JUST IN: Minnesota Fraud Probed In Contentious House Oversight Committee Hearing — Part 2

[0:00] very quickly on the House floor. If we don't get this done, we're going to have to come back [0:04] and vote after the floor votes, however long that lasts. So the first motion is the Luna [0:14] motion to subpoena Neville Singham. It's now brought under consideration. Does any member [0:20] wish to speak on the motion? Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment to the motion. [0:25] Take your amendment. Thank you. Pursuant to Clause 2K6 of House Rule 11, the committee shall [0:32] subpoena Lex Wexner to sit for a deposition before the House Committee on Oversight and Government [0:37] Reform. Lex Wexner is the funding mechanism for Epstein. Do it. And Mr. Chairman, I'd like to be [0:46] recognized to explain the amendment briefly. Okay. Explain your amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [0:53] This is an amendment, of course, to Representative Luna's motion. Lex Wexner is a longtime benefactor [0:59] of Jeffrey Epstein and at one point was Epstein's only documented client. Maria Farmer was abused [1:06] in a house attached to Wexner's Ohio property and guarded by Wexner's security staff. [1:11] Virginia Giffrey was named Wexner in a deposition as one of the men she was trafficked to. [1:16] Wexner also paid for Epstein's home in New York City. There is probably no one more important [1:21] as it relates to the financing and the work of this investigation, which both sides of the aisle [1:27] are interested in, have voted to move forward, but ensuring that we bring Mr. Wexner in to come [1:33] and be deposed by this committee. Public reporting has documented their longstanding ties. He should [1:39] answer our questions in a non-partisan way to get the truth to the Epstein investigation, [1:44] and that is the motion. Would you, let's see, so I guess we're going to debate the amendment [1:54] to the motion. Would you yield to a question? Sure. We are serious about the Epstein investigation, [2:06] and I think you've seen a lot of our members stand up and make it very clear they want to get to the [2:12] bottom of the scene. Nobody wants to do it more than I do. We also want to hear from Bill Clinton, [2:19] and you all vote. We voted a bipartisan manner to subpoena Bill Clinton, but we haven't gotten [2:25] confirmation for President Clinton to come in for a transcribed interview or now a deposition. [2:33] So do you all, are you all going to help us try to get Clinton in? I figure you guys know. I've been [2:39] very clear, and I think the committee agrees, that we're willing to talk to anyone, including the [2:43] former president, if they have information regarding the Epstein investigation. And so the motion in [2:48] front of us right now is on Lex Wexner, who is central to the Epstein investigation and probably [2:56] knows more than anyone else about the financing and has been named by survivors. That is in addition [3:02] to Luna's motion, which if part of the amendment, we can certainly take that vote. Okay. Any other [3:09] discussion on the Garcia Amendment, Ms. Stansberry? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to echo my [3:15] support for this subpoena and say two things. One, this is not a quid pro quo. This is an investigation, [3:22] and so we will subpoena and support subpoenas for any co-conspirator and anyone who has evidence [3:28] that's important in this case. Secondly, I want to note that this individual is actually named in the [3:34] Department of Justice emails that were released in the partial release by the administration as one [3:41] of the 10 co-conspirators the Department of Justice was investigating and was actually named. Okay. And [3:46] finally, I just want to say this, Mr. Chairman, the Department of Justice has released, as we understand [3:51] it, only 1% of the files in their possession. And I think we really want to know why this committee is not [3:57] demanding the DOJ come in front of us immediately to account for this. And with that, I yield back. [4:04] Any other, Ms. Luna, use your request to speak on the Garcia Amendment to your motion. Yes, yes. I think [4:11] that this is a sound motion for subpoena because Les Wexner has been named by victims and also to is in a [4:17] number of documentaries. But I would like to at least offer my opinion and refute what Ms. Stansberry said [4:23] regarding some of the files that have been released. There have been thousands of files released, [4:26] so