property which the department of justice has taken the position for decades that when you are protecting federal property, federal agents, that's not dodomestic law enforcement. listeners might think, >> we will leave this here as the u.s. senate is returning for legislative work. live coverage on c-span2.

mr. murphy: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut.

mr. murphy: pursuant to section 32b, from further consideration of s. j. res. 53 as are provided under the previous order. the clerk: the senator from connecticut moves to discharge s.j. res. 53 of the proposed foreign military sale of the government of qatar, from the committee on foreign relations. mr. murphy: pursuant to the arms export control act, i wish to control the committee from further -- of s.j. res. 54. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: the senator from connecticut, mr. murphy moves to

discharge s.j. res. 54, joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval of the proposed foreign military sale of the government of the united arab emirates of certain goods and services. mr. murphy: mr. president, i bring before the senate an opportunity for us to take a stand against the corruption of american foreign policy. the senate will take a vote in just a moment to deny the president's ability to move forward with two arms sales, one to qatar and one to the united arab emirates. i believe that this senate should join republicans and democrats together in saying that any country that's willing to pay the president's

personally, to enrich our president personally in order to receive favorable treatment from the united states of america in its foreign policy or to receive national security secrets from the united states of america shouldn't be able to do business as usual with this congress or with this country. so i want to tell you a story that is heartbreaking as it is aggravating. so we give the american president enormous power, and particularly we give the president enormous power when it comes to managing the foreign relations of this country. the president decides where we send arms, the president gets to negotiate peace treaties, the president decides how millions of troops are deployed all around the world.

we trust the president is going to use those powers for good, that the president is going to use those authorities to protect the united states of america, but they are vast powers. they are immense powers. and so there is always the potential that those powers are going to be used for corrupt purposes. that instead of using those authorities in order to gain concessions from other nations that benefit the broad american public or benefit american national security, the president may use those powers in order to enrich himself personally. our founding fathers actually thought a lot about this problem because they had watched their monarch, they had watched the king of england use the powers that he had in order not to protect the british people but to amass enormous wealth. he used those powers both to control dissent and protest

domestically, but he also used those powers in order to compel other nations and actors inside the empire to pay him tribute. president trump has decided that he is going to use the powers that we have given him to demand the same kind of tribute that kings and monarchs demanded. and the reason we have to stand together today to avoid the arms sales to qatar and united arab emirates, they are often important allies of the united states, have decided to comply with president trump's request, to pay him that tribute. shortly before the president went to the middle east, he did not dispense the region his secretary of state. instead, he dispensed to the

region his business partners. just before the president made his first major foreign trip to the uae, saudi arabia, and to qatar, he sent his son and their business partner, who not coincidentally happens to be the son of trump's middle east envoy to the middle east arabs. their request was simple. not that the uae would do something that would be in the interest of collective american security, their request was that uae invest $2 billion in donald trump's new crypto business, in particular his stablecoin vent use. this is the -- venture. this is the president of the united states, going to the uae, and asking a foreign government to invest $2 billion. it is called world liberty

financial, and on its website, it says that the majority of the company is owned by donald j. trump. now, this was a pretty exceptional request to make because his crypto business was brand-new. at the time it was a pretty minor player. a $2 million investment like uae would vault world liberty financial into the stratosphere. in fact it did, when they complied with the request, they became the fifth biggest stablecoin overnight. the uae felt it had to comply with the president's request because they had things they wanted from the united states. first, they wanted a continuation of arms sales, including the sale of chinchin

ook helicopters. they wanted something they couldn't get from the other admini administrations, they wanted to get their hands on compute chip technology, the kind of technology that will power the next generation of a.i. now, we, as a nation, again, based on bipartisan consensus, had been unwilling to give uae that technology because it is a fairly open secret that the uae has a very close, very cozy relationship with china and there was a very real worry, there still is a real worry, that technology, if transferred to the uae would be quickly transferred to china, allowing china to be able to outpace us, to out run us in the race to advanced a.i. but the uae knew that there was

a way to get what they wanted. there was a way to change the policy of the united states. and it was a $2 billion investment in trump's business. and not coincidentally just weeks after they announced that they were putting $2 billion into trump's crypto business, his father, who, again, not coincidentally is trump's middle east envoy, went back to the region and announced that they would be moving forward with the transfer of these computer chips to the uae. $2 billion into trump family's pockets, the most sensitive technology that had previously banned from going to the uae being sent to the uae.

apparently we didn't make any demands that the uae divest itself from its security relationship with china. instead, what we demanded was that the uae make a $2 billion investment in donald trump's business. as can you can imagine, once the word was out that the trump administration was for sale, other countries decided to get into the mix. donald trump had apparently taken a look at a luxury plane that the country of qatar owned. reportedly the most luxurious plane in the world, gold plating a spiral staircase, and the president wanted it personally, and so he dispensed the department of defense, apparently, to go to the qataris

and his them to give him the plane. just like he asked the uae for a $2 billion invest in his business, a $2 billion investment that nobody else was going to give him, except for a foreign power who donald trump had leveraged because of his role as president of the united states. he went to the qataris to give him this jet because he liked it, because it was fancy, and he thought he deserved it, and he knew that they couldn't say no. why? because the qataris have specific asks of the united states. they were burned in trump's first term when the qataris implemented an economic and political blockade on qatar, they effectively took the side of the emiratis and the saudis.

that was devastating to the qataris. they wanted to make sure that never again trump would abandon them if there was -- them if there was a contest like that in the middle east. when he asked for the plane, just based upon their desire to make sure they did not get abandoned again, they felt they had to say yes, they also wanted an arms sale. and it was a groundbreaking arms sale, never before has the united states sold our drone technology to the middle east, we weren't willing to send our most sensitive drone technology. qatar wanted that drone technology, just like the uae knew they could get our most sensitive chip technology if they sent $2 billion, qatar, having learned that lesson, if they gave a massive gift to the president, maybe he would break with a bipartisan precedent not

to send this sensitive drone technology into the middle east, and guess what? they got what they wanted. the president moved forward with sending the most sensitive drone technology to the middle east, selling them to qatar. not a coincidence they're also willing to send him this jet. i had a chance to talk to the secretary of defense about this jet. because one of the claims the administration made is that the jet is actually being sent to the u.s. government. but we learned some important facts this morning. so it is true that right now the u.s. government is buying two new air force ones and it is true that contract is expensive and it's taking a little bit longer than both democrats and republicans had hoped. but both those planes from boeing are due to delivery sometime at the end of trump's

term. what we learned today is that this plane that's being gifted temporarily to the united states government is going to take several years to retrofit and will become available essentially at the exact same time that the two bothering boeing plains are made available. we don't actually need this plane as a new air force one because boeing is still under contract and they'll be ready simultaneously. but the secretary of defense is committed to accepting the gift of this plane and then spending upwards of $1 billion of taxpayer money in order to retrofit this plane. $1 billion that we don't need because we're already spending $4 billion on the two boeings. now instead of having two air force ones, we're going to have three air force ones. we don't need three air force ones but trump is solving this problem. because what he has said is that when he leaves office, he's

taking this air force one with him. now that's never ever happened before. we've never just given a president of the united states a gift on the way out the door. but we're going to spend $1 billion getting this plane ready. it fetively will not be used -- it effectively will not be used as an actual air force one because it won't be completed up the very end of his term and then trump is taking the plane apparently to his presidential library but who knows. so this gift is actually going to donald trump, not to the american taxpayers. the department of defense is effectively a straw purchaser. it will hold the plane for a couple of years. it will spend your taxpayer dollars to retrofit the plane. and then the plane will just be given to donald trump to take with him in his post presidency. $2 billion to the uae into the president's cryptoventure, a

plane that when all is said and done is probably going to be worth about $1.5 billion, straight transfer to donald trump personally. this is unprecedented in the history of the united states of america. never has a president of the united states while in office solicited, sought, and accepted billions of dollars worth of investments in his private companies or gifts to him and his family. remember, our founding fathers thought about this problem. they worried about this exact situation. a president using the vast power of the article 2 authorities he is given in order to trade

favorable american treatment for foreign countries in exchange for personal enrich hadn't of the president. they literally wrote a clause into the constitution which clear as day says that a president of the united states cannot accept gifts from a foreign prince, king, or nation. that is exactly what the president is doing. this plane is a gift. he advertises it as a gift. a gift that will be in the american public's hands for a nano second before it goes into his private hands. if we don't take a stand, if we don't act together against this unconstitutional corruption of our foreign policy, i don't know that we can ever get this ge ni e back in the bottle. i understand it's difficult for my republican colleagues to

stand up to this precedent. but we have an independent responsibility as a coequal branch of government charged with upholding the constitution to call out wrong when we see it, to call out illegality when we see it. this is wildly unconstitutional. this is wildly illegal. so we have a chance today with these resolutions in order to make clear that we are not going to accept or make normal this kind of corruption of american foreign policy. now, mr. president, i will finish with this because my colleague from maryland is going to add some remarks. i admit that these are imperfect vehi vehicles. it's all part of the same story. trump would not be moving forward with these arms sales if he wasn't getting what he wanted personally from these two

countries. but i also admit that the uae and most especially qatar have been allies of the united states. we have worked together in our efforts, for instance, to combat terrorism in the region. qatar specifically has at times been a heroic partner of the united states. we would never have been able to rescue thousands of americans and american allies from afghanistan without qatar's help. qatar has consistently acted as an interlocutor between warring and conflicting factions in the region. qatar has taken risks on behalf of the united states. we, of course, have thousands of american troops and soldiers and airmen in qatar today. and so what we need to say here is not that we are going to

permanently pause our military relationship with these countries, but for the time being while these two nations are willing to pay the president tribute, we cannot endorse or condone business as usual. these are important partners of the united states in the region. they will be important partners in the future. but this is an exceptional moment where the corruption and our effort to stop the corruption has to take priority and has to take precedent. and so i'm going to sfroet both of these -- vote for both of these resolutions while also still believing we're going to have a continued important bilateral relationship with qatar and with the uae. but if we start to endorse and grease the wheels of this kind

