the clerk: ms. klobuchar, aye. the clerk: mr. carper, aye. the clerk: mr. sullivan, no.

the clerk: mrs. britt, no.

the clerk: mr. merkley, aye. the clerk: mr. ossoff, aye.

the clerk: mrs. capito, no. mr. boozman, no. ms. murkowski, no.

the clerk: mrs. murray, aye. mr. manchin, no.

the clerk: mr. warnock, aye. the clerk: ms. stabenow, aye.

the clerk: mr. menendez, aye. mr. van hollen, aye. the clerk: ms. rosen, aye.

the clerk: mr. lujan, aye.

the clerk: mr. hickenlooper, aye. ms. cantwell, aye. ms. duckworth, aye. >> the clerk:

the clerk: mr. budd, no.

the clerk: mr. kelly, aye.

vote:

the clerk: mr. warner, aye.

the clerk: mr. kaine, aye.

the clerk: mr. whitehouse, aye. the clerk: mr. booker, aye.

the presiding officer: the yeas are 50. the nays are 45. the motion is agreed to.dchendoe nomination. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, rachel bloomekatz, of ohio, to be united states circuit judge for the sixth circuit.

mr. cornyn: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senior senator from texas. mr. cornyn: mr. president, are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: no, we are not. mr. cornyn: thank you, mr. president. under president biden's leadership, the united states has shattered virtually every record in the book when it comes to uncontrolled illegal migration flows. we we've seen record -- we've seen historic numbers crossing the border. the busiest day came before the public health title that was imposed as a result of the pandemic. the busiest day came just two months ago just before that title was lifted or expired, when border patrol apprehended

10,300 migrants a day. the pace of migration exceeded anything we've ever experienced under previous presidents, and of course, law enforcement not knowing what would happen once title 42 expired, they braced for the worst. federal officials and immigration experts predicted an increase in border crossings when it was lifted. the department of homeland security expected up to 18,000 migrants a day. just to remind you at its height it was 10,300, but even president biden's department of homeland security said that could go to 18,000 now that title 4 # 2 -- 42 went away. it's not that the president and homeland security don't have the tools necessary to control immigration, but they have the

lack or will to do so. unfortunately that surge that couldn't happen didn't happen and we're left with a lot of opinions and guesses as to why that's true. one possibility is the drop could be seasonal, it is really hot, there were triple-digit numbers, and traveling across the south range of south texas, can be quite dangerous. if you went to border patrol 70 miles from the border, where the coyotes, the smugglers will tell them to get out of the vehicle and give them a jug of water and power bar and tell them they will meet them on the other side. unfortunately, many of those migrants don't make it because they simply die from exposure to

the elements, particularly after experiencing a long trek from their homes. so we don't know, whether due to the hot weather, whether in the fall and spring, these numbers will jack back up again, so the the -- this could be temporary. some are waiting to see what happens under the new bored policies. we are dealing with a shrewd operators. they understand that a massive flood of migrants may well trigger some reaction from the administration and authorities and they may be just metering the flow of migrants across the border so as to not attract undue attention. it could be this lull in numbers is a gimmicky accounting.

the administration has set up what it calls new legal pathways in order to reduce the number of illegal migrants it encounters. in other words, it's quit counting some of the migrants that come across the border. for example, the bierntion is part of this program -- as part of this program -- the biden administration said as part of this program we're going to allow 20,000 migrants to come into the united states and give them a work permit and make this for the next two years. the problem is there's nothing temporary about temporary status and, in fact, this is part of the gimmicky accounting you simply subtract 360,000 migrants admitted under this new program under the course of a year, and it makes your numbers look a whole lot better than they really are. it remains to be seen whether this program is legal at all. i can't imagine congress, which

has been given the main authority to deal with immigration law matters, whether this could be considered within the president's authority or power, but that remains to be decided perhaps in a court of law. but i suspect that this drop in encounters is a combination -- is a result of a combination of factors. in my own personal opinion, living in texas, having spent a lot of time at the border and talking to a lot of experts that serve there, like the border patrol, my own view this is not likely to last congress, this lull. but it's long enough for some of the mainstream media to accept what the administration is selling, which is that their new border policy is solving the problem. i'll go back and say what i said earlier, which is even at 3,360 a day, that's more than three

times what jeh johnson, the former secretary of homeland security said was a problem. back in that day, if there were 1,000 a day, he said that would be a serious problem. but the biden administration has no problem with more than three times the number of migrants currently being encountered at the border even if it is temporary. well, you can see the -- the administration trying to spike the football. last may, the department of homeland security said the drop in numbers is proof -- proof that the administration's plan is working as intended. they boasted that the number of unlawful entries between the ports of entry had declined more than 70% since title 42 ended. well, that may be true, but it's tough to brag when the starting point is an all-time record that

happened on this administration's watch. in other words, the argument of the administration seems to be, well, it's been as high as 10,000 that day, so now that it's down to only 3,400 a day, it's not as bad as it could be, and let's pat ourselves on the back and say job well done. well, four years ago, in july of 2019, customs and border protection apprehended 2 -- before that we saw fewer than 1,300. in july, before that, only about 800 migrants were apprehended per day. so in other words, the argument the administration -- is -- is making and the celebratory of

the shame -- champagne cork is, i think an illusion. we went from 1,017 to 28,300 day in 2023. the biden administration wants to argue this is a good thing. they're supposed to applaud. stand up and applaud the biden administration's failed efforts to deal wp uncontrolled immigration and flow of drugs across the border. as i said, former secretary of homeland security jeh johnson once said that even a thousand a day overwhelms the system and we're currently operating at 3,000 a day. so even attorney general merrick garland acknowledges that flooding the border, obviously that is a moneymaker for the

cartels that smuggle had these people from their country of origin into the united states, that overwhelming the border patrol and requiring some of the border patrol, in my experience as many as 40% of the online border patrol officers have to go to the -- off the front line to take care of the migrants to support them, feed them, clothe them and take care of the unaccompanied children. which means they're not on the front line when the drug smugglers bring the drugs through. this is a pretty shrewd business model and the biden administration is accepting it hook, line, and sinker. when immigration levels are high, as they are, it impacts all of our missions at the southern border, even it those that have nothing to do with

migration. since president biden took office, customs and border security has seized more than 1,600 pounds of drug, including fentanyl. we talked about this in the judiciary committee today and the scourge of fentanyl and the fact that last year alone it took 71,000 american lives, unfortunately many of those lives were the age of some of our pages an high school students who thought they were taking something relatively innocuous only to find out it was a counterfeit drug laced with fentanyl which ended their lives tragically and prepla tiewrly. some would say -- some would say we're stopping the drugs from coming across. which i suggest is looking at this the wrong way. we ought to look at the volume of drugs seized and recognize there's a whole lot more that's

gotten through. just during the biden administration there's been what the border patrol calls one and a half million gotaways. these are people who are not turning themselves in claiming asylum. these are people fleeing from law enforcement who are being picked up on cameras and other sensors but evading attention by the border patrol. ip can't buy the argument that these people are up to good. i think they're up to no good. they're either people with convicted criminal records or other law enforcement problems or simply drug mules carrying more of this poison across the border. i am great -- grateful to our hardworking officers and eanlts who -- agents, but we know this does not tell the full story. these are only the drugs they were able to identify and stop

