Richard Blumenthal
Senator for Connecticut · Democratic · United States
“This resolution is necessary now to give the Senate the ability to hold President Trump accountable on behalf of the American people to go to court and have our day before a judge who will assess the facts of this case and second guess me or any of us and rule and uphold the rule of law.”
“This resolution is necessary now to give the Senate the ability to hold President Trump accountable on behalf of the American people to go to court and have our day before a judge who will assess the facts of this case and second guess me or any of us and rule and uphold the rule of law.”
“Now, the obvious answer is that these accusations by my colleague do not support the constitutional threshold of an emolument, and my Democrat colleagues are just playing politics. This resolution seeks to authorize litigation rather than legislation. This issue has already been litigated, and, as my colleague said, they lost.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 119 (Tuesday, July 21, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 119 (Tuesday, July 21, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S4170-S4172] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 807 Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr.”
“This bill proves that the Democrats' goal right now is to attack President Trump instead of fixing problems Americans expect us to deal with. They don't want to reduce the cost of living, lower inflation, balance the budget.”
“I am asking for a resolution to direct the Senate legal counsel to bring a civil action in the name of the U.S. Senate to enforce the foreign emoluments clause contained in article I of [[Page S4171]] the Constitution.”
The complete record
Every one of 81 lines we hold for Richard Blumenthal, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 2.
“This resolution is necessary now to give the Senate the ability to hold President Trump accountable on behalf of the American people to go to court and have our day before a judge who will assess the facts of this case and second guess me or any of us and rule and uphold the rule of law. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution to restore the dignity of the executive office and to assure enforcement of the Constitution of the United States of America. And so as if in legislative session and notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 807; that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The Senator from Florida.”
“The American President is supposed to work for us, for the American people, for everyday Americans, not for his own self-enrichment, and that is what the emoluments clause is really supposed to guarantee-- that the President of the United States works for the United States, not for himself. As I mentioned, I tried to enforce the emoluments clause myself by filing a lawsuit on June 14, 2017. The United States Court for the District of Columbia held that we didn't have standing. I disagree. I think we do have standing under the law, but I respect the court's judgment; and so we are charting this path forward.”
“It is not only offensive as a matter of self-enrichment, but it is a threat to our national security--exactly the same kind of threat that our Founders sought to prevent as a result of the emoluments clause. Not only has President Trump violated flagrantly the emoluments clause, but he has effectively slapped a ``for sale'' sign on the door of the Oval Office. He accepted a gold-plated desk clock and engraved gold bar as gifts from Swiss business executives before slashing Switzerland's tariff rate. He hosted a private gala dinner featuring a tour of the White House to reward top buyers of the Trump cryptocurrency meme coin. Attendees of that dinner included Chinese billionaires, CEOs, and investors with ties to the Chinese Communist Party.”
“In other words, an investment by the UAE wealth fund, controlled by the ruling family of the UAE, for 49 percent in World Liberty Financial, $500 million. And then magically--magically--President Trump approved sales of $1.4 million in military equipment for the UAE. And in addition, the sale of highly sophisticated advanced chips necessary for the UAE to build a data center that could rival ours in the United States--our national security compromised as a result of payments to World Liberty Financial--the Trump--and, by the way, Witkoff--family crypto business. This kind of self-enrichment has made a very wealthy Donald Trump even wealthier. He made $2 billion last year--$2 billion in income--1.4 billion of it from crypto.”
“What we do know is costly modifications were required to ensure the installation of multiple top-secret systems to get the plane flight ready, and now it has to go back for more work because, in fact, the security system right now is inadequate. But we know taxpayers are going to foot the bill--a benefit to the President probably in excess of $1 billion. That jet barely scratches the surface of emoluments going to President Trump. In 2025, President Trump and his sons took about $500 million for a 49 percent stake in the Trump family crypto business, World Liberty Financial, invested by the MGX Fund Management Limited, which is an investment firm in turn backed by a UAE sovereign wealth fund at the initiative of Sheikh Tahnoon, the UAE's national security advisor and the brother of UAE's President.”
