All posts tagged "richard blumenthal"

Pam Bondi covers up Trump's 'dumb moves' with made-for-TV 'stunt': Top Dems

WASHINGTON – Democrats on Capitol Hill are nervously laughing off President Donald Trump’s so-called investigation into Joe Biden’s use of an autopen.

Prominent Democratic senators who spoke to Raw Story at the Capitol on Thursday dismissed the effort — passed through executive order and giving Attorney General Pam Bondi authority to launch a criminal probe — as a made-for TV “political stunt.”

“It’s a political stunt trying to change the narrative from tariffs that are gonna harm the economy,” said Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

“It’s a gigantic distraction and totally frivolous and unfounded,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), the second-most senior Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, told Raw Story.

“They would be better advised to focus on problems that really matter to everyday Americans, like rising prices and threats to our economy from dumb moves like imposing across-the-board tariffs. It’s a political stunt.”

Biden’s use of an autopen to sign documents — from pardons to pieces of legislation — has become the subject of Republican conspiracy theories.

Riding the coattails of the new book Original Sin, by Jake Tapper of CNN and Alex Thompson of Axios, conservative pundits and far-right politicians are claiming Biden was too old to function properly as president.

Biden was 78 when he entered the White House in 2021, and 82 when he left office this year.

Trump, who turns 79 next week, has shared numerous conspiracy theories about the man who beat him in 2020.

Last week, Trump shared the objectively absurd claim that Biden was “executed in 2020” and replaced by “clones[,] doubles and robotic engineered soulless mindless entities.”

Compared to that, the autopen conspiracy theory is relatively mundane, holding that aides used the robotic device to sign documents and keep the government running because Biden was too old to keep up.

Republicans claim documents signed by autopen would be invalid, including pardons issued by Biden to family members and leading Democratic politicians, especially those who served on the House January 6 committee.

Experts, historians and journalists have repeatedly countered that presidential autopen use is long established and perfectly legal — as Trump would know, having used an autopen himself.

“I don't think there's a there there,” Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) told Raw Story. “I think this is more of a political point.”

Coons has more reason to know than most. A close Biden ally, he holds the Senate seat Biden vacated to become President Barack Obama’s vice president in 2009. He has also served as an executive himself, in his home state.

“Broadly, governors, mayors [and] presidents should have and need to have processes that guarantee that the documents that are executed by them are, you know, duly reviewed and appropriately executed,” Coons said.

“When I was county executive, we used to have signing day once a month where I would sit down and sign a stack of a thousand documents. And I remember saying on several occasions, ‘Do I really need to personally sign every single one of these?’

“Anyone who's been an executive of any significant entity recognizes that the use of the approved, auditable use of an autopen is essential to carrying out the due functions of a large government. The number of things the U.S. president has to sign would boggle the imagination.”

Asked about Republican claims that then-First Lady Jill Biden really ran the government during much of Biden’s four years in the White House, Coons answered wryly.

“In the case of Edith Wilson, where the president was literally in a coma, yeah, that was true,” Coons said.

President Woodrow Wilson suffered a stroke while in office in 1919. Accounts of Wilson’s illness differ, but he is not thought to have fallen into a coma.

Coons said he was with Biden in his final days in office, and he says he was cogent.

“I had breakfast with President Biden the last Friday that he was in the White House and he was present, engaging, positive, clear,” Coons said — before admitting that at other moments Biden seemed his age.

“Did he have some bad moments in his last year as president? Like the debate? Yes.”

Biden’s catastrophic display against Trump in Atlanta last June ultimately precipitated his withdrawal as Democrats’ presidential nominee.

“But I've seen no evidence that he actually, at any point, wasn't fully capable of being president,” Coons said.

'Very much in disarray': Dem scrambles as CNN host asks if party is in turmoil

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) shifted the blame to Republicans Friday when CNN's Brianna Keilar claimed the Democratic Party seemed "very much in disarray" — and asked how they planned to fix the problem.

Major cracks in the Democratic Party appeared this week as Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said he planned to vote in favor of the GOP funding bill that pushes President Trump's agenda. The alternative, Schumer said — a government shutdown — was just what Trump and his cohort Elon Musk wanted to see happen.

"Our Dana Bash reporting that your colleague, Sen. Michael Bennett, was very upset in a private meeting this week. That he accused Democratic leadership in the Senate of having 'no strategy, no plan, and no message,'" Keilar said. "That was the quote on the spending bill. And then we just got word that Hakeem Jeffries, Democratic leader in the House, was asked, just moments ago, if he has confidence in Schumer, and his answer was to say, 'Next question.' I mean, what do you say to the appearance of this disarray?"

