So what we did is we sued on behalf of a group--and they were named earlier on.

what you're doing is you're locking people out of their livelihood. And what's going to happen, we're going to have a gunfight; someone's going to get killed; and it's your problem.

you either manage it or it manages you.

I was acknowledging that the other side has been ranting and raving about issues that are not pertinent to today's hearing.

I'd love to know exactly who that is and who they were, because my understanding is that there's something peculiar in that regards.

So why wouldn't you ask any and all sources, like the DNI, the military, CIA, special ops, any remote centers, if they had hacked into the server during this time?

And the reason I say that is, when I asked the question last Thursday as to who looked at that server, I was told that it was an individual from the FBI.

So is Strzok's edit advice to Comey not a clear example of where Strzok's bias is not publicly sound?

It is very important in making public policy to base it on information and not on the lack of information.

The challenge we have here is to face, to balance competing interests, serious economic interests that benefit different communities in different ways, and this legislation clearly creates a presumption in favor of oil and gas drilling at…

They can actually say: we want a moratorium, and here is what we are willing to pay for it.

I want to thank the witnesses for their valuable testimony and the Members for their questions.