of corruption, then there will be no end because once it becomes accepted, once it becomes implicitly endorsed by the united states senate that foreign governments can put money into the personal treasury of the president in order to gain favorable treatment from the united states of america, that becomes the way our foreign policy works. and so i appreciate my colleague's time and attention to this -- colleagues' time and attention to this matter and i encourage them to support these resolutionswhen they come up for a vote later this afternoon. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from maryland mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. president. i want to start by thanking my friend and colleague, senator murphy, for shining a light on this issue of corruption because the corruption that we are seeing from president trump is unprecedented in scale and scope

in our nation's history. it's affecting our democracy here at home, and it's corrupting our foreign policy around the world. we will soon be debating here in the united states senate what president trump calls his big, beautiful bill. well, it is a big bill. but it's only beautiful if you're a billionaire or a very wealthy american. because he gives those big tax breaks to very wealthy people at the expense of everybody else in america. we've heard of the cuts to medicaid and food and nutrition programs and the fact that even after that, it will drive a huge hole, upward hole in our deficit. but there's one billionaire that president trump is especially focused on making sure does well. and that's himself. and his family. and his family's business. and we've seen a great example

of that corruption here at home with the meme coin. this is the coin that trump put together and he said that he's going to reward the people who buy the most of this meme coin by meeting with him personally at his golf course in virginia. and so people all over the world scurried to purchase that meme coin in order to get an audience with the president because having an audience with the president means you get a chance to influence the president. and many people from around the word, including china, purchased those meme coins to buy that influence. and people should understand that the president's business makes money whether the value of that meme coin goes up or whether it goes down. every time there's a transaction to buy or sell that meme coin,

the trump business makes money. so other people can get totally hosed but it's a win-win for president trump and his family. in fact, it's estimated that in the early days of launching this, they made about $350 million. so that's the meme coin here at home. what brings us to the floor today is how this personal corruption is infecting the foreign policy of the united states. because all of us hope and expect that when a president of the united states goes overseas to conduct american foreign policy, they have the interests of america first. donald trump says himself america first. that's not what president trump has foremost in his mind when he travels overseas. what he has foremost in his mind right now is the bottom line for his personal profit.

literally selling the office of the presidency. you might as well open the white house and make it an air bnb. so let's talk about the details about how this is unfolding and how it's hurting the united states of america. on his first major overseas trip, donald trump went to three countries in the middle east, gulf countries. went to saudi arabia. he went to the united arab especial rats, the uae, and he went -- emirates, the uae, and he went to qatar. normally before the president of the united states takes one of these important overseas trips, they send out the diplomats to help work out important u.s. foreign policy objectives and goals with these countries to make sure the interests of the united states of america are put

first. in the case of this trip to these three gulf countries, again the first major overseas trip president trump took, it was his son eric trump who went out to the region two weeks in advance. and what did eric trump do when he was there some was he talking about foreign policy? no. he was talking about doing deals for the trump family business. and so let's zero in on some of the deals that he worked on. let's start by what happened in qatar. because it was about two weeks before president trump arrived there that eric trump worked with qatar to partner the trump organization on a $5.5 billion trump branded golf course and real estate development deal.

it should be pointed out that qatar has also invested over a billion dollars in a private equity fund for trump's son-in-law, jared kushner in a deal announced in 2024 after donald trump's most recent election victory. and now as senator murphy pointed out, then trump asked qatar to give him as a gift this jumbo jet plane to use as air force one and potentially to keep for later on as part of his presidential library. and so qatar for the reasons that senator murphy indicated felt apparently compelled to comply with this wish from the president of the united states. the president of the united states has a lot of influence in the region. and qatar has been on the losing

end of that influence in the first trump administration. and so qatar gave donald trump at donald trump's request a $400 million jumbo jet, what the president calls the palace in the sky. it's complete with a 55-inch tv, leather sofas, wood panelling, the works. and during this whole period of time, qatar has also wanted to make sure it establishes a solid relationship with the united states and specifically with the trump administration and the trump administration had noticed a major arms sales to qatar, $1.9 billion weapon package complete with predator drones, 500-pound bombs, and hellfire 2 missiles. so all of this gets caught up together in the major corrupt

deals that are being put forth in order to enrich the trump family, not advance the national security interests of the united states. now let me turn to the united arab especial rats, the -- emirates, the uae. because in this case the corruption is at least as bad, probably more so. so once again in the case of the uae before president trump went to the region, it wasn't the state department emissaries that went out. it was eric trump on behalf of the trump family businesses. in this case, it was a new cryptocurrency stablecoin enterprise launched by the trump family called world liberty financial. now, world liberty "federalist papers"ing is 60 -- now world liberty financial is 60% owned by the trump family.

as senator murphy pointed out, one of the cosponsors is actually zach witkoff, the last name you might know because his dad, steve witkoff, is donald trump -- president trump's middle east envoy, going to places like qatar as part of the middle east negotiations with -- both with respect to iran and gaza. so two weeks before donald trump goes to the region, his son eric trump goes on behalf of the family business along with zach witkoff, the son of the president's special middle east envoy. so what happens when eric trump, the president's son, goes to the uae? well, they soon after announce that mgx, which is a uae government-backed investment firm, would use trump's new stablecoin, new stablecoin

called usd1, to close a new $2 billion investment in the crypto coin investment binance. so by putting $2 million into the trump stablecoin, putting that into circulation, the uae turned an unknow stablecoin -- unknown stablecoin company into one of the biggest players in the world overnight -- overnight the value of that company shot up with the action that the uae took with the $2 billion. and the trump family stands to make tens of millions of dollars every year from that deal alone. now, mr. president, i doubt that the emirati investment firm went with a trump-branded cryptocurrency for its $2 billion investment because eric trump put together the best

slide deck for the pitch meeting. somehow i think it's because he was the son of the president of the united states who was going to be arriving in the uae two weeks later. so i want to -- i want everybody to hold that deal in their head, just put a pin in it for a minute, right? eric trump, the president's son, goes to the uae two weeks before president trump arrives and does this crypto deal, $2 billion crypto deal. so two weeks later, the president of the united states arrives in the uae, and what happens? president trump gives away some of the most sensitive, advanced american technology -- in fact, the crown jewels of american a.i. technology in

semicomputers. the previous administration, president biden, had restricted the flow of this very sensitive a.i. technology to places like the uae because of a fear of what's known as diversion; that that technology would not be safe in the hands of the uae without really important safeguards in place. because the uae, has a partnership with the united states, but it also has very close relations with china, the prc, and so there's been well-documented concern about the real risk that very sensitive american a.i. technology would go to china. i would also point out that the uae mazed it its -- has made it its ambition to become one of the a.i. leaders in the world. and so they obviously will benefit greatly from getting the very best technology, the highest compute power that the

united states can provide them. now, interestingly, it was the day before president trump departed to the uae and qatar and saudi arabia that the trump administration rolled back the important safeguards the biden administration had placed on the transfer of this very sensitive a.i. technology. they rolled it back as the president was about to take off to go visit the uae. now, this deal, this deal that was cut where the united states agreed to lift its limitations on the transfer of this technology really does compromise the national security interests of the united states. mr. president, a group of us wrote a letter, led by senator

warren. it was signed by leader schumer, also by the ranking member of the armed services committee, senator reed, the ranking member of the intelligence committee, senator warner and others. these detail the sensitive technology in exchange for illusory promises of foreign investment. if completed, they will present an immediate threat to national security and over the long term may irreversibly erode u.s. leadership in artificial intelligence by offshoring american technology and jobs. so that's what the president did just two weeks after the uae said it would invest $2 billion in the trump family business crypto exchange, letting that skyrocket to very valuable levels.

i will point out, mr. president, that it wasn't only democrats who have expressed concern about the risks of transferring this sensitive a.i. technology to the uae. in fact, during the biden administration, the republican chairman of the house select committee on china wrote to the president -- actually wrote to the president's then-national security advisor jake sullivan expressing exactly these kind of concerns. it was a letter dated july 10, 2024. it is a short letter, mr. president. i ask unanimous consent that it be entered in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. president. now, here's an important thing for everybody to understand. when eric trump went two weeks before donald trump's trip and when he did that deal where a

uae-owned company put $2 billion into the trump family stablecoin business, that was with a company called mgx. the chair of that company is a member of the royal family. his name is sheikh kanon. he's also knownals as tbz. he's a real proper and does look out -- he's a real entrepreneur and does look out for the interest of the uae. so he does this deal with eric trump but guess what else he's the chairman of? e he is the chairman of g-42, the emirati state-owned business that cut the a.i. deal with the trump administration. so the guy who's the chairman of the company that put $2 billion

into the trump family stablecoin business is also the chairman of the company g-42 that was the beneficiary of donald trump's giveaway of very sensitive u.s. a.i. technology. now, look, when it comes to sheikh ahun -- you know, i've met him. he's good businessman. he was looking out for the interests of the uae when he got that deal where the united states government will give the uae all this a.i. technology. so he was looking out for the interests of the uae. the problem is that it was president trump who wasn't looking out for the interests of the united states america. he was looking out for the interests of his family business. and literally gave away the sensitive technology two weeks after the uae invested $2

billion in the trump family newly launched stablecoin. and at the same time, like in the qatar situation, this was accompanied by a request from president trump for a $1.3 billions arms sale to the uae. now, mr. president, that arms sale is part of the overall corrupt bargain that the trump administration struck with the uae. it also ignores what the uae is doing right now as we speak with respect to the terrible war and conflict in sudan. because the uae has been sending weapons to an organization, a murderous organization called the rapid support forces. the rapid support forces have been engaged in all sorts of atrocities, and during the biden

administration, president biden met with the uae leaders and asked for assurances that they would no longer be providing weapons to this murderous group and thought he received those assurances. but the reality is, right at the end of the biden administration, at my request, i asked for a briefing and it turns out that the u.s. has determined that the uae is continuing to provide weapons to this murderous group, which the united states government has found is committing genocide in darfur as we speak. and so on top of all the corruption that's part of this deal, we have the trump administration green-lighting an arms transfer to the uae at the same time the uae is transferring weapons to a murderous group in sudan that is committing genocide.

