[0:00]It's incredible. After the hearing, I met with them. I'll never forget that meeting. You can imagine and some are here today and one will testify a little later before this
[0:12]panel. Try to imagine if you will one of these young women saying to me, "Jeffrey Epstein abused me when I was 13 years
[0:23]old." 13 years old. Visualize in your own family a daughter, a granddaughter 13 years of age who is a victim of this
[0:34]sexual predator. Should she at least have a moment with the attorney general to tell her story? Is that too much to ask? Apparently, it
[0:43]was. This is what I'll tell you. I don't believe a single member of the United States Senate would vote for this nominee after meeting with these survivors. to think that he turned down
[0:54]the opportunity to even meet with them. He went on to say, "Well, President Trump signed this law which required us to uh disclose the Epstein file." The law was necessary because he wouldn't
[1:06]voluntarily disclose them. Yes, President Trump signed the law after it was discharged in the House of Representatives because we had one new
[1:16]person who won a special election. It was a amazing political miracle that that law ever passed, but it had to pass so the American people would even have a
[1:26]chance of looking at these files. And now these women and many more are willing to come forward and say, "Don't stop with prosecuting two people, Jeffrey Epstein and Gileain Maxwell.
[1:38]There are more people you should consider." And yet the man who would be attorney general of the United States said he wouldn't meet with him, wouldn't listen to him. That isn't right. That is
[1:49]just plain wrong as far as I'm concerned. And secondly, let me tell you what. I guess I was born in a different era from this president and people around him, but I kind of understood
[2:01]going into public life that if you wanted to get rich, this was the wrong job. You're supposed to take this job to serve the public, make enough money to
[2:11]get by, but not get rich. How did the president do in the first year of his second term? $1.4 billion dollar added to his income from the
[2:22]cryptocurrency group. Why is that even relevant to this conversation? Because the president opposed the cryptocurrency
[2:30]idea for years, switched his position, and then Mr. Flowers or Mr. BR Blanch uh changed the regulation, the federal
[2:41]regulation of cryptocurrency. He time he changed the regulation of cryptocurrency in the Department of Justice, he had personally over $160,000
[2:52]in cryptocurrency assets. He had to dis disclose that and he had to send that to some other source. He sent it to his
[3:01]children to lessen the regulation of an industry which generates a $ 1.4 billion dollar windfall for the president of the United States and money for the person
[3:12]who was acting attorney general is just plain wrong. Just plain wrong. And all the excuses in the world don't make a difference. And I'll tell you that one
[3:23]document that he signed. Imagine if you will, if you've ever heard of this, the president, his family, and his businesses, because of the document
[3:34]signed by Todd Blanch, because of that, have no liability for any tax crimes they ever committed before the date of that document. No liability, no criminal
[3:44]liability. Every single one of us in this room has to obey the law. That's the basics in a democracy like ours. And when it comes to tax crimes, the same
[3:55]applies. Now, there's an exception, of course, in in the eyes of Todd Blanch, and that exception is the president of the United States, his family, and his
[4:05]businesses. That is just plain wrong. This man should not be attorney general. >> Can I go ahead and introduce Gohead and
[4:18]stuff? >> If you want to. >> Yeah, >> sure. Because Okay. Um, I'd like to enter into the record an
[4:35]article written by former Attorney General Bill Barr. His article urbs the Senate to confirm Mr. Blanch. The article touts the successes of Mr.
[4:46]Blanch has already delivered while leading >> [clears throat] >> while already leading the Department of
[4:57]Justice. It further stated, quote, "Mr. Blanch has necessary qualities for the job. He is a skilled and accomplished
[5:08]lawyer with extensive experience in the department as a prosecutor and deputy attorney general. Throughout his career, he has shown the personal determination,
[5:19]discipline, and thick skin this position demands. End of quote. Without objection, it will be entered in the record.
[5:30]Uh [clears throat] uh I'd like to also introduce a letter
[5:40]uh from the concerned Women for American Legislative Action Committee. The group represents hundreds of thousands of
[5:50]women nationwide. The letter praised Mr. Blanch and stated quote Mr. Blanch extensive experience,
[6:01]proven character, and wise judgment make him an outstanding pick uh that the women I represent are proud to support.
[6:12]>> I would just go to We waiting for waiting for two. So, I would just say go ahead and do the the witness introductions on this page. >> Okay. Well, we'll we'll need to have them come to the table.
[6:24]>> Yes, you can go ahead. You can just ask them to go ahead and come up to the table. >> What? you can ask them to go ahead and come up to the table, but we don't spur them in yet. >> Uh, as I indicated to everybody in the audience, everybody was supposed to be
[6:35]here at 9:00 and everybody isn't here and we don't have a lot of time to waste. So, I would ask the witnesses if they would come to the table and I would
[6:46]like to uh introduce uh read your introductions. Uh, And then
[7:00]>> no, we'll do that after. We'll do that when we go to the hearing. >> Okay. Uh uh you uh please uh be seated and uh we
[7:12]won't be questioning you right away, but I'd like to take this time to introduce you first. uh a person when he was in
[7:22]the United States Senate, a person that I work closely with uh John Ashccraftoft,
[7:31]>> you know, he served as United States attorney general under George W. Bush. He led the Justice Department's
[7:41]anti-terrorism efforts after 911. Mr. Ashcro previously served for over two decades as Missouri's attorney
[7:52]general, governor, and then senator. He since founded a consulting firm and serves as distinguished professor at Regent University.
[8:04]Mr. Ashkov understands how to lead the Justice Department free from political influence. Indeed, Senator Schumer once
[8:14]praised U. Mr. Ashccraftoft quote fidelities to the rule of law end of quote. I look forward to hearing his
[8:25]perspective on Mr. Blanch's qualifications to lead the department. Next, I would introduce uh Jennifer
[8:34]Boss. Miss Boss is an angel angel mom, a title that no mother should ever have to
[8:43]bear. She suffered an unimaginable loss. Miss Boss's daughter, Megan, was
[8:52]discovered in a dumpster belonging to an illegal immigrant. The man was arrested, but within 24 hours, he walked free. The
[9:03]sanctuary city and soft on crime policies of her home state failed to protect her daughter or deliver justice
[9:12]to the families. Miss Boss had no recourse until President Trump learned of the case and ensured that the man was
[9:21]detained by ICE. Sadly, Miss Boss knows firsthand how important it is to have justice department that listens to
[9:32]victims, pursues justice, and works to protect communities. Miss Boss, I'm very sorry for your loss. I'm grateful for
[9:43]your testimony today. We also have John Edler, president of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers
[9:52]Association Foundation. He was a first responder at ground zero on 911 and has decades of
[10:02]experience in law enforcement. For years, he served as the chief firearms and tactical training instructor of the
[10:12]Southern District of New York. While at that position, Mr. Adler met and observed Mr. Blanch's dil diligent work
[10:22]firsthand. Mr. Adler previously served as director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance based on that experience and
[10:31]his decades in law enforcement. Mr. Edler uh uh now advocates for officers in the field. I look forward to learning here
[10:43]his experience uh uh and perspective on Mr. Blanch's efforts to support law enforcement. And now Senator Durban, would you please
[10:54]introduce your guest? >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me say at the outset, I'm at your request, I'm trying to accommodate the attendance issue, which we both struggle with as
[11:05]you as chairman and me as ranking member. Uh, and one of my witnesses, minority witnesses, has not arrived yet. She was told we' be a little bit later, but we would start that. So, I'm going
[11:15]to introduce her and when she arrives, she'll take to the table and be sworn in by you. Okay. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> The first minority witness is Danny Bensky.
[11:25]I met her yesterday. Miss Bensky is a choreographer and dance educator. She's also a survivor of abuse by convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, to whom
[11:35]she was trafficked when she was 17 years old. Miss Binsky will tell us when she comes how due to the carelessness of the Justice Department, graphic details of
[11:47]her abuse as well as her identity were released many times. despite her efforts to redact her information. She says that she quote won't stop
[11:58]fighting until the world is safer. >> I'm thank her for her courage and I hope she arrives soon because of the change in plans. We've had some confusion. My
[12:08]second witness, second minority witness is Elizabeth Oyer. Thank you for being here. She was the Justice Department pardon attorney until March 2025. She
[12:20]oversaw the pardon office now run by the failed nominee and mega extremist Ed Martin. Prior to service in the Justice Department, Miss Oyer was an assistant
[12:30]federal public defender in Maryland and a litigation partner at Mayor Brown. She's a graduate of Harvard Law School and the illustrious Georgetown University. She will let us uh she will
[12:42]tell us our former office has devolved into a paytoplay play operation with mega donors jumping ahead legitimate pardoned candidates often without proper
[12:54]vetting the height of corruption. How do we know this? Miss Oyer was fired by Mr. Blanch just days after he took office for refusing to restore gun ownership
[13:05]rights to one of the president's personal friends, convicted domestic abuser and actor Mel Gibson. I yield, Mr. Chairman. >> Yeah. Now, back to the work of our
[13:16]committee. We have one more member to get here. In the meantime, I want to enter into the record nine letters supporting Mr. Blanch's nomination from
[13:26]major law enforcement organizations. Combined, these organizations represent hundreds of thousands of law enforcement
[13:35]officers from around our country who work every day to uphold the rule of law. The letters all praise Mr. Blanch's
[13:45]qualifications to serve as attorney general and his collaboration with law enforcement Americans to keep everybody safe.
[13:56]One letter states this. So I quote, "We believe Mr. Branch's leadership will help ensure that the Department of
[14:07]Justice remains focused on public safety, the rule of law, and providing unwavering support for law enforcement
[14:16]professionals who risk their lives daily to protect our families and communities." End of quote. Without objection,
[14:26]these will be entered in the record. Uh then also I want to introduce into the record uh a letter supporting
[14:37]Mr. Blanch's nomination from 23 state attorneys general. The letter praises the Justice Department's success under Mr. Blanch's
[14:48]leadership in combating violent crime, enforcing our immigration laws, ending race-based discrimination,
[14:58]prosecuting criminal enterprises, and rooting out fraud against taxpayers. The letter goes on to state, quote, "At a
[15:08]time when Americans expect their government to protect communities from violent crime, narcotics trafficking, human trafficking, terrorism, and
[15:19]organized criminal activity. Todd Blanch has shown the ability to deliver real results. His record reflects a commitment to public safety, vigorous
[15:31]enforcement of federal law and effective stewardship of the Department of Justice. End of quote. Without objection, those letters will be entered
[15:41]into the record. Uh would you like to make your speeches on judges now? >> I only have one or two if you >> Why don't you go ahead and do it? Okay.
[15:52]We got we got to wait for >> tell us. Okay. We're still waiting on one senator. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Well, this is a little out of sequence, but I'm trying to cooperate on a
[16:03]bipartisan basis. Report that. >> Uh, say a word about Daniel Trainer, nominated to be the US Court of Appeals for the Eth Circuit. Prior to his confirmation for District Court,
[16:13]Justice, Judge Trainer showed his true colors when it came to MAGA issues. after he was concerned he after he was confirmed he had a chance to show
[16:23]whether he would be a neutral arbiter on the bench. Unfortunately, he's not demonstrated that. As one example, Judge Trainer has ruled in favor of the Trump
[16:33]administration in all 28 cases on his docket involving challenges from immigrants who've been detained by ICE under the administration's illegal
[16:43]mandatory detention policy. That includes seven habius corpus petitions trainer volunteered to preside over in the district of Minnesota following
[16:53]operation metro surge. Judge Trainer is an outlier. Of the more than 17,000 cases in which federal district judges have ruled on ISIS's mandatory detention
[17:05]policy, at least 15,000 were rulings against the Trump administration, including the vast majority of rulings by Trump appointed judges. Yet, Judge
[17:16]Trainer's partisanship was apparent when he served as a contributing author and signatory of a May 2024 letter from federal judges to the president of
[17:25]Columbia University. The signitories vowed not the judges vowed not to hire anyone who attended Columbia University beginning that year. But Trainer denied
[17:37]a recusal motion in a case brought by Columbia Law School Initiative for a just society implausibly claiming he wasn't biased against Columbia University. Just said he wouldn't hire
[17:48]anybody who went to school there. While he was comfortable taking a position on this controversial political question, Judge Trainer refused to answer questions at at the hearing as to who
[17:58]won the 2020 election. For the record, Joe Biden did by 7 million votes. It's very clear that Judge Trainer seeks to remain in good graces of the president
[18:08]at the cost of his own independence. I urge my colleagues to oppose him. Uh, I'd like to introduce into the
[18:19]record a letter supporting Mr. Blanch's nomination. This letter is from the American Center for Law and Justice. The letter states, quote, "Mr. Blanch
[18:30]has demonstrated the experience, judgment, leadership necessary to guide the Department of Justice at a time when the faithful administration of our laws
[18:40]is a paramount importance. his service as deputy attorney general and most recently acting attorney general together with his distinguished career
[18:52]as both a federal prosecutor and defense attorney has given him a broad understanding of the department's responsibility and the constitutional
[19:02]principles that must guide him in his work. Without objection, this will be entered in the record. Uh, now we'll have
[19:14]77 former Department of Justice official writing a letter in support of Blanch. So, I'll enter this in the record and I
[19:24]want to quote from uh this this letter. Todd Blanch understands that the department's mission is to deliver justice,
[19:36]not to serve political interest in entrenched bureaucracies. He has shown the courage and institutional knowledge to restore the
[19:45]focus on public safety, law enforcement support, and the rule of law. His career path from parallegal to prosecutor to
[19:56]second highest position in the department gives him a perspective few others possess. He knows what work what
[20:05]works because he has lived it at every level. So without objection, the uh department or the letter from 77
[20:16]former DOJ officials will be inserted. Liberty Institute
[20:33]uh the nation's largest legal organization dedicated solely to defending religious lit liberty. The
[20:42]letter states, quote, "Every attorney general faces difficult decisions that will inevitably generate disagreement."
[20:53]The proper question before the Senate is not whether members agree with every future judgment, but whether the nominee possesses the character, experience,
[21:04]legal ability, and commitment to constitutional government necessary to faithfully discharge the office. Mr. Blanch's career demonstrates those
[21:16]qualities. Without objection, that will be entered into the record. Do you want to ask?
