Lindsey Graham

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Katherine Nikas, Caitlin Wilson, Lillian Meadows, and Walker Truluck from my staff, and Mike Jones, Melissa Kaplan-Pistiner, Josh Smith, and Tyler Evilsizer from Senator Merkley's staff be granted floor privileges during the consideration of S. Con. Res. 7.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, rule XXVI, paragraph 2, of the Standing Rules of the Senate requires each committee to adopt rules to govern the procedure of the committee and to publish those rules in the Congressional Record not later than March 1 of the first year of each Congress. Today, the Committee on the Budget adopted committee rules of procedure. Consistent with Standing Rule XXVI, I ask unanimous consent to have a copy of the rules of procedure of the Committee on the Budget printed in the Congressional Record.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, I want to show my support for what my colleague just said, Senator Risch, who made perfect sense. This is a consequential vote, and we all know how it is going to end, but let me tell you why it is consequential. A lot of people are watching what we are doing here today, and they are trying to get a signal to understand, like, where we are all coming from. Let me tell you where I am coming from. I am coming from the idea that, if you want to end the war between Israel and the Palestinians, we need to replace Hamas with somebody who doesn't want to kill all the Jews. Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, killing more Jews than at any time since the Holocaust. What were they up to in their pledge to destroy the Jewish State? They are religious Nazis. If you don't believe me, listen to what they have said. It was barbaric. They slaughtered entire families. They decapitated children. They raped women in front of their own families. And they filmed it to create hard hearts throughout the world and the region. The Nazis hid their crimes. Hamas filmed it so you could see it. Why? October 7, in large part--not completely--was designed to stop efforts to have Saudi Arabia and Israel recognize each other and virtually end the Arab-Israeli conflict. I have been to the region seven or eight times since October 7. I went with a group of five Republicans and five Democrats right after October 7 to deliver two messages. I went to Saudi Arabia, the biggest power in the Islamic world, and I went to Israel. To our friends in Israel, I said: We will give you--at least from my view--the ability to make sure there is no second Holocaust. And the weapons we have provided to Israel have resulted in the destruction of Hamas. There is no way forward for the Palestinians until you reform the P.A., which is run by a bunch of corrupt old guys, and make sure Hamas never comes back. The most radicalized population on the planet are the young people in Gaza. From the time they are born to the time they die, they are taught to hate and kill the Jews. Look at their education system. How do we change that? Somebody other than Israel has to come in and take over Gaza and reform the West Bank and give the Palestinians a better life. It will not be the United States. We can't do that. It certainly isn't going to be Israel. Well, who would it be? It would be the Arab world. The Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia has a vision for his country and the region that I buy into. We have had our problems in the past, for sure, but women can drive, which is a big thing, even though it doesn't sound like it. Women can go out to dinner without a male escort. It doesn't sound like a big thing, but it really is, and 38 percent of the people working in Saudi Arabia are young women. So he has a vision to change his country and to build on the Abraham Accords. President Trump and his team were able to get six Arab nations to recognize Israel--the United Arab Emirates and others--which was a huge deal, and we have a chance to build on it. So, for the last 2\1/2\ years, I have been going over to Saudi Arabia and Israel, working with the Biden administration, to try to build out the Abraham Accords. The big prize would be to have Saudi Arabia make peace with Israel, take over Gaza and the West Bank with other people in the region, and give the Palestinians a better life: rebuild Gaza; create an honest government to replace a corrupt government; give them sovereignty, self-government, the ability to live dignified lives; and to give Israel security. October 7 was designed by Hamas to stop what was imminent. I am here to tell you that, on October 6, by the way, there were discussions about how to roll out the normalization deal. Then, along comes October 7. Ever since that day, we have been dealing with this horrible situation--the rape and torture and destruction of 1,200 Jewish people, the response by Israel that has resulted in thousands of people being killed--a lot of terrorists but a lot of children, a lot of innocent people. There are a lot of photos being presented. I ask unanimous consent to display two photos, if I may.

