That future was going to be better for them and that they would bring with them our values. In that regard in term of a Better Future im so proud that this morning richie neil announced in the hearing they were having with hr3 lowering the cost of Prescription Drugs he was suggesting to name the bill for Elijah Cummings. So appropriate because elijah was a fighter for low income and Prescription Drugs, reaching across the aisle to do so. He always chose to reach across the aisle and treat all of our colleagues with respect and even had dialogue with the president for a while on this subject. So it would be very appropriate that hr3 would now be the eliemeliemjah cummings low drug cost now legislation, whatever the formal title will be. Its very sad, very sad for all of us. Weve all lost a friend. Im devastated by the loss and conveyed the condolences of our caucus to maya, his dear wife this morning, and she said what we all knew, he just fought to the end. But thats what he was not only on his personal health but what he believed in the congress of the United States. So were back now after our district work period where members all over the country were part of a drum beat for hr3 for our for the People Agenda, our first number one was to lower the cost of Prescription Drugs. They presented hr3 feed pack and we are benefitting it one with energy and commerce, the other in education and labor. The hearing in the ways and means this week and then the mockup next week and then well be well on our way to reconciling different versions and bringing something to the floor. I think its really important to note that since the break or towards the end of break we did get this congressional budget offices cbo score of 345 billion in savings just in the Medicare Part d part of the bill. Other savings 158 billion in savings for family households. 46 billion of rebates and the rest. So savings are considerable, and the congress will decide how some of it will be reinvested into innovation at the National Institute of health, perhaps at Community HealthCenters Across the country and expanded benefits for medicare, visual hearing, dental. Perhaps committees will hear back from them in just trying to lower the cost to the community. Bobby scotts committee is marking up this bill. But as many of you know earlier in the week we announced his College Affordability act, and were very proud of the response from the members on that. And that will be making college less expensive. Were still at work on the u. S. Mexicocanada trade agreement and making progress every day on our path to yes. But were not there yet. The soonest we can get the assurances from the administration and from the other everyone involved that there will be enforceability of some of the provisions of the legislation that it will really be an improvement on the current nafta then well be able to receive. But im optimistic about that. Im still hoping and this came up when we were focused on the for People AgendaLower Health Care costs and bigger paychecks by building the infrastructure of america, cleaner government. That was our agenda and again paying one of our priorities in this session has been to reduce the risk of gun violence in our country. Its now been 232 days since we sent our Bipartisan Legislation to the senate. Every day about a hundred people die from gun violence. Nearly half of them children and up to the age of teenagers. My colleague, frederica wilson, when i was in florida during the break gave me this bracelet made from bullets and the orange color of gun violence prevention. So were not going away until we get legislation passed to reduce gun violence in our country. As you know this has been a week of some issues that relate to our foreign engagement. I was very proud of the work on the floor of congress to associate ourselves with the democratic aspirations of the young people of hong kong. Ive been working with now three generations of hong kong Democratic Leaders just from the chinese regime to obey the basic law under which hong kong was to exist one country, two systems living under the basic law which made certain guarantees that are not being lived up to. But congress came through this week, spoke very clearly in a bipartisan way about our support for that and that we had bipartisan support in the senate, too. So hopefully that will come up soon there. As you know yesterday on the floor 354 members voted in a bipartisan way to oppose the president s dangerous decision in regard to syria. By 21 republicans voted to oppose the president s actions. There were only 60 votes in favor of the legislation. The legislation would have called for turkey to use restraint, for us to have our friends be a trustworthy ally to kurds and especially humanitarian needs now theyre being bombed by the turks or being attacked by the turks. And also calls for the president to show a clear plan for how america will be protected from isis which has been further unleashed. Actions taken that renege on our handshake with the kurds and now we need to have a plan to deal with what happens with isis. As you know that was the subject of conversation yesterday at the white house. I also pointed out to the president i had concerns that all roads seemed to lead to putin. The russians have been trying to get a hold in the middle east unsuccessfully and now the president has given them an opportunity with the kurds reaching out to them for support in syria. They have the russians were the beneficiaries of any withholding of assistance or encouragement to the ukraine. Again, putin benefits. The russians benefitted, putin did. The president can place some doubt about our commitment to nato right from the start of his administration. All roads lead to putin. Then the president said, well, the reason im taking the troops utof syria is because i promised in the campaign to bring the troops home. My question to him was is saudi arabia home . Is saudi arabia home . Why are our troops going to saudi arabia if you promised to bring them home . He said, well, the