“Senate to take a stand--to stand up against the illegal practices of this President in taking an array of benefits, including payments--literally payments--in violation of the emoluments clause. The emoluments clause is a dead letter if it is not enforced, and our national security is at risk. President Trump's willingness to use the privileges of his office to enrich himself is well known to Americans, and it seems to have no bounds. Just this month, President Trump's gift from the government of Qatar--a $400 million jet--entered service as an interim Air Force One, but he wants to take that jet and then install it as part of his private library. In fact, he may use it afterward. We don't know.”
“I know a lot about the emoluments clause because I sued Donald Trump under the emoluments clause during his first term, and we won at the district court level. In fact, we prevailed in that lawsuit, but then we were told that we had no standing. Under the Federal laws of procedure, a party in court, to successfully invoke the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, must have what is called standing, which is not just aggrievement but personal involvement and harm. And the court said, in effect: You are individual Members of Congress--there were more than 250 of us--but you are not the body; you are not the Senate; you are not the House of Representatives, which brings me here today because I want the U.S.”
“And so specifically in the Constitution, as a matter of our national security--not just to prevent corruption, gift-taking that might violate our sense of morality, but as a matter of the defense of our Nation, they inserted the emoluments clause that required consent of Congress before the President, or any other public official, could accept anything of value, whether it be a benefit, an indirect payment--anything of value. And so now if you are a member of the armed services and you are asked to teach a course in another country and you are paid for it, you need to get permission. It applies to the lowliest of Federal officials and the highest. The emoluments clause is part of our Constitution.”
“This clause states that the President cannot accept any gifts, payments, benefits, or anything else of value from foreign governments, unless he receives the consent of Congress. Presidents have uniformly obeyed the emoluments clause for all of our illustrious 250 years of existence. The Founders thought this clause was central to preserving our Nation. Why? Because at the time of our founding, we were a fledgling and struggling nation. Foreign powers like France and England were arrayed against us with potentates and rich businesspeople, powerful adversaries who could corrupt our leaders.”
“Mr. President, I am here today with a very straightforward, simple resolution. It is about enforcement. For most of my career, I was an enforcer: a Federal prosecutor, U.S. attorney for Connecticut, and then attorney general of the State of Connecticut for 20 years. So I know--we all know--that the law is dead letter if it is not enforced. And there is a very, very profoundly important law--in fact, our Constitution--that needs enforcement. That is the task that brings me to the Senate floor today. I am asking for a resolution to direct the Senate legal counsel to bring a civil action in the name of the U.S. Senate to enforce the foreign emoluments clause contained in article I of [[Page S4171]] the Constitution.”
“Unfortunately, my Democratic colleagues aren't coming to the table. Why don't we spend some time on real issues rather than attacking the President? For those reasons, I object to passage of this resolution and hope my colleagues can reject the anti-American socialists capturing the Democratic Party before it is too late for all of us. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.”
“This bill proves that the Democrats' goal right now is to attack President Trump instead of fixing problems Americans expect us to deal with. They don't want to reduce the cost of living, lower inflation, balance the budget. They do want to tax working Americans so they can spend more of it on special interests and run bigger deficits--already spending $2 trillion in deficits. They want to use the Senate's time--the precious time we have--to attack President Trump by twisting the words of the Constitution. The resolution is moot. The accusations: Purely political. We all know it is political. It is a waste of time. And this Chamber only works 2-and-a-half days a week. I think we need to spend every time doing something like pass the SAVE America Act, fund our government, lower the debt, lower the deficit.”
“Leader Schumer responded to the facts about voter fraud by declaring the SAVE America Act, an election security bill--even though Democrats, Republicans, Independents all across the country believe in it--said it is ``dead on arrival.'' Unfortunately, my Democratic colleagues don't want fixes; they want to ignore the fraud because it benefits them. They are trying to distract the American people with platitudes while they defraud them of their vote. Have you looked at what Olive Garden is doing, OK? You can buy a pasta pass--an unlimited pasta pass, but guess what you have to do? You have to show an ID. So Olive Garden has a voter ID, but my Democratic colleagues don't want to do it for Federal elections.”