much so that, yes, there have been redactions, but most of the redactions, to my knowledge, have been [4:31] pertaining to either CSAM materials and or victim information. I know that in one instance, there was [4:40] potentially a breach of that, of which the DOJ immediately corrected. But we have also been working, at least my [4:45] office has, with the Department of Justice to make sure that victims have received their direct information. So please [4:50] understand, at least from my perspective, that it is not our opinion that there have been [4:55] a holdback. I do know that the documents are on a rolling basis as well, similar to the other [5:00] declassified files. However, aside from that, I do support Garcia's amendment, and I would encourage [5:05] my colleagues to do so. All right. Any other discussion on the Garcia Amendment? Seeing none, [5:10] all those in favor of the amendment, of the Garcia Amendment to the Luna Motion, signify by saying aye. [5:16] Aye. All those opposed, say no. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. [5:24] We want a recorded vote? Actually, no, we don't. Okay. So, the, now, the debate is on the, does any member wish to speak on the [5:38] LUNA motion as amended? Representative LUNA. Um, just, uh, so everyone is tracking, Neville [5:44] Seeingham was referred to the Department of Justice, I believe, for FARA violations by then-Senator Rubio when [5:50] he served on, um, the Senate Foreign Intelligence, or, uh, Senate Intelligence Committee. Neville Seeingham, [5:56] regardless of what you might feel about your colleagues, has been a mechanism and funding arm of the [6:01] Chinese Communist Party. He's not a registered agent by FARA, and has been connected to a number of [6:07] riots to include the anti-ice riots being funded in Los Angeles, as well as a group that was tied to and [6:12] being investigated for the assassination of Charlie Kirk, known as, um, I think it was, uh, the, uh, [6:19] a group of, uh, socialism and liberation, and then also to, um, is, has been avoiding our, our, um, [6:26] requests for him to come bring information to Congress. He is definitely someone that is, um, [6:32] anti-American in ideology, and regardless of where you might stand, even on topics like Israel versus [6:36] Palestine, is funding certain groups that actually sow discord in this country with no, uh, no efforts [6:42] to actually resolve the issues, only to get us to fight one another. So I would encourage you all, [6:47] at least if you don't politically agree with one another, to at least respect the fact that he is [6:51] a known foreign agent to China, has not been registered as such, has been made to, um, fund riots, [6:58] and has been known to be the result of many of our own Americans, um, being targeted with violence, [7:04] and as a result of that, I do think that he should face subpoena. In the event that he's not subpoenaed, [7:08] or that he does not answer the subpoena, I will be making a motion for inherent contempt. [7:13] And I encourage my colleagues to support this motion. [7:16] Luda yields back. Men? Represent Men? [7:19] Thank you. Uh, being new to this committee, I guess I'm just curious why this is happening in this [7:24] hearing, and why we didn't have a chance to review this subpoena with some notice so that, you know, [7:30] as much as I want to appreciate what you say and just take it at face value, uh, we're all learning [7:35] this right now, and, uh, it doesn't really give us a lot of time to, to do our research to determine [7:40] the validity of your subpoena requests. And so I, I just really, from a procedural perspective, [7:45] I'm just curious if this is normal. Can I, if I can respond and answer? Yeah, okay. [7:49] Do you yield to Luna or Garcia? I yield to Garcia first. [7:53] Okay. No, I just, I just want to add that I, um, I understand this concerns. I'm going to [7:56] recommend that we vote yes on the Luna motion. I think the representative, uh, made clear her [8:01] support for the deposition that we're going to have with Mr. Wexner. And so that's going to be [8:06] my recommendation for our committee. Um, and if I could just answer the question, uh, so as part of [8:11] the rules, if, um, if subpoenas are not sent in the traditional fashion through the chairman, [8:16] individual members can actually make motions where the committee as a whole can vote on it. And so [8:20] because Neville Singham has been avoiding receipt of our request for him to come in and just give basic [8:25] informations