ALSO READ: 'The Hard Reset': Here's how the U.S. is exporting terrorism around the world

Blumenthal agreed that the party needs to be "unified" to fight against "the slide toward tyranny." In opposition to Schumer, Blumenthal said he's voting "no" on the continuous resolution "because of the harm it will do."

"Sir, I hear you on that, but right now, constituents look at your party and they see you fighting each other, and they are looking for that unity that you're talking about, but they're not they're not getting it. It's not there," Keilar said. "What do you say to those folks who are looking for leaders to be on the same page and to have a clear strategy, because we're getting clear signs that is not the case right now."

"I'll be very blunt, Brianna," Blumenthal said, continuing, "I think we need to come together, no question about it."

He then suggested that the Democrats should be "angry at that predicament and the choice that we have been made to take."

Keilar asked where he was placing responsibility for turning the situation around.

"That's the key question. We need to focus on who has foisted this choice — two terrible alternatives — on us: Republicans in the House, Republicans in the Senate. And we need to work to avoid that kind of choice in the future," Blumenthal said.

Watch the clip below via CNN.

'Excuse me!' Indignant Pam Bondi pushes back on Democrat's questioning on Kash Patel

Attorney General nominee Pam Bondi grew indignant when Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) questioned her about disavowing unethical acts by President-elect Donald Trump and his nominee for FBI Director, Kash Patel.

Blumenthal suggested that Bondi was tailoring her answers at Wednesday's hearing not out of honesty, but out of a desire to be confirmed.

"Can you say no to the president of United States when he asks you to do something unethical or illegal?" Blumenthal asked.

Bondi shot back, "Senator, first, I need to clarify something that you said: that I have to sit up here and say these things. No, I don't! I sit up here and speak the truth. I'm not going to sit up here and say anything that I need to say to get confirmed by this body. I don't have to say anything. I will answer the questions to the best of my ability."

Blumenthal then asked about Patel's inflammatory comments that he'll pursue the new administration's enemies.

ALSO READ: Fox News has blood on its hands as Trump twists the knife

"Well, let me ask you — an individual who says that he is going to quote, 'come after,' end quote, people he alleges, quote, 'helped Joe Biden rig the presidential elections.' That he has a list of people who are part of this deep state who should be prosecuted. That he's going to close down the FBI building on his first day in office. Is that a person who, appropriately, should be the FBI director? Aren't those comments inappropriate? Shouldn't you disavow them and and ask him to recant them?"

"Senator, I am not familiar with all those comments. I have not discussed those comments with Mr. Patel. What I do know —"

Blumenthal interrupted, "Well, I'm asking you for your view."

"Excuse me!" Bondi shot back. "What I do know is Mr. Patel was a career prosecutor. He was a career public defender defending people. And he also has great experience within the intelligence community. What I can sit here and tell you is, Mr. Patel — if he works with running the FBI, if he is confirmed, and if I am confirmed — he will follow the law if I am the attorney general of the United States of America, and I don't believe he would do anything otherwise."

Watch the clip below via CNN or click the link here.

'Appalled!' CNN's Scott Jennings condemns Dems' 'unseemly mudslinging' against Hegseth

CNN conservative commentator Scott Jennings claimed he was "appalled" by Democrats' line of questioning of defense secretary nominee Pete Hegseth.

Jennings gave his assessment on Tuesday's Senate hearing to Dana Bash, saying, "In short, I think Pete Hegseth kicked their today asses today. I mean, it wasn't even close. They didn't lay a glove on Hegseth. No mistakes. Calm, cool, collected."

Jennings then took aim at protesters who heckled Hegseth as he gave his opening statement, as well as the quality of questions asked by the Democratic senators.

"I mean, before the thing even started, you had this, like, this CodePink, you know, protester freak show trying to disrupt the hearing. That's the Democratic base, by the way, which probably explains why the Democrats on the committee acted in such a bizarre and unprofessional way," he said.

Protesters displayed signs referring to Hegseth as a "religious extremist," before Capitol Police removed at least four four people from the hearing room.

ALSO READ: Fox News has blood on its hands as Trump twists the knife

During questioning, Democratic senators hammered Hegseth on his past issues with alcohol, sexual abuse claims, and financial mismanagement.

Jennings declared, "I was appalled at some of the way these senators handled themselves and some of the lines of questioning. I mean, Tim Kane sounded like a sex pervert in his questioning of Pete Hegseth. Blumenthal, who lied about his service in Vietnam, questioning Hegseth's qualifications. You had Gillibrand, you had Warren, you had Hirono going on unhinged rants about things. Angus King obviously doesn't understand what it's like to fight terrorism — on and on and on. Hegseth was cool in the face of this unhinged questioning. They made him look good today. It would be difficult for a Republican to vote against Hegseth after the Democrats' unseemly mudslinging today."

