STILL I RISE

On 2026-07-16, Representative Al Green (D-TX-9) delivered a floor speech titled "STILL I RISE" in the House.

STILL I RISE

Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 116 (Thursday, July 16, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 116 (Thursday, July 16, 2026)] [House] [Pages H4617-H4620] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] STILL I RISE (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 today, in the name of we the people. I rise censored, Mr. Speaker, but not silenced. I rise as a unbought, unbossed, liberated Democrat--some would also add unelected liberated Democrat. My friends over on the racist radio say that proudly, and they have a lot of alacrity when they say it. They seem to say it because they seem to think that somehow they played a role in it happening. Well, be that as it may, I still rise in the name of we the people. I rise in the name of we the people today, Mr. Speaker, because of concern that I have with the killing that took place in Houston, Texas. As a result of some other things that happened, there was a killing in Maine. I sent out a tweet, as it were. I am not sure that they are called tweets anymore, but a message by way of the electronic social media. I would like to read this message because it is the essence of my message today. It reads: @realDonaldTrump--I am told that by saying ``@realDonaldTrump'' in this message, the President should have an opportunity to hear about it and possibly read it himself. ``@realDonaldTrump, your ICE force has killed a person in Maine. After the killings of Good, Pretti, and Araujo, without accountability, we cannot trust your Homeland Security or Justice Department to investigate ICE. `We the people' demand accountability and congressional oversight.'' I rise in the name of we the people to demand accountability and oversight. I do so because, quite frankly, I am concerned about the possibility of a cover-up, and I am also concerned about the possibility of a clean-up. Let's start with the clean-up, and then I will move into the cover-up. The clean-up. You might recall, friends, that there was an assault on the citadel of democracy, this Capitol. You might recall, also, that there were persons who engaged in this dastardly act of cowardice. They were here to prevent the peaceful transfer of power at the insistence of the President, it seems. He delivered incited commentary that caused much of what happened that day to take place. They were here and did some things that were unlawful. They were unlawful, and we know they were unlawful because they were prosecuted, many of them--not just 5 or 10, not just 20 or 30, not just 100 or 200. Hundreds of them [[Page H4618]] were prosecuted--after they were prosecuted, convicted and sentenced. We also know that the President, upon being reelected--upon being reelected, one of his first acts as a new President for a new term of office--this was not his first term, his second term--his first act was to pardon the people who assaulted the citadel of democracy at a time when there was an attempt to engage in a peaceful transfer of power, something that our country is known for far and wide. We are known for the peaceful transfer of power. After he pardoned them, they were able to walk freely. They were pardoned. Now, let's bring that forward. Given what has happened to the persons who were here to prevent the peaceful transfer of power, who were convicted and who were pardoned by the President. The people who are a part of the ICE force are very much aware of what happened, and they know that the President--who gave a pardon to those persons who assaulted the Citadel of Democracy--they know that this President can provide them a pardon if they are charged with a Federal offense. Because they know, it is my belief that this somehow has caused some of them to believe that they have a license to exceed what the law allows--some of them, not all. This is not a condemnation of everybody. This is about the people who have done things that are unlawful, in my opinion. They know this. As a result of knowing it, I think they take liberties that they should not because they know that the President--to borrow a term that we use in my hood--will have their backs. They know. Let's now examine a rationale for my being concerned about the possibility of a cover-up. That was the clean-up, by the way. The clean-up occurred when the President had those persons released--after he pardoned them, of course--who had been found guilty. They were released. They are walking freely. By the way, that was lawful. The President has every right to pardon people, and he doesn't really have to give a rationale for it. That was a clean-up of what he started when he engaged in this movement to prevent the peaceful transfer of power. Unfortunately for him, and fortunately for the country, it did not succeed. So now, back to where I was. {time} 1150 After the cleanup having occurred and these officers now understanding that the President has this authority, then we have to examine what happened next with Ms. Good. Let's talk about Ms. Good first. We, with our very own eyes, saw most of what happened with Ms. Good, and we can say, because of what we saw if we want to believe our eyes, that Ms. Good was not there to harm anyone. She was unarmed. She was an American citizen. She was engaging in a peaceful protest--unarmed American citizen, and engaging in peaceful protest--when confronted by officers who were making demands. If you saw what happened, you know that it ended with her losing her life. She said kind things, by the way, to the officers, kind things, but she lost her life. We saw this with our own eyes. We saw it. Let's move over to Mr. Pretti. We saw Mr. Pretti as he was prostate. He was sprawled on the ground and an officer removed a weapon that he had, but it was after the removal of the weapon that he was shot. He lost his life. He was an American citizen, not armed at the time his life was taken. He was an American citizen engaging in peaceful protests. These two cases are worthy of following because to this day, we don't have credible information about what has happened. We don't really know when or if there will be charges that will be brought before a court of law such that there would be a trial. These cases are evidence of the fact that at least these investigators are taking an unusual amount of time to bring these cases to the attention of the public in a fashion such that the public will understand that there will or will not be prosecution. I happen to think there should be prosecution, but if there is not going to be prosecution, if they found some evidence beyond what we have been able to see and hear, then I think they should bring this evidence forward and let us have an opportunity to review it so that we can, again, have the transparency necessary for the public to have the knowledge that it is entitled to when an American citizen has been killed at the hands of the constabulary. We should know. We should have the opportunity to be told by credible sources what the final decision is, whether we are moving forward with trials. With this happening the way it is happening and given that we were able to see in these two cases most of what happened--didn't see all of it, but most of what happened--in fact, I would say we saw the relevant portions, but there may be something else that is there that we need to see, but we saw relevant portions. Having to see that and not seeing any action taken after all of these months have passed that causes me the consternation and concern that I placed in my message to the masses today indicating that I am concerned about and would be addressing a possible cover-up. We live in a world where it is not enough for things to be right, they must also look right. It doesn't look right for these two cases to be pending. We have two additional cases now, and we also have very little evidence of what actually occurred in one of these cases, and that would be the case with Mr. Araujo. We don't have all of the evidence of what occurred. We saw enough to get some sense of what is likely to have happened, but because we don't have enough evidence--we are told that there were no body cameras. There were no vehicle cameras. We don't have any evidence from the side that should produce evidence because they should have had their body cameras on. There was $20 million accorded to them for body cameras. They should have had vehicle cameras. There should have been cameras, but they don't have the cameras. They don't have the cameras. Now, why would I believe, as in the case with Mr. Araujo, why would I believe the story that the person who is deceased, Mr. Araujo, tried to assault officers with a vehicle? Why would I believe that given that we have seen stories manifest themselves about the cases that we actually saw wherein the original stories told were not in conformity with what our eyes allowed us to see. Immediately after the shooting of Pretti, immediately after the shooting of Good, there was a story put forth that was not in conformity with what we saw. If we know that you will send us a message, a false message, about things that we saw, you send a false message about things that we saw, a prevarication about things that we saw, why should I believe that you are going to do anything less in a case where we didn't see everything? I am concerned about a cover-up. I am concerned about a cover-up because, as I have explained, these officers are aware that there will be a cleanup. If the President is true to his words and he honors what he says he will do, he has given hints to officers in his prior administration about how they should conduct themselves when arresting people. He told their officers, you don't have to be nice, words from the President of the United States of America about making an arrest. You don'