C-Span2

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am here to say happy 40th birthday to C-SPAN2, broadcasting democracy in the Senate to the American people.

I have to confess to you that, 40 years ago today, I voted no on the Senate being televised. I thought it would hurt the decorum of the U.S. Senate.

Whether it has hurt the decorum of the U.S. Senate or not, I am not going to make a judgment on that today. But I do tell you that, on reflection, I am glad that the Senate is televised to make government more real to the American people.

So I guess I would have to confess that I cast the wrong vote 40 years ago.

So now, for four decades, C-SPAN2 has served as an essential conduit between the U.S. Senate and the American people. Since its launch on June 2, 1986, C-SPAN2 has offered uninterrupted, unfiltered access to the debates, the votes, and the deliberations of the U.S. Senate so people in this country that watch the Senate on C-SPAN2 get the news unfiltered, directly to you, the American people.

The American people don't have to rely on biased journalists to get their news when it might really be distorted. And when I say ``distorted,'' too often at my town meetings in Iowa--and I had 12 of them last week--I hear people say: How come you can't get along? In other words, Republicans and Democrats don't seem to be talking to each other.

I always try to explain that there is more partisanship than there should be, but I also say there is not as much as you, as an Iowan, actually see because you see on television Members of the Senate always disagreeing. When there is agreement, you never see much about it.

So this is your opportunity to listen in the U.S. Senate, to get it unbiased, in a way that you would not from journalists.

Also, C-SPAN2 operates without any public funding or any government oversight. The continued success of C-SPAN2 is due to the funding that is provided by platform operators such as cable, satellite, and now even streaming services. These platforms should continue to make delivery of C-SPAN2 a priority, and I am sure they will because Americans then can watch Congress in action in realtime.

So I say once again: Happy birthday, C-SPAN2. Your coverage of the Senate helps democracy work and provides a true public service.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, on March 15, 2026, I made public an FBI agent's interview statement. That agent was involved in a conspiracy called Crosswind, which was a code-named investigation into former Trump adviser Walid Phares. That statement, made under penalty of perjury, exposes widespread abuses within then-Special Counsel Mueller's operation.

That operation is kind of history, but it leads us up to something more current. For example, the statement noted that multiple personnel were removed from then-Special Counsel Mueller's team because they ``saw concerning things and voiced their concern''--that word ``concerning'' meaning they knew something wasn't right going on in Special Counsel Mueller's team investigating the whole thing about Russia's involvement in the first election of Trump.

That statement--remember, that statement was made just this year-- noted that former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe referred to President Trump in a derogatory manner. In other words, were they unbiased in their investigations? And I think I will show you where they weren't very unbiased in that investigation.

A Justice Department attorney wanted to remove and water down McCabe's negative tone about Trump from McCabe's interview summary, so it looks to me like another coverup attempt.

The statement--and again, this is an FBI agent who served on Mueller's team and was under oath when he gave this statement--noted that Mueller's right-hand man Aaron Zelinsky exhibited clear bias against President Trump. And that political infection at the top trickled down to everyone else, because this FBI agent said the Mueller team created throughout the office space characters and cartoons that were very anti-Trump.

To wrap it all up in a bow, the FBI agent's statement discusses violations of security protocol, mishandling of classified information, and more potential FISA abuses.

For example, one Justice Department prosecutor is alleged to have brought a classified notebook to a meeting without the proper carrying bag. This prosecutor also was alleged to have traveled from her house, which means she had stored classified information outside of a classified facility.

This is the same Justice Department that prosecuted Trump for allegedly mishandling classified information. Remember, the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago, all in an attempt to ruin Trump politically, financially, and, of course, with the end goal that they were hoping to put him in prison.

Of course, the partisan media has neither reported these jaw-dropping findings nor the blatant and potential criminal FISA abuses. The FBI agent said the FISA on Crosswind shouldn't have been renewed, and other FBI personnel held that very same view. The agent's statement said: ``As the investigation progressed, the facts that we originally thought meant one thing were learned to mean something else. Per reporting from another agency and what we learned from the investigation up to the point of the third renewal''--

Meaning the FISA renewal--

``there were no corroborating facts that tied Crosswind to certain facts that we thought were originally true.''

