John Kennedy
Senator for Louisiana · Republican · United States
“They are the people who pay to go to the games--the fans--the ordinary Americans out there who have to make donations to the athletic programs in order to even have the privilege of buying the tickets.”
Senate28 September 2026Source ↗
“They think they are on a mission from God, that God has told them to kill everybody who disagrees with their radical form of Islam--kill them all, including Americans, and drink our blood out of a boot. They can't have nuclear weapons, and thanks to President Trump, they don't and they won't. (Ms.”
Senate28 September 2026Source ↗
“The same principle would apply if colleges and universities and their athletic programs got together and agreed on what athletes could make on NIL and salaries and how many times they could transfer. This bill exempts the colleges and universities and the athletic programs from the antitrust laws.”
Senate28 September 2026Source ↗
“Mr. President, I want to say a few words, first, about the Protect College Sports Act that Chris just talked about. I am not going to go into a lot of detail about the rules. Basically, it will set about--the bill, rather.”
Senate28 September 2026Source ↗
“If I am given the chance--and it doesn't look like I am going to be able to--I am going to offer an amendment that says, in return for the antitrust exemption and capping the amount of money that colleges and universities and coaches have to pay their athletes, you can't raise ticket prices on the fans more than 4 percent a year.”
Senate28 September 2026Source ↗
“If I did, we would be voting to get rid of these rules like a hobo on a ham sandwich, but I don't control the Senate. I am not putting anybody down, but all I am saying is, it is legal malpractice, legislative malpractice, if the U.S. Senate is not allowed this week to vote to kill these rules.”
Senate28 September 2026Source ↗
The complete record
261 held · 119 searchable for John Kennedy. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 3.
This is not an official version of US Congress proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one US Congress publishes.
“We said: We don't want to take food stamps away from people who need them; we want fewer people to need food stamps. And it is working. The full provision of the law is not even implemented, but so far, we have had 4 million people who were on food stamps--in those States that have implemented the work requirement, we have 4 million people who have either decided they don't need food stamps because they didn't want to work or they have gone to work for a living and they no longer need food stamps. Now, those are the only two possibilities. When you say ``You have to work to get food stamps,'' and 4 million people say ``We are off the food stamp rolls,'' one of two things has happened: You either really didn't need the food stamps or you went to work and you didn't need the food stamps.”
Senate16 July 2026Source ↗
“Food Stamps Mr. President, last year, we passed the One Big Beautiful Bill. One of the provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill was that, in America, if you are hungry, we are going to feed you. We are going to give you food stamps. We don't want you to be hungry. But in return for those food stamps, if you are able-bodied, if you are not disabled and you don't have kids at home, you have to go get a job. You have to work 20 hours a week or go to school for 20 hours a week or do community service for 20 hours a week--a fair trade.”
Senate16 July 2026Source ↗
“And where I come from, we call that a three-wheeled shopping cart. So Intel needs to build that manufacturing plant in America or they need to give the American people their money back, and they need to do it now. And they need to explain it to the American people. Mr. President, we have to vote, but I have still got 5 minutes. That is a dangerous combination, but I am going to do it in 5 minutes.”
Senate16 July 2026Source ↗
“You don't get any money, but you get money. If that decision will be made, it ought to be made by Congress, folks--your elected representatives. But it was done. But right after we did it, Intel took the money and invested it in Ireland. It triggers my gag reflex. I hope I am wrong. Intel, if you are listening, I hope you will explain all of this. Department of Commerce, if you are listening, I hope you will explain all of this. The Department of Commerce, I think, is going to say: Oh, Intel has outside investors in building this plant. That, to me, is a distinction without a difference. As far as I am concerned, the way it looks to me right now, we gave them $8.9 billion of American taxpayer money, and they said ``Thank you very much'' and went and decided to spend it in Ireland.”
