00:00Good afternoon, Mr. Blanche. Good afternoon. Our president has a very well-documented history of
00:05attempting to corruptly influence government officials to advance his own personal interest.
00:10He called the Republican Secretary of Georgia, asking him to find enough votes to overturn the
00:15election. He withheld military aid to pressure Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden's son.
00:22For these things, he has been impeached. He's been criminally convicted in Georgia,
00:28ignited in Georgia, because he uses his power to unjustly influence people.
00:33When a president routinely pressures public officials for his own personal benefit,
00:38the Department of Justice has to remain independent. This brings me really to you,
00:43and I think what has you at the center of so much concern, is that you seek to lead the
00:49Department of Justice after being the president's personal lawyer. The American people are really
00:54entitled to know whether your allegiance to the rule of law is your focus or your allegiance to
01:01one man who clearly has an insatiable appetite for revenge, self-enrichment, and the abuse of power.
01:08So I want to talk about your record. Under you, the Department has prosecuted people
01:13that have caught folks on both sides of the political aisle by surprise.
01:17Jim Comey, Letitia James, my colleague Adam Schiff, Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook.
01:25This casts a shadow over your ideas, any ideas of independence. You directed the arrest
01:33of Mayor Roz Baraka of my city of Newark. You weren't at Delaney Hall on May 9th, 2025,
01:40when he was arrested. But yes or no, did you have a conversation with special agent in charge,
01:47Ricky Patel, ordering him to arrest Mayor Baraka?
01:51I had a conversation. I didn't order him to arrest. I authorized the arrest, which is my job.
01:58So you were not there, and we have body camera footage of him then moving and saying,
02:03we are arresting the mayor right now per, this is his quote, the Deputy Attorney General of the United
02:08States. I want to put that into the record, your comments there. And the district court,
02:14assessing all of your conduct, admonished the Department of Justice. This is their,
02:19this is the quote of the judge, the federal judge. Your role is not to advance political agendas.
02:26Your allegiance is to the impartial application of the law and to uphold due process for all.
02:33But this is just one example cited by over 1,200 current and former Department of Justice officials
02:39appointed under presidents of both parties who warned that you should not be in this position
02:45because of your inability to be independent from your personal allegiance to Donald Trump
02:50over the rule of law. I met yesterday with Epstein survivors. Some of them are here in the room
02:57today. Congress, in a bipartisan fashion, passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act because the
03:04American people were demanding justice. Yet you failed to abide by that law and release the files
03:12by the deadline established by the law. And when the files were finally released, you failed to protect
03:18the survivors that that law was intended to protect. Survivors' personal information, including names,
03:25phone numbers, home addresses, and images were released. Powerful people were redacted.
03:35Survivors were subjected to re-traumatization. More than 1,200 victims, yet only two people have
03:41ever been prosecuted. Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. Now, I was stunned earlier by your
03:48conversation with one of my colleagues that you wouldn't even commit to meeting with the survivors.
03:54But you did meet with Ghislaine Maxwell. Your claim that you can't meet with these victims
03:59because they're represented by counsel is utter nonsense. Counsel can be present or a client can waive
04:06their right to have counsel. But you're a lawyer. You know this. That was not truthful, what you said to
04:13my
04:13colleague. You said that they should meet with the FBI. All of these women have reported their crimes
04:20decades ago, but yet you won't meet with them. What you will do is meet with Ghislaine Maxwell. Over a
04:27year ago,
04:28you sat with her and you publicly said you were seeking the truth. So let's talk about what that two
04:34-day meeting
04:34was being produced. Did your interview with Ms. Maxwell lead to a single additional person being charged, yes or no?
04:43No. Did it lead to a single new investigation, yes or no?
04:51I can't talk about whether there's any investigation. I'm not asking you about an ongoing or closed investigation.
04:57I'm just asking you about this unusual. I can't answer your question, yes or no. Did you or anyone else
05:02from the DOJ
05:02or associated with the president discuss a presidential pardon with Ghislaine Maxwell or her
05:08attorneys? No. Did you discuss
05:11clemency, yes or no? No. Did you discuss
05:15She was convicted. What do you mean, clemency? Did you discuss her transfer to another
05:19institution, yes or no? No. Well, just one week after your
05:23meeting, Ms. Maxwell was transferred from a low-security
05:27federal institution to a minimum security prison camp. Were you involved with that transfer?
05:34When, as I've talked about before,
05:36in the time leading up to me going down to meet with her,
05:40we learned that she was receiving threats.
05:44It turned out when we were there. I'm going to interrupt you for a matter of time because...
05:47Okay, well, it's not a question I can answer apparently in the time you're giving me. Sir, I'm going to
05:51tell you this because I deal with
05:53issues of criminal justice. When people are under threats in a bureau of prison facility,
05:58they're put into solitary confinement or protective. They're not moved to a camp.
06:04That's not always true. You're just wrong.
06:06What is true is someone that is accused of child sex trafficking
06:10under the bureau of prison's own policies
06:14is not put in a facility like this that seems clearly like a reward.