[21:26]>> Yeah. Um, >> is he here? >> He's coming. He's walking up. >> Okay. >> Okay.
[21:46]>> We're still waiting on he's walking up right now. should start. >> No, we have to wait.
[21:57]>> He said he's walking out. Okay, >> we now turn to the nomination.
[22:08]>> Wait, wait, wait, here. Just read that one. He's almost here. Okay. Now, I have uh one other letter to
[22:17]enter into the record by RA by Jacob Titlebomb. He praised Mr. Blanch's legal acumen and
[22:27]character, stating, and I quote, "One on more than one occasion, I witnessed Mr.
[22:37]Blanches continue to provide first race representation after learning that a client was facing severe financial
[22:47]hardship, often taking on cases on a proono or substantially reduced fee basis. It was evident that to him
[22:58]practicing law was not merely a profession. It was calling rooted a calling rooted in fairness, dignity, and
[23:07]compassion. These are precisely the qualities that I believe our nation needs in its next attorney general. Firmness to the pursuit of justice
[23:18]joined with mercy and respect for every person who enters the law. End of quote. Okay, we can vote now. Okay, we'll now
[23:29]turn to the nomination of Daniel Trainer to be circuit judge, US Circuit Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit. Clerk will call the role.
[23:40]>> Mr. Corn, >> I >> Mr. Lee. >> Hi, >> Mr. Cruz. >> Hi, >> Mr. Collie. >> Hi, >> Mr. Tis. >> Hi, >> Mr. Kennedy. >> Hi, >> Mrs. Blackburn. >> Hi,
[23:51]>> Mr. Smith. >> Hi, >> Mrs. Brick. >> Hi, >> Mrs. Moody. Mr. Duran, >> no. >> Mr. White House, >> no. >> Miss Clashar, >> no by proxy. >> Mr. Cuz
[24:03]>> no by proxy. >> Mr. Blumenth, >> no by proxy. >> Miss Herono, >> no by proxy. >> Mr. Booker, >> no by proxy. >> Mr. Pia, >> no by proxy. >> Mr. Welsh, >> no by proxy.
[24:14]>> Mr. Schiff, >> no. >> Chairman Grassley. >> I of this vote, the eyes are 11, either 10. The nomination will be favorably reported.
[24:25]Now we go to Angela Monero, >> Judge, US District Court, Southern District, Texas. Clerk will call the role.
[24:37]>> Mr. Corn. >> Hi. >> Mr. >> Hi. >> Mr. Cruz. >> Hi. >> Mr. Collie. >> Hi. >> Mr. Tis. >> Hi. >> Mr. Kennedy. >> Hi. >> Mrs. Blackburn. >> Hi. >> Mr. Smith.
[24:49]>> Hi. >> Mrs. Rick. >> Hi. Mrs. Moody. >> Hi. >> Mr. Durban. >> No. >> Mr. White House. >> No. >> M. >> No by proxy. >> Mr. Cuz >> no by proxy.
[25:00]>> Mr. >> No by proxy. >> M. Herona. >> No by proxy. >> Mr. Cooker. >> No by proxy. >> Mr. Pia. >> No by proxy. >> Mr. Welch. >> No by proxy. >> Mr. Schiff. >> No. >> Chairman Grassley. >> I.
[25:12]>> On this vote. The eyes are 11. The days are 10. >> The nomination will be reported. Uh, now we have Castine Mitchell,
[25:23]Judge, District Court, Northern District, Texas. Clerk will call the roll. >> Mr. Cornin, >> I. >> Mr. Lee, >> hi. >> Mr. Cruz, >> I >> Mr. Holly,
[25:34]>> hi. >> Mr. Tis, >> I >> Mr. Kennedy. >> Hi, >> Mrs. Blackburn. >> Hi, >> Mr. Schmidt. >> Hi, >> Mrs. Brit. >> Hi, >> Mrs. Mies.
[25:45]>> Hi, >> Mr. Der. No >> Mr. White House. >> No, >> Miss Clashar. >> No by proxy. >> Mr. Cuz >> no by proxy >> Mr. Flu. >> No by proxy >> Mr. >> No by proxy.
[25:57]>> Mr. Booker. >> No by proxy. >> Mr. Padilla. >> No by proxy. >> Mr. Welsh. >> No by proxy. >> Mr. Schiff. >> No. >> Chairman Grassley.
[26:04]>> I vote. The eyes are 11. The are 10. >> Mitchell will be reported to the Senate floor. Now we have the nomination of
[26:16]Michael Martin. Uh, District Court, Eastern District of Michigan. Clerk will call the RO. >> Mr. Cornin. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lee. >> Hi,
[26:28]>> Mr. Cruz. >> Hi, >> Mr. Holly. >> Hi, >> Mr. Tis. >> Hi, >> Mr. Kennedy. >> Hi, >> Mrs. Blackburn. >> Hi, >> Mr. Spent. >> Hi, >> Mrs. Rick.
[26:39]>> Hi, >> Mrs. Moody. >> Hi, >> Mr. Durban. >> Hi, >> Mr. White House. >> Hi, No by proxy. >> Mr. Cuz >> no by proxy. >> Mr. Flu.
[26:51]>> No by proxy. >> Mr. Reno. >> Yes. >> Mr. Booker. >> No by proxy. >> Mr. Padilla. >> No by proxy. >> Mr. Welch. >> No by proxy.
[27:03]>> Mr. Schiff. >> No. >> I. >> Jeremy Grassley. >> Uh the nomination >> of this vote. The eyes are 14. The names are seven. The nomination will be
[27:14]favorably reported. Now the last one is an Antonio Poso, uh, Eastern District, Pennsylvania. Clerk will call the role. >> Mr.
[27:24]>> Hi, >> Mr. Lee. >> Hi, >> Mr. Cruz. >> Hi, >> Mr. Collie. >> Hi, >> Mr. Phillips. >> Hi, >> Mr. Kennedy. >> Hi,
[27:35]>> Mrs. Blackburn. Hi, >> Mr. Smith. Hi, >> Mr. Hi, Mr. Mr. Durban. >> Hi. >> Mr. White House. >> Uh, no.
[27:47]>> M. >> Kobach. >> No. By proxy. >> Mr. Cuz >> no by proxy. >> Mr. Blumenthal. >> No by proxy. >> M. Herono. >> No. >> Mr. Booker. >> No by proxy.
[27:58]>> Mr. Padilla. >> No by proxy. >> Mr. Welch. >> No by proxy. >> Mr. >> No. >> Grassley. >> I. >> On this vote. The eyes are 12. The are
[28:08]nine. The uh nomination favorably voted on will be reported. Uh
[28:18]we will uh uh this ends our business meeting.
[28:27]Uh now I call the hearing to order. Uh, I would like to have um the witnesses
[28:40]would you please stand because we swear each in at every meeting. Um, do you swear
[28:54]that the testimony you're about to give before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So help you guys. >> I do.
[29:04]>> They all answered affirmative. Okay. Uh >> Senator Bourbon would like to give an opening. So
[29:14]>> go ahead. Want to say something? >> We're done. >> Okay.
[29:22]Uh so welcome back, Senator Ashcrooft. uh will you please begin your testimony and then we'll go right down the uh list
[29:33]of people the way you're seated there. >> Well, thank you, Chairman Grassley and and Ranking Member Durban. I'm grateful to you and please allow me just a moment
[29:43]to extend my condolences to the committee, the friends and colleagues of Senator Lindsey Graham. He had a vivid history of bringing out
[29:53]the best in people he worked with on both sides of the aisle. We enjoyed his friendship. And I take this moment to say my condolences and my
[30:04]sympathy also to Jennifer Boss whose daughter was brutally murdered. Allow me to thank you for your serious
[30:14]consideration and attention to the constitutional responsibility of confirming highranking executive branch officials. It's an honor for me to participate with you today by my
[30:26]appearance. Testifying and sharing my profound support for the nomination of the honorable Todd Blanch as attorney general of the United States is something for which I am deeply
[30:38]grateful. Justice is best served in the United States through a commitment to uphold the Constitution and laws of this country.
[30:48]Integrity is an indispensable imperative for the rule of law. The rule of law is the best friend of constitutionally guarded liberty.
[30:59]For the highest quality administration of justice, law enforcement must never be diluted nor contaminated by personal bias or political preferences.
[31:09]Todd Blanch's record of upholding the Constitution and enforcing the law recommends him supremely to serve America as the 88th Attorney General of
[31:19]these United States. I know of no person, no person of a higher commitment to integrity. He has spoken the unvarnished truth to those he works for
[31:29]and to those he works with. Todd's career stands as an outstanding record of public service. He is a consistently well-prepared, tough, but fair
[31:40]prosecutor fundamentally focused on the Constitution. He understands that he has a profound responsibility in the Justice Department to seek justice, not merely
[31:51]to prosecute. 25 years ago during my opportunity to serve as attorney general, Todd worked
[32:00]as an individual in the Justice Department. And in his law school years, Todd worked with the Justice Department. And in that
[32:10]respect, upon graduation from law school, he clerked for several judges, two of whom are now serving on the respected nationally focused second
[32:21]circuit court of appeals. So he had an understanding of the law from both the prosecutorial side and the side of the bench. Following his clerkships, Todd
[32:32]became an assistant United States attorney as the US attorney office for South Southern District of New York, a premier uh prosecutorial office of the United
[32:44]States. He spent roughly two years as the co-chief of the violent crimes unit, supervising there nearly two dozen prosecutors. Then served as a co-chief of the offic's
[32:55]white planes division where he presided over a wide span of work, public corruption, securities and bank and wire
[33:04]fraud, federal programs fraud, Medicare fraud, RICO, and violent crime. Today, as deputy attorney general and acting attorney general, Todd energizes the
[33:15]roughly 115,000 employees from across Maine justice, the FBI, the DEA, the US Marshall Service,
[33:25]ATF, and 93 US attorneys offices that span the United States. He's conducted the department's daily
[33:34]operations at full scale, demonstrating his readiness to manage the office in his own right. HD therefore brings to the Department of
[33:43]Justice, a relevant reservoir of experience coupled with sound judgment on an array of different issues. They're all related to law enforcement and the
[33:55]administration of justice. He understands that the rule of law exists to secure the and safeguard the god-given rights of liberty and freedom
[34:05]in America. In professional moments, both priv private and public, I have seen Todd's thoughtful, decisive, yet humble leadership. He's he's a careful and
[34:16]willing listener, skilled at welcoming diverse viewpoints. He is adept at synthesizing and harmonizing different voices in complex situations.
[34:27]He's a he is comfortable in being held to account and he will require those in the department to be similarly accessible and accountable.
[34:38]Todd Blanch's record reflects a commitment to the rule of law and the constitution. Our 250th anniversary properly reminds us that liberty is the core value of
[34:48]America. In fact, it's a core value of human existence. To safeguard this core conult cultural value, America needs an attorney general exclusively devoted to
[35:00]the rule of law and who unfailingly will honor his vote, his oath to the Constitution. Todd Blanch is the right person for that responsibility.
[35:12]Mr. Chairman and committee members, thank you for what I consider to be a privilege to appear before this committee and communicate to you my unreserved endorsement of Todd Blanch
[35:23]for Attorney General of the United States. And I thank you for this opportunity. >> Thank you, Mr. Ashcro. Now, Miss Bensky.
[35:34]>> Thank you. First, I'd like to thank you and the committee. >> Microphone. Push push the red button. >> There we go. Thank you. First, I'd like to thank you all and thank you to the committee for
[35:46]hearing survivor voices. I'd like to remind you of who you're hearing from today. At this time, can my survivor sisters and family please rise? We may look like grown adults when you
[36:00]see us now, but we were children, young girls at the time of our abuse. These are the photos of when our innocence, dreams, and lives were stolen. Please take these faces in as you think of us
[36:12]as your own family, daughters, nieces, sisters. Now look at our faces and remember the women and families of the of who the DOJ revictimized. You guys
[36:24]can sit. Thank you so much. [clears throat] I'm a teacher in my school. If a student released a nude photo depicting a peer's sexual assault and abuse, they would
[36:34]almost certainly face expulsion. And yet, this is what our Department of Justice did to crime victims. Today, Todd Blanch, well, Todd Blanch has been
[36:45]at the helm of the release of nude images of survivors, the outing of Jane Doe's, and the exposure of more than 100 victims identifying information and
[36:55]documents describing horrific acts of abuse, including my own. Instead of treating this release as its own violation and holding the man who led it
[37:06]accountable, you have a deci a decision on whether you place him in the highest law enforcement position in this country.
[37:17]In December, before the document release, our attorneys submitted 350 victim's names to the Department of Justice as victim's names to be redacted
[37:27]prior to the release. In that first release, I found my name in two places. In that next release in January, my name appeared again, but this time the redactions were so far worse. Um, the
[37:38]files displayed not only my name, but my phone number, my former addresses, where I worked, and other identifying information. When my name appeared in the third file release, it became
[37:50]difficult to believe that this was not intentional. Despite my lawyer repeatedly contacting the DOJ seeking protection, my
[37:58]information continued to be exposed. And it's not just my name, it's the identifying information. These documents contain disturbing yet incomplete
[38:08]accounts of my abuse. They were available not only for the entire world to see, but my child, my students, my friends, my employers, my colleagues, and my family. [snorts] It was
[38:20]humiliating. Worse, my FBI 302 exposed a Jane Doe who had fought for decades to conceal her identity. It's been absolutely
[38:31]devastating. Outing survivors causes real and irrevocable harm while coping with our emotional distress and psychological trauma. We also have
[38:43]lost our privacy and confidentiality, suffered reputational harm, lost jobs, and now fear for our personal safety.
[38:52]We are not activists. We are crime victims. For us, this has never been about politics. It has been about getting justice for
[39:02]the crimes committed against us. And their reductions are not the only problem with Todd Blanch's nomination. Todd Blanch has never attempted to listen to us, the crime victims.
[39:13]Survivors in this room repeatedly asked to meet with Todd Blanch through multiple channels. He never responded. Yesterday he said he would meet with us with our attorneys if they were present.
[39:24]Um but let's be clear that was the first time that that was ever communicated to us before yesterday. He simply ignored us for the last eight months.
