Whistleblowers

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today I would like to address a whistleblower complaint that I received the morning before Emil Bove's nomination hearing. That is the complaint that was given to the New York Times for them to report on it the very same morning.

One group has publicly accused this chairman of the Judiciary Committee of undermining that whistleblower. That group also said:

I used to be a champion of whistleblowers.

Then the whistleblower and his lawyers took part in a political hit piece on my handling of this situation, and so now my Democratic colleagues have all of a sudden found whistleblowers to be of benefit to them.

Let me be absolutely clear. I appreciate the whistleblower's disclosure being sent to my office. My door is open to anyone, but that doesn't mean that I am going to jump at every allegation in a way that some may want this Senator to do. So let me respond with a very short history lesson.

Last Congress, during the Biden administration, I worked to protect many whistleblowers, as I have throughout my Senate career. I recall with pride the work that I did during the Reagan administration with Department of Defense whistleblowers.

In some cases, my whistleblower work never sees the light of day because the situation demands nonpublic attention. In other cases, publicity is required.

In my efforts to protect the IRS whistleblowers who came forward during the previous administration, my Democratic colleagues didn't join me. In my efforts to protect the Department of Homeland Security whistleblowers, my Democratic colleagues refused to join me.

And those whistleblowers even disclosed problematic conduct during the Trump administration, conduct which that administration actually tried to fix.

In my efforts to protect Health and Human Services' whistleblowers, my Democratic colleagues didn't join me in that effort either.

Last year, I hosted two oversight roundtables, one on the Biden administration's failure to protect unaccompanied children from trafficking, another on the Biden administration's failure to collect DNA at the border, resulting in Americans being subjected to senseless crimes from illegals.

At that roundtable, the witnesses said that Rachel Morin's murder by an illegal could have been prevented had his DNA been taken by the border people, as required under law.

At both of these roundtables, my whistleblowers testified. On both roundtables, not a single Democrat attended, even though I invited them to come.

During Trump's first term, I made a public statement that it appeared the Ukraine complaint followed whistleblower laws. I said that even though I had serious concerns about the complaint's substantive legitimacy--concerns which have been proven right over time. Now, at that particular time, Democratic groups praised me.

During Trump's first term, I investigated Russian collusion, then- Ranking Member Feinstein joined me in that effort. We and our staffs interviewed Donald Trump, Jr., and other Republicans. As we found out, there was nothing there.

And what ended up happening is the exposure of the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee paying for the fake Steele dossier.

Yet, with overwhelming evidence of Biden family corruption, my Democratic colleagues didn't do any investigation of that matter. And when I say ``overwhelming,'' I made bank records public proving the case, and it was still crickets from the other side.

During the Kavanaugh nomination, many alleged whistleblowers came forward. I directed my oversight and investigative staffs to dig in: 45 witnesses were interviewed, 25 written statements, and an over 400-page report.

Some of those witnesses were sent to us by my Democrat colleagues. The conclusion of that, no evidence to support the allegations that were brought forward against Kavanaugh. Indeed, what ended up happening were several criminal referrals for felonious lies from these same witnesses. This committee made four criminal referrals for materially false statements and obstruction, two of these four referrals also included criminal conspiracy.

One witness was referred to my staff by a fellow Senator who also referred that witness to a reporter. That witness's information was used to question Kavanaugh under oath. That witness later publicly admitted that they lied.

When individuals provide fabricated allegations, it diverts committee resources when other time-sensitive investigations are ongoing. Resources were diverted away from whistleblowers to handle the Kavanaugh matter. Such conduct impedes the Senate's work. During Kavanaugh, my investigative staff spent hours, days, and many weeks investigating one claim after another.

So getting back to the matter I opened with, Emil Bove, my first question to him at a public hearing was directly about the whistleblower complaint that my staff received the very single day before the hearing.

So the nominee, Mr. Bove, denied the allegations under oath. The Deputy Attorney General has denied the allegations publicly. Two high- level principals have made outright denials publicly. The whistleblower also signed papers acknowledging the Justice Department had complied with court orders. So right now that is the state of the play.

Every day my office receives many whistleblower cases. My investigative staff study them and run down the facts.

There are many government employees who need help. And just this year, I have had a lot of success with whistleblowers that were discriminated against, investigated against, maybe fired, maybe put on administrative leave. But in most cases, it was all an attempt to hurt them professionally, besides being out of a job.

So in regard to the IRS whistleblowers, they were finally helped--one of whom is a Democrat. My Department of Homeland Security whistleblowers got their guns, badges, and retirement back. On another example, I spent significant time helping FBI whistleblowers, and it appears their cases are trending in the right direction.

And guess what. One of those whistleblowers is also a Democrat.

I would always welcome more bipartisan oversight. It is just that the Democrats apparently don't want to join my efforts.

So when I read unfounded public broadsides about my operation in that political piece I have already referred to, let what I said today be a reminder of my dedication to helping the whistleblower community. And let me also remind everyone that sometimes what I do to protect whistleblowers is nonpublic, as it should be. And I don't care about that. All I care about are the results of helping whistleblowers and bringing attention to the wrong that the whistleblowers say are wrong within our government.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source