Summary
- Committee favorably reported Daniel Traynor's Eighth Circuit nomination on an 11-10 vote, advancing four district judgeships despite Democratic opposition over impartiality concerns.
- Dani Bensky (Epstein Survivor, Advocate) said Todd Blanch exposed over 100 victims' identities in Epstein files and refused survivors' meeting requests for eight months.
- Sen. Durbin (D-IL) pressed Bensky on Blanch's refusal to meet survivors despite spending hours with Ghislaine Maxwell, calling for Senate delay.
- Sen. Hirono (D-HI) called Blanch's DOJ retributive and corrupt while Josh Hawley attacked Elizabeth Oyer (Former Pardon Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice) over death-row clemency.
- Traynor and district nominees now head to full Senate floor votes, while Blanch's attorney general nomination faces further scrutiny over Epstein victims' demands.
Morning digest
Get hearings like this in your inbox
Transcript
well i mean if you fly in water with the ship so that's just uh you visit three or five people
i told everybody to be here at nine so we could do our business meeting right away uh but since we can't do that i'm going to start with some of the things that we can do so um we have eight nominations listed today we'll vote on daniel trainor to be circuit judge us court of appeals eighth circuit we're also voting on four district court nominees angelo camaro uh southern district of texas casdain michael northern district texas michael martin eastern district michigan and Antonio Pozo Eastern District of Pennsylvania the remaining nominations are listed for the first time so we'll hold them over to future consideration and i'll call on senator uh durbin for his opening comments
thanks chairman grassley yesterday's hearing i can't uh easily forget in this room because i asked a question uh, Mr. Todd Blanch, Blanch, about the uh opportunity he had to meet with the victims of Jeffrey Epstein. I asked him the same question the night before in my office and he said, " Oh, I'll meet with anybody to talk about this." So I thought it was an easy question. Will you meet with those who were here today? There were ten or twelve survivors of Jeffrey Epstein. And he said no. He wouldn't meet with them. And I asked why. I couldn't understand whether he thought they had a lawyer or needed a lawyer, but he wouldn't meet with them. It's incredible. After the hearing, I met with them. I'll never forget that meeting. You can imagine, and some are here today and one will testify a little later, before this panel. Try to imagine, if you will, one of these young women saying to me, Jeffrey Epstein abused me when I was thirteen years old. Thirteen years old. Visualize in your own family, a daughter, a granddaughter, thirteen years of age, who is a victim of this sexual predator. Should she at least have a moment with the Attorney General to tell her story? Is that too much to ask? Apparently it was. This is what I'll tell you. I don't believe a single member of the United States Senate would vote for this nominee after meeting with these survivors. to think that he turned down the opportunity to even meet with them. He went on to say, well, President Trump signed this law which required us to uh disclose the Epstein file. The law was necessary because he wouldn't voluntarily disclose them. Yes, President Trump signed the law after it was discharged in the House of Representatives, because it w- it had one new person who won a special election. It was a a amazing political miracle. that that law ever passed. But it had to pass so the American people would even have a chance of looking at these files. And now, these women, and many more, are willing to come forward and say, " Don't stop with prosecuting two people, Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. There are more people you should consider." And yet, the man who would be Attorney General of the United States said he wouldn't meet with them, wouldn't listen to them. That isn't right. That is just plain wrong as far as I'm concerned. And secondly, let me tell you what. I guess I was born in a different era, from this president and people around him. But I kind of understood going into public life that if you wanted to get rich, this was the wrong job. You're supposed to take this job to serve the public, make enough money to get by, but not get rich. How did the president do in the first year of his second term? One point four billion dollars. added to his income from the cryptocurrency group. Why is that even relevant to this conversation? Because the president opposed the cryptocurrency idea for years, switched his position, and then Mister Flores, or Mister Blanche, uh changed the regulation, the federal regulation of cryptocurrency. He, by the time he changed the regulation of cryptocurrency in the Department of Justice, He had personally over a hundred and sixty thousand dollars in cryptocurrency assets. He had to disclose that and he had to send that to some other source. He sent it to his children. To lessen the regulation of an industry, which generates a one point four billion dollar windfall for the President of the United States, and money for the person who was, uh, acting Attorney General, is just plain wrong. just plain wrong. And all the excuses in the world don't make a difference. I'll tell you that one document that he signed. Imagine if you will, if you've ever heard of this. The president, his family, and his businesses, because the document signed by Todd Blanch, because of that, have no liability for any tax crimes they ever committed before the date of that document. No liability, no criminal liability. Every single one of us in this room has to obey the law. That's the basics in a democracy like ours. And when it comes to tax crimes, the same applies. Now there's an exception, of course, in in the eyes of Todd Blanch. And that exception is the President of the United States, his family and his businesses. That is just plain wrong. This man should not be Attorney General.
uh can i go ahead and introduce the foreign assistants and stuff
sure go ahead if you want to
yeah
sure
cause i thank you thank you thank you ok um i'd like to enter into the record an article written by former attorney general bill barr his article earns the senate to confirm mister blanch the article touts the successes of mister blanch has already delivered while leading it's a very caring idea so i'll let you know of course while already leading the department of justice it further stated quote mister blanch has necessary qualities for the job is a skilled and accomplished lawyer with extensive experience in the department as a prosecutor and deputy attorney general throughout his career he has shown in the personal determination discipline and thick skin this position demands end of quote without objection it will be entered in the record uh yeah one question one more uh i'd like to also introduce a letter uh from the concerned women for american legislative action committee the group represents hundreds of thousands of women nationwide the letter praised mister blanche and stated quote you are welcome mister blanche extensive experience proven character and wise judgment make him an outstanding pick uh that the women i represent are proud to support i would just go to uh we're waiting for waiting for two so i would just say go ahead and do the the witness introductions of the story on this page yeah ok
we'll we'll have them come to the table
well we'll we'll need to have them come to the table yes you can go ahead you can just ask them to go ahead and come up to the table
we're
what you can ask them to go ahead and come up to the table but we don't swear them anything yeah oh as i indicated to everybody in the audience everybody was supposed to be here at nine o'clock and everybody isn't here and we don't have a lot of time to waste so i would ask the witnesses if they would come to the table and i would like to uh introduce uh read your introductions uh and then no we'll do that after we'll do that when we go to the hearing ok uh you uh please uh be seated and uh we won't be questioning you right away but i'd like to take this time to introduce you first uh a person when he was in the united states senate a person that i worked closely with uh john ashcroft alright i see it's fine you you know he served as uh united states well he's he's not as you can see attorney general Under George W. Bush, he led the Justice Department's anti-terrorism efforts. After nine eleven, Mister Ashcroft previously served for over two decades as Missouri's Attorney General, Governor, and then Senator. He's since founded a consulting firm and serves as distinguished professor at Regent University. Mister Ashcroft understands how to lead the Justice Department, free from political influence. Indeed, Senator Schumer once praised uh Mister Ashcroft, quote, " Fidelities to the rule of law", end of quote. I look forward to hearing his perspective on Mister Blanch's qualifications to lead the department. Next, I would introduce uh jennifer boss miss boss is an angel angel mom a title that no mother should ever have to bear she suffered an unimaginable loss miss boss's daughter megan was discovered in a dumpster belonging to an illegal immigrant the man was arrested but within twenty four hours he walked free the sanctuary city and soft-on-crime policies of her home state failed to protect her daughter or deliver justice to the families. Miss Boss had no recourse until President Trump learned of the case and insured that the man was detained by ICE. Sadly, Miss Boss knows firsthand how important it is to have Justice Department that listens to victims, pursues justice, and works to protect communities. Miss Boss, I'm very sorry for your loss. I'm grateful for your testimony today. We also have John Edler, President of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association Foundation. He was a first responder at ground zero on nine eleven. and has decades of experience in law enforcement. For years he served as the Chief Firearms and Tactical Training Instructor of the Southern District of New York. While at that position, Mister Adler met and observed Mister Blanchett's diligent work firsthand. Mister Adler previously served as Director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance based on that experience and his decades in law enforcement mister edler uh uh now advocates for offices in the field i look forward to learning here here's experience uh uh and perspective on mister blanchett's efforts to support law enforcement and now senator durbin would you please introduce your guest
thank you mr. chairman let me say at the outset i'm at your request i'm trying to accommodate the the attendance issue which we both struggle with this
yeah
us chairman and me as ranking member uh and one of my witnesses minority witnesses is not arrived yet she was told we it'd be a little bit later we would start that so i'm gonna introduce her and when she arrives she'll take to the table and be sworn in by you ok
ok oh thank you
alright the first minority witness is danny bensky uh i met her yesterday Miss Binsky is a choreographer and dance educator. She's also a survivor of abuse by convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, to whom she was trafficked when she was seventeen years old. Miss Binsky will tell us when she comes how, due to the carelessness of the justice department, graphic details of her abuse, as well as her identity, were released many times, despite her efforts to redact her information. she says that she quote won't stop fighting until the world is safer
mmm yeah
i'm thank her for her courage and i hope she arrives soon uh because the change in plans we've had some confusion my second witness second minority witness is a elizabeth euler thank you for being here she was the justice department pardon attorney until march twenty twenty five she oversaw the pardon office now run by the failed nominee and mega-extremist Ed Martin. Prior to service in the Justice Department, Miss Oyer was an assistant federal public defender in Maryland and a litigation partner at Mayor Brown. She's a graduate of Harvard Law School and the illustrious Georgetown University. She will let us uh, she will tell us our former office has devolved into a pay-to-pay-play operation, with mega-donors jumping ahead legitimate pardoned candidates. often without proper vetting, the height of corruption. How do we know this? Miss Oyer was fired by Mister Blanch just days after he took office for refusing to restore gun ownership rights to one of the president's personal friends convicted domestic abuser and actor Mel Gibson. I yield, Mister Chairman.
Yeah. Now back to the work of our committee. We have one more member to get here in the meantime. i wanna enter into the record nine letters supporting mister blanch's nomination from major law enforcement organizations combined these organizations represent hundreds of thousands of law enforcement officers from around our country who work everyday to uphold the rule of law the letters all praise mister blanch's qualifications to serve as a and his collaboration with law enforcement americans to keep everybody safe one letter states this so i quote "we believe mister blanche's leadership will help insure that the department of justice remains focused on public safety the rule of law and providing unwavering support for law enforcement who risk their lives daily to protect our families and communities and to quote without objection these will be entered in the record. uh Then also i want to introduce into the record uh a letter supporting mr. blanchett's nomination from twenty three state attorneys general The letter praises the Justice Department's success under Mister Blanchett's leadership in combating violent crime, enforcing our immigration laws, ending race-based discrimination, prosecuting criminal enterprises, and rooting out fraud against taxpayers. The letter goes on to state quote, "At a time when Americans expect their government communities from violent crime narcotics trafficking human trafficking terrorism and organized criminal activity tod blanch has shown the ability to deliver real results his record reflects a commitment to public safety vigorous enforcement of federal law and effective stewardship of the department of justice end of quote uh without objection those letters will be entered into the record uh would you would you like to make your speeches on judges now
i only have one or two if you want me to do that
once you go ahead and do it we've got we've gotta wait for tiller's
ok ok we're still waiting on one senator
yeah yeah
ok well this is a little out of sequence but i'm trying to cooperate on a bipartisan basis report that
uh
say word about daniel trainer nominated to be the us court of appeals for the eighth circuit part of his confirmation for district court justice judge trainer showed his true colors when it came to MAGA issues after he was concerned he after he was confirmed he had a chance to show whether he would be a neutral arbiter on the bench unfortunately he is not demonstrated that as one example judge trainer is ruled in favor of the trump administration in all twenty-eight cases on his docket, involving challenges from immigrants who've been detained by ICE under the administration's illegal mandatory detention policy. That includes seven habeas corpus petitions, Trainer volunteered to preside over in the District of Minnesota following Operation Metro Surge. Judge Trainer is an outlier. Of the more than seventeen thousand cases in which federal district judges have ruled on ISIS's mandatory detention policy, at least fifteen thousand were rulings against the Trump administration, including a vast majority of rulings by Trump-appointed judges. Yet Judge Treanor's partisanship was apparent when he served as a contributing author and signatory of a May twenty twenty-four letter from federal judges to the president of Columbia University. The signatories vowed not the judges, vowed not to hire anyone who attended Columbia University beginning that year. But Traynor denied a recusal motion in a case brought by Columbia Law School, initiative for a just society, implausibly claiming he wasn't biased against Columbia University, just said he wouldn't hire anybody who went to school there. While he was comfortable taking a position on this controversial political question, Judge Traynor refused to answer questions at the at the hearing, as to who won the twenty twenty election. For the record, Joe Biden did, by seven million votes. It's very clear that Judge Trainor seeks to remain in good graces of the President, at the cost of his own independence. I urge my colleagues to oppose him.