given the fact that countless agents were taken off the front lines in order to care for the flood of humanity, what president obama said, even in smaller numbers, he called it a humanitarian crisis, there's no question that more drugs have slipped through the cracks. while the agents are transporting migrants, can clears a highway across the border to smuggle fentanyl, heroin and who knows what else across the border. there's no way to know what we don't know, but the fact that we're losing more than 1,800 americans a year is proof that we are not successful at interdicting the drugs that come across the border. that seems obvious. one of the many victims of fentanyl poisoning is a 17-year-old from texas named kevin. last fall two weeks before the start of the school year, his

senior year, kevin took a pill he thought would help him fall asleep. little did he know it was laced with a deadly dose of fentanyl, and he didn't wake up the next morning. his momg shannon -- his mom shannon found him pt next morning -- the next morning too late. like many family members who lost a loved one to fentanyl, sharon and her husband darren are on a mission to end fentanyl. in another area of texas, a father who lost a young daughter gave me a bracelet which says, among other things, one pill can kill. that is what public health officials are taking to make sure that our children understand there is nothing like an illicit drug.

when i spoke with sharon and daren in february, sharon was adamant about doing more to stop fentanyl from entering our country in the first place. the most critical place to do that is where it crosses our southern border from mexico, where it comes from. the vast majority of fentanyl comes to the united states from mexico made from chemical precursors imported from china. if we're going to have a shot at ending the fentanyl epidemic, we have to go to the source rather than just deal with the symptoms. this morning as the presiding officer knows in judiciary committee, we talked about people selling drugs using social media platforms and certainly that is something we all abhor and ought to do what we can to stop. and we'll be debating that more. but as important a step that is, it's only one brick in the wall. it's only a baby step in terms

of dealing with the fentanyl crisis because we have to stop it at the source, not deal with it once it's made its way into our country. until that happen, law enforcement and drug treatment facilities across this nation will be fighting a losing battle. shannon told me that when it comes to the border, the biden administration is failing, and i agree with her. president biden is completely abdicated his border security responsibilities for more than two and a half years leading to catastrophic and deadly consequences. 5.4 million border crossings. in addition to that, another 1.5 million got-aways for almost seven million mai grants transiting our southern -- migrants transiting our southern border. 108,000 drug overdoses. 85,000 children lost, lost after

having been placed with sponsors in the interior of the united states by the biden administration. when officials tried to contact those sponsors to check on the welfare of those children, there was no answer. and there was also no follow-up by the biden administration. we don't know whether these kids are going to school, whether they're getting the health care they need, whether they're being forced in involuntary servitude, whether they're being sexually abused or neglected. we just don't know. and the biden administration cannot tell you, and that, mr. president, is completely unacceptable. if any official did that to an american citizen child, they would be prosecuted and i believe convicted of child endangerment, human trafficking, and other sorts of offenses. but because these are migrant children, the biden administration says hey, we've done our job. we put them with sponsors.

now it's somebody else's responsibility. well, there is nobody else to deal with that. the child protective services in new jersey, in texas, and elsewhere are already overwhelmed. and so to say to the states now it's your job to protect these children once we've allowed 300,000 of them into the united states and placed them with sponsors because of misguided border policies is a complete akd indication of -- abdication of responsibility. well, two and a half years of failed border policies cannot be erased by a couple of months of reduced migration. it is premature to say the least to declare victory, to spike the ball, to pop a cork. the fact that we are not currently experiencing record breaking migration levels is admittedly a step in the right

direction, but it's not a victory. there's still a crisis occurring. the number ever border crossings is still historically high. law enforcement remains under tremendous strain, and the southern border is far from secure. if the administration spent half as much time trying to solve the problem as it does trying to spin it, we'd be in a much better place. mr. president, i have to say that there are those of us here, the presiding officer included, who would like to be part of the solution. we've asked the administration. we've asked the chairman of the judiciary committee, senator durbin to bring legislation to the judiciary committee which has jurisdiction over these matters. give senators on the republican side and democratic side a chance to debate it and amend it and pass a bill out of the judiciary committee that would address this crisis. we've asked the majority leader,

senator schumer, to encourage the chairman of the judiciary committee to bring a bill out of the committee and bring it to the floor. let us do our job. there's nobody else to fix this problem eastern us, those of us who have asked the enorm us privilege of -- enormous privilege of serving our constituents here in the nation's greatest dlibbive -- deliberative body the united states senate or the house of representatives. but all we get are crickets. i keep asking myself, mr. president, what will it take? what will it take to get the president's attention? what will it take to get the attention of our democratic colleagues who are in leadership positions and who are able to make this -- put this on the agenda and do something about it? obviously 6.9 million migrants coming across the border the last two and a half years isn't enough to get their attention. obviously 108,000 dead americans

is not enough to get their attention. 300,000 unaccompanied children, lost to the administration who can't tell you where they are or what's happening to them has so far not gotten their attention. but it should get our attention. we are in a position of responsibility, given the privilege of serving in this body and in the united states congress. and we ought to do something about it. so if it doesn't start at the white house, if it doesn't start in the leadership here in the united states senate, rank and file members, rank and file members of the senate can do something about it. and we can force the leadership at the white house and in the congress to accept the responsibilities and do something about the devastation and death that's occurring as a result of these uncontrolled borders. mr. president, i yield the

floor. and i'd note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. the clerk: ms. baldwin. quorum call:

bipartisan vote. we're encouraging filing

amendments for the managers package before the close of business today. senator mcconnell, the committee's and i will have our teams working over the weekend to see what we can include in the package of amendments. undoubtedly come hundreds of amendments will be filed to this important piece of legislation. i'm hopeful all committee chairs and committee rakers will work together in good faith. obviously both sides want to amendment votes. just like we have in recent efforts i'm willing to ensure we consider and vote a reasonable number of amendments. no, senator wants a dilatory process. i know senators reid and wicker have done such a fine job putting together a bipartisan bill will work with senator mcconnell and me and we will develop a list of amendment votes and hopefully can proceed from there. there are important issues i believe we must address while we're on the floor. we must consider chinese government competition package. we must consider the australia

united kingdom and united states submarine deal. i know there will be more to do here next week and i look forward to the debate on the floor. now on ai. last night in for my colleagues we will hold our third all sin everything onto a eye on wednesday, july 26. our first briefing focus on the state of ai as it stands today. our second briefing held earlier this week was a classified presentation on ai's national security implications. our third briefing, return to the future. we will hear from federal researchers and developers about where ai is headed in the years to come and how it will continue to change our world. i encourage all members to attend this important briefing. i am also pleased to announce that there are presenters that they will be rick stevens from the department of energy is argonne national laboratory, doctor -- from the, head of the

nsa, he's known as patch. it's easier to say. and dr. kathleen hicks sure from the information innovation office at darpa, the defense advanced research projects he agency. our moderator will be doctor rosa griffis member of the national security commission on artificial intelligence and president of dakota state university. so it's a broad range of presenters from academic defense energy and scientific backgrounds. it will be great discussion and a truly important one because senators have no time to waste learning as much about ai as possible. ai is going to be a regular part of our life some here on out. rapid changes may at times seem frightening but if applied correctly ai promises to transform life on earth for the better. there are real risks, to. we must now work to anticipate the risks, mitigated them and

ensure that ai innovation is safe in the decades to come. so i encourage all senators to attend a briefing on the 26. i think are presenters will join us that day and i thank my colleagues, particularly senators round, heinrich and yelling for working together as a team and putting this briefing together. now on inflation, yesterday we learned that inflation slowed down for the 12 month in a row, down to 3%, 3% the lowest that it's been in years. this morning, as american families stop for gas on way to work or check their pocketbooks and go to the supermarket they can continue to see throughout the country that we are turning the corner. they are seeing more money in their pockets. they are seeing inflation cooled down and they are seeing wages continue continue to go up. listen to this. this is important. wage growth is now significantly

above inflation for the first time since march of 2021. this is the work of the democratic agenda in action, of president biden's could work. lower cost for families, higher wages for workers and billions s and millions of new jobs created. ..

