Jim Jordan

For them to then deliberately oppress American citizens based on their religious or political views with these powers is an unconscionable act.

In a constitutional republic like the United States of America, we are fundamentally predicated on the rule of law.

I thank the gentleman. He is right on target. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the fine gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Davidson).

I thank the gentleman for his good remarks. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry.)

I thank the gentleman for his comments, which are right on target. Mr. Speaker, I yield to gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Schweikert).

I thank the gentleman for all his hard work. I yield to the gentleman from the great State of Kansas (Mr. Huelskamp), another hardworking Member.

I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Franks).

I thank the gentleman for his hard work on this issue and for bringing the motion forward to get this issue in front of Congress. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).

It is not affordable for our entire nation, and yet we have people continuing to try to defend it.

It's not supposed to be different. Everyone is supposed to be treated equally under the law.

There's really no legal basis for these redactions.

That's the way a banana republic acts. It's not the way the United States of America acts.

I believe passionately in the role of Congress.

I didn't create this mess. Hillary Clinton created this mess.

We have a duty, we have an obligation.

You shouldn't have to go to court and sue in order to get access to information that should be readily available.

Hillary Clinton created this mess. Hillary Clinton set up this convenient arrangement with herself.

This is not Jim Jordan saying this. This is not Donald Trump saying this. This is not the Freedom Caucus saying this.

It is absurd to say targeting has stopped when the unlawful conduct continues.

Can you get us that information? That would be something we would like to know.

I think it is clear, statute is very clear, if the State Department believes it is an effective tool, then you have got to put them on notice so they can use the tool.

I do not believe any pose a national security threat for that reason.

With substantial confidence I would say no.

It is a substantial number.

That is as plain as you can write it.