Senate16 July 2026Source ↗
“And I know Intel is going to say: Oh, it wasn't the $8.9 billion that the American taxpayers gave us that we took and helped the Irish economy. Money is fungible, folks. Money is fungible. And they can say all they want ``Oh, it wasn't American taxpayer money; it came from a different pot of money.'' Now, if this is true--and I saw it announced publicly that they are building a $5 billion chip manufacturing plant in Ireland--after $8.9 billion of American taxpayer money was given to them, as far as I am concerned, this deal is a breech birth; it is a total cockup. And somebody from the Department of Commerce or from Intel needs to explain this to the American people, because I don't like it. I didn't like it when we started giving money to particular companies going: Yeah, we like you, but we don't like you.”
Senate16 July 2026Source ↗
“When the Federal Government takes a 10-percent equity position in a company, you can bet that the politicians, of which I include myself, are going to give a whole lot of advice to Intel--or any other company they buy the stock in. Sometimes that will be sound business advice, but sometimes it will just be raw gut politics. I don't like it. I don't like it. I know the new thing is neosocialism. I have watched new Members of Congress get elected, all of whom can--they all know the words to the Cuban national anthem, and they are all for socialism. I would ask them to take a look at the history of Cuba and the former USSR and China and Argentina and Venezuela--and I could continue going--and they should try to show me a country where socialism has worked. They can't. But I digress.”
Senate16 July 2026Source ↗
“The Federal Government--the Department of Commerce--gave Intel $8.9 billion cash, bought 10 percent of the company--not $8.9 million, $8.9 billion cash. Now, a fairminded person, when the Department of Commerce did this, could have said: Well, why Intel? Why not some other company? So that gave me pause. Fair point. I didn't like seeing the Federal Government picking and choosing among American companies about which should get $8.9 billion of American taxpayer money. I didn't like that. I still don't like it. If there is a fair competition, fine. And I get that manufacturing chips are important to America. I get all that. But the government is still playing favorites. When the government buys 10 percent of a company--$8.9 billion. Did I mention that is how much money Intel got?”
Senate16 July 2026Source ↗
“Mr. President, I have a friend in Louisiana. He is the former State speaker of the house. And Charlie invented a new word in English. The word is ``winky-doo.'' When the then-speaker of the statehouse wanted to describe someone acting dishonestly or denigrating your position or double-crossing you, the speaker would say: He tried to winky-doo me. He tried to winky-doo me. I have always loved that word. Intel, a fine American company, may be trying to winky-doo the American taxpayer. Last year--and let me say that again. Intel is a fine company. They have to compete in the market to manufacture chips like everybody else. I believe in free enterprise. I don't believe in state-supported capitalism, government-run capitalism. But Intel was not doing a very good job competing, and so the Federal Government decided to bail them out.”
Senate16 July 2026Source ↗
“Mr. President, Nathan Hays, to whom I just referred, is an intern in my office. He is from Baton Rouge. He is a rising junior at LSU. Lucy John is from Lafayette, LA. Lucy is a rising senior at Tulane. Bradley Fusilier is from Ville Platte. Bradley is a rising senior at LSU. And Gabby Sumrall from Monroe is a rising junior at Covenant College there. They are interning in my office this summer, and I am glad to have them. ____________________”
Senate18 June 2026Source ↗
“Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following interns in my office be granted floor privileges until June 19, 2026: Nathan Hays, Bradley Fusilier, Gabby Sumrall, and Lucy John.”
Senate18 June 2026Source ↗
“The New York Times has been called many things--some good, some bad--but they have never been called unbiased. That is just a fact that goes with the turf. Once again, this is America--you are entitled to your opinion. But I wanted to come down this morning to say that I think we ought to give peace a chance. I think we ought to give peace a chance. It is only 60 days, and we are just going to have to trust the President on this one. We will know soon, and I hope it works. I hope our giving peace a chance makes peace possible. My work here is done. I can see myself out. I suggest the absence of a quorum.”
Senate18 June 2026Source ↗
“I don't know how many bills it has been--a squillion. It has been bill after bill after bill. They haven't passed. But now that the President has done it, the Democrats are unhappy. I was reading the New York Times this morning. I mean, they are just bashing this agreement which they have been asking for. Now, I don't mean any disrespect, but I discount what is in the New York Times because I know the folks running the New York Times, and the folks running the New York Times hate Republicans as much as the Devil loves sin. The New York Times and the people running the New York Times would endorse a dead armadillo over a live Republican if the dead armadillo had a ``D'' behind its name. That is just the way it is. I get it. They are entitled to their opinion.”