quorum call:

berlin really is at a turning point. i'm hopeful germany defense commitment will be realized,

that promised funds will go under contract will repair is absent for military and german businesses will diversify their investments away from increasingly risky bets. in the prc. the united states are part needs no convention that china poses a singular threat. in fact, clear majority of americans support expanding our deterrence in the indo-pacific. but if you want to succeed at the big things, like outcompeting china, we need to get our ducks in a row on our most basic governing responsibility. providing for common defense. hard power is essential. more so than any number of that rocks politicians hold up as helpful to compete with china. hard power is the currency of

geopolitics. national defense authorization act are and you must pass opportunity to assert national security priorities is finally before us. when it comes to actually delivering a robust funding our armed forces need, the biden administration has left our work cut out for us. it's a defense budget was plainly insufficient to meet the growing security challenges we face. we need to invest in the cutting edge capabilities that will make our adversaries think twice, and we need to rebuild the industrial base that keeps america's arsenal and the arsenal of democracy, our allies, stocked. there is no time to rest on our laurels.

a member of the energy and commerce and natural resources committee also the chair of the conservative climate caucus,

thanks for your time. >> good morning. good to be with you. >> there are many debates now the congress is back before the august break about the status of spending bills. what are your concerns that getting all that done in a timely manner? >> anytime you're talk but to turn the matter with congress you should be concerned but i will tell you over and over again this congress we have met tight deadlines. it's been difficult each time but we've always got it across the finish line at a think we will with this as well. >> host: one of the issues being reported concerns that some republicans looking for lower levels of spending that initially agreed on with the debt ceiling bill. are you part of the group of what your concerns about that being a hold as for passing appropriations? >> guest: i would say i am part of the group that is most like my district, very concerned about government spending that wants to make sure we have been responsible, fiscal responsible in all that we do. this is a good debate we're having. it's an important debate for the country. >> host: as far as the lower levels what exactly are you

looking for? >> guest: i think the specific group you are looking for is referring to get back to 2022 levels and i think we've made a good swing at that but they would like us to go even further. >> host: how far is too far do you think? >> guest: well listen, we know the government doesn't have a revenue problem. it has aof spending problem. i think it's there everything is evaluated and we didn't be asking those hard questions. that'sju our job in congress. it's also matter of timing at how quickly we make those cuts and a painful they are. i particularly in tune with that but i want to make agencies not to suppress american speakers and american viewpoints that they disagree with. this seems obvious. the first amendment would mean little if government simply used big tech to get around it. who disagrees with this basic principle, that government dreakd scens -- directed

censorship is un-american and unconstitutional? i can tell you who disagrees with that -- the biden administration. the justice department almost immediately asked the corporate of appeals to stay this ruling, to allow it to continue to censor americans while it appeals. in recent years, increasing evidence has emerged regarding a disturbing alliance in which big government and big tech work together to sensor speech they don't want -- to censor speech they don't want americans to see nor to hear. published e-mails reveal the extent to which twitter worked to prevent americans from seeing a new york post news story weeks before the 2020 election. the extent of the suppression was breathtaking. indeed, the twitter executives locked the twitter account of the white house press secretary simply for mentioning this

"new york post" story. facebook admits that it likewise limited the spread of this story based on a general warning from the fbi about it being propaganda. this is even though the fbi had verified the authenticity of the laptop in question. this censorship activity carried over into the biden administration. in 2021, then-press secretary jen psaki stated that the government is in, quote, regular touch with social media platforms and, quote, flagging problematic posts for facebook that spread what she called disinformation. meta, the parent company of facebook and instagram, disclosed it had communicated with more than 30 federal officials about content moderation on its platform, including senior employees at the fda, u.s. election assistance commission, and of course the white house. youtube, which is owned by

google, disclosed that it had such communications with 11 federal officials. the disturbing truth is that when biden administration officials don't like what americans are saying, they simply reach out to their allies at big tech to silence it. government, using its power to coerce censorship of disfavored information, is what the chinese communist party or the north korean regime would do. it's not only fundamentally un-american, most often it's unconstitutional. the other day a federal court confirmed that the government cannot use big tech as a tool to end-run the first amendment. the judge wrote that the case, and i quote, arguably involves the most massive attack against free speech in united states history. americans deserve to know when their government and big tech platforms are trying to manipulate what they can say or what they can read.

i introduced legislation last congress and again this past may to require this transparency. the disclose government censorship act would require government officials publicly disclose communicates -- imhiewrkses with big tech regarding act -- communications with big tech. this protects legitimate law enforcement or national security activity. our nation was founded on the idea that protecting citizen speech from censorship, under the first amendment, would protect the people's right to govern themselves by preventing government from controlling information and ideas. americans deserve to know when their government is covertly trying to accomplish what the first amendment pro liberties -- first amendment prohibits. as if in legislative session, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on homeland security and governmental affairs be discharged from further consideration of s. 1672, and the senate proceed to its

immediate consideration. i further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. peters: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from michigan. mr. peters: mr. president, reserving the right to on. i certainly appreciate senator hagerty's concerns. the freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of the press are all the very found anxiouses of our nation -- foundations of our nation. i'm also concerned about the power of large tech companies, who we must, must hold accountable. the homeland security committee, which i chair, has held a series of bipartisan oversight hearings on social media, including bringing in top executives to testify and to answer tough questions. i'm deeply concerned, however, that the legislation we are

discussing today could have serious, unintended consequences, including undermining our national security. this bill could damage our national intelligence and law enforcement operations by requiring agencies to disclose every interaction with a social media platform about the activity of a terrorist or a criminal on their platform. this can involve sensitive, ongoing investigations and enforcement action, including the terrorist use of social media to recruit americans to carry out attacks against our homeland. the bill could also chill effects by executive and legislative branch employees who are working to address online threats and hate speech directed at americans in communities all across our nation. in addition to creating new red tape before staff trying to address these very difficult

issues, it threatens them with a year in jail for not meeting paperwork deadlines. certainly, we must all protect our nation's first amendment and the right to speak freely. however, this bill will not accomplish that goal while potentially undermining our national security. mr. president, therefore, i object. mr. hagerty: mr. president. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. hagerty: mr. president, i appreciate the sentiments my democratic colleague expressed and very much appreciate his work and concerns with respect to big tech. i share those concerns. i share optimism today we'll find common ground to work together. the legislation i put forward simply allows americans to see when the government is trying to censor them. my colleague suggests this is because of concern over protection for law enforcement or national security work. i'd like to say this, my lotion contains appropriate exceptions

to protect legitimate law enforcement or national security activity and preserve the confidentiality of those communications. in assuming that the details of those protections are my colleague's only concern, i'm happy to work with my colleague to address those and ensure the core of this legislation, which requires disclosure of government censorship efforts, is quickly enacted. i hope senator peters and i can work together and do this, because it's too significant to ignore. our government, at the end of the day, works for the american people. to ensure this continues, the first amendment prohibits the government from controlling what americans can say or read. now government is using big tech to accomplish such censorship. without disclosure of such communications americans' free speech rights become a dead letter, because there's no way to address improper government efforts to ban speech. my legislation would preserve these rights by allowing americans to see when government is trying to silence them. it's a basic element of self-government, and i look forward to working with senator peters and his committee to try

to make this something that can be acceptable to all. thank you.

