senator hawley. >> mr. chairman, did you call on me? i'm happy to go. >> i didn't see senator osaff. >> thank you, senator hawley. thank you, mr. chairman. attorney general, nice to see you. thank you for joining us. last week, the senate passed legislation that i introduced alongside chair durbin and ranking member grassley, the prison camera reform act. to reduce violence and civil rights abuses in bop facilities by overhauling the security camera system that ig horowitz has found is outdated, in reliable as well as the means of recording and preserving the footage from the systems. do you agree these reforms are necessary and should this bill become law will you commit to prioritizing the implementation of the requirements it imposes upon the bop? >> yes, and yes. >> thank you, attorney general. like to discuss with you staffing issues at the bureau of prisons. earlier this year, the gao, which as you know is a nonpartisan independent watchdog, concluded b.o.p. lacks a reliable method for assessing the scope of staffing issues or the

mr. chairman? >> thank you, senator hawley. senator rowan. >> thank you, mr. chairman. did you mention that the formatting should be changed as soon as possible? the manufacture of this product needs to have a date until after the point of sale. do you support that change? >> i used to work with them here in the senate. i'm not a legislator. i think i'll leave that to the legislators, if i could. >> shouldn't they get information to the customer before the consumer purchases the goods? >> i support that, yes. >> since mr. dugan supports it, do you also support it? >> we want to work with the committee to fine-tune some things in the bill, particularly timelines and thresholds, which are very important. >> it sounds as though you support the concept of disclosure information? >> correct. >> yes, i do. >> yes, i do. >> thank you. so mr. muderick, you have brought to the attention of these online sellers about maybe amazon, that they have online unsafe products and they don't take it down. you've been asked a number of questions relating to section 230. i'm wondering wheth

mr. chair. >> senator hawley. >> thank you, mr. chairman. secretary mayorkas, just a few additional questions. i want to clarify something you just testified to, to senator cruz. i think you just said that your view is that paying illegal immigrants $450,000 or more, a million per family, that that is not a pull factor. in other words, it wouldn't encourage more illegal immigration. you said not a pull factor, your words. >> may i have the opportunity to answer this question? >> well, i just want -- you said not a pull factor, right? i couldn't quite hear you at the time so i wanted to be sure that's what you said. >> the settlement payments of the federal tort claim charge arising from the family separation effected under the prior administration's zero tolerance policy would not be a pull factor. that is my testimony. >> understood. i think that's news that you think that these payments to illegal immigrants would not be a pull factor, that paying them would not encourage more illegal immigration. that's news. thank you for that. i want to

mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator johnson. the chair recognizes senator hawleyr your question. >> thank you very much, mr. cha. congratulations to both the nominees. thank you for being here. mr. gonzalez i'd like to start with the following fus i've asked of the nominees who appear before this committee. do you believe unauthorized entry at our borders should remain a crime? >> yes, sir. >> here's another fundamental question. putting aside any resource constraints, whatever they may be due think of an alien enters illegally they should be subject to removal from the united states? >> best. >> do you believe individuals who can't have an order of removal should in fact, be removed from the united states? >> yes. >> if an illegal alien enters a country and it's been convicted of a crime, do you believe the odd to be subject to removal? >> yes. >> what about illegal aliens have have been convicted of things, say assault, homicide, kidnapping, sex offenses, sexual assault, weapons offenses, do these illegal aliens, should they be removed from the united states? >>

mr. hooks: absolutely. i will commit to that. chairmain peters: senator hawley, you are not recognized for your questions. sep. hawley: congratulations to the nominees. i want to start by raising an issue i've been talking to for two years as it relates to fema. that is the in the fema process particularly after there has been a disaster in the state when it comes to rewarding individual assistance, working with local residents. in my state, in the state of missouri, we have historic flooding. historic flooding in my state. unfortunately, we had many residents who were out of -- who were forced out of their homes. out of their businesses, off their farms. their experience with fema was not a pleasant one. they could not figure out what the rules were, who to talk to, we had residents who were awarded assistance and had it retracted from them while they were still out of their homes you do qualify, no, give it back to us. this is totally unacceptable and at a minimum, fema needs to commit to being more transparent and doing a better job on the ground in informing residents in disaster areas what assistance

producer saying there were concerns, quoting here, events at the capitol, josh hawley were tied together and implied connection to mrs at the u.s. capitol. he gets a call, he's terminated because of one tweet we showed you. now there is litigation, how will this play out? >> emily: he asked the producer, what is this about, what am i being terminated for, because of xyz, to which the producer responded, it's everything. on the lawsuit it says terminating me on basis of religious discrimination. this is how they will respond, they will say it is everything, at-will employment, difficult bar to cross as actual proof, which he has in part on the e-mail. they will say in the tweet, you said you were not obeying a mandate by the governor. he will say the mandate was ruled unconstitutional in court in california and in the state of new york. i think there will be back and forth, i'll bet they will settle. most unfortunate thing, he hasn't gotten another job. he's auditions in california and throughout the west coast and the reality is that because of his tweet, he's been stigmatized and in the entertainment and theater wo