Uh, I'd like to introduce into the record a letter supporting Mister Blanch's nomination. This letter is from the American Center for Law and Justice. The letter states quote, " Mister Blanch has demonstrated the experience, judgment, leadership necessary to guide the Department of Justice at a time when the faithful administration of our laws is a paramount importance. His service as Deputy Attorney General and most recently acting Attorney General, together with his distinguished cour- career as both a federal prosecutor and defense attorney, has given him a broad understanding of the department's responsibility and the constitutional principles that must guide him in his work without objection this will be entered in the record uh now we'll have seventy seven former department of justice official writing a letter in support of blanch so i'll enter this in the record and i want a quote from uh this this letter todd blanchard understands that the department's mission is to deliver justice not to serve political interest in entrenched bureaucracies he has shown the courage and institutional knowledge to restore the focus on public safety law enforcement's support and the rule of law his career path from paralegal the prosecutor to second highest position in the department gives him a perspective few others possess he knows what work what works because he has lived it at every level so without objection read talk the uh department or the letter from seventy seven former doj officials do we see will be inserted in case he's not welcome anyone here to play this game Uh, we have a letter from the First Liberty Institute, uh, the nation's largest legal organization, dedicated solely to defending religious letter, li- liberty. The letter states, quote, "Every Attorney General faces difficult decisions that will inevitably generate disagreement. The proper question before the Senate is not whether members agree with every future judgment, but whether the nominee possesses the character, experience, legal ability, and commitment to constitutional government necessary to faithfully discharge the office. Mister Blanch's career demonstrates those qualities without objection. that will be entered into the record
do you wanna ask if anybody on our diaspora is taking any
now um is he here he's coming he's walking up ok i shall have one telus coming ok we're still waiting until as he is walking up right now she should uh yeah can we start no we have to wait um to have him wake up he said he is walking up is what they just told us ok we now turn to the nomination
hmm
wait wait wait wait not yet not yet here let's read that one we have he is almost here great now i have uh one other letter to enter into the record by rib by jacob teitelbaum he praised mister blanche's legal document and uh character stating and i quote one on more than one occasion i witnessed mister blanche's continue to provide first rate representation after learning that a client was facing severe financial hardship often taking on cases on a pro bono or substantially reduced fee basis it was evident that to him practicing law was not really a profession it was calling rooted a calling rooted in fairness dignity and compassion precisely the qualities that i believe our nation needs in its next attorney general firmness to the pursuit of justice joined with mercy and respect for every person who enters the law end of quote ok we can go now ok we'll now turn to the nomination of daniel trainor to be circuit judge us circuit court of appeals eighth circuit circle call the roll
mr. cornyn
aye
mr. lee
aye
mr. cruz
aye
mr. cully
aye
mr. tillis
aye
mr. Kennedy
aye
this is blackburn mr. schmidt
aye
this is bris this is moody
aye
this is durbin
no
mr. whitehouse
no
miss klobuchar
no by proxy
uh
mr. coos
no by proxy
mr. blumenthal
no by proxy
miss haruna
no by proxy
mister hooker
no by proxy
mister kudia
no by proxy
mister welch
no by proxy
mister schiff
no by proxy
jeremy grassley
aye
uh miss sophie eyes are eleven blazer ten
the nomination will be favorably reported now we go to angela call monero judge us district court southern district texas clerk will call the roll
mr. cornyn
aye
mr. lee
aye
mr. cruz
aye
mr. cauley
aye
mr. tillis
aye
mr. kennedy
aye hmm
mrs. blackburn mr. schmidt
aye
mrs. griff mrs. moody
aye
mr. durbin
no
mr. whitehouse
no
mrs. klobuchar
no by proxy
mr. coons
no by proxy
mr. blumenthal
no by proxy
mr. rohno
no by proxy
mister pucker
no by proxy
mister pibia
no by proxy
mister welch
no by proxy
mister schiff
no
chairman grassley
aye
uh miss bovie either eleven, eight or ten
the nomination will be reported uh now we have castine mitchell judge district court northern district texas clerk will call the roll
mr. cornish
aye
mister lee
bye
mr. cruz
aye
mr. hawley
bye
mr. tillis
aye
mr. kennedy
ah
mrs. blackburn
aye
mr. schmidt
oh
mrs. brick
aye
mrs. moody
ah
mr. durbin
no
mr. whitehouse
no
miss plebitar
no by proxy
mr. kuz
no by proxy
mr. plumenthal
no by proxy
miss erotta
no by proxy
mr. hooker
no by proxy
mr. padilla
no by proxy
mister welsh
no by proxy
mister schiff no chairman grassley
hi
i'm just gonna be guys eleven and eight are ten
michael will be reported to the senate floor now we have the nomination of michael martin uh district court eastern district of michigan clerk will call the roll
mister cornyn hi mister lee hi mister cruz hi mr. coley
aye
mr. tillis
aye
mr. kennedy
aye
mrs. blackburn
aye
mr. schmidt
aye
mrs. bryant
aye
mrs. moody
aye
mr. durbin
aye
mr. whitehouse
aye
mrs. klobuchar
nobody proxy
mr. kuz
nobody proxy
mr. plumenthoff
nobody proxy
mr. rono
yes
mr. booker
no by proxy
mister padilla
no by proxy
mister welch
no by proxy
mister schiff no
aye
jimmy grassley
uh the nomination
on this vote the ayes are fourteen the nays are seven
the nomination will be favorably reported now the last one is an antonio pozo uh eastern district pennsylvania clerk will call the roll
it's recording aye mr. hay
aye
mr. cruz
aye
mr. hawley
bye
mr. tillis
bye
mr. kennedy
aye
mr. blackburn
aye
mr. schmidt
ok
mr. quidd mr. cooey mr. durbin
aye
mr. whitehouse
uh uh no
mrs. klobuchar
no by proxy
mr. kooz
no by proxy
mr. blumenthal
no by proxy
mrs. harona no great so i'll use the mr. booker
no by proxy
mr. padilla
no by proxy
mr. welch
no by proxy
mr. schiff
no by proxy
jimmy grassley
aye
i'm just both the either twelve and these are nine
the uh nomination favorably voted on will be reported uh we will uh uh this ends our business meeting uh now i call the hearing to order uh i would like to have um the witnesses would you please stand because we swear each in at every meeting um do you swear that the testimony you're about to give before this committee will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you guys
i do
they all answered formatively yeah ok uh senator durbin would like to give an opening so go go ahead you wanna say something
i have something i have something you're done
ok Uh, so, welcome back, Senator Ashcroft. Uh, will you please begin your testimony and then we'll go write down the, uh, list of people the way you're seated there.
Well, thank you, Chairman Grassley and and Ranking Member Durbin. I'm grateful to you and please allow me just a moment to extend my condolences to the committee, the m- friends and colleagues of Senator Lindsey Graham. He had a vivid history of bringing out the best in people he worked with on both sides of the aisle and we enjoyed his friendship and I take this moment to say my condolences and my sympathy also to Jennifer Boss whose daughter was brutally murdered. Allow me to thank you for your serious consideration and attention to the constitutional responsibility confirming high-ranking executive branch officials. It's an honor for me to participate with you today by my appearance. Testifying and sharing my profound re- support for the nomination of the Honorable Todd Blanch as Attorney General of the United States is something for which I am deeply grateful. Justice is best served in the United States through a commitment to uphold the constitution and laws of this country. Integrity is an indispensable imperative for the rule of law. The rule of law is the best friend of constitutionally guarded liberty. For the highest quality administration of justice, law enforcement must never be deluded nor contaminated by personal bias or political preferences. Todd Blanch's record of upholding the Constitution and enforcing the law recommends him supremely to serve America as the eighty-eighth Attorney General. of these United States. I know of no person, no person of a higher commitment to integrity, he has spoken the unvarnished truth to those he works for and to those he works with. Todd's career stands as an outstanding record of public service. He is a consistently well-prepared, tough, but fair prosecutor, fundamentally focused on the Constitution. He understands that he has a profound responsibility in the Justice Department to seek justice, not merely to prosecute. Twenty-five years ago, during my opportunity to serve as Attorney General, Todd worked as an uh individual in the Justice Department. And in his law school years, Todd worked with the Justice Department and in that respect, upon graduation from law school, he clerked for several judges, two of whom are now serving on the respected nationally focused second circuit court of appeals. So he had an understanding of the law from both the prosecutorial side and the side of the bench. Following his clerkships, Todd became an assistant United States attorney as a US attorney office for South Southern District of New York, a premier uh, prosecutorial office of the United States, he spent roughly two years as the co-chief of the violent crimes unit, supervising there nearly two dozen prosecutors. Then served as a co-chief of the, uh, office's White Plains division, where he presided over a wide span of work, public corruption, securities, and bank and wire fraud, federal programs, fraud, Medicare fraud, RICO, and violent crime. Today as Deputy Attorney General and Acting Attorney General, Todd energizes the roughly one hundred and fifteen thousand employees from across Maine Justice, the FBI, the DEA, the US Marshal Service, ATF, and ninety-three US Attorneys' offices that span the United States. He's conducted the department's daily operations at full scale, demonstrating his readiness to manage the office in his own right. Todd therefore brings to the Department of Justice a relevant reservoir of experience coupled with sound judgment on an array of different issues. They're all related to law enforcement and the administration of justice. He understands that the rule of law exists to secure this and safeguard the God-given rights of liberty and freedom in America. In professional moments, uh both pi- private and public, I have seen Todd's thoughtful, decisive, yet humble leadership. He's he's a careful and willing listener, skilled at welcoming diverse viewpoints. He is adept at synthesizing and harmonizing different voices in complex situations. He's a, he is comfortable in being held to account, and he will require those in the department to be similarly accessible and accountable. Todd Blanch's record reflects a commitment to the rule of law and the constitution. Our two hundred and fiftieth anniversary properly reminds us that liberty is the core value of America. In fact, it's a core value of human existence. To safeguard this core cultural value, America needs an attorney general exclusively devoted to the rule of law and who unfailingly will honor his vote his oath to the Constitution. Todd Blanch is the right person for that responsibility. Mister Chairman and committee members, thank you for what I consider to be a privilege, to appear before this committee and communicate to you my unreserved endorsement of Todd Blanch for Attorney General of the United States. And I thank you for this opportunity.
Thank you. Mister Ashcroft, now Miss Bensky.