and related issues. thanks for giving a short time. register today and here's the headline. pushing back against as lawmakers assail the fbi. what was expected, director wray walking into what he walked into the hearing yesterday? >> it was his first hearing before this committee that has promised to conduct far-reaching investigation of federal law enforcement and what chairman jim jordan called the weaponization of law enforcement and fbi specifically. he was bracing i think for very combative hearing and that

certainly promised to be true we saw republican lawmakers repeatedly interrupting him and continuing to give him this very aggressive drilling as part of his first oversight hearing. since investigations of trump, since trumpist been charged and hunter biden took a plea deal. >> host: as far as a term weaponization how do republicans apply to the fbi? >> guest: specifically republicans are think the fbi inappropriate is targeting their party and conservatives and trying to silence conservative voices and specifically supporters of trump. >> host: what do they present as evidence? >> guest: there were a number of different things. yesterday we covered a lot of ground. they talked about, in addition to the investigations of trump and what they described as a two-tiered justice system, feste block parties, in one example in baltimore it turned to a tragic gun violence in our

backyards and across the country. it's been a deadly summer so far and we've only made it to the middle of july. in my home state of maryland in salas barry -- salisbury a 14-year-old was killed and six others juris during an overblock party. it came after a horrific mass shooting on july 1 at an annual block party for the south baltimore neighborhood which claimed the lives of a young man and a young woman while injuring 28 others, many of whom are teenagers. a 20-year-old died at an yeah hospital and -- an at area hospital and an 18-year-old was pronounced dead at the scene. weeks before the shooting gonzalez graduated from high school in anne arundel county. gonzalez decided to enroll at anne arundel community college to stay closer to her family

according to news reports. now she is dead. i join governor wes moore and baltimore mayor scott in a visit to the neighborhood on independence day. as i said at that time this is a dark moment for our community and our country. people who shouldn't have guns have guns, and they're causing i are i reversible harm. public safety, as always, must be our top priority. sympathy and words are not enough. a comprehensive approach to reducing violence includes cracking down on illegal guns, many of which flow from other states into maryland. we must also enact stricter regulations on legal gun purchases. mayor scott of baltimore summarized the need for action, and i quote him. we're talking about a country where it's easier for a 14-year-old kid to order pieces to put a gun together and go out and use it and commit a crime than it is for me to get a

claritin-d from cvs. that's what we should be talking about in this country. maryland has been working on this. governor moore enacted legislation regarding safety rules regarding carrying concealed weapons, restricted carrying firearms in sensitive locations such as schools and health care facilities, strengthening safe storage requirements for firearms and raise the age from 18 to 21 to qualify for a handgun permit. following the brook land shooting mayor scott shoot up a coordinated response within the community under the auspices of the mayor i don't haves office of neighborhood -- mayor i don't haves office. this response focused on addressing trauma and stabilizing the neighborhood in partnership with community-based organizations and city agencies. our federal partners also have been working to make baltimore safer. with a focus on reducing violent crime and the homicide rate,

particularly gun crimes. the u.s. attorney for the district of maryland noted that the overall homicide and nonfatal shootings in baltimore are continuing to trend down significantly. while this is little consolation to the victims of the recent shootings and their families, as of the half year mark in 2023, homicides were down over 22% and nonfatal shootings were down over 12%. in congress, our maryland delegation has worked to increase resources and investments to improve public safety in baltimore and throughout our state. this has included direct resources to local governments, community organizations, colleges, universities, and others. i have introduced bipartisan legislation to end violence and protect crime victims and sponsored legislation to boost federal assistance for state and local witness protection programs. and i continue to urge the u.s. justice department to provide additional resources to combat

violent crime in baltimore and throughout the state of maryland. it is important to understand that the horrific and seemingly endless instances of gun violence are not limited to our state. sadly, over the july 4 holiday, there were at least 538 shootings in which 199 people were shot and killed and 520 were shot and wounded across a total of 43 states and the district of columbia. mr. president, this is a national problem that must be addressed at the federal level in conjunction with state and local measures. president biden is correct that we have the power to make a change and end the cycle of violence caused by guns in our society. he recently stated that as we have seen over the last few days, much more must be done across america to address the epidemic of gun violence that is tearing our communities apart. when i heard that half the

victims in the brookland shooting were under 189 -- 18 years old it brought back memories of last summer where a shooter in texas killed 19 children and 2 teachers. following that tragedy congress formed a bipartisan working group and within a month of the shoot passed the bipartisan safer communities act. president biden signed this legislation into law which finally broke the decade-long gridlock on gun safety legislation. it is already making a difference with increased funding for community violence intervention and prevention initiatives, including some under way in baltimore. the new law strengthens protections for victims of domestic violence by adding abusers to background checks. it creates a new source of funding for states to implement red flag laws which helps to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous individuals who should not have access to a firearm. it cracks down on criminals and

makes clear which gun sellers need to register, conduct background checks and keep appropriate records. it also strengthens the background check process for those under 21 years of age seeking to buy firearms by ensuring that officials have access to juvenile and mental health records. importantly, in july of 2022, shortly after the passing of this historic gun safety legislation, the senate acknowledged, unfortunately it was on a party-line vote, confirmed steven deddleback to be the director of atf. the atf has not had a perm nannette senate confirmed -- permanent senate confirmed director since 2018. the a atf now has a permanent leader in place who can carry out the mission to stem the illegal use of trafficking of firearms among other important

priorities. mr. president, there is no single solution to this deadly problem. we've got to attack this from all directions until our children and our neighborhoods stop being shot. in addition to battling the scourge of illegal weapons and the changing mind-sets of our community level, there has to be, we've got to end the kneejerk reaction to every disagreement trying to be settled by the use of handguns. it's time, way past time for congress to pass commonsense additional legislation such as renewing the assault weapons ban, requiring background checks for gun sellers, eliminating the charleston loophole, banning the importation sale, manufacture, transfer and possession of magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition, raising the minimum age for

purchasing assault weapons, and ending gun manufacturers from liability. these are a few of additional examples we could do right here in the united states congress and make a difference. as a community and as a nation, we are not powerless to act. in fact, we have a responsibility to do something meaningful to save lives. most americans support commonsense gun safety action. saving lives is the right think to do and should never be partisan. gun violence affects both urban and rural communities and daily gun violence affects both large and small communities. even when it doesn't make the headlines. i urge my colleagues to take action now, not wait for another mass shooting to break this ongoing cycle of violence in so many of our neighborhoods and communities.