“They don't want to fund government; they want to shut it down. They walked away from government funding negotiations. They don't want to secure elections. They want systematic fraud because it benefits their elected incumbents. Department of Homeland Security just found 278,000 noncitizens on voter rolls for Federal elections. Are Democrats talking about that? [[Page S4172]] Just last week, President Trump exposed foreign adversaries like China and Cuba for interfering in our elections. Did my Democratic colleagues talk about that?”
“Now, the obvious answer is that these accusations by my colleague do not support the constitutional threshold of an emolument, and my Democrat colleagues are just playing politics. This resolution seeks to authorize litigation rather than legislation. This issue has already been litigated, and, as my colleague said, they lost. The Democrats just like don't like the answer. Now, the President isn't taking a plane or any gifts for personal use, and the United States has long accepted diplomatic gifts pursuant to Federal law, with such gifts generally becoming property of the United States rather than any individual officeholder. Now, what is going on here is the Democrats are putting their hatred for President Trump before the law. But aside from the obvious facts, this is the agenda Democrats want from this Chamber.”
“SCOTT of Florida. Mr. President, reserving the right to object. Mr. President, at a time when we are seeing the Democrat Party embrace the hellish evils of socialism and ideologies that hate the founding ideals of America, Democrats are hoping to pass a resolution to direct this Chamber to sue the President of the United States on a very false premise. The emoluments clause reads: No title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States. I don't think that is happening. And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title of any kind [whatsoever], from any King, Prince, or foreign State.”
“This resolution is necessary now to give the Senate the ability to hold President Trump accountable on behalf of the American people to go to court and have our day before a judge who will assess the facts of this case and second guess me or any of us and rule and uphold the rule of law. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution to restore the dignity of the executive office and to assure enforcement of the Constitution of the United States of America. And so as if in legislative session and notwithstanding rule XXII, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 807; that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The Senator from Florida. Mr.”
“The American President is supposed to work for us, for the American people, for everyday Americans, not for his own self-enrichment, and that is what the emoluments clause is really supposed to guarantee-- that the President of the United States works for the United States, not for himself. As I mentioned, I tried to enforce the emoluments clause myself by filing a lawsuit on June 14, 2017. The United States Court for the District of Columbia held that we didn't have standing. I disagree. I think we do have standing under the law, but I respect the court's judgment; and so we are charting this path forward.”
“It is not only offensive as a matter of self-enrichment, but it is a threat to our national security--exactly the same kind of threat that our Founders sought to prevent as a result of the emoluments clause. Not only has President Trump violated flagrantly the emoluments clause, but he has effectively slapped a ``for sale'' sign on the door of the Oval Office. He accepted a gold-plated desk clock and engraved gold bar as gifts from Swiss business executives before slashing Switzerland's tariff rate. He hosted a private gala dinner featuring a tour of the White House to reward top buyers of the Trump cryptocurrency meme coin. Attendees of that dinner included Chinese billionaires, CEOs, and investors with ties to the Chinese Communist Party.”
“In other words, an investment by the UAE wealth fund, controlled by the ruling family of the UAE, for 49 percent in World Liberty Financial, $500 million. And then magically--magically--President Trump approved sales of $1.4 million in military equipment for the UAE. And in addition, the sale of highly sophisticated advanced chips necessary for the UAE to build a data center that could rival ours in the United States--our national security compromised as a result of payments to World Liberty Financial--the Trump--and, by the way, Witkoff--family crypto business. This kind of self-enrichment has made a very wealthy Donald Trump even wealthier. He made $2 billion last year--$2 billion in income--1.4 billion of it from crypto.”
“What we do know is costly modifications were required to ensure the installation of multiple top-secret systems to get the plane flight ready, and now it has to go back for more work because, in fact, the security system right now is inadequate. But we know taxpayers are going to foot the bill--a benefit to the President probably in excess of $1 billion. That jet barely scratches the surface of emoluments going to President Trump. In 2025, President Trump and his sons took about $500 million for a 49 percent stake in the Trump family crypto business, World Liberty Financial, invested by the MGX Fund Management Limited, which is an investment firm in turn backed by a UAE sovereign wealth fund at the initiative of Sheikh Tahnoon, the UAE's national security advisor and the brother of UAE's President.”