At the beginning of the discussion, Bash said Donald Trump's team was "in good spirits" over the hearing. "They see the warm reception that [Hegseth] received from Republican senators as a very good sign."

Watch the clip below via CNN or at this link.

DeJoy faces pain over postal 'crime wave’

Amid nonstop grilling by U.S. senators about the nation’s shambolic mail system, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy had jokes.

After Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) relayed a constituent’s question about the manufacturing of ubiquitous blue mail boxes on America’s street corners, DeJoy cracked that Johnson's constituent wouldn't want to steal from one of those blue mailboxes … would they?

“Pardon?” Johnson said.

“It’s not somebody who wants to break into 'em, is it?” DeJoy repeated with a smile and a laugh.

“I don’t think so. This is a cooperative type of question,” Johnson said, not seemingly amused.

Curbside blue mailboxes are indeed prime targets for raiding by criminals, particularly as the U.S. Postal Service is in the midst of a self-described “crime wave” that includes a 543 percent increase in letter carrier robberies over a three-year period, a recent Raw Story investigation found.

Criminals are increasingly robbing letter carriers for their “arrow keys” that provide widespread access to what’s inside those blue mailboxes, including paper checks, cash and other valuables.

During the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Senate Committee hearing on April 16, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) asked DeJoy and Tammy Hull, inspector general for the United States Postal Service, for their support of a bill known as the Postal Police Reform Act of 2023. Blumenthal, a co-sponsor of the bill, said the legislation would address the “growing problem” and “very troubling trends” of rising mail thefts and letter carrier robberies.

The spike in letter carrier robberies coincided with the time of a 2020 directive from the United States Postal Inspection Service, the law enforcement arm of the Postal Service. The memo clarified postal police officers could only work on Postal Service properties, unable to intervene in off-property crimes.

“In Connecticut, I've heard from postal employees, lots of them, about the serious impacts of assaults, robbery. They’re increasingly vulnerable. These attacks have far reaching effects,” Blumenthal said. “I don’t need to tell you, hardworking civil servants are afraid to do their jobs, and Americans’ confidence in our mail system is undermined.”

DeJoy didn’t directly answer the senator’s question about supporting the bill, which Blumenthal said “clarifies an authority for postal police officers that can help address the threat of violence, assault and robbery.”

DeJoy said he would read the bill. But he emphasized that the Postal Service’s own uniformed police force, known as postal police officers, “protect our facilities where our people are and the mail is” — not on the streets.

Since the 1970s, some postal police officers patrolled the streets to deter and intervene in high-crime areas where letter carriers delivered until the 2020 directive.

DeJoy, who maintained the Postal Service has “done a lot over the last year” to address postal crime, said there aren’t even enough postal police officers to patrol mail facilities such as post offices and regional sorting centers.

“I have 600 postal police officers in the country. It's hardly enough to have any impact on the 260,000 routes and 300 [thousand] carriers I have running around the country.”

“There are places where we have a thousand people and no security, so that’s where we’re trying to redirect it,” DeJoy said.

Blumenthal pressed on DeJoy, asking if he thought the issue of mail crime “remains a problem.”

“I think that crime in the city streets …” DeJoy said before Blumenthal cut him off.

“No, I’m talking about crime against your employees, your civil servants,” Blumenthal interjected. “They’re being assaulted. Are they not?”

DeJoy concurred, “They are,” but pointed to the Postal Service’s use of postal inspectors in cities and partnerships with local police and local prosecutors to address crime. Postal inspectors are different from postal police in the similar way that police detectives are different from uniformed officers, postal employees told Raw Story.

“Do you think the Postal Service is doing enough?” Blumenthal asked DeJoy.

That’s when Hull jumped in to discuss a report, “U.S. Postal Service’s Response to Mail Theft,” that the Postal Service’s independent Office of Inspector General released in September.

The report noted that while the Postal Service is attempting to improve security measures around collection boxes and arrow keys — universal keys that open blue boxes and communal mailboxes in a given zip code — the Postal Service still lacks notable guidelines for its mail theft initiatives and accountability for arrow keys, which are frequently targeted in carrier robberies, Raw Story reported.

“We identified some additional things that the Postal Service could do to address the mail theft issue. We did not specifically address the postal police problem because we wanted to see more locally what was happening locally in various locations,” Hull said, noting that the team is investigating the issue in Queens, N.Y.

“Isn’t better law enforcement key?” Blumenthal said.

