[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 11 (Thursday, January 15, 2026)]
[House]
[Pages H912-H915]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1120
WHERE DO YOU STAND
(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.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today on this, the birth date of Dr.
Martin Luther King, a man so great in the eyes of this country that we
honor his birthday as a holiday, but it is more than a holiday. It is
an opportunity for us to do some introspection, to examine some of the
many things that are occurring within our country that should be
addressed in a King-like fashion.
Dr. King had something that many other intellectuals of his time did
not have. He was an intellectual. He had something that many of the
persons who did speak up did not have; he had something called courage.
Many of the great intellectuals could expose and expound on some of
the great issues of the time, but they didn't have the courage to take
a stand, as Dr. King did, to go out into the public--into the streets,
if you will--with protest--peaceful protest--to bring about a change in
this country, and he did bring about a change.
So today, on his birthday, I want to honor Dr. King by speaking from
one of his quotes. He had many quotes that are quite quotable, to be
quite honest. It is difficult to single out just a few, but today I
will mention a couple. But there is one that I will focus on, the third
one. He, of course, is known for having said: ``Injustice anywhere is a
threat to justice everywhere.''
Injustice in Minnesota is a threat to justice in every other State in
the Union.
He didn't say that about Minnesota, but he was giving us the words to
help us understand that what is happening in Minnesota, if it is an
injustice, it can happen in your State. It can happen in Texas, my
State. ``Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'' I
think that is probably one of his most-quoted quotes.
But then he also had one that is not quoted too often. This one is
one that people don't like to associate with Dr. King because it speaks
to his militancy, in a sense, but it also speaks to things that people
don't want us to do. We have a State that has as its motto Live Free or
Die.
Well, it is all right for a State to have that, but Dr. King's quote
was: ``A man who hasn't found something worth dying for isn't fit to
live.''
A man, a person, who has not found something worth dying for isn't
fit to live. Very few people will cite Dr. King for having said this.
By the way, I paraphrase a lot of what I am saying in terms of his
quotes.
``A man who hasn't found something worth dying for isn't fit to
live.''
But the one that I would like to quote today and say much about is
his quote that deals with the ultimate measure. ``The ultimate measure
of a man . . . '' is the way he put it, but I will be paraphrasing.
The ultimate measure--the ultimate measure of the person is not where
the person stands in times of comfort--comfort, when all of your bills
are paid and you are living the high life--not where the person stands
in times of comfort and convenience--when everything is at your
fingertips. You have at your fingertips all of the luxuries of life,
all of the things that make life worth living.
The ultimate measure is not where the person stands in times of
comfort and convenience, but, rather, where do you stand in times of
challenge--challenge, when you have a reckless, ruthless, lawless
President who is breaching the Constitution, who is doing things that
we never expected to see in our lifetimes. Where do you stand when you
have a President who is doing things within and without the country
that we did not anticipate?
Dr. King says that the ultimate measure of the person is not where
you stand in times of comfort and convenience, but where do you stand
in times of challenge and controversy--controversy because what he is
doing is being justified by many people who stand in the corridors of
power. What he is doing is being justified by members of the clergy,
who ordinarily would take the righteous stand. Where do you stand?
``The ultimate measure of a man. . . .'' Where do you stand in times
of challenge and controversy?
Let's talk about this. Where do you stand when the President of the
United States has replaced Congress with corporate America; when the
President of the United States will consult corporate America before he
consults Congress; and when the President of the United States goes
into another country, Venezuela, bombs this country, and consults with
corporate America but does not consult with the Congress of the United
States of America? Where do you stand?
Well, here is where the Senate has taken a position. Here is where
the Senate stands. Let's first read what the Senate has in S.J. Res.
90. This is a resolution brought before the Senate and has been voted
on but was voted down.
Let's examine briefly an excerpt from the resolution.
The resolution reads: ``A joint resolution to direct the removal of
United States Armed Forces from hostilities within or against Venezuela
that have not been authorized by Congress.''
Remember, this is the President, who consulted with corporate America
but not the Congress of the United States of America. The Senate has
this resolution, S.J. Res. 90.
It continues in the Findings. ``Congress makes the following
findings.'' I will read a portion of one.
This is what Congress finds. This is the United States Senate:
``Congress has the sole power to declare war under Article I, Section
8, Clause 11 of the United States Constitution.''
Congress, the sole power to declare war.
It goes on to say: ``Congress has not yet declared war upon Venezuela
or any person or organization within Venezuela. . . .''
Mr. Speaker, Congress not having declared war, a President who has
declared that he visited with corporate America before taking kinetic
activity in Venezuela, where do we stand?
Well, the Members of the Senate, 50 of them, stood with this
resolution. I would stand with them. I stand with them now, 50 of them
who stood for this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, 50 Members were antithetical to the resolution. When
this occurs, the Vice President of the United States has a vote.
