YouSaid · the spoken record
Jamie Raskin
On the record 2025–2026
congress
This is everything the corpus holds for Jamie Raskin. It is not everything they have said on the record.
Every line below is reproduced as it was said and credited to the record it came from, and links to that record wherever it can be linked. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections
“Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Let us go after the criminals, the kind of people that Donald Trump has been pardoning--dozens and dozens of convicted white collar fraudsters. Let's go after them. Let's not engage in an information grab against tens of millions of other Americans who have done nothing other than try to survive in this economy, which is teetering. That is what we should have been spending our time on today rather than on this nonsense, and I yield back the balance of my time.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“But, in any event, there is no problem being solved by their legislation, other than the fact that they haven't really done anything in this Congress and so they want to say that they are doing something. The fraud prosecutions are taking place today. This legislation is really a vehicle for creating a mass privacy database of information about Americans who have dared to go and seek a benefit from their own tax dollars going to the Federal Government, whether it is the SNAP program, or it is a background check on guns, or it is applying for a VA loan, or what have you. I don't think applying for participation in a Federal program or a Federal benefit should be justification for surrendering the rights that you have under the Privacy Act and under the Constitution. We are talking about law-abiding, innocent Americans, millions of them.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I think that we have demonstrated that this is legislation that is a solution in search of a problem. We are working on the fraud problem, which in the last bill they were bragging about all of the great successes that they have had. Now, we can, in fact, contest some of that because most of those cases came from the prior administration. But, regardless, they were bragging about the successes that they have had prosecuting fraud cases. They certainly haven't prosecuted any of the friends of the President, but that is a separate problem that we have talked about exhaustively today.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Well, what the gentleman offers by way of brevity, he lacks in terms of accuracy. There are lots of Federal programs, lots of Federal moneys that go to State and local governments. That is the whole point of the legislation that the gentleman is representing--to use that as a lever to get all of this information from the States and localities about the people of the United States. Let's stand up on a bipartisan basis for constitutional values and reject this legislation. In fact, I would urge our colleagues just to withdraw the legislation and say save it for another day where we can have an actual hearing about it and a markup, and we can analyze it and engage in the legislative process. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the police departments receive money for background checks for NCIC and have gotten traditionally tons of Federal money through various grant programs. Any grant program under the legislation that the gentleman is carrying opens up that State, county, or municipality to investigation by the Federal Government. If I am wrong about that, please correct me. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“We don't have a problem today going after the fraud by using that old- fashioned American principle of evidence. If somebody is actually ripping off the system or we have reason to believe, reasonable suspicion to believe, then you can launch your investigation. If there is probable cause, bring an indictment. That is what has been working in Minnesota. That is happening right now. They just want to exploit the opportunity of that scandal to say, now, let's go and get everybody's data information in the country, and I think that is totally antithetical to the basic founding values of our Constitution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Now, we are doing it through the backdoor by saying if you have ever sought any kind of program benefit, such as a school loan, a VA loan, a housing loan, you could have tried to get a gun permit, you could have applied to get some kind of benefit from your State, some kind of tax benefit from your State or what have you, then all of a sudden, the attorney general now has fishing expedition rights to mop up all of that information. The courts are not allowing it under the Privacy Act. The courts are not allowing it under the specific privacy protections inscribed into the very statutes. That is why they are coming forward with this mass omnibus database that they want to put together at this point. I think the American people reject it just like the courts have rejected it and just like our Constitution rejects that approach.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“We want to know every time they have applied for that benefit or any other benefit. We want any information you have about their finances. The gentleman seems to be saying that is fine with him, that any Federal agency that can get the approval of the Attorney General to do it or the Department of Justice itself can go on a fishing expedition against anybody who has sought any Federal benefit or program. We are going to be creating a mass Orwellian database of information about people and that, of course, is what Elon Musk and the President wanted to do, and the courts shut them down.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I will return for a moment to the example that I gave about this legislation being written in such an overly broad and sloppy way. Remember, we have not had a hearing or markup on it, so we haven't had the opportunity to improve it. It has been written in such a sloppy and broad way that an Attorney General could literally say, we believe that there is pay-to-play going on for people getting gun licenses or getting a concealed carry permit in a particular State, and there has been scandals about that. Therefore, we want to get all of the information about everybody who has sought and received or been rejected in getting such a gun license or such a permit. We want their addresses. We want their names. We want their Social Security numbers.