“It is, and that’s actually one of the things that we talked about in that higher level work, and so some of it, there’s local partnerships that are critical to this, as the postmaster general mentioned," Hull said. "We’re looking into what the postal police situation is when we do the local work.”

‘We can make a difference’

The main response of the Postal Service and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service to letter carrier robberies and mail thefts has been “Project Safe Delivery.”

The plan, launched in May 2023, focuses on modernizing postal mailboxes and keys to deter criminals and reduce violent attacks on letter carriers. But the program’s plan to replace 49,000 antiquated arrow keys is just 0.5 percent of 9 million arrow keys overall — in other words, only one out of every 200 arrow keys will be replaced, Raw Story reported.

So far, the Postal Service has deployed 15,000 high security blue collection boxes and more than 30,000 electronic locking mechanisms, said David Walton, a spokesperson for the Postal Service.

In a press release on March 12, the Postal Inspection Service reported more than 1,200 arrests for letter carrier robberies and mail theft since May 2023 — 213 arrests were for postal robberies and more than 1,025 were related to mail theft, Walton said.

Postal-related robberies in the first six months of fiscal year 2024 went down by 21 percent when compared to the same period last year. Walton said. Mail theft complaints compared during the same time periods decreased by 35 percent, and arrests for postal-related robberies are up by 72 percent over the past six months when compared to the previous year, Walton added.

"These security enhancements to mail receptacles have been deployed strategically for maximum effect to all 50 states. Postal inspectors and other personnel have conducted law enforcement surges consisting of enforcement and outreach/education efforts in various cities across the country," Walton told Raw Story via email. "Project Safe Delivery’s multi-faceted approach appears to be having the intended result."

DeJoy’s hearing responses sparked outrage from the Postal Police Officers Association union, which submitted a nine-page statement for the record after the hearing.

Frank Albergo, president of the Postal Police Officers Association, called DeJoy’s answers “either misleading or, quite frankly, silly.”

“The Fraternal Order of Police, the National Association of Police Organizations, the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association all support our bill, but the postmaster general doesn't know? He has to take a look at it? Does he think that he knows more than the premier law enforcement organizations in America?” Albergo told Raw Story. “He's already paying for postal police, but why wouldn't he want the option to utilize postal police? I just don't understand it. It's a mystery.”

ALSO READ: A neuroscientist reveals how Trump and Biden's cognitive impairments are different

In the union’s statement to Congress, Albergo called the Postal Service’s publicized 1,200 arrests between May 2023 and March 2024 “unimpressive,” saying that mail theft and letter carrier robbery arrests were reported "pale in comparison” to former numbers reported by the Postal Inspection Service.

In fiscal year 2022, the Postal Inspection Service made 4,291 arrests. Its peak number of arrests in the past 43 years happened in 1992, with 14,578 arrests that year, according to research published by the State University of New York at Albany.

Albergo called on DeJoy to think about how as many as 700 uniformed postal police officers could assist on the streets in the 20 cities they’re stationed in across the country.

“Can postal police stop all mail theft? No, of course not, but we certainly can make a difference in the locations where we're domiciled. That's just common sense,” Albergo said.

'Expansion of our resources would be required'

In a May 17, 2023, hearing before the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability's Subcommittee on Government Operations, DeJoy said he was aware of "legislative proposals to expand Postal Police Officer jurisdiction."

"The Inspection Service would likely not deploy PPOs in a different manner than they are used today, even if the jurisdiction of the PPOs was legislatively modified," DeJoy said. "PPOs are assigned to certain facilities because the Inspection Service has determined that these facilities require the presence of uniformed, trained and armed officers."

DeJoy said postal police officers deter criminals who may want to compromise the mail and harm people inside Postal Service buildings.

"Removing those officers from Postal Service property, where a significant concentration of mail and employees exist, would put at risk not only postal facilities, but also the employees and customers who use those facilities every day," DeJoy said.

DeJoy insisted that postal inspectors could handle off-property protection of letter carriers and the mail.

"Postal inspectors, not PPOs, regularly conduct surveillance and appropriate enforcement actions in areas where high numbers of letter carrier robberies and mail thefts have been reported," DeJoy said.

The Postal Service is generally self-funded and primarily relies on the sale of stamps, products and services to fund its operations. For fiscal year 2023, the Postal Service reported a net loss of $6.5 billion, Reuters reported.