[39:34]He has been radio silent and the silence was deafening. Crime victims deserve better from the nation's highest level of law enforcement officials. We deserve to be
[39:46]heard directly, not dismissed and ignored. There are numerous investigative leads that must be followed. Despite Mr. Blanch's claim that there are none, Epstein and Maxwell
[39:57]did not abuse women and children alone. They did not build their operation alone. Others enabled these crimes, exploited victims, and avoided
[40:07]accountability for decades. You do not have to take my word for it. Several weeks ago, after examining the evidence, chairman James Comr directed
[40:17]Todd Blanch to open investigations into two men connected to Epstein. The Epstein files are not merely a collection of embarrassing names and
[40:27]politically damaging associations. They are records connected to the sexual exploitation and trafficking of girls and young women.
[40:38]They contain information about how Epstein's network worked, who assisted him, and whether additional crimes can still be investigated. The Department of Justice should pursue every credible
[40:50]lead, not just tirelessly, tirelessly, work tirelessly, um, not just to shut down the investigations. The survivors in this room know they're
[41:00]our investigative leads because they are our stories. Mr. Blanch knows it, too. yet he has chosen not to pursue them. Mr. Blanch's actions have have destroyed
[41:11]survivors trust. According to public reporting, Mr. Blanch spent approximately 9 hours meeting with Gillan Maxwell. He did not even spend 9
[41:21]minutes meeting with the survivor. Afterward, Maxwell was transferred to what many have described as a summer camp prison. We learned all of this
[41:31]through the news. Imagine what that feels like as a survivor to sit there if you were exploited by Gilen Maxwell and you're hearing this for the first time with no explanation, no outreach, and no
[41:41]transparency from your And to add insult to injury, the information that Todd Blanch gathered in the White House situation room last summer to curb the political fallout
[41:52]from the Epstein files was absolutely abhorrent. Instead of following investigative leads, our government treated and continued to treat this as a political
[42:02]crisis that needs to be managed in our nation. Everyone deserves equal protection under the law. Todd Blanch has been unwilling to protect Epstein
[42:12]survivors personal information [snorts] and he has been resistant to investigate the people who helped Epste and Maxwell commit those crimes. We need an attorney general committed to
[42:24]ensuring that everyone who facilitated Epstein's crimes is held accountable. Please, I implore you, please think carefully and think about the
[42:35]girls in these photos. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Bensky. Now, Miss Boss. >> Thank you, Chairman Grassley. Is it on?
[42:52]Thank you, Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Durban and members of the committee. >> Can you pull it real close to you? >> There. >> Yeah, I think that's right.
[43:03]>> There you go. >> My name is Jennifer Boss. I live in Antioch, Illinois. I'm the mother of an angel named Megan Boss. And I'm here because my daughter's tragic and
[43:14]gruesome death has exposed catastrophic failures in immigration enforcement and drug trafficking policies. The investigation into her death continues,
[43:24]but one truth is painfully clear. Dangerous gaps in our system allowed an illegal alien to exploit our laws. And my daughter paid the ultimate price.
[43:34][clears throat] Losing Megan and then being forced to navigate multiple broken systems while drowning in grief taught me that policies carrying life or death
[43:45]consequences cannot remain political talking points. That's why I've tried, despite the most intense heartache anyone can ever experience, to speak
[43:56]locally and nationally about the four crisis that compounded our tragedy. [clears throat] illegal immigration, sanctuary policies, the fentanyl crisis,
[44:07]and cashless bail. [clears throat] I'm so grateful that the whole of this administration with Todd Blanch leading the DOJ has prioritized all four of these issues.
[44:19]I'm asking the committee not to wait until another mother is sitting where I am. Confirmed Todd Blanch. He is a leader who will uphold the law, honor
[44:29]victims, confront dangerous criminal organizations, and fight to give other American families the safety and lasting
[44:36]protection that came too late for mine. I couldn't save my daughter, but Todd Blanch's attorney general, he might save
[44:48]yours because next time it could be your child. It could be your family. It could be you. This can happen to
[44:59]anyone. We must have leaders that are willing to act before the next life is taken. Leaders that are willing to confront the failures instead of explaining them
[45:09]away. Leaders like Todd Blanch. Megan was my first born. She was a mom and a sister and an aunt.
[45:20]Loyal friend. She was bubbly and funny. She loved to be silly.
[45:31]Sorry. [snorts] She was extraordinarily creative. And she was blessed with the spirit that
[45:40]just lit up the room. In February of 2025, Megan disappeared. For 51 days, [snorts] our family lived
[45:50]in the most unbearable agony. Day after day, I did everything I could think of to search for her. Instead of bringing Megan home, our
[46:01]search ended with the most unbearable truth a mother could ever be forced to face. [snorts]
[46:15]We learned that Megan's life had been cut short and her body was concealed, [snorts] stuffed upside down in a garbage can
[46:30]filled [snorts] with bleach by an illegal alien that had no right to be here. [snorts] again.
[46:41]She was stuffed upside down in a garbage can for 51 days, soaking in bleach. [snorts]
[46:56]For seven weeks, this man walked past that garbage can on his way to the bakery he worked at every day under a fake name.
[47:08]>> [snorts] >> And during those weeks, I couldn't breathe or eat or sleep. We searched his neighborhood. We knocked
[47:17]on his door. We left Megan flyers with Megan's face
[47:24]on every surface we could find. And then I learned she was only a driveway distance away
[47:34]from us the whole time. Excuse me. [snorts] Not only was she killed, her dignity was
[47:50]stolen in death. [snorts] Had Megan not been identified by the tattoos that she loved so dearly. Even the beautiful image of my daughter
[48:01]that I hold in my heart, my head, [snorts] it would have been replaced forever by the unbearable image of what had been done to her. [snorts]
[48:13]Megan's daughter, she was only 5 years old when this happened. [snorts] Her life with Megan and her right to know and make memories with her mom.
[48:23][snorts] It was stolen. [sighs and gasps] This is Megan's bracelet. >> [snorts] >> It's a charm bracelet we started when
[48:34]she was five. And it has every memory on it from growing up. [snorts] Every milestone, every place that we visit, anything that was important to
[48:45]her. [snorts] It's here. This is her story. These are the stories that she should be telling her daughter.
[48:57]I have to hope I can remember them all. There's so many. [snorts]
[49:08]My husband and I, we won't be retiring like we imagined, of course, because we have to pray that we live long enough to raise her little girl into adulthood. And this is because our laws that we
[49:23]already have aren't enforced. This [snorts] is why victims don't care about partisan victories.
[49:33]We care whether the dangerous criminals and drug traffickers and cartels are stopped before another loved one is buried and another family's life is shattered. [laughter] [snorts]
[49:46]Right now, governors and local officials enact sanctuary protections, cashless bail policies, and identification laws that undermine federal enforcement and
[49:57]create dangerous public safety loopholes. [snorts] A criminal that's released under a reckless local policy does not remain inside that city or
[50:09]state. He can cross into yours. Megan's perpetrator was released the day after he was arrested.
[50:19]Do you want him as your neighbor? [snorts] Angel families have told me how they've been entirely abandoned and
[50:29]ignored by the government. Our children and our families were politically inconvenient. Some of these angel families have been trying asking
[50:39]for someone to listen to the stories and learn from what's happened to us for more than 25 years [snorts] in this very room. The last angel f the
[50:55]last angel mom that sat here was asked how come she was here and why did they have to sit through another
[51:04]hearing? [snorts] That's beginning to change now under the current leadership of Todd Blanch. Angel
[51:15]families finally are feeling heard and respected and taken seriously. There is a renewed focus on prosecuting immigration crimes and the transnational
[51:27]criminal organizations, drug trafficking and the like. So [snorts] much work that's done by ICE and Homeland Security investigations
[51:37]goes on scene. It's not limited to detaining the individuals who escape detection at the border. Their work is lifeprotecting.
[51:48][snorts] From the time that I've spent talking with Todd Blanch, I knew immediately that he makes victims a priority. [sighs] Under his [snorts] direction, the DOJ
[51:59]has engaged directly with the Angel families and treated us not like political props, but as partners in preventing future tragedies. And that's all that we've
[52:11]ever asked for. [snorts] Justice can't bring our children home. nothing. Nothing can.
[52:22]So, the justice that we're seeking now is the assurance that their deaths won't be ignored and they won't be in vain and preventable tragedies
[52:33]from these laws not being enforced, won't be repeated. I 100% believe Todd Blanch will be the
[52:43]one who can deliver that justice, saving lives of people who will never know it. [snorts] Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you, Miss Boss. Now,
[52:53]Miss your lawyer. [snorts] >> Good morning, Chairman Grassley, Ranking Member Durban, and members of this
[53:02]committee. I am here as a public servant, a former Justice Department employee, and a concerned American who cares deeply about the future of our country.
[53:14]I had great hope that Todd Blanch would be an effective leader and a responsible steward of the Department of Justice, but he quickly proved me wrong. Two days
[53:24]after Mr. Blanch was confirmed as Deputy Attorney General, he fired me from my position as the department's career pardon attorney. I declined to rubber stamp a political favor for a friend of
[53:36]the president and it cost me my job. Mr. Blanch's office had asked me to recommend restoring the gun ownership rights of a convicted domestic abuser. I
[53:46]raised concerns about public safety, but Mr. Blanch's staff pressured me to go along anyway. I did not. Domestic violence is the leading type of homicide
[53:58]among women. When a domestic abuser is armed, his victim is five times more likely to be killed. But because this particular domestic
[54:10]abuser had a personal relationship with the president, Mr. Blanch's staff asked me to set aside my concerns. When I wouldn't, Mr. Blanch fired me within
[54:19]hours. He then took extraordinary measures to silence me. He sent US marshalss to my home in an effort to prevent me from speaking with members of
[54:29]Congress. I was shocked to hear Mr. Blanch's testimony about this yesterday. What he
[54:37]said about my firing is provably false. His claim that it had nothing to do with the concerns I raised is contradicted by documents and evidence. His claim that
[54:48]he tried to call me before sending marshals to my home is flatout false. His claim that it is normal for DOJ to use armed law enforcement officers to
[55:00]deliver mail to the homes of its former employees is preposterous. The casual lies that Mr. Blanch tells
[55:10]even while sitting in this chair testifying to this committee are emblematic of a much larger problem. Courts across the country have said they
[55:22]can no longer trust the Justice Department to upho to uphold the law and tell the truth. There are over 700 documented instances
[55:33]of DOJ violating judicial orders. There are nearly 100 cases in which judges appointed by both parties have found that DOJ presented false or misleading
[55:45]information in court. Earlier this week, a federal judge found that Mr. Blanch personally misled this Congress about the department's settlement agreement with President
[55:56]Trump. To the American public, it looks like Mr. Blanch is running DOJ as Donald Trump's personal law firm. He is using
[56:06]law enforcement powers to pursue petty grudges harbored by the president. These pointless vendettas are wasting our scarce resources and destroying
[56:18]DOJ's credibility. Mr. Blanch has repeatedly placed President Trump's interests ahead of the interests of the country. The collusive
[56:29]settlement agreement is a perfect example. It protects the entire Trump family and all of their businesses from
[56:37]any investigation or audit forever. It gives away nearly $2 billion dollar of our money for no reason at all. It is
[56:48]a windfall for the president and his allies at the expense of the American people. A court found that signing this agreement was a betrayal of Mr. Blanch's duty to zealously represent the
[57:00]interests of the United States. That is the most basic obligation of the attorney general. Mr. Mr. Blanch said yesterday that the
[57:10]settlement fund is dead. It is not. That is contract law 101. Mr. Trump or his sons could seek to enforce it at any time.
[57:21]Mr. Blanch gave bizarre excuses for not meeting with Jeffrey Epstein's victims. Yet, he spent two days personally eliciting testimony from Guilain
[57:32]Maxwell, Epstein's partner in crime. After this imprisoned sex trafficker made statements claiming to exonerate the president, she was moved to a
[57:43]minimum security camp. That is a grievous breach of DOJ policy. It is an abuse of Mr. Blanch's office. It is a
[57:54]terrible betrayal of Epstein and Maxwell's victims. Mr. Blanch's callous approach to the Epstein case matches his cavalier
[58:04]attitude toward rearming domestic abusers. At the end of the day, the priority of this DOJ is protecting powerful men, even when it comes at the
[58:15]expense of vulnerable women. What Mr. Blanch is doing is dangerous. Earlier this week, two Supreme Court justices sat here and testified about
[58:27]the terrifying threats that judges are facing in this country. Meanwhile, Mr. Blanch is fueling those threats by attacking judges who rule against the
[58:36]administration and declaring a war against the courts. These are not partisan concerns. Americans across the political spectrum
[58:47]rely on DOJ to keep us safe and free. Mr. Blanch has shown that he is willing to put all of that at risk to serve a political agenda.
[58:58]I beg the members of this committee to think about what this is costing our country. Please do not degrade our justice system further by promoting Mr. Blanch. Thank you.