and here's what the state department's own assessment says. the rapid support forces and allied militias have systematically murdered men and boys, even infants, on an ethnic basis and deliberately targeted women and girls from certain ethnic groups for rape and other forms of brutal sexual violence. they have murdered innocent people, escaping conflict and preventing access to lifesaving supplies. so there are lots of reasons we shouldn't go forward with this arms sale, partly because it is part of an overall corrupt deal with the trump administration but also because of the uae's ongoing actions. so let me really close with this, mr. president -- we do expect the president of the united states, when he travels overseas, to be looking out for american interests. in this case, it's very clear president trump was going out to

look out for his own interest. in the case of the middle east, it doesn't even seem that he raised the issue of the genocide in sudan during his trip to it the uae, while he was following up on the corrupt deals. and the president also, i think people will remember, said he was going to end the war in gaza on day one. that he was going to bring back the hostages and end the absolute awful humanitarian disaster we're witnessing right now with literally hundreds of thousands -- not millions -- of innocent palestinians -- if not millions -- of innocent palestinians dying of starvation. civilians. but instead of looking at working the gaza issue or these other foreign policy priorities, the president was there for himself. and it's sending a terrible message. other countries are getting that message. reports say that vietnam is making way for a trump golf complex to get lower tariffs and

that serbia is demolishing an hypocritic building to fast -- his storic building to fast-track a building in belgrade. we cannot allow our foreign policy to be corrupted in this way. and the one way we can send that signal message right now is by voting yes on these joint resolutions of disapproval on these arms sales because they're part of the overall corrupt panel. so i urge my colleagues to vote yes, and i now yield the floor to my friend, the senator from vermont. mr. sanders: let me thank senator van homos hollen for hi leadership on this issue. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont is recognized. mr. sanders: thank you. let me thank senator van hollen

for his leadership as well as senators merkley and schatz who are leading the effort and murphy, that we pass these joint resolutions of disapproval. mr. president, joint resolutions of disapproval are about denying military assistance to countries who break u.s. and international law. that's all they're about, respect the law, don't break the law. these resolutions before us today would prevent multibillion-dollar arm sales to both the uae and qatar, precisely because both of these countries have violated u.s. and international law in allowing -- and allowing these sales to go forward would be a dereliction in the duties of the united states senate. let me take a moment to say a

few words about these countries, countries who would receive billions of dollars in military aid. as it happens, both of these countries are strongly authoritarian, anti-democratic governments that repress any forms of dissent. we talk a lot about protests here in the united states. well, they don't have protests in qatar, they don't have protests in uae. you protest, you go to jail. these are countries who exploit migrant labor. and these are countries who treat women as third-class citizens. in the uae and qatar, where the ruling families are worth many hundreds of billions of dollars, there are no elections, there is no freedom of the press, there

is no freedom of speech. the ruling families of both of these countries are among the wealthiest and most powerful oligarchs in the entire world. mr. president, in the uae's case, in recent years they have provided extensive military assistance to the so-called rapid support forces in sudan, the rsf. this paramilitary group started the bloody civil war in that country, and is responsible for numerous horrific atrocities that, among other things, have contributed to the famine and starvation that is currently taking place in that country. in january the u.s. state department concluded that the

rsf, supported by the uae, the country who would get weapons if we are not successful in opposing that, has committed ethnic cleansing. i'm not quite sure why we would support arms to a country involved in ethnic cleansing. cle clearly, the actions of the uae are in violation of u.s. and international law. there is no reason, therefore, that we should be providing billions more in arms sales to this country. the other arms sale we are objecting to today would go to qatar, a country which has also broken u.s. and international l law. qatar has channelled hundreds of millions of dollars into a wide variety of political organizations in the middle east

including the hamas terrorist organization. and i have no understanding as to why anybody in the united states senate would be voting to support a nation providing military aid to a nation that has provided financial assistance to hamas. and while qatar deserves credit for attempting to facilitate a ceasefire in gaza, it should also be noted that the political leaders of hamas have resided in qatar for many years. but, mr. president, there is another very serious problem regarding military aid to both qatar and the uae. both of these countries, in a variety of ways, have attempted to corrupt our political system and the president of the united states in violation of the

emoluments clause of the constitution and united states anticorruption laws. i find it interesting, as i'm sure millions of americans do, that president trump's first major foreign policy trip was not to europe to reaffirm our long-standing alliances with other democratic countries. it was not to visit our neighbors in canada or mexico. no, instead he chose on his very first foreign trip to go to saudi arabia, qatar, and the uae. now, why was that? why would the president of the united states go to visit countries that are run by oligarchs, are strongly anti-democratic, and oppress the rights of women? kind of funny places for a

president, the so-called leader of the free world, to visit on his first foreign policy trip. well, i think we now know the answer to that question. trump went for the money and to secure business deals for himself, his family, and his cronies. shortly before trump's visit to the gulf, an investment firm owned by the uae announced that it would use the so-called stablecoin issued by world liberty financial to facilitate a $2 billion cryptocurrency deal. world liberty financial just happens to be 60% owned by trump and his family. so, by making this deal, the uae was effectively giving the trump family $2 billion in cash to invest as it wishes and keep the

proceeds. even conservative estimates of such a sum would generate somewhere around 85 million in profit a year for the trump family. think about that. the uae is directly giving the trump family some $85 million a year. now, what did the uae get in return? they don't give away $85 million for nothing. in qatar's case, that government announced during a -- trump's visit that they would give him a $400 million luxury jet for use as air force one, which he plans to keep for personal use after he leaves office. necessary security and communications updates will cost the taxpayers of our country

millions of dollars and take several years. so, if this plane is actually ever used by the u.s. government, it will only be for a year or two. but that is really not donald trump's concerns. because he gets to keep this flying palace, this $400 million plane for use for himself and his family forever. not a bad gift, $400 million plane. once again, it is pretty obvious what trump gets from this deal, not quite so clear how the american people benefit. qatar also announced that it was, just begins dentsly, financing a -- coincidentally, financing a $5.5 billion trump-branded golf course, and

invested another billion dollars in trump's son-in-law jared kushner's company, just for good measure. now, what are these authoritarian governments getting in return for the many hundreds of millions of dollars they are funneling to trump and his family? well, it could be the arms sales we are talking about today. it could be other policy priorities of these governments. for example, just ten days after the uae crypto deal with trump, he lifted restrictions on the export of an advanced -- of advanced a.i. microchips to the uae which had previously been limited over security concerns. that delivered on a long-standing uae priority worth billions of dollars to its leaders. but the deeper truth is we

really don't know what these authoritarian foreign powers are getting for their bribes. but we shouldn't have to be asking these questions. this is precisely why the constitution of the united states and u.s. law make it illegal for presidents to accept gifts from foreign powers. mr. president, the truth is that the autocratic leaders of saudi arabia, the uae, and qatar have perfected the art of channeling money to trump and his family as a way to buy influence and get what they want. our job is to say no, to say no to providing military aid to one country which is involved in horrific policies which are resulting in famine and star

starvation, and another country which is making huge amounts of money from side deals with the president. let us support these resolutions. and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. merkley: i ask unanimous consent to grant floor privileges to my interns for their shadow days, leslie maldon everyone do, june 17, emma singleton, june 24, ma lea perry july 8, katherine lackey july 15, salma sheikh july 17, mellenia jones july 22, vincent shoeships on july 24, ethan uvasalin july 31. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. merkley: thank you.

president trump is engaged in massive corruption. there is a government for sale sign flashing its lights on the line -- on the lawn of the white house. he's selling access and influence through two types of crypto coins. a meme coin, which is a digital baseball card, and he invited the 220 people who gave him the most money for these digital baseball cards, called a meme coin, to come to a dinner where he would feed them at his fancy virginia golf club. held two weeks ago. he said, oh, and the top 25 buyers of my meme coin, those buyers will get some other special access, a special tour. 220 people gave the president

$148 million, approximately, and they didn't give him $14 million north to have a digital -- in order to have a digital baseball card. they gave it because he was conveying this would give you access and influence. as the president of freight technologies, inc, said, i bought $2 million of these coins, i'm hoping to buy $20 million of these coins, because i want the president to change a policy related to freight transportation between mexico and the united states of america. that ceo was saying out loud what everyone else understood, that the president was selling access and influence. and that's not all. there's another type of trump coin, crypto kin -- crypto coin inducing these corrupt practices. it's called a stablecoin. a company associated with eunitd

arab emirates said, you know, we're going to buy $2 billion of your coins, and guess what, you get to keep the value of everything earned on that $2 billion deposit. even at 4%, that's $80 million a year. what did uae want? uae wanted advanced a.i. chips in order to have an advanced a.i. center in the arab emirates. well, what did we see transpire? uae repeatedly advocated for having access to these chips that the united states had previously said were a security risk. then a company closely associated with uae buys $2 billion of trump's usd-1 stable coin. then president trump says, you know what? you can have these a.i. chips

after all. we'll help you establish an advanced a.i. processing, artificial intelligence center in abu dhabi, one of the uae emirates. that's corruption laid out as black and white as you could ever see it. this is incredible. this is what we expect of very poor and i am' vishd countries. but instead it's the president of the united states doing it, and our founders said this should never be allowed. hamilton noted the reason that there is an emoluments clause in the constitution, he said in federalist 22, many mortifying examples in republican governments. so here were our founders

putting together this series of checks and balances, separation of powers between a judiciary, an executive, and a legislative branch, but they knew it could all be corrupted if you had an executive, that is a president, who could be bought. well, folks, we have a president who is being bought, who is advertising it to the world, and we haven't acted to stop it. our founders acted. they put a clause into the constitution that said no person holding any office of profit or trust under them -- that of course included the president of the united states, the vice president of the united states, all of us here who are elected -- shall, without the consent of congress, accept any present, emolument, office or title of any kind, whatever from any king, prince, or foreign state. well, mgx, the head of mgx is the national security advisor of

the united arab emirates. this company is absolutely intertwined with this foreign government. our constitution forbids this type of gift to a president or a vice president or anyone of us. so here is the fact -- we are right now debating a bill dealing with crypto currencies. this is a debate and a time to debate an amendment on these banned practices. for that reason, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate resumes consideration that the pending amendment 2310 be set aside so i may offer my amendment 2349 which would stop the corruption in stablecoins for any elected official, federal official of the united states of america.

