-9999

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, nobody in our country should be above the law--not a politician, not a celebrity, not a billionaire--no one. The principle of ``equal justice under the law'' is so powerful that if you walk outside these doors and you look across to the Supreme Court, you will see them carved into the facade above the pillars: ``Equal justice under law.''

No matter how powerful someone is, if they commit a crime, then they need to be prosecuted, and the American people have a right to know if information is being held related to the conduct of the crime.

So in regard to the Epstein files, there is only one right answer: the complete and total disclosure of everything, all the details, while protecting the names of the victims. Whatever a person's political party is shouldn't matter. The level of power shouldn't matter. Their net worth shouldn't matter. ``Equal justice under law'' is the vision of our Nation. If an individual is a pedophile, if an individual has raped a young girl, then they need to be held accountable. Let the chips fall where they may.

Jeffrey Epstein was a monster. He groomed and abused and raped and coordinated the rape by others of underage girls, and he trafficked these girls to rich and powerful men.

As I speak here tonight, the Department of Justice has files detailing a tremendous amount of information about his operation, and in those files, as we have heard from Pam Bondi and as she has informed the President, the President's name is among them.

Well, that doesn't mean that he was somebody who participated in a crime. He could be listed as an associate. He could be listed as a friend. He could be listed as somebody who attended a gathering. We don't know. In fact, we don't know about any of the names that are in those files as to what they did. But that is the point. As to the names of the powerful people who associated with an individual--Jeffrey Epstein--who was running an international sex trafficking ring--all of that information must be disclosed. Full disclosure is the only option. Every detail should be brought to light, and anyone who committed egregious crimes should be held accountable no matter who they are.

My colleague from Oregon Senator Ron Wyden and the Senate Finance Committee have been investigating Mr. Epstein's financial network for years. They have been seeking disclosure.

I have a letter that Senator Wyden wrote. It reveals more than 4,700 suspicious wire transfers adding up to more than $1 billion from just one of Mr. Epstein's bank accounts and hundreds of millions of dollars in other bank accounts. What would that information show us about who they went to? What questions would it lead us to ask, and what questions would that information answer? The American public has every right to know the questions that Senator Wyden and the Finance Committee are asking.

Let me be clear. That work was bipartisan work, Democrats and Republicans together calling for disclosure and accountability.

In this letter, Senator Wyden notes:

Epstein clearly had access to enormous financing to operate his sex trafficking network, and the details on how he got the cash to pay for it are sitting in a Treasury Department filing cabinet.

For years, so many people across America in both parties have been demanding the release of the Epstein files, but we heard a lot from a few folks who are in the administration now.

December 15, 2023, Kash Patel said that Mr. Epstein's ``black book'' was ``under [the] direct control of the FBI.'' Well, Mr. Patel is now the Director of the FBI.

On October 22, 2024, Vice--well, he wasn't Vice President yet, but now he is Vice President--JD Vance said in a podcast:

Seriously, we need to release the Epstein list. That's an important thing.

On February 25, 2025, Attorney General Pam Bondi, who was in office, said Mr. Epstein's client list was ``sitting on my desk right now to review.''

But, suddenly, we are hearing a different tune from people in the administration. We are hearing: There is nothing to see here, they are saying. Go look somewhere else, they are saying. This is not important, they are saying.

But not everyone agrees with that. Let's take the Speaker of the House. July 15, House Speaker Mike Johnson told CNN:

We should put everything out there and let the people decide.

On July 16, Senator Majority Leader John Thune told FOX News:

I'm always a believer in transparency--I think more is . . . better.

I agree with Speaker Mike Johnson. I agree with Majority Leader John Thune. I agree that the right principle about this information is to put everything out there.

Let us not forget that as the Senate Finance Committee is pursuing those information about the file transfers and what they show, that, ultimately, it is not about money itself but about what money tells us and the case it builds for who did what, because what really matters here is this: the victimization of young girls. That is what this is about, the abuse of young girls, the rape of young girls. That is what this is about. That is what transparency is about.

So whether the information in the Department of Justice files is about flight and travel records, names of people who were involved in various ways, names of businesses or nonprofits, other organizations, about meetings held or communications made, whether it was by email, whether it was by text, whether it was by phone call, any immunity deals, any nonprosecution agreements, any plea bargains, any settlements--whatever it is--the American people demand transparency, just as the Speaker of the House demanded transparency, just as the majority leader of the Senate has demanded transparency.

This bill requires ``no record shall be withheld, delayed, or redacted on the basis of any of the following: embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary,'' regardless of who they are, regardless of where they live.

But what the bill also says is the information released must protect the victims and the underage witnesses, protect those who were victims or who were underage witnesses to crimes. So information can be redacted by those victims and underage witnesses--personally identifiable information, depictions of abuse, or information that would jeopardize a Federal investigation or national security.

Colleagues, the question before us is simple: Will this body follow the lead of the Speaker of the House and the majority leader of the Senate and call for full transparency?

The administration has said the law doesn't allow us to do it, so I am proposing a law that gives them the power to do what they have said they would like to do--transparency.

Will we, instead, object to this law to protect perpetrators of crimes against girls? That is the question tonight: Will we protect our children, or will the information be withheld? Will we fail to demand it, fail to adopt this law to ensure that it is delivered in order to protect the powerful? That is the choice: Protect the victims, be on their side, pursue justice, or protect the powerful?

So, Mr. President, as if in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 2557, which is at the desk. I further ask that the bill be considered read three times and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MERKLEY. Would my colleague yield for a question?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, I ask my colleague to yield for a question. He has chosen not to, and that is his right.

But the question I would ask is this: If the Speaker of the House is demanding transparency, if the majority leader of the Senate is demanding transparency, if the American people are demanding transparency, if my colleagues who have said time and time again just months ago there should be transparency, then why does my colleague come here and object to transparency? What is it that they know that they don't want the American people to know?

To withhold this information is an assault on justice, and it is absolutely wrong. We must continue to demand that the rich and powerful are not shielded from the full force of justice if they have perpetrated crimes against underage children.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source