[59:10]>> Thank you, Mr. Now, Mr. Adler. Good morning, Chairman Grassley, Ranking Member Durban, and distinguished members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. My
[59:21]name is John Adler, and I appear before you today in my personal capacity to provide testimony in support of the nomination of the Honorable Todd Blanch to serve as the United States Attorney General. I respectfully offer my
[59:32]perspective both as a former colleague of acting attorney general Blanch and as a national law enforcement organization leader. My experience in law enforcement spans over 30 years, and I was honored
[59:43]to serve under 10 attorney generals as a federal law enforcement officer. Concurrent with my active duty law enforcement service, I also served as the national president of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association for
[59:55]two terms, representing federal offices from 65 different agencies nationwide. As a volunteer law enforcement leader, I had and continue to have the privilege of serving with the leaders of the
[1:00:06]largest national law enforcement organizations, including the FOP, NAPO, NSA, IAP, and others. I have dedicated my life towards making it safer for those who serve and supporting
[1:00:17]innovative approaches towards augmenting both officer and public safety, which are intertwined. As a career tactical instructor, I emphasize marrying tactical proficiency with compassion and
[1:00:28]civility. Within a legal context, I am convinced that acting attorney general Blanch exudes this. When I joined the US Attorney's Office in April 2001, I met an incredibly intelligent and highly
[1:00:40]motivated parallegal by the name of Todd Blanch. My first impression of then parallegal Blanch was that he moved like a football fullback, carrying the federal criminal statutes book under his
[1:00:50]arm as he charged through the revolving doors. It didn't take long for me to figure out why all the prosecutors were so friendly with Mr. Blanch. They all wanted him on their trial teams. It was
[1:01:01]clear from the beginning that parallegal Blanch had a passion for prosecuting violent crimes. He later became an assistant US attorney and his amazing work ethic and passion for combating
[1:01:12]violent crime were unparalleled for a new A USA. A USA Blanch exuded the speak softly but carry overwhelming evidence demeanor. It was no surprise to anyone
[1:01:22]at the office that a USA Blanch ultimately became the co-chief of the violent crimes unit. It was clear that unit chief Blanch was fully committed to litigating violent crime cases in
[1:01:32]furtherance of public safety. For context, I want to emphasize that the acting attorney general began his parallegal and prosecutorial career in an office that was predominantly represented by a USA with different
[1:01:44]political views. What impressed me during my 16 years with the US attorney's office was the unified commitment to the rule of law irrespective of political affiliation. I
[1:01:55]am absolutely convinced that if confirmed as the attorney general, acting attorney general Blanch will carry forward that spirit and unwavering commitment to the rule of law. During
[1:02:06]the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the US attorney's office in the Southern District of New York was located in the hot zone in New York City. While we often hear the acting attorney general speak of the
[1:02:17]extraordinary bravery of first responders who run forward into harm's way, he exuded that charge forward spirit during the challenging days following 911. I have profound respect
[1:02:27]for his service above self spirit then and it has only grown. Moving forward to Deputy Attorney General Blanch's tenure as the acting attorney general, his outreach and engagement with law
[1:02:38]enforcement nationwide has been extraordinary. Same can be said for his 247 staff. In speaking with my fellow national law enforcement organization
[1:02:47]leaders, it is clear that I have great respect for the acting attorney general and appreciate his commitment to backing the blue. Acting attorney general Blanch has demonstrated a strong commitment to
[1:02:58]officer safety and ensuring that all law enforcement officers have the same protection under the law. According to the FBI's recent annual report, 90,000 law enforcement officers were assaulted
[1:03:09]in 2025. That represents a 10-year high. Acting attorney general has made clear that his department will stand by law enforcement and support the prosecution of anyone who assaults a law enforcement
[1:03:21]officer. Civility does not work when it's one-sided. He has earned the respect and admiration of officers nationwide. In terms of civility, acting attorney general Blanch has
[1:03:32]distinguished himself during the substantial time he spent with all the national law enforcement organizations during National Police Week. In particular, the time he spent with the concerns of police survivors, which are
[1:03:43]the survivors of our heroes killed in the line of duty was heartfelt and riveting. Much like his powerful support for our angel families, acting attorney general Blanch is equally supportive of the surviving family members of our
[1:03:55]fallen heroes. and I have no doubt he will continue that as he prioritizes the safety of all Americans. As the father of beautiful teenage daughter, I worry about her safety every day. I expect our
[1:04:06]government leaders to do everything they can to support a safe and just quality of life for all our children. That should be an unbreakable priority. I sleep well knowing that my daughter's safety and all Americans are an
[1:04:18]unwavering priority for acting attorney general Blanch and his team. Under his leadership and through the dedication of all law enforcement officers, violent crime continues to be driven down. We
[1:04:29]must sustain these powerful results and we need acting attorney general Blanch to be confirmed as our nation's chief law enforcement officer. Throughout my law enforcement career, I wore and
[1:04:39]continue to wear a pendant that has John 15:13 inscribed. Greater love hath no one than this to lay down when life's for a friend. I am absolutely convinced that the acting attorney general, acting
[1:04:51]attorney general Blanch, will exude that spirit of the scripture and do everything he can to protect the safety of all Americans by following the rule of law. I therefore respect that the committee set aside any political
[1:05:02]differences, demonstrate its unwavering commitment to both officer and public safety, and vote to confirm acting attorney general Blanch as the next attorney general. Thank you.
[1:05:14]>> Thank you, Miss Boss. Uh first of all, thank you for your courage coming forward. Uh you know how important it is to have
[1:05:24]effective leadership in pursuing justice. I think you've answered my question in your fir in your last two minutes of your testimony, but I'd like
[1:05:34]to give you an opportunity to say it once again how you feel about Mr. Blanch and the prospects of his continued
[1:05:41]leadership at the Justice Department. Thank you, chairman. Um,
[1:05:50]I feel like we have already seen what has come out of the Justice Department as far as the prosecutions of um the
[1:06:02]drug trafficking, the cartels. Um he is following up the hard work of the men and women that are in our uh the ICE
[1:06:12]agents CBP and he's prosecuting those dangerous criminals and that is making a difference. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Now Miss
[1:06:21]Oyer, um we know the Biden administration was the most active pardoning administration in American history.
[1:06:32]4,000 total acts of clemency. Uh I think you were the pardon attorney
[1:06:40]on January the 17th, 2025 when President Biden granted more communications in a single day than any prior president had
[1:06:52]over that entire presidency. Is that right? >> I was the pardon attorney on on that date, sir. >> Okay. Were you also the pardon attorney
[1:07:02]on December 23rd, 2024 when President Biden commuted 37 of 40 inmates on federal death row?
[1:07:13]>> Yes, sir. I was >> Thank you for that. Um, so I want to bring up some of these uh commutations.
[1:07:24]Thomas Sanders, who killed a 12-year-old girl, Lexus Roberts. He shot Lexus four times and slid her throat after the girl
[1:07:36]had witnessed him murder her mother. Did you object to President Biden's commuting his sentence? >> Sir, I'm not able to discuss the recommendations that I made to the
[1:07:47]president regarding acts of clemency. Uh, can you speak? Uh, did you turn your microphone on?
[1:07:58]>> I believe it's on, sir. >> You were the pardon attorney. Yeah, >> I was. Yes. Yes. >> You recommended. You didn't object to the recommendation.
[1:08:07]>> Sir, I'm not uh able to discuss the recommendations I provided to the president about clemency matters which are considered >> covered by executive privilege.
[1:08:18]>> Okay. I want you to know that I have read evidence that you made this recommendation. So, are you telling me the evidence I read that I'm wrong? So,
[1:08:28]did you make the recommendation or you don't want you you're telling me you can't talk about it? >> Sir, just like Mr. Blanch explained yesterday, I'm not free to discuss the recommendations that I provided to the
[1:08:39]White House because they are covered by executive privilege. You can't even tell me if you contacted the victim's family.
[1:08:49]You can't say yes or no to that. >> Sir, I I cannot talk about the discussions I had unless the White House chooses to wave the executive privilege.
[1:08:59]I would be happy to come back and speak with you or other members of this committee. >> And I think what I'm going to do is I'm going to tell you what I know. So, let's
[1:09:09]go to the uh uh the case of Jorge Avila Torres, who stabbed to death eight-year-old Laura
[1:09:19]Hobbs and 9-year-old Crystal Tobias, who were riding their bicycles in Chicago, Sunborg.
[1:09:28]He had also sexually assaulted at least one of them. And four years later, he strangled to death a 20-year-old naval
[1:09:37]officer, Amanda Snell, in her barracks. So, uh, you can't talk about this, but I have read evidence that you made this recommendation.
[1:09:49]And, uh, you can't even tell me yes or no whether you made that recommendation. Well, sir, what I can tell you is that President Biden did commute the sentences of 37 individuals who were on
[1:10:00]death row to sentences of life imprisonment and all of those individuals will remain incarcerated for the rest of their lives, most likely in maximum security. >> Well, we know what the commentation uh
[1:10:11]did, but the fact is that they were taken off death row. Then we have the case of Dylan Roof
[1:10:20]shot up a church in South Carolina that made national history for a long period of time in his trial. He murdered nine
[1:10:29]Africanameans in a racially motivated attack. And you're telling me you can't talk about that? But I have read evidence that you made this recommendation.
[1:10:41]And uh uh since you can't comment it on it, I'm just going to have to tell you that you made that recommendation.
[1:10:50]Robert Bowers murdered 11 people in Pittsburgh Tree of Life synagogue in the deadliest attack on a local Jewish
[1:11:00]community in American history. And you're telling me you can't talk about the rec commutation of Robert Bowers? But I want to tell you that I have read
[1:11:11]evidence that you made this recommendation. Uh and then also Johar Sarna
[1:11:19]planted bombs at the 2013 Boston Marathon, killing three and injuring hundreds in an act of terrorism. And
[1:11:29]you're telling me you can't talk about that. But I want you to know that I have read evidence that you made this recommendation. And uh it seems pretty I'm going to give
[1:11:40]you a chance to react to it, but it seems pretty obvious that you were fired because the current Justice Department leadership disagreed with how you
[1:11:49]handled the pardons last administration. You want to respond, >> sir? Regarding these cases, these are absolutely horrific cases and every one of the individuals you mentioned will
[1:12:01]remain incarcerated for the rest of their lives, most likely in a maximum security prison facility. Uh, as far as the reasons for my firing, I've been in litigation with the Justice Department
[1:12:11]for over a year about my firing, which was plainly illegal. And Mr. Blanch's comments in this room yesterday are the first time I have ever heard the explanation that I was fired because of
[1:12:23]recommendations I made to the prior administration about how to accomplish their clemency objectives. Mr. Blanch's Justice Department submitted a pleading
[1:12:33]to the Merit Systems Protection Board that stated that the facts about my firing were not in dispute. The facts, as I have been saying for one year plus,
[1:12:43]are that I was fired within hours of declining to make a recommendation that I believed was very dangerous. And Mr. Blanch's statement yesterday that it was
[1:12:53]for another reason materialized out of thin air and has never been stated before. >> Okay, Mr. Ashkoff, you served this nation with distinction during your
[1:13:04]tenure as attorney general. You know what it takes to do the job and to do it well based on Mr. Blanch's leadership of the Justice Department during this
[1:13:14]administration. Do you believe he would serve as an effective and capable attorney general? >> Well, I think the statistics and the history tells a story here. Thank you
[1:13:25]for the question. But Todd Blanch has a heritage and history of involvement in the Justice Department pursuing the rule of law and enforcing the rule of law.
[1:13:36]And that extended from his time as a as a an assistant in the office when I was attorney general 25 years ago to recent
[1:13:46]times when his aggressive approach in fighting crime has actually uh been a part of the effort that's driven down violent crime across the country and
[1:13:58]particularly in cases where the department has been welcome to assist and work with local officials. In my home jurisdiction in southwest Missouri,
[1:14:06]they had Operation Spring Cleanup and a number of very important uh prosecutions were begun at that time. And I think
[1:14:17]it's a credit to him. I have no doubt that his commitment to maintaining the safety and security of Americans and their rights will be pursued in in in
[1:14:27]the pursuit of the rule of law and within the bounds of the Constitution of the United States, which is the framing that I think every American expects that the Constitution and rule of law of the
[1:14:38]United States be followed and defended. >> Mr. Duran, Senator, I'm sorry, Senator Dur. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Miss Boss,
[1:14:49]breaks my heart to hear the story of you and your loss of your daughter. And I I just want to say my heart goes out to you and to your husband. Carrying
[1:15:00]on for her with your granddaughter uh is the greatest tribute you can give her. I'm sure uh I'm sorry you went through this terrible tragedy. I'm glad you're
[1:15:12]here today to tell that story, Miss Pensky. It's hard to imagine that this government kept publishing your personal
[1:15:22]information. Did you anyone notify them of this breach of privacy? >> Yeah, I mean we notified them immediately. um back in the first document release and even before the
[1:15:34]document release happened after the Epstein files transparency act passed um like I said in my testimony um my lawyer teamed up with other lawyers and and
[1:15:43]gave 350 names and um basically every batch that came forward um all the way through basically I believe it was April
[1:15:52]but in the January batch uh I was I was exposed. >> So did this happen to any of the others who were present here? Oh yes. I mean all >> I think almost all. >> Yeah.
[1:16:03]>> Yes. Um there were hundreds of victims that were outed and Jane does. Um and you know I do want to speak to just the damages for a moment. You know we we've been receiving threats. We've had loss
[1:16:15]of jobs. We've had loss of confidentiality and privacy. Um but there's there's another piece here and it's that this idea of withholding information. We're trying to get justice. We have always been trying to
[1:16:27]seek justice and we're seeing if you just even look at New Mexico right now um that the AG, the New Mexico AG has
[1:16:34]attempted five times to get the files um uh from Todd Blanch and from this DOJ and it's it's obstruction. They are
[1:16:43]obstructing. So for us, yes, of course, there are so many damages. There are so many things that we are mourning the loss of, including a lot of our innocence and who we were as these young
[1:16:55]girls. Um, but to still see it be obstructed after 30 years. Um, and this is five administrations. We're not saying that this is just this administration. We've been at this fight
[1:17:06]for for 30 years. Um, so we just really hope that, you know, there's a huge impact as far as just releasing information and making sure that it's followed up on.
[1:17:18]>> I can't understand how this attorney general can find 48 hours to visit with Gileain Maxwell. >> Yeah. >> Who has been prosecuted for sex trafficking. >> Yeah.
[1:17:28]>> And can't find 30 minutes to meet with the survivors of that sexual predatory conduct. It's certainly not for lack of trying. We have tried in every way we
[1:17:40]know how to try. Um and then we did hear from him yesterday that he would sit with counsel. And I would I would say I hope I think many of us in this room would be interested in meeting with him today if we could.
