[0:00]98. Uh, say I >> Mr. Grassley. Mr. Grassley, where I'm sorry, I was trying to be recognized. >> Go ahead. >> Yes. First of all, I I want to express the top a lot of frustration that the
[0:12]DOJ is scraping money back from some states. I've made this point uh uh multiple times, but is very frustrating to me that um my state is being denied
[0:23]these type of grants um while other states are. We're seeing uh a big frustration uh across New Jersey that um
[0:33]very thoughtful uh grants um that could be saving lives and being substantively helpful um are being denied. Um and with
[0:43]that frustration, um I want to call up an amendment. Uh I'd like to call up my amendment number 25698.
[0:53]Um uh uh Mr. Uh, Mr. Chairman, this amendment would allow S1098 to take effect on the date when the attorney general makes public all unclassified
[1:05]files, flight logs, correspondence, and evidence related to Jeffrey Epstein, uh, Guslane Maxwell and their associates. >> The Department of Justice, we know
[1:17]clearly, has lied to the American people one way or another. Attorney General Bondi said that there were truckloads of evidence from the Epstein files and the Epstein list,
[1:28]leading people to believe that there was criminal activity that they had evidence of. I know Boie, who we're talking about, was part of this. We found out yesterday that the president is
[1:39]mentioned several times in the Epstein files and he was briefed on it back in May when he said he was not told that. Then in July, suddenly the DOJ and the
[1:50]FBI said there was nothing additional to disclose. So what's the lie? That there are truckloads of evidence and this DOJ is protecting those associates with this horrific crime that Mr. Boie, a third
[2:01]circuit nominee, is part of that coverup or is a lie that there is nothing there at all? Let's just find out. This is simply asking for disclosure and transparency. And I'd like to offer that
[2:13]amendment. >> Mr. Chair, uh parliamentary inquire, Mr. chair down here. I I don't know the the details of the judiciary rules, but is it an order for a member to interrupt the chair when he's in the middle of
[2:25]calling a vote? >> I I'm I'll have to ask >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Lawyers on that point. >> It's up to the chairman. >> What?
[2:36]>> It's up to the chairman. >> It's up to the chairman, but I'm not going to pick a fight with Booker. >> Thank you. Go ahead. Thank you, sir. Mr. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman,
[2:47]I'd call up um a secondderee amendment to Senator Booker's amendment um to uh 1098. This has to do with death penalty
[2:57]as aggravating factors for illegal aliens who commit a homicide uh in the United States while illegally in the country. I find it astonishing that our
[3:09]colleagues are more interested in the crimes of a dead man than they are in addressing the real problems that affect the public safety of American citizens
[3:19]on a daily basis and virtually all of which flow from the open border policies of the Biden administration. As we discussed in a subcommittee
[3:29]hearing a couple of days ago, there are more than 200,000 illegal aliens under final orders of deportation who have exhausted all of
[3:39]their remedies under the law and who have either committed crimes or are charged with crimes. And yet we hear from our colleagues here that well these
[3:51]are just gardeners or housekeepers or uh people who uh are relatively innocent other than having committed the crime of illegally entering the country. But to
[4:02]our colleagues, uh the intrigue and salacious details of the Epstein case of course are our great distraction from the issues that have a meaningful make a
[4:13]meaningful difference in the lives of ordinary Americans and what I thought we were here to actually serve was which is their interests. And what do the
[4:24]American people really care about? well, that President Trump is doing exactly what he promised to do and what he campaigned on. Um, from the moment he
[4:34]took to the campaign trail and of course has followed through on and kept that promise now he's in office. Um, let's talk about how President Trump has kept
[4:44]his promises when it comes to making our communities safer by securing the border and enforcing our immigration laws. He promised to restore America's standing
[4:55]in the world. And President Trump has kept this promise from making his tax cuts permanent through the one big beautiful bill to trade deals that put
[5:04]America first and stop unfair competition by our adversaries, help lower inflation, lower gas prices, lower food prices. President Trump is
[5:15]delivering on the pocketbook book issues that virtually all Americans care about. And let me turn to national security and public safety. He promised to secure the
[5:26]border. Promise made, promise kept. He promised to restore the rule of law and enforce the laws actually on the books. A promise being kept every day by our
[5:37]men and women in blue, our immigration officers and our law enforcement officers in the field. This last hearing, as I indicated earlier, I held a hearing on President Biden's open
[5:48]border policies that led to our country being flooded, literally flooded by millions of illegal aliens, including among that terrorists and gang members
[5:59]and people who committed heinous crimes against innocent American citizens like Lake and Riley. We heard the stories of two angel moms, Tammy Nobles and Marie