“Senate to take a stand--to stand up against the illegal practices of this President in taking an array of benefits, including payments--literally payments--in violation of the emoluments clause. The emoluments clause is a dead letter if it is not enforced, and our national security is at risk. President Trump's willingness to use the privileges of his office to enrich himself is well known to Americans, and it seems to have no bounds. Just this month, President Trump's gift from the government of Qatar--a $400 million jet--entered service as an interim Air Force One, but he wants to take that jet and then install it as part of his private library. In fact, he may use it afterward. We don't know.”
“I know a lot about the emoluments clause because I sued Donald Trump under the emoluments clause during his first term, and we won at the district court level. In fact, we prevailed in that lawsuit, but then we were told that we had no standing. Under the Federal laws of procedure, a party in court, to successfully invoke the jurisdiction of the Federal courts, must have what is called standing, which is not just aggrievement but personal involvement and harm. And the court said, in effect: You are individual Members of Congress--there were more than 250 of us--but you are not the body; you are not the Senate; you are not the House of Representatives, which brings me here today because I want the U.S.”
“And so specifically in the Constitution, as a matter of our national security--not just to prevent corruption, gift-taking that might violate our sense of morality, but as a matter of the defense of our Nation, they inserted the emoluments clause that required consent of Congress before the President, or any other public official, could accept anything of value, whether it be a benefit, an indirect payment--anything of value. And so now if you are a member of the armed services and you are asked to teach a course in another country and you are paid for it, you need to get permission. It applies to the lowliest of Federal officials and the highest. The emoluments clause is part of our Constitution.”
“I am asking for a resolution to direct the Senate legal counsel to bring a civil action in the name of the U.S. Senate to enforce the foreign emoluments clause contained in article I of [[Page S4171]] the Constitution. This clause states that the President cannot accept any gifts, payments, benefits, or anything else of value from foreign governments, unless he receives the consent of Congress. Presidents have uniformly obeyed the emoluments clause for all of our illustrious 250 years of existence. The Founders thought this clause was central to preserving our Nation. Why? Because at the time of our founding, we were a fledgling and struggling nation. Foreign powers like France and England were arrayed against us with potentates and rich businesspeople, powerful adversaries who could corrupt our leaders.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 119 (Tuesday, July 21, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 119 (Tuesday, July 21, 2026)] [Senate] [Pages S4170-S4172] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 807 Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I am here today with a very straightforward, simple resolution. It is about enforcement. For most of my career, I was an enforcer: a Federal prosecutor, U.S. attorney for Connecticut, and then attorney general of the State of Connecticut for 20 years. So I know--we all know--that the law is dead letter if it is not enforced. And there is a very, very profoundly important law--in fact, our Constitution--that needs enforcement. That is the task that brings me to the Senate floor today.”
“(c) Retroactive Effect.--This section shall apply to any action or proceeding that is pending on the date of enactment of this Act and any action or proceeding initiated on or after such date of enactment. ______”
“(a) In General.--Section 202 of title 9, United States Code, is amended-- (1) by adding ``as modified by section 1 of this title,'' after ``title,''; and (2) by adding after the period at the end of the third sentence the following: ``The entirety of section 1 of this title, including all of the exemptions listed in section 1, shall apply to this chapter as if specifically set forth herein.''. (b) Intent of Congress.--It is the intent of Congress that the definition of commercial in section 202 of title 9, United States Code, be limited by limiting the relationships described in section 2 of that title to those as modified by section 1 of that title, and incorporating the entirety of such section 1, including all of the exemptions in that section, into section 202 of that title.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 172 Issue 113 (Monday, July 13, 2026) [Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 113 (Monday, July 13, 2026)] [Senate] [Page S3785] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] SA 6591. Mr. BLUMENTHAL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 4784, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2027 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following: SEC. _____. AGREEMENT OR AWARD FALLING UNDER THE CONVENTION.”