Mr. GRAHAM. This is a photo of Hiroshima--two photos, actually. This is what happens when you drop a nuclear weapon on people. It is not good. Now, why did we do that? After Pearl Harbor, we and the civilized world went to war against the Nazis and Imperial Japan. Millions of people lost their lives, but it was the goal of the United States to defeat Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, and we were able to do that. Out of the ashes of that terrible, horrible war, we now have two democracies. Japan and Germany are good allies of the United States. They are productive members of the international community. It took a generation-plus to change the radicalization of the German population to the Nazis and the same in Imperial Japan. What will happen is, if we can find normalization between Saudi Arabia and Israel, there will be hope for the Palestinians like I have not seen before. Those who want a two-state solution, we have to sit down and talk about how you do that after October 7. But I do believe that without resolving the Palestinian issue where the Palestinian people have a hopeful life versus a glorious death, we will never move forward. I really do believe, after October 7, Israel needs security more than ever. What is the key? The Arabs. The Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, I think, hold the key to this. If we could create a political horizon over the arc of time for the Palestinians that you will have self-governance, that you will be independent, and convince the Israelis that this new entity will not threaten you, that there could never be another Oct 7, then we are well on our way to a new region. This resolution today, no matter how sincere, undercuts all of this. Israel has had to respond to an attack that was the most vicious since World War II against the Jewish people. I blame Hamas more than any other group for the loss of life in Gaza because they use their own people as human shields. This commitment of the United States to give Israel what they need to win a war they can't afford to lose has to be uncompromising, but what is not uncompromising is the day after. We are getting to the point now that, with the destruction of Hamas, we have to think about, how can we prevent them from coming back? Israel cannot occupy Gaza. The West Bank needs to be reformed, but it has to be done with the Arab world leading the charge. So what I would like to do with President Biden before he leaves office is work with President Trump, the incoming President, and President Biden, the outgoing President, to see if we can find a solution. Can we lock down a normalization agreement between Saudi Arabia and Israel that protects Saudi Arabia, a defense agreement with the United States so they will be in our column and they will have an anecdote to Iranian aggression? Can we, as a part of that, create a political horizon for the Palestinians to have hope where there is despair? Yes, we can. But now is not the time to send this signal. This signal will be seen by the enemies of Israel and the enemies of peace that if they just stick with it, they will win. If you want peace, you have to destroy those who hate peace. This is not a Bibi problem; this is a problem where the Islamic terrorists-- Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran--want to kill all of the Jews, not just Bibi. Now, why do they want to do that? They are religious Nazis. I don't know why Hitler wanted to kill all the Jews, but he did. So the Ayatollah has a couple of things in mind: the purification of Islam, which means that Sunni Islam will bend to his will--if you don't believe me, ask the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. The other goal is to destroy the Jewish State and to drive us out of the Mideast. The religious doctrine of the Shiites in charge compel them to kill all of the Jews. It is a commandment from God. Here is what I know: That is not what Islam teaches most Muslims, but they believe it. And when we ignored Hitler, we did so not only at our own peril but the peril of millions of people. What have I learned from Israel? When someone threatens to kill you because you are of a particular race or religion, you should take that seriously. So how do we end this conflict? We end this conflict with the complete decimation of Hamas, a plan for the day after that will replace Hamas in Gaza, reform the PA, try to get a cease-fire in Lebanon, and reduce the impact that Hezbollah has on the Lebanese people. All of the Shiite, Iranian-backed militia have as their goal disruption, upheaval, and tyranny. They want to control the region and remake it in their own image. Look at what they are doing in Syria. Look at what they are doing in Yemen. Look at what they are doing in Lebanon. We have a historic opportunity here to give Israel what they need to finish a war they can't afford to lose, come up with a day-after plan that would replace Hamas with a better life, try to get Lebanon in a better space, and build on the Abraham Accords. This effort by my colleagues undercuts all of that. You have every right to say anything you want to say in this body, but I have been there a lot, and none of you have gone with me. Making peace is hard. We have not done this together. I have been with Senator Van Hollen to Israel. I have been with Senator Van Hollen before in the region. I think he wants to help the Palestinians, and I don't think he is anti-Semitic. I just think there is an opportunity here. It is not about Bibi, folks; it is about a strain of Islam that will kill every Jew, including Bibi, and come after us unless they are defeated. So my goal is not only to reject this idea but to work with President Biden and President Trump and their teams before the next President takes office, to have a day-after plan that will allow Israel to withdraw, and there will be no more October 7ths, and allow Gaza and the West Bank to be rebuilt with dignity and hope. That is my goal. This resolution undercuts my goal. I would urge you to vote no. I will be going back next week to Saudi Arabia, and I am going to keep working with the Biden administration and the incoming Trump administration to the last hour, to the last minute of the last day to find a solution. I would end with this: If we fail to find a day-after plan that allows Israel to withdraw and be secure, and fail to deliver a political horizon for the Palestinians, God help us all. This will repeat itself. Iran will come back. Hezbollah and Hamas will reemerge. We have a moment in time to change the region and change the world. I would ask all of us to see that moment in this resolution, this counter to what I am trying to achieve. So I would urge a ``no'' vote because peace and a dignified life for the Palestinians rests with a viable day-after plan. What is the proper response to people who want to kill you and your family and destroy your way of life? I can tell you what the United States did. We went to war. We dropped two atomic bombs to end a war we couldn't afford to lose. What is the right response to those who want to kill all the Jews? Make sure they don't have the capability to do it. I yield the floor.