the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. scott: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from north carolina. south carolina. sorry, brother. mr. scott: no problem, brother. reserving the right to object, i think it's pretty rich for the party of president biden to talk about improprieties. i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. merkley: mr. president, i hear an objection from my friend and colleague, the head of the banking committee, but would my friend and colleague explain while we are on a cryptocurrency bill debate to honor the emoluments clause of the constitution. mr. scott: my good friend on the other side of this issue -- the presiding officer: the senator from south carolina is recognized. mr. scott: thank you, mr. president. i think it's clear that the underlying consumption is that there is something nefarious going on and i object the

aspersion to the president of the united states particularly given the fact that this is the party that had cocaine in the white house, that had a problem with biden's, hunter biden's laptop. my point is i'm not going to cast aspersions on the president of the united states without any clear evidence that any law has been broken, and i do not believe that there has been. mr. merkley: to my colleague -- the presiding officer: the senator from oregon is recognized. mr. merkley: thank you, mr. president. i ask to be recognized. we're in the middle of a series of presentations here. the presiding officer: you're recognized. mr. merkley: thank you. thank you. so, i could understand if my colleague was objecting because that amendment only covers one type of cryptocurrency that is being used in this fashion, and, therefore, i'll present a different option which is to say we should address both the sale

of meme coins as a way to profit from people wanting to give us money and we should also cover the stablecoins as well. and so this broader amendment is a more comprehensive way, regardless of what conclusions you might have about president trump currently, a broader way to ensure as we go forward this body and the executive branch, the house down the hall will not be corrupted by us making personal money by selling something like a stablecoin or a meme coin, a digital baseball card, a way for people to essentially channel us cash, pretending to buy a digital baseball card. so i ask unanimous consent that when the senate resume consideration of amendment 2307 postcloture that the penned amendment 2308 be set aside so that i may offer my amendment

2350 which more broadly covers the set of corrupting risks that we would be addressing not just for the executive branch, but for the legislative branch as well. the presiding officer: is there objection? mr. scott: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from south carolina. mr. scott: i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. mr. merkley: mr. president, i'm disappointed. i was very present when the majority leader said on this bill there will be an open amendment process, and we made it very clear that this was one of the issues that we feel the we should be debating while we are on the cryptocurrency bill. there are other amendments. one is to stop a form of scam that bypasses a bank teller by getting older folks to think they are wiring money to a nephew in distress, but instead of wiring the funds they get digital funds at an amt as

instructed but they are giving the money to crooks overseas. that amendment should be considered. there are other amendments that address creating more side boards so that this bill, which purports to regulate an industry, actually regulates it in effective fashion rather than essentially endorsing an unregulated industry, which is what in sum this bill is currently. so i am disappointed. i would, as i asked earlier, for the majority leader to honor his previous commitment to have an open amendment process so that we can pursue the people's work, fighting for a better america, including ending corruption in cryptocurrencies. thank you, mr. president.

a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from idaho. mr. risch: mr. president, i come to the floor today to oppose the two resolutions that we are about to vote on. what they are, they have to do with arms sales to qatar and uae. these flawed resolutions aren't really about arms sales in qatar or uae. if they were the discussion would be about how qatar is a non-nato ally and how it is our 12th largest foreign military sales customer. it would be about how the uae

fought alongside the united states in afghanistan and iraq, is a participant in the global coalition to defeat isis and is working against iran and it's terror proxies and the debate would mention that the uae is the first state to join the abraham accords when it normalized relations with israel in 2020. the discussion would be how these proposed sales will support the national security objectives of the united states by improving the security of two allies that continue to be important forces for stability in the middle east. and we would talk about how these agreements will lay the foundation for investment, innovation and good-paying u.s. jobs that would boost our economy. but, no, these joint resolutions do not conduct oversight or provide congressional disapproval. instead they make arms sales to some of our closest allies in the middle east about partisan politics. as such, i would urge my

colleagues on both sides of the ai aisle, and i object to the resolutions and urge a no vote. mr. president, i yield back all time and request we proceed to the vote. the presiding officer: all time is yielded back. the motion is on the table to discharge, discharge s.j.res 53. motion to second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: the clerk: ms. alsobrooks. ms. baldwin. mr. banks. mr. barrasso. mr. bennet. mrs. blackburn. mr. blumenthal. ms. blunt rochester. mr. booker. mr. boozman. mrs. britt. mr. budd. ms. cantwell. mrs. capito. mr. cassidy. ms. collins. mr. coons. mr. cornyn. ms. cortez masto. mr. cotton. mr. cramer.

mr. crapo. mr. cruz. mr. curtis. mr. daines. ms. duckworth. mr. durbin. ms. ernst. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mr. gallego. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. the clerk: mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mr. husted. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. justice. mr. kaine.

mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. kim. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. mccormick. mr. merkley. mrs. moody. mr. moran. mr. moreno. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy.

mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. ricketts. i want to tell you a story that is hard to breaking as it is . so, we give the american president enormous power. we give enormous power when it comes to managing the country, the president gets to negotiate peace treaties, the president decides how millions of troops are deployed all around the worldit. the president uses those powers for good.

the president will use those authorities to protect united states of america. they are immense powers. always the potential to be used for corrupt purchases. using the authority in order to gain concessions for the brought american public or in order to enrich himself personally. following this problem because they had watched their monarch and watched the king of england use the powers that he had in order not to protect the british people, but a mass enormous wealth. he used those powers to control the sense and protest domestically. but he also used those powers in

order to compel other nations and actors inside the empire to pay him tribute. president trump has decided he will use the powers that we have given him to demand the same kind of tribute to kings and monarchs demanded. the reason we have to stand together today to vote against these, is because, unfortunately , these two countries that are often allies, important allies of the united states have decided to comply with president trump's request to pay him that tribute. before the president went to the middle east, he did not dispense the region his secretary of state. instead he dispensed to the region his business partners. just before the president made

his first major foreign trip to the uae, saudi arabia and to cutter, he sent his son and their business partner who not coincidentally happen to be the son of trumps middle east envoy to the united states united arabs. the request do something in the interest of collective american security, their request was uae request $2 billion and donald trump's crypto business in particular his stable coin venture. the president of the united states going to the uae and asking a foreign government to invest $2 billion in his personal business. world liberty financial on the website. it says that the company is

owned, the majority of the company is owned by donald j trump. this is a pretty exceptional request to make because his crypto business was brand new. at that time a pretty minor player. $2 billion investment from a country like uae into the stratosphere. and, in fact, it did. world liberty financial, the stable coin that it issues became the fifth biggest in the world overnight. now, the uae felt like it had to comply with the president's request because they had things that they wanted from the united states. first they wanted a continuation of arms sales. including the sale of helicopters we will be voting on today. but they wanted something more

specific. something they were not able to get from the first trump administration or biden administration. they wanted some of the most vital national security secrets. they wanted to be able to get their hands on computer chip technology. the kind of technology that will power the next generation of ai. we as a nation, again, based on bipartisan consensus had been unwilling to give uae that technology because it is a fairly open secret that they have a very close very cozy relationship with china. there was a very real worry, there still is a real worry that that technology have transferred to the uae will be quickly transferred to china allowing china to be able to outpace runoffs in the race for advanced ai.

it was a way to change the policy of the united states and a $2 billion investment in trumps business. and, not coincidentally, just weeks after they announced that they were putting $2 billion into trump scrip no business his father who, again, not coincidentally is trumps middle east envoy went back to the region and announced that they will be moving forward with the transfer of these computer chips to the usa e. $2 billion into trump families pockets, the most sensitive american technology that had been previously banned from going to the uae being sent to the uae. apparently, we did not make any

demands that the uae divested itself from its security relationship with china, instead what we demanded was that the uae make a $2 billion best and donald trump's business. as you can imagine, once the word was out that the trump administration was for sale, other countries decided to get into the mix. donald trump had taken a look at a luxury plane that the country of cutter owned. reportedly, the most luxurious plane in the world. gold plating, a spiral staircase designed by a famed french designer and the president wanted it. personally. and, so, he dispensed the department of defense, apparently, to go to the countries and ask them to give him the plane.

just like he had asked the uae for $2 billion investment in this business, a $2 billion investment that nobody else would give him except for a foreign power overha whom donald trump had leverage because of his role as president of the united states. he went to the cutter reason asked them to give him this jet because he liked it and it was nancy because he thought he deserved it and he knew they could not say no. why? because the countries also have specific tasks of the united states. more broadly, they were burned during trumps first term when the saudi's banged up on the countries and effectively implemented an economic and political blockade on cutter. the trump administration in the first term effectively took the side of the emma rowdies and the saudis. devastating for the coterie spirit first and foremost they wanted to make sure that never

again would trump abandon them if there was a contest like that in the middle east. and, so, when he asked for the plane just based on their desire to make sure that they did not get abandoned again, they felt they had to say yes. an arm sale that they wanted was a groundbreaking arm sale. never before has united states been willing to sell our most sensitive drone technology into the middle east. weren't willing to transfer most sensitive computer chips. also were not willing to send our most sensitive drone technology. once again just like the uae knew that they could get our most sensitive computer chip technology if they spent $2 billion to donald trump's business ventures. cutter, having learned that lesson realized if they gave a massive gift to the president, maybe he would break with a bipartisan precedent not to send

this sensitive drone technology into the middle east and guess what, they got what they wanted. the president has agreed to move forward with sending our most sensitive drone technology into the middle east selling them to cutter. not a coincidence that they are also willing to send him this jet. now, i had the chance this morning to talk with the secretary of defense about this jet because one of the claims administration is made is that the jet is actually being sent to the u.s. government. another round of votes here in the senate. lawmakers are deciding whether to move two pieces of legislation out of committee and onto the floor. they arecl two separate votes he this first one contains a joint

resolution blocking the proposed sale of certain military weapons to the government of cutter. the next boat will be a similar resolution blocking military sales to the government of the united arab emirates. both of these bills came before the senate foreign relations committee which is not voted on the legislation. this procedural boat offered by democrats which force the senate to take up the bill was out first getting approval from the committee.