Thank you. first i'd like to thank you and the committee for preparing oh sorry
microphone
uh push push red button
there we go thank you first i'd like to thank you all and thank you to the committee for hearing survivor voices i'd like to remind you of who you're hearing from today at this time can my survivor sisters and family please rise we may look like grown adults when you see us now but we were children Young girls at the time of our abuse, these are the photos of when our innocence, dreams, and lives were stolen. Please take these faces in as you think of us as your own family, daughters, nieces, sisters. Now look at our faces and remember the women and families of the, of who the DOJ re-victimized. You guys can sit. Thank you so much. I'm a teacher. In my school, if a student released a nude photo depicting a peer's sexual assault and abuse they would almost certainly face expulsion. And yet, this is what our Department of Justice did to crime victims. Today, Todd Blanch, well, Todd Blanch has been at the helm of the release of nude images of survivors, the outing of Jane Doe's, and the exposure of more than one hundred victims identifying information in documents describing horrific acts of abuse including my own. instead of treating this release as its own violation, and holding the man who led it accountable, you have a a decision on whether you place him in the highest law enforcement position in this country. In December, before the document release, our attorneys submitted three hundred and fifty victims' names to the Department of Justice, as victims' names to be redacted, prior to the release. In that first release I found my name in two places. In that next release in January my name appeared again, but this time the reductions were so far worse. Um the files displayed not only my name, but my phone number, my former addresses, where I worked, and other identifying information. When my name appeared in the third file release, it became difficult to believe that this was not intentional. Despite my lawyer repeatedly contacting the DOJ, Seeking protection, my information continued to be exposed. And it's not just my name, it's the identifying information, these documents contain disturbing yet incomplete accounts of my abuse. They were available not only for the entire world to see, but my child, my students, my friends, my employers, my colleagues, and my family. It was humiliating. Worse, my FBI three O two exposed to Jane Doe, who had fought for decades to conceal her identity. It's been absolutely devastating. Outing survivors causes real and irrevocable harm. While coping with our emotional distress and psychological trauma, we also have lost our privacy and confidentiality, suffered reputational harm, lost jobs, and now fear for our personal safety. We are not activists. We are crime victims. For us, this has never been about politics. It has been about getting justice for the crimes committed against us. And the redactions are not the only problem with Todd Blanch's nomination. Todd Blanch has never attempted to listen to us, the crime victims. Survivors in this room repeatedly ask to meet with Todd Blanch through multiple channels. He never responded. Yesterday, he said he would meet with us, with our attorneys, if they were present. Um, but let's be clear, that was the first time that that was ever communicated to us before yesterday. He simply ignored us for the last eight months. He's been radio silent and the silence was deafening. Crime victims deserve better from the nation's highest level of law enforcement officials. We deserve to be heard directly, not dismissed and ignored. There are numerous investigative leads that must be followed. Despite Mister Blanch's claim that there are none, Epstein and Maxwell did not abuse women and children alone. They did not build their operation alone. Others enabled these crimes, exploited victims, and avoided accountability for decades. You do not have to take my word for it. Several weeks ago, after examining the evidence, Chairman James Comer directed Todd Blanch to open investigations into two men connected to Epstein. The Epstein files are not merely a collection of embarrassing names and politically damaging associations. They are records connected to the sexual exploitation and trafficking of girls and young women. They contain information about how Epstein's network worked, who assisted him, and whether additional crimes can still be investigated. The Department of Justice should pursue every credible lead. not just tirelessly uh tirelessly work tirelessly um not just to shutdown the investigations the survivors in this room know they're our investigative leads because they are our stories mister blanch knows it too yet he has chosen not to pursue them mister blanch's actions have have destroyed survivors trust according to public reporting mister blanch spent approximately nine hours meeting with Guilen Maxwell. He did not even spend nine minutes meeting with the survivor. Afterward, Maxwell was transferred to what many have described as a summer camp prison. We learned all of this through the news. Imagine what that feels like as a survivor to sit there, if you were exploited by Guilen Maxwell, and you're hearing this for the first time with no explanation, no outreach, and no transparency from your. injury the information that todd blanch gathered in the white house situation room last summer to curb the political fallout from the epstein files was absolutely abhorrent instead of following investigative leads our government treated and continued to treat this as a political crisis that needs to be managed in our nation everyone deserves equal protection under the law todd blanch has been unwilling to protect epstein survivors personal information and he has been resistant to investigate the people who helped epstein and maxwell commit those crimes we need an attorney general committed to ensuring that everyone who facilitated epstein's crimes is held accountable please i implore you please think carefully and think about the girls in these photos thank you
thank you miss bensky now miss boss
thank you chairman grassley is it on thank you chairman grassley and ranking member Durbin and members of the committee
thank you
microphone roll
can you pull it real close to you uh yeah
microphone
there
yeah i think that's right
there you go
my name is jennifer boss i live in antioch illinois i'm the mother of an angel named megan boss and i'm here because my daughter's tragic and gruesome death has exposed catastrophic failures in immigration enforcement and drug trafficking policies the investigation into her death continues but one truth is painfully clear dangerous gaps in our system allowed an illegal alien to exploit our laws and my daughter paid the ultimate price losing megan and then being forced to navigate multiple broken systems while drowning in grief taught me that policies carrying life or death consequences cannot remain political talking points that's why i've tried despite the most intense heartache anyone can ever experience to speak locally and nationally about the four crisis that compounded our tragedy illegal immigration sanctuary policies the fentanyl crisis, and cashless bail. I'm so grateful that the whole of this administration, with Todd Blanch leading the DOJ, has prioritized all four of these issues. I'm asking the committee not to wait until another mother is sitting where I am. Confirm Todd Blanch. He is the leader who will uphold the law. Honor victims, confront dangerous criminal organizations, and fight to give other american families the safety and lasting protection that came too late for mine i couldn't save my daughter but todd blanches attorney general he might save yours because next time it could be your child it could be your family it could be you this can happen to anyone we must have leaders that are willing to act before the next life is taken leaders that are willing to confront the failures instead of explaining them away leaders like ty blanche megan was my first born she was a mom and a sister in ant loyal friend she was bubbly and funny she loved to be silly sorry she was extraordinarily creative and she was blessed with the spirit that just lit up the room in february of twenty twenty five megan disappeared for fifty one days our family lived in the most unbearable agony day after day i did everything i could think of to search for her instead of bringing me home our search ended with the most unbearable truth a mother can ever be forced to face we learned that megan's life had been cut short and her body was concealed stuffed upside-down in a garbage can filled with bleach by an illegal alien that had no right to be here. Again, she was stuffed upside-down in a garbage can for fifty-one days, soaking in bleach. for seven weeks this man walked past that garbage can on his way to the bakery he worked at everyday under a fake name and during those weeks i couldn't breathe or read or sleep we searched his neighborhood we knocked on his door We left Megan, flyers with Megan's face, on every surface we could find. And then I learned she was only a driveway distance away from us the whole time. Excuse me. Not only was she killed, Her dignity was stolen in death. Had Megan not been identified by the tattoos that she loved so dearly, even the beautiful image of my daughter that I hold in my heart, my head, it would have been replaced forever by the unbearable image of what had been done to her. Megan's daughter, she was only five years old when this happened. Her life with Megan and her right to know and make memories with her mom, it was stolen. This is Megan's bracelet. It's a charm bracelet we started when she was five. And it has every memory on it from growing up. Every milestone, every place that we visit. Anything that was important to her. It's here, this is her story. And these are the stories that she should be telling her daughter. I have to hope I can remember them all. There's so many. My husband and I, we won't be retiring like we imagined, of course, because we have to pray that we live long enough And this is because our laws that we already have aren't enforced. This is why victims don't care about partisan victories. We care whether the dangerous criminals and drug traffickers and cartels are stopped before another loved one is buried and another family's life is shattered. Right now, governors and local officials enact sanctuary protections, cashless bail policies, and identification laws that undermine federal enforcement and create dangerous public safety loopholes. A criminal that's released under a reckless local policy does not remain inside that city or state. He can cross into yours. megan's perpetrator was released the day after he was arrested do you want him as your neighbor angel families have told me how they've been entirely abandoned and ignored by the government our children and our families were politically inconvenient some of these angel families have been trying asking for someone to listen to the stories and learn from what's for more than twenty five years. In this very room, the last angel, the last angel mom that sat here was asked how come she was here and why did they have to sit through another hearing. That's beginning to change now. under the current leadership of todd blanch angel families finally are feeling heard and respected and taken seriously there is a renewed focus on prosecuting immigration crimes and the transnational criminal organizations drug trafficking and the like so much work that's done by ice and homeland security investigations goes on scene it's not limited to detaining the individuals who escaped detection at the border. Their work is life-protecting. From the time that I've spent talking with Todd Blanch, I knew immediately that he makes victims a priority. Under his direction, the DOJ has engaged directly with the Angel families and treated us not like political props, but as partners in preventing future tragedies. And that's all that we've ever asked for. Justice can't bring our children home. Nothing, nothing can. So the justice that we're seeking now is the assurance that their deaths won't be ignored, and they won't be in vain, and preventable tragedies from these laws not being enforced won't be repeated. I one hundred percent believe Todd Blanch will be the one who can deliver that justice, saving lives of people who'll never know it. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you, Miss Boss. Now, Miss, your lawyer.
Thank you.
Good morning, Chairman Grassley, Ranking Member Durbin, and members of this committee. I am here as a public servant, a former Justice Department employee, and a concerned American who cares deeply about the future of our country. I had great hope that Todd Blanch would be an effective leader and a responsible steward of the Department of Justice. But he quickly proved me wrong. Two days after Mister Blanch was confirmed as Deputy Attorney General, he fired me from my position as the department's career pardon attorney. I declined to rubber stamp a political favor for a friend of the president, and it cost me my job. Mister Blanch's office had asked me to recommend restoring the gun ownership rights of a convicted domestic abuser. I raised concerns about public safety, but Mister Blanch's staff pressured me to go along anyway. I did not. Domestic violence is the leading type of homicide among women. When a domestic abuser is armed, his victim is five times more likely to be killed. But because this particular domestic abuser had a personal relationship with the president, mister Blanch's staff asked me to set aside my concerns. When I wouldn't, mister Blanch fired me within hours. He then took extraordinary measures to silence me. He sent US Marshals to my home in an effort to prevent me from speaking with members of Congress. I was shocked. to hear Mister Blanch's testimony about this yesterday. What he said about my firing is provably false. His claim that it had nothing to do with the concerns I raised is contradicted by documents and evidence. His claim that he tried to call me before sending marshals to my home is flat out false. His claim that it is normal for DOJ to use armed law enforcement officers to deliver mail to the homes of its The casual lies that Mister Blanch tells, even while sitting in this chair, testifying to this committee, are emblematic of a much larger problem. Courts across the country have said they can no longer trust the Justice Department to uphold the law and tell the truth. There are over seven hundred documented instances of DOJ violating judicial orders. There are nearly one hundred cases in which judges appointed by both parties have found that DOJ presented false or misleading information in court. Earlier this week, a federal judge found that Mister Blanch personally misled this Congress about the department's settlement agreement with President Trump. To the American public, it looks like Mister Blanch is running DOJ as Donald Trump's personal law firm. He is using law enforcement powers to pursue petty grudges harbored by the president. These pointless vendettas are wasting our scarce resources and destroying DOJ's credibility. Mister Blanch has repeatedly placed President Trump's interests ahead of the interests of the country. The collusive settlement agreement is a perfect example. It protects the entire Trump family and all of their businesses from any investigation or audit forever. It gives away nearly two billion dollars of our money for no reason at all. It is a windfall for the President and his allies at the expense of the American people. A court found that signing this agreement was a betrayal of Mr. Blanch's duty to zealously represent the interests of the United States. That is the most basic obligation of the Attorney General. Mr. Blanch said yesterday that the settlement fund is dead. It is not. That is contract law one O one. Mr. Trump or his sons could seek to enforce it at any time. Mister Blanch gave bizarre excuses for not meeting with Jeffrey Epstein's victims. Yet he spent two days personally eliciting testimony from Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's partner in crime. After this imprisoned sex trafficker made statements claiming to exonerate the president, she was moved to a minimum security camp. That is a grievous breach of DOJ policy. It is an abuse of Mister Blanch's office. It is a terrible betrayal of Epstein and Maxwell's victims. Mister Blanch's callous approach to the Epstein case matches his cavalier attitude toward rearming domestic abusers. At the end of the day, the priority of this DOJ is protecting powerful men, even when it comes at the expense of vulnerable women. What Mister Blanch is doing is dangerous. Earlier this week, two Supreme Court justices sat here and testified about the terrifying threats that judges are facing in this country. Meanwhile, Mister Blanch is fueling those threats by attacking judges who rule against the administration and declaring a war against the courts. These are not partisan concerns.
Thank you, Mr. O'Hara. Now, Mr. Adler. Thank you.