saudi arabians are paying for it. Really, were putting our troops in harms way for saudi arabia because theyre paying . It just didnt add up. But what it did do is cause a melt down on the part of the president because he was unhappy with those questions. And it was unfortunate because we were invited to the meeting. The president started off the meeting by saying i dont know who asked for this meeting, i didnt. And were like, well, lets proceed anyway. And we had hoped our real mission was to find out what the plan was. Leader schumer was very forceful in that discussion with the president on what is the plan. My plan is to protect america, so thats a goal. Its not a plan. What is the plan for us to be protected from isis now that some of them have been unleashed in syria because of the green light that the president gave the turks and reneging on our trustworthiness as an ally with the kurds who had been our friends . So for these and other reasons that was most unfortunate. On a separate front of all of that im very proud of the work of chairman adam schiff. Again, this is so solemn. None of us came to congress to impeach a president. Thats not what we come here to do and any such actions are to be taken very solemnly, seriously and in my view prayerfully. We do have to go through we do have to on our oath of Office Protect and defend the constitution of the United States, our democracy and our republic as Benjamin Franklin said. Our republic if we can keep it. Well, it is our fight to keep it. As ive said to you before have found us to do just that. This isnt about politics or partisanship, its about patriotism for our country and i value the way hes conducted this, the equal time on all sides, the questions. You heard from him we were together when he presented how it was proceeding. He also sent a letter to members yesterday which is in the public domain. I call it to your attention in case you have some questions about the professionalism and the fairness on which these hearings are being held. Any questions . On the impeachment inquiry how important is it to you not to let this thank you for your question and thank you for your condolences on elijah. I keep saying to people impeachment is about the truth and the constitution of the United States. Any other issues that you have disapproving of the way the president has dealt with syria, whatever the subject is, the reluctance and cowardice to do something about gun violence, the cruelty of not wanting to help our dreamers and transgender people, the denial about the Climate Crisis we face, the list goes on. Thats about the election. That has nothing to do with what is happening in terms of our oath of office to protect and defend the constitution and the facts that might support. And we dont know where this path will take us but could take us down the further path but the two are completely separate. At what point might you say let the Voters Decide . The voters arent going to decide whether we honor our oath of office. They already decided that in the last election. Republican leader mcconnell seems to think an impeachment trial in the senate could wrap up by the end of the year. The does that seem unrealistic to you . I have no idea. The time liep will depend on the truth line and thats what were looking for. On the syria policy number one youve gotten into this question of and the second part as you said yesterday that this could lead over into the impeachment issue let me ask you a second question first. When i became speaker the first time no, maybe not but there were those who were here who knew that hundreds of thousands of people in the street were asking me to impeach president bush because of the war in iraq and because of the misrepresentation that was made at the time as to why we should be going into iraq. Thats a policy matter that isnt in my view an impeachment matter. And i said if they had any case to make they could make it but i was not going down that path. Again, what could be worse than a war in iraq and the misrepresentations that were made to the american people. And as you know, says i, i was the senior democrat on intelligence. I had the adam schiff job, the one he had before become chairman in the majority. But in the minority i was in the gang of four. I knew there was no intelligence to support the threat that the administration was putting forth. And i said at the time the intelligence does not support the threat. Senator graham of florida was kelly the chairman because they had the majority at the time, the democrats, the chairman of the Intelligence Committee and he came to the same conclusion. We both voted no on the war. So i think that the war in iraq was one of the worst mistakes in our country. I did not think it was about impeachment. Its about policy and thats a different debate. Impeachment is about the law, not being above the law, abuse of power, obstruction of justice, about honoring our oath of office. On the u. S. Mca you said youre making progress, and leader mcconnell has charged in recent days the democrats impeachment is blocking work for american families. Are there ways for democrats to better convey good faith progress to prevent the president and Republican Leaders from charging that you are trying to plot this anybody else want to put all the republican talking points on the table because we could just get rid of them all at once. Let me just respond to the second let me respond to your question rather than their misrepresentations, okay . First and foremost it might be interesting to you in but a negotiation of this nature and the administration would support this, not only support this but its what they want, these negotiations are not in the public domain. The exchange of proposals in this i cant even share them with members. In fact, i have a hard time getting some of it myself from time to time. And i do it as pelosi written across it so should it go astray i try to copy it, that wouldnt happen. So these are a confidential back and forth and i can honestly say i think every day were