the clerk: mr. schatz, no. hello, mr. secretary. i would like to call the sub committee to order. remind everybody that two days hearing is not a welcome place for demonstrations and anybody who tries to disturb the proceeding will be echoed out. secretary, general, ms. mcdonald , a pleasure to have you here. this is no doubt the global threat demands from us and

uncompromisingly lethal force. departments focus on your attention to the concerns of service numbers at the tip of the spear are worthwhile and appreciated. of course, sustaining this ship requires a clear statute strategy and adequate investments and capabilities. so, we are looking forward to hearing what exactly the office of management and budget is requesting on behalf of the department of defense for this coming fiscal year and whether this budget flows from strategy for, and said, defines and limits the strategy. this hearing will be the first public demonstration of what we

hope to be a productive relationship between the subcommittee and the department. in the past, the relationship has functioned best when it is based on timely and forthcoming communication. last year, details from the department about the growing requirement actually did inform the subcommittee's efforts to mark up a bill to provide the military with $18.8 billion in resources above president biden 's last request. and, unfortunately, did not become law, regrettably the cr we are under right now yet another was another missed opportunity that compounded the constraints facing the department. on this subcommittee, you will find plenty of support for the department's efforts, for example to improve air and

missile defense systems for the pipeline for unmanned technologies, modernize our nuclear triad and expand ship building capacities. reconciliation spending and with full-yearmr appropriations risk conflating different objectives. chairman and house counterpart pointed out already that even an important one time investment in military modernization is not a substitute for city growth in the annual budget. in fact, it may well end up functioning as a shell game to avoid making the most significant annual investment that we spent years urging the previous administration committee.

i have struggled to understand for example why the administration was cut procurement funding in the base fiscal year 26 budget by 14.4 billion and move that funding into all of which enjoys strong bipartisan support. why that would be moved into a simple majority reconciliation bill. fiscal year 26 annual request seems to do justice for virginia class submarines, earlybird class destroyers and be 21 bombers spirit like critical ammunitions we should send the services and industry sustained demand signal by incorporating into annual creations. we are really serious about making this long-term investment in our military, then let's do

it more than just a one time injection. if the administration wants to request a trillion dollar defense budget for fiscal year 26, then make a full year investment and priorities and new programs. let's do it. in the meantime, let's not overstate the fiscal 26 request. the administration's request facing defense budget is lower than 15 of the last 20 annual request including president biden's request for fiscal year 25. in pass, fiscal year 26 extends your predecessors to five straight base reduction request that would failed to keep pace with inflation, let alone with the threat of china. .... no.

as a share of gdp even including reconciliation to 2026 request is still just around 3%. that's half the level of the reagan buildup that secured peace through strength and it's even less than the 4.5% of gdp requested for defense under president carter. as we have discussed before and think it's worth repeating, the cost of war is a lot bigger than preventing a war.

at the height of world war ii 37% of our domestic product was on defense. north korea 13% vietnam 9% the reagan buildup 2%. so we know looking strong actually works. saves money, it saves lives. but what we are looking at this year is less than 4.5% of the gdp, which is the last defense request of president carter. why should we expect our allies to spend 5%, 5% when we are investing half that. the failure to spend foreign defense is compounded by another dynamic. every year a greater share of the defense budget goes to cover

costs other than modernizing and procuring new weapons and equipment to our fighting forces. without additional resources rising personnel and operations costs risk crowding out new capabilities. now we will allocate taxpayer dollars to the expression of our political will could we can expect our aberrant -- adversaries to take hard power seriously if we don't put our money where our mouth is. as i mentioned we are also interested in your articulation of the strategy that it forms or is informed by the administration budget. how does that strategy account for adversarial alignment and how does it address of only the threat of conflict in the indo pacific but the reality of conflict and other threats to

our interests in europe and the middle east. most of us on this panel believe that russia's war in ukraine is in alignment with the aims of other u.s. adversaries and its eventual outcome that's profoundly important to america'scl interest and offers more than just a glimpse into the future of warfare. i would like to hear your views on this conflict. who is the aggressor and what are the stakes for america and the west? what is the return on investment of our assistance to ukraine? i don't see funding for ukraine security assistance initiative in the budget request. is it the administration's view that security assistance to ukraine would make lasting peace or a less likely? what lessons is the u.s. military learning from the

conflict? how will the department or industry continue to learn if we cut off the partnership with the world's leading battlefield innovators? why would our partners trust us if we abandon partners in europe? what lessons are china iran and north korea learning and how much more will it benefit if russia prevails? i would like to hear your views on the impact of war in europe and other theaters such as the asia-pacific valleys we just met with recently were under no delusions about how unchecked the russian aggression influences the calculus of president xi. they understand the strategic alignment among adversaries is actually global and we all

communicate with each other. america must recognize in turn at the risk of simultaneous conflict is real and growing area your undersecretary for policy acknowledges the reality that confirmation hearing this spring. the capabilities america needs to prevail did not seem to be reflected in the requests we have received from omb. so there's a lot we need to cover today and with that i'd like to turn to. and i think mr. chairmen thank you as well secretary hegseth chairman haynes and mcdonnell for joining us here today. we are confronting a world more dangerous today than at any time since the cold war and their nation needs and deserves a strong and coordinated response to deter the threats we face to protect their freedoms and keep our citizens safe.

the last several administrations correctly prioritized china, the peoples republic of china as a threat to our nation security but more recently as the chairman just said and i strongly agree china russia iran and north korea are increasingly aligned in ways that are making each of them more threatening to our national security. this is happening right now in ukraine and russia's aggression is buttressed by iranian drone. >> soldiers and chinese components technology and funding. ukraine is not just a preview of geopolitics it's also the future of warfare with pervasive warfare with drums mix as we see on the front lines in the lessons we must learn. we need to address the urgency of those moments unifier efforts to focus their precious time and money on what's important. chairman mcconnell and i are ready to do that with anyone interested in engaging in good faith. which is why it pains me to point out the obvious at this budget hearing. in the face of these threats

department defense is more internally divided and beset by challenges of its own than at any point in my memory but let's start with the budget. the department defense and our troops are currently operating under a full-year continuing resolution for the very first time. continuing resolution provides tens of billions of dollars less in purchasing power than under the previous administration did this does not deliver peace through strength. no one on the subcommittee wanted this outcome. mr. secretary we appeal to your office to kindly and publicly opposed the cr as all previous secretaries have done that you are silent. he never responded. the cr's cuts are forcing dod to hault training shrink exercises and it undermines readiness. dod has made the cr with border activities with dod funds meant for military quality of life money to repair buildings and relocate military families keep

the navy's fleet operations ready, shrinking the budget will not speed up our acquisition system. it won't complete killed and we are falling behind thanks to some poor choices. should go without saying the peoples republic of china does not operate under a continuing resolution. fiscal year 2026 requests is no better. if you go to dod fiscal year 2026 page right now this is what you'll see. this is what is currently publicly available. and the budget request was not much better. we were given a month after omb's press release we are still waiting for real budget details. this is officially the latest budget submission of the modern era. for anyone not versed in how this should go at this stage we would have received at least this if not reams more.

this committee to do its job wants to work with you on the details of exactly which programs and exactly which deployments and exactly which end strength you are requesting so in a timely way we can complete our work and avoid another disaster is continuing resolution. the but the department has been able in 2026 in the debate as it was a 2025 debate. bills are being written and they explained the budget slowly making it less relevant to what it received in fiscal year 2022 and our appropriations process but what's clear is that these requests is the exact funding level is the fy25 cr. mr. secretary you are requesting an increase through budget reconciliation. a partisan gamble that i believe shows poor judgment about how the handle our nation security. dod's abilities to care for warfighter should not be contingent on whether congress

can pass a bill that also explodes the national debt gives billionaires tax cuts cuts money to -- and i think isn't it sends a bad message to the u.s. defense industry about the uncertainty of appropriations for key systems at precisely the time we want certainty and we want more. the owens and the likes not the american people but are ever series. far more of your time has been down culture wars rather than outside the building deterring real ones. his administration began by firing a long list of qualified uniform people could determine the joint chiefs chief of naval operations the vice chief of the air force ahead of the national security agency u.s. military representative to nato the director of defense outreach team ahead of the coast guard and all of the service in general. continues to push thousands of

civilians and should instead be repairing our ships with equipment. it's rooting out fully qualified combat proven servicemembers solely because they are transgender to satisfy the petty antics. and no future leader of our military to read maia angelou or jenna jacobs book on the holocaust or jackie robinson's world war ii service book is not safe from culture wars. jr. this year and a patriotic american who met the qualifications can serve a nation could marines at twentynine palms were training in the indo pacific and not the streets of los angeles. we worry about our enemies rather than each other and we should return to that model. we also think they we need to get back to partnering with supporting our allies. this administration has publicly repeatedly threatened the territory of nato allies to take the panama canal.

the present plus eight ukraine both military support in the middle of there just were against one of our global enemies. had times are then help them partner with our allies -- department's fiscal year 2026 requests compounds by explicitly eliminating assistance to ukraine and slashing security cooperation with allies around the world sending exactly the wrong signal. our global network is there asymmetric advantage. the administration's budget will abandon our allies when congress should not. i will cite predecessor your role secretary mattis testified to. congress that would need to complement strong investment defense and diplomacy and and i think you once and said famously if we don't spend adequately i will need more

bullets because we will be in wars yet doge is shredded our development work shredding trusts as well with our partners. last i'm troubled by the chaos and poor judgment that's been on full display from the pentagon front office for the secretary should not have shared operational details on u.s. strikes and other executive branch officials or personal acquaintance. the mishandling of important military information in the middle of an operation by secretary. you've also fired several top aides any been unable to hire staff for months. mr. secretary this cannot continue. your responsibilities tortured nation are far too important. we cannot win the fight of the future without allies or deter china and russia without a functional department of defense and we on this committee cannot do our jobs without an adequate budget. i welcome partnership on these important priorities that look

forward to discussing why we haven't been able to achieve that so far and where to go from here. thanking mr. chair. >> mr. secretary-general go right ahead. chairman o'connell ranking member distinguished members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to testify in full support of president trump's proposed fiscal year 2026 budget for the department of defense. i'm honored to testify alongside chairman kaine the joint chiefs of staff who is performing the comptroller and chief financial officers. we are also proud to represent our warriors and their families. today as they do every day here keeping america safe. they are defending the homeland and standing up to communist china working hand in glove with our allies and partners and they

are achieving peace through strength. this morning at like to start by thanking this committee in congress for your bipartisan leadership to give our troops a big pay raise in 2025 for this included an additional 10.5% raise for junior enlisted services e1 to i-4. thank thanking for improving other initiatives that will improve quality of life for our warriors and their families. but they focus on our troops and their loved ones i'm directing additional actions that will further improve their quality of life. making historic investments in improving living conditions and erik's and reduce the cost and stress that these moves and improving the quality of care for the health care system. the best job is interacting and meeting with the troops and their families. i hear their concerns. i know how it feels to face these challenges and i've been