"Given the important role that PPOs play in the facilities to which they are assigned today to deter crime, to protect our employees, customers, contractors, and our real property, and to defend the sanctity and security of the mail, we are certain that this is the appropriate use of the limited resources we have," DeJoy said. "To engage in additional activities significant expansion of our resources would be required, and we do not have the ability to obtain them consistent with our financial self-sufficiency business mandate, nor the organizational, social, and political support to engage in the activities suggested.“

‘If you don’t fix it … I don’t think you’re fit for this job’

Raw Story reached out to a dozen senators on the Homeland Security and Government Affairs committee who, during the April 16 hearing, questioned DeJoy and Hull — as well as Roman Martinez IV, chairman of the U.S. Postal Service Board of Governors, and Michael Kubayanda, chairman of the Postal Regulatory Commission.

All but one senator declined to comment or did not reply to Raw Story’s request for comment.

The lone senator who responded, Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA), told Raw Story in a statement that “Georgians right now aren’t getting prescriptions in the mail, they can't pay rent and mortgages, and businesses can't receive supplies and ship products.”

“I was deeply dissatisfied by the Postmaster General’s response last week before the Homeland Security Committee,” Ossoff told Raw Story. “There are postal workers who every day are pouring their hearts and souls into delivering the mail on time, but they don't have the management and the infrastructure they need to succeed.”

Ossoff said he would apply “maximum pressure” in asking DeJoy and his team to provide resources and processes to fix the delivery issues in Georgia.

“This is a crisis that the postmaster general needs to meet with the urgency it demands,” Ossoff said.

During the hearing, Ossoff told DeJoy he had “weeks not months” to fix issues with late mail deliveries in Georgia, where 11 Atlanta area plants were consolidated into three.

“If you don’t fix it, 36 percent on-time delivery, I don’t think you’re fit for this job,” Ossoff said to DeJoy during the hearing.

ALSO READ: 16 worthless things Trump will give you for your money

Only the nine-member Postal Service Board of Governors, whose members are appointed by the president with Senate approval, can fire the postmaster general. President Joe Biden cannot directly fire DeJoy, although he would have the power to appoint a new postmaster general if the Postal Service Board of Governors, which by law may have no more than five governors from the same political party, replaced DeJoy.

Then-President Donald Trump nominated DeJoy in 2020.

Kubayanda, the chairman of the Postal Regulatory Commission, told Raw Story through a spokesperson that he felt the hearing was “timely and addressed urgent and important issues facing the postal system and customers.”

In terms of rising mail crime and law enforcement, Kubayanda said “criminal and safety matters in the postal system” are under the jurisdiction of the Postal Service and the U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General.

“The Commission is aware of the concerns regarding crime affecting postal personnel,” Kubayanda said in a statement. “If data indicates that these issues affect service performance and customer experience, the Commission can monitor those issues and provide some additional transparency.”

The Postal Regulatory Commission will release in June its analysis of the Postal Service’s fiscal year 2023 performance report and fiscal year 2024 performance plan, Kubayanda said.

Hull was not available for an interview, said Tara Linne, a spokesperson for the U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General.

Linne told Raw Story via email that postal police officers fall under the jurisdiction of the Postal Inspection Service, clarifying that the inspector general’s office has different jurisdiction involving internal crimes, fraud, narcotics offenses and employee misconduct committed by postal employees and contractors.

“The attacks on letter carriers are unconscionable and of such high concern the Inspection Service has launched the Project Safe Delivery campaign,” Linne said.

DeJoy and Martinez were not made available for interviews.

Hypocrisy alert: Senators who scorched Mark Zuckerberg love Meta money

Last week, senators put the CEOs of five social media giants each in the hot seat over accusations of their platforms’ negligence toward the sexual exploitation and online safety of children.

The hottest seat of all at a multi-hour Senate Judiciary Committee hearing belonged to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who a senator asked to stand up and publicly apologize to victims and parents in attendance holding photos of their children they say were sexually abused, bullied or committed self harm — many dying by suicide — related to exploitation on social media platforms.

“Mr. Zuckerberg, you and the companies before us, I know you don’t mean it to be so, but you have blood on your hands,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), the committee’s ranking Republican. “You have a product that’s killing people.”

ALSO READ: Senators extend their streak of never punishing other senators

“With the touch of your finger that smartphone that can entertain and inform you can become a back alley where the lives of your children are damaged and destroyed,” said Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“You, as an industry, realize this is an existential threat to you all if we don't get it right?” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) said. “We can regulate you out of business if we wanted to.”

“There is literally no plausible justification, no way of defending this,” Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) said.

Yet, Graham, Durbin, Lee and Tillis are among more than a dozen senators who grilled Zuckerberg and his tech peers but also took donations from Meta’s political action committee, company executives, lobbyists, or a combination of all three, totaling more than $120,000 combined since 2017, according to a Raw Story analysis of federal campaign records.