[1:17:52]>> Many of the members of the committee will remember when we had the Olympic athletes in here. >> Yeah. >> Who had been sexually abused. >> Uh and the head of the FBI head of the
[1:18:03]FBI sat through their entire testimony. >> Yeah. uh to show his concern for what had happened to them and any wrongdoing by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. >> That to me was the right thing to do
[1:18:15]from both sides. Why in the world would Mr. Blanch at this point say he doesn't have the time? I couldn't understand his argument yesterday. He couldn't see you because you had a lawyer or he couldn't
[1:18:26]see you because you didn't have a lawyer. >> Yeah, I think it was because we had a lawyer. But, you know, I think um as a career prosecutor, we talk so much about Todd Blanch's credentials in this room
[1:18:35]and we've heard a lot about them. Um and that's great, but I think as a career pro prosecutor, he should be salivating by this case, right? This case is um
[1:18:46]it's gold for somebody that wants to prosecute. There are six million files. There are thousands of victims. And yet, all we've seen is one perpetrator that died in prison. The other per
[1:18:56]perpetrator is now in a minimum security penitentiary. And Todd Blanch believes that there are zero investigations when he's already been told by members of the House that that is inaccurate. >> I'll just tell you point blank, I don't
[1:19:08]think his name should be called on the floor of the United States Senate until he meets with you. >> Yeah, I agree. >> It's not too much to ask. >> Set aside two hours, four hours, whatever it takes so that there is
[1:19:19]clearly an effort by this government to get all the information. >> Yes. >> Uh and make a judgment as to what to do with it. But to shun you and to snub you at this point, there's something else
[1:19:30]going on here. There's got to be Someone told me once in politics, there's always a good reason and then there's always a real reason. What is the real reason why Todd Blanch does not want to meet with
[1:19:41]the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein? >> It appears from the outside reputational harm. And that is what I think is at the core of this that um he prioritizes the
[1:19:51]reputation of of the administration um over survivors of sexual abuse and of crime survivors in this country. >> Well, I I hope the message goes out to
[1:20:01]all senators on both sides of the table. >> I do want to say, you know, to that end, I'm we are not we've been saying that we're not political. I don't I've asked everyone we've met with a lot of your offices on both sides and every single
[1:20:12]conversation u Mr. Holly, we had a great conversation with your office, right? It was amazing. And I feel so much hope leaving those spaces actually. Um, and when we had those conversations, it just
[1:20:23]felt like you see us as human beings. You don't see us like we have survivors on both sides of the aisle. We are not here to be political. These are just our stories. Like 17-year-old me, I promise
[1:20:33]you, not political. Um, but so when we have these very real interactions in your offices, we hope that you can put politics aside. Um, it was something so beautiful that we saw during the Epste
[1:20:44]Files Transparency Act. There was a moment where Marjorie Taylor Green went and sat right next to Melanie Sansbury and that is a moment that will live in my memory forever because they cross party lines for something that was
[1:20:54]really important. Um, so I hope that you can all do that. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Senator Hall. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just on that note, Miss Bisky and for everybody who's here, all of the victims, thank you for
[1:21:05]being here. Thank you for standing up and telling your stories. Miss Boss, thank you for being here and for telling us about your daughter. I'm sorry for what all of you have been through. So, I want to say thank you and honor your
[1:21:16]voices and honor what you're doing. Miss Or, if I could just turn to you, you were President Biden's pardon attorney. Is that correct? >> I was the Justice Department's pardon attorney. >> You recommended You made clemency
[1:21:27]recommendations to the White House whether or not to pardon inmates. Is that correct? >> My job was to make clemency recommendations. And in that in that capacity, you recommended that the president of the United States, Joe
[1:21:37]Biden, grant clemency to all 40 federal death row inmates. All of them. Clear them out. Correct. >> Sir, as I told Chairman Grassly, I'm not free to discuss the recommendation.
[1:21:49]>> Well, that's what your memo says. >> I mean, we have your memo. Your memo of November 4th, 2024 says, and I quote, "Disparity and undue severity of sentence, which are present in many, if
[1:22:01]not all of these cases, have been recognized as grounds for clemency." And you went on to recommend in that memo and a series of other memos that are now recorded and public record that the president of the United States grant
[1:22:13]clemency to murderers, rapists, and the most horrible offenders. All of them clear death row completely out. I'm amazed you've been called here today. I'm absolutely amazed by it. But let's just talk about the people who you
[1:22:24]recommended. You you talk about honoring victims. The people who you recommended get clemency and live at the the expense and sufference of taxpayers for the rest of their lives. Let's start with Dylan
[1:22:34]Roof. Dylan was a neonazi who murdered nine African-American worshippers at a Bible study in Charleston, South Carolina, 2015. Do you
[1:22:45]remember this case? >> I do remember it very well. >> I would hope you did. Here's his victims. You want to look at them? There they are. Nine of them at a Bible study
[1:22:54]in a church killed in cold blood. The DOJ knew from day one that he had decided, I'm going to quote from the prosecutors, decided to attack
[1:23:04]African-Americans because of their race. He further decided to attack African-American worshippers in a black church in order to make his attack more
[1:23:14]notorious. More notorious. And yet you recommended that he be granted clemency, live at the expense of taxpayers for the rest of his life, substitute your judgment for that of the American
[1:23:24]judicial system. Do you stand by that recommendation today? >> Sir, I'm not going to comment on the recommendations that I made. But I can tell you that Mr. Roof is going to die in prison as >> Oh. Oh, he's going to live in prison for
[1:23:36]a very long time because of you, because of your recommendations. And here's what you said in your memo of October 30th, 2024. You said that actually ROF is not a compelling candidate for clemency, but
[1:23:46]you recommended it anyway. Why? Because he suffered from anxiety. You said, right? He suffered from anxiety. Did it ever occur to you that maybe the family
[1:23:56]of his victims might suffer a little bit of anxiety because he marched into their church and murdered them in cold blood because he was an incredible racist and he wanted to get on TV? >> Sir,
[1:24:08]>> do you regret it? I'm not going to comment on the record that I made to the president. >> Let's talk about Robert Bowers, a man who regularly spewed such vile hatred of Jews, it's unlike anything I've ever
[1:24:18]seen. He barged into a Pittsburgh synagogue in 2018 and he shot everybody he could find, killing 11 innocent people who were there to worship. A
[1:24:30]federal jury in Pittsburgh unanimously recommended the death sentence after finding him guilty on 63 counts. Here they are. They're his victims. Take a
[1:24:41]good look. You recommended clemency for this person who went in and killed these people just cuz they're Jews. He killed the other guy killed people just cuz they're
[1:24:53]black. This guy killed people just cuz they're Jews. A jury recommended that he be sentenced to death and you substituted your judgment for theirs and and now he's going to live. Are you proud of that,
[1:25:04]>> sir? What I am proud of is the fact that I took my job as pardon attorney extremely seriously. >> Apparently not seriously enough. You certainly didn't take the victims seriously. Then there's Jorge Avala
[1:25:16]Torres who wasn't just a murderer. He was a silly serial killer and a rapist. >> Sir, >> here is who he assaulted and killed. He sexually assaulted and killed 8-year-old
[1:25:28]Laura Hobbes and 9-year-old Crystal Tobias in a Chicago suburb in 2005. And then four years after that, he
[1:25:38]committed another murder. He slaughtered a fellow service member, Navy Petty Officer Amanda Snell, in 2009 while she was in her barracks. That's what he did.
[1:25:48]And you recommended clemency for this individual. And now he'll live his life at the expense of taxpayers because you substituted your judgment for that of
[1:26:00]the American judicial system jury judges the whole lot and yet you're here to tell us that you're somehow a victim. I don't think so, Miss Oyer. I think your
[1:26:08]judgment is astoundingly terrible. I'm amazed that this side of the aisle has called you. And I just asked my friends on this side of the aisle, do you agree
[1:26:17]with this? Is this what you want? Do you want these people to be pardoned and live at the expense of taxpayers for their whole lives? Do you want to excuse the murders of African-American
[1:26:29]churchgoers? Do you want to excuse the murders of Jews in their synagogues? Do you want to excuse the murders of these children? Because that's what she did. And now she's online hawking products to
[1:26:39]try to make money off of it. I see you've got your own website where you put your face on baseball caps and mugs. The lawyer.com. You're trying to make money on this, >> certainly.
[1:26:51]>> This is unbelievable, Miss Oyer. And yet you say you're a victim. These are the victims and you helped victimize them and what you're doing is wrong. I hope every
[1:27:02]member on this side of the aisle will repudiate what you have done and what you stand for. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Sir, I assume that your questions directed at me were rhetorical and that you're giving >> They're not rhetorical at all. I I asked
[1:27:13]you to respond and you said you wouldn't. So, what I did is I read to you what you have said. I I quoted verbatim and I'm happy to keep doing it. In fact, I'd ask now, Mr. Chairman, that this report, restoring and strengthening
[1:27:25]the federal death penalty report be entered into the record. It contains information regarding Miss Oyer, her recommendations, and the track record of all of it. The written records are here. I ask to be entered in the record.
[1:27:35]>> It'll be uh Miss Hoyer. Uh take a minute to res respond if you want to.
[1:27:45]>> Uh thank you, Chairman Grassley. I uh under President Biden, just like under President Trump, had a job to do, which was to make recommendations to the president about how to best accomplish
[1:27:55]their clemency objectives. I put the utmost effort into doing that in a way that was consistent with the interests of the justice system and all of its stakeholders, which includes crime
[1:28:07]victims as well as defendants as well as family members as well as judges as well as prosecutors, all criminal justice system stakeholders. The process that I
[1:28:18]presided over was one that was beyond reproach. what's happening now with clemency is an absolute disgrace and I'm sorry that I can't answer the questions about the specific recommendations in
[1:28:29]this public setting but I would be glad to meet with any members of this committee who have concerns privately to discuss to the extent I can what your >> privately why don't you meet with the victim's families here's the disgrace
[1:28:41]>> senator white house >> thank you chairman um Mr. Ashtcro, welcome back to the
[1:28:51]Senate. Um, you knew Jim Comey. >> Pardon me. Yes, indeed I did. >> You trusted him?
[1:29:03]>> He was the deputy attorney general as well as the US attorney for the Southern District of New York. >> You trusted him with the top job in your department? >> I asked him to help administer justice
[1:29:14]at the Department of Justice. >> Yeah. You respected him? Yes, I did. >> Do you have can you vouch for this
[1:29:24]department's prosecution of him for lying to Congress or for the process that was performed?
[1:29:35]>> I'm not in a position I don't know all the facts. I'm not in a position to comment on pending investigations or prosecutions.
[1:29:44]Can you vouch for this department's prosecution of him for posting a picture of the numbers 8647
[1:29:55]or the process that led to that? My response would certainly have to be the same as it is for any prosecution. I'm not a part of the department now. I'm
[1:30:05]not fully informed of its factual basis or for the considerations it's made in in bringing uh prosecutions.
[1:30:15]>> What are your views today of Mr. Comey's character and merits. >> Uh
[1:30:25]I'm not I I'm I'm not going to start to discuss the character and merits of individuals especially those who are standing in
[1:30:35]in a position of responding to charges from the Justice Department. I can respond to what I believed during the time I served as attorney general and
[1:30:44]when he served with me and his service to me and I believe to the United States at that time was commendable and honorable.
[1:30:53]>> Um what is OPR in the Department of Justice? >> It's I believe it's Office of Professional Responsibility.
[1:31:02]>> Yeah. And what is its role? >> Its role is to encourage individuals in the department to act
[1:31:12]in compliance with and uh and in uh in conformity with the rules of ethics and responsibility. >> And did you respect the role of the office of professional responsibility
[1:31:23]when you were attorney general? >> I certainly did. I I hope that they would advise me properly to keep me out of trouble.
[1:31:32]>> If the uh office of professional responsibility were functionally disabled by an administration and the department
[1:31:42]of justice, what message would that send to the line prosecutors? I I'm not in a position to comment on a
[1:31:52]hypothetical of disabling. And and when you say functionally disabled, I think that requires the the uh an assumption of the
[1:32:02]of what does functionally disabled mean? I I personally uh that's a hypothetical to which I just am unable to respond. But you do agree that
[1:32:13]OPR does an important job and has an important role and is important to the Department of Justice in the performance of its duties. I I certainly respected
[1:32:24]the department's operation, including OPR at the time of my opportunity to serve as attorney general of the United States. While you were attorney general, were
[1:32:35]there procedures that took place when judicial findings of prosecutorial misconduct
[1:32:46]or dishonesty occurred? >> I don't I have to say I don't remember charges of prosecutorial misconduct and
[1:32:57]that I dealt with. >> Yeah, they were pretty scarce until now. It was pretty unusual to have judges say that arguments were made in bad faith,
[1:33:08]that arguments were made as pretexts, that arguments were disingenuous, that arguments were shoddy or terrible, that the department was losing or
[1:33:19]sacrificing its credibility, that [snorts] the department was disrespecting orders of the court, that the department had lied or was engaged
[1:33:28]in sham. that there was willful and intentional non-compliance or willful disregard of court orders, that department lawyers were contemptuous or that their behavior and arguments were
[1:33:40]unconscionable. To me, those are red flag words. I was a United States attorney and if my federal court had used those words about my line attorneys,
[1:33:51]there would have been some followup. And I expect that in your department, if those kind of words were used, there'd at least be some preliminary followup.
[1:34:01]And if it were serious, there might actually be a review by the Office of Professional Responsibility. Does that sound like what likely would have happened during your day?
[1:34:12]Uh, I was only admonished at one time that I remember by a court for having commented on evidence. I thought it was pretty good evidence. I think I just said pretty good evidence. And
[1:34:23]>> yeah, I didn't mean you. I meant I meant your line. >> At that time, I I >> decided that I needed to be more careful about my remarks. >> Yeah. No, my question my my remarks I
[1:34:34]were safeguarded and and and carefully made. >> Yeah. And and frankly, I might add, more carefully made than the remarks of some of the judicial officers who have been
[1:34:44]uh who, while very concerned about the Justice Department, seem to be uh willing to themselves engage in political considerations which I didn't
[1:34:54]think were appropriate for the judiciary. So maybe there's a problem that's broader than than we would otherwise recognize. Well, you've changed the topic a little bit to
[1:35:05]your own comments and the response to that, which is fine. I appreciate that you've said that. But my question had to do with when criticisms like that are
[1:35:15]leveled against department lawyers, there is ordinarily some kind of a process or review that takes place. They're not just brushed off. That is
[1:35:24]correct, is it not? Yeah, it's certainly the reason that the office of professional responsibility exists to to safeguard against things that are not
[1:35:35]responsibly done or or undertaken in a way that discredits the department. Public confidence in the department is very important
[1:35:43]>> indeed and it and the rule of law and guided by the constitution is at the foundation of our safeguarding liberties and I I take that seriously. I believed
[1:35:54]that with all my heart when I served and I believe it today. >> Thank you, sir. >> Senator Schmidt. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh first and most importantly, uh I want to thank all the victims who are here for your
[1:36:06]courage to come forward. This not easy to do to um relive everything. So, thank you for for being here and telling your stories. Uh Miss Oyer, I want to I want to turn to you. You were um Biden's part
[1:36:17]attorney and your I want to make sure you're I'm clear. Your testimony here today is that you were fired because you wouldn't recommend restoring Mel Gibson's gun rights. Is that right?