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I wish to pay tribute and say a special thank you to a truly exceptional U.S. Army officer. MAJ Thomas E. Dickson has served admirably as a congressional budget liaison for the Assistant Secretary of the Army, Financial Management and Comptroller, for the past 2 years. I have come to know Tom personally over this time as he has escorted me on countless congressional delegations across the globe, to include numerous trips to Ukraine and Israel, doing so with a level of skill and professionalism that has left a lasting impression on me and my staff. Major Dickson graduated from the U.S. Military Academy in 2013 and commissioned as a military police officer. Major Dickson's first assignment was as a platoon leader with the 230th Military Police Company in Sembach, Germany. While stationed in Germany, Major Dickson attended the United Nations Military Police Course in Aalborg, Denmark, where he trained alongside students from 17 different nations including Ukraine, Montenegro, and Rwanda. After serving as the executive officer for the 92nd Military Police Company, Major Dickson was selected to attend the Marine Corps Expeditionary Warfare School in Quantico, VA. During his time in Quantico, Major Dickson published an article for the U.S. Naval Institute and earned honors as a distinguished graduate. Next, Major Dickson served in 2-2 Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT) out of Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA. While in 2-2 SBCT, Major Dickson graduated the Army's Ranger School in 61 days and served as the brigade provost marshal prior to commanding its headquarters and headquarters company. After command, Major Dickson deployed and attached to 6th Battalion, 4th Security Forces Assistance Brigade in Kabul, Afghanistan, in support of Operation Freedom's Sentinel. While in Afghanistan, he planned and executed over 50 adviser missions integrated with multinational partners. As a Congressional Budget Liaison, Major Dickson has been the Army's conduit to several congressional offices, including my own, and he has built a reputation of trust, respect, and competency. Just mere days after the attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, Major Dickson helped quickly stand up and lead a historic bipartisan U.S. Senate congressional delegation of five Republicans and five Democrats to Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. His efforts have been nothing short of incredible. Major Dickson's extraordinary career is a testament to his hard work and unyielding desire to make himself, his organizations, and his fellow soldiers the best they can be. Our Nation has been enriched by his leadership, thoughtful judgement, and exemplary work. On behalf of the State of South Carolina, the U.S. Senate, and a grateful nation, I join my colleagues today in recognizing and commending Major Dickson on his service to our Nation. We wish Tom all the best as he continues his journey in the Army.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Michelin North America on its 50th anniversary of operating in South Carolina and 35 years of being headquartered in Greenville, SC. Michelin produced its first tire in South Carolina in 1975 and now employs 10,000 people across 15 facilities throughout the State. As a global leader in producing tires, Michelin has significantly contributed to the community and the region, generating an economic impact of $266 billion. Michelin has provided steady employment for many of the most talented workers in our State, providing thousands of jobs and, in many cases, lifelong careers. Again, congratulations to Michelin and its employees on celebrating 50 years in the great State of South Carolina.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, reserving the right to object, let's be clear--this is not about improving the Court; this is about undermining the Court. We have three branches of government here. We have the legislative, executive, and judicial branch. This would be an unconstitutional overreach. This would undermine the Court's ability to operate effectively. And it has been a continued effort by our friends on the Democratic side to undermine a Court they don't like. Here is what the Supreme Court has done: In April of 2023, all nine Justices signed a statement on ethics, principles, and practices specifying the ethics, principles, and practices they follow. In March of 2023, the Committee on Financial Disclosures formally amended the personal hospitality regulations in a manner that now requires more complete disclosure. In November of 2023, all nine Justices promulgated a code of conduct. The Court is taking these problems seriously. The question is, What are we up to here? We are trying not to empower the Court or reform the Court; we are trying to attack it right at the end of the term. I remember very well when the majority leader, Senator Schumer, went to the Court and said, right in front of the Court itself: I want to tell you, Gorsuch; I want to tell you, Kavanaugh: You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won't know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions. This is really about the way the Court decides cases that our colleagues on the other side really don't like. So all I would say is that there are provisions in this bill that should bother anybody that cares about an independent judiciary. Judicial investigative panels in section 2 of this bill are made up of lower court judges who would actually preside over their bosses. There is one Supreme Court here. It is unnerving to have a group of lower court judges basically handing an investigative panel the ability to investigate the Supreme Court--the constitutionally designated Supreme Court. Recusal--that has been up to the individual Justices since the Court's founding. This bill would create a panel of judges to decide when a Supreme Court Justice should be recused. Again, that just puts the Court in, I think, disarray and fundamentally assaults the one Supreme Court we have. All I can say is that section 7, where you have to have disclosures of amicus briefs, would make it very hard for certain people to register their opinions about a particular matter before the Court because they could get destroyed by the media, they could get destroyed by special interest groups, and I think that chills out the ability of people to petition the Court apart from politics. So my hope is that not only will we stop this exercise now, we will stop it forever. With that said, I withhold my objection at this time.