This FBI agent--again, I want to remind you that he was under oath when he gave this statement. The agent then ``pointed out these specific corrections to the application''--meaning the FISA application--``in numerous instances throughout the FISA-certified copy process. This was circa 2018. I sent these edits to Kevin Clinesmith, who said, `We can't send this to DOJ.'''

That is the same Clinesmith who admitted to criminally altering an email connection with a FISA application during Crossfire Hurricane, which, as we all know, was yet another effort to get Trump and his associates, even if it meant breaking the law to get Trump.

The FBI agent also testified about Crosswind that there were overzealous thoughts and bias that permeated the investigation and a ``let's get him'' attitude.

Even with these known material defects and objections to filing the FISA renewal, then-Special Agent Walter Giardina ``signed it as Case Agent,'' according to this FBI agent's statement under oath.

If the statements by this FBI agent are true and accurate, the FISA application process described was a false filing intended to improperly target a known innocent person.

These are criminal allegations that the Justice Department and the FBI ought to fully investigate. In fact, this FBI agent implored the FBI to do just that. This agent encouraged the FBI to get copies of the FISA and the predicating documents.

This Senator asked for the same, and the government has failed to produce these important documents. And I don't know why they would be afraid to let this Senator have access to those documents, because transparency is going to bring accountability. And for the sake of justice and for the sake of exposing things that have been political weaponization in our government, they should be exposed so they don't happen again.

Now, Crosswind wasn't the only investigation this FBI agent gave a statement about. So this brings us more up to more recent months, at least the recent year and a half.

The agent also discussed the known defects of the case against Trump adviser Tom Barrack. The agent said the ``get someone'' attitude that led to the FISA renewal and search warrants also led to the investigation of Tom Barrack.

The agent's statement noted that these matters ``relate to ethical dilemmas.'' The FBI agent further stated that ``there was no authority for the [Special Counsel's Office] to open a case on Tom Barrack.''

Even the FBI Washington Field Office had, at that point in time, declined to open a case on Barrack, and yet this FBI agent said: ``Giardina didn't want to open a case on Barrack but wanted to keep people happy.''

So you do illegal things just to keep people happy. That is not right. And the fact that we have this FBI agent's statement to verify all of the wrongdoing that went on in this whole process, that is obviously no basis to criminally investigate anyone.

What the Biden Justice Department and the FBI did to Barrack and his staffer Matthew Grimes is worthy of note as another lesson of what the government should not do.

Barrack gave an interview to the government way back in December 2017 and June 2019. Grimes also gave interviews. It appears they cooperated. Then, years later--4 years later and 2 years later in another instance--the Biden administration Justice Department, in July 2021, decided to indict both Barrack and Grimes for acting as an agent of a foreign government, for obstruction, and for false statements.

They were arrested by more than 20 Federal agents going to their homes. At first, the government asked that Grimes not be given bail. The government said that he was a flight risk, among other things.

Grimes, a 22- and 23-year-old at the time the crimes were alleged to have occurred, was detained for 5 days and eventually released--can you believe this?--on $5 million bond. Barrack's bond was set--can you believe this?--at $250 million, even though he had no criminal record.

Barrack and Grimes took their fight to a jury trial, and the jury acquitted Barrack on all nine counts. Grimes was acquitted of the two counts against him.

So I would like to share three quotes from that trial.

During the trial, the judge told the government:

I mean, I've had patent cases that I tried involving algorithms that were easier for the jury to figure out than this one is going to be.

Then a further quote from the judge also said, about some of the government's theories in the case, that they ``were right in line between barely permissible inference and impermissible speculation.''

And then there is the third, and last, quote from an alternate juror, who stated publicly after the verdict:

I thought much of the prosecution's evidence was very misleading and misrepresented the truth.

So that is what you have with political weaponization going on in the American Government.

So now, to sum up, year after year, my investigative work has exposed the overt bias by Federal law enforcement against Republicans. Here, the same political government Agencies were involved in Crosswind, the Barrack case, and Crossfire Hurricane. These cases went nowhere.

My Democratic colleagues never raised a finger about any of these abuses. My Democratic colleagues did the opposite and went on partisan television every day, falsely claiming crimes occurred.

And you can see from what I have said today and what the FBI's statements--the agents' statements--say, that there was no crime. But it appears the real crimes were committed by the Biden-Harris government investigators.

Now, bringing this today, and the responsibility of President Trump's administration, it is clear that this administration has a responsibility to fully investigate these matters.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source