bill that we passed here in the House. We are all ready to go and we move on. And then the president of the United States decides that Bill Py, a man who's never held a security clearance, a man who I'm not sure two days ago could have told you what the initials DNI stand for, a man who has distinguished himself in the role he currently has as an attack dog to go after the political enemies that gets thrown in. And we're asked for yet more indulgence at that moment in time.

[00:29:03]There is a simple way out of this conundrum. The president can follow the law. Allow the principal deputy DNI, a Senate confirmed appointee of the president to assume the role of acting DNI until a suitable nominee can be confirmed by the Senate. That's all that needs to happen and none of us need to swallow what has just happened. This is a funny moment because I have lots of Republican friends and to a person they have told me what a catastrophic appointment this is that we're not going to hear that on the floor in public. But we all know that this is the path. It did not need to be this way. And there is still time though very little to choose a new and responsible path consistent with our obligations to national security. When this vote fails, and it will, I hope that the president sees the writing on the wall and puts national security first.

[00:29:53]Thank you. I yield back.

[00:29:54]>> Gentleman yields back. Reserve. Thank you.

[00:29:56]>> Maryland reserves. Gentleman from Ohio.

[00:29:59]>> Reserves. Gentleman from Maryland's recognized.

[00:30:01]>> Um, can you tell us how much time we have left, Mr. Speaker?

[00:30:05]>> Three minutes. Gentleman has three minutes remaining.

[00:30:08]>> Okay.

[00:30:09]>> And gentleman from Ohio has 11 minutes remaining.

[00:30:14]>> We reserve.

[00:30:16]>> Gentleman from Maryland reserve.

[00:30:17]Gentleman from Ohio is recognized.

[00:30:18]>> I think we're ready. I think we're ready to close if the if the uh the ranking member can wind up his remarks.

[00:30:26]>> Gentleman from Maryland is recognized.

[00:30:28]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um my my friend, the distinguished chairman of the judiciary committee flippantly uh says, "What's another three weeks after we've kicked the can down the road this far?

[00:30:38]Um where is the passionate stalwart defender of American civil liberties and right to privacy we've come to admire and esteem? The Fourth Amendment protects the rights of all Americans. It does not have a uh unless it's just for another three weeks exception. Um Congress must act to protect the rights of Americans. We agreed to one week one week. We agreed to 45 days. Enough enough of this disorganization and chaos. Um if there's a serious proposal on the table, we are all ears. We will sit down and we will work on this. We want to reauthorize section 702 and we want to make it safe for the constitutional rights and liberties of the people.

[00:31:25]We also know, Mr. Speaker, that section 702 explicitly allows any current authorizations to continue until their expiration dates, even if the statute sunsets. So there's no reason we cannot protect both the fourth amendment rights of the people and the authorities that keep us safe. And if Speaker Johnson will just allow us to do so, I believe that the judiciary and intelligence committees can come together and get this done. Again, Mr. Speaker, I believe there's a robust bipartisan majority.

[00:31:58]I think it's ridiculous that we even need to say it, but I do believe there's a robust bipartisan majority that will stand with the constitution that will make sure we are interposing the proper independent judicial magistrate between the government and searches of the private rights and the persons and things protected by the fourth amendment. So we need to protect the rights of the people in the constitution. We can do that. We need to protect our national security with section 702. We can do that. We can harmonize them. All it takes is old-fashioned legislative deliberation and compromise. I am certain we can do it. But we haven't had any effort by the GOP leadership to look to this body, both Republicans and Democrats. Where do they look? They look to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

[00:32:52]But we are in Article One for a reason.

[00:32:55]We are the legislating branch, not the president. We've got the power to declare war. The president's forgotten that. We've got the power to appropriate. We've got the power to tax.

[00:33:06]And we've got the power to pass this legislation on section 702. We don't have to wait on hand and foot for the White House to tell us what to do. Let's just sit down. Let's hammer out a great legislative compromise that will take us not for another 7 days or 42 days or 45 days. How about we do it for the next 5 years? If we build a search warrant requirement into it, I bet we could do it for the next 10 years.

[00:33:34]Let's live up to our constitutional responsibilities and legislate together.

[00:33:38]And I yield back to you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you for your >> gentle yields back. The gentleman from Ohio is recognized.

[00:33:44]>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, I would just remind my friend from Maryland, the the ranking member of a couple things.

[00:33:52]I said initially in light of the 56 reforms we did a couple years ago to this legislation, I was willing to go for a short-term reauthorization 18 months. Remember that was the original package. I was willing to go for that particularly at a time when we like it or not were in a conflict military operation in Iran. I thought that made sense in light of the reforms we've done. Second, he said that I had said earlier, what's what's another three weeks? Well, he just talked about hammering it out. I didn't say what's another three weeks. I said we can take three weeks to continue to hammer it out and figure it out. That's all we're asking. And while we're hammering out and figuring it out, we maybe want to not let the program go completely dark.

[00:34:30]Not because, but because the guys on the intel committee, even Mr. Heimmes understands how important this is. And finally, I would say this when he says, "Where's my friend from a few years ago?" If I remember right, we could have had the warrant requirement maybe two years ago cuz I remember what the vote was. 212 to 212.

[00:34:53]All it would have taken was one more no vote then to vote yes and shazam, we pass it.

[00:35:00]So, you can criticize all you want, but those are the facts. Now, the question again is real simple. Can we go another three weeks? I think we can and hammer out a deal, which I'm willing to do with the gentleman from Maryland and the folks on the judiciary committee. So, I would urge yes vote. With that, I yield back.

[00:35:20]>> All time for debate has been yielded.

[00:35:22]The question is, will the House suspend the rules and pass