The Vice President of the United States voted with those who were
antithetical to this resolution, S.J. Res. 90. You can research and
pull up the entirety of it, and I beg that you would.
So where do you stand when the Senate of the United States of America
cannot reclaim its power to declare war? And we ought to do it while we
can. We are losing it.
{time} 1130
The ultimate measure of the United States Senate--what is the
ultimate measure of it when it has the opportunity to reclaim its power
to declare war and it doesn't?
We are finding ourselves now with the National Guard being sent into
various cities around the country, various States, without a request
from the Governors, without a request from the mayors, without a
request from the officials who are in a position to make that request,
without a request from the people, we the people not making that
request. I know that we the people don't make the request; the Governor
makes the request. But the point is we the people put the Governor in
place.
So we the people are not making the request by and through our
official agent, Governors, but the President has decided he would do
this. And he always concocts some fallacious, some fictitious means by
which this should be done, and he does it. And, unfortunately, we have
to ask: Where do the courts stand?
Some of the courts are yielding to the President's pressure. He has
threatened judges. Where do we stand when the President is threatening
judges? Where do we stand when the President has decided that there is
no separation of powers, that he can determine when a judge is right or
wrong and if that judge is wrong, that judge should be
[[Page H913]]
impeached? Where do we stand when the Senate holds a hearing to discuss
the impeachment of judges who differ with the President of the United
States of America? It has been done. I saw it myself. Where do we
stand?
Where do we stand when, after the President has sent the National
Guard into various places, more turmoil has been committed as a result
of the Guard being there than was being committed before they arrived?
The President is the person who is creating the turmoil so that he can
then say: I am justified in sending the National Guard.
Where do we stand when a woman seated in her vehicle, a woman, Ms.
Renee Nicole Good, seated in her vehicle when she is approached by a
member of the constabulary in a rather aggressive way--and I am being
kind, because with that aggression was an insufficient amount of
profanity, more than sufficient. It was really insufficient, not
necessary, profanity.
Now, do we expect the constabulary to approach people and in this
process swear at them, or do we expect them to be respectful, be
respectful even when the person that the member of the constabulary is
approaching is disrespectful? That is our job. We are to be respectful,
notwithstanding the disrespect we have to suffer.
I was a judge. I remember having a man come before me in court and
said some very unkind things with profanity. I could have held him in
contempt. All I had to do was say: Mr. Bailiff, take this man over to a
certain area and hold him until I finish the docket. I have to have a
further discussion with him.
I could have held him in contempt, but I had heard enough of that
case to know that he was right about the facts in the case; he was
wrong in how he expressed himself. I never held that man in contempt. I
had the black robe on. I had the power.
How you use power determines whether you are a person who should
possess power, whether you are the person that should be armed with
lethality such that you can change a person's family's history and
remove a person from existence.
Where do we stand when officers approach a person such as Ms. Good
was situated and when Ms. Good says to this person: Dude, in a sense, I
am not mad at you. I am not mad at you. To the person approaching
aggressively: I am not mad at you. And as she is saying these things--
it has been said that these were her last words--another officer comes
across, near her, in front of her, and this officer with a video camera
has his weapon just with him. This officer, as she turns away, shoots
her and then, as she is passing by, shoots again.
I assume the first shot hit her. I don't know whether it did or
didn't. That is my assumption, so I am saying that. But we do know
this: There were additional shots fired as she passed by through her
window--the window was not up; it was not elevated--through her window.
We do know that she died. We do know because we have seen it.
Now, you can justify this if you would like, but you can't justify
the Justice Department concluding that it would not cooperate with the
local authorities with the investigation, not if you want transparency.
Where do we stand when the Justice Department refuses to be transparent
after we see what appears to be an injustice to many people? I am one
of them. I believe that the killing of Ms. Renee Nicole Good was a
grave, gross injustice. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice
everywhere. So where do we stand when this is happening? Where do we
stand? Sent in armed persons, and they have now taken a life in a way
that is quite questionable.
Well, where do we stand when the President now is saying that he is
declaring martial law? Well, he is not declaring it currently. He is
saying that he may have to, talking about martial law. He talked about
that some time ago. Actually now he is talking about the Insurrection
Act, the Insurrection Act. He is talking about the Insurrection Act. He
has spoken of martial law on other occasions long ago, a while ago, but
now the Insurrection Act. So that means he is going to send in the
military, if he does it, and then the next thing after that could be
martial law.
