So, it didn't follow the law, the E-Government law, it didn't file proper privacy impact assessment notices like it was supposed to, didn't provide timely notice, didn't provide proper testing of the system it had, and didn't check the…

Five key things they were supposed to do when they started implementing the system...

Who are those individuals?

Facial recognition technology, there are all kinds of mistakes made when it is implemented. Those mistakes disproportionately impact African Americans.

The FBI has access to 640 million photos, and this is the FBI that didn't comply with the five things they were supposed to comply with when they set up the system.

That is 1984 George Orwell kind of scenario that I think troubles us all.

The potential for mischief when you think about folks exercising their First Amendment liberties at some kind of political rally, whether it is on the right or the left, as the chairman talked about, I think is scary.

Seems to me it is time for--it is time for a time out. Time out. Fifty million cameras, real concerns.

Okay. You can assure this committee that there is no shadow banning that ever takes place with Twitter accounts?

So only 600,000 out of 330 million. There are 435 members of the House, and 100 members of the Senate, 535 accounts. But four of them had this happen to them, and they just happened to be four Republicans, four conservative Republicans…

This is a critical hearing on a critical issue. Congressional oversight on this issue, I think, is of paramount importance.

Let us at least have a debate with people who were actually elected versus unelected people just deciding.

A facial recognition system appears to me to be a direct violation of Americans' First Amendment and Fourth Amendment liberties.

So we have got 50 million cameras in the country, a system that, as we said earlier, is--makes mistakes all the time. Those mistakes disproportionately hurt people of color. Violates First Amendment--I think violates First Amendment…

But you are a bad guy. You are a bad guy.

I just want to thank a company who has developed a drug that has saved millions of people.

I just cannot possibly understand why we are spending time sitting here while I listen to people lecturing companies about making money.

I hope they make a lot more, and I hope they make a lot more drugs to save a lot more people.

The right to reap the rewards of your invention is so vital that our Framers included it in the Constitution.

Isn't that supposed to be how it is supposed to work under the Constitution?

Some would have you believe that Gilead did not invent this drug or discover its uses and that the Federal Government has equities here for which the company is not accounting.

I don't know that you do it by going after a company who has developed an amazing drug that has helped so many people.

It's time to bring Defense procurement into the 21st century, with a commonsense reform aimed at reaching nontraditional contractors.

It is too complicated, too slow, and too expensive, does not consider how businesses operate.

There is no place in America for hate. It must be condemned any time, any place it rears its ugly head.