“I hear again and again and again from my constituents in Connecticut about their concern that the right to vote may be restricted. I say to the people of Connecticut right here and now: I will fight this bill because it is wrong, because it eviscerates voting rights, and because it threatens our democracy. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Schmitt). The Senator from Oregon.”
“citizens who are eligible to vote don't have the requisite documentation that would be required under the SAVE Act. To solve the delusional nonproblem, the SAVE Act would deprive real citizens of the real right to vote--21 million of them. Married women, younger voters, voters of color--they are the ones who are going to be impacted. I don't know how they would vote in Connecticut or elsewhere, but they have a right to vote, and we should not be fooled by this wolf in sheep's clothing, a measure that masquerades as preserving democracy. We should not let our voter rolls be purged by a measure that has false pretenses. We must protect the right of every eligible citizen to vote. The best way to do it is to say no to this bill, and I ask my Republican colleagues to join me in saying no because this issue is larger than any one of us.”
“And, now, again--as there has been throughout our history--there are efforts to suppress that right for political reasons, for political gain. That is what we have in the SAVE Act, an effort to erect obstacles and to require documentation that, very simply, Americans-- many of them--don't have. This measure is a solution--supposed solution--in search of a problem. There is no widespread voter fraud. Undocumented people, noncitizens, almost never try to vote. And I am using the word ``almost'' because I am tempted to say ``never.'' But, of course, you can't rule out a negative. You can't prove it. But the fact of the matter is, widespread voter fraud, even significant voter fraud by noncitizens, is an imaginary, delusional issue. Some 21 million U.S.”
“Mr. President, of all the thrills of living in a democracy, none is more meaningful than walking into a voting booth and casting a ballot. I can remember the first time I did it when I came of age. I can remember, always--and I see it again and again and again--new citizens walking out of the courtroom after the naturalization ceremony, with their certificates of citizenship in their hands and handing it to the League of Women Voters person who is doing voter registrations. It is the thrill of their lifetime to be registered. Of all the rights we have, voting is perhaps the most meaningful and the most practiced. It is foundational to all the others. It is the way we preserve the others. And that is why the fight for voting rights-- and blood has been spilled in the effort to secure it--is a storied bedrock of our American history.”
“Congressional Record, Volume 171 Issue 71 (Tuesday, April 29, 2025) [Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 71 (Tuesday, April 29, 2025)] [Senate] [Page S2657] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] VOTE EXPLANATION Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, earlier today, I was unable to vote on Executive Calendar No. 80, David Perdue to be Ambassador to the People's Republic of China, due to my attendance as ranking member at a Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee hearing on mental health care for veterans. I would have opposed Mr. Perdue's confirmation had I been present for the vote, rollcall vote No. 215. ____________________”
“My Republican colleagues, who have been almost entirely silent, please do the right thing. Our country has made a sacred promise. Our duties as Members of Congress is to keep our promises. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Lummis). The Senator from Delaware.”
“These VA employees are the ones delivering healthcare to the people we love and revere. To my colleagues across the aisle, I just want to remind you in closing that this is a moment that will define you, your career, your reputation. It is a moment of profound historic challenges that has been recognized with massive marches here in the Nation's Capital, in Connecticut, around our State--New London, New Haven, Westport, New Britain. I have been to many of them. Veterans are one of most powerful voices in our country, and I urge them to use those voices and their faces to say: We need the PACT Act. We need veterans' healthcare. We need to fulfill our promises. As VFW commander Al Lipphardt said at that hearing, apply pressure and stop the bleeding. These heartless and heartbreaking cuts, firings, freezes are un- American.”