Good morning, Chairman Grasley, Ranking Member Durbin, and distinguished members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. My name is John Adler and I appear before you today in my personal capacity to provide testimony in support of the nomination of the Honorable Todd Blanch, to serve as the United States Attorney General. I respectfully offer my perspective both as a former colleague of Acting Attorney General Blanch and as a National Law Enforcement Organization Leader. My experience in law enforcement spans over thirty years and I was honored to serve ten Attorney Generals as a federal law enforcement officer. Concurrent with my active duty law enforcement service, I also served as the National President of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association for two terms representing federal offices from sixty-five different agencies nationwide. As a volunteer law enforcement leader, I had and continue to have the privilege of serving with the leaders of the largest national law enforcement organizations, including the FOP, NAPO, NSA, IACP and others. I have dedicated my life towards making it safer for those who serve, and supporting innovative approaches towards augmenting both officer and public safety which are intertwined. As a career tactical instructor, I emphasize marrying tactical proficiency with compassion and civility. Within a legal context, I am convinced that Acting Attorney General Blanch exudes this. When I joined the US Attorney's Office in April two thousand and one, I met an incredibly intelligent and highly motivated paralegal, by the name of Todd Blanch. My first impression of then-paralegal Blanch was that he moved like a football fullback, carrying the federal criminal statutes book under his arm as he charged through the revolving doors. It didn't take long for me to figure out why all the prosecutors were so friendly with Mister Blanch. They all wanted him on their trial teams. It was clear from the beginning that paralegal Blanch had a passion for prosecuting violent crimes. He later became an assistant US attorney, and his amazing work ethic and passion for combating violent crime were unparalleled for a new AUSA. AUSA Blanche exuded the " speak softly but carry overwhelming evidence" demeanor. It was no surprise to anyone at the office that AUSA Blanche ultimately became the co-chief of the violent crimes unit. It was clear that unit chief Blanche was fully committed to litigating violent crime cases in furtherance of public safety. For context, I want to emphasize that the acting attorney general began his paralegal and prosecutorial career in an office that was predominantly represented by AUSAs with different political views. What impressed me during my sixteen years with the US Attorney's Office was the unified commitment to the rule of law, irrespective of political affiliation. I am absolutely convinced that if confirmed as the Attorney General, Acting Attorney General Blanch will carry forward that spirit and unwavering commitment to the rule of law. During the terrorist attacks on September eleventh, two thousand and one, the US Attorney's Office in the Southern District of New York was located in the hot zone in New York City. While we often hear the Acting Attorney General speak of the extraordinary bravery of first responders who run forward into harm's way, he exuded that charge-forward spirit during the challenging days following nine eleven. I have profound respect for his service above self spirit then, and it has only grown. Moving forward to Deputy Attorney General Blanch's tenure as the Acting Attorney General, His outreach and engagement with law enforcement nationwide has been extraordinary. Same can be said for his twenty-four seven staff. In speaking with my fellow national law enforcement organization leaders, it is clear that they have great respect for the Acting Attorney General, and appreciate his commitment to backing the blue. Acting Attorney General Blanchard has demonstrated a strong commitment to officer safety and ensuring that all law enforcement offices have the same protection under the law. According to the FBI's recent annual report, ninety thousand law enforcement officers were assaulted in twenty twenty five. That represents a ten year high. Acting Attorney General has made clear that his department will stand by law enforcement and support the prosecution of anyone who assaults a law enforcement officer. Civility does not work when it's one-sided. He has earned the respect and admiration of officers nationwide. In terms of civility, Acting Attorney General Blanch has distinguished himself during a substantial time he spent with all the national law enforcement organizations during National Police Week. In particular, the time he spent with the concerns of police si- survivors, which are the survivors of our heroes killed in the line of duty, was heartfelt and riveting. Much like his powerful support for our angel families, Acting Attorney General Blanch is equally supportive of the surviving family members of our fallen heroes. And I have no doubt he will continue that as he prioritizes the safety of all Americans. As a father of beautiful teenage daughter, I worry about her safety every day. I expect our government leaders to do everything they can to support a safe and just quality of life for all our children. That should be an unbreakable priority. I sleep well knowing that my daughter's safety and all Americans are an unwavering priority for Acting Attorney General Blanch and his team. Under his leadership and through the dedication of all law enforcement offices violent crime continues to be driven down. We must sustain these powerful results, and we need Acting Attorney General Blanch to be confirmed as our nation's Chief Law Enforcement Officer. Throughout my law enforcement career, I wore and continue to wear a pendant that has John fifteen thirteen inscribed, "Greater love hath no one than this, than to lay down one's life for a friend." I am absolutely convinced that the Acting Attorney General, Acting Attorney General Blanch, will exude that spirit of the scripture, and do everything he can to protect the safety of all Americans, by following the rule of law. I definitely respect that the committee set aside any political differences, demonstrate its unwavering commitment to both officer and public safety, and vote to confirm acting Attorney General Blanch as the next Attorney General. Thank you.
Thank you. Miss Boss, uh, first of all, thank you for your courage coming forward. Uh, you know how important it is to have effective leadership. in pursuing justice. I think you've answered my question in your uh in your last two minutes of your testimony. But I'd like to give you an opportunity to say it once again, how you feel about Mister Blanchard and the prospects of his continued leadership at the Justice Department.
Thank you, Chairman. Um. I feel like we have already seen what has come out of the justice department as far as the prosecutions of um the drug trafficking the cartels um he is following up the hard work of the men and women that are in our uh the ice agents cbp and he is prosecuting those dangerous criminals and that is making a difference
ok thank you very much now miss orier um we know the biden administration was the most active pardoning administration in american history four thousand total acts of clemency uh i think you were the pardoned attorney on january the seventeenth twenty twenty five when president biden granted more communications in a single day than any prior president head over that entire presidency. Is that right?
I was the pardon attorney on on that date, sir.
OK. Were you also the pardon attorney on December twenty third, twenty twenty four, when President Biden commuted thirty seven of forty inmates on federal death row?
Yes, sir, I was.
Thank you for that. Um, so I wanna uh bring up some of these uh, commutations, uh, Thomas Sanders, who killed a twelve year old girl, Lexus Roberts. He shot Lexus four times and slit her throat after the girl had witnessed him murder her mother. Did you object to President Biden's commuting his sentence?
Sir, I'm not able to discuss the recommendations that I made to the president regarding acts of clemency.
Um, can you speak, uh, did you turn your microphone on? Re-
I believe it's on, sir.
You were the partner attorney, yeah.
I was, yes, yes, sir.
And that you recommended, you didn't object to the recommendation.
Sir, I'm not, uh, able to discuss the recommendations I provided to the president about clemency matters which are considered to be
OK. I want you to know
covered by executive privilege.
OK, I want you to know that I have read evidence that you made this recommendation. So are you telling me the evidence I read that I'm wrong? So did you make the recommendation? Or you don't want you you're telling me you can't talk about it.
Sir, just like Mister Blanch explained yesterday, I'm not free to discuss the recommendations that I provided to the White House, because they are covered by executive privilege.
You can't even tell me if you contacted the victim's family you can't say yes or no to that
uh sorry i i cannot talk about the discussions i had unless the white house chooses to waive the executive privilege i would be happy to come back and speak with you or other members of this committee
ok and i think what i'm going to do is i'm going to tell you what i know so let's go to the uh uh the case of jorge avila torres who stabbed to death eight year old laura hobbs and nineteen year old christopher tobias who were riding their bicycles in chicago sunburn he had also sexually assaulted at least one of them and four years later he strangled to death a twenty year old naval officer amanda snell in her barracks so uh you can't talk about this but i have read evidence that you made this recommendation and uh you can't even tell me yes or no whether you made that recommendation
Well sir what I can tell you is that President Biden did commute the sentences of thirty seven individuals who were on death row to sentences of life imprisonment and all of those individuals will remain incarcerated for the rest of their lives, most likely in maximum security persons.
K well we know what the commentation uh did but the fact is that they were taken off death row. Then we have the case of Dylan Roof. Shot up a church in South Carolina. That made national history for a long period of time in his trial. He murdered nine African Americans in a racially motivated attack. And you're telling me you can't talk about that, but I have read evidence that you made this recommendation. And uh Uh, since you can't comment on it, I'm just going to have to tell you that you made that recommendation. Robert Bowers murdered eleven people in Pittsburgh Tree of Life synagogue in the deadliest attack on a local Jewish community in American history. And you're telling me you can't talk about the commutation of Robert Bowers? But I wanna tell you that I have read evidence that you made this recommendation uh and then also johar uh planted bombs at the twenty thirteen boston marathon killing three and injuring hundreds in an act of terrorism and you're telling me you can't talk about that but i want you to know that i have read evidence that you made this recommendation and uh it seemed pretty I'm gonna give you a chance to react to it. But it seems pretty obvious that you were fired because the current Justice Department leadership disagreed with how you handled the pardons last administration. You wanna respond?
Sir, regarding these cases, these are absolutely horrific cases, and every one of the individuals you mentioned will remain incarcerated for the rest of their lives, most likely in a maximum security prison facility. Uh, as far as the reasons for my firing, I've been in litigation with the Justice Department for over a year about my firing, which was plainly illegal. And Mister Blanch's comments in this room yesterday are the first time I have ever heard the explanation that I was fired because of recommendations I made to the prior administration about how to accomplish their clemency objectives. Mister Blanch's Justice Department submitted a pleading to the Merit Systems Protection Board that stated that the facts about my firing were not in dispute. The facts as I have been saying for one year plus, or that I was fired within hours of declining to make a recommendation that I believed was very dangerous.
K.
And Mister Blanch's statement yesterday that it was for another reason materialized out of thin air and has never been stated before.
K. Mister Ashcroft, you served this nation with distinction during your tenure as Attorney General. You know what it takes to do the job and to do it well, based on Mister Blanch's leadership of the Justice Department during this administration. Do you believe he would serve as an effective and capable Attorney General?
Well, I think the statistics and the history tells a story here. Thank you for the question, but Todd Blanch has a heritage and history of involvement in the Justice Department, pursuing the rule of law and enforcing the rule of law, And that extended from his time as a, as a, uh, uh, an assistant in the office when I was Attorney General twenty-five years ago to recent times when his aggressive approach in fighting crime has, uh, actually, uh, been a part of the effort that's driven down violent crime across the country, and particularly in cases where the department has been welcomed to assist and work with local officials. In my home jurisdiction in South Operation Spring Cleanup. And a number of very important uh prosecutions were begun at that time. And I think it's a credit to him. I have no doubt that his commitment to maintaining the safety and security of Americans and their rights will be pursued in in in the pursuit of the rule of law and within the bounds of the Constitution of the United States which is the framing that I think every American expects that the constitution and rule of law of the United States be followed and defended.
Mister Durbin. Senator, I'm sorry, Senator Durbin.
Thank you, uh, Mister Chairman. Miss Boss, breaks my heart to hear the story of you and your loss of your daughter. And I I just wanted to say my heart goes out to you and to your husband, carrying on for her with uh your granddaughter, uh, is the greatest tribute you can give her i'm sure uh i'm sorry you went through this terrible tragedy i'm glad you're here today to tell that story miss pinsky it's hard to imagine that this government kept publishing your personal information did you anyone notify them of this breach of privacy
yeah i mean we notified them immediately um back in
so did this happen to any of the others who were present here today or was it
i think almost all yeah yes um there were hundreds of victims that were outed and jingoes um and you know i do wanna speak to just the jammages for a moment you know we we've been receiving threats we've had loss of jobs we've had loss of confidentiality and privacy um but there is there is another piece here and it's that this idea of withholding information we're trying to get justice we've always been trying to seek justice and we're seeing if you just even look at new mexico now um that the ag the new mexico ag has attempted five times to get the files um uh from todd blanchett and from this doj and it's it's obstruction they're obstructing so for us yes of course there are so many damages there are so many things that we are mourning the loss of including a lot of our innocence and who we were as these young girls um but to still see it be obstructed after thirty years. Um, and this is five administrations. We're not saying that this is just this administration. We have been at this fight for for thirty years. Um, so we just really hope that, you know, there's a huge impact as far as just releasing information and making sure that it's followed up on.
I can't understand how this Attorney General can find forty eight hours to visit with Ghislaine Maxwell,
Yeah.
who has been prosecuted for sex trafficking
Yeah.
and can't find thirty minutes to meet with the survivors of that sexual predatory conduct.
Yeah. It's certainly not for lack of trying. We have tried in every way we know how to try. Um, and then we did hear from him yesterday that he would sit with counsel, and I would I would say I ho- I think many of us in this room would be interested in meeting with him today if we could.
Many of the members of the committee will remember when we had the Olympic athletes in here.
yeah
who had been sexually abused uh and the head of the fbi head of the fbi sat through their entire testimony
yeah
uh to show his concern for what had happened to them and any wrongdoing by the federal bureau of investigation
mmm
that to me was the right thing to do from both sides why in the world would mister blanchett at this point say he doesn't have the time i couldn't understand his argument yesterday He couldn't see you because you had a lawyer? Or he couldn't see you because you didn't have a lawyer?
Yeah, I think it was because we had a lawyer. But, you know, I think, um, as a career prosecutor, we talk so much about Todd Blanch's credentials in this room and we've heard a lot about them. Um, and that's great. But I think as a career pros- prosecutor, he should be salivating by this case, right? This case is, um, uh, it's gold for somebody that wants to prosecute. There are six million files. There are thousands of
i'll just tell you point blank i don't think his name should be called on the floor of the united states senate until he meets with you it's not too much to ask
mmm
set aside two hours four hours whatever it takes mmm so that there is clearly an effort by this government to get all the information
yes
uh and make a judgment as to what to do with it but to shun you and to snub you at this point there's something else going on here there's gotta be someone told me once in politics there's always a good reason and then there's always a real reason
yeah
what is the real reason why todd blanchett does not wanna meet with the survivors of jeffrey epstein
it appears from the outside reputational harm And that is what I think is at the core of this, that um he prioritizes the reputation of of the administration um over survivors of sexual abuse and of crime survivors in this country.
