Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As you noted, we will now consider virtually the same resolution we visited before the recess.
It may be useful to review how the Committee arrived at this point.
Since President Trump took office, my colleagues and I have written to the Administration at least 20 times—on matters ranging from routine oversight to allegations of obstruction of justice.
To date, the Administration has not sent us a single meaningful response.
As a matter of fact, the Administration has indicated that it will answer no letters sent by Democrats or rank-and-file Republicans.
Over that same time, Mr. Chairman, my colleagues and I have written to you on six separate occasions to ask for oversight hearings with the leadership of the Department of Justice.
But to date, this Committee has not held a single substantive oversight hearing of the Trump Administration.
That inaction is why we in the Minority have little choice but to pursue today’s resolution of inquiry.
As you have explained, you and I met with Director Comey before he was fired. We were also scheduled to have a similar closed-door briefing with Special Counsel Mueller earlier this week, before he canceled.
I appreciate these efforts. But no closed-door meeting can replace what my colleagues request and what our assignment on this Committee demands: open oversight hearings, with the leadership of the Department of Justice, without delay.
I am unconvinced by the reasons we have been offered for postponing this oversight.
It has been suggested that we cannot discuss current events at the Department of Justice because “[t]here are other committees that have jurisdiction over parts of this.”
But we cannot ignore our responsibilities simply because the House and Senate intelligence committees are investigating similar subjects.
Under the leadership of Chairman Grassley, our Senate Judiciary counterparts began their work in this space months ago—and we should join them.
It has also been suggested that, until the special counsel’s investigation is complete, “it is redundant for the House of Representatives to engage in fact-gathering on the same issues.”
Not so. Nothing about the investigation prevents us from conducting our own oversight.
The Congressional Research Service has compiled nearly a century of precedent—from the Palmer Raids of 1920 to Operation Fast & Furious in 2011—where congressional inquiries overlapped with ongoing work at the Department of Justice.
Some insist that we cannot conduct oversight of the Trump Administration until the special counsel finishes his investigation—because the Committee “did not hold any hearings until [Director Comey] completed his investigation” of Hillary Clinton.
The record simply shows otherwise, Mr. Chairman.
During oversight hearings with the Department of Justice and the FBI, you and others in the Majority repeatedly asked the witnesses about the Clinton investigation—in 2015, long before the investigation was over.
The resolution before us today, sponsored by Mr. Cicilline (D-RI) and Ms. Jayapal (D-WA), asks for information related to the firing of James Comey, the Attorney General’s recusal, and a meeting at Trump Tower between Russian officials and senior campaign personnel, among other matters.
We require this information to do our jobs, plain and simple.
If you agree—and every member of this Committee should agree—then I urge you to support the resolution.
And if you disagree, then I hope the Majority will allow us the courtesy of an up-or-down vote on the matter.
The Majority took a different course at our last markup, Mr. Chairman, when you ruled in order an amendment offered by Mr. Gaetz (R-FL).
That amendment struck the contents of the underlying resolution, and replaced them with a long list of lingering grievances aimed at Hillary Clinton.
We later learned that this amendment was largely borrowed from an online forum that is “notorious for playing host to unfounded conspiracy theories and anti-Islam tendencies.”
I am reading from an article published in Wired magazine on July 28.
I ask that it be placed into the record.
Later that day, Ms. Jayapal, Mr. Cicilline, and I wrote to Chairman Goodlatte.
That letter reads, in pertinent part:
“The tactics employed this week are inconsistent with the rights and prerogatives of the Minority as we have understood and observed them over our legislative careers. In our judgment, the Majority’s actions were heavy-handed and violate the sense of fair process that you and other chairmen of this Committee have enjoyed over the years.”
I ask that this letter be placed into the record as well.
I understand that Mr. Gaetz plans on introducing a similar amendment today. I urge my colleagues to consider both its origin and its effect on Committee process, and to reject it accordingly.
We have an obligation to conduct oversight—and until we do, I’m afraid that we may be at a bit of an impasse.
If we return to the regular order, and begin our oversight work in earnest, then I suspect my colleagues will no longer see the need for resolutions of inquiry.
But until the Administration answers our questions, and until the Majority calls them here to do so, my colleagues and I will do everything in our power to hold both the Administration and the Majority accountable.
I thank the Chairman, and I yield back.