mr. carper: mr. president i ask unanimous consent -- mr. cardin: i ask the senate consider the following nomination, all nomination, placed on the secretary's desk in the coast guard, the nominations be confirmed en bloc, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate, that no further motions be in order to any of the nominations, that the president be immediately notified of the senate's actions. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cardin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cardin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 83, s. 932. the presiding officer: without objection. with apologies the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 83, s. 932, a bill to amend title 5, united states code, and so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. cardin: mr. president, i further ask the bill be considered read a 24eurd time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cardin: mr. president, i ask

unanimous consent that the committee on veterans affairs be discharged and the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h.r. 3672. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: h.r. 3672, an act to designate the clinic of the department of veterans affairs in indian river, michigan, as the private first class justin t. patton department of veterans affairs clinic. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. cardin: mr. president, i further ask that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cardin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate committee on veterans affairs be discharged and senate proceed to the immediate consideration of s. 475. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 475, a bill to

designate the clinic of the department of veterans affairs in gallup, new mexico, at the hershey miamorav.a. clinic. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the committee will -- is discharged and the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. cardin: i further ask the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cardin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to consideration of s. res. 297 which was submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 297 honoring the life achievements and legacy of gloria malina and so forth. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate

will proceed to the measure. mr. cardin: i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. cardin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 298 which is at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 298 designating july 30, 2023, as national whistleblower appreciation day. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. cardin: i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. cardin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on veterans affairs be

discharged from further consideration of s. 1096 and the senate proceed to its immediate consideration. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 1096, a bill to require the secretary of veterans affairs to require the employees of the department of veterans affairs to receive training and so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection, the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. cardin: i ask unanimous consent that the hassan substitute amendment at the desk be considered and agreed to, the bill as amended be considered read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. cardin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar 101, s. 112. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 101,

s. 112, a bill to amend title 38, united states code, and so forth and for other purposes. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. the committee is discharged and the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. cardin: i ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection. mr. cardin: mr. president, i have seven requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. cardin: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn to convene for pro forma session only with no business being conducted at 9:30 a.m. on friday, july 14, 2023. further, that whether the senate adjourns on friday, july 14, it stands adjourned until 3:00 p.m. on tuesday, july 18.

that on tuesday, following the prayer and pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day and morning business be closed. following the conclusion of morning business, the senate will proceed to executive session to resume consideration of the bloomekatz nomination postcloture. further, that all postcloture time be considered expired at 5:30 p.m. and that if the nomination is confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's actions. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cardin: mr. president, for the information of the senate, members should expect two roll call votes beginning at 5:30 p.m. on tuesday. if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that the senate stands adjourned under the previous order following the remarks of the senator from virginia. the presiding officer: without objection.

changed it from an individual appropriation. $16.5 million nationwide provided the state with a great deal with different money. about after the end of welfare as we know it. of course, the first came out of

wisconsin under the governor. >> really focused on work. providing a safety net. >> the hearing yesterday, what was the purpose? >> the hearing was entitled looking at waste, fraud and abuse in the program. one of our key witnesses was in auditor for the state of mississippi who focused on the tennis court that brett favre, former quarterback was able to build. great detail about kickbacks and other things were used.

but it is that the law itself was designed to attract this kind of abuse. in fact, the documents i put into the record demonstrated that we started welfare reform in wisconsin. we put $24 million in the budget for vendors for profit and nonprofit organizations to give bonuses for the reductions. case load reductions do not mean connecting women with work. it is simply throwing them off. a great deal of incentives to throw people off. all of the overage, the money left over, these agencies, whether they were state or

county or for-profit agencies were able to use this for whatever they want. including bonuses for the ceos of private companies like maximus out of virginia here which had a contract in wisconsin, has a contract in wisconsin. the auditors thought that they were inappropriate. staff activities unrelated to delivery services. the christmas party were not in attendance. the real fraud came from the way they design the program. the program said, the law said that these funds were unrestricted.

i would push back and say that the law allowed this. that is what i did. >> 2,027,488,004 democrats. independence 2,027,488,000. you can text at 2,027,084,003. the auditor found about 77 million and misused funds. we keep it from being wasted. an outstanding witness. who was the administrative program called the magnolia trust. emulating what we have done with child tax credits. we reduce poverty. over those few months under the

biden administration where we have child tax credits provided on monthly basis. it provides $1000 a month to $1000 annually. no strings attached. it incentivizes not too much to prevent you it may reduce a snap that they get. they have an additional thousand dollars. two trust women, some people need it for transportation. other people need it because they have a large family. it allows them to make their own

decision about how to spend household funds. maybe that they want a better housing with more rooms. to trust people with cash assistance as opposed to what we saw yesterday building huge bureaucracies around poverty. as i mentioned before, we had these agencies, african-american, spanish, tribal and for-profit agencies all getting pieces of money to checkboxes. this person showed up for their interview for work, this person showed up for the seminar. how to listen to your alarm clock to get up for work. child welfare where if you do not comply with rules you are

subject to having your children taken care of, taken from you. this huge bureaucracy. a lotta people that they need money. it is $7.50 an hour job that they do get is a step up instead of a burden. allow them to continue to have medicaid while they are making $7.50 an hour. instead of the program as designed. the minute you make $10 an hour you are thrown off the program. >> coming from yesterday's hearing from the department of human services secretary. she gave some recommendations on how these laws could be performed. i want to play a little bit of what she had to say and hear your thoughts on it.

>> often instrumental of how we use dollars during the 2023 session to transfer the program from the division of workforce services to the department of human services. recognizing it for economic ability and initiatives dhs could offer coordinated services including prevention and preservation that holistically mean support and provide assistance from moving barriers to work. with the transfers we plan to integrate internal control for reconciliation of cash to expand and grant reporting processes with our existing finance and accounting unit that oversees all federally funded programs. arkansas is looking to be transformative particularly around non-cashless systems initiatives. to this end, i have three recommendations for this committee. first, continue to support fort state's ability to contract with private faith-based and community organizations.

second, consider allowing states to reinstate high-performance bonuses with payments to the state not for high performance but employers and families that successfully move their employees and themselves off of welfare. review definitions and requirements that conflict with or are duplicative of other benefit programs. they seek to conduct policy across all programs. our children and families do not come to us in pieces. >> a long with a recommendations representative, particularly those last three, what do you think. >> that was a mouth full. i would have to really sort of dissect some of the things that you said. and a lot of it sounds like the original program. we think about returning it to the department of health and human services and reintegrating services like medicaid, snap and

you know the recipient see of cash benefits. they deliberately disaggregated, disconnected those services to discourage people from using the services. but, you know, restoring cash bonuses for performance, i would have to make sure that it was not like it is now. cash bonuses were for simply getting people off the road anyway you could do that. up to including kicking them off. as i pointed out yesterday, in wisconsin, we have staff positions called divergent specialists. it was their job to tell a woman who may have been pregnant and having a child there on her side. you don't really need welfare. we will give you a food voucher and a couple bus tickets and you are now off. we could check a box saying we got a person off welfare. it sounds to me like she met

performance bonuses, hopefully, where you actually connect people with job opportunities. the training opportunities, the getting into the workforce and remain attached to the workforce with regard to her recommendations, reintegrating the services, i agree with that, bonuses, if you actually help me lift people out of poverty. millions of dollars that they received at the program and