because he has been known to be funding these groups that are literally causing [8:30] us to eat each other alive, even sometimes within the house of representatives. Um, I do think that [8:35] he needs to answer for that. And so to answer your question, that is why I made the motion today. [8:39] Any other members wish to speak? Seeing none. All those in favor of the Luna motion as amended by the [8:46] Garcia amendment signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed say no. In the opinion of the chair, [8:55] the ayes have it. And the motion as amended is agreed to. Next up is the Luna motion number two [9:04] to subpoena Jonathan Greenblatt. Uh, does any member wish to speak on the motion, Ms. Luna? [9:12] Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment. Okay. We'll do your amendment first. Okay. [9:17] Thank you. I have an amendment to Representative Luna. Uh, pursuant to clause 2K6 of House Rule 11, [9:23] the committee shall subpoena Governor Tate Reeves of Mississippi to testify in a hearing before the [9:28] House Committee on oversight and government reform. And I have some comments if you'd like to recognize [9:32] those now. Uh, all right. State your comments. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to recognize [9:36] the motion. Uh, we of course, I had a big hearing today and we certainly shouldn't just be concerned [9:41] with fraud that could be happening in states with Democratic governors, but also those with [9:47] Republican governors. Fraud should be looked at anywhere it happens. The Wall Street Journal on [9:52] Monday reported a massive Mississippi welfare scandal. Mississippi has seen years of scandals under [9:58] multiple governors, but we have been silent as a committee. We didn't have any witnesses from [10:02] Mississippi here today. And oversight Republicans aren't calling in Governor Tate. So this is an [10:08] opportunity for the American people to hear about fraud wherever it occurs. And this motion will do [10:13] just that and I yield back. Okay. Uh, now characterize Ms. Luna to speak on the Garcia amendment to your [10:23] motion number two. Fraud is fraud. I support this. I encourage my colleagues to do it. Doesn't matter if [10:28] they're Republican or not, if he's guilty of it, bring him in. Uh, any other debate? Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, [10:35] I am wondering if the gentleman would allow me to move to amend his amendment to include the governor of [10:43] Arizona who, uh, who admitted that they had, uh, 2.5 billion dollars worth of fraud in Medicaid, uh, fraud, uh, [10:54] just a year ago. The attorney general did. Okay. This is where my FFA parliamentary procedure came in [11:02] in place. Ellie, you can, uh, back in amendment. There's a, a motion to amend the amendment. Do we go [11:10] into that emotion? All right. So Mr. Biggs has made an amendment to the Garcia amendment to the Luna [11:19] motion. Does anyone wish to speak on the Biggs amendment to the amendment? And, and his is a subpoena, [11:30] the Arizona governor. Right. Okay. I'm, look, I'm, I'm, I'm glad that the representative wants to subpoena [11:37] his opponent in the governor's race. Just to be clear, if it makes you happy, I'll, I'll say not [11:42] heard. Let's bring in the AG. No, I mean, just, uh, just to bring in the AG. Thank you, sir. Uh, [11:47] since I, this is, I have the floor. I just want to say that, um, my amendment is clear. We heard from [11:53] one state today. I think it's important that we hear from governor Tate of Mississippi. That's the, [11:58] the amendment that we're, I'm going to let stand as presented. If other motions are made, [12:02] we can vote on those as appropriate. Chair recognizes Mr. Biggs to specify his amendment to [12:08] the amendment on who we're. Yeah. Thanks. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I'm happy to, um, uh, reword my [12:14] amendment to, instead of the governor of Arizona, if you want the attorney general. I don't, because [12:18] the attorney general is the one who stood up a year and a half ago and said that she discovered 2.5 [12:24] billion dollars worth of waste in the Arizona's Medicaid program. And that, uh, we don't, we, we need [12:30] to find out more about that. So I'm content with doing that. And, and I just find it hilariously [12:36] hypocritical to say, well, we want the dude from Mississippi because he's a Republican. And, and, [12:42] but when you want to bring in someone from my home state, not even running