Well, I I hope the message goes out to all senators on both sides of the table.
And I do wanna say,
Uh, and
you know, to that end, I'm, we are not, we have been saying that we're not political. I don't, I've asked everyone, we've met with a lot of your offices on both sides and every single conversation, uh, Mister Hawley, we had a great conversation with your Right? It was amazing. And I feel so much hope leaving those spaces, actually. Um, and when we had those conversations, it just felt like you see us as human beings. You don't see us like, we have survivors on both sides of the aisle. We are not here to be political. These are just our stories. Like seventeen year old me, I promise you, not political. Um, but so when we have these very real interactions in your offices, we hope that you can put politics aside. Um, it was something so beautiful that we saw during the FC files transparency act. There was a moment where Marjorie Taylor Greene went and sat right next to Melanie Stansbury. And that is a moment that will live in my memory forever because they crossed party lines for something that was really important. Um, so I hope that you can all do that.
Thank you, Mister Chairman.
Uh, Senator Hall.
Thank you, Mister Chairman. Just on that note, Miss Binsky,
Please, yeah.
and and for everybody who's here, all of the victims, thank you for being here. Thank you for standing up and telling your stories. Miss Boss, thank you for being here and for telling us about your daughter. I'm sorry for what all of you have been through. So I want to say thank you and honor your voices and honor what you're doing. Miss O'Rourke, if I could just turn to you. Uh, you were President Biden's pardon attorney. Is that correct?
I was the Justice Department's pardon attorney over three.
You recommended, you made clemency recommendations to the White House, whether or not to pardon inmates. Is that correct?
My job was to make clemency recommendations to the rest of the
And in that, in that capacity, you recommended that the President of the United States, Joe Biden, grant clemency to all forty federal death row inmates, all of them. Clear them out. Correct?
Sir, as I told Chairman Grassley, I'm not free to discuss the recommendations that are being
Well, that's what your memo says.
presented.
I mean, we have your memo. Your memo of November fourth, two thousand twenty four says, and I quote, "disparity and undue severity of sentence, which are present in many if not all of these cases, have been recognized as grounds for clemency." And you went on to recommend in that memo and a series of other memos that are now recorded in public record, that the President of the United States grant clemency to murderers, rapists, and the most horrible offenders, all of them clear death row completely out. I'm amazed you've been called here today. I'm absolutely amazed by it. But let's just talk about the people who you recommended. You, you talk about honoring victims. The people who you recommended get clemency and live at the the expense and sufferance of taxpayers for the rest of their lives. Let's start with Dylan Roof. Dylan was a Neo-Nazi who murdered nine African-American worshipers at a Bible study in Charleston, South Carolina, two thousand fifteen. Do you remember this case?
I do remember it very well.
I would hope you did. Here's his victims. Do you wanna look at them?
I remember.
There they are. Nine of them at a Bible study in a church, killed in cold blood. The DOJ knew from day one that he had decided, I'm gonna quote from the prosecutors, decided to attack African-Americans because of their race. He further decided to attack African American worshipers in a black church in order to make his attack more notorious, more notorious. And yet you recommended that he be granted clemency, live at the expense of taxpayers for the rest of his life, substitute your judgment for that of the American judicial system. Do you stand by that recommendation today?
Sir, I'm not going to comment on the recommendations that I made, but I can tell you that Mister Roof is going to die in prison as
Oh, oh,
That is good point.
he's gonna live in prison for a very long time because of you, because of your recommendations. And here's what you said in your memo of October thirtieth, twenty twenty four. You said that actually Roof is not a compelling candidate for clemency, but you recommended it anyway. Why? Because he suffered from anxiety, you said. Right? He suffered from anxiety. Did it ever occur to you that maybe the family of s- of his victims might suffer a little bit of anxiety because he marched into their church and murdered them in cold blood? Because he was an incredible racist and he wanted to get on TV?
Sir,
Do you regret it?
I'm not I'm not going to comment on the recommendations that I made to the press.
Do you regret it? Let's talk about Robert Bowers, a man who regularly spewed such vile hatred of Jews. It's unlike anything I've ever seen. He barged into a Pittsburgh synagogue in twenty eighteen and he shot everybody he could find killing eleven innocent people who were there to worship. A federal jury in Pittsburgh unanimously recommended the death sentence finding him guilty on sixty-three counts. Here they are. They're his victims. Take a good look. You recommended clemency for this person who went in and killed these people just cuz they're Jews. He killed, the other guy killed people just cuz they're black. This guy killed people just cuz they're Jews. A jury recommended that he be sentenced to death, and you substituted your judgment for theirs, and and now he's gonna live. Are you proud of that?
Sir, what I am proud of is the fact that I took my job as Pardon Attorney extremely seriously.
Apparently not seriously enough. You certainly didn't take the victim seriously. Then there's Jorge Avila Torres, who wasn't just a murderer, he was a silly serial killer and a rapist.
Sir, you're you're not
Here is who he assaulted and killed. He sexually assaulted and killed eight year old Laura Hobbs and nine year old Crystal Tobias, in a Chicago suburb in two thousand five. And then four years after that, he committed another murder, he slaughtered a fellow service member, Navy Petty Officer Amanda Snell in two thousand nine while she was in her barracks. That's what he did. And you recommended clemency for this individual, and now he'll live his life at the expense of taxpayers because you substituted your judgment for that of the American judicial system jury judges the whole lot, and yet you're here to tell us that you're somehow a victim? I don't think so, Ms. Oyer. I think your judgment is astoundingly terrible. I'm amazed that this side of the aisle has called you. And I just asked my friends on this side of the aisle, do you agree with this? Is this what you want? Do you want these people to be pardoned and live at the expense of taxpayers for their whole lives? Do you wanna excuse the murders of African-American churchgoers? Do you want to excuse the murders of Jews in their synagogues? Do you want to excuse the murders of these children? Because that's what she did, and now she's online hawking products to try to make money off of it. I see you've got your own website where you put your face on baseball caps and mugs, thelawyeroyer.com. You're trying to make money on this?
Sir, I
This is unbelievable, Ms. Oyer, and yet you say you're a victim? These are the victims. And you helped victimize them. And what you're doing is wrong. I hope every member on this side of the aisle will repudiate what you have done and what you stand for. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Sir, I assume that your questions directed at me were rhetorical and that you're giving it as speech,
They're not rhetorical at all.
Sheriff?
I, I asked you to respond and you said you wouldn't. So what I did is I read to you what you have said. I, I quoted verbatim. And I'm happy to keep doing it. In fact, I'd ask now, Mr. Chairman, that this report, restoring and strengthening the federal death penalty report, be entered into the record. It contains information regarding Miss Hoyer, her recommendations, and the track record of all of it. The written records are here. I ask to be re-entered in the record.
It'll be uh Miss Hoyer, uh, take a minute to resp- respond if you want to.
Uh, thank you, Chairman Grassley. I, uh, under President Biden, just like under President Trump, had a job to do, which was to make recommendations to the president about how to best accomplish I put the utmost effort into doing that in a way that was consistent with the interests of the justice system and all of its stakeholders, which includes crime victims, as well as defendants, as well as family members, as well as judges, as well as prosecutors, all criminal justice system stakeholders. The process that I presided over was one that was beyond reproach. What's happening now with clemency is an absolute disgrace. And I'm sorry that I can't answer the questions about the specific recommendations in this public setting, but I would be glad to meet with any members of this committee who have concerns privately, to discuss to the extent I can what your concerns are.
Privately. Why don't you meet with the victims' families? Here's the disgrace.
Senator Whitehouse.
Thank you, Chairman. Um, Mister Af- Ashcroft, welcome back to the Senate. Um, you knew Jim Comey?
Yes, indeed I did.
Pardon me. Yes, indeed I did.
You trusted him?
He was the Deputy Attorney General as well as the, uh, US Attorney for the Southern District of New York.
You trusted him with the top job in your department?
I asked, I asked him to help administer justice at the Department of Justice.
Yeah. You respected him?
Yes, I did.
Do you have, uh, can you vouch for this department's prosecution of him for lying to Congress or for the process that was performed.
I'm not in a position, I don't know all the facts. I'm not in a position to comment on pending investigations or prosecutions.
Can you vouch for this department's prosecution of him for posting a picture of the numbers eight six four seven or the process that led to that.
My response would certainly have to be the same as it is for any prosecution. Uh, I'm not a part of the department now. I'm not fully informed of its factual basis or for the considerations it's, uh, made in in bringing, uh, prosecutions.
What are your views today of Mister Comey's character and merits?
Um, I'm not, I, I'm, I'm not gonna start to discuss the character and merits of individuals, especially those who are standing in a in a position of responding to charges from the Justice Department. I can respond to what I believed during the time I served as Attorney General, and when he served with me, and his service to me, and I believe to the United States at that time was commendable. an honorable.
Um, what is OPR? In the Department of Justice.
That's, that's, I believe it's uh, Office of Professional Responsibility.
Yeah. And what is its role?
Its role is to encourage individuals in the department to act in uh, compliance with and uh, and in uh, in conformity with the rules of ethics and responsibility.
And did you respect the role of the Office of Professional Responsibility when you were Attorney General?
I certainly did. I I hoped that they would advise me properly to keep me out of trouble.
If the uh Office of Professional Responsibility were functionally disabled by an administration in the Department of Justice, what message would that send to the line prosecutors?
i i'm not in a position to comment on hypothetical of disabling and and when you say functionally disabled i think that requires an the uh an assumption of the of what does functionally disabled mean uh i personally uh it's a hypothetical to which i just am unable to respond
but you do agree that OPR does an important job and has an important role and is important to the Department of Justice in the performance of its duties.
I I certainly respected the Department's operation, including OPR, at the time of my opportunity to serve as Attorney General of the United States.
While you were Attorney General, were there procedures that took place when judicial findings of prosecutorial misconduct or dishonesty occurred?
I don't, I have to say I don't remember charges of prosecutorial misconduct and that I dealt with.
Yeah, they were pretty scarce, and till now
So.
it was pretty unusual to have judges say that arguments were made in bad faith, that arguments were made as pretexts, that arguments were disingenuous, that arguments were shoddy or terrible, that the department was losing or sacrificing its credibility, that the department was disrespecting orders of the court, that the department had lied or was engaged in sham, that there was willful and intentional noncompliance or willful disregard of court orders, that department lawyers were contemptuous, or that their behavior and arguments were unconscionable. To me, those are red flag words. I was a United States attorney, and if my federal court had used those words about my line attorneys, there would have been some follow-up. And I expected in your department, if those kind of words were used, there'd at least be some preliminary follow-up. And if what were serious, there might actually be a review by the Office of Professional Responsibility. Does that sound like what likely would have happened during your day?
Uh, I was only admonished at one time that I remember by a court for having commented on evidence. I thought it was pretty good evidence. I think I just said pretty good evidence and at that time
Yeah, I didn't mean you. I meant I meant your line of prosecutors.
at that at that time I I decided that I needed to be more careful about my remarks.
Yeah. No, my question
So I uh my my remarks I were safeguarded and and and carefully made.
Yeah.
Uh, and and frankly, I might add more carefully made than the remarks of some of the judicial officers who while very concerned about the Justice Department, seem to be uh willing to themselves engage in political considerations, which I didn't think were appropriate for the judiciary. So maybe there's a problem that's broader than than we would otherwise recognize.
Well, you've changed the topic a little bit to your own comments and uh response to that, which is fine, I appreciate that you've said that. But my question had to do with, when criticisms like that are leveled against department lawyers, there is ordinarily some kind of a process or review that takes place. They're not just brushed off. That is correct, is it not?
Yeah. It's certainly the reason that the Office of Professional Responsibility exists to to safeguard against things that are not responsibly done or or uh undertaken in a way that discredits the department. Public confidence in the department is very important.
Indeed.
The, and it, and the rule of law, uh, guided by the Constitution, is at the foundation of our safeguarding liberties. And I, I take that seriously. I believed that with all my heart when I served, and I believe it today.
Thank you, sir.
Senator Schmidt.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, first and most importantly, uh, I wanna thank all the victims who were here for your courage to come forward. This is not easy to do, to um, relive everything. So thank you for, for being here and telling your stories. Uh, Miss Oyer, I wanna, I wanna turn to you. You were um Biden's part of an attorney and your, I wanna make sure you're um, I'm clear, your testimony here today is that you were fired because you wouldn't recommend restoring Mel Gibson's gun rights. Is that right?