coming closer with the meeting yesterday with the trade representative with some of our task force. I think theyre going to meet later today, perhaps one more time and then we should just see the issue is do we have enforcement. So the people who are saying that dont know what theyre talking about or have a different agenda that they want to present. But we feel very good about being on a path to yes. Were not there yet because we dont have the enforceability assurance that we need to have. While we have some good things in the bill, its only a good thing unless it can be enforced. Overarching is enforceability of the whole thing and then the three concerns as we have discussed before are environment and environmental concerns. And i can tell you firsthand that needs to be addressed but all the border states could tell you that as well, the southern border. But the agreement has to be respectful of global agreements that are there on the environment, that this is about what is realistic that we can get done. In terms of the Prescription Drugs, thats a very big issue in our caucus and we hope that we can resolve that. And then the third is workers rights and the rest. We dont see a situation where diminishing the prospects of workers in mexico is any good so we want that to be very fair in that regard. Thank you madam speaker, and again condolences on chairman cummings. There was a picture yesterday that was taken at the white house of you standing at the table speaking to the president. Could you tell us a bit about that picture and what was being said at that time . I think i was excusing myself from the room. I think i told you what the the thought that i conveyed to the president in the meeting about the 35460 vote in the house disapproving of his syria actions. Peag being my concerns about all roads leading to putin and the president said in the campaign i said i was going to take the troops home and is hope saudi arabia . That would be the essence of the either sitting down or standing up of what my conversation was with the president. But the most important part of the meeting was what is the plan . And that was part of my report on the legislation on the floor. What is the plan for fighting isis now that we have reneged on our handshake with the kurds to do that fighting for us there . And that was strongly presented by senator schumer. So one or other of those things that was being said i think it would be interesting if you tell me, if we could have a recording of what goes on in those offices. Because when they come out and say oh, this happened and that happened like we must have been at two different meetings because that didnt happen. But nonetheless then you get these kind of questions that have no fidelity to fact but its true what they say. So i dont know at that moment i was probably saying all roads lead to putin. Last question. As you pointed out chairman schiff describing the process hes going through and the committee saying there could be public testimony ahead. How do you determine including when the president will be able to have counsel or representation down the road to impeachment. This is matter for the committee and the rules are we have rule of the house that govern all of this, but i think its really important to reiterate the following. The process that the house is going through right now would be the equivalent of a special counsel in case of whatever the name was, if a clinton or jawarsky and they had prosecutors who were doing the investigation and they were not doing that in the public domain. And so this is the part where we gather evidence, and as ive said to the president over and over if you have i said this to him on the phone the other day we made our announcement about proceeding with the inquiry that weve asked for your taxes. If you have nothing to hide, show us your taxes. This, that and the other thing if you have nothing to hide were giving you opportunity to show that you have nothing to hide. Put what youre doing is just going further up in it court. Last friday we had five Court Decisions, five Court Decisions in our favor. Another one this week. So in terms of the law this is about the congress, the courts and the constitution. And in terms of the congress our responsibility is to fairly get the information according to the rules, and mr. Schiff is running that show for us now. Thank you all very much. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi right there, a lot to cover. Let me bring in cnn chief political analyst gloria borger, cnn political reporter and david sanger who of course is also a National Security correspondent for the new york times. Gloria, where nancy pelosi kind of ended off there talking about what democrats say was a melt down from the president in the white house meeting yesterday, a lot of the question has been since both sides put out that picture that we probably have an image of it we can put up to remind folks from that meeting, nancy pelosi now says it was her excusing herself and at that moment she thinks she was saying all roads lead to putin. Whats your take on after a colossal break down in any hint of communication that still remained between the two sides there going in. What now . Well, its hard to know. I mean its very clear people had different reads. I thought it was interesting she said maybe we ought to record these meetings because we come out and effectively live in alternate universes. And she made it very clear why the president was upset with her because she pointed out that he lost his republicans by a 21 margin in the house on the vote on syria, that she had said to him, okay, all roads lead to putin. And then she talked about troops in saudi arabia. And she said, well the president said apparently well i promised during the campaign i want all the troops home and she said what about our troops in saudi arabia. Is that home . And clearly he was incensed by this, and she didnt go into the back and forth about namecalling, but it does seem theres been a break down. And the president starts a meet