Tom McClintock

This absence of Congressional action since 1952 has allowed the courts to set policy on what can and cannot get a patent.

I saw the video of the killing of Eric Garner, and it is appalling, particularly when you consider the fact the only crime that was even alleged was selling loose cigarettes.

I would first observe that every police officer that I have spoken with on this subject strongly supports body cameras because they provide an accurate record of encounters.

Well, Mr. Lewandowski, welcome to the Judiciary Committee. You and the President are accused by the majority of a coverup of foreign collusion, but the Mueller team of partisans, try though they did, couldn't find any evidence of collusion.

The abuse of these powers for political purposes would be a direct threat to the most fundamental freedoms that we have as Americans and the most fundamental institutions of our democracy.

As dually elected Members of this Committee and as elected Members of the House of Representatives, each of us is limited to 5 minutes.

The President was being treated unfairly and he had done nothing wrong, yet it's upon this pretext the Democrats feel justified to invoke impeachment.

For more than 3 years now, our Nation has been torn apart by this monstrous lie that the President of the United States was a willing agent of a hostile foreign power.

If we're serious about protecting the American political process from unwarranted interference, either by foreign governments or by our own government, where should we be looking?

I am very proud that the scientific integrity complaints have nose dived under this administration.

So, transparency, sunlight, the ability of the data to be seen by all and analyzed by all.

I would just add--that is absolutely essential to us as policy makers because we have to have a solid foundation in order to make proper decisions.

I think we can at least all agree that science requires extensive and unadulterated data, detailed analysis, respectful debate, and also successful replication.

Well, that has been our frustration with a lot of the rulemaking by the bureaucracies, is we get the rule and they will not give us the supporting data to justify the rule.

Science is fact. Policy is opinion. When we mix the two, we run the risk of politicizing and degrading the science that ought to provide the factual foundations that assures good policy making.

You describe him as, quote, a Russian-Ukrainian political consultant and long-time employee of Paul Manafort.

Greg Jarrett describes your office as the team of partisans.

You omitted it. You quoted the part where he says we need some kind of heads-up.

Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle just want political cover.

It starting to look like, you know, having desperately tried and failed to make a legal case against the President, you made a political case instead.

The President's removal powers are at their zenith with respect to principal officers, that is officers who must be appointed by the President and who report to him directly.

Did not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference.

It’s starting to look like, you know, having desperately tried and failed to make a legal case against the President, you made a political case instead.

The fundamental problem is, as I said, we've got to take your word.

Again, the problem we're having is we have to rely on your report for an accurate reflection of the evidence, and we're starting to find out that's not true.