there recently. each of these initiatives respond to feedback it or we have received directly from forces. we will keep listening and keep looking for ways to improve their quality of life. under president trump's leadership this budget puts america first and gives our warriors what they need. the $961.6 billion budget request which is over 1 trillion for national security total will end four years of chronic underinvestment and our military by the biden administration. as is custom with first year at administration budget releases additional time was necessary to implement the presidential initiative so in the last four months we have moved very quickly to reverse course after four years of weakness and mismanagement. we found nearly $30 billion in

savings across the department could be killed wasteful programs, targeted bureaucratic excess and redirected funding provided era rarities. working with the department of homeland security we have increase border security to say the least. we have china's blind influence in our hemisphere defending the freedom of navigation in the red sea however because of so much deferred maintenance we still have the lot of work in front of us. to carry out the presence mission we have set three priorities for the department. for store the warrior ethos rebuild our military and reestablish deterrence. first we are restoring the warrior ethos for prison trump charged me to focus for metal fans were fighting lethality readiness and that's exactly what we are doing. we are refocusing on what works

for our warriors and sweeping away distractions and bureaucracy and set standards that are high equal and unwavering. dei is dead. we replaced it with a colorblind gender-neutral merit-based approach and their forces responding incredibly positively because of president trump's recruiting and retention is higher than it's been in decades this budget provides a historic level of funding for military readiness putting our warfighters and their needs first and young americans are responding and lining up in droves. second we are rebuilding our military. 25 years ago military was unchallenged and we squander that it managed this time carried out in an unprecedented military to let our president trump is correcting those mistakes. we are reformers acquisitions process and dealing with emerging technologies and new

weapons sober warfighters can face the challenges. this budget is $25 billion in golden dome it down payment prison terms prior to defend our homeland. it also commits more than $62 billion in total to modernize our workforce respond. the motion is not agreed to.ond. under the previous order, the question is on the motion to discharge resolution 54, s.j. res. 54. ask for the yeas and nays? is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote:

the clerk: ms. alsobrooks. ms. baldwin. lightfeldt indo pacific visit forces in work with allies and partners but and partners because they shift their focus toward the indo pacific president trump to our allies and partners to be force multipliers alongside the night dates but we are making progress in that endeavor on multiple theaters theaters. we applaud those allies and partners who are stepping up but

need more done more quickly to include with their partners. as the president has rightly pointed out it's only fair that allies and partners do their part. their security more than they do. the defense department is executing a commonsense agenda to achieve peace through strength. we face -- that's what this budget does. it matches capabilities to threats. we long for peace so i must prepare for war. we are overcoming decades of neglect and decline. we must fortify their positions as world's most lethal fighting force and that means acting fast. this committee is a critical partner in everything we do in their leadership and oversight is essential essential for look forward to accomplishing these goals to achieve peace through

strength to support our warriors protect our citizens and do right by her taxpayers together. may grant us the wisdom to see what is right and the courage to do it. thank you. >> chair mcconnell ranking member chair collins other ranking members of the city senators thank you for having today. i'm honored to join secretary hegseth and mr. mcdonnell to appear before you today to testify and they presence fiscal 2026 budget for today's hearing reflects our shared commitment to maximize efficiency and accountability of our taxpayer dollars ensuring every expenditure increases the lethality and survivability of our joint force in providing our warfighters the advanced capabilities and cutting-edge technology that scale required

to dominate our adversaries. i have gratitude for the leaders in this room and your commitment to helping deliver the capability and capacity required for 2.8 million servicemembers, civilians and their families to deliver peace through strength. it's my responsibility as chairman to understand advice and integrate our joint force capabilities to confront the rest that we faced worldwide. this demands a comprehensive understanding across every domain land, sea airspace and cyberacross all the military services every region of the globe. it also requires making hard informed decisions about where to recommend we prioritize ourga capital that you give us in order to determine the capitol for the presence budget enables

the joint force to defend our great nation from adversaries and mr. chairman is used in seeking to do us harm. we are reckless in her pursuit of innovation and technology that allows us to hopefully did tour -- use every opportunity while ensuring we are positioned to win should we be called upon to do so. this budget empowers the joint force to get after the secretary's three pillars as you mentioned restoring it were ethos rebuilding our military and reestablishing deterrence. we intend to deliver that ensuring the forces are properly armed globally integrated and ready to go. as i mentioned the presence budget invests in our warfighters to win on the battlefield and our forces must be properly armed that scale with the right mix of capabilities, lethal modern reliable and survivable. it requires people and platforms that will allow us to overmatch

the enemies systems that will work under the most harsh conditions and technologies that will give our warfighters a lethal edge. the budget gives us the necessary tools to reinvigorate our national and defense industrial base and our nation is full of incredible talent and we need every bit of it for warfighters demands for the legit helps the joint force to become more globally integrated. relationship entrepreneurs in the joint force not only working together with their military better allies and partners interagency and industry to deliver the capabilities that we got to have. funny the presence budget reflects their mandate to be ready always anticipating the next fight and not fighting the last fight in order to deliver for our forces and their families. her family is the most important part this budget makes

meaningful investments in our servicemembers and their families improving quality of life housing and medical care in the moving process. on the hour most precious assets for people are properly armed integrated together and ready to go our citizens will be defended in our enemies deterred in our nation safe. speaking of keeping our nation safe i want to highlight the gunnery sergeant behind me the senior enlisted adviser to the chairman who after 37 years of selfless service to the nation and is the nation's highest ranking in the listed servicemember will retire from the service later this month. he and his wife who's also a marine that gone old and over and over again. it's an honor to serve every day alongside some of the most extraordinary warriors and civilian teammates civil servants and their families that this nation is safer now. i assure this committee for joint force remains committed and ready to go. with continued support will

maintain the competitive edge that we continue to have. i'm also reminded toys remember our deployed servicemembers right now and their families who are right now as we sitr. here today in this hearing room are out there doing your nation's business and i would ask us all to remember our fallen and their families who continue to show us. imr think if for the congress ad this committee for the support and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you general. mr. secretary it probably won't surprise you. i'm going to start with ukraine. i'm going to ask you a serious question so i don't want you to linger on any one of them. but answer the series of questions in one answer. number one who is the victim in a conflict?

in the russia is the aggressor. >> which side you want to win? in and as the said time and time again is present is committed to peace in the conflict ultimately peace serves our national interests and the interests of both parties even if the outcome would not be preferable to many in this room for congress. then as stated by both of you would understand that fortunately under this administration under the previous administration for policies they pursuit it has driven russia and china closer together so there's no doubt that china would prefer that putin have a good outcome but it would prefer a prolonged conflict that would keep us in other countries tied down in incapable of. >> one thing i'm sure we agree on is we don't want a headline

at the end of this conflict that says russia wins in america loses. given the fact that all of our adversaries extremely important for continue play the role of the world and the vast majority of members of congress think we should still play it particularly now that are ever serious are more significant than they have been the berlin wall came down. with regard to money we are spending what is the return on investment of our security assistance to ukraine? >> senator i would just say given the approach of president trump that's not the headline regardless. previously, under the obama administration we gave them blankets and under president trump during his first term he

gave ukrainians javelins than they were since it not invade. under biden the russian student they and it was slow walked incompletely and has resulted became a gridlock think -- thankfully the javelins that presents are provided to it. vladimir putin knows president trump is strong. he knows his words mean something and as a result a negotiated peace in ukraine makes america look strong makes us look like we understand the state of the world and where we want to be focused even if we understand rushes the aggressor and we applaud the efforts of the ukrainians ukrainians. this amount we have to recognize what exists on the battlefield and a better outcome negotiates peace full stop the killing. and if i may mr. secretary not here to defend the previous administration. they were completely inadequate anyway and we could make an argument that they presume to withdraw from afghanistan would

be a green light to prudent that we are where we are and beating up the past is not a plan to go forward for the future. what has benefited the united states and i think you would agree 38 different states have weapons out of the money that ukraine supplemental package last year. two new members of nato now increased spending to her virtually all of our nato allies which president trump deserves part of the credit for encouraging not probably guaranteed it. everybody seems to be moving in the right direction and then they look at us and wonder whether we are in the midst of

brokering what appears to be allowing the russian to define victory. i think victory is defined by the people that have to live there, the ukrainians and i don't think they are ever going to conclude the victory means basically adopting the russian views so what do you make up of what the russian syrup to? they don't seem to be 2 inches at and talking. we want to talk and they seem to be increasing the war. what is your take on that no one is adopting view sir. i would say the budget reflects the reality that europe needs to step up more for the defense of its own content and president trump deserves credit for that in his first term in this term we are close -- about either the

hague where we hope most nato countries are going to commit 3.5 to 1.5 total up 1% defense spending which is inconceivable before president trump. he has set the standard that america can't be everywhere all the time for everybody and if you are european country you cannot freeload off of the united states in perpetuity. you are allies and our friends and we stand with you but you need to stand up in times of peace in of peace and intensive for this budget reflects its long overdue in europe does more and we'd be strategic about the outcome even if it's not preferable for all parties. so that our focus and turn as was mentioned by everybody thus far to be in the indo pacific while europe ensures peace on the continent for the budget meant to reflect that reality includes hard choices but that's one of things we are trying to do in the defense department in their facing hard choices along with president trump. >> i would say to conclude this

before senate -- turning it over to senator thune revisiting the past it seems to me is not helpful. i did defend any of the submissions budget submissions of the previous administration that they made. i have a lot of the same complaints. i want to avoid that in the future. it seems to me obvious that america's reputation is on the line. will we defend democratic allies against authoritarian aggressor's? that is the international concern that i have about this and i think a number of members share that view. senate thanking mr. chairman. mr. secretary just a quick question to clarify a is a

full-year continuing resolution bad for the department of defense, just yes or no. in the a continuing resolution is never preferable for any department and especially the department of defense. not preferable. >> and i know the general is written test my specifics is routinely operating under a continuing resolution lowers buying power results in less political capital makes it harder for industries to make long-term investments produce at your commitment mr. secretary you will work with us to reach the see the old year of preparation. we will submit the budget documents necessary to work with us closely and will be able to do our work so you can do yours. in the center we are committed to working with you to make sure we have robust a budget as possible so we can meet the threats of today and tomorrow. >> i am increasingly concerned that there is a threat and some believe they can best governed