Who took donations from Meta?

Raw Story reached out to the offices for 15 senators who spoke at the hearing and received donations from political action committees or leaders at Meta and other social media companies represented at the hearing, including TikTok, Snap, X (formerly Twitter) and Discord.

Raw Story asked: Would the senators return donations from these social media companies or refuse future donations?

Only three responded to Raw Story’s requests for comment.

Between late 2019 and mid-2023, Graham’s campaign committee, Team Graham, received at least $15,800 from the PAC and lobbyists for Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, according to Raw Story’s review of records from the Federal Election Commission.

After a Nov. 7 Senate Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law hearing with a Facebook whistleblower, Graham said he would refund the money his campaign received from Meta companies and other social media platforms, NTD reported.

Team Graham donated $16,000 and his Fund for America’s Future PAC donated $2,500 to the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, said Kevin Bishop, a spokesperson for Graham.

The National Center on Sexual Exploitation confirmed it received Graham’s committed gift, which helped bring survivors to the hearing and “will continue to be used to bring survivors to meet with legislators across the aisle so survivors have a voice to educate policymakers on the impact of sexual exploitation and the scale at which it occurs online,” said Dawn Hawkins, CEO of the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, via an emailed statement.

“We aren't aware of any similar pledges made by other legislators,” Hawkins said, noting that the center supports bipartisan legislation including the Eliminating Abusive and Rampant Neglect of Interactive Technologies Act (EARN IT) Act and the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA).

“Graham made a pledge and he fulfilled that pledge,” Bishop told Raw Story via email.

Hawkins said Big Tech companies “know the harm they are facilitating” and “continue to shirk responsibility and roll out piecemeal and ineffective solutions,” particularly in relation to vulnerable populations such as those who identify as LGBTQ+.

“These companies continue to put the burden on overwhelmed parents despite having flawed and ineffective parental controls, and they ignore children without the privilege of involved, tech-savvy caregivers, when high-level corporate actions could better protect all children,” Hawkins said.

The social media companies don’t spend enough on child safety protocols either, Hawkins said, calling the CEOs unprepared for the hearing. To them, “investment in child safety is not a priority, but an afterthought,” she said.

Tillis’ campaign committee received at least $27,200 from current and former registered lobbyists for Facebook and Meta Platforms Inc PAC (previously known as Facebook Inc. PAC), between June 2017 and March 2023, FEC records indicate.

Lee’s campaign received at least $16,800 combined in donations from Meta (and formerly Facebook) PAC and a former Facebook lobbyist, as well as from an executive for ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok, between September 2019 and June 2022. The vast majority of the funds were Meta-related, and one $2,500 check from Facebook PAC went uncashed, according to FEC records.

The campaign for Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) took in at least $17,100 combined from Meta and (formerly Facebook) PAC and Sheryl Sandberg, former COO for Meta, between March 2020 and December 2023, per federal records.

Durbin’s campaign received at least $11,300 between June 2019 and December 2021 from the Facebook and Meta PAC, and Sandberg, according to Raw Story analysis of FEC data.

Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI) received at least $7,900 from Facebook PAC and Sandberg between March 2017 and September 2018, per FEC records.

In 2017 and 2018, Facebook PAC and Sandberg combined to donate at least $7,700 to Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), according to FEC records. Other Facebook lawyers donated to her campaign.

"Senator Klobuchar has long been the leading advocate for bipartisan competition and safety legislation that the tech companies have opposed. Any question of her integrity when it comes to tech can be refuted by the hundreds of millions of dollars they have spent on TV and in lobbying against her and her legislation,” said Ben Hill, a spokesperson for Klobuchar’s campaign, in a statement to Raw Story.

ALSO READ: Kevin McCarthy just got jacked

Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA) did not receive donations for his campaign from the PACs for the social media companies, but hundreds of individual employees from Snap, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook and ByteDance donated to his campaign, according to FEC records.

In particular, Isaac Bess, an executive at ByteDance, and Jerry Hunter, an executive at Snapchat, each donated $1,000 to him in January 2021. Michael Lynton, Snapchat chairman, donated nearly $2,000 in December 2020 to his campaign committee.

Other individuals who identified themselves in leadership positions such as directors, business leads and attorneys donated more than $35,000 combined to the Jon Ossoff for Senate committee.

“Sen. Ossoff does not accept contributions from corporations, corporate PACs or federal lobbyists,” said Jake Best, an Ossoff campaign spokesperson, who did not address Ossoff's campaign accepting money from individual social media executives.

ALSO READ: This Capitol Police officer has a new mission

The campaign for Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) received at least $4,500 from Facebook PAC in 2017 and 2018, per federal campaign records.