against me, okay, [12:48] that's why I move it. And to say, well, we can't do that. Can I do that? Because, uh, because that would [12:55] be, I don't know. It's just because this is the cycle you guys chose to get on. She's admitted, [13:02] she has admitted, the attorney general, that there's 2.5 billion dollars worth of waste in the Medicaid [13:07] program. I submitted that for the record earlier today. And, uh, well, let's have at it. [13:13] Well, the, you want to look, let's do it. Okay. Okay. So the amendment to the amendment [13:20] is to subpoena the Arizona attorney general. Does anyone wish to speak on the amendment to the [13:26] amendment? Mr. I'll speak after Ms. Crockett. Mr. Crockett, Ms. Crockett. I, I just wanted to clarify, [13:32] um, because I think the gentleman from Arizona said that this was over a year ago, a year and a half [13:37] ago, if I'm correct. Is that correct? Mr. You asked me to yield? Yeah, I'll yield. Which question? [13:44] So you said over a year and a half ago? Mr. No, it was, it was, I believe it was last summer, [13:49] about a year ago. Okay. So about a year ago, um, there was an opportunity for you as a representative, [13:55] and presumably before you were actually running for office, I think the concern is about using [14:01] federal dollars to further political aspirations. And as someone who was representing [14:09] Arizona, there should have been an opportunity for you to do something to try to subpoena. You [14:14] could have tried to open an investigation. We know that the Republicans are the ones that control [14:19] this committee and have controlled this committee for some time. So, um, I just wanted to say that I [14:24] definitely am opposed to this particular portion of the, I guess it's the amendment to the amendment. [14:32] Yeah. Chair recognizes Mr. Fallon to speak on the amendment to the amendment. Yeah, I support the [14:38] amendment to the amendment because, I mean, just we're, a lot of us served in the state legislature, [14:42] as I did for eight years in the House and Senate in Texas. This is a systemic problem across all [14:46] states. I want to, I mean, we're talking about hundreds of billions of dollars of criminals and [14:51] scumbags stealing money that's not going to where it's intended. So I don't give rats nuggets if it's [14:56] Arizona, Mississippi, wherever. We need to be rooting this stuff out. So I'm fully in support of Mr. [15:02] Biggs, and I think your efforts are noble. I yield back. All right. I yield to Mr. Biggs. [15:07] Yeah, I appreciate the gentleman from yielding. I, I do find it rich to say, oh, you should have [15:11] subpoenaed this a year ago. Uh, just like you guys could have subpoenaed, uh, uh, anybody you wanted [15:17] to a year ago as well. So let me just, let me just add to this by saying, um, our, our current governor, [15:25] um, has been, is being investigated. And, and I don't want to get into that because she is currently being [15:31] investigated for, uh, corruption and abuse. That's, I'm not trying to get into that. What I'm trying [15:37] to get into is what I thought, I thought we'd reached some comity here that we are going to be [15:44] going after fraud wherever it sits in these social welfare programs. And so, so you didn't like it. You [15:52] thought that might be doing for political purposes. It's not for political purposes. This is because [15:56] Arizona has a systemic problem in their Medicaid program of two and a half billion dollars fraud [16:03] that the Democrat attorney general pointed out. Let's have her come in and explain how this has [16:09] happened and what, what needs to be, uh, done to fix the system at systemic problems in Arizona. [16:16] Maybe that would be helpful to fix the problems nationwide. That's all. You'll back to the gentleman [16:22] from Texas. Thank you. Gentleman from Texas. You Mr. Chairman, you're back. Uh, chair recognizes [16:29] Mr. Garcia for the amendment on the amendment. Thank you. Just a final comment on this. Um, [16:34] I oppose the amendment and here's very clear. Uh, today we talked about five states, all states with [16:41] Democratic governors focused on one. We're asked where the motion that we're making as an amendment [16:46] is very clear. It's to bring in one Republican governor in comparison to what the majority has [16:53] proposed in the past, and that's where we're leaving it. And so at a minimum, the majority [16:58] should want to bring in one Republican compared to the six that we discussed today. And