[1:36:28]>> I was fired just hours after I declined to make that report. >> Okay. You can't think of another reason why you might have been fired. >> That's the only explanation that I am aware of. The Justice Department
[1:36:38]actually put in a pleading that was submitted in my appeal of my firing the fact that the facts of my firing are not in >> on November. And you talked about um you you're concerned about public safety. On
[1:36:50]November 4th, 2024, you author authored a 73page memorandum recommending the commutation of all 40 federal death sentences. Isn't that correct? >> Well, as I've told two,
[1:37:01]I know, but don't play the game with me because it's not. They've waved executive privilege. I have the report right here. It's dated April 24th, 2026.
[1:37:12]It's actually your memo is quoted in here. It's p it's public knowledge. And the idea that you would come here, you know that already, you would come here and disparage somebody else and not be
[1:37:23]willing to answer questions about how you commuted the sentences of murderers is ridiculous. I can't believe that you're here to do that. >> Don't have the authority to commute any deny. Do you deny that you authored the memo?
[1:37:34]>> I I'm not sure which memo you're referring to. >> I'm referring to the November 4th, 2024 73page memo. >> Do you deny authoring it? I can't say without having
[1:37:45]>> It's ridiculous. I honestly I can't believe you did. You did. And everybody in America and in the world can pull it up. So, it's a ridiculous like a document that has DOJ's logo on the cover.
[1:37:56]>> Yeah. And it quotes your letter. It quotes your letter. >> I don't know where >> you're losing cred. You should just admit it. You should just admit you authored it. Everybody knows you authored it. So, I'm not going to waste
[1:38:06]any more time on on your your convenient little game you're playing here. You also authored and recommended the commutation of the Boston Marathon bomber, the Tree of Life synagogue
[1:38:16]murderer, and Dylan Roof. We all know this. How many pages of the 73 pages did you dedicate to victims? Because you expressed your concern over victims. How many pages were dedicated to the victims?
[1:38:28]>> Sir, I don't have the memo. >> I can tell you in front of me, >> three pages. Three pages were dedicated to the victims. Um, so I also happen to have I made a
[1:38:39]special access request last year under the Presidential Records Act for documents from the Biden White House on the abuse of pardons and commutations. We recently got those documents. I want
[1:38:49]to show you a couple. Here's one. It's dated December 3rd, 2024, and it's an internal memo on the commutation of the 37 death sentences that you were involved with. The memorandum states
[1:39:01]that the White House worked with reporters to quote ensure positive coverage. It says the White House gave advocates, the elected officials, resources and key messaging to amplify
[1:39:11]the news. You personally recommended commuting com commuting all 40 death sentence cases and even broader action than Biden took. Again, that included
[1:39:22]Dylan Roof, the Boston Marathon bomber, the Tree of Life synagogue shooter. Did you know that the White House was using your recommendations as a PR stunt? >> Sir, I have no idea what document you're
[1:39:33]referring to currently. >> Well, let me just ask you, in general, did you know that they were planning to message around your commutation, >> sir? I was not an employee of the White House. >> I'll take that as a no. I'll take that
[1:39:44]as a no. But they used your ridiculous recommendation to as a veneer of legitimacy. Document two. >> I was called here to talk about Mr. Blanch's nomination. Yeah, I know that's
[1:39:54]what you thought you were came here to talk about, but the reality is your credibility is gone. You can't come here and do the political bidding of the
[1:40:04]Biden administration and then when you're called out on that and being fired, and thank God you're being fired. You know what I really think? I think you thought you came here and you had You're selling merch, by the way. Do we
[1:40:15]have the hoodies that are up for sale? You sell merch. Let's show the hoodies. I think you came here thinking that you were going to be uh ordained the high
[1:40:24]priestess of the resistance. That's what I think. That's why you're denying simple facts that you authored the memo commuting the sentences. Everyone knows that.
[1:40:35]>> And we have documents now from the White House that they use that memo as a PR stunt. And so the idea you have no credibility to talk about Todd Blanch. You have none. You've come here. You
[1:40:47]deny basic facts. You you recommended the commutation of murderers. You gave no quarter at all or any time to the
[1:40:56]victims of these brutal murders. So again, I can't believe you've been called here by the other side, but I'm glad we've had an opportunity to expose your hypocrisy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[1:41:08]>> Senator Herano. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank all the witnesses for being here.
[1:41:17]As a continuation of the confirmation process for Mr. Blanch, we are here to determine whether or not Mr. Blanch, who
[1:41:27]continues to be President Trump's lawyer and all that that implies, should be the attorney general of the United States of
[1:41:37]America, who is supposed to be defending the Constitution, not the president. Miss Bensky, thank you so much for being here and for all of the other uh Epstein
[1:41:48]victims. Mr. Blanch was asked whether uh he would meet with you and because we knew that
[1:41:58]he had refused basically to meet with the victims of the Epstein crimes and he offered apparently yesterday and he made some excuses about uh it not being appropriate
[1:42:10]uh for him to meet with the victims directly. Why? I do not know. >> Understand? Yeah. But he offered up a staff person and I understand that a
[1:42:19]staff person from his office contacted you uh you and others and offered to meet with your council. That's is that correct? Not with you
[1:42:30]directly. >> I am not aware of a staffer reaching out. We I don't I can ask but um we have not heard from a staffer. No, we have not heard from a staffer in the last
[1:42:41]>> Okay, let's get that clarified. I um did I misunderstand that in fact yesterday when he said I have a staff person here
[1:42:50]and we can get this done today. >> Yeah. >> Um that they did they have not contacted you? >> They have not contacted us. Now >> he also said that it would not be appropriate for him to meet directly
[1:43:01]with you. So, not only is his staff not have they not contacted you as he indicated yesterday that uh this could
[1:43:11]all happen yesterday. He continues to make excuses as far as I can tell for not meeting with you in spite of the fact that he met for hours with uh Miss
[1:43:22]Maxwell. Why is it so important? Can you tell us once again why is it so important? >> Yeah. for you to you and the other
[1:43:31]victims of Epstein's crimes to meet with the >> with Mr. Blanch personally. >> Thank you for the question. I think that
[1:43:40]if a victim comes and reports a crime in the FBI, what is the first thing that they do? They follow up. Like Law and Order SVU taught me that when I was 15
[1:43:50]years old. Um the DOJ has never followed up in 30 years with any of us. There is a lot in the files right now that you should be investigating and looking
[1:44:00]into. Um, and to my knowledge and I I mean they can ask they can answer this too, but um, we have never been approached by anybody on the
[1:44:12]prosecutorial side of of things. So I do think like sitting down telling our stories and explaining like the people that were in the room, right? We were
[1:44:22]witnesses of crimes. We had crimes committed to us directly. We do have a lot of information and you would think that um somebody would take that lead
[1:44:32]that's already in like we already went to the FBI because that we wouldn't have 302s if we hadn't have gone to the FBI. It's already there, right? So the
[1:44:41]following up of those 302s um and then once the once it's supposed to be handled by the Department of Justice, why aren't we hearing from prosecutors?
[1:44:51]This case was never handled correctly from the beginning. >> And he also made some excuses [clears throat] as to why personal information were was
[1:45:01]not redacted and exposing >> speaking of you including you and >> yeah um I think something that stood out yesterday was that he had said that
[1:45:11]immediately when things were misacted that they were taken down and they fixed them and within 24 hours they were put back up. That is entirely not true. there are still things um that need to
[1:45:22]be redacted and there's still survivor information in there even today from my awareness um that I mean my information just came down in April um and that was after begging.
[1:45:32]>> Would you say that Mr. Blanch exhibits a rather dismissive attitude toward all of you and the Epstein crimes? >> 1000%. Yes.
[1:45:43]>> Thank you, Miss Oyer. Uh Trump's DOJ under Todd Blanch leadership has purged career prosecutors for personal reasons for refusing to
[1:45:54]prioritize President Trump's interests over their constitutional oath. Todd Blanch has fired more than 1,200 former
[1:46:04]career DOJ employees who worked for both Republican and Democratic administrations. Uh this doesn't even include all of the uh DOJ attorneys who
[1:46:15]resigned because they didn't want to be part of the kind of DOJ that Todd Blanch is creating which is basically not a department of justice but a department
[1:46:26]of retribution and corruption in my view. Miss Oya, what risks does this pose to
[1:46:33]our country for the kind of DOJ that Blanch is running? >> Senator, one of DOJ's greatest strengths
[1:46:44]historically has been its non-political career workforce of experts. People who are experts in their subject matter. That is crucial to keeping all of us safe. We need people who have
[1:46:55]specialization in things like national security, prosecuting child exploitation, all manner of sophisticated crimes involving cryptocurrency. Mr. Blanch has decimated
[1:47:05]the expertise of the career workforce. The Justice Department has lost over a quarter of its attorneys under his leadership and has not been able to replace them, certainly not with
[1:47:15]experienced, knowledgeable, non-political people. I think the DOJ is very much losing its credibility and as uh Mr. Ashkov mentioned the credibility
[1:47:26]and trust in DOJ is very important. The rule of law is very important. We have a president who does not believe the rule of law applies to him and his uh
[1:47:35]attorney Mr. Blanch is helping him helping the president uh proceed with his basically anti-ruule of law agenda. I thank everyone for testifying today.
[1:47:47]Thank you. Senator Booker. >> Um, I just want to start off by saying, Miss Oyer, um, I hold you in the highest esteem and and respect, especially what you're doing now as a private citizen.
[1:47:58]Uh, you use a platform to educate people about the law. It is technical, but yet accessible. And the badgering you just endured, uh, it should be completely unacceptable.
[1:48:10]You were asked to comment on things you didn't have before you. The treatment here to me is just outrageous. And I'm I apologize on behalf of the United States Senate. Th this idea that as a private
[1:48:22]citizen you can't sell things is insulting to me when we have Cash Patel or sitting FBI director selling merch on his site. When you have a president of
[1:48:33]the United States hawking the Bible and yet you as a private citizen who is has a platform to inform people
[1:48:43]about the law. H how dare we make such an accusation when the mockery of justice, the exploitation and the grifting off of their offices has never
[1:48:55]received criticism from that side of the aisle and yet they want to demean you as a private citizen for for for engaging in commerce. That's ridiculous.
[1:49:06]In addition to the fact that you were a career public servant for your entire life, you are a public defender,
[1:49:16]underpaid, overworked, not for a year, not for five years, but for years. The dignity and the service you have brought, no matter whether we disagree with your
[1:49:27]politics or not, should merit the praise of every single senator here. So I apologize for what you endured. I thank you for the service you've given to this
[1:49:39]country and on matters of horrible killings, horrific acts. These are complicated matters. I hold here and I'll submit this for the
[1:49:50]record. People who were victims, families, survivors who wrote letters to the president of the United States asking not to have the death penalty put there. And I
[1:50:01]understand there's differing views, but you are put in those complicated decisions to write career memos for the president to make decisions about who's
[1:50:10]pardoned and not. And so I I I am sorry what I witnessed. I I came late to the hearing was just unacceptable to me. And I am grateful as somebody that follows
[1:50:19]you, that reposts your content, I am grateful that you're here. >> Thank you. >> I want to say I didn't hear that on the microphone. Uh senators enjoy praise. So, what did you say?
[1:50:31]>> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you very much. I appreciate that. I appreciate that. >> Um, I I just want to say before serving as a partner attorney, I pointed out that you were a federal def uh public
[1:50:41]defender uh with clients in the Bureau of Prisons. Was it customary process for transferring a bureau prison prisoner from a low security prison to a minimum security camp? Was that standard
[1:50:53]practice? >> That was unheard of. >> Unheard of. It's against BOP policies. What role does the deputy attorney general usually play uh in in that
[1:51:04]process? >> Usually the deputy attorney general would have no role in designating or transferring inmates. >> No role whatsoever. Yet the the Todd Blanch went directly and met with him.
[1:51:15]Are you aware of any person serving time for child sex trafficking like Gileain Maxwell being transferred from a low security prison facility to a minimum
[1:51:26]security camp? I have never heard of that. It would be an egracious violation of the Department of Justice's own rules. Miss Bangsky, how do you feel knowing that the deputy attorney Todd
[1:51:38]Blanch went to meet with her for two days and then gave her a cushy transfer while he would not meet with you and
[1:51:48]then lied to this committee yesterday saying he was barred by the law which a firstyear law student >> can know the difference of. How did that make you feel? It's devastating for
[1:52:00]survivors. And I'd like to add to that that Annie Farmer, a um victim and uh survivor who testified in Gilan Maxwell's hearing, actually wrote a letter to Todd Blanch immediately after
[1:52:11]that and requested a meeting with him regarding the move and the transfer, and she's never heard anything back at all. >> It is insulting to heap upon survivors
[1:52:21]the indignities that he has by not even meeting with you. Yet he transferred a sex offender to a cushy camp against bop
[1:52:32]policies. It sounds like she got a sweetheart deal while he released your personal information, your address, phone
[1:52:42]numbers, images, and yet he seems to be favoring the the victimizer and not the survivors. I'm out of time and and I it's honorable to
[1:52:53]see Mr. Ashcraftoft here. Sir, I know you I know your record. We may have disagreed on policies, but I also know you would never when you're when you
[1:53:03]were reviewing a merger, you would never go out to dinner with the parties of that merger. It would be unacceptable
[1:53:12]for a person that is supervising a matter to attend a social event with those people before your lawyers. It's about ethics. It's about the appearance
[1:53:23]of impropriety. It's about following the law. This nominee has not followed the ethics laws, has not followed the the urgency for for avoiding the imperence
[1:53:33]of improprieties, has broken a bipartisan law passed by Congress, has demeaned and degraded survivors of sexual violence, and has shielded the
[1:53:44]president by some kind of deal we know nothing about that allowed her now to be transferred to some cushy camp >> that has never been done before with sex
[1:53:55]offenders. this man should not be in this office. I cannot believe we're going through this farce when when his record alone should make him disqualified not for to be the attorney
[1:54:06]general but for even being employed by the federal government. Thank you >> Mr. W Senator Welch. Uh, thank you very much. Uh, first of all, uh, Miss Boss,
[1:54:16]thank you so much. And I fully support your advocacy that the Department of Justice have as a priority focusing on victims.