Sen. Alex Padilla (D-CA) did not receive PAC donations from the social media companies, but his campaign took in at least $1,250 in donations combined from registered lobbyists for Twitter (now known as X) and TikTok. Other attorneys and leaders in public policy or risk management from ByteDance (the parent company of TikTok), Twitter and Facebook donated at least $3,700 combined, according to FEC records.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) got $2,000 from Facebook PAC between 2018 and 2019, and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) received at least $1,500 from a Facebook lobbyist between October 2018 and October 2022, according to FEC records.

Sens. Peter Welch (D-VT) — when he was running for the House — Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and John Kennedy (R-LA) each got $1,000 for their campaigns from Facebook PAC or executives between 2018 and 2021, records show.

Meta did not respond to Raw Story’s request for comment.

We asked 15 U.S. senators: Blood on Big Tech’s hands or on your hands?

WASHINGTON — If the titans of Silicon Valley have blood on their hands — as Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg on Wednesday — then how much blood is on federal lawmakers’ hands for congressional inaction on measures to protect the nation’s children online?

Raw Story posed that question to 15 members of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee as they exited their high profile hearing with the heads of TikTok, Snapchat, Discord, X (formerly Twitter) and Meta where senators, like Graham, the committee’s top Republican, blamed the CEOs for the issue Congress has yet to address.

“Mr. Zuckerberg, you and the companies before us, I know you don’t mean it to be so, but you have blood on your hands,” Graham said as the room erupted with applause.

ALSO READ: Kevin McCarthy just got jacked

Graham's argument: Social media companies have failed to adequately combat online sex predators, bullies and harassers, as well as the proliferation of content that glorifies violence, exacerbates eating disorders and elevates unrealistic beauty standards."

Raw Story caught up with Graham in the hall outside the hearing, and offered his accusation back to him as a question.

“If there’s blood on their hands,” we inquired, “how much blood is on Congress’ hands for inaction?”

“It's fair to say that we need to do better. Yes, absolutely. I think you can say it eventually becomes our problem,” Graham told Raw Story.

Graham says the solution is easy: Pass the legislation he wrote with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) to set up a new regulatory commission overseeing Big Tech.

Matt Laslo · Blood on Big Tech’s hands – or blood on Congress’ hands – for not protecting kids online?

“It’s very simple: Let them be sued,” Graham said. “Pass the bills. Pass a regulatory commission.”

It’s not that easy though, or so it seems from the deafening sound – and empty feeling – of congressional inaction for years on end.

In 2021, Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen warned Congress “lives were in danger,” while also divulging thousands of pages of internal documents to back up her dire warnings.

Last year, Haugen’s testimony was supported by a second Meta whistleblower, Arturo Bejar, who testified that he warned Zuckerberg and other executives – “they knew and they were not acting on it” – about the pitfalls of the platform to teens and children to no avail.

Facebook has since changed its corporate name to Meta.

Congress, however, has taken no significant action.

‘For good or for evil’

In his opening remarks Wednesday, Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D-IL) touted five measures that have passed out of his committee aimed at protecting kids online.

They include slapping an up to $850,000 fine on tech companies that fail to report child sexual abuse content and giving the Department of Justice enhanced prosecutorial tools to go after those who spread child porn online.

But Durbin didn’t mention that the measures have languished, never coming before the entire Senate for a vote.

Blood on Congress’ hands?

“We've tackled this markup a year ago, so this hearing is a follow-up for that,” Durbin – the whip or number two most powerful Democrat in the Senate – told Raw Story.

“But it’s never seen the light of day on the floor?” Raw Story pressed.

“Not yet,” Durbin said.

So, when will it?

Crickets from Durbin.

There will be blood

Many senators on the Judiciary Committee disagreed with Graham’s characterization — at least when the charge of “blood on your hands” was leveled at Congress.

“I don’t necessarily think of it, or express it, in that way,” Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI) told Raw Story. “But we all have responsibility, and to the extent we can change the laws that will provide safety for our children, then that’s what we should do.”

It wasn’t just Democrats — who are in the majority and thus control votes on the Senate floor — who took umbrage with the characterization and question of Congress having blood on its hands.

“I don’t think that’s helpful,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) told Raw Story. “As you know, social media can be used for good or for evil, and that’s a huge challenge.”

ALSO READ: Uncivil war: How Speaker Mike Johnson’s dream of bipartisan decency died in his hands

One member of Graham’s party asked not to be named so he could candidly discuss his colleague.