Senate18 June 2026Source ↗
“The private sector--Iran has got--I don't know how anybody is eating or living in Iran. They have got 70 percent inflation, huge unemployment. In Iran today--and I regret this, but it had to be done. In Iran today, its public and private sectors are held together with spit and duct tape, and all the President has done is said: OK. For 60 days, I am going to give peace a chance and give you a chance to do what you say you are going to do. It is 60 days. That is it. I hope it works out, but I have my doubts. The President is taking a big risk here, and he has been roundly criticized by my Democratic friends, which I don't really get. You know, since the conflict started, my Democratic colleagues have been offering bill after bill after bill to stop the conflict and to take the authority away from the executive branch and prosecute.”
Senate18 June 2026Source ↗
“The other thing that I am certain of today is that Iran is immeasurably weaker than it was a year ago, than it was before the United States and Israel bombed their nuclear facilities last June, and before the conflict that we have watched transpire over the last couple of months--immeasurably weaker. There are whole swathes of Iran that look like the aftermath of a bar brawl. There are entire regions in Iran that look like something out of ``Mad Max'' 4. We have bombed the living bejesus out of them. We haven't destroyed all their missiles, but we have destroyed a bunch of them. We have destroyed their weapons production factories. We have destroyed their entire navy. We have destroyed a lot of their drones. We have just given them a curb stomping. Hated to do it, but we did what we have to do.”
Senate18 June 2026Source ↗
“As far as I am concerned, if your religion tells you, in order to be devout, you have to kill somebody, you probably ought to get another religion. My experience with the Iranian Government--not the Iranian people--is that they lie like they breathe. They lie like fish swim. They learned to lie before they could--before they learned to talk. But you know what, they have got 60 days to prove otherwise. Sixty days--not 160, not a year. They have got 60 days to prove otherwise. And if they don't prove it, the bombing is going to start again. I heard President Trump say it last night, big as Dallas, right there on television: They got 60 days. And if they don't do it, if they are jacking me around, I am going to start bombing again.”
Senate18 June 2026Source ↗
“They have got 60 days to do it--not 160, not a year. They have got 60 days. And President Trump has said if they don't do it, I think his expression was: I'll start dropping bombs on their head again. That is the other thing that we know. Now, this might be a good time to say that--as I have said all week and as I have said in another context before--I trust the Iranian Government like I trust gas station sushi. The Iranian Government--not the Iranian people--the Iranian Government are a bunch of religious nuts. Their religion tells them that if you--if you and I or anybody--don't agree with all the tenets of their religion, that they want to kill you and hurt you the entire time you are dying.”
Senate18 June 2026Source ↗
“And as a result of the Strait of Hormuz being opened, the price of fertilizer, for example, and other commodities that go back and forth through the Strait of Hormuz are coming down, and that is a good thing. And that is all we know. That is all--that is the only practical consequence of this document. Now, in the document, Iran says that it is willing to negotiate for 60 days to get rid of its fissile material that it can use to make a nuclear weapon, including, but not limited to, its centrifuges that it uses to enrich the uranium. And in the document, Iran says: We are willing to renounce our desire to have a nuclear weapon. And in the document, Iran says: For 60 days, we are willing to negotiate some sort of inspection protocol so that the world can go in and make sure that Iran is telling the truth.”
Senate18 June 2026Source ↗
“They are not any more clairvoyant than I am. Just like me, they have to wait for the future, like everybody else. Here is what I see in the document. The only certainty, the only practical, real consequence of this document is that for 60 days America has removed its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. And for 60 days, Iran has removed its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, which means ships containing oil and natural gas and fertilizer can go back and forth just like they were before the conflict started. The other practical consequence is that Iran will be able to start selling its oil again for 60 days. The other thing that we are certain of is that, as a result of this agreement, the price of oil is going down. And as a result of that, the price of gasoline is going down.”
