[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 7 (Friday, January 9, 2026)]
[House]
[Pages H607-H610]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1110
                         FEARING FOR OUR LIVES

  (Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3, 2025, Mr. Green 
of Texas was recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority 
leader.)
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, and still I rise, and still I rise, 
a liberated, unbought, unbossed, unafraid Democrat.
  And still I rise, and I rise today because I have grave and great 
concern for the American people. I fear for the lives of the American 
people.
  I do so, Mr. Speaker, because if the President of the United States 
and his underlings and his persons who are in charge of very powerful 
agencies within the Federal Government can convince this country or 
some significant portion of the people in this country that Ms. Renee 
Good was a terrorist, I fear for the lives of the people in this 
country.
  In fact, I fear for my own life. I am not afraid to speak truth to 
power. I am not afraid to speak truth about power. I am going to speak 
truth about power today, but I can tell you that I fear for our lives 
because if you can justify what happened to Ms. Good after seeing with 
your very own eyes what took place, and if we can allow the king's men 
to conclude that only they can investigate this and remove the local 
constabulary from the process, if this can happen, I fear for our 
lives.
  We are now living in a country where people are expected to believe 
that this mother of three, a Christian woman, seated in her vehicle--
yes, the vehicle was across the roadway--that somehow she was a 
terrorist. The head of Homeland Security has as much as said so, a 
terrorist.
  Mr. Speaker, I fear for our lives because what we saw when this lady, 
this woman, was accosted--and I say ``accosted'' because men who had on 
masks in police regalia, I suppose, approached her rather aggressively, 
it seems to me, and one of them, in approaching, said: ``Get the f out 
of the car.'' I am not using the profanity, but that is what was said.
  You can see it for yourselves, and you can hear it for yourselves. 
That is what was said: ``Get the f out of the car.'' When men can 
approach a female in a car and say this to her and expect her to 
immediately respond in a positive manner, and if she does not and 
attempts to drive away, if they can take her life, I fear for our 
lives.
  Do not assume that it can happen only to her. They aggressively 
approached her. Cars were going around her in various ways, but when 
she made her move to extricate herself, to move along, to move her car, 
officers started to shoot. She was shot. One officer shot through the 
side window as she was moving away.
  You don't have to know this lady. I don't know her. I don't know who 
she was other than what I have seen and what I have read, but the truth 
is, officers ought not be allowed to do what was done to this lady. 
There should be an investigation that includes the local constabulary.
  If you truly want to be transparent, if you truly believe in liberty 
and justice for all, if you want the people in this country to believe 
that what occurred was the right thing, then you would want the local 
constabulary to be involved, but no. This administration is shutting 
out the local investigation, and they are including only the Federal 
investigation, which means, by some thought processes, that they have 
no desire to let this go to trial.
  There are people who believe that this administration has no desire 
to let this case go to a trial. For edification purposes, I am one of 
them. I don't believe that they want this case to go to a trial.
  I think that this is why they have decided that only the Federal 
authorities will investigate. I also believe that if the case goes to a 
trial and if there is

[[Page H608]]

a conviction and it is a Federal conviction, I believe this President 
will do for the person or persons convicted, I believe he will do for 
them what he did for the people who assaulted the citadel of democracy 
on January 6. I believe he will pardon, and I believe he will do it 
without question, reservation, or hesitation, just as he did for those 
persons who assaulted this Capitol. He did it immediately after being 
sworn in.
  Mr. Speaker, I fear for the lives of the American people, and again, 
I say that includes me. I think we have a reckless, ruthless outlaw who 
has found his way into the Presidency.
  To further validate my thinking, I have here the words of the 
President of the United States of America, Donald John Trump. Here are 
his words when asked if there were any limits on his international 
power. I know what happened within the country was national. This deals 
with international power. Give me just a moment, please, of your time 
so that I might connect these dots.
  When asked if there were any limits on his international power, here 
is his response: ``My own morality. My own mind. It's the only thing 
that can stop me.'' Some things bear repeating: ``My own morality. My 
own mind. It's the only thing that can stop me.''
  Mr. President, what about Congress? What about the Constitution? What 
about the power to declare war and where that power is vested? What 
about it, Mr. President? Only your mind? Only your morality?
  I won't go into the President's moral standards. I will leave that to 
you.