So are we going to just stand by and witness the President replace
Congress with corporate America, decide that he will send in the
National Guard, send it in to cities across the country without a
request from the Governor of the State? When he decides that he is
going to talk about now the Insurrection Act as his next tool, National
Guard already in, using the Insurrection Act, bring in the military,
the only thing left is martial law. He hasn't said that he will resort
to martial law at this time, but I want to say this: I have been trying
to warn you. I have been trying to warn the American people that this
President is moving us toward a dictatorship. I was among the very
first, if not the first, to say publicly that this was an
authoritarian, among the first to say it. It is difficult to be a part
of the avant-garde when you are trying to warn powerful people about
something that is taking place.
{time} 1140
I have been trying to warn you. I say it is difficult because
Voltaire was right. It is dangerous to be right in affairs where
established men are wrong. It is dangerous to be right. It is dangerous
to be right when the establishment in this country refuses to
acknowledge what is taking place.
Thank God for people associated with free speech for people. Thank
God for the impeach and removal coalition, people who are willing to be
a part of the avant-garde, who are willing to take the proper stand
when they see democracy at risk, when they see the President absolutely
disregarding the separation of powers, absolutely disregarding the fact
that the judiciary has the authority to render opinions about
circumstances that have been brought before the judiciary.
There are some people who are standing up. I am proud to say that,
here in the Congress of the United States of America, there are people
who are taking a stand against this President's unconstitutional
behavior. They are taking a stand.
I am proud to tell you that many Articles of Impeachment have been
filed since the first was filed. Many have been filed, and I am on
every one of them.
December 9, a stand was taken. Articles of Impeachment were filed. I
am on those articles.
December 10, a stand was taken. Articles of Impeachment were filed. I
am on those articles.
January 14, a stand was taken. I am on these Articles of Impeachment.
I do not require people to stand with me when I take a stand, because
I sincerely believe, as I have said here at this microphone many times,
on some issues it is better to stand alone than not stand at all. I
don't lead by telling people you have to follow me. No, I am an
example. If you think I am a good example, then you can embrace the
example.
I am not out whipping people for votes. I am not going to demand that
people do something that I think is appropriate. I lead by example, and
I try to be a good example. I am not always a good example, so no one
should claim that I claim perfection because I do not.
I do claim this: On these issues related to the Constitution, I
refuse to stand by and see what is happening in my country as it
devolves into what I perceive as a dictatorship. I refuse to stand by
and see that and say nothing.
The truest and the ultimate measure of the person is not where you
stand in times of comfort and convenience when you have all of these
things happening that I have cited, but where do you stand in times of
challenge and controversy when these things are happening--not when all
is right with the world, but where you stand in times of challenge and
controversy.
Do you stand with the President who is behaving in an unlawful
fashion as it relates to the Constitution, or do you stand with the
Constitution? Do you stand with the Constitution of the United States
of America?
This is where we Members of Congress now have to make a decision. Are
we going to stand with the reckless, ruthless, lawless President, or
are we going to stand with the Constitution of the United States of
America?
I am proud to tell you that when we filed the last Articles of
Impeachment--and I have filed many. I plan to file more, just for
edification purposes. I will say more about that at a later time.
[[Page H914]]
When the last Articles of Impeachment were filed, it was H. Res. 939.
With these Articles of Impeachment, there was a vote. I believe that we
ought to take a stand. We ought to take a stand. These are times of
challenge and controversy. We were elected to take a stand in times of
challenge and controversy.
Yes, I know that it can put my career at risk. There are people
trying to get me out of office, and they are doing a pretty good job. I
never know what my next day will bring.
I do know this: I will have my record show that I fought all the way
out. I didn't come to stay forever, but I did come to make a difference
while here on the great issues of our time.
Where do we stand? On H. Res. 939, 140 persons voted for H. Res. 939,
140 Members of Congress, not one from the other side of the aisle--140,
Members who hold high positions. I am not calling anybody out.
As a result, we have identified all of them in this document. This is
my copy. But all 140 Members who voted for H. Res. 939 will receive a
similar copy, and their names are all listed. Each person's name is
going to be highlighted one time, and that one time will be the time
that we will acknowledge this person as being in the document by
highlighting the name. That will be given to that person. Each person
will have his or her name highlighted on the page when no other names
are highlighted but that one person's.
It is important now for me to read a bit from H. Res. 939. It reads:
``Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United States, for
high crimes and misdemeanors.''
I have to pause a minute and say this. The President said just
recently that ``they will find a reason to impeach me.'' Mr. President,
we don't have to find a reason. You are giving reasons. You are
providing reasons on a daily basis almost. I said ``almost.''
On a daily basis, you are providing reasons for people to file
Articles of Impeachment against you. The question is not whether the
reasons are there. You are providing them. The question is, Mr.
President, will we have the courage to bring you to justice?
This is the bar of justice for you, Mr. President. You will be
brought before this bar of justice, the House of Representatives, where
impeachment is the indictment that will bring you to justice.
So, it reads: ``Impeaching Donald John Trump, President of the United
States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.''