Senate18 June 2026Source ↗
“Mr. President, last night, I read the memorandum of understanding between the United States and Iran. I read it twice. And for what it is worth, here is my conclusion: I think we ought to give peace a chance. And that is all I am saying today. You are entitled to your opinion, but all I am saying today is I think we ought to give peace a chance. I have--all week long, even before the memorandum came out--I have heard all the speculation about the agreement, the rank speculation. I have listened to people say: Well, I don't like this, and I don't like that; or this is in it and it shouldn't be and this isn't in it and it should be; and if we do this, this is going to happen. And it is all rank speculation. The people offering these points of view, to which they are entitled, they are not clairvoyant.”
Senate18 June 2026Source ↗
“And, given these kinds of articles, to do so incites the anger of at least half of our country, and that is not right. Mr. President, I suggest--well, I have a few minutes. Shoot, I am going to take them.”
Senate8 April 2025Source ↗
“I want to say it again: The people who wrote these articles and the people who published these articles have every right to do that. I mean, I am a firm believer in the First Amendment. Without the First Amendment, how are we supposed to know who the idiots are? I support the First Amendment. These folks have the right to publish that, but they do not have the right to publish it with taxpayer money--$500 million a year. And we know how--I think you know how I feel. We know how President Trump feels. But I hope the U.S. Congress, in our reconciliation package, abolishes the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and no longer gives them or any media organization in this country a single solitary dime of taxpayer money. That is not the role of the Federal Government.”
Senate8 April 2025Source ↗
“And some of my colleagues are mad about that. That is not what concerns me the most. I am sorry they are mad, but that is not what concerns me the most. My question is this: What in God's name--what on God's green Earth are we doing with a $36 trillion deficit and $36 trillion worth of debt, which is just accumulated deficits--why are we giving certain TV stations and certain radio stations in America but not others $500 million a year? Why? They don't need it, and even if they did need it, they shouldn't get the money to the exclusion of every other media organization. What happened to treating all people and all entities similarly situated similarly? So that is why I support abolishing the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.”
Senate8 April 2025Source ↗
“Here is--I love this one. This is from one of my local radio stations in Louisiana: ``Arguments that trans athletes have an unfair advantage lack evidence to support.'' What planet did this reporter parachute in from? He or she really believes that men don't have a physical advantage over a woman in sports? Here is another headline: ``Trump `Embodies Nearly Every Aspect Of A Racist,' Author Says.'' Another: ``The Nation: Confronting Trump's Coded Racism.'' These are coming from my local TV and radio stations that get money from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Here is another one: ``Sexism Is Out In The Open In The 2016 Campaign. That May Have Been Inevitable.'' I wonder who the author of this piece voted for. Another one: ``Is Trump Really That Racist?'' I wonder who that reporter voted for.”
Senate8 April 2025Source ↗
“Still, anti-trans politics followed her.'' Here is another one by WRKF, another example of opinion journalism paid for with your tax dollars: ``These far-right media figures are getting center stage under Trump.'' But there is more, as they say on ``The Price Is Right'' or something like that. Here is another one. This one came from Louisiana Public Broadcasting: ``Becoming Papa: Father's Key to Gender Justice.'' I can tell you, every mom and dad in Louisiana, when they lie down to sleep at night and they can't, they are lying there worrying about gender justice. Not. I mean, the title of the article suggests what you ought to believe. That is not fair or balanced. Here is another one: ``Transgender athletes seek protections to play sports.'' Let me see the next one, John. This is John Lowery, who works with me. He is a fine American.”
Senate8 April 2025Source ↗
“I don't know what the others did not to get Federal money, but clearly this is a case of the Federal Government picking and choosing. Let's see what they have done with the money. I will just read you a couple of the headlines paid for with your dollars in my local public media organization: ``How illegitimate [critical race theory] concerns shaped Louisiana's new social studies standards.'' No bias there. ``Trump's anti-trans effort is an agenda cornerstone with echoes in history.'' No bias there. That came from NPR and one of my local stations. Here is another one: ``What It's Like To Choose Transgender Sex Reassignment Surgery.'' Here is another one: ``Transgender Boy Tells Mom `It Shouldn't Be Scary To Be Who You Are.' '' Here is another one.”