“It’s very productive for getting attention, but I don't like it,” the senior Republican senator on the Judiciary Committee told Raw Story. “I certainly don't buy the idea that blood is on our hands for not prohibiting something, particularly something that does have legitimate uses.”

One member of the committee, known for his pithy one liners, seemed to lose the use of his tongue, if momentarily.

“I don’t have anything for you on that,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) told Raw Story before the senator answered a question from a television crew.

Defensiveness aside, many members of the Judiciary Committee admitted Congress’ culpability.

“We’ve got some responsibility,” Sen. Peter Welch (D-VT) told Raw Story.

Blood on Congress’ hands?

“That's a great question,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) told Raw Story. “We ought to do something … We need to vote.”

Hawley — who’s usually anti-regulation — has been one of the Senate’s most vocal advocates for policing Silicon Valley firms, especially when it comes to children who he’s proposed not be allowed on social media until they hit 16 years old.

Being pro-business, to Hawley, does not mean letting tech titans pave their own digital superhighways.

“Their view is, they’re for regulation, if they can write the regulation,” Hawley said. “I've just become — after working on this now for five years — I've become convinced that the best way to drive change is to allow people to get into a courtroom. That’s the key thing. It's what they hate. That's what they want the least. They would rather a new agency, than have the courtroom doors opened up to private citizens.”

Hawley’s been lonely for much of those five years, but these days — after two Meta whistleblowers in three years have captured Congress’ attention — other Republicans agree Congress is complicit in hurting children and has therefore stained its hands.

“I think through inaction, it’s a shared responsibility,” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) told Raw Story.

Time to un-friend?

While Big Tech has dropped tens of millions of dollars on lobbying efforts to defeat proposed regulations, Tillis is not alone in arguing that the companies need to change their tune before Congress is forced to change it for them.

“The industry needs to stop looking at safety as a competitive advantage and come up with a collaboration that they all use,” Tillis said. “I think the industry needs to realize you, you need to compete on features, you should all be looking for the same norm in terms of community safety.”

Blood on Congress’ hands? Some Republicans say they’re in the minority so don’t look at them.

“At the end of the day, Chuck Schumer controls what goes to the floor, and at least so far, he has not been willing to move this legislation. It should move,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) told Raw Story.

Schumer’s office didn’t reply to a request for comment on if — or when — measures aimed at protecting children’s privacy online may hit the Senate floor this year. But his rank-and-file believe this – just as last year was and the year before that – is the year.

“Leader Schumer has committed that he will work with us in bringing this bill and others to the floor,” Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) told Raw Story. “Hopefully as soon as possible but before the election.”

As for whether Congress is covered in the same blood in which Silicon Valley is now — according to Graham — covered?

“Congress has a responsibility to act, and it must act,” Blumenthal said. “I’m not talking about blood on people’s hands, I'm talking about a basic responsibility.”

PGA-Saudi LIV merger has Congress teed off. But one senator won't commit to quitting his golf money.

Republicans and Democrats alike have been blasting the planned mega-merger this week of the PGA Tour and Saudi Arabia-backed LIV Golf.

But one leading merger critic — Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) — wasn't so enthusiastic about discussing a recent campaign donation he received from the PGA's political action committee.

“I’m really focused on what can be done, what is appropriate to do about the merger, given the possibility, the goal of sports-washing by the PGA," Blumenthal said Thursday when asked by Raw Story whether he would return or otherwise dispose of the $1,000 the PGA Tour Inc. Political Action Committee contributed to his re-election campaign committee in October, according to Federal Election Commission records.

Blumenthal is one among several federal lawmakers to have received four- or five-figure contributions from the PGA's PAC in recent years, Federal Election Commission records indicate.

Others include Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who received $10,000 in 2021, and Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-SD), who got $10,000 in 2022. Schumer and Thune could not immediately be reached for comment.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (C-SPAN)

While fairly uncommon, federal lawmakers may legally dispose of unwanted or surplus campaign cash by returning it, donating it to charity or disgorging it to the U.S. Treasury's general fund.

Blumenthal, who defined "sports-washing" as “the use of investment in a sport to give credibility or to redeem the reputation of a country or interest that is in disrepute," said Saudi Arabia's sovereign wealth fund "seems to be buying control of an American sport.”

Given this, "I think there is a role and responsibility for Congress” to investigate the matter, Blumenthal told Raw Story.

Blumenthal easily won a third term in the U.S. Senate in November.

The Saudi kingdom has been widely panned for repressive policies and human rights abuses, with Amnesty International accusing the nation's government of a litany of wrongdoings.

American intelligence agencies concluded in a report that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman approved the 2018 assassination of Washington Post contributing columnist Jamal Khashoggi, a leading critic of Saudi Arabia's government.