[1:54:27]And I also want to express to the uh the Epstein victims my appreciation for allowing me to be with you yesterday and be so uplifted by your support for one
[1:54:38]another and all you've done uh to enable uh the rights of victims and the strength of victims uh to recover. Thank
[1:54:47]you very much. Uh Mr. Ashcroft. Um, I wanted to first of all say we seem to have a problem in Missouri with the attorney generals not being able to keep
[1:54:57]their job. They all end up in the US Senate. [laughter] You started quite a trend with Mr. Holly and Mr. Schmidt. >> Well, in all difference, it should be
[1:55:08]remembered that a very important member of the Senate named Jack Danforth, >> that's right, >> had previously served as attorney general of Missouri. So
[1:55:17]myself excluded, I have been uh privileged to be in a line of individuals that I believe have rendered very significant and valuable service to this nation.
[1:55:27]>> Well, I think I think you Thank you and I agree with that. And I I think first of all, I want to express to you how much I've admired your career and uh I think that being an attorney general is
[1:55:38]probably the most difficult cabinet position. Um, and one of the things that's required is that you give advice to the president. And it may be advice
[1:55:48]he doesn't want to hear. And you know, I remember uh March of 2004 when you were recovering from an illness and Mr. Comey
[1:55:58]was the acting uh attorney general and the president's council uh came to your hospital room and wanted you to sign off
[1:56:10]on a uh security law that Mr. Comey in his opinion thought was not legal and you said that was Mr. Comey's
[1:56:22]decision because he was the acting attorney general. Is that right? Uh I I believe that the public written reports, you know, they've been it's been in novels and other things and I I
[1:56:34]have no reason to contest what they've said, >> right? >> I was in bed with a morphine pump in one hand. >> I was in uh in what you call uh what do
[1:56:44]they call this? intensive care. And uh >> but the bottom line here is that the president uh
[1:56:54]wanted an answer to permit him to proceed, but it was the opinion of Mr. Comey at that time that that was not legal.
[1:57:03]>> And this raises really what I think is the heart of what is so challenging to be attorney general. The the president is the executive. you serve in his
[1:57:15]cabinet, but there are times when an attorney general has to say no. Is that correct? >> Well, he adi it. No attorney ever is a good
[1:57:26]attorney who doesn't tell his client the truth, >> right? >> And it's important that the client trusts the attorney and I accept that.
[1:57:36]And so I believe that the attorney general is sworn to the constitution of the United States >> and not to an individual. >> He answers to the president. He is sworn to the constitution.
[1:57:47]>> That's exactly right. Now also when the Enron case, which was an explosive case, came up uh you had received contributions in your political career.
[1:57:57]They were totally and completely legal. But my understanding is because of that in the appearance of a potential conflict, you recused yourself from that that case. Correct.
[1:58:09]>> I wish I remembered things, especially things you say are favorable about what I've done. [laughter] But but it's it's over two decades ago that I did a lot. >> What you did, Mr. Ashcraftoft, is what
[1:58:20]needs to be done. You said it. It's the Constitution who's your client. It's the American people who are ultimately your client and you have to give that direct
[1:58:29]and candid advice to the executive who is the president. So that's my question about Mr. Blanch. It's not his competence. It's not that he's got an
[1:58:39]ongoing relationship, but could you imagine serving as attorney general and having President Bush come to you and say, "By
[1:58:50]the way, who paid you $9 million before you got to be attorney general to represent him in criminal actions?" Okay, this is it's astonishing, right?
[1:59:00]But then he said, "I've got an idea. We're going to sue the federal government for $10 billion dollar and you're going to represent the IRS
[1:59:11]and then why don't you work out a settlement where there's a $1.7 billion fund that I control? >> Would you see any
[1:59:22]>> anything like odd about that? I I didn't have that situation. And I didn't have a president that had been >> uh the subject of
[1:59:34]illegal disclosure of his activities. >> No, but criminal dis criminal disclosure. >> I want to get to your judgment on this because I >> Well, yeah, but you know, I swore to tell the truth, the whole truth, and
[1:59:45]nothing but the truth. That's that's a big challenge in an oath. And I So I want to give my answer and not your answer, although I respect your
[1:59:53]question. No, but what I'm asking is I You have incredible credibility. Incredible character. Incredible. >> Incredible credibility is kind of almost
[2:00:04]like Senate speak. >> Unbelievable believability. I mean, no, >> I was in this body myself and sat on that side of the dis. But I >> Well, you wouldn't had that reputation
[2:00:14]if you were a senator. I mean, this is because you stood up to the president. >> Oh, yes, I would. I was I was honest as a senator. I have to >> I I I I confess the pro my faults from
[2:00:25]both eras both my legislative >> I'm just going to finish thank you for your indulgence but number one when you saw that there was the appearance of a conflict you did not continue
[2:00:35]representing the government in the Enron case number two when it came to a president's demand on something of vital concern to the president a national
[2:00:45]security law surveillance law where it was the opinion of your department that it was illegal. You stood up to the president and didn't cave.
[2:00:55]I respect that and I believe that's the obligation and the burden of whoever serves as our attorney general. Mr. Blanch does not share that.
[2:01:05]>> I thank you for that respect. I I I hope when I grow up I live to do things right. >> Senator Till,
[2:01:15]>> Mr. Ashcrooft and to all the witnesses. Thank you for being here. Um, Mr. Ashcro, I told the the chairman or I told the chairman staff I had one question, but like John Kennedy, it has
[2:01:26]two parts. Um Um, you know, my first question, Mr. Ashcro, I I I mentioned yesterday that I'm disturbed with the political physics going on today. If you
[2:01:38]think about the Obama administration, they had vindictive prosecutions. President Trump came in more or less matched up on some of it. President Biden comes in goes a little bit further
[2:01:49]and this administration seems to me when we're doing 8647 we're doing indictments for that unless there's other it's an active investigation but that's a reason to
[2:01:59]bring Mr. Comey uh and do a per walk because he arranged shells 8647 on a beach in North Carolina. That's all we know right now. It just seems like that does it seems to me like there's a
[2:02:11]continuing you know this exceptional nation we are Americans always want to do better the you know get bigger higher the next time. Do you am I wrong or am I
[2:02:20]perceiving a continued escalation of of prosecutions that some of which really because of the way that they're being adjudicated they're not being successful. It just seems to me that
[2:02:31]we're like shooting you shoot ready aim on uh on some prosecutions. And I'm not only talking about the current Trump administration. I'm going back to the Obama era. Do do you agree with me that
[2:02:42]there seems to be a trend that each administration we seem to be upping it of late?
[2:02:50]>> I'm not sure I could u quantify any disenchantment. I I
[2:02:59]believe I believe partisanship and >> that's okay, Mr. Ashcraftoft because I'm going to live up to my promise to yield back some time. My my point is I'm a management consultant. I'm not an attorney. I'm not a prosecutor. I'm not
[2:03:11]a law enforcement officer, but I deal with facts and empirical data pretty well. I guarantee you I can give you a list of cases and a list of
[2:03:19]investigations, a list of vindictive uh audits. And every year it's like from
[2:03:26]2008 to 2012 to 2016 to 2020 and 2024. One party is going to have to actually be an adult in the room and stop it. And
[2:03:38]our members here need to stop having situational ethics where they're only opposed to it when the other party's in power. But that was not my question. Yesterday
[2:03:49]before the uh the hearing and Mr. Blanch I have a p a positive predisposition to just so that everybody knows um I have not made a final decision but Mr. Blanch
[2:04:00]said very quickly yesterday that he would meet with the victims the the Epstein victims today if it could be
[2:04:09]arranged well right now the markup if if you all don't know procedure here after this hearing is done today next week we'll hold it over the earliest possible markup would be two weeks from now and
[2:04:21]because it seemed to me that Mr. Blanch was willing to u to say that he would meet with them and council. I understand the restriction that council has to be
[2:04:31]present. I expect that meeting to occur before I'm willing to vote out of this committee and I'm trying to get to yes. Um but this is a very important part of
[2:04:40]getting to yes. U there should not be any reason why based on what Mr. what Mr. Blanch said yesterday if he said that he would do it today then he can certainly do it over the next two weeks.
[2:04:51]Thank you Mr. Chair. I yield back. Yeah, talking about what you said, what advice or how political attorney general offices, I remember that Holder said he
[2:05:02]was a wingman for President Obama. >> That's exactly right, Mr. Chair. And anybody who comes up here and steps up on their on their pulpit and then all of
[2:05:13]a sudden I can go back and and see of record the absolute silence of Democrats when Biden and Obama did the same thing. I'd love to see a Democrat who has taken the position that I have with an
[2:05:25]administration that shares my jersey because that's the only way this nonsense stops. >> Senator Schiff, >> thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, Mr. Adler, thank you for being here and for your
[2:05:36]many years of service. Uh, Miss Oyer, likewise. Thank you for your courage at the Justice Department and for your willingness to speak out. Miss Boss, I'm
[2:05:46]I'm just heartbroken for your loss and very much appreciate your advocacy. Uh and Miss Bensky, thank you for your willingness to speak out and for all of the Epstein victims that are here. Uh
[2:05:57]I'm glad the attorney general uh finally acknowledged that he could meet with you. I was perplexed when he said somehow that he was prohibited. That's simply not the law. Uh and I hope that
[2:06:07]meeting takes place. Mr. Ashcro, thank you for your service. Um, I wanted to ask you about uh some remarks the
[2:06:16]attorney general made when he said uh that he thought the president he was asked about the president targeting his political opponents and enemies for prosecution.
[2:06:27]Um, and I don't subscribe to the what I think is a false equivalence. We've never seen a president behave this way. um where he openly and privately calls
[2:06:38]on the attorney general to prosecute his enemies. Um and I want to ask you about that, Mr. Ashcraftoft, because Mr. Blanch has said that he believes the president has both the right and the
[2:06:49]duty to use the [clears throat] Justice Department to go after his enemies. Do you subscribe to that view? Thank you, Senator. I I believe that the
[2:07:01]attorney general of the United States has the right and responsibility to enforce the law uniformly. And if the law has been broken by the president's enemies, he has a duty, they
[2:07:12]do not become exempt from following the law merely by by their emnity to the president of the United States. As a matter of fact, the people who break the
[2:07:23]law are in emnity with the people of the United States whose expression of what is the law has been developed in this body in the Congress of the United States. So the we used to call people
[2:07:34]who break the law public enemies. >> Well, Mr. >> and so my view is that whether a person has been a political supporter or not of the president of the United States is
[2:07:44]not the determining factor regarding prosecution. It's whether a person has violated the law and in enforcing the law uh the attorney general is carrying
[2:07:54]out the will expressed in the Congress. >> Mr. Attorney General, you realize having sat here my time is very limited. Um that really isn't my question. My question is do you think it is
[2:08:04]appropriate for the president to call on the attorney general to prosecute one of his enemies and acting on that request of the president for the attorney
[2:08:14]general to do so? The president of the United States is the executive branch of the United States whose charge it is to enforce the laws of the United States.
[2:08:26]So is >> when the president of the United States asks that the laws be enforced, I don't see that as consistent with his duties or responsibilities if the laws were to be enforced
[2:08:36]differentially in which one of the things that scares me about as many laws as we have. You know, someone said all in order to run a police state, you only have to have one policeman, but if you have enough laws, you can go find
[2:08:48]something wrong with anybody you want. >> So, the president, I believe his job is to have an administration which calls for the enforcement of the laws of the
[2:08:59]United States without regard to the political preferences of the people who are perpetrators or accused individuals in the system. I I'm not I'm not sure that I understand your answer
[2:09:09]except you seem to accept the premise that it is okay now for a president to call the attorney general and ask him to prosecute his enemies. You don't seem to have a problem with that. If you do have
[2:09:20]a problem with that, please say so. >> Well, I believe the president needs to be an advocate of strong law enforcement. >> Okay. That that that is includ
[2:09:31]with respect Mr. Attorney General. If an enemy of the president goes out and conducts a violent crime, it's nothing wrong with the president calling the attorney general and say, "I hope you do
[2:09:42]something about this violent crime." >> And if the president's enemy takes a photo of seashells, you think it's appropriate >> to prosecute them. If senators make a video stating the plain law and
[2:09:54]constitution that you can disobey an illegal order, you think it's okay for the president or others to call on them to be prosecuted? I don't think so. I
[2:10:05]don't think so. And I don't think you would have done that as attorney general. I hope you wouldn't have. If you would have, you were not the attorney general I thought you were. I don't think it's appropriate for this
[2:10:15]attorney general or any other. And I don't remember seeing not notwithstanding the false equivalence I hear expressed so many times from my colleagues in this committee. I don't
[2:10:24]remember any Democratic president calling the attorney general and saying you need to prosecute him and you need to prosecute her and you need to prosecute them and you need to go after
[2:10:35]this organization. We have never seen that before or anything like it. Anything like it and generic statements, oh they all do it is is simply not the
[2:10:45]case. And by making that argument, it just it just further erodess the wall of independence that I'm sure attorney general, you remember after Watergate
[2:10:56]when because of the abuses of President Nixon, there was an effort to make the Justice Department independent from the White House. Not not completely independent in the sense that the
[2:11:06]president couldn't set general priorities. I want you to emphasize these cases and these cases, whether it's immigration cases or drug cases. That was always appropriate. But what
[2:11:16]has never been appropriate and particularly so after Watergate was for the attorney general of the United States to break that wall and call on his attorney general to prosecute his
[2:11:27]enemies. Uh and I would say even without any basis to do so and this justice department has been willing to do so and has gone before grand juries. And we
[2:11:39]have never, I think, seen the likes of this either in these high-profile cases where the grand jurors in some cases to a person have refused an indictment.