Senate8 April 2025Source ↗
“Here is another one: ``The hidden racism of young white Americans.'' ``AP FACT CHECK: Trump seeds race animus with COVID falsehood.'' Here is another one: ``Biden trumpets economic gains, but struggles to get credit.'' Here is another one: ``Democracy on Trial, Part One: A Blueprint For the Case Against Trump.'' This is paid for with your tax dollars. This is opinion journalism. But it is not just at the national level; it is in my State too. It is in Louisiana. Louisiana has 318 radio stations. Only 10 of them get money from Federal taxpayers through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. So the folks who are publishing the articles I just referenced--pick 10 out of 138, and Louisiana said: We are going to favor you and give you money. My State also has 48 TV stations. Eight of them get Federal money-- your dollars.”
Senate8 April 2025Source ↗
“Now, some of my colleagues say the reason all this ought to stop is because the so-called journalism being published by NPR and PBS, which get their money from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which gets its money from you, out of your pocket--$500 million a year--some of my colleagues say: Well, we ought to stop it because the reporting is biased. And they have marshaled a persuasive argument to that effect. I have talked about some of the articles that have appeared, paid for with the American people's tax dollars. I am not going to go through all of them, but I will just mention a couple. Here is one: ``How racism became a marketing tool for country music.'' That is pretty fair and balanced, huh?”
Senate8 April 2025Source ↗
“Back in the 1940s and 1950s when we only had three TV stations and a handful of radio stations, it might have been necessary for the government to get in the TV and radio business, particularly to help our citizens in rural areas, but those days are gone. Now there are all kinds of forms of media. We have TV, newspapers, radio. We have the internet. We have Facebook. We have blogs. We have podcasts. We have cable TV. We have streaming TV. Yet the government continues to spend $500 million a year to subsidize the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, National Public Radio, and PBS. It ought to stop. It ought to stop. President Trump has talked about it. Many Members of Congress have talked about it. I have talked about it on the floor of this Senate.”
Senate8 April 2025Source ↗
“Public Broadcasting Let me talk about a second subject quickly. Take that one down, John, and put up the next one. I have talked--and I am not going to repeat--I have talked a lot about the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and its two cousins: National Public Radio and PBS. U.S. taxpayers spend $500 million a year subsidizing these media organizations. I have talked about that. There was a time when maybe we needed to do that.”
Senate8 April 2025Source ↗
“But these officials at the State level--not the local level--they said no State or Federal laws prohibit the principles of DEI, and they said that they are aware of no jurisdiction--no jurisdiction--that the Federal Government has to withdraw funding. Well, you know what, I hope we find out. I hope we find out. This kind of stuff makes me want to jump out of a moving car, and this is the kind of, in the words of the teacher who resigned, systemic rot, rank anti-Semitism, that in New York they are sending to our teachers and to our kids and to the world.”
Senate8 April 2025Source ↗
“It should not go unnoticed that in addition to this oversight--we know it wasn't an oversight; I mean, pigs may fly someday, but I doubt it; this wasn't an oversight--now we find out recently that New York State education officials have rejected President Trump's administration's demand to do away with certain diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts that call for quotas, racial quotas, which are illegal in the United States of America under recent Supreme Court precedent. These State officials wrote President Trump, and this is what they said: [T]here are no federal or state laws prohibiting the principles of D.E.I. I don't understand that. Racial quotas are illegal. You can't use race in America, according to well-settled law, to hurt a person or to help a person.”
Senate8 April 2025Source ↗
“``Stop Gaza Genocide Toolkit.'' ``Stop Gaza Genocide Toolkit.'' The administration of the New York public schools, the largest in the country, is sending this out to its teachers and its students and to the world. If you take a look and you say ``What is in this toolkit, this `Stop Gaza Genocide Toolkit'?'' it contains the biggest bunch of anti-Semitic rot you can imagine. The toolkit, among other things, breaks down how to mobilize pro-Palestinian campaigns on social media. It tells you--it tells our students and our teachers how to boycott and encourage divestment from pro-Israel organizations. It encourages readers to print out ``Palestine'' yard signs and calls our kids and our parents to action. Now, the head of the public schools in New York was embarrassed once people started going: What is going on?”