[6:11]Vega, both of whom have to live every day with the horrendous murders of their loved ones. They had a few simple
[6:18]questions for us and for um for uh law enforcement during the Biden administration. Why didn't the Biden administration do anything to stop
[6:30]criminals from coming into the country? Why didn't President Biden remove the worst criminal aliens that were already in the United States and who kept committing crimes, not just one, once,
[6:42]not just twice, but multiple crimes against innocent Americans? Why aren't congressional Democrats more
[6:50]concerned about keeping our community safe than they are about distractions like the salacious details with regard
[7:00]to a dead man? uh Jeffrey Epstein. As Miss Vega told us, no mother should have to bury her child before she dies and
[7:12]certainly not bury a child because he or she was killed by an illegal alien who should have never been here in the United States in the first place. Yet, my colleagues insist there's nothing to
[7:23]see here and that the real crime is President Trump being in office and enforcing the law. They lost the election fair and square. President
[7:34]Trump received a mandate and they still haven't accepted the fact that he won the election on November the 5th. Well, I challenge my colleagues to put their
[7:45]money where their mouth is and do right by these angel moms who I mentioned a moment ago. And so this amendment will allow us to truly deal with criminal
[7:53]aliens and illegals who pose a threat to national security and public safety, not just play lip service. It adds mandatory
[8:02]bars to asylum for sex offenders, pedophiles, and aliens who commit crimes of violence. It would punish and deter illegal aliens who murder US citizens by
[8:14]giving federal prosecutors jurisdiction to pursue these illegal alien murderers and guiding judges and juries to pronounce the sentence of death for
[8:23]aliens convicted of mur murdering US citizens. If my colleagues truly care about public safety, they will vote for my amendment today. Before I call on
[8:34]Senator Blumenthal, no, Senator Blumenthal was going to be next. Before I call on him, I'd like to say a couple things. Number one, we're in the middle of a vote, so we may not be able to get
[8:46]these three bills out. Secondly, I know that if we got to go to finality on these amendments, we'll have to do that. But I would beg with the two people that
[8:58]are sponsoring amendments. We're dealing with an op opioid overdose bill with the problems we have. It seems like this is
[9:08]a bipartisan bill, too. Why we should screw this bill up and I would ask if my colleagues would think about changing their mind on offering the amendment.
[9:18]Senator Blubol. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, you know, uh, I really hope that this issue would be bipartisan.
[9:29]Because I think that the American public, regardless of whether they identify as Republicans and Democrats, really
[9:39]believe that full disclosure of these files is absolutely necessary to dispel the doubts about the
[9:50]credibility of the Department of Justice in the Epstein matter. I really believe it's in the interest of the president, you mean >> for there to be full disclosure? That's the reason why on the House side,
[10:01]>> exactly right, >> there has been bipartisan support >> for full disclosure of the Epstein files. I really hope there would be here too.
[10:12]Senator Cornin is right that Jeffrey Epstein is dead. But right now ongoing in real time right before our eyes
[10:23]are events and actions that smack of a cover up. There ought to be no secret
[10:31]meetings, no secret deals, especially with Trump's personal lawyer who is now doing his bidding at the Department of Justice, namely Todd Blanch, who
[10:43]reportedly is on his way as we speak to Florida or whatever prison is currently confining
[10:53]Gelain Maxwell, possibly to offer her a deal in return for excul pulpatory information about his former client, the president of the
[11:05]United States. All of it just really stinks. No ordinary person can send their Department of Justice henchmen to
[11:15]some kind of cover up talking to a convicted felon in a federal prison. And unfortunately, the appearance here is
[11:25]that President Trump once again is misusing his power corruptly to benefit himself. Most people can't do any of it. It is unfair and it undermines the
[11:37]credibility of our entire criminal justice process. The American people deserve full disclosure of this file. I hope we can have bipartisan agreement. >> Senator, >> Mr. Chairman. >> Senator,
[11:48]>> Mr. Chairman, >> well, I should probably go back and forth. Go ahead and then I'll call on Durban. >> Good, good call. Um, Mr. Chairman,
[11:58]are we under some sort of time limit by which we have to act today? >> If we want to get these bills out, the answer is yes. Whenever we lose a quorum
[12:09]because there's a vote going on or the 2-hour rule is kicked in. How can we uh go ahead and vote while then allowing
[12:19]everybody else to have their say? Uh >> I'll stay around as long as people want us. >> Would Could we go ahead and vote and then those who would like to make comments
[12:30]um can stay? Would that be okay? >> We could we could >> pretty please with sugar on top. >> We could, but I'm not going to have a upheaval like we had.