their own maintenance of efforts actually put it into helping people. >> let's hear from some viewers. this is bill in new york from the democratic line. good morning. >> good morning. i am very interested in your approach to your programs designed to help though welfare to work program in wisconsin or president clinton's program or president jackson's program to give pre-k instructions so they can catch up with the majority. the thing is, the biggest problem with this is the expanded cost. the unnecessary costs put into these programs. in order to get the money to

find a pre-k for minority children you have to pay off everybody in between the poor people and the people and you will recall, they ended up with more pre-k money. so we are able to go into the workforce and indeed become members of the upper-middle-class. >> thank you, caller. >> he makes a point that it costs money to put people into pre-k programs. you know, the point that really ought to be made is that kindergartners are our future workforce. all of us were kindergartners at one point. no more resource money you put into children, the better those

outcomes are. the science absolutely demonstrates that. one reason to provide a basic child subsidy like the magnolia trust does, like we did with the child tax credit. i mean, it demonstrates that there are better outcomes, not only educationally, career development, health, housing, predetermine it of health providing its opportunity pays off in the long run. we have a lot of competitors around the globe who put a lot of resources into educating the public and it really pays off. >> lakewood new jersey republican line. you are up next for our guest. good morning. >> good morning, congresswoman. >> good morning. i wanted to ask you, there is a law for the legislature in

california trying to put through which would give black fathers who are not with the mother of their baby anymore, that they won't have to pay child support. such a law, even with all of the considerations that you may have, it will cause those children and those mothers to be on welfare. more people to be reliant on the government. >> i'm not familiar with the california law. what i will say is when paul, former chair of the ways and means committee and budget committee was here, one of the things that we wanted to work on to gather was make sure that child support that was collected actually went to the family instead of going back to the state or the county to repay old medicaid bills are back child

support. there is absolutely no incentive for a father to pay child support when his child is not going to see a dime of it. going back to some medicaid or hospital bill that is five years old. so i do not know what they are doing in california. i am all for incentivizing fathers to not only pay child support, but to be involved in their children's lives. >> 2,027,488,000 for democrats. 8001 for republicans and independents. you brought up workforce requirements. i want to ask you about your reaction to the new requirements that were added to snap over the debt issues. what do you think about those requirements and what is a short and long-term impact, do you think? >> i was very upset about that. i thought that it was a

deliberate stamp. it disproportionately had an impact on women of color. particularly, black women. elderly black women with regard to work requirements. to say if you are between 49 years old and 54 years old appointed time when a lot of people are diagnosed with diabetes or heart trouble or arthritis, you know, to say that you have to get out there, stand on your feet, the a waitress or be a cna at age 49, or else you will be eligible for snap. even if you are eligible for snap and you work those hours you will only be eligible for three months out of every three years. i think it is cruel to take food away from anybody.

to demand, because, we exempted veterans. thank god we exempted foster youth. that leaves, i think many many women, especially women of color. let me .1 thing out. >> anticipation of women, black women higher than any other women in the united states. people are 49-54 and they are not working, it is probably because they are facing health problems, they are facing responsibilities for other family members who are sick or disabled. it is just cruel. >> let's hear from roy. independent line north carolina. >> heidi and good morning. i just want to go ahead and ask

representative more your personal opinion on means testing. do you personally think that it really contributes to the inefficiency in our welfare system? preventing undeserving individuals, but in reality i think it does more harm than good. just wondering your personal stance representative. >> thank you for bringing that up. means testing is important. it depends on what you are testing it against. the poverty level is not increased for decades. it is not a full measurement of what people need in order to thrive and make it in society. think of another measurement. the minimum wage, which i think ultimately is a good thing but it has not changed from $7.25 an hour. where can you find an apartment by food, stand up a family, a

one person family, who can live anywhere off of $7.50 an hour. in my state, if you make 13,000, if you worked to $7.25 an hour jobs, if you were that enthusiastic i will get ahead person and you take two fast food jobs were $7.25 an hour, all that would accomplish for you is make you ineligible for medicaid in my state. if you are 1 penny over 100% over the poverty level you would be ineligible. the math just does not add up. i am grateful this morning. >> this is shannon in iowa. democrats line. >> hello. thank you for taking my call. as someone who lived off of food stamps before, i understand that it is something that is vital for the needs of working

families. i also understand that it is important -- >> shannon, go ahead. >> shannon hung up. >> shannon was beginning to make a good point. what snap is, food stamps, it is a supplement. it is literally $2 per meal per person. that is $6 a day. the notion that somehow people are squandering this benefit or miss using it is, it is absolutely cruel to say that, you know, you do not deserve $6 a day to eat. it is a supplement. people actually do have to have some other income. i also want to point out that food stamps, snap, is one of the programs where we require people to work.

most of the people, 80, 90% of the people that have received snapped have worked a year before or year after that period of time that they found themselves in need of snap. it is a program where people are working. >> representative more, you wrote a piece earlier this year talking about the maternal mortality crisis. we will show people, can you elaborate your concerns? >> well, i am very concerned because the maternal mortality rate in the united states is higher than it is in some so-called third world countries. studies have just come out from the journal of american associates, academies that demonstrated in the last 20 years have doubled. and, especially for black women and native women. it is gone up 162% for native

women. it is not just restricted to poor black women, two black women. a lot of that harkens back to racism, classes of racism. even when you are not for, the medical profession is not paying attention and listening to women of color. these are their conclusions. i have been very, very delighted to be involved in a package of bills, 13 bills put together by the hands of our maternal caucus , doctor elma adams of north carolina and a nurse profession laura underwood that represents illinois. there teen bills trying to address maternal mortality as we experience it.

one of my bills, one of the 13 bills is to increase the workforce. to create opportunities for dual laws and the kids. to go to your doctors appointments with you. to coach you through a pregnancy so that we can avoid. this works. we found that it works to have dual laws. another is the mama's first bill a bill that would reimburse some of these perinatal workforce recipients. it is a career ladder for women. it is something that women have done for thousands of years. take care of other women who are pregnant and postpartum. this is something that we need to institutionalize and pay for. it saves lives. one more call.

this is dylan in south dakota. republican line. >> yes. my daughter is on snap. i was wondering about, you know that there are white people poor, too. it just is not right. >> listen. my brother god rest his soul lived in south dakota and he was like the only black person in that community. the original aid to families with dependent children came into focus interview because of appalachia and the poor children that are there. it is very puzzling to me. west virginia, i absolutely know that there are poor white people when i talk about black women and black people, it is because they are disproportionately poor

numerically speaking there are more white people that are poor. so, when i talk about tenants getting structured in our safety net, structured in a way that is unfair, it is a classist and racist problem. and it does have an impact on poor white people and poor children as well. i appreciate you raising that. >> a democrat from wisconsin serving on the ways and means committee. we thank you for your time. >> thank you. joining us to talk about that is the director of the f di. covering the justice department and related issues. thanks for giving us your time. pushing back at gop against lawmakers -- what was expected when he walked into this hearing