Senate8 April 2025Source ↗
“Mr. President, I saw something last week that I didn't believe. I read the article, and then I searched the internet for other articles saying the same thing to confirm that it was true, and it was true. I am still in disbelief. The largest public school system in America is in New York City. I love New York City. I think it is the greatest city in the world. And the New York public schools publish a monthly newsletter. It is called--let's see what it is called--the Office of Student Pathways Newsletter.”
Senate8 April 2025Source ↗
“Make this offer today: Offer to go to zero tariffs in Canada on American goods--no tariffs, none, zero, zilch, nada--and challenge America to remove all of our tariffs on Canada so the people of Canada can sell their goods to Americans without a tariff, and the people of America can sell their goods to our friends in Canada without a tariff--zero tariffs. Let Canadian businesses and American businesses compete. Competition makes all of us better. That is one of the shared values that we have with our friends in Canada. Let American businesses and Canadian businesses go at it in a friendly, competitive way and may the best price and the best product win. That is fair trade. That is free trade. If Prime Minister Carney wants fair trade and free trade, he will make that offer.”
Senate2 April 2025Source ↗
“The good people of Canada did the same thing when we had the horrible fires in California. Here is my point: I don't want to be at war with Canada. I don't want to have a trade war with Canada. I want us to continue to be friends. I made this suggestion to the new Prime Minister of Canada the other day, Prime Minister Carney. I am going to make it again, and I hope, this time, he will take it more seriously. Remember, if you want to be taken seriously, you have to act seriously. If you want respect, you have to act respectfully. Prime Minister Carney, you say that President Trump is not a fair trader. I understand your point of view. I don't agree with you, but I understand your point of view. You have got to stand up for your people. Prime Minister Carney, if you believe in free trade, then here is what you do.”
Senate2 April 2025Source ↗
“I remember this, too, that Gander has 10,000 people, but they welcomed thousands of American passengers. They fed them. They sheltered them. They comforted our American citizens. They gave them a little bit of peace at a scary time for America and the world. There was no hesitation by the people of Canada. It was only humanity. I will never forget that. I remember, after Hurricane Katrina, which hit my State, it destroyed Southeast Louisiana--New Orleans, yes, but many other parts of my State as well--and Mississippi. Canada was the very first country and the people of Canada were the very first people to send disaster relief. Their program was called Operation UNISON. Their military ships sailed south to help us in Louisiana. They sent 1,000 people and a lot of supplies. And do you know what?”
Senate2 April 2025Source ↗
“We share a 5,525-mile border. I am proud of that. We share history. We share values. We maintain longstanding mutual security commitments. We are both members of NATO. Canada and America are members of the binational North American Aerospace Defense Command. You probably know that as NORAD. It is more than just security commitments, though. It is more than just business. We are friends, and I am proud of that. I remember, on 9/11--who will ever be able to forget 9/11--U.S. airspace was shut down. The people of Canada stepped right up to the plate. They immediately implemented Operation Yellow Ribbon. They opened their airports. The Canadians opened their homes. The Canadians opened their hearts to 33,000 Americans who were stranded. There is a little town in Newfoundland called Gander.”
Senate2 April 2025Source ↗
“He said: I want China to be part of the negotiations and India and Brazil and South Africa--and get this; this will curdle your lunch-- North Korea. Mama Gump said that stupid is as stupid does. President Putin is not interested in peace. President Putin thinks President Trump took the bullet train to Chump Town. I mean, I can tell you how I look at this and, I think, how most Americans look at this situation. I think to myself: You know, my mama didn't raise a fool, and if she did, it was one of my brothers. I see what Putin is doing. He is not serious here. I would gently--no. I take that back. I would firmly suggest to President Putin: If you want peace, stop treating President Trump and the American people like a bunch of chumps. Stop it. If you want respect, act respectfully.”