[2:11:49]How often did you have that happened to you, Mr. Turn? Last question I'll ask you. How often, Mr. Attorney General, did you seek an indictment as a prosecutor and have not a single grand
[2:11:59]juror vote to indict? Did that ever happen to you? >> I don't know. Uh, I just don't know. >> I thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Britt.
[2:12:10]>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, appreciate all of you being here today. Uh, witnesses taking your time, uh, to be in front of us. Uh, before I start, I want
[2:12:20]to say thank you to Attorney General Ascro for being here today and your service to our country um, both as Attorney General and as a United States Senator. And also, thank you for your
[2:12:31]kind words uh, about Senator Graham. Um, really appreciate it. Um, Mrs. Boss, um, thank you for sharing
[2:12:42]your story. Um, reliving the worst day in your in your life, being willing to
[2:12:51]tell your story so that people hear it. Really appreciate it, and I am so sorry for your loss. We're going to talk a little bit in a
[2:13:01]second about uh people needing to meet with survivors, which I completely agree with, and and victims. Um, let me ask
[2:13:11]you a question. Do you think that when someone is killed at the hands of an illegal alien that their
[2:13:22]representation in Congress, Senator, Congressman should meet with that family? >> Absolutely. Of course.
[2:13:34]>> It's my understanding that there are many angel families that cannot get meetings with their senators. Have you heard that? >> Absolutely. It happens all the time. As
[2:13:44]a matter of fact, the lovely and kind words from Senator Durban. I am his constituent. This is the first time I've ever spoken
[2:13:54]with him. I haven't spoken with him. He spoke to me. Well, I hope and I'm sure that uh I hope I I heard actually the ranking
[2:14:04]member yesterday talk about the need for the attorney general to meet with with victims which I support and I certainly am hopeful that he will and others uh
[2:14:16]will meet with you. >> Yes. So Sheridan Gorman
[2:14:25]and other names need to be said and I think the accountability that we have in this room for other people, we should be able to have it for this body as
[2:14:35]well. So I certainly hope that you get your face toface meeting um that you deserve. >> I would hope so. We've had several um laws introduced uh legislation
[2:14:46]introduced in this last session that have been completely ignored. Um and there's there hasn't been any way to really get in and talk to anybody. Um especially those who are opposed to
[2:14:58]those legislations for whatever reason. >> Well, thank you so much for for elevating your voice. Um
[2:15:06]Miss Bazinski, am I saying that right? >> It's Bensky. Yeah. >> Okay. Gosh, I'm going to have to try. >> Um, I am so sorry for everything that you've been through and thank you for
[2:15:18]your courage for for being here today and being able to elevate your voice. I completely support your quest to to be able to be heard um to obviously for
[2:15:30]victims to be protected and for us to pursue every uh every lead possible. And you know, I do believe after my conversations uh with the assistant
[2:15:40]attorney general that that he is going to pursue those. Let me ask you this. Did you were you asked um in the previous administration, did you ever have an opportunity to sit down with the
[2:15:51]then attorney general Merrick Garland? >> We did not. But um there were active investigations going on because of Gillan Maxwell's hearing. >> So but did you ever have a face tof face with with him?
[2:16:02]>> Um no. No. Did did y'all request a face tof face? This was before uh a time that I was comfortable coming forward. It was just this last September that a group of
[2:16:13]us felt like we had met each other. And a huge part of this has been finding the collective voice of a sisterhood and understanding that we weren't isolated in these experiences.
[2:16:24]>> Absolutely. And let me ask you this. Did you um were was there ever because I know that my um colleague Senator Blackburn really wanted to make sure that you all had an opportunity to tell
[2:16:35]your story. >> Are you aware of any Senate um hearings that were held uh under the previous administration that tried to
[2:16:45]>> I don't because again I just came forward really in September. >> Well, thank you for coming forward. I mean, thank you so much. Um,
[2:16:55]Mrs. Oyer, uh, obviously do we have Are you cutting people off right on time today? >> What? >> Are you cutting people off right on time
[2:17:07]today or are people getting to go way over? >> I I've been too liberal, but go ahead. Go ahead and ask one more question. >> Just let me ask one more question, please, sir. I appreciate it. Um, after
[2:17:19]you were fired from DOJ, uh, you had an independent media company and a Substack platform and you had the, you know, lawyer or Ora brand name and the the
[2:17:30]hoodies that said Hiredwired to stand up to bullies. I I'm I'm wondering, you know, it's my understanding that as a pardon attorney during the the Biden
[2:17:41]administration, you recommended actual commutations for Daniel Troyer and Ricardo Sanchez Jr. who were sentenced to death in 2009 after executing a
[2:17:51]family of four on the side of a highway. Is that true? >> Uh ma'am, I think you were not in the room when several of your colleagues asked me about those >> This is my turn to ask a question. So,
[2:18:03]is that true? said then remains which is that I'm not able to talk about the clemency advice that I provided to the White House because of >> well the victims included a four-year-old and a three-year-old boy
[2:18:13]who died um while cradled in the arms of their mother who was trying to shield them. Um those two little boys were shot 10 times and their mother was shot 11
[2:18:23]times and their father was shot five times. So, I appreciate the grace on getting to go over, but that doesn't sound like to me that you stand up to bullies. It sounds like to me you stand
[2:18:35]with them. Thank you, >> Senator Bulman. >> Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I want to thank all of you for being here.
[2:18:46]uh this day of the hearings often gets less attention but it is very important to us and you are performing a very important
[2:18:56][clears throat] service. Uh I particularly want to thank uh Miss Bensky and Miss Boss for sharing your stories and reliving
[2:19:08]a lot of the pain that you have been through. Uh, Miss Bensky, I don't know whether you were here yesterday when I asked
[2:19:19]uh acting attorney general Blanch to apologize and I'd just be interested in your reaction to his response. >> Yeah, I think it was the most that we've
[2:19:31]gotten from him. Um, and that was a moment where there was a a touch of humanity to say that we do understand that there was in fact failure here because he's been on the record multiple times saying that nothing was
[2:19:42]mishandled. Um, and as a survivor who literally saw nude images of, you know, friends and and had my own information
[2:19:52]exposed all over the place. um you know to tell the world that this had not been mishandled was just so absolutely
[2:20:01]egregious. Um like anybody from here to Mars and no matter what political affiliation you're with can see that like your government should not be, you know, sending out nude photos of you. Um
[2:20:12]obviously. Yeah. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh very well said. Let me let me ask you a general question. Um, and you don't have to give me an
[2:20:24]exhaustive answer uh today, and I know there are others in the room who may want to answer this question as well, but what should we
[2:20:33]demand of the Department of Justice to make things right, to make things better? Yeah, we've always just been looking for accountability and for this
[2:20:44]case to be handled correctly because even from the very start of this case, we have not seen it handled the way anybody would normally prosecute
[2:20:53]something. So, we are looking to get to the bottom of why our perpetrators were never held to account. How does the largest sex trafficking ring in this
[2:21:04]country exist when only two people have been found even remotely? I mean, Epstein's dead, but Maxwell is the only one who has been held to any sort of account, and she's in a lower um you
[2:21:15]know, a lower security penitentiary at this point. So, um you know, we I think we are we are owed answers and we are owed, you know, justice for us, we get that question a lot of what does justice
[2:21:26]look like? I think yes, the culture shift is part of it, but really like having your government stand up for you and stand up for what's right and um you know there's there's a chilling effect
[2:21:37]that it sends to survivors everywhere when their government is outing their personal information. Other survivors are not going to want to come forward, right? And so we need to make sure that
[2:21:48]we are getting all the information with these cases. So I think um we really just hope that the government will take it seriously and start investigations >> accountability.
[2:21:59]>> Accountability. Yeah. Always. >> And I think a working hypothesis here is that accountability is difficult when rich and powerful people are potentially.
[2:22:10]>> It's always been the vulnerable versus power for this case for most sex trafficking cases or all sex trafficking cases really. Um, and it is about how the powerful consistently exploit the
[2:22:22]vulnerable. And that is what we see a lot. I mean, I have a six-year-old son and I teach him that accountability matters every single day. And I hold him to account. Why can't we hold our
[2:22:33]government to account? >> Well, I will just say uh your voice and face has been a very powerful antidote.
[2:22:43]>> Thank you. to the wealth and power that may be brought to bear here and I hope that this forum will encourage you and others to come forward as you've done so courageously.
[2:22:55]>> Thank you so much. Yeah, I do also want to mention that Virginia Jaffrey has been monumental in all this and I think it would be um unfair to not name her because her deposition holds the key to
[2:23:06]quite a few things. So if you started her deposition, you can start really investigating. >> Thank you. Um, Miss Oyer, uh, I want to
[2:23:17]ask you about the pardon that I mentioned yesterday. I asked Todd Blanch about it. Uh, David Gentilly,
[2:23:27]sentenced to seven years for a multi-million dollar fraud scheme that uh, involved a seven-year sentence. He
[2:23:38]served 12 days of it before he was pardoned. He boasted to his fellow inmates that he was going to pay $2.5 million
[2:23:49]to someone to get him out. Father Frank Man told one of his parishioners
[2:23:58]that he had talked to President Trump to ga get David Gentilly out of prison. These are facts that have been publicly
[2:24:07]reported. The investigation into the potential impropriy of this pardon was
[2:24:15]shut down allegedly by high officials in the Department of Justice talking to the US attorney in the Southern District of
[2:24:24]New York, Joe Nella. I know you're not familiar with the facts. I'm not going to ask you whether you believe that
[2:24:34]that reporting is true. Mr. Blanch never denied it. He basically said, "Well, it was a leak." Sometimes leaks act actually involve truthful
[2:24:45]information. But the point that I think is lost here is that that pardon involved $16 million in forfeite
[2:24:56]to innocent victims, many of them retirees who were depending on that money to survive. and he will no
[2:25:05]longer be required to do restitution. So his ill gotten gains, some of which
[2:25:14]he may have used to pay for his clemency, so to speak, are not going to go back to the people
[2:25:24]who were cheated, his victim, as a result of that pardon and clemency. Uh so I guess my question to you with
[2:25:36]this introduction is essentially are victims and survivors often revictimized
[2:25:46]by pardons that are unjust or unfair to them? And shouldn't we have them given a voice? I recognize the
[2:25:58]Constitution gives the president unlimited authority and it's one of those powers that's unchecked rarely. But isn't there a need to give the
[2:26:08]victims a voice in this process? >> Yes, Senator. The millions of dollars that Mr. Gentile stole from his investors unfortunately are a drop in the bucket of the restitution that
[2:26:19]victims have been deprived of as a result of President Trump's pardons. He has forgiven over a billion dollars in restitution that is owed to victims of fraud as well as money that is owed to
[2:26:30]taxpayers by people who committed white collar crimes and who have served in many cases none of their sentence and repaid none of their money. That is not consistent with the regulations that the
[2:26:41]Justice Department has in place for evaluating applications for pardons. The Justice Department historically has looked to see that people have repaid their debts before recommending
[2:26:50]clemency. But this president is using clemency in a strategic transactional way to forgive huge amounts of debts owed to taxpayers and crime victims.
[2:27:01]>> Senator Derby. >> Mr. Chairman, uh, in closing here, I would like to make, uh, a couple points. >> Please do. >> First, I understand that the senator
[2:27:11]from Alabama mentioned my name while I stepped out. Uh, Miss Boss, anxious to meet with you. I hope we can do it soon, maybe even right after this because I
[2:27:22]know it was a hardship for you to make this journey here to testify from Illinois. And I don't want you to have to wait to see me. Uh, I want to
[2:27:32]meet with you now and we we can talk as soon as this meeting adjourns if it's okay with you if it if it fits in your schedule. Let me say a word about [clears throat]
[2:27:42]Miss Sawyer. I'm glad that uh the senator from New Jersey said what he did about you. Uh I believe the fact of the matter is that
[2:27:53]most of the things that were uh brought up today in this hearing about your activity related to a decision by the Biden administration as they were
[2:28:02]leaving office uh to uh turn death penalty convictions into life imprisonment instead. Is [clears throat] that
[2:28:12]correct? >> That's that's right, sir. that reflects I I'll say this, you don't have to comment on this. I believe that
[2:28:22]reflects the President Joe Biden's uh opposition to the death penalty. I share that opposition. There are people in the audience who agree with me and some who
[2:28:32]vehemently disagree with me, but America is divided in this issue. I didn't have this position my entire political career, but toward the end of it, I've come to the conclusion, as Justice
[2:28:43]Blackman did at the end of his conclusion of serving on the Supreme Court, that he no longer wants to tinker with the machinery of death. The fact of the matter is there are clear cases
[2:28:54]where one can argue a death penalty and there are cases which we have found were wrongly decided and people uh faced a death penalty or worse until evidence
[2:29:05]and other things were discovered at the end. Uh that is my position. That was Joe Biden's position. That's why the cases which were brought up today uh are
[2:29:15]so serious. Uh, and I believe that you were doing your job as a pardon attorney to advise him as to his decision. But is it not true that the final decision on
[2:29:27]the disposition of these inmates was the decision of the president of the United States? >> That's absolutely correct, Senator. >> So, if you want to take exception to Joe
[2:29:37]Biden and his position, be my guest. But to blame you for those, I think goes beyond your responsibility as pardon attorney. Uh, and I I will just say I
[2:29:47]know the controversy behind this issue, but uh I I feel that that's what led him to his conclusion. Uh, Miss Binsky, thank you for bringing your friends with
[2:29:57]you today. It is great to see them and I I hope that what you heard from Senator Tillis is a promising possibility that he said he would not I hope I'm saying
[2:30:09]this correctly. He wouldn't vote to confirm this uh nomination until there's been an actual meeting. That would be a dramatic piece work of progress for us
[2:30:20]to reach that point. And because you had the courage to stand up, not only you but your friends, uh we we have achieved that. I believe I hope that's the fact. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[2:30:31]>> Yeah. Uh, thanks to all of our witnesses for being here today and for traveling the long distances some of you have had
[2:30:40]to go. We're grateful that you did it. Uh, for all the members of this committee, written questions to these witnesses here are due on Wednesday,
[2:30:52]July 22 this year at 5:00 p. M the hearing is adjourned. >> Yeah. Thank you.
[2:31:10]>> See if the finance committee still meeting. >> Okay.