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, again, I am afraid we are talking at cross-purposes here because what we are talking about is the vast acquisition of information from the States that cannot be obtained now, which is why they are consistently losing in court. They can't receive it under the Privacy Act or under the provisions of each of the Federal statutes governing those State programs. They want to wipe out those privacy protections and say it is up to the Attorney General. Then the Attorney General can share with other Federal agencies and departments if, in his sole view, that it is relevant to what he says is related to fraud and he can share it with all of these other Federal departments and agencies and so on.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“If you are saying that the Privacy Act in its entirety is preserved by this bill, please clarify because that is something that we need to know. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“In any event, the gentleman has not denied--I wish he would--that this is overriding all of the other provisions of the Privacy Act, and it is also overriding all of the privacy provisions that we have inscribed into the specific statutes that are being affected here. For example, the SNAP Act and the USDA's implementing regulations have privacy provisions. The Privacy Act of 1974 itself and all of the other provisions, the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988, the Paperwork Reduction Act, and so on, all of these other laws have privacy protections that you are wiping out by giving the attorney general all of this authority. If you are not doing that, please clarify it for the legislative history record that we are making right now.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Why do our colleagues want to skip over the entire legislative process and just throw this very hastily and, I think, incompetently written legislation on the floor? That is my question. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Do we really want to say, or do our colleagues want to say, that we are going to empower the Attorney General to go to State police forces or licensing authorities around America and get all of the information about people who have applied for a gun license, even if they didn't get it, or everybody who has received a gun license, their Social Security number, their home address, any other information the Attorney General considers relevant, their criminal record, their civil record in court, whatever the Attorney General says is relevant to the possible vulnerability of fraud? This is why we have a legislative process. This is why we have hearings, so we can talk about these things.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Under a different administration, this legislation that we are about to vote on would allow the Department of Justice to go to police departments and gun licensing agencies around America and demand that they turn over all of the privacy data for all individuals who have applied for a firearm license, if in the unilateral discretion of the Attorney General he or she thinks that is relevant to combating fraud. You don't have to show they have done anything wrong. You can already get that information. That is what I am trying to explain to you. That is what the whole process is designed around today. The reason why the administration is losing in court is because they just want all of the information, even if it doesn't relate to any particular facts suggesting that there is criminal wrongdoing taking place.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Let me just try to explain why the constitutional values that we are raising here apply to everybody across the board in America. There are some people perhaps who don't have much of an interest in people who get SNAP benefits. Those are millions of our fellow citizens. You say, well, no big deal. I don't care about their privacy rights. Imagine a future administration, and let's say there are allegations that there is a pay-to-play system for getting a gun license or a concealed carry permit. There have been scandals around that. Say there are allegations about that in a particular State or a group of States. In fact, you don't even need allegations because the Attorney General can just dream it up and say: I think that there is a risk or a hazard of that happening. But say there are allegations.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“You want to demolish and override all of that simply to say whatever the Attorney General considers to be appropriate, as either a program to target or information that the Attorney General wants, is now going to be the standard. Now we are right back to Elon Musk land. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“So that is work--there are dozens of investigations, prosecutions, and indictments that have taken place there. They say: Oh, well, something bad happened, and we responded to it. Therefore, now let's get back to that Elon Musk idea of mopping up everybody's privacy data information in the country. The gentleman assures us that it is narrowly tailored. Well, I hate to bring some facts into it, but why don't we actually look at the legislation itself, because it goes through a whole series of programs that it applies to. The gentleman might say, okay, well, that is a finite number of programs, like the SNAP program, the Community Development Block Grant Program, or the highway funds program.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank our Independent colleague from California for saying that we are registering legitimate concerns here, because we certainly are. Remember, there has been no subcommittee hearing, no committee hearing, and no markup. This just appeared on the House floor on the last day of session before the election. I don't know where it came from. Maybe the stork brought it. The floor leader assures us that this is narrowly tailored. Look, we can root out criminal fraud while protecting the data and privacy rights of hundreds of millions of Americans. That is what we have been doing. Our colleagues are talking about what took place in Minnesota, which was atrocious. It was also discovered, investigated, and prosecuted by State and Federal teams.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Relevant prosecutions are taking place every day, which is why the Department of Justice is able to brag about all the successes they have been having based on prosecutions and investigations done in the Biden administration. What DOGE demanded, and Trump's DOJ is now demanding, is access to all of our data, including the data of tens of millions of Americans who are not and have never been suspected of fraud. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“{time} 1650 The States can only make our most sensitive information--our Social Security numbers, photographs, addresses, sources of income, and other private data--available to a law enforcement agency in extraordinary circumstances, when the government can show that their target is a flight risk or violating probation or subject to immediate arrest, or there is probable cause or reasonable suspicion that a crime is being committed. The Trump administration is now demanding that State administrators provide the most intimate details of everyone's lives--home addresses, recent locations, Social Security numbers, and household incomes--to the Department of Justice on demand without any demonstrated need and without any showing of probable cause or reasonable suspicion or what have you.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“They have been challenging the administration's data demands in court, and now that the States are, again, systematically beating Donald Trumped in court all over America, including with some Trump appointed judges, the administration is coming to Congress to insist that we force the States to give the Attorney General unfettered access to troves of Americans' most sensitive data for whatever purposes they see fit. I want to clear up a misconception since it seems to be a common one among our colleagues. In addition to cooperating with law enforcement agencies like DOJ, the States already share program data and other information with the Federal Government for the purposes of prosecuting and preventing fraud in federally funded programs. That goes on all the time.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“They stormed into the Social Security Administration in February of last year demanding access to the complete personal records of tens of millions of Americans. Judges all over America blocked DOGE's unlawful effort to vacuum up our most personal financial data. One court called it a mass fishing expedition. Another judge blocked DOGE from obtaining student records, work records, and financial records from the Department of Education, the Office of Personnel Management, and the Treasury Department.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“It seeks to wipe out the privacy protections that Congress has enacted in these programs and to force States to turn over to Attorney General Todd Blanche massive amounts of personal data without the government having to show an iota of evidence that anyone is even suspected of fraud or anything else, no probable cause, no reasonable suspicion, no legal standard, just give us the information, which is exactly what Elon Musk wanted to do and why he was driven out of town by a bipartisan coalition. This is not the first time the administration has tried to collect and assemble all of our data into one master Big Brother database. Madam Speaker, you remember DOGE, and you remember Elon Musk.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“That is not consistent with the Privacy Act or any of the Federal statutes we have protecting the private information of every American citizen. Under the statutes governing programs explicitly covered by this bill, States are already required to share information with the Federal Government to prevent, investigate, and root out fraud. We have gone through a very careful, painstaking legislative process writing those into specific bills. Madam Speaker, what is the point of this bill? It is not about fraud at all.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Earlier this year, the DOJ announced arrests and convictions in a variety of cases against fraudsters who tried to steal $340 million from various government programs. Although the administration claimed credit for bringing several cases, it actually began under the last administration. It is clear either way, wherever you want the credit to go, Madam Speaker, that the government had the capacity to investigate and prosecute fraud. Our friends have not referred to a single case, not one single criminal case, where they tried to get evidence but couldn't get evidence. They have not shown one. They just said: Well, we have demanded all of the data. Of course, Madam Speaker, you shouldn't get all the data.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“That is because the majority's constituents are not going to like it one bit. This legislation is totally unnecessary. The Department of Justice already has the tools it needs to investigate and prosecute fraud. That is what the other side has been bragging about for the last hour about the fraud investigations, most of them coming from the Biden administration originally, but in any event, they are bragging about the fraud investigations that they have done. Using grand jury subpoenas, Republicans were able to get everything they need not just from the State agencies but from banks, from businesses, and from people. Madam Speaker, follow the Constitution. The Framers were pretty wise people.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“We are being asked to vote today on a bill that overthrows the longstanding privacy safeguards governing these programs and all the general privacy laws enacted by Congress to protect our personal data from unwarranted government surveillance and collection. This is a sweeping change being rushed to the floor at the last minute in the waning days of the least productive Congress for one century, at least, in total violation of regular order. We have had no Judiciary Committee hearings on this bill and no Judiciary subcommittee hearings on this bill. We have not marked it up in committee, nor have we had an opportunity to amend or improve it. I know my friends are not going to get any votes over on this side of the aisle, at least I hope not, but I sure hope that other Members on that side of the aisle read the fine print on this thing.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“They were trying to amass all of our private and personal data into a master government database of every American who has ever applied for or accepted a benefit from or otherwise used any Federal program without any proof or any probable cause or any reasonable suspicion of a crime. The gentleman says that the requests from DOJ are not being honored by the States. They are being honored when they can demonstrate that there is a connection to actual fraud. However, when the States are resisting and going to court to stop--and this is not just blue States but red States too--our requests from the administration to turn over all data, all data about Americans who are not suspected of any fraud, courts across the country are ruling for the States and for the people against that outrageous privacy data power grab.