by a continuing resolution reconciliation and rescission and not actually have it appropriated so i look forward to working with you to avoid that outcome which i think will disregard the role of congress and from all of us and put us at greater risk that it seems to be clear with regards to ukraine that vladimir putin is no serious intent toco negotiate bt he continues to attack the clean targets night after night and hundreds and hundreds of drums make ukrainians have started of a spectacular attack against military targets and it seems to me concerning that the 2026 requests eliminates eight to ukraine entirely. the same time the senate has a strongly bipartisan bill led by senator graham and senator blumenthal to impose more sanctions on russia. many senators of both parties want to provide more aid to ukraine. would you agree mr. secretary tonight dates should use every tool it has at its disposal

including additional sanctions to pressure russia to come to the table to negotiate a just and lasting peace in the war in ukraine? >> senator every tool is at our disposal. we have lot of tools and a lot of places. >> you said and i'll take some exception to this their european allies cannot freeload off united states in perpetuity. my impression is article v of nato is only invoked once and that was after 9/11 and a significant number of our european allies and partners deployed to afghanistan alongside of us and suffer significant combat casualties. in the first two years of the war in ukraine there were 50 other countries that step forward-deployed military support delivered material provided financial operating support and that regular meetings with defense contact group your predecessor let that

process applying military assistance. what message do you think it sends that as ukraine continues to suffer day after day of fishing attacks on civilians that were not using the $3.8 billion in the presence of found that remains to send additional air defense in interceptors and you yourself chose to not attend the ukraine defense contact group. mr. secretary when it used the appropriated presidential drawdown to deliver defense badly needed by ukraine. >> the drawdown authority 71 through 74 still applies and they are still flowing. there is some in reserve for you to about my statement and i've sir to lot of nato allies in afghanistan occurred -- incredible capable canadian sabrett and i've got no lot of them.

>> thus i was struck mr. secretary --. >> do you know what the was that before i saw american fighting is what was a lot of flags, lot of flags was not a lot of on the ground capability. you're not a real coalition and not a real alliance and if you have robust and capabilities in real armies that can bring those to bear. that's a reality that europe is waking up too quickly and we are glad. we want them to be secure in daunte -- sometimes that takes true talk in tough love and they have responded well to them we want them to succeed. the mr. secretary lets make clear for the record or military targets in afghanistan included many that served and died protecting its partners and allies on a per capital -- per at a basis for. >> don't make it sound like you don't care. of course i do. all of the efforts were americans and it needs to

include other countries at the balance alliance. and as i pointed out my opening comments we have invested in gate in the defensive should we. we should not be pursuing a cease-fire and a negotiated resolution for the war in ukraine at any cost continuing to support ukraine's and securing a lasting peace. putin will only stop when we stop them in the best way to stop him is indeed for a stronger nato and i look forward to the nato summit. i agree with you a significant investment by nidal in our collective security is a great investment but we cannot abandon ukraine. that would put us significantly in a strategich, disadvantage. thanking mr. chair. >> senator collins. in the thanking mr. chairmen and let me start by thanking you for framing what is at stake and for

your emphasis on ukraine. i also agree with vice chair that the department has been acceptably slow in providing us with the account level information that we need to draft the defense appropriations bill. i agree with him that acr is not conducive to the smooth and effective operations of the department that i would respectfully point out to my colleague that the preparations committee reported the appropriations bill before the august recess and it was the democratic leader who decided not to bring the bill to the floor. that is why we ended up with the continuing resolution. mr. secretary let the turn to you now. you recently stated that dod is

focused on the strategic threat posed by china in this threat and these are your words are real and could be eminent and i agree with you. china now feels it may be of approximately or hundred ships and is expanding to at a pace that far exceeds ours for the u.s. navy currently has only 293 ships, clearly inadequate yet the department of defense budget for fy2026 proposes funding for only three additional ships of colombia classifying the virginia class submarine and an ocean surveillance ship. no funding in the base budget is requested for bbg 51 the navy's

surface. instead the administration unwisely is relying on reconciliation to fund the second virginia class submarine and a class destroyer. reconciliation mr. secretary was meant to provide one-time supplemental funds to augment the defense budget not to supplant the investment should be in the base budget. could you explain the department's rationale for excluding these critical warfighting platforms from the annual appropriations request and creating the instability for future defense budgets? >> senator i appreciate the question. there allow the complexities that go into how budgets are

formed from the view bar department working working on capitol hill that the white house we have to build in one budget so when i look at the threats we face in the indo pacific that is precisely as we work with the chairman of the joint staff and across ost and all the cocom is precisely has been the compass by which we have judged the capabilities that we need only look at the totality of the 1,961,000,000,000 or 1 billion total of national security that's 19 new ships a historic investment shipbuilding over $6 billion in the shipbuilding industrial base. its long-range fires hypersonic and it's all focused in which the previous administration talk aloud about what we are making the tough choices to best understand the dynamics versus reconciliation i can see that but ultimately we are looking at is one investment for fy2026 and

a 13% increase over last year and it sets a toric investments. >> i would point out the budget overall actually provide less buying power than the fy2025 because it does not adjust for inflation. i hope that something we can work together on to correct. let me turn to another issue. a the naval shipyard in catering maine overhauled the navy submarine. senator shaheen helps to secure an exemption for the shipyards. that is absolutely essential that i could speak for senator shaheen as well as myself both of us are hearing from shipyards

leaders as well as the navy as well as the rank-and-file workers union leadership that the delay to and hiring and onboarding across the workforce from front-line mechanics to security personnel continue. could you speak to what is causing this delay of the exemption from the hiring freeze was granted months ago? >> it's a great point senator. i'll have her team back into that because that should not be the case. they were specifically exempted because the importance of the shipyards and whatever we can do this as though it up for you we will do. and i think you. and i think he senator collins. senator murray and then senator brown. m thank you very much mr. chairmen. secretary hegseth you oversee one of the largest and most

important organizations on planet earth. more than anything the department defense need stable constant and strategic leadership and as much as i appeared in january it's not what we are seeing under your leadership. in a matter of months you have lost faith in reportedly struggled to hire new ones. you have fired highly respected top military officials. you shared highly sensitive attack plans over signal and apparently with people in your own personal circle and you have not taken responsibility for those mistakes. also while the security challenges we face have grown larger and not smaller and in the face of these challenges you have taken the series of actions to weaken our posture. for example of my home state of washington which is home to many dod installations critical to our indo pacific strategy in the pushed out almost 2000 highly trained civilian employees

colluding the puget sound naval shipyard could you talk about returning the department to warfighting. i'm repeatedly hearing their policy and personnel changes at the pentagon are only undermining and not strengthening our military to protect our country. you're deploying the american military. you are sending the national guard and the california without the governor's request sending them read after american protesters and now president trump is promising heavy force against peaceful protesters in d.c. military for those actions a frederic from a press in the united states should stop everyone at the school. threatening to use their own troops on our own citizens that such scale is unprecedented. it is unconstitutional and if it downright un-american. we should all be speaking out

against the end demanding accountability. just secretary have to say for people who tout their commitment to transparency and efficiency have never seen an administration more bent on hiding the basic facts from the american people. her department has been unresponsive to congressional increase in oversight requests all the while to muzzle the free press denying journalists access to the pentagon press corps. before he i turn to my questions let me just note it is now mid-june and we only few days ago received some but not all important portions of your budget request to it should not have taken this long to get this request and we do still need to see the justification and we are prepared to do the work. not having a full budget at this juncture is accountable --

unaccountable so i'm deeply concerned the administration is at the civilian workforce under attack encouraging resignations firing probationary employees instituting hiring freezes requiring wealthy and to approve any new hire one by one and last week requiring perspective employees to explain how they would quote help support the president's executive orders and policy priorities. we have spoken with military installations across our country and almost all of them have been forced to fire civilian employees who are badly needed in all of them have hundreds and in some cases felt and the new hire is ready to bring on board that now have to individually be reviewed by opm apparently to ensure they support the president's priorities. secretary hegseth i want to know

and it limited time we view the -- yes or no? in we have not fired shipbuilders. we have offered to ride the thing of her civilian positions. the defense department -- it's a voluntary process. >> i'm just asking you a question. is it totally and characterization. do we need more or fewer shipbuilders? we are investing historically in our shipbuilding industrial base and workforce and ships in this budget more than any of the previous administrations. so he managed to hire workers including my home state of washington for no reason. so let me just say the navy needs welders not people who can recite an executive order. the navy wants to hire a qualified candidate for the role

and that kenneth happened to vote for or donate to democrats would they be hired? senator there has never been a litmus test for hiring welders. i that is what they are being asked in mr. secretary we need to drop the politics and our military we need to hire the best people we do not need to force them out. that is the case at this point and i'm out of time. >> senator brown. in the welcome. what it thinks you're trying to do is hire people based on merit, right? in nikkei sir. you could care less if they were libertarian republican -- more have joined and in recent memory, right? they are signing up in droves

for a senator that has a stored search. you know why because they think you will be a winner in you will have their backs and that's why they are signing up. you agree that the world miscalculated hitler in the 30s and he did not understand the scope of the threat. [inaudible] general kane is that a fair statement that the military industrial complex of the 20s and 30s miscalculated hitler? n yes, sir let's don't do that now. as to iran they say they want to kill all the jewish people and you agree with that. >> i believe they mean what they chant yet senator. and i think they have an agenda for sure.

i think they would ask them if they had a nuclear weapon that they used in your professional military judgment. >> that think they would use the pressure israel and i don't know if they would use it. >> you can't be wrong, can you? you think mr. secretary? >> i think israel believes. >> do believe that do you believe that? in the hands of the wrong iranian cleric or radical -- a radical cleric exists there today and i'm trying to get everybody to think let's don't do what we did in the 30s.

they are going to use a nuclear weapon if they get it. are they trying to build a nuclear weapon versus a diesel powered program is to secretary? and the iranians have been trying to build the new? there plenty of indications they are moving their way through something that looks a lot like a nuclear weapon. invictus china intend to take taiwan by force if necessary and if we don't believe they have made that decision yet but if you look at the exercises they are performing in that area. >> general you think china on saving taiwan. >> not to split hairs but it depends on how you define to take. >> like take it over. >> i think they could use military capability and maybe and maybe not that we need to be prepared for that. what do you think secretary? finnigan remains to be seen.