I was fired just hours after I declined to make that recommendation.
OK, there, you can't think of another reason why you might have been fired.
That's the only explanation that I am aware of. The Justice Department actually put in a pleading that was submitted in my appeal of my firing the fact that the facts of my firing are not in dispute.
OK. On November, uh, and you talked about, um, you, you're concerned about public safety. On November fourth, twenty twenty four, you author authored a seventy three page memorandum recommending the commutation of all forty federal death sentences. Isn't that correct?
Well, as I've told two members of the committee now.
Yeah, I know, I know. But don't play the game with me, because it's not, they've waived executive Privilege. I have the report right here. It's dated April twenty fourth, twenty twenty six. It's actually, your memo is quoted in here. It's pu- it's public knowledge. And the idea that you would come here, you know that already, you would come here and disparage somebody else, and not be willing to answer questions about how you commuted the sentences of murderers, is ridiculous. I can't believe that you're here to do that.
I, I don't, I don't have the authority to commute anyone's sentence.
Do you deny it? Do you deny that you authored the memo?
I I'm not sure which memo you're referring to. The just
I'm referring to the November fourth, twenty twenty four, seventy three page memo.
I don't
Do you deny authoring it?
I can't say without having a memo and
It's ridiculous. I honestly, I can't believe you did.
there's something I offer.
You did and everybody in America and in the world can pull it up. So it's a ridiculous, do you also
Like a docu- that looks like a document that has DOJ's logo on the cover.
Yeah, and it quotes your letter. It quotes your letter.
What do you mean?
I don't know what letter you're
You're you're losing credibility. You should just admit it. You should just admit you authored it. Everybody knows you authored it. So I'm not gonna waste any more time on, on your, your convenient little game you're playing here. You also authored and recommended the commutation of the Boston Marathon Bomber, the Tree of Life synagogue murderer, and Dylann Roof. We all know this. How many pages of the seventy-three pages did you dedicate to victims? Because you expressed your concern over victims. How many pages were dedicated to the victims?
Sir, I don't have the memo that you're referring to in front of me.
I can tell you, three. Three pages. Three pages were dedicated to the victims. Um, so, I also happen to have, I made a special access request last year under the Presidential Records Act for documents from the Biden White House on the abuse of pardons and commutations we recently got those documents I wanna show you a couple. Here's one. It's dated December third, twenty twenty four, and it's an internal memo on the commutation of the thirty-seven death sentences that you were involved with. The memorandum states that the White House worked with reporters to quote " insure positive coverage". It says the White House gave advocates, the elected officials, resources and key messaging to amplify the news. You personally recommended commuting, commuting all forty death sentence cases in even broader action than Biden took. Again, that included Dylann Roof, the Boston Marathon bomber, the Tree of Life synagogue shooter. Did you know that the White House was using your recommendations as a PR stunt?
Sir, I h- have no idea what document you're referring to currently.
D- well, let me just ask you in general, did you know that they were planning to message around your commutation?
Sir, I was not an employee of the White House.
OK, I'll take that as a no. I'll take that as a no. But they used your ridiculous
I didn't work.
recommendation t- as a veneer of legitimacy.
Sir,
Document two.
I was, I was called here to talk about Mister Blanch's nomination for Attorney General.
Yeah, I know that's what you thought you were came here to talk about. But the reality is, your credibility is gone. You can't come here and do the political bidding of the Biden administration. And then when you're called out on that and being fired, and thank God you're being fired. You know what I really think? I think you thought you came here and you ha- you're selling merch, by the way. Do we have the hoodies that are up for sale? You sell merch. Let's sell the hoodies. I think you came here thinking that you were gonna be uh ordained the high priestess of the resistance. That's what I think. That's why you're denying simple facts that you authored the memo, commuting the sentences. Everyone knows that.
Sir.
And we have documents now from the White House that they use that memo as a PR stunt. And so the idea, you have no credibility to talk about Todd Blanch. You have none. You've come here, you deny basic facts, you, you recommended the commutation of murderers. You gave no quarter at all, or any time to the victims. of these brutal murders so again i can't believe you've been called here by the other side but i'm glad we've had an opportunity to expose your hypocrisy thank you mister chairman
senator ronald
thank you mister chairman uh thank all the witnesses for being here as a continuation of the confirmation process for mister brunt we are here to determine whether or not mister blanch who continues to be president trump's lawyer and all that that implies should be the attorney general of the united states of america who is supposed to be defending the constitution not the president miss bencki thank you so much for being here and for all of the other uh epstein victims mister blanch was asked uh whether uh he would meet with you and uh because we knew that he had refused basically to meet with the victims of the epstein crimes and uh he offered apparently yesterday and he made some excuses about uh it not being appropriate uh for him to meet with the victims directly why i do not know
understand yeah
but he offered up a staff person and i understand that a staff person from his office contacted you uh you and others and offered to meet with your counsel that's is that correct not with you directly
i am not aware of a staffer reaching out we i don't i can ask but um we have not heard from a staffer mmm no we have not heard from a staffer in the last few words
ok let's let's get that clarified i um did i misunderstand that in fact yesterday when he said i have a staff person here and we can get this done today
yeah
um that they did they have not contacted you
they have not contacted us no
he also said that it would not be appropriate for him to meet directly with you so
i think we don't understand the situation yet
not only is his staff not have they not contacted you as he indicated yesterday that uh this could all happen yesterday he continues to make excuses as far as i can tell for not meeting with you in spite of the fact that he met for hours yeah with uh miss maxwell why is it so important can you tell us once again why is it so important
yeah
for you to you and other the other victims of episodes crimes to meet with the with mister blanchard personally
yeah thank you for the question i think that if a victim comes and reports a crime in the fbi what is the first thing that they do they follow up like law and order s. v. u. taught me that when i was fifteen years old um the doj has never followed up in thirty years with any of us there is a lot in the files right now that you should be investigating and looking into um and to my knowledge i'm i mean they can ask they can answer this too but um we have never been approached by anybody on the prosecutorial side of of things so i do think like sitting down telling our stories and explaining like the people that were in the room, right, we were witnesses of crimes, we had crimes committed to us directly, we do have a lot of information. And you would think that um somebody would take that lead that's already in, like we already went to the FBI because that we wouldn't have three O two's if we hadn't have gone to the FBI. It's already there, right? So the following up of those three O two's um and then once the once it's supposed to be handled by the Department of Justice, why aren't we hearing from prosecutors this case was never handled correctly from the beginning
and he also made some excuses as to why personal information uh were uh was not uh redacted and uh exposing
i'd love to
many of you including you and i
yeah um i think something that stood out yesterday was that he had said that immediately when things were misredacted that they were taken down and they fixed them and within twenty four hours they were put back up that is entirely not true there are still things um that need to be redacted and there is still survivor information in there even today from my awareness um the i mean my information just came down in april um and that was after begging
would you say that mister blanche exhibits a rather dismissive attitude toward all of you and the have seen crimes
one thousand percent yes
thank you miss oyer uh trump's doj under todd blanch leadership has purged career prosecutors for personal reasons for refusing to prioritize president trump's interest over their constitutional oath todd blanch has fired more than twelve hundred former career doj employees who worked for both republican and democratic administrations uh this doesn't even include all of the uh d o j attorneys who resigned because they didn't wanna be part of the kind of d o j that thal blanch is creating which is basically not a department of justice but a department of retribution and corruption in my view what risks does this pose to our country for the kind of d o j that uh thal blanch is running
Senator, one of DOJ's greatest strengths historically has been its non-political career workforce of experts people who are experts in their subject matter. That is crucial to keeping all of us safe. We need people who have specialization in things like national security, prosecuting child exploitation, all manner of sophisticated crimes involving cryptocurrency. Mister Blanch has decimated the expertise of the career workforce. The Justice Department has lost over a
i think the doj is very much losing its credibility and as uh mister ashcroft mentioned uh credibility and trust in doj is very important the rule of law is very important we have a president who does not believe the rule of law applies to him and his uh attorney mister blanche is helping him helping the president uh proceed with his basically anti-rule of law agenda i thank everyone for testifying today thank you
senator boker
um i just wanna start off by saying miss oyer um i hold you in the highest esteem and and respect especially what you're doing now as a private citizen uh you use a platform to educate people about the law it is technical but yet accessible and the badgering you just endured Uh, it should be in completely unacceptable. You were asked to comment on things you didn't have before you. The treatment here to me is just outrageous, and I'm, I apologize on behalf of the United States Senate. Th- this idea that as a private citizen you can't sell things is insulting to me when we have Kash Patel, our sitting FBI director, selling merch on his site. When you have a president of the United States hawking the Bible. And yet you as a private citizen, who is, has a platform to inform people about the law, how, how dare we make such an accusation when the mockery of justice, the exploitation and the grifting off of their offices, has never received criticism from that side of the aisle. And yet they wanna demean you as a private citizen for, for, for, for engaging in commerce. That's ridiculous. in addition to the fact that you were a career public servant for your entire life, you were a public defender. Underpaid, overworked, not for a year, not for five years, but for years. The dignity and the service you have brought, no matter whether we disagree with your politics or not, should merit the praise of every single senator here. So I apologize for what you endured. I thank you for the service you've given to this country. And on matters of horrible killings, horrific acts, these are complicated matters. I hold here, and I'll submit this for the record, people who were victims, families, survivors, who wrote letters to the president of the United States asking not to have the death penalty put there. And I understand there's differing views. But you are putting those complicated decisions to write career memos for the president to make decisions about who's pardoned and not. And so I, I am sorry. What I witnessed, I, I came late to the hearing, was just unacceptable to me. And I am grateful. As somebody that follows you, that reposts your content, I am grateful that you're here.
Thank you.
I wanna say, I didn't hear that on the microphone. Uh, uh, senators enjoy praise. So what did you say?
Thank you, sir.
Thank you very much. I appreciate that. I appreciate that. Um, uh, I just wanna say before serving as a partner attorney, I pointed out that you were a federal, uh, public defender, uh, with clients in the Bureau of Prisons. Was it customary process for transferring a Bureau of Prison, prisoner from a low security prison to a minimum security camp? Was that standard practice?
That was unheard of.
Unheard of. It's against BOP policies. what role does the Deputy Attorney General usually play uh in in that process?
Usually the Deputy Attorney General would have no role in designating or transferring inmates.
No role whatsoever, yet the the Todd Blanch went directly and met with him. Are you aware of any person serving time for child sex trafficking, like Ghislaine Maxwell, being transferred from a low security prison facility to a minimum security camp?
I have never heard of that. It would be an egregious violation of the Department of Justice's own rules.
Miss Bansky, how do you feel knowing that the Deputy Attorney Todd Blanch went to meet with her for two days and then gave her a cushy transfer while he would not meet with you, and then lied to this committee yesterday, saying he was barred by the law, which a first year law student can know the difference of how did that make you feel.
It's devastating for survivors and I'd like to add to that that Annie Farmer, a um victim and a survivor who testified in Guilen Maxwell's hearing, actually wrote a letter to Todd Blanch immediately after that, and requested a meeting with him regarding the move and the transfer, and she's never heard anything back at all.
It is insulting to heap upon survivors the indignities that he has by not even meeting with you, yet he transferred a sex offender to a cushy camp against BOP policies. It sounds like she got a sweetheart deal while he released your personal information, your address, phone numbers, images. And yet he seems to be favoring the the victimizer and not the survivors. I'm out of time and and I it's honorable to see Mister Ashcroft here, sir. I know you, I know your record, we may have disagreed on policies, but I also know you would never, when you're, when you were reviewing a merger, you would never go out to dinner with the parties of that merger. I- i- it would be unacceptable for a person that is supervising a matter to attend a social event with those people before your lawyers. It's about ethics. It's about the appearance of impropriety. It's about following the law. This nominee has not followed the ethics laws, has not followed the the urgencies for for avoiding the appearance of improprieties, has broken a bipartisan law passed by Congress, has demeaned and degraded survivors of sexual violence, and has shielded the president by some kind of deal we know nothing about that allowed her now to be transferred to some cushy camp
I think I'll give it a second.
that has never been done before with sex offenders. This man should not be in this office, I cannot believe we're going through this farce, when when his record alone should make him disqualified, not for to be the Attorney General, but for even being employed by the federal government. Thank you.
Mister Wel- Senator Welch.