[12:40]>> You won't have a fight with Booker. He's okay with that. Go ahead. Senator Biden asked for the floor. >> But but can we do that, Mr. Chairman?
[12:51]That was a question actually. >> I'm going to ask, can we proceed to vote on these amendments and then proceed to vote on the bill? >> I I have a question on the corn and
[13:02]second degree, >> but I have a question first. >> I'm sorry. I did. I thought you gave up the floor. Go ahead. >> No, sir. Um, can we go ahead and vote on
[13:12]the bills and then you stay or whomever else wants to stay to let everybody finish making their
[13:23]remarks in light of the fact that we have a time limit by which we have to act and we're in the middle of a vote. >> I thought I answered that by saying that I wanted to make sure that we had a
[13:34]consensus that we ought to do that >> because a vote for I'm going to vote on this. Can we vote? >> I don't hear an objection, Mr. Chairman. >> Well, I didn't hear a motion.
[13:45]>> I make that motion. >> Okay. >> That we vote. Excuse me. Would you restate your motion? >> Sure. I I I move that we go ahead and vote on the matters before us in light
[13:56]of the fact that we're under a time limit. >> Clerk will call the role. >> No, no, no, no, no, no. Mr. Chairman, >> Mr. Chairman, I I think I'd just like to be recognized. I know Senator Durban and
[14:07]Senator White House who outranked me on this committee have asked to be recognized as well. >> I don't want to pick a fight with Mr. Booker either, but I made a motion. >> Is my motion in order, Mr. Chairman?
[14:18]>> Yeah, your motion is in order. >> Could we have a vote, Mr. Chairman? Pretty please. >> We have a vote. >> Yes. Call the role. I But but we clarify without a discussion on the second degree amendment.
[14:30]>> Don't call the role yet. without discussion or debate >> on the >> on the motion. >> Go ahead, sir. >> I don't want to jump over the ranking member of the >> I'll
[14:41]I'm I'm reading that Cornin second degree and he said a lot of really important things about I immigration that are worthy to be worthy to be
[14:51]discussed. And I'm happy to vote on an immigration bill. I disagree with the death penalty. I I I will vote my conscience on this. But I want to draw everybody's attention to the first two
[15:01]lines of your second degree. They have nothing to do about immigration. They have nothing to do with the death penalty. I I've never seen this before. His first two line is not to bring up
[15:12]this important issue that should be discussed, debated. Your first two lines are to strike my amendment in its entirety. So what we have right here is hidden
[15:23]behind real issues on immigration is really just trying to not vote on the important points that we brought up about transparency
[15:34]and accountability on the Jeffrey Epstein files. This is not an amendment to my amendment. This is an attempt to strike what I have a whole list of prominent
[15:45]Republicans, elected leaders who want the same thing I want, which is just to have transparency on this matter. >> Can we vote? >> I've heard some of the comments. If I can finish, Mr. Chairman,
[15:55]>> go ahead. >> I have heard public statements by my Senate colleagues on both sides of the aisle. I've heard com comments from Republicans in the House side and
[16:07]Democrats on the House side that we want transparency and accountability on a matter of of public safety. Senator Corman said that Jeffrey Epste's dead yet, but his
[16:18]victims are not. There are women who have horrific stories of vile violence
[16:30]that was committed against them. We have Pam Bondi, our attorney general, who said that there is evidence, truckloads
[16:38]of it as to these crimes, potential co-conspirators, potential others involved.