yesterday. >> it was his first hearing before this committee that promised to conduct a forward reaching of federal law enforcement and the weaponization of law enforcement and the fbi specifically. he was bracing, i think, for a very competitive hearing and i think that that promise to be true. we sell republican lawmakers repeatedly interrupting him and just continuing to give him this very aggressive grilling as part of his first oversight hearing since investigations of trump have been charge since hunter biden took a plea deal. >> how do republicans apply it to the fbi. >> republicans are saying that the fbi inappropriately are targeting their authority. specifically supporters of trump. >> what do they present as evidence of that? >> yesterday we covered a lot of

ground. they talked about, in addition to the investigations of trump and what they describe as a two-tiered justice system. more lenient handling of the president's son. we also saw things like social media, republicans are saying that the fbi worked with twitter and other companies to silence their voices and take down conservatives off of the web. we saw criticism about anti-catholic bias. we sell repeated attacks on the director of a memo from about two years ago concerning school board members. we really covered different complaints and grievances from the gop. >> in general, we heard the director give it defense of bureau. what are the main arguments he made to push back the claims

against republicans? >> he strongly rejected any insinuation that the fbi is partisan or act on political motive. he said since he has been in charge he has tried repeatedly to instill this idea you need to do things through the book. you need to follow these processes. he believes that they come up for the most part, are doing that. he has instituted reforms in my do some of the things that the republicans brought. he resisted and the idea in any suggestion that the fbi is partisan. >> the idea that it is still available on our website a nap if you want to see. if you want to ask questions about that hearing yesterday and what took place with the fbi director, call 8004 democrat, 8014 republicans.

i want to show you some of the exchange that the director had with the republican of wyoming about what you talked about as far as weaponization is concerned. we will get some context out of it. >> sure. you have personally worked to weapon eyes the fbi against conservatives. i asked mr. durham about this for which he answered i don't think that things can go too much further with the view that law enforcement particularly the fbi the department of justice runs at two tiered system of justice. director ray, what are you prepared to do to perform federal law enforcement in the matter better inspect the trust of the american people?

>> first off i would disagree with your characterization of the fbi in the description of my own approach. the idea that i am bias against conservatives seems somewhat insane to me given my own personal background. as to how we are approaching our work of protecting the american people and upholding the american constitution i empathize for all of our folks and everything we do and we need to do the right thing in the right way and that means following the facts no matter where they lead and no matter who likes it. >> you are personally responsible for these kind of claims. what did she mean or what do republicans think she meant? >> she is setting the tone is a leader of the organization. he has not done enough to rein in his agents, particularly, other leaders. making her responsible for pursuing this sort of anti-conservative agenda. it is interesting in terms of

the political moment we are in. once the law and order party as some of the harshest critics of the fbi and you see the democrats coming to the bureaus defense. christopher wray is a registered republican. that was mentioned a couple of times. he resisted this idea that he is somehow anti-conservative because he is conservative himself. >> who made him becoming director of the fbi responsible? >> he has been at the bureau since 2017. >> what happened in the transition between someone appointed by republican now to someone being vilified. >> we have seen the justice department aggressively investigating trump. we have seen the attack on the capital. these are two of many different investigations that republicans are pointing to suggest that the

bureau has been politicized or weapon eyes and it is overzealously recognizing supporters. >> asked by several members about. members were there that day at the capital. can you give some context on that. >> sure. there still seems to be this idea that they somehow had agents or, you know, encouraging the violence. you know, directing people into the capital that day. many, many times they have pushback on this idea that says that the idea that the fbi somehow insinuated, started the riot, is totally, you know, unbelievable. this did not happen. but that is still something that is a big republican talking point. >> when it came to the seizure of the documents, offer some context there as well as far as the fbi's role.

>> sure. this is what they point to when they talk about a two-tiered justice system. overly aggressive in getting a search warrant. especially compared to the way the justice department had been treating the classified documents found that president biden's house. the justice department says that trump refused to relinquish the documents and that is why they needed to go and get the search warrant to get them back and then the case of president biden , they say his team quickly relinquished them. republicans are saying they are taking a hands up approach to biden in a very aggressive way for trump. >> covering the justice department. the fbi director on the website. if you want to ask questions

about the hearing and some of the contents there you can call. we will start with tom. you are on with our guest. good morning. >> good morning. i have been involved in this issue long before it was popular conversation. i wrote a report, we talked about it in the past. inside the domestic terrorism strategy. it is a real easy read. there is only one of those in the entire u.s. government. i pushed back at the national counterterrorism level about the fbi's desire to have a federal statute with the expressed purpose for the american people.

in october of 2020 in a meeting with the domestic terrorism task force, i warned that we were headed into a potential black swan event. we call it something that spirals out of control very rapidly and unexpectedly and you cannot get your hands around it. just like what happened on january 6. >> what is a question for our guest? >> my question is this. i watched the entire interview. started saying the number one threat was domestic terrorism. now, of course, it is china which we always knew. how can anyone, anyone of any political stripe in the united states, now it has been revealed that the fbi was coercing social

media to silence any voices in america in addition agree just violations of 702 where they evade privacy. regarding for the recent injunction involving twitter and the federal government. the judge had ordered saying that they are taking down a certain post. the directors said that they take steps to comply with that court order about how best to do that. he is certainly sensitive to that concern. >> mentioning 702. how does not apply to how that

works? >> a very important tool in terms of combating threat by terrorism and attacks from rival says it is vital to investigate these attacks. it is up for renewal at the end of the year. facing democrats and republicans are skeptical about the potential intrusions. the fbi in the justice department had an uphill battle in explaining why they should review that surveillance tool. >> independent line. good morning. >> good morning. i always feel that the truth lies somewhere in the middle of an issue. looking back, the way the fbi has conducted themselves since donald trump became president, i

think that the manner in which they conducted business was very aggressive compared to the way they treated the democrats. keep in mind, i am an independent down both sides. i expected director ray to conduct himself that way yesterday. the director of it. we know that the fbi did some things wrong. we know that may be mr. trump did some things wrong, but the way that they conducted themselves, would it not leave the people on the right to think that perhaps there are things that are not being done correctly and a two-tiered justice system. >> that is the heart of republican allegations. the fbi being politicized. it could be viewed for the

leaders of two political parties what they are filed in court, just the amount that they have amassed at the time of that search. the director believed that there was because at that time. considering that extraordinary step. if you look at what the justice department says our crimes and willful retention, very sensitive documents. that gave them the right to go in. the fbi took steps to make sure did not generate undue attention they did not wear rain jackets at some of these searches. they were cognizant of that insensitive to it.

there were stark differences in two cases. >> the fbi has an outside source for the bureau itself. something along that line. >> there is an inspector general they have classified documents at biden's house and the documents being led by a special counsel outside and a pointy jack smith. a political independent. an actual former trump u.s. attorney overseeing the investigation of the documents found at biden's home. they did this to add a layer from the very attacks we are seeing on the hill yesterday. >> let's hear from mike in texas. republican mine. >> good morning. first, i wanted to say in regard to the claim that trump, i'm

just saying that there was a comment about it regarding trump supporters going into the capital. the person who gave the orders and encourage people to go into the capital, nobody knows where he is. hunter biden's laptop, it was real. waiting in december of 2019 and whereabouts. i know they can hate him for all they want, but tony is a witness. tony was never fully interviewed, was waiting for the fbi to interview him and they slowly walked it even to this day. he is an incredible witness. six whistleblowers the democrats will not accept. the transparency is not what they are after.

fifty-one former intelligence officers, russia misinformation. you know the price that they pay for lying to the american people before the 2020 election, nothing. it reminds me of senator reid when he claimed that mitt romney never paid taxes for 10 years. he was asked about it. he said, well, he did not win, did he? >> at the heart of a long-standing conspiracy theory. working with ef vi to instigate the violence of that day. this conspiracy theory, we heard about it yesterday on the hill. the fbi director denied that the fbi was involved in the attacks. >> also as of this morning, suing fox news for defamation.