Mr. GRAHAM. I object.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I will be making a unanimous consent request here in a second, and Senator Britt will be joining me in that endeavor. We are going to have a vote at 2 o'clock about a bipartisan bill. I applaud the effort to change our immigration laws and get control of an out-of-control situation. Unfortunately, it doesn't matter what law is on the books, if the administration is not going to enforce the ones that already exist. We had a vote in February on this bill. One of the problems I had the entire time is that parole is being abused by this administration. Since February until now, April, 77,800 people have been paroled in the United States, and I believe that is an abuse of the statute that is on the books. There were 1.3 million in fiscal year 2023. Over 1.2 million were paroled by the CBP alone. Now let's talk about the parole statute, if we have that. If we don't, well, let me tell you what the law says. It basically says you can be paroled for two reasons: a unique humanitarian need or a special benefit to the country. The statute that they are using to parole all of these people has limitations as to how it can be used. On average, the statute in question during the Obama- Trump years was used--about 6,000 people, on average, were paroled in the United States using the statute that the Biden administration has been abusing. In fiscal year 2019, it was 7,525; in fiscal year 2018, 6,466; in fiscal year 2015, during the Obama years, 4,598; in fiscal year 2019, again, 7,500. In fiscal year 2022, the Biden administration paroled 795,561 and, in fiscal year 2023, 1.2 million plus. Why are they doing parole differently than Obama and Trump? They are abusing the statute. Why are they just waiving so many people into the country? That is for the voters to decide. I think they are just basically abusing the statute because they don't want to turn anybody around and send them back. So they just let people come into the country in violation of the law. Again, the parole statute in question is limited to two circumstances: a unique benefit to the country or a special benefit to the country. A unique humanitarian situation is that your mother is dying. A special need to the country is you are a witness in a trial, and we need to get you in for a limited situation. Parole is not permanent status. As for Laken Riley--and we will ask unanimous consent to vote on the bill authored by Senator Britt--the man accused of murdering her and who was indicted in Georgia, Mr. Ibarra, in September 2022, was apprehended by the Border Patrol. He was released through parole. And it took me forever to find this out, the reason for parole: The subject was paroled due to detention capacity at the central processing center in El Paso, TX. The reason for parole: The subject was paroled due to detention capacity at the central processing center in El Paso, TX. They had no room for the guy, and he is now being charged with murdering this young woman in Georgia. He was arrested in 2024. Senator Britt will tell us what her bill does here in a moment. She is trying to find a way to make sure this never happens again. The two crimes he was charged with should result in an immediate expulsion from the country. That is what her bill does. But I want the country to know that the man accused of killing this young lady in Georgia was released into our country by the DHS--illegally, in my view. They violated the statute. They gave him parole for a reason that doesn't exist in the statute. And you wonder why we don't want to pass another bill. The reason we don't want to pass another bill is we don't trust you, the Biden administration. Why create a new law that isn't going to be any more effective than the current law? From the time we had this debate until the end of April, did things get better? No. There have been 77,800 people paroled from the original debate until now. So, clearly, they haven't changed their idea or policies regarding the abuse of parole. The average for Obama-Trump was around 6,000 for the entire year using the parole statute in question. This is 77,800 since February. So why are we skeptical? Because of the way they do business in the Biden administration. Secretary Mayorkas has all the power he needs to stop this. You will never convince me that 77,800 people were individually screened. They have a program to waive people through based on country, not individual status. They promised me that an individual analysis was done on each parolee. I asked him that, and he said yes. Well, we found one parolee accused of murdering a young lady in Georgia who was not individually analyzed and released based on the criteria of the statute. He was released because they had no place to put him. So what we want to do today is try to find a way to deal with the situation that led to the murder of this young lady. The law has a loophole in it, I guess, for lack of a better word. I am going to recognize Senator Britt now to tell us what her bill does, because what do we know about the Georgia case? We know the man charged with the murder of Ms. Riley was released into the United States under parole, not based on statutory requirements but just because we were full. If I were the Riley family, I would be pretty upset. They might want to think about suing. Right now, I would like to yield to Senator Britt from Alabama, who has tried to find a solution to this problem.