It goes on to read: ``Resolved, That Donald John Trump, President of
the United States, is an abuser of Presidential power who, if left in
office, will continue to promote the incitement of violence''--and he
has a done a job--I almost said ``a good job,'' but I hate to use
``good'' in this context. He has ``engender[ed] invidious hate,
undermine[d] our democracy, and dissolve[d] our Republic, that he is
impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following
Articles of Impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate.''
They were first exhibited to the House. The House took a vote. One
hundred forty persons voted for the impeachment. We had another 47, I
believe, who chose to vote ``present.''
For these 140, I have the courage to present to you this document in
this fine piece of cover that has a very soft texture to it. We will
present this to you. I want to read what it says above the patriotic
140.
{time} 1150
It reads: Patriotism means to stand.
Where do you stand in times of challenging controversy? Remember Dr.
King.
Patriotism means to stand by the country in times of challenging
controversy.
That is what patriotism means: Stand by the country. Patriotism means
to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the President.
Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand
by the President.
Dr. King, today we honor your profound words in the ultimate measure
of the man. As it was said at that time, the ultimate measure of the
person is not where the person stands in times of comfort and
convenience but where does a person stand in times of challenge and
controversy.
The answer is from Theodore Roosevelt. I am a bipartisan guy. The
answer is: Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean
to stand by the President.
This is Dr. King's birthday. I thought it most appropriate to pay
tribute to the 140 patriotic Americans who took a stand.
For those who have concluded that there will not be impeachment: You
are wrong.
It is the only solution available to prevent the next Donald Trump,
the next would-be, from assuming the position that this Donald Trump
has taken and imposed the kinds of horrific atrocities on society that
this Donald Trump is the imposing.
We need to impeach right here and send it over to the Senate. The
Senate would have a trial. Impeach, convict--conviction takes place in
the Senate--and remove. The Senate has the power to do this. This is
the solution.
I understand that the network television programs, for the most
part--there are some exceptions, but for the most part, they stand with
Donald Trump. Donald Trump does not want to be impeached. He as much as
said so, and the networks don't want him impeached. They have said so.
I have listened to many persons associated with the networks, and they
said so. They don't want to see impeachment.
I differ with them. By the way, when you differ with them, they won't
let you say that. This is a free-speech country when people will allow
you to speak broadly on their networks. So they are not going to let
you do that. You won't see me on CNN. You won't see me on MSNBC, but
you will hear from me here as long as I am allowed to speak because I
just believe in speaking truth about power, not just speak truth to
power, but speak truth about power.
Speak truth to power, you say: Power, there is a problem. Let's solve
it.
Speak truth about power, you say: Power, there is a problem, and you
are it.
That is just as I did from that seat right over to my right when the
President was up at that podium and I told him he didn't have a mandate
to cut Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security.
The networks are a status quo institution for the most part. They
want to maintain things as they are. I am not a status quo
Representative. I want to see change, positive change, change that can
make a difference in the lives of people.
I tell you this, Mr. Speaker, if we don't speak up, stand up, and
meet the ultimate measure of the person that Dr. King calls to our
attention, it may be too late at some point within the next 3 years for
us to do so. Because this President is showing us that he intends to
become a dictator. To a certain extent, he is already, to a limited
extent, a dictator.
So we have to take back our power to declare war while we can before
it is too late. We have got to take back the authority in the
Constitution to have a separation of powers while we can before it is
too late. We have got to stand up to this President.
Dr. King, that is what you would have us do. I believe you would have
us take a stand.
I believe that Dr. King would not sit silently by and witness what
has taken place now and do it without taking a stand.
Not everybody has to take a stand to impeach. Some people decided
that they would peacefully protest. I am a peaceful protester. I will
stand by people who peacefully protest. I will not stand by people who
do not peacefully protest. If you introduce violence, then you just
lost me. I am not with you. It doesn't matter who you are, I am not
with you.
The ultimate measure of the person in times of challenge and
controversy is with the Constitution of the United States of America.
That is where I am, and that is where I stand. I assure you as I stand
here, I want you to know, Mr. Speaker, that we who believe that Dr.
King should be commemorated ought to commemorate his life respectfully.
There is nothing wrong with commemorating his life by engaging in
peaceful protest. There is nothing wrong with commemorating his life by
[[Page H915]]
standing on the authority vested in the Constitution of the United
States of America which is imparted to us. The words are without us
they just become words. We give meaning to the Constitution.
So there is nothing wrong with taking that stand. Stand on the
Constitution of the United States of America. Dr. King, I know that is
what you would have us do.
That is what I encourage others to do.
I assure you, Dr. King, I am going to bring additional Articles of
Impeachment to a vote on the floor of the House of Representatives.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Schmidt). Members are reminded to
refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President and to
direct their remarks to the Chair.
____________________