>> that is right. another major defamation's case against fox in line with what we have seen before. headline from. we will continue on with aaron. in virginia, democrats line. >> good morning. thank you so much for taking my call. what prompted my call was hearing you state that, you know, during the raid, they made an effort as to not be visually appearing as the fbi something of a grand gesture. normally, the fbi handles everything on a straight line. i just wanted to ask a question. donald trump not having a mug shot, does that suggest that he is above the law? again, when you have people rating the capital, they were not treated like some other groups may have been treated in

the past with attacking a federal building which the law states what the penalty is for that. is the fbi, i know mr. ray was appointed by trump, but is the stance with cog laying him, and my words, showing him that he is somehow above the law. >> the special counsel that charged trump said that nobody is above the law. emphasizing the gravity of the charges of 37 accounts against the former president. what i think we are seeing here is an understanding and acknowledgment that he is not necessarily above the law, but he is a different type of suspect. the republican front runner for president. former president, first time in history this has ever happened. i think the justice department is cognizant of that and is taking steps to make sure that, you know, sort of minimize the

atmosphere around this case and emphasize the fact that it is a court case like any other and it is playing out in federal court in florida and to try to sort of minimize the fanfare around it and any future violence associated with it. >> independent line. we will hear from robert. >> yes. good morning. i was wondering if you could offer any opinion on the plea deal that hunter biden took. five years and there is a two count misdemeanor felony and a discharge of the fraudulent application of the gun purchase. you even have attorneys on networks like cnn saying something is not right. can you understand or see why many americans, myself included

think that this just does not smell right. five years? anyway. your opinion. >> thank you for the call. they have to provide some content. go ahead. >> hunter biden, president son, is agreed to plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax offenses. failure to pay taxes in 2017 and 18. likely avoiding jail time and prosecution on a separate gun offense. he presents a weapon as an unknown drug use are back in 18. as you pointed out, many republicans in particular think that this was somewhat of a sweetheart deal because they did not charge him with felony tax crimes. this was a case prosecuted by 12 appointed u.s. attorney in delaware, the very kind of criticism that he is giving.

so, you know, it is an open debate because we have not seen the statement of fact in the case. we have not seen all of the evidence. that is something that they will file in court before his plea deal takes effect likely on jul. that is when he will go before a judge. a judge it still has to approve all of this. we could learn more details about what happened at that time. his case also is dissimilar to others we sort of looked at other prosecutions of similar gun crimes and found that his is unique in terms of how the justice department usually handles these things. frequently, these types of charges are brought into mention with larger drug trafficking offenses. we do not see that alleged here. we have to see what that says before we can draw meaningful opinion. >> hunter biden came up in

another way yesterday in the hearing. we will play a little bit of what happened and have you discuss it. >> i'm sitting here with my father. i will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person that he knows in my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. i am sitting here waiting for the call with my father. sounds like a shake down, doesn't it, director. >> i'm not going to get into comment on that. >> you seem deeply and curious about it. almost suspiciously un- curious. are you protecting the bidens? >> absolutely not. >> you will not answer the question about whether or not that is a shakedown. everybody knows why you will not answer it. to the millions of people that will see it, they know that it is. your inability to acknowledge that. >> exchange some context,

please. >> the context of some irs agents coming forward as so-called whistleblowers saying that the justice department slow walked the investigation. that the prosecutor in the case, david weiss was denied special counsel status. something that he has denied. they will come forward with a lot of various allegations about hunter that republicans are saying were not thoroughly investigated by the fbi. that is what he is talking about. apparently, what the irs agent, that message in which he is accusing hunter biden of saying these things. coming up in a broader context. the director is denying that the agency is somehow protecting the president and his family. >> that whole hearing is on our website and you can see it on

the app. this is bob in georgia, republican line. >> what really bothers me about this hearing and part of what we just saw there on the video, what bothers me about it is this murkiness, this director. he acts as though congress has no power over him at all. doing everything but sticking his tongue out at them. he is very, just very rebellious. you know, all of my life i have heard how congress has the power of the purse. will you please tell me, do they not have any power over this man , do something other than sitting there and smirk at them. please. >> bob and george. >> to thoughts about that. .... ....

do your other point funding the fbi is something republicans have threatened and the head of the judiciary panel floating the idea of taking the fbi of washington politics by taking out of washington and moving it to huntsville alabama. it's not a plant is likely to be tracked but it does show the unusual political motives we find ourselves in and how serious the republicans are about holding the fbi at

county -- accountable. by the way she rode in a story a few days ago and you can find in "the wall street journal" movie in fbi headquarters alabama. we hear from christina pennsylvania on the independent line. at morning and thank you take for taking my call. i was wondering your opinion, i watch some of the hearing yesterday and i thought i heard a question by director wray regarding joe biden's questionable money deals and what was the answer that director wray gave? >> i'm not sure that i recall that line of questioning. but i guess what stood out to me the most in the context of the biden's and the investigation of the biden's is at the fbi director is denying the agency is giving them -- to the president. he denies under his watch he said he was handled evenhandedly

and he was not giving cover to the biden family. in san diego on the democrats line, hello. at morning. thank you for taking my call. my question is that a reflection of a two-tier system where certain members of supreme court justice or member of congress a member of the supreme court refuses to answer any questions about ethics, is that a two-tier, i mean legal system and the second question here, how can a member of congress, does he have the authority or even the power or even the right to suggest subpoenaing someone if that person does not acquiesce to that subpoena, what

do you call it when they threaten to cut off the funds to that individual? thank you. thank you. with the supreme court i'm, little out my depth there so i will give that to the experts >> chairman jordan himself and the investigation january 6 and applying it yesterday. can you add context to that if that's the case? >> what i would say it's an interesting moment because some of trump's allies including people in congress were caught up in the investigation that does pose some questions for separation of power issues and to what extent the executive branch has the ability to do that. with regard to that specifically i'm not sure. one more call from robin in pennsylvania on the republican line. you are the last caller. good morning. at morning everybody.

i want to ask the lady on here do you really think everything that we are seeing is not true? they have bank records, proving the biden's have been taking money from china, over 30 some million dollars and they've been doing this investigation for long. this is and i want you to get someone on here that will be on both sides. what i would say is that the type of questioning shows you that even as the director goes on the hill and addresses the criticism like what the caller is describing its it's not going away anytime soon and people are pretty -- in their opinions and views of the fbi and it's hard

to to sway me but to their site. you can see her work at wsj.com. thank you so much. thank you. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate stands adjourned until 9:30 a.m. tomorrow. adjourn:

if you are the upper mezzanine of c-span's coverage and find it any time on line at c-span.org videos of key hearings debates and other events featuring markers to guide you through an string and newsworthy highlights. points of interest markers appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you hit play on select video. this timeline makes it easy to quickly get an idea of what was debated and decided in washington.