                              {time}  1120

  Mr. Speaker, what the President is saying is, this joint resolution, 
S.J. Res. 90, over in the Senate--here is a copy of it--permit me to 
read some excerpts.
  Mr. Speaker, it reads: ``Joint Resolution--To direct the removal of 
the United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against 
Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress.''
  S.J. Res. 90, it goes on to say: ``Resolved by the Senate and House 
of Representatives.''
  Eventually, if it passes the Senate, it has to come to the House for 
our approval.
  ``Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled,
  ``Section 1. Findings. Congress makes the following findings: (1) 
Congress has the sole power to declare war under article I, section 8, 
clause II of the United States Constitution.''
  Mr. President, the Constitution still has some relevancy. The 
Constitution is not meaningless.
  It goes on to say: ``(2) Congress has not yet declared war upon 
Venezuela or any person or organization within Venezuela, nor enacted a 
specific statutory authorization for use of military force within or 
against Venezuela.''
  Mr. Speaker, it is only his mind and his morality. That is the only 
thing that can stop him. This resolution won't stop him.
  Here is what he knows. He knows that if it passes the Senate and he 
knows that if it passes the House, he knows that he has a vote. He 
knows that if he votes ``no'' with his veto, he knows or believes that 
it will not be overridden.
  Mr. Speaker, I still say this is the right thing to do. I say this 
because you cannot allow a President to do what he has done in terms of 
going to another country, bombing the country, to do this and not put 
some check on him. At least you have to try. You can't just allow it to 
happen and decide we will wait until we can override his veto.
  Pass it in the Senate even if it never passes the House. You ought to 
pass it in the Senate. The House should pass it. If the House doesn't, 
the Senate is doing the right thing. Pass it. Let him know that there 
are some people who are watching.
  By the way, the President has also gone on to say that the five 
Republicans who voted for this to move forward shouldn't hold public 
office again. Threats and intimidation, this President spells the word 
``respect'' f-e-a-r. That is respect. He wants people to fear him.
  I don't fear you, Mr. President. I am concerned about your behavior. 
I am concerned about what you might have your underlings in some way do 
to me. I want you to know I will not be deterred, just as these 
Senators are not being deterred. Yes, they are doing the right thing, 
notwithstanding the fact that you have a vote in this process. They did 
it, and they are doing it. I support what they are doing.
  In doing what he has done, the President is doing the following. He 
is using the noble ends--not always noble--to justify ignoble means. 
They are noble ends to justify ignoble means. That is what is happening 
in Venezuela. Only it is noble ends to justify unconstitutional means.
  I think some Senators seem to agree with me on that: Unconstitutional 
means to justify what are perceived to be ignoble ends. The President 
of Venezuela is a part of this, but it is not about him. It is about 
the Constitution. It is about whether we will have a Constitution.
  If we are going to allow what are perceived to be noble ends to 
justify unconstitutional means, at some point the Constitution of the 
United States of America will become meaningless. He is using noble, 
perceived ends to justify unconstitutional means.
  The President should have brought this to the attention of the 
Congress. He did not do so. He did, however, bring it to the attention 
of the oil companies. Have the oil companies replaced Congress in the 
United States of America? Is what they think more important than what 
we think, given that the Constitution has given us the authority to 
declare war?
  I know that this is a difficult topic for some people to embrace, but 
this is where we are. Congress has become irrelevant in the mind of 
this President. It is not relevant. It is not. His own morality, his 
own mind is the only thing that can stop him.
  Well, Mr. President, you are wrong. Congress is relevant. Just as the 
Senate took this action, Congress, meaning the House of 
Representatives, should take action. By definition, the House and the 
Senate make up the Congress. The House of Representatives should take 
action. We have the power to do what has to be done. We have the power. 
Before I go further with that power, I want to come back to, if I may, 
Ms. Good.
  If the President believes this about international law, if the 
President believes that the only thing is his mind, I believe he 
believes the same thing about domestic law. I think he believes that 
the only thing that he has to concern himself with is whether he 
agrees, whether he thinks it is right.
  I believe he thinks that what those officers did can be justified 
simply because they are officers of the law. I support officers of the 
law. I don't support outlaws who are pretending to be officers of the 
law when they are committing crimes.
  My uncle was a deputy sheriff. I support officers of the law, but I 
am not going to support officers who would do what happened to this 
lady and the President is then going to immediately back them up. The 
head of Homeland Security immediately backs them up. The Vice President 
of the United States immediately backs them up.
  They set the narrative to allow the exoneration of the persons who 
did these dastardly things. They have put in motion immediately without 
an investigation.
  Well, you say: Al, you didn't investigate.
  No, but I am investigating by virtue of seeing what happened and 
having read news articles and having looked into it. They didn't do as 
much. They just immediately concluded that this lady was a terrorist.
  I am not a terrorist, but if you can conclude that she is, I am not 
sure that anybody is safe from being captioned, labeled, or designated 
a terrorist. I am not sure.
  I am standing up for her today. I am standing up for the American 
people today. I am standing up for those good law enforcement officers 
who would have approached that lady with a kinder gesture and not as 
bullies. They would have approached her and simply said: Ma'am, would 
you please step out of the car.
  What is wrong with being kind? You have got the gun. What is wrong 
with being respectful? No, the President as a bully has passed on his 
tendencies to those who are under him. It starts at the top. The tone 
and tenor starts at