Senate2 April 2025Source ↗
“And do you know what his conditions are?--to have the United States of America remove the sanctions on the Russian economy. Then, to make matters worse, President Putin said: Oh, by the way, I have one other condition. I want to put the people of Ukraine and the Government of Ukraine under the administration of the United Nations. In other words, he wants the people of Ukraine to give up their democratic form of government and be run by the United Nations. Then, finally, President Putin said to President Trump: Oh, yes. There is one other thing, too, before I will agree to a cease-fire in the Black Sea or to a cease-fire generally. ``I don't want to just negotiate with you, President Trump,'' President Putin said.”
Senate2 April 2025Source ↗
“President Putin said: No, I won't agree to a blanket cease-fire, but I will stop bombing infrastructure in Ukraine. He lied like he breathed. He continued to destroy civilian infrastructure in Ukraine. Then President Trump said: OK. Let's try for a cease-fire in the Black Sea. That would benefit both Ukraine and Russia, both of which use the Black Sea for maritime commerce. And, indeed, the world depends on a lot of the grain that they both export. So President Trump said: Let's try for a cease-fire in the Black Sea and maritime security in the Black Sea. President Zelenskyy said: ``Sure, I am with you,'' just like he said previously, ``I agree to a ceasefire, Mr. President.'' President Putin said: I will agree to a cease-fire in the Black Sea, but I want conditions. I want conditions.”
Senate2 April 2025Source ↗
“Madam President, I want to spend a few minutes first talking about Russia. To get respect, you have to act respectfully. To be taken seriously, you have to act seriously. We know that. It is a matter of common sense. President Putin in Russia is not acting with respect toward the United States of America or President Trump. President Putin is not acting seriously. I don't know a single fairminded person with an IQ above his age who doesn't want peace in Ukraine. We all want to see peace in Ukraine. President Zelenskyy wants to see peace in Ukraine. President Trump wants to see peace in Ukraine. I thought President Putin did. I am beginning to wonder. President Trump, who is leading these negotiations, first asked for a cease-fire. He said: For 30 days--maybe 45, 60 days--I am asking both Russia and Ukraine to lay down their arms.”
Senate2 April 2025Source ↗
“Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following interns and law clerks in my office be granted floor privileges until May 5, 2025: John Mark Huff, Jr., John Paul Doucet, Alexandra Grace Davis, and Maura Elaine Schlee.”
Senate4 March 2025Source ↗
“But they don't have an inalienable right to report these things using opinion journalism that no fair-minded American can construe as anything but representing one point of view with your tax dollars. I am going to try to stop subsidizing media, not just PBS and not just NPR but any form of media that somehow is getting Federal taxpayer dollars. It is just not right. It is not fair. I have a bill to do that. We are also going to pursue it through reconciliation. I think President Trump and Mr. Musk are going to pursue it on their own, and I think that is a very good thing. With that, I suggest the absence of a quorum.”
Senate4 March 2025Source ↗
“Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. There being no objection, the Senate, at 7:32 p.m., adjourned until Wednesday, February 26, 2025, at 10 a.m. ____________________”
Senate25 February 2025Source ↗
“10 be executed; further, I ask unanimous consent that at 12 noon the Senate proceed to executive session and vote on confirmation of the Greer nomination, as provided under the previous order, and that following disposition of the Greer nomination, the Senate resume consideration of S.J. Res. 10.”
Senate25 February 2025Source ↗
“Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 10 a.m. on Wednesday, February 26; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, morning business be closed, and the order of February 18 in relation to S.J. Res.”
Senate25 February 2025Source ↗
“Hearing no further debate, the question is on adoption of the resolution. The resolution (S. Res. 96) was agreed to. Mr. KENNEDY. I ask unanimous consent that the preamble be agreed to and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.”
Senate25 February 2025Source ↗
“Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 96, submitted earlier today.”
Senate25 February 2025Source ↗
“President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.”
Senate25 February 2025Source ↗
“Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 97, which was submitted earlier today”
Senate25 February 2025Source ↗