[16:49]How can we not want to just know what happened? Why are we trying to simply turn away from the highest law enforcements in the
[17:01]officers in the land, from our FBI director to our attorney general who spoke towards crimes committed and others involved in those crimes?
[17:12]Why are we considering an amendment that is hiding behind real immigration issues, but real's intent is to strike a simple request for transparency,
[17:23]for accountability that Republican voices all across the spectrum have been demanding from this president and this attorney general. So
[17:34]if if Senator Cornin is going to offer an amendment, I'm going to offer a third degree that simply strikes his first two lines. I'll vote on your immigration stuff that you
[17:44]so strongly stated that was the importance of this. But you hid the fact that you put here >> what >> the real intention of your amendment. It has nothing to do with immigration. It says it right here in the first two
[17:56]lines. The real effort was just to not have accountability and transparency. What are you afraid of? >> Mr. Chairman, may I respond?
[18:05]>> Yeah, you may respond. I trust the Senate confirmed attorney general of the United States to
[18:15]make the proper legal analysis to determine what of the Jeffrey Epstein files can be released. >> He was confirmed by the United States
[18:25]Senate as chief law enforcement officer of the United States. I trust her to make the right legal determination. But I would ask my colleague from New Jersey, you claim you care about the
[18:35]victims. Do you care about Tammy Nobles? Do you care about Marie Vega, the Angel Moms who lost their loved ones, their children
[18:46]>> to the acts of an illegal alien who never should have been here in the first place? Do you care about them? Can I respond to the senator's question? Sir, I I've known you for 14 years. You
[19:01]and I both care about victims of crime. And to suggest otherwise is stunning to me. If I may finish, sir, I allow you. I
[19:12]saw I didn't make an accusation. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, >> answer the question. >> I should have an allowed a time to respond to the senator's question. I did not interrupt him and now he's interrupting me.
[19:24]>> It is another violation of the decorum of this place. >> Go ahead, Senator. >> Senator Cornin, both you and I have spent our lives. I know your record. I know your history. I know what you've
[19:36]done. I would never ever question whether you care about the victims of a heinous crime. >> Mr. Chairman, please help me. >> You ask me if I care. Absolutely.
[19:47]>> Thank you. >> No, I'm not finished yet. >> Well, thank you for answering the question. >> Well, I'm going to answer the question in full. You are not sincere. >> Let me explain. I
[20:00]>> I Sir, he has put an amendment in. Would you allow me >> trying to use the horrific nature? >> Would you allow me as sponsor of this bill to >> certainly I will not pick a fight with Chuck Rasley in the same way that Chuck
[20:12]Rasley won't pick a fight with me. >> The reason for his amendment is because your amendment says that this bill that we're working on will not go into effect
[20:22]until we get all these records. And this bill is an opioid bill to solves help solve some of the drug problems in this country. and we ought to get it passed
[20:33]because it's a bipartisan bill and it's uh very badly needed. >> Sir, I've May I respond? >> Yes. >> So, I I've said at the top of my comments my frustrations I've we've said
[20:44]it to your staff, we've said it to others that when funds like this have been made available so far in the first six months, they're clawing back funds from my state. And that's unfair. And I would like to
[20:56]deal with those. We could deal with them. And given that I am sticking to an amendment that is not controversial. >> The o I I I know it's not controversial,
[21:07]sir, because I've seen polling literally on Republican channels that the overwhelming majority of Republicans and Democrats want transparency and accountability >> that the overwhelming majority of
[21:18]Americans has seen that one of these two things is lies. Is there truckloads full of evidence
[21:28]as to victims of crime not having justice? Have we been lied to?
[21:37]Who is who are we trying to protect? What are they trying to hide? This is not controversial. We have Republican leaders in Congress calling
[21:49]for the same thing that this amendment calls for. And so for an a a second degree to be offered to mine where you're using horrific crimes to
[22:00]hide the real intention of this. If this amendment is so important, just strike the first two lines. That strikes my entire my entire
[22:10]amendment. The intention of this is clear. It's to not give the American people accountability, transparency, and truth. That's what we as the judiciary
[22:21]committee should be seeking. So I offer a thirdderee amendment preserving every noble thing that the senator from Texas said he wanted.