“I challenge the Secretary of the VA; I challenge the President of the United States; I challenge my colleagues across the aisle: Instead of saying yes blindly to Elon Musk, when he says ``Slash and trash the VA, fire those thousands of people, and end those programs,'' look at them not as waste but as an investment. Yes, if there is waste, let's eliminate it. But as the national commander of the VFW--Veterans of Foreign Wars--said to us in one of our hearings, when he was wounded in combat, the surgeon who took the shrapnel out of his arm did it with a scalpel; he did not cut the arm off with a chain saw. Let's give up Elon Musk's chain saw, and if there is waste, do it with a scalpel. These first 100 days have been disgraceful and shameful, cruel and dumb, deeply un-American.”
“Now, I know very few of my colleagues have heard about VASP, but it is a program that enables veterans to get some very temporary, short-term help so they can avoid eviction from their homes and the homelessness that we are all ashamed to acknowledge continues to exist in the greatest country in the history of the world. Our veterans are on the streets without shelter because they lack homes, and here is a program designed to keep them in their homes, and the Secretary is canceling it. With housing more unaffordable than ever and veterans losing their jobs, I am at a loss--total, absolute loss--to understand how he can cancel a critical program that helps veterans undergoing financial hardship to stay in their homes.”
“We are hearing about VA supply teams now understaffed and behind on placing critical supply requests for medication and equipment; support lines for caregivers that have been reduced; Veterans Crisis Line employees fired and, after a public backlash, maybe some rehired, as we heard today in a hearing of the Veterans Affairs' Committee. But the impact is enduring because suicide prevention has to be done in the moment, and suicide [[Page S2638]] prevention training sessions have been postponed or canceled. Earlier this month, the Secretary announced he will be abruptly canceling the VA Servicing Purchase Program, known as VASP, on May 1.”
“These human impacts include world-class researchers who are looking into how to predict stroke risk among veterans; enrollment of veterans into clinical trials for advanced cancer delayed because of the VA's hiring freeze; openings for new clinics that have been delayed because the VA can't hire the necessary staff to open their doors; the VA mental health staff forced to conduct counseling sessions in open cubicles without privacy, basic privacy, for the veterans who are talking about their innermost doubts and fears; service lines at VA hospitals and clinics that have been halted; beds in operating rooms at VA facilities that have been suspended.”
“The approach of this Secretary of the VA, of Elon Musk, and Donald Trump is ``Fire first, plan later''; ``Fire first, evaluate later.'' I am disappointed that so many of my Republican colleagues are seeking to minimize or diminish the human impacts of these cuts, because I am hearing from veterans, just as I am from people in Connecticut and all around the country. I went to Michigan just last week to talk to folks there. Those human impacts are heartbreaking because these actions are heartless, and they are impactful not only on the incomes of these people but on their self-worth, their sense of dignity. They have devoted their lives to caring for veterans, and now, with the sweep of a hand, they get the back of a hand from Elon Musk, who has never ever even thought about wearing the uniform of the U.S. military.”
“That is why I have proposed the Putting Veterans First Act, which would put those veterans back on the job--all of them from the VA--and put those veterans back on the job from the Federal workforce, and make sure that anybody who is terminated in the future gets a right to a personal, individual evaluation, and not just fired because Elon Musk wants to meet certain numbers or apply an algorithm or have his tech bros pick out randomly, arbitrarily names from the list. There are 83,000 of those VA jobs on the chopping block.”
“And make no mistake, every one of these days has been a time of crisis for those veterans. Since day one, the administration has systematically shortchanged and betrayed veterans with its policies. They have not only fired that 2,500 in reckless mass terminations of probationary employees--our young workforce, starting out on jobs, our VA future, and some of them dedicated multiyear employees who have just been promoted and, therefore, are in those new positions on a probationary basis. They have been promoted because they were good at their jobs and dedicated and hard-working, and they have been fired.”
“For our veterans, it has been 100 days of chaos, of cruelty, stupidity, anxiety on their part, and apprehension, and 100 days of decisions made about their healthcare and their benefits. They were promised healthcare, and they were promised benefits. And now this administration is breaking those promises, not by coming to Congress and asking for a rescission or changing the PACT Act, which we passed in a bipartisan way, but simply by firing the people who were supposed to approve those claims for PACT Act benefits for veterans who have been exposed to toxic chemicals or burn pits. And this is an administration that has fired already 2,500 of those dedicated VA employees, close to one-third of them veterans themselves, thousands from the Federal workforce, generally, close to 30 percent of them are veterans as well.”