[[Page H609]]

the top. It starts with a bullying President.

                              {time}  1130

  Now, you have officers who believe that they can bully people into 
doing things. I imagine this lady was frightened. I would have been, 
rushing up to me, mask on, ``Get out of the f'ing car.'' That may have 
been the last thing I would want to do. It may have been the last thing 
she wanted to do.
  The President, in his thinking, believes he is above and beyond the 
law, whether it is international law or whether it is domestic law. 
That is his thinking.
  I come back to where I was when I said the Senate is doing the right 
thing, and they are. I said the House should do the right thing, and we 
can.
  The President fears what the House can do. He fears it because he 
knows that this is where an indictment can take place, right here in 
this House. He knows it. He knows that that indictment can be very 
harmful to him, very harmful to him.
  He is afraid of what the House can do. He has as much as said it 
without using those explicit words. He said it. He has said it. He said 
that they will find some reason to impeach him, find some reason.
  Mr. President, it is easy to find the reasons because you have given 
them to us. Venezuela is a reason. We don't have to look very far or 
very hard to find a reason. It is right before our eyes. The reasons 
are there. It is not about whether we can find the reasons. The 
question is whether we can find the will. It is the will. Do we have 
the willpower to do what should be done?
  I am talking about bipartisan effort. It should be bipartisan. But if 
it can't be bipartisan, that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to stop this 
reckless, ruthless President.
  If the Senate can go forward knowing the rules and how things are 
likely to play out, if we can pass legislation here just yesterday that 
I supported going over to the Senate--there is a good likelihood that 
their behavior is not going to be acceptable to me. If we can do this, 
we can also do the same thing with the one thing that can stop a 
reckless, ruthless, outlaw President, the one thing. That one thing, my 
friends, is what the President fears most. He fears even having votes 
on it take place.
  There are people who will say: ``Well, if you can't pass it, why vote 
on it?'' Because the American people need to know that there are some 
people who see the wrong and who are willing to take a stand against 
the wrong. They see the injustice, and they are willing to take a stand 
against the injustice, even when that stand may not result in what is 
the desired end. A noble end, a noble cause, ought not be avoided 
simply because you can't bring it to fruition today. It ought not be.
  Yes, this thing that we can do is almost sacred. Yes, it requires 
considerable thought. Yes, it is something that we should do when we 
have the evidence. Well, friends, I guess the evidence is comparable to 
the evidence that we had on January 6 when we saw it before our very 
eyes. After all, this is an indictment here. The trial will take place 
in the Senate.
  There is this one thing that he fears, and he is very much concerned 
about it and what we will do.
  I can't speak for anybody else. I don't speak for any of my 
colleagues who are in Congress. I don't speak for anybody outside of 
Congress. I speak for one person, so do not now say that the Democrats 
are doing something. Just say Al Green. Tell the truth.
  On some issues, I believe that it is better to stand alone than not 
stand at all, so I am going to take a stand. I am going to agree with 
what the Senate has said. By the way, I would invite you to read all of 
it because there is much more to it than what I read to you.
  I agree with what the Senate has said when they said that Congress 
has the power to declare war. They go on to say Congress has not yet 
declared war. You had no right, under the Constitution, to do what you 
did, but you do have the right to do it if the standard is your mind 
and your morality.
  We should not assume that this applies only to international affairs. 
It applies to domestic affairs as well. I am going to do what the 
Senate has done, as best as I can, but it will just be me. It is not 
the Democratic Party.
  I believe that these are votes of conscience. Let your conscience be 
your guide, Members. Don't follow my lead, Members. Don't do it because 
I am doing it. I don't think that there are very many who would. Do it 
because you believe. If you don't believe, do not do it.
  I am not asking anybody to vote for it when I bring it to the 
attention of Congress. I am not asking you to. Don't vote for it if 
your convictions don't command that you do so. Do what you think is 
right.
  The Senate has done what they believe to be correct, and I assure 
you--without question, I assure you of this--I will bring Articles of 
Impeachment against the President of the United States of America for 
taking our military to war against Venezuela, for doing it based upon 
some theory that in and of itself does not align with the Constitution, 
some theory that if you have an indictment, you can now send in the 
police or the Justice Department and various officers associated, you 
can send them in to do something--in this case, to seize the President 
of a country--and use the military to back them up.
  I marvel at how people will say: ``Well, they did it in Panama. If we 
did it in Panama, we can do it here.'' God, the list is endless of 
things that have been done that were wrong that at some point we had to 
stop. It was wrong to bring folks to this country in chains. They 
thought it was lawful at the time, I suppose, in their minds, but we 
stopped it.
  Regardless as to what has happened prior to this second in time, I 
say to you the Constitution still rules. The Constitution is above 
indictments. The Constitution is above the things that are in the mind 
of a President that he believes would give him the authority to do 
these things. It is the Constitution that counts.
  If you are going to have a Constitution, you have to make it count. 
It doesn't count because the words are on paper. It is how we react and 
behave in response to the words that are on paper. It is the 
Constitution that counts.
  An indictment is no constitutional reason to send the military, to 
send a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, to send planes in large 
numbers, or to send other military paraphernalia. Indictments don't 
accord you that, Mr. President.