[22:31]>> You can't offer thirdderee amendment. >> I can't offer a a third degree then I then I ask that we strike the true intention of his amendment. The first two lines
[22:42]>> at this stage you can offer a thirdderee amendment. If there's some way for you to do that I don't know what it is. >> Yes. May respond. Yes. >> Briefly, >> then we'll have we'll have a roll call
[22:52]vote because I know you folks want to get votes on your amendment. I asked you to withdraw them and you aren't withdrawing them. So, >> I just want to ask a question, Mr. Chairman. In your opinion,
[23:04]with the addition of these amendments to the underlying bipartisan bill jeopardized our ability to pass this underlying
[23:15]bill, anti-opioid bill out of committee and across the Senate floor and get it enacted into law. Would these amendments jeopardize that?
[23:24]>> I see them jeopardized in ways even beyond what you said. So, because if we passed the legislation with this stuff on, it wouldn't go into effect anyway.
[23:35]Who knows how far down the road when the president signs the bill, I want it to be effective. That's what I that's what I thought and I appreciate your answering the question. I think the
[23:47]debate that Senator Booker and I have is not something that's going to be resolved today. And um so it will continue. So, I think
[23:57]regardless of how we act on the underlying bill, that debate will continue. And neither he nor I are giving anything up in terms of our ability to continue to debate this
[24:08]topic. But I'm willing to withdraw my amendment if Senator Booker's willing to withdraw his amendment in the interest of passing
[24:18]this bipart bipartisan anti-opioid bill out of the committee and through the Senate and seeing it enacted into law and hopefully hopefully saving some lives in the
[24:29]process. >> Senator Booker, >> Mr. Grassly, sir, I have asked for someone who addressed my New Jersey concerns for months now. There was an
[24:41]incident in which you got a special carveout for your state when they froze funds. But I I I have got no justice for New Jersey. So, if you want to postpone
[24:51]this and and and address my New Jersey concerns about the resources we are not getting, and I know you would do that with me in good faith, I I would be happy in the in
[25:03]our next meeting, but right now, I am sticking with my amendment. >> We can be it'd be faster to address your concerns for New Jersey if you'd asked
[25:14]me to help you with the administration to get something done so you can get your money. Uh and uh >> sir, I I I've got no qu I'm not from you.
[25:23]>> Then if you uh do it through the legislative process, tell me that. >> Let me make a let me make a conversation
[25:34]with the White House on your issue. >> But I'm going to stick with my amendment until I get satisfaction on it. >> The clerk will call the role. >> What are we voting on? I have no idea. On my amendment. >> No, we're voting.
[25:45]>> The second degree. >> Call the role on the corn amendment. Mr. Grant. >> Hi, >> Mr. Cornet. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lee. >> Hi, >> Mr. Cruz. >> Hi, >> Mr. Holly. >> Hi, >> Mr. Tis. >> Hi,
[25:57]>> Mr. Kennedy. >> I by proxy. >> Mrs. Blackberry, >> I proxy. >> Mr. Smith, >> no. >> Mr. Brit, >> I by proxy.
[26:07]>> Mrs. Moody, >> Mr. German, >> no. On concealing the Epstein files, >> Mr. White House,
[26:15]>> no. Most >> no by proxy. >> Mr. >> No by proxy. >> Mr.
[26:26]>> I vote no because I vote no on concealing the Epstein file. >> By proxy. >> Okay. >> Mr. Booker. >> I vote no on this effort to conceal the Epstein files.
[26:37]>> Mr. Mr. >> No. I'd like the Epstein files. >> No one concealing the Epstein files. I
[26:49]>> on this vote the eyes are 12 are 10. >> Okay. The corn and amendment is adopted.
[26:55]Uh now we will go to uh uh uh the uh >> the clerk will call the role.
[27:05]>> Mr. Mr. Chairman, point of order. So his second degree which had nothing to do with immigration which was to conceal the Epstein file. Senator Cordon's
[27:14]effort to conceal the Epstein files right here on one and two has now violated my amendment. There is no amendment anymore. It passed. >> That's right.