so we're [17:02] going to, would you, would you yield? Sure. Yeah. So I, I'm fine. If there's fraud in any state, [17:12] would the, would the, uh, will you work with us to get Waltz back in here so he can have an opportunity [17:19] to defend what was stated today? Are you going to work with us on that? I think, I think that Governor [17:24] Wallace right now is looking at coming into the committee. Obviously, I'm happy to have anyone [17:28] in front of us that's willing to explain. Well, a lot of people are looking, but I mean, are they [17:33] going to do it? We're willing, oversight Democrats are willing to talk to any person, any governor, [17:38] any person that can be in front of us so that we can explain issues that are important to the [17:42] American public. We have no issue with Governor Wallace coming in to testify. Any other members speak [17:47] recognition on the Biggs amendment to the Garcia amendment? Uh, Mr. Perry. Mr. Chairman, if, if it will make it [17:55] less political, if the maker of the secondary amendment would like me to offer it in his name [18:01] coming from nowhere close to Arizona to subpoena the Arizona Attorney General regarding her statements [18:06] about known fraud in Arizona, I'd be happy to do that. Well then, since he's willing to do it, [18:15] we can then. Well, he would have to, Mr. Biggs would have to withdraw his amendment. Can we get back to [18:20] Greenblatt? Hmm. Then I'll withdraw and leave it in your capable hands. Okay. The gentleman has [18:26] withdrawn and then we can, I'll make the same motion to subpoena as a secondary amendment to the [18:33] primary amendment to the primary resolution, the Attorney General from Arizona regarding her [18:40] position and statements on fraud in Arizona in the Medicaid program. I want to make sure everybody [18:44] understands this. Representative Biggs has withdrawn his amendment to the amendment and now Mr. Perry [18:50] has filed an amendment to the amendment in the same language to subpoena the Arizona Attorney [18:57] General. Does everyone understand that? Okay. Now, do any Democrats wish, Mr. Men, you've had your hand [19:04] up over there. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I appreciated our conversation earlier today when you expressed [19:11] very clearly that this should not be a partisan committee, that we should go after fraud in all forms, [19:15] and at which point you also agreed that having some kind of investigative hearing into Mississippi [19:21] might be appropriate. I appreciate your support of this amendment to the bill. If we're going to have [19:28] amendments to amendments, I guess the one question I have, and this might be a proposal, the inspector [19:33] generals were all fired at the beginning of Trump's term, in his second term. Those are the primary watchdogs [19:40] for protecting the American taxpayer from waste, fraud, and abuse of this kind. So why are we not calling in [19:46] Pam Bondi and anybody else who might have had knowledge and input into the decision to fire these inspector [19:53] generals, as well as their staffs? And so I guess I would propose an amendment to the amendment to the [19:58] amendment that we have a hearing and subpoena Pam Bondi and others in this regard. Why were the inspector [20:06] generals fired? Are you making an official motion to amend the amendment? Yes, I am. And what is your motion? [20:12] That we subpoena Pam Bondi. You are making a motion to subpoena Pam Bondi? [20:17] And anyone else with knowledge around the decisions and input on the decisions to fire and terminate the [20:24] inspector generals. Now I want to remind you, they've called votes, and I have a feeling this is going to [20:29] keep going on and on and on, but you've made a motion to amend the amendment to the amendment. [20:38] Yep, sir. Okay. Hold on. Stand here. [20:43] Yeah, you can only do that twice. That's a parliamentary rule. [20:46] That's uh, okay. So you're done speaking. All right. Chair recognizes Mr. Donalds. [20:53] Uh, Mr. Chairman, um, I move that the committee, uh, recess or call the committee. We want to call [21:00] the question. You just want to recess so we can go vote and come back and finish this up. [21:03] Okay, because we have votes called. I'm flexible either way. [21:06] All right. I think that's a fair vote. They called votes about 10 minutes ago. So pursue it to the [21:12] previous order. The committee will recess until immediately following the votes. The committee [21:16] stands to recess.