Uh, thank you very much. Uh, first of all, uh, Miss Boss, thank you so much. And I fully support your advocacy that the department of justice have as a priority, focusing on victims. And I also wanna express to the uh uh the Epstein victims my appreciation for allowing me to be with you yesterday, and be so uplifted by your support for one another, and all you've done uh to ennoble uh the rights of victims and the strength of victims, uh to recover. Thank you very much. Uh, Mister Ashcroft, Uh, I wanted to, first of all, say we seem to have a problem in Missouri with the Attorney General's not being able to keep their job. They all end up in the US Senate. You started quite a trend with Mister Hawley
Uh.
and Mister Schmidt.
Well, uh, in all deference, it should be remembered that a very important member of the Senate named Jack Danforth
That's right.
had previously served as Attorney General of Missouri. So, uh, myself excluded, I have been a, privileged to be in a line of individuals that i believe have rendered,
Yeah.
very significant and valuable service to this nation.
Well I think, I think you, thank you, and I agree with that, and I, uh, I think, first of all I wanna express to you how much I have admired your career, and, uh, I think that being an attorney general is probably the most difficult, uh, cabinet position, uh, and one of the things that's required is that you give advice to the president, and it may be advice he doesn't wanna hear. and you know i remember uh march of two thousand and four when you were recovering from an illness and uh mister comey was the acting uh uh attorney general and the president's council uh came to your hospital room and wanted you to sign off on uh a uh security law uh that mr. comey in his opinion thought was not legal And, you said that was Mister Comey's decision cuz he was the acting attorney general. Is that right?
Um, I'm, I believe that the public, the written reports, you know, they've been, it's been in novels and other things, and I, I have no reason to contest what they've said.
Right, in
I was in bed with a morphine pump in one hand.
Right.
I was in a, in a what you call a, what do they call this? Intensive care. And uh
But the bottom line here is that the president uh wanted an answer to permit him to proceed, but it was the opinion of Mister Comey at that time that that was not legal.
Hmm.
And this raises really what I think is the heart of what is so challenging to be Attorney General. The the president is the executive, you serve in his cabinet. But there are times when an Attorney General has to say no. Is that correct?
Uh, he advi- it, no attorney ever is a good attorney who doesn't tell his client the truth.
Right.
And it's important that the client trust the attorney so it can accept that.
No, and I, and I appreciate that.
And so, I believe that the Attorney General is sworn to the Constitution of the United States.
And not to an individual.
The answers to the president, he has sworn to the constitution.
That's exactly right. Now, also, when the Enron case, which was an explosive case, came up, uh, you had received contributions in your political career. They were totally and completely legal. But my understanding is, because of that and the appearance of a potential conflict, you recused yourself from that. Of that case, correct?
I wish I remembered things, especially things you say are favorable about what But it's it's over two decades ago that I did a lot of these things.
Well, what you did what you did, Mr. Ashcroft, is what needs to be done. You said it. It's the Constitution who's your client. It's the American people who are ultimately your client. And you have to give that direct and candid advice to the executive who is the president. So that's my question about Mr. Blanch. It's not his competence. It's not that he's got an ongoing relationship. but could you imagine serving as attorney general and having president bush come to you and say by the way who paid you nine million dollars before you got to be attorney general to represent him in criminal actions ok i think four or five people would be enough this is yeah it's it's astonishing right but then he said i've got an idea we're gonna sue the federal government for ten billion dollars and you're gonna represent the irs And then why don't you work out a settlement where there's a one point seven billion dollar fund that I control.
He says he just has to
Would you see any
Oh, that's good.
anything like odd about that?
I I didn't have that situation. I didn't have a president that had been uh the subject of uh
No that's
illegal disclosure of his activities,
but that No but sir it's
uh criminal criminal disclosure.
it's just I I wanna get to your judgment on this, cuz I it's
Well, well, yeah, but, you know, I swore to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Right.
That's a, that's a big challenge in an oath and I, so I wanna give my answer and not your answer, although I respect your question.
No, uh, but what I'm asking, uh, I, you have incredible credibility, incredible character,
Incredible credibility is kind of almost like sentence speak,
incredible respect. Right, but you
unbelievable believability, I mean,
No, I'm, here's what
yes.
Well, you wouldn't have had that reputation if you were a senator. I mean, this is because you stood up to the president.
Oh, yes, I would. I was I was honest as a senator. I have to s I I I I confess the pro my faults from both eras,
I mean.
both my legislative and
All right. But I I'm just gonna finish. Thank you for your indulgence. But number one, when you saw that there was the appearance of a conflict, you did not continue representing the government in the Enron case. Number two, when it came to a president's demand on something, a vital concern to the president, a national security law, surveillance law, where it was the opinion of your department that it was illegal, you stood up to the president and didn't cave. I respect that and I believe that's the obligation and the burden of whoever serves as our Attorney General. Mister Blanch does not share that.
I thank you for that respect. I, I I hope when I grow up I live to do things right.
Senator Tillis.
Mister Ashcroft, and to all the witnesses, uh, thank you for being here. Um, Mister Ashcroft, I told the the chairman, or I told the chairman's staff I had one question, but like John Kennedy it has two parts. Um, um, you know, my first question, Mister Ashcroft. I I I mentioned yesterday that I'm disturbed with the political physics going on today. If you think about the Obama administration, they had vindictive prosecutions. President Trump came in, more or less matched up on some of it. President Biden comes in, goes a little bit further, and this administration seems to me, when we're doing eighty-six, forty-seven, we're doing indictments for that, unless there's other, it's an act of investigation, but that's a reason to bring Mister Comey uh and do a perp walk because he arranged shells eighty-six, forty-seven on a beach in North Carolina. That's all we know right now. It just seems like that does it, it seems to me like there's a continuing, you know, this exceptional nation we are. Americans always wanna do better, the, you know, get bigger, higher the next time. Do you, you know, am I wrong or am I perceiving a continued escalation of of prosecutions that some of which really because of the way that they're being adjudicated they're not being successful it just seems to me that we're like shooting you know, shoot, ready, aim on uh on some prosecutions. And I'm not only talking about the current Trump I'm going back to the Obama era. Do do you agree with me that there seems to be a trend that each administration we seem to be upping it of late?
I'm not sure I could um quantify any disenchantment. Uh I I I I bel- I believe I believe that partisanship and uh
OK, that's OK. That's fine. I I think I think it's
Obama.
Yeah. No, that's OK, Mister Ashcroft, cuz I'm gonna live out my promise to yield back some time. My point, uh, I'm a management consultant. I'm not an attorney, I'm not a prosecutor, I'm not a law enforcement officer. But I deal with facts and empirical data pretty well. I guarantee you, I can give you a list of cases and a list of investigations, a list of vindictive, uh, audits. And every year, it's like from two thousand and eight to two thousand and twelve to two thousand and sixteen to two thousand and twenty, and two thousand twenty-four, one party is gonna have to actually be an adult in the room and stop it, and our members here need to stop having situational ethics where they're only opposed to it when the other party's in power. But that was not my question. Yesterday, before the uh the hearing, and Mister Blanch, I have a a positive predisposition too, just so that everybody knows. Um, I have not made a final decision. But Mister Blanch said very quickly yesterday that he would meet with the victims, the the Epstein victims, today, if it could be arranged. Well, right now, the mark-up, if if you all don't know procedure here, after this hearing is done today, next week we'll hold it over, the earliest possible mark-up would be two weeks from now. And because it seemed to me that uh, Mr. Blanch was willing to um, to say that he would meet with them and counsel, I understand the restriction that counsel has to be present, I expect that before I'm willing to vote out of this committee. And I'm trying to get to yes, um, but this is a very important part of getting to yes. Um, there should not be any reason why, based on what Mister, what Mister Blanch said yesterday, if he said that he would do it today, then he can certainly do it over the next two weeks. Thank you, Mister Chair, I yield back.
Yeah.
Talking about what you said, what advice or how political attorney general offices, I remember that Holder said
That's exactly right, Mister Chair, and anybody who comes up here and steps up on their on their pulpit and then all of a sudden I can go back and and see of record the absolute silence of Democrats when Biden and Obama did the same thing. I'd love to see a Democrat who has taken the position that I have with an administration that shares my jersey because that's the only way this nonsense stops.
Senator Schiff.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, Mr. Adler, thank you for being here and for your many years of service. Uh, Ms. Weir, likewise thank you for your courage at the Justice Department and for your willingness to speak out. Ms. Boss, I'm I'm just heartbroken for your loss and, uh, very much appreciate your advocacy. Uh, and Ms. Bensky, thank you for your willingness to speak out and for all of the Epstein victims that are here. Uh, I'm glad the Attorney General uh, finally acknowledge that he could meet with you. I was perplexed when he said somehow that he was prohibited, that's simply not the law. Uh, and I hope that meeting takes place. Mister Ashcroft, thank you for your service. Um, I wanted to ask you about uh, some remarks the Attorney General made when he said uh, that he thought the President, he was asked about the President targeting his political opponents and enemies for prosecution. Um, and I don't subscribe to the, what I think is a false equivalence. We've never seen a president behave this way. Um, where he openly and privately calls on the Attorney General to prosecute his enemies. Um, and I wanna ask you about that, Mister Ashcroft, because Mister Blanchess said that he believes the president has both the right and the duty to use the Justice Department to go after his enemies. Do you subscribe to that view?
thank you senator uh i believe that the attorney general of the united states has the right and responsibility to enforce the law uniformly and if the law has been broken by the president's enemies he has a duty they do not become exempt from following the law merely by by their enmity to the president of the united states as a matter of fact the people who break the law are in enmity with the people of the United States whose expression of what is the law has been developed in this body and the Congress of the United States. So the we used to call people who break the law public enemies.
Well, mister, it was your turn to ask.
And uh, so my view is that whether a person has been a political supporter or not of the presidency of the United States is not the determining factor regarding prosecution. It's whether a person has violated the law. And in enforcing the law, uh, the Attorney General is carrying out the will expressed in the Congress.
But, Mister Attorney General, uh, you realize having sat here, my time is very limited. Um, that really isn't my question. My question is, do you think it is appropriate for the President to call on the Attorney General to prosecute one of his enemies and acting on that, request the President for the Attorney General to do so?
The President of the United States is the executive branch of the United States, wh- whose charge it is to enforce the laws of the United States.
So is that is that is that
And when the president of the United States asks that the laws be enforced, I don't see that as consistent with his duties or responsibilities. If the laws were to be enforced differentially, and which one of the things that scares me about as many laws as we have, you know, someone said, oh, in order to run a police state, you only have to have one policeman, but if you have enough laws, go find something wrong with anybody you want.
But Mr. Ashcroft, Mr. Ashcroft,
So the president, I believe his job is to
uh, uh, uh, w- I
have an administration which calls for the enforcement of the laws of the United States without regard to the political preferences of the people who are perpetrators or accused individuals in the system.
OK, I'm I'm not I'm not sure that I understand your answer, except you seem to accept the premise that it is OK now for a president to call the Attorney General and ask him to prosecute his enemies. You don't seem to have a problem with that. If you do have a problem with that, please say so.
Uh, I believe the President needs to be an advocate of strong law enforcement.
Okay, that that that is,
And that and that includes the uh enemies of his and
Mr. Arch, with with with with respect, with with respect, Miss Miss Attorney General.
and and if if an enemy of the President goes out and conducts a violent crime, it's nothing wrong with the President calling the Attorney General and saying,
And and and and if and if the
I hope you do something about this violent crime.
and if the President's and if the President's enemy takes a photo of sea shells, you think it's appropriate to prosecute them? If senators make a video stating the plain law in constitution that you can disobey in a legal order, you think it's OK for the president or others to call them to be prosecuted? I don't think so. I don't think so. And I don't think you would have done that as attorney general. I hope you wouldn't have if you would have. You were not the attorney general I thought you were. I don't think it's appropriate for this Attorney General or any other. And I don't remember seeing, not notwithstanding the false equivalence I hear expressed so many times from my colleagues in this committee, I don't remember any Democratic president calling the Attorney General and saying, you need to prosecute him, and you need to prosecute her, and you need to prosecute them, and you need to go after this organization. We have never seen that before or anything like it. Anything like it. And generic statements, " Oh, they all do it," is is simply not the case. And by making that argument, it just, it just further erodes the wall of independence that I'm sure, Attorney General, you remember after Watergate, when because of the abuses of President Nixon, there was an effort to make the Justice Department independent from the White House. Not, not completely independent in the sense that the President couldn't set general priorities. I want you to emphasize these cases and these cases, whether it's immigration cases or drug cases, that was always appropriate. But what has never been appropriate, and particularly so after Watergate, was for the Attorney General of the United States to break that wall and call on his Attorney General to prosecute his enemies, uh, and I would say even without any basis to do so. And this Justice Department has been willing to do so. and has gone before grand juries, and we have never, I think, seen the likes of this either, in these high profile cases where the grand jurors, in some cases to a person, have refused an indictment. How often did you have that happen to you, Mister Attorney, la last question I'll ask you. How often, Mister Attorney General, did you seek an indictment as a prosecutor, and have not a single grand juror vote to indict? Did that ever happen to you?