“We must stand with Ukraine. We now have more than 60 cosponsors of a Russia sanctions bill that I have been proud to lead with Senator Graham--it is bipartisan, evenly divided in cosponsorship--to send a message to Vladimir Putin: We are going to hit you, and we are going to hit you hard economically if you continue to stall and string along America, if you continue to play the President. But Donald Trump has been a seemingly willing partner in being played by Vladimir Putin, his bro, his role model, perhaps. Nobody has a stronger right to claim credit for preserving our freedoms in the past and now than our veterans, and they have been betrayed by this administration.”
“Basic fairness and due process rights that involve also the President intimidating law firms with threats that they will be denied access to security clearances or even to go on to governmental property, and intimidation and threatening our universities, supposedly in the name of anti-Semitism--nobody hates anti-Semitism more than I do, but I despise using anti-Semitism as a pretext or a guise simply to attack people or institutions because they disagree with a public official. We live in a time when the rule of law is under threat, perhaps as never before in my lifetime, and the cause of freedom, all around the world, is in jeopardy. Ukraine has been betrayed. This Nation has switched sides to the enduring and deep detriment of our standing in the world, our reliability as a partner and ally. The harm may be irreparable.”
“It is unmatched for its meanness and stupidity--the harm and hurt done to everyday Americans in real life and realtime; the harm in tariffs already having effect on the uncertainty of businesses about the future, their inability to plan, to invest in new manufacturing, and the fear of people that they will be jobless and lose the dignity of work and be hit with higher prices for everything from groceries to gasoline, to housing; the harm done in healthcare already, our federally qualified health centers deprived of funding, NIH research grants for curing cancer, for diabetes or hypertension canceled or frozen; in education, the uncertainty and loss of funding for special education and other programs that benefit children and the neediest and most vulnerable of our districts, in rural areas as well as urban; and, of course, the damage to our fundamental freedoms, women's reproductive freedoms, the suspension of title X grants, and the assault on women's healthcare--other freedoms: the basic due process of people who should have a right to receive notice and the opportunity to be heard before they are deported, before they are detained, before they are imprisoned or put on a plane to be imprisoned out of the country.”
“There are many, many other differences, but the whirlwind of activity here has produced chaos. That is the operative word: chaos. The turmoil and turbulence have produced confusion and, yes, anxiety, deep fear, and apprehension about the future of this country. And the poll numbers only reflect not only the downward spiral of our economy but of our confidence in the future. This administration has been cruel, and it has been dumb.”
“Second, in those first 100 days of the Roosevelt administration, there was a whirlwind of congressional activity, inspired by the President, with his proposals for new Agencies and programs and investments. Congress was a partner. In this administration, President Trump has acted unilaterally by Executive order--illegally, unconstitutionally, and unchecked, except by courts that have been a bulwark. In those first 100 days of the Roosevelt administration, F.D.R. appealed to our ``better angels,'' our willingness to give back, to be generous to our fellow Americans. He later inspired us with the call to ``a rendezvous with destiny.'' In this administration, which is plagued with corruption, crypto theft, and Musk exploitation of Agencies, it is a downward spiral, a race to the bottom in an appeal to self-indulgence and self-enrichment.”
“Mr. President, I am honored to follow the ranking member on the Foreign Relations Committee and to be followed by another distinguished member of that same committee and to focus on these first 100 days. The focus on the first 100 days of an administration, I think, comes from [[Page S2637]] the time of Franklin Roosevelt and his 100 days in the midst of deep depression, despondency, and despair on the part of the American people, and the whirlwind of activity that he brought to addressing our Nation's depression. And there are dramatic differences between those 100 days and the 100 days we have seen from President Trump. First and foremost, our economy was at near full employment, at a time of solid prosperity, 100 days ago, and we are now sliding toward exactly the kind of economic downturn that F.D.R. helped to address.”