senator hawley, recognized for your question. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. thanks for waiting for me and thanks to the witnesses for being here today. it's good to see all of you. ms. lerner, i want to start with you, if i could. are you familiar with the report from wilmer hale, their independent investigation regarding the nomination of dr. kafari. >> i'm aware of the report. >> have you read it? >> very heavily redacted version. >> so, my office has been contacted by multiple whistle-blowers who allege widespread misconduct, including, i'm afraid, you, and i want to give you the chance to respond to those. always take whistle-blower complaints very seriously and they pointed me to the wilmer hale report which i have read which i have to say is very disturbing. it's 108 pages here, 70 interviews conducted, 42,000 documents reviewed and what wilmer hale found is that a number of dhs oig employees improperly interfered in the presidential nomination and senate confirmation process regarding dr. kafari to be the ig at dhs. wilmer hale notes at the outset of t

hawley loves to salute. i'll tell you all about it in tonight's "seditionist round-up roundup." >> hay. grab 'em by the posse! >> stephen: first to meet lady justice is new jersey resident and mrsual ragheb. ms. ragheb planned her big insurrection day well in advance, and even urged people to join her and to "bring your own guns," and said she was bringing pepper spray, a knife, and a stun gun. and her social media posts confirm she was ready to resort to violence if the former president wasn't declared the winner, posting "it's 45 or civil war... 1776 is coming." okay, the civil war was not in 1776. ( laughter ) that's the revolutionary war. that's like going to comic-con and saying, "all right, "star wars" fans, here he is, captain james t. shrek!" ( laughter ) ( applause ) her lawyer has pushed against jail time for her client, saying ragheb was "not prepared for a civil war, nor intended to be a part of one." which would be a lot easier to believe if ragheb hadn't actually posted, "civil war is coming, and i am happy to be a part of it." kind of undercuts the defense. it's like trying to convince the jury that your client is innocent while they sit there wearing a t-shirt t

hawley. recognized for questions. >> thank you very much, chairman. thanks for waiting for we, and thanks to the witnesses for being here today. mr. lerner, i want to start with you if i could. are you familiar with the report from will marie hill, the independent investigation recorded allegations of misconduct by three trump lawyers? >> i'm aware of the report. >> a few rented? >> very heavily redacted, but aren't it. >> my office has been contacted by multiple whistleblowers who allege widespread misconduct including, i'm, afraid you. and i want to give you the chance to respond. i always take the whistleblower complaint very seriously. and i [inaudible] whistleblower warrants which i have read, and i say it's very, very disturbing. there's 100 pages here, some of the interviews conducted, 42,000 documents reviewed, and what will more hail found is that a number of dhs and ig employees improperly interfered in the senate confirmation process regarding [inaudible] doctor safari to be the ig at dhs. well michael notes that at the outset of the report that of course any citizen has the right to question a presidential nomination i

mr. hawley: mr. president, i object. mr.ndez: i ask that it be in order with respect to calendar number 461, bernard maurice to be director general of the foreign service. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. hawley: on behalf of my colleagues and myself i object. the president pro tempore: -- the presiding officer: the objection is heard. mr. menendez: i can't wait to hear about the next one, nomination for israel. i ask the same request with are 51, thomas a.nyed to the state of israel. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. hawley: on behalf of my colleagues, i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. menendez: so we will have no ambassador in israel as we deal with the challenges of iran and others in the region, it is -- it is mind-boggling, all of those who get up here and talk about the importance of the state of israel but we won't have an ambassador to help us meet the challenges that israel has. i ask that it be in order to make the same request for calendar number 443, michael carpe

mr. hawley: i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call: quorum call: quorum call: a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from massachusetts. mr. markey: thank you, mr. president. madam president -- the presiding officer: senator. we're in a quorum call. mr. markey: i ask unanimous consent that we vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection, proceed. thank you. mr. markey: thank you, madam president. madam president, 60 years ago president dwight david eisenhower warned americans about the unwarranted influence of the military complex. he told us of the relentless interest that would use their lobbying muscle that would keep money flowing into the coffers of the pentagon. while our adversaries and competitors changed in the past self-decades, the military complex's revolving door is as well greased as ike warned our congress. today congress is set to vote on increasing the bloated budget the same year we ended the war