06:21The Department of Justice is also responsible that powerful corporations
06:25play by the same rules. Let's take a proposed merger between Paramount, Warner Brothers and Discovery.
06:31This is no ordinary transaction. It was a proposed $111 billion merger involving two of the last remaining
06:38legacy Hollywood studios. As Deputy Attorney General and later Acting Attorney General, you exercised
06:45oversight of the Antitrust Division. You approved the decision to close the department's investigation
06:51into that merger, yes or no?
06:55I was part of the decision. I don't know whether...
06:57Yes, you were involved in that.
06:58You don't even let me answer, man. That's incredible.
07:00Did the career attorneys who investigated that deal
07:03recommend closing that investigation?
07:05I didn't have a conversation with the career, but as I was saying earlier...
07:09I didn't ask you that. I asked you, did the career attorneys who investigated the deal
07:13recommend closing the investigation? I have no idea what they were...
07:16You were in charge of that department, yet you have no idea. Well, this is...
07:18I didn't say I had no idea. It's no idea about the question you asked about what the career attorney's
07:23view was.
07:23You do not know what the career attorney's view was?
07:26I'm not sure what the view was with respect to closing it or not closing it.
07:29Well, let me tell you why ethics laws that bind you about the appearance of impropriety
07:36are so, so damning in this case. On the same day that Paramount shareholders voted to approve the merger,
07:42David Ellison, the head of the acquiring company, hosted a dinner that you attended honoring the president of the United
07:48States.
07:49While you were at that dinner, the DOJ was still investigating a merger.
07:54Did you speak with Mr. Ellison on that evening?
07:59No.
08:00Did you discuss with anyone involved in that organization that evening the department's ongoing investigations?
08:07No.
08:09Well, six weeks later, after that dinner, that investigation was closed, that you're stating
08:14you have no idea if the attorneys in charge even finished their investigation.
08:18That's not what I said.
08:20What did you say?
08:21You asked me a question about whether the attorneys recommended that the investigation be closed,
08:26and I said I wasn't sure. That's different than what you just threw back at me.
08:30Do you believe that that creates an appearance of impropriety that you were at a dinner?
08:34No.
08:35Okay. The Justice Department ethics rules are very clear about avoiding the appearance of impropriety.
08:44In a case like this, I don't think that's an appearance of impropriety. I think that's improper.
08:51That the connected and the powerful are getting a chance to rub shoulders. It would seem appropriate that you avoid
08:59those kind of appearances and dinners like that.
09:03Every appearance or dinner or speech that I give are cleared by ethics officials.
09:07So your attendance at that dinner was cleared by ethics officials?
09:11Everything that I do.
09:12I didn't ask you everything you do. Was your appearance at that dinner cleared?
09:16You can ask the questions, but you cannot control my answers.
09:18I'm under oath and I can answer the questions. I choose to answer them.
09:22Were you approved to approve?
09:22So what I will tell you is when I do things outside of the department, whether it's a speech,
09:30whether it's a dinner, whether it's an event, they are approved by ethics officials.
09:35You did not answer whether that attendance was approved.
09:38Every time I go out, it's approved. Yes.
09:42You know, Lincoln, it was said about him that if you want to see the true character of a man,
09:47don't view him in adversity, give him power.
09:50I believe you've had a lot of power.
09:54And so we don't have to speculate about what has been revealed with your time in that office.
09:59We don't need to worry about what kind of attorney general you've already had that power.
10:04This isn't a job interview like usually.
10:07You've sat before this committee before.
10:09You've made promises time and time again before.
10:12You got the job actually to be the number two and the acting director.
10:16So this isn't a confirmation hearing. This is more of a performance review.
10:20And clearly, when it comes to the treatment of Epstein victims, when it comes to politically motivated prosecutions,
10:27when it comes from avoiding appearance of impropriety with corporations, you failed.
10:34You're asking this body for a promotion.
10:37And you've spent today making a lot of promises, promises to follow the law, promises to be independent, promises to
10:44serve the American people and not the president.
10:45But we don't need your promises.
10:48We have your record.
10:50We have watched you exercise one of the greatest powers entrusted to any public servant.
10:55And what have you shown us?
10:561,200 victims waiting for justice.
10:59What have you shown us?
11:00There's two prosecutions.
11:03While the party, while the people involved, the victims, are waiting for action,
11:09one of the people prosecuted gets the most cushy arrangement possible after you visit with her.
11:16Again and again, you seem to be favoring the interests of a president and the powerful.
11:21You've chosen Trump over truth.
11:24You've chosen corporations over the Constitution.
11:28And you failed to meet the test.
11:30I'll say this in closing.
11:32This is why your nomination should fail.
11:35The attorney general's client is not the president.
11:40It's the American people.
11:42You've been protecting one man for most of your career.
11:46For years and years and years.
11:48He has demonstrated himself to put undue pressure.
11:51This is why he was impeached.
11:52This is why he was criminally indicted.
11:55If your record and your testimony today should show us anything,
11:59it should show you, in my opinion, that you should not be confirmed to this job.
12:03Thank you, Senator Booker.
12:06Subscribe to One India and never miss an update.
12:11Download the One India app now.
Comments