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I will be making the unanimous consent request in just a minute, as I am just about to wrap up. I sent a letter yesterday to Secretary Mayorkas, wanting to know about the two people who tried to get into the Marine base, Quantico. Apparently, both of them were illegal, claiming to be Amazon contractors but were not. There is a lot of mystery around this, and I want a response to my letter. Who are these people? What do we know about them? Have they any affiliation with terrorist groups? What were they up to? I think we need to know as a nation what went on, because I find it very odd that two fighting-age illegal immigrants joined together to try to falsely get into a Marine base. That sends shivers up my spine. So I ask unanimous consent that this letter be printed in the Record, if I may.

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, as in legislative session, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from further consideration of S. 3933 and that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, to my colleague from Illinois, Senator Durbin, we do a lot of things together. I enjoy working with you. But, here, we have a fundamental disagreement. No. 1, you are entitled to your opinion but not your facts. There were 77,800 people paroled in the U.S. since February who came from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. That doesn't count the people from Ukraine. They all showed up at the border. They were paroled in. There is no way that two statutory requirements were applied to 77,800 people. Why did they just wave them through? All I can tell you is that parole has been abused. The average was 6,000 per year for Trump and Biden during their Presidency. From April to now, it is 77,800--nothing to do with Ukraine. As to the people from Ukraine, I want to help them, but we have a refugee law where you can apply for refugee status if you are in a war zone or things are bad where you live. They are taking the parole statute and just granting to anybody and everybody they choose to grant. The bottom line is we are either a rule-of-law nation or we are not. This has nothing to do with ICE funding. We were not talking about funding ICE here. This is a decision by the executive branch to abuse the law on the books. The tools available apparently are not being used by anybody. Why does Senator Britt offer legislation? Because we have a real- world example where the system failed. Let's make it stronger. Why did this bill pass overwhelmingly in the House? Because it makes sense. If you learned nothing from the Laken Riley case, learn the following: She is a victim. Her family is a victim of a broken immigration system. Her family is a victim of willful disregard of the law by the Biden administration. The man accused of murdering this young lady was allowed to come into the country on parole based on ``we have no place to put you,'' not the statutory requirements to get paroled. This is a big issue. We should learn from the death of this young lady. We should change our parole system. We are not. That is why we are not going to add a new law that won't be enforced. Until you prove to me you are serious about following the law as written, you are going to have a problem with us on this side of the aisle and, hopefully, a few Democrats. We should learn from the Laken Riley case and do what Senator Britt encourages us to do, which is to change the law, to address the situation so we have no other Laken Riley cases. Apparently, the death of this young lady has taught us nothing as a body. We have learned nothing from this case. We are doing nothing different, and it breaks my heart. It looks like the murder of this young lady should be a wake-up call to a parole system broken and to fix this never-ending catch-and- release--you are caught for crimes, and you are released before the Sun goes down to commit more crimes. It needs to come to an end. We will have a chance, as a democratic people, to vote in November. If you think the system is working the way it is intended to work, and you are OK with what is going on, vote for Biden. You are going to get more of the same. If you think this is broken, it needs to change, you ought to think about voting for somebody else. I yield the floor.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, to kind