I don't know.
I just don't know. I I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Brett.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, appreciate all of you being here today, uh, witnesses taking your time, uh, to be in front of us. Uh, before I start, I wanna say thank you to Attorney General Askroff for being here today and your service to our country, um, both as Attorney General and as a United States Senator. And also thank you for your kind words, uh, about Senator Graham. Um, really appreciate it. Um. Mrs. Boss, um, thank you for sharing your story. Um, reliving the worst day in your, in your life. Being willing to tell your story so that people hear it. Really appreciate it. And I am so sorry for your loss. We're gonna talk a little bit in a second about people needing to meet with survivors, which I completely agree with, and and victims. Um, let me ask you a question. Do you think that when someone is killed at the hands of an illegal alien, that their representation in Congress, Senator, Congressman, should meet with that family?
Absolutely. Of course.
It's my understanding that there are many angel families that cannot get meetings with their senators. Have you heard that?
Absolutely. It happens all the time. As a matter of fact, the lovely and kind words from Senator Durbin, I am his constituent, this is the first time I've ever spoken with him, I haven't spoken with him, he spoke to me.
Well, I hope and I'm sure that uh i hope i i heard actually the ranking member yesterday talk about the need for the attorney general to meet with with victims which i support
mmm
and i certainly am hopeful that he will and others uh will meet with you
yes
so sheridan gorman and other names need to be said and i think the accountability that we have in this room for other people, we should be able to have it for this body as well. So I certainly hope that you get your face-to-face meeting um, that you deserve.
I would hope so. We've had several um
Thank you.
laws introduced, uh legislation introduced in this last session that have been completely ignored. Um and there's there hasn't been any way to really get in and talk to anybody. Um. especially those who are opposed to those legislations for whatever reason.
Well, thank you so much for, for elevating your voice. Um, Miss Bensky, am I saying that right?
It's Bensky, yeah.
OK.
Yeah. Yeah.
Um, I am so sorry for everything that you've been through and thank you for your courage, for, for being here today and being able to elevate your voice. I completely support your quest to, to be able to be heard, um, to obviously for victims to be protected and for us to pursue every, uh, every lead possible. And, you know, I do believe after my conversations, uh, with the Assistant Attorney General that, that he is going to pursue those. Let me ask you this. Did you, were you asked, um, in the previous administration, did you ever have an opportunity to sit down with the then Attorney General, Merrick Garland?
We did not. but um there are active investigations going on because of gill and maxwell's hearing
so but did you ever have a face-to-face with with him
um no
no did did you all request a face-to-face
this was before uh a time that i was comfortable coming forward it was just this last september that
wow
a group of us felt like we had met each other and a huge part of this has been finding the collective voice of a sisterhood and understanding that we weren't isolated in these
Absolutely. And let me ask you this. Did you um, were, was there ever, cuz I know that my um, colleague, Senator Blackburn really wanted to make sure that you all had an opportunity to tell your story.
Mm-hmm.
Are you aware of any Senate um, hearings that were held uh, under the previous administration that tried to,
I don't personally have that information because again,
to bring light to this? Yeah.
it just came forward really in September.
Uh, well thank you for coming forward.
Thank you.
I mean, thank you so much. um mrs. oyer um obviously do we have are you cutting people off right on time today
what
are you cutting people off right on time today or people getting to go way over
uh i i've been too liberal but go ahead and go ahead and ask one more question
ok alright well just just let me ask one more question please sir i appreciate it um after you were fired from doj uh you had an independent media company and a Substack platform and you had the, you know, lawyer aura brand name and the the hoodies that said, uh, hard-wired to stand up to bullies. I I'm I'm wondering, you know, it's my understanding that as a pardoned attorney during the the Biden administration, you recommended actual commutations for Daniel Troyer and Ricardo Sanchez Junior who were sentenced to death, two thousand and nine after executing a family of four on the side of a highway. Is that true?
Uh, ma'am, I think you were not in the room when several of your colleagues asked me about those recommendations.
Yeah, but this is my turn to ask a question.
And
So, is that true?
what I said then remains, which is that I'm not able to talk about the clemency advice that I provided to the White House because of exactly.
OK. Well, the victims included a four-year-old and a three-year-old boy who died, um, while cradled in the arms of their mother, who was trying to shield them. those two little boys were shot ten times and their mother was shot eleven times and their father was shot five times so i appreciate the grace on getting to go over but that doesn't sound like to me that you stand up to bullies it sounds like to me you stand with them. Thank you.
senator blumenthal
thanks mr. chairman uh i wanna thank all of you for being here uh this day of the hearings often gets less attention but it is very important to us and you are performing a very important service uh i particularly wanna thank uh miss bensky and miss boss for sharing your stories and reliving a lot of the pain that you have been through uh miss bensky i don't know whether you were here yesterday when i asked uh acting attorney general blanch to apologize and i'd just be interested in your reaction to his response
yeah i think it was the most that we've gotten from him um and that was a moment where there was a a touch of humanity to say that we do understand that there was in fact failure here because he's been on the record multiple times saying that nothing was mishandled um and as a survivor who literally saw nude images of, you know, friends and, and had my own information exposed all over the place. Um, you know, to tell the world that this had not been mishandled was just so absolutely egregious. Um, like anybody from here to Mars, no matter what political affiliation you're with, can see that like your government should not be, you know, sending out nude photos of you, um, obviously. Yeah, thank you.
thank you uh very well said let me let me ask you a general question um and you don't have to give me an exhaustive answer uh today and i know there are others in the room who may want to answer this question as well but what should we demand of the department of justice to make things right to make things better
yeah we've always just been looking for accountability and for this case to be handled correctly because even from the very start of this case we have not seen it handled the way anybody would normally prosecute something so we are looking to get to the bottom of why our perpetrators were never held to account how does the largest sex trafficking ring in this country exist when only two people have been found even remotely I mean Epstein's dead but Maxwell is the only one who has been held to any sort of account and she's in a lower um you know a lower security penitentiary at this point so um you know we i think we are we are owed answers and we are owed you know justice for us we get that question a lot of what does justice look like i think yes the culture shift is part of it but really like having your government stand up for you and stand up for what's right and um you know there's there's a chilling effect that it sends to survivors everywhere when their government is outing their personal information other survivors are not gonna wanna come forward right and so we need to make sure that we are getting all the information with these cases so i think um we really just hope that the government will take it seriously and start investigations
accountability
accountability yeah always
and i think a working hypothesis here is that accountability is difficult when rich and powerful people are potentially
it's always been the vulnerable versus power for this case for most sex trafficking cases or all sex trafficking cases really um and it is about how the powerful consistently exploit the vulnerable and that is what we see a lot i mean i have a six year old son and i teach him that accountability matters every single day and i hold him to account why can't we hold our government to account
well i will just say uh your voice and face has been a very powerful antidote
thank you
to the wealth and power that maybe brought to bear here and i hope that this forum will encourage you and others to come forward as you've done so courageously
thank you so much yeah i do also wanna mention that virginia giuffrey has been monumental in all of this and i think it would be um unfair to not name her because her deposition holds the key to quite a few things so if you started her deposition you can start really investigating.
Thank you.
Thank you. Um, Miss Oyer, uh, I wanna ask you about the pardon that I mentioned yesterday, I asked Todd Blanch about it, uh, David Gentilly sentenced to seven years for a multimillion dollar fraud scheme that, uh, involved a seven year sentence, he served twelve days of it before he was pardoned. He boasted to his fellow inmates that he was gonna pay two point five million dollars to someone to get him out. Father Frank Mann told one of his parishioners that he had talked to President Trump to get David Gentile out of prison. These are facts that have been publicly reported. the investigation into the potential impropriety of this pardon was shut down, allegedly, by high officials in the Department of Justice, talking to the US Attorney in the Southern District of New York, Joe Nacella. I know you're not familiar with the facts. I'm not gonna ask you whether you believe that that reporting is true. mister blanch never denied it he basically said well it was a leak sometimes leaks actually actually involve truthful information but the point that i think is lost here is that that pardon involved sixteen million dollars in forfeiture to innocent victims many of them retirees who were depending on that money to survive and he will no longer be required to do restitution. So, his ill-gotten gains, some of which he may have used to pay for his clemency, so to speak, are not gonna go back to the people who were cheated, his victim, as a result of that pardon and clemency. Uh, so i guess my question to you with this introduction is essentially are victims and survivors often re-victimize by pardons that are unjust or unfair to them and shouldn't we have them given a voice and recognize the constitution gives the president unlimited authority And it's one of those powers that's unchecked, rarely. But, isn't there a need to give the victims a voice in this process?
Y- yes, Senator, the millions of dollars that Mister Gentile stole from his investors, unfortunately, are a drop in the bucket of the restitution that victims have been deprived of as a result of President Trump's pardons. He has forgiven over a billion dollars in restitution that is owed to victims of fraud. as well as money that is owed to taxpayers by people who committed white-collar crimes and who have served in many cases none of their sentence and repaid none of their money. That is not consistent with the regulations that the Justice Department has in place for evaluating applications for pardons. The Justice Department historically has looked to see that people have repaid their debts before recommending clemency, but this president is using clemency in a strategic transactional way
Senator Gerben.
Mr. Chairman, uh, uh, uh, in closing here, I would like to make, uh, a couple points.
Please do.
First, I understand that the Senator from Alabama mentioned my name while I had stepped out. Uh, Miss Boss, anxious to meet with you. I hope we can do it soon, maybe even right after this, because I didn't know it was a, a hardship for you to make this journey here to testify. uh from illinois and i don't want you to have to wait to see me uh i wanna meet with you now and we we can talk as soon as this uh meeting adjourns if it's ok with you if it if it fits in your schedule let me say a word about about nisoyer uh i'm glad that uh the senator from new jersey said what he did about you uh i believe the fact of the matter is that most of the things that we're uh brought up today in this hearing about your activity related to a decision by the biden administration as they were leaving office uh to uh turn death penalty convictions into life imprisonment instead is that correct
that's that's right sir
that reflects i i'll say this you don't have to comment on this i believe that reflects the president joe biden's uh opposition to the death penalty i share that opposition there are people in the audience who agree with me and some who vehemently disagree with me but america is divided in this issue i didn't have this position my entire political career but toward the end of it i have come to the conclusion as justice plackman did at the end of his conclusion of serving on the supreme court that he no longer wants to tinker with the machinery of death the fact of the matter is there are clear cases uh where one can argue a death penalty and there are cases which we have found were wrongly decided and people uh faced a a death penalty or worse uh until evidence and other things were discovered at the end uh that is my position that was joe biden's position that's why the cases which were brought uh up today uh are so serious uh and i believe that you were doing your job as a pardon attorney to advise him uh as to his decision, but is it not true that the final decision on the disposition of these inmates, was the decision of the President of the United States?
That's absolutely correct, Senator.
So, uh, if you wanna take uh exception to Joe Biden and his position, be my guest, but to blame you for those, I think goes beyond uh, your responsibility as Pardoned Attorney. Uh, and I I will just say I know the controversy behind this issue. but uh i i i feel that that's what led him to his conclusion uh miss binckley thank you for bringing your friends with you today is great to see them and i i hope that what you heard uh from senator tillis is a promising possibility that he said he would not i hope i'm saying this correctly he wouldn't vote to confirm this uh nomination until there's been an actual meeting that would be a dramatic a work in progress uh for us to reach that point and because you have the courage to stand up not only you but your friends uh we we have achieved that i believe i hope that's the fact thank you mister chairman
yeah uh thanks to all of our witnesses for being here today and for travelling the long distances some of you have had to go we're grateful that you did it uh for all the members of this committee written questions are due on wednesday july twenty two this year at five p m the hearing is adjourned
thanks jerry
you're welcome thank you i wanna go see i wanna see if uh the finance committee is still meeting
ok
yeah
Morning digest
Start every morning briefed on yesterday’s hearings
A free weekday email covering yesterday’s hearings and transcripts newly unlocked in the archive.