                              {time}  1140

  The only way we can stop this is with impeachment because that is the 
only thing. Why is it impeachment? Because, friends, it would say to 
the next Donald John Trump we will not tolerate unconstitutional means 
that are justified. You can't decide that you are going to use some 
sort of means-justifies-the-ends theory to go to war. He needs to be 
impeached. He needs to be convicted, and he needs to be removed from 
office; impeached, convicted, and removed.
  However, if we can't do it now, that doesn't mean that the process 
can't start now. If we can't do it now or sometime in the near future, 
it doesn't mean that we should not let the American people know that we 
know that what has been done is wrong. We should protect the 
Constitution, not allow this to happen. The only way we can do it--
while I believe that this is good and I support it, S.J. Res. 90. I 
support it. I believe it is good; but the real remedy, the remedy that 
can make the difference is to impeach, convict, and remove Donald John 
Trump from the Presidency.
  Friends, this is where I stand. I don't do these things to make 
friends. I do them because I care about my country. I do it because I 
believe it when I salute the flag in liberty and justice for all. I do 
it because I believe in government of the people, by the people, for 
the people, and that includes the people who have the authority to 
enforce the Constitution. We are the people. We are the ``we'' in we 
the people. I believe we have to do whatever we can when we can, and 
this is something I can do, and I will do.
  By the way, those who say: Well, you are just taking up time. We take 
up more time in between votes than it takes to vote on Articles of 
Impeachment. We took up more time just recently in between votes than 
it takes to vote on Articles of Impeachment. It

[[Page H610]]

doesn't take up the time that prevents us from doing other things.
  All of these things that people will say now in terms of why we can't 
do it, when we get the opportunity to by their standards, they will 
push all of these things aside and move forward. Well, I will be there 
with you. I am not asking you to be here with me, but I will be there 
with you. I will be there because it is the country, it is the 
Constitution, and it is the Republic that we must protect.
  I promise you, friends, I will not be deterred. There is no need, not 
that anybody would, but there is no need to try and dissuade me. What 
happened in Venezuela was an act of war. The President doesn't have the 
authority to do that without consulting with the Congress. The Congress 
may very well conclude that you shouldn't do it. Maybe the Congress 
doesn't want to take over Venezuela. Maybe the Congress doesn't want to 
do this to provide the oil companies with greater revenues. Maybe the 
Congress has a different point of view. Your point of view is but one. 
The Congress has the right to have its point of view recognized as 
well. I must--others can do what they may. I must take this stand. I 
will take this stand.
  This President will face Articles of Impeachment for his declaration 
of war based on his moral standards and his mind, based upon what he 
thinks he can do without congressional input. I will take a stand. I 
will bring the Articles of Impeachment.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Messmer). Members are reminded to 
refrain from engaging in personalities towards the President and direct 
their comments to the Chair.

                          ____________________