but that remains to be seen. he kills everybody of round and are you familiar with this military buildup is well beyond what we need in ukraine. i i think we have to get this stuff right. iran cannot have a nuclear weapon because they are homicidal and they are religious. china's expansionist power who would take taiwan if we don't deter them in russia will dismember ukraine if we don't stop them. radical islam are they still out there general kane wax. >> sir i think their folks that would do america harm.

threat of radical islam is still a threat. and we work hard to not allow that to happen. >> you hit them over there before we come here, right? it's better to have partners than to do it by yourself. so the point is radical islam is out there trying to get here in mr. secretary if they had a nuclear weapon would they use it? what al qaeda use a nuclear weapon in the senator a nuclear weapon in the hands of al qaeda would be a bad thing. >> is there a difference between al qaeda and the ayatollah iran with the point is budgets are important and we need to up our game. we need to build more ships because china's building warships that we need to hit the enemy before they hit us and we

need a military to protect and ask to russia china fights in india by 70% of russia's oil mr. secretary are you familiar with that? i guess, sir if they stopped buying russian oil tomorrow without bringing to a hault flex. >> we have an ability through legislation that if you keep buying russian oil to kill ukrainian children you will lose access to our market. i would urge you and the frustration to use that tool to get the attention of china and india. we are going to effect any russian from ukraine and i'm a practical guide that we have to end this so we don't invite china to take taiwan and encourage iran stopping their nuclear ambition. we live in dangerous times and i want to help you.

general kane you are the right man at the right time. >> senator reed and then senator moran. >> thank you mr. secretary and chairman. mr. secretary you have ordered 4000 national guard and los angeles plus 700 active-duty marines. that is against the advice and opposition of the governor the mayor of force. these forces are in addition to 11,000 military personnel active-duty and national guard have been deployed to the southern border support of customs and border protection. separately the department home security has requested more than 20,000 troops to assist quote entered immigration outreach. i understand you have approved

an additional 730 -- with additional associated command-and-control for texas florida and louisiana. at this rate the department home security send another request to transport ammunition quote to authorize military force to detain and arrest american citizens to provide support for a drone surveillance and to have them record advice on running joint operations. is it your intent to approve the requests for all of them? >> senator we very much support president trump's focus on defending the homeland on our southern border as well as supporting law enforcement officials doing their job with i.c.e. in los angeles who

deserve not to be assaulted and ride it up while rounding up 21 million illegals led in by the previous administration. >> are you prepared to authorize dhs and military forces to detain or arrest american citizens flexing center every authorization we provided the national guard and the marines in los angeles is under the authority of the president of united states. they are assisting in defending law enforcement officers. >> so the answer is yes? n how are you paying for this? is the thumb on the universal bases by the department of homeland security or the department of defense. >> as you mentioned yesterday a lot of this is collaborate with dhs. >> how is that done given the cr

restrictions in because we know it's in a ask my colleagues and friends into the details on some 2025 we have refunded and then some the fy2026 budget. many are whole ethic to be -- how is this operation with marines in national guard improving the listality? and he mentioned the 11th of the border actually 13,000 i've been down there speaking multiple times and people will say that globalization hurts readiness to. >> i'm talking about lethality inaptly talk about all the time. >> readiness training is part of the deal. the more capable you are the more accountable you are the higher the standard and makes you more lethal. this initiative in los angeles

as you know well is not about lethality is about maintaining law and order of the half of one person and to do their job being attacked by mobs of people. i'm proud of the national guard and then return the streets defending these i.c.e. agents. in the long orders of deval function under the constitution of the united states. if law enforcement authorities and not the u.s. military. >> there is plenty of precedent for the u.s. military. >> guarding building for maintaining services this is not only a think illegal but also a diminution of readiness and the focus. let me change course again. is it your understanding that you pick a section of the qatari

aircraft and 747 but there were reports that the qatari have not signed a memorandum of understanding. this would specify the agreement was initiated by the trump administration and qatar is not responsible for any future transfers of it. are you -- any specifics about future aircraft for air force one cannot be discussed here. a memorandum of understanding remains to be signed. >> you have signed a contract with a company to reconfigure the aircraft. what is the price of that contract? stated that can be -- but that that cannot be rebuild the setting. >> this is united the they then it only appropriate the money

operates by my committee and you can't tell us? the contract has been sidetracked sidetracked for extends a memorandum of understanding is then signed. i've been talking about the contract with the american has been signed. >> nothing on the front that i'm aware of. that's contrary to what we have heard. what is the time -- the delivery time in the contract? can you tell me the delivery time for the boeing aircraft for air force one in one of the problems we preach your aircraft it take so long to order seven, eight, 9 or 10 years late. in the what you just said the boeing information is public

knowledge. their delivery dates the cost but but this is not. this is not only a bad deal for the american public gratifying to president. >> senator moran senator durbin and senator hogan. >> chairman mcconnell thank you secretary an issue for me at the camp and that an issue for folks to fly out of ronald reagan national airport january january 29 at army blackhawk helicopter in a commercial airliner arriving at d.c. from wichita collided in midair for they know you are aware of it and you have been both in responding the night of the accident january 29. it killed 67 individuals many of

them -- i want to hear a confirmation from you since that flight i asked if the department of transportation and the faa a helicopter flight emanating from the pentagon be put on pause. it's my understanding from information from the army since january the 29th, seven flights of taken off and landed at the pentagon six of those flights occurred during periods of high volume at dca. one of those aircraft caused two different commercial flights to abort landing on may 1 and since this latest incident in the sand all flights have been halted. my question is will you commit to maintaining that restriction on all nonessential rotary planes including transport until from the pentagon until the

department of transportation if a determined the safe way in which that can be done if there is a safe way. >> senator that was a very tragic incident which can never happen again. we initiated an investigation immediately worked directly with the department of transportation and they have taken the lead on it. in real time at that moment we have said over maps to make sure we were ensuring blackhawks were away from the flight path and it wouldn't happen again. there are essentially since we you may need to move along a corridor similar to that but there is no authorization for vip or continuous flights along that route. that is not the case then it will not remain the case then you have our assurance. i'm working with secretary duffy very closely to make sure the only flights that would be even in a modified half would be those that are necessary.

>> that banned except for, that ban on nonessential flight including transportation remains in effect until secretary duffy reaches a conclusion that it's possible to fly safely. we are in direct communication with secretary deference we work together only where there is a dynamic and ongoing need for the defense department. you thank you and i compliment you on your response on january the 29th. i appreciate that very much including the conversation you and i had. there's so many national and international issues i want to talk to about what they also want to make certain something that no other member of this committee would ask about the circumstance that i've encountered in kansas.

we saw the department of defensive help in my view we are fighting are -- fighting a bureaucracy the army corps of engineers with knicks city called counsel growth of several thousand people for their committee depends on tourists traffic and usage of that lake. we had a manager in a ranger the court did hire a ranger shifted to another a hiring freeze prevented somebody from being hired to replace that person. the secretary of the army i appreciate his cooperation to sign a waiver to allow the hiring but now we have been told weeks to months to go through the hiring process took place a person if i can get your attention or your staff's attention to see if there's not a faster way committee says that

the people who come the moment the marinas threatened to be close in no one can check the permits of the lake is unusable and summer is the season in which this committee thrives based on visitors to the lake. i was told by the army corps of engineers they had a person that they wanted to hire that person applied in a hiring freeze prohibited them from being hired. do you have people might to do the seasonal work at the lake but now the bureaucracy by words and not anybody else's bureaucracy of the army corps of engineers delayed this for weeks and months longer in the fifth and regarding this memorial day. in that this an issue we were made aware of almost in real time secretary of the army was very responsive.

i'm meeting at the cabinet with the director of the core of the engineers. >> i appreciate that very much. the season is that economic community's well-being. it is reported the pentagon is or has averted technology intended for ukraine to the u.s. air force and the middle east. the explanation for that was safety and security of our military men and women. i assume no one can argue with the imports of protecting our military. were there precipitating factors that cause that circumstance, that move to be necessary and is there any plan to provide ukraine with the necessary technology to replace that anti-drone defends us? >> center as you know he remains

a very dynamic theater. in the interest of putting america and americans first we are going to surge counter uaf to ours first and if we think there's a potential for a threat. considering the environment there right now that has been and continues to be a priority for us. enough what about the capability of resupplying or reinserting that technology and other places? is the capacity just not sufficient to do that? if we would have to review the capacity but it's a challenge in ukraine and its graded challenges. >> i can imagine many things are frustrating to you if they are to me and one is our inability to have the supply-chain sufficient to meet global demand in the united states military. it is a focus that i heard you say in your testimony is one of

yours or safety is dependent upon private-sector supply-chain necessary to support ukraine. t are 39. t the nays 56. one senator responded present. the motion is not agreed to. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from ohio mr. moreno: i ask unanimous consent that the senate be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. moreno: mr. president, i have five requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the majority -- they have the approval of the

majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. moreno: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 272, which is at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: s. res. 272, expressing support for the designation of the second saturday in june as veterans get outside day. the presiding officer: without objection. the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. moreno: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, 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. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. moreno: i ask unanimous consent that following disposition of long nomination, the senate resume legislative session and consideration of calendar number 66, s. 1582. further, that the postcloture time with respect to the substitute amendment number 2307

be expired, and senator merkley or his designee be recognized to table amendment number 2310. further, upon disposition of the motion to table amendment number 2310, there be two minutes of debate equally divided between the two leaders or their designees, and following the use or yielding back of that time, senator merkley or his designee be recognized to raise a budget point of order. further, if the budget point of order is waived, the remaining pending amendments with respect to calendar number 66, s. 1582, except for the substitute amendment number 2307, be withdrawn, and the senate vote on adoption of the substitute amendment. finally, if cloture is invoked on calendar number 66, s. 1582, as amended, if amended, all postcloture time be expired and the senate vote on passage of the bill, as amended, if amended, at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the democratic leader on tuesday, june 17.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. moreno: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 11:00 a.m. on thursday, june 12. 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 notwithstanding rule 22, the senate proceed to executive session, resume consideration of executive calendar number 173, and execute the order with respect to the long nomination at 12:30 p.m. further, if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president be immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. moreno: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order. the presiding officer: the the presiding officer: the

in a nation divided a rare moment of unity. this fall c-span present cease-fire for the shouting stops in the conversation begins in a town where partisan fighting prevails