[27:24]>> That's and Cornin is saying yes, I passed I did something to stop the American public from seeing the Epstein files. It renders my amendment moot. >> That was the intention of Senator
[27:35]Cornin's amendment that he just passed, which was to conceal. >> I have to respond. Nothing we were voting on today is going to change any of the debate about the Epstein files.
[27:47]>> So your your letter addresses their debate will continue. >> That is not true. >> If you don't acknowledge that, I just uh have to I uh I really uh
[27:58]question whether your amendment is actually in good faith or not because nothing's going to change that. >> But Mr. Chairman, my second degree amendment passed which included a
[28:09]striking the Senator Booker's amendment. I believe we've committee spoken. May >> May I respond? He directly referenced me. May I respond? >> Mr. Chairman, >> go ahead.
[28:19]>> So you Mr. Cornin claims that nothing about this would end debate. We're not seeking to end debate. We're seeking to pass legislation out of this committee
[28:30]that would force the disclosure and the transparency and the truth being made public. We had a chance today
[28:40]>> that Senator Cornin blocked to make the truth known to the American public. We had the power today, the possibility today
[28:51]to force out the truth regarding the Epstein files and the lies and the obfiscation that is happening by this administration. What Senator Cornin did
[29:02]today was to block the truth about what's happening with the Department of Justice and the Epstein file. It is that on its plain truth. No matter how much
[29:12]he wants to try to dodge that truth. >> Mr. Chairman, I have to respond well quickly because >> I will respond quickly.
[29:22]>> Save time. What Senator Booker Joe is trying to do is to kill this underlying bipartisan bill
[29:32]>> that will hopefully save hundreds, maybe thousands of lives because of the opioid crisis. It's already taken tens of thousands of lives in this country over
[29:44]recent years because of the Biden open border policies. So, I'm simply trying to preserve this bipartisan legislation
[29:54]again that will save lives. The debate that he and I are having over the Epstein files, I doubt will be resolved today based on any amendments either he
[30:04]or I offer. So that's the reason for my amendment because I want to save lives from the opioid crisis and I believe his amendment
[30:16]>> is a distraction from that and actually will jeopardize >> seeing this bipartisan legislation enacted into law. >> Mr. Chairman,
[30:26]>> Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you, Mr. >> Mr. Chairman. May I respond? >> I No, I'm calling on Grant. >> I thought you were going back and forth, sir. I didn't know that. >> I'll be real quick. So, if Senator
[30:36]Booker's problem is with the bill itself, which it seems to be, uh, I understand that. Hopefully, we can work out a way to get money to your state you
[30:47]think does justice for New Jersey. I got that. >> That makes perfect sense. But the Epstein amendment >> presented some other ways
[31:01]>> is not going away. What we're trying to do with this bill is really good >> control >> and there's no end to this
[31:10]>> a way of doing business here. >> If this is a headline about Cornin blocks transparency of Epstein, then that would be sad
[31:22]because she's responding to your amendment that would make the bill quite frankly >> fail. Yeah, >> I want to help Senator Booker with your problem.
[31:33]>> But what you're doing, I don't think is helpful >> to the bill. I don't think it's helpful to the committee. I don't think it's helpful to your problem. >> Senator Graham, there's not been a time
[31:44]in my career where you said you want to help me that you didn't. So, I'm going to take you up on that and I'm going to withdraw my and I'm and I'm going to withdraw my amendment. >> You're a good man and I will try to deliver with Senator Presley the best I
[31:55]can. >> Mr. Chairman, I would also >> Okay, >> I would also ask leave to withdraw my amendment and vote on the underlying bill. >> Uh those in favor of 1098 say I.
[32:07]>> I. >> Those opposed say no. The 1098 is reported. Uh now uh the last bill that we have on the agenda is the child act.
[32:18]I co-lead this bill with Senator Durban. The bill ensures that all individuals with unsupervised access to children as authorized to receive nationwide
[32:29]background checks. I'd like to recognize the bill's lead sponsors, Senator Durban. I think you already spoke on it, didn't you? >> Yeah. Uh those in favor of uh 1528 say
[32:40]I. >> Those opposed say no. The eyes have it. The bill will be reported and the committees adjourned. Thank you.