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I was delighted to help the majority on the last bill because I thought it made some sense. However, I rise in vehement opposition to H.R. 10326, the so-called PROOF Act, which is a dangerous bill and has nothing to do with fighting fraud and everything to do with orchestrating a huge privacy data power grab from the American people. The goal of the bill is to get Congress to permit Trump's Department of Justice to do what DOGE was unable to do, even though it tried, because the courts blocked them from doing it.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Well, that is not going to work for a society devoted to the rule of law, to freedom, democracy, and justice. At this point, let's put it all in the hands of the American people. We can continue as we are going, the government being an instrument for the private self-enrichment of the guy who gets in and his family, friends, and corporations or the government being an instrument for the common good of the people. That was the vision of the Framers. That was the vision of the Founders of this country. Let's get back to it. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“I understand the impulse to say: Well, let's say we are against fraud, hey, we will put JD Vance on it, and then there will be an antifraud unit. If you want to call it an antifraud unit, great, I am with you. I will demonstrate my bipartisanship. Will you, on the other side, demonstrate your bipartisanship by calling out the billions of dollars worth of fraud that are taking place right now in the executive branch of government? It is going to take us years, maybe decades, to dig out from this nightmare of corruption and fraud that they have brought down on the Government of the United States. They have sent the message to all the white-collar criminals and fraudsters out there: They are just fine with what is going on. If nobody blows the whistle on the executive branch, then they won't blow the whistle on anybody else.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“I said: If you are still looking for vandals in the District of Columbia who are destroying Federal property worth more than a thousand dollars, I have a very good lead on who demolished the east wing of the White House without any permission from Congress or any license to do that. I have a very good lead on who has been scrawling graffiti illegally on the wall of the Kennedy Center and desecrating that institution set up by Congress, if you are looking for vandals. This fraud goes from the biggest cases involving billions of dollars down to the level of the Reflecting Pool and the President's press team. I call it the deflecting pool. The whole executive branch of government is drowning in corruption and fraud.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“He was pounced on by Federal agents, held for 5 hours, and then they charged him with felony counts of destruction of Federal property, when they knew it was totally fallacious. Then, finally, in court, they had to release the real Interior Department study showing that this was a botched installation by President Trump's contractor, by his hand-picked, no-bid, insider contractor, which has now taken full responsibility for it. My constituent had to go out and find a lawyer, 76 years old, an Olympic canoeist, and they have no problem with that, a fraudulent prosecution. I hope that the new fraud unit with the sign on the door will prosecute that case. I sent a letter to the U.S. attorney, Jeanine Pirro, the former FOX News commentator who is the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia. I sent her a letter.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. I am going to just share with you a few of the other people who have been pardoned in case people aren't completely convinced of the culture of corruption that we are saturated in. President Trump said he was going to drain the swamp. He became the swamp. In fact, he gave a very swampy, insider, no-bid contract to the pool guy from Mar-a-Lago, who ended up turning the reflecting pool of the United States into an algae farm. My constituents are now calling it the strait of warm ooze, as the algae overpours the sides of the Reflecting Pool. They tried to set up one of my constituents, Madam Speaker. Davey Hearn, a three-time Olympic canoeist, went for a bike ride, and he dipped his hand in the water to see what was going on.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“They have converted the Department of Justice into an instrument of fraud, not an instrument of fighting fraud. I take the gentleman to be absolutely sincere in wanting to fight fraud, but this administration is not doing it. We have to get back on track, and we have to restore the rule of law in America. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. {time} 1630”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Madam Speaker, while they have dropped thousands of criminal investigations, thousands of them, including lots of fraud investigations, they brought prosecutions against James Comey, against Letitia James, against Senator Adam Schiff and Senator Mark Kelly, and against our colleagues Jason Crow and Maggie Goodlander. These are fraudulent investigations and fraudulent prosecutions. Simply, the President orders out for a pizza, and they snap to and deliver every time. Oh, you want us to prosecute the former Director of the FBI? You want us to prosecute a U.S. attorney? You want us to prosecute a U.S. Representative, a U.S. Senator? Fine, we will do it. They had to fire a bunch of U.S. attorneys who refused to go along with it. That, in itself, is fraud.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, our colleagues today have bragged about a lot of the investigations and prosecutions that were conducted under the Biden administration's Department of Justice. By the way, before this Presidential administration, we didn't really think that the Attorney General was someone who reported directly to the President. That is an innovation of President Trump, who says he wants his own Roy Cohn and he wants an Attorney General who is going to report directly to him.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Where is the bipartisanship on that side that will say that the legislative branch stands for something, that we are going to stand up for the Constitution, and that we are going to stand up against fraud and crime even if the executive branch won't do it? They are the ones who are acting like naked partisans every day and why the performance of this 119th Congress limps to a close with a whimper because they won't even speak up for the constitutional powers that have been stripped from us, like the tariff power, the taxing power, and the war power, even the power to regulate Federal buildings, like the Kennedy Center and the White House. They won't stand up, actually, for a muscular law essentially deferred to the U.S.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Madam Speaker, it may be that the majority has no interest in the fact that $1.7 billion is going from the victims of white-collar fraud back to the perpetrators because of the pardons, and we haven't even begun to tabulate how much has been taken from the victims when they don't even bring the charges because somebody gets the right lawyer or the right lobbyist involved in the situation. I guess my question is, are we not interested in what this National Fraud Enforcement Division is actually going to do? Do we not want them to deal with the fraud that is now rampant throughout the Federal Government? This President has made more than $2 billion in his first year in office, which is more than every other President in the history of the United States combined.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I am afraid that the floor leader for the majority simply won't take ``yes'' for an answer. He says that we are here to consider this bill about fraud enforcement at the Department of Justice. I agree with his bill. I am going to vote for his bill, but I don't just want a new sign on the door. I want a completely new philosophy which says that we actually prosecute fraud. I am certain that my colleague is not interested just in the form of fraud enforcement but in the actual substance of fraud enforcement. The gentleman does somewhat of a drive-by hit on my numbers. If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have different numbers, let me know because I am taking the actual numbers that come from public records about how much money is being forgiven.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Why don't Republicans cross the aisle and say that it is wrong for them to be pardoning white-collar fraudster after white-collar fraudster, or at least pardoning them from having to pay the fines and the restitution back? It is an honest question. Do my colleagues really think that $1.7 billion should go from what was going to be the pockets of the victims back into the bank account of the perpetrators? Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“We counted up more than $1.7 billion in restitution that was supposed to go to the victims of white-collar fraud or to the government, to the taxpayers and the citizens, which President Trump forgave. If they don't do it on the back end with the pardon, they do it on the front end by dismissing the case, if you can find the right lawyers and the right brokers. My dear friend from New Jersey wants to make it sound like I am doing something partisan. I am joining his bill. It would be very easy for me to say that I reject everything Republicans do because they are on the side of this pro-fraud President, but I am not doing that. The bill says let's call this the National Fraud Enforcement Division, and I say fine. That makes sense to me.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Devon Archer, a name familiar to a lot of people on the other side of the aisle, committed securities fraud conspiracy and securities fraud, and he was supposed to pay $43,427,436 back to the victims, and that was forgiven by President Trump. The next one, Jason Galanis, he was convicted of conspiracy to commit securities fraud, investment adviser fraud, conspiracy to commit securities fraud, securities fraud, and conspiracy to commit investment adviser fraud. But he did do something for the President. I remember because he came over on a video Zoom presentation to testify against Hunter Biden about something, and, of course, that led nowhere because Hunter Biden had already been convicted of his crimes and had done good time. But, anyway, this guy, Jason Galanis, he was forgiven $84,817,513. {time} 1620 We have dozens more like this.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“A bunch of the white collar criminals--now some of them, as we have seen, were on their way to prison, and he let them go from prison and also forgave their crimes. But a lot of them are applying after they have done their time because they don't want to pay the fines back, and President Trump is forgiving the restitution and the fines that have been ordered by a court. If you go chronologically, I am looking at the first four that he happened to pardon who had committed white collar fraud crimes. One of them, Governor Blagojevich, there was no restitution left to pay. Then there is the second, Trevor Milton, convicted of securities fraud and wire fraud. Check this out. He was forgiven $695 million that his victims could have gotten back, $695 million.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, the President has pardoned dozens of people convicted of fraud. These are the people most likely to go out and start committing fraud all over again, and we are already seeing his pardonees go out and reoffend. But if you make a chronological list of the people that he pardoned, the thing that is most shocking to me is the forgiveness of the fines and the restitution that they owe to the public and that they owe to their victims, because every other prior President had essentially deferred to the U.S.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“I am sorry, you might have political sympathies with the people that they are covering up for, but that is not how the rule of law works. The rule of law should be objectively rendered. If people violate the law, they should not be freed. The charges should not be dropped. The indictments should not be quashed, or they should not be pardoned simply because they are friends with people in the right place. America sees what is going on. That is not justice. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗
“After the 2024 election, Sun invested $75 million into World Liberty Financial, the President's family's own crypto company, and he became one of the largest known holders of Trump's memecoin. He attended a private reception and dinner with President Trump. Then, suddenly, what do you know, the FCC dropped all the charges and moved to a settlement, with Sun paying a mere $10 million penalty. And on and on, case after case dropped. We have seen what they have done with respect to the Epstein files with the Department of Justice leading the coverup, doing everything that they can to blockade the release of the materials mandated by the United States Congress in the Epstein Files Transparency Act. So the Department of Justice is not acting to ferret out and prosecute fraud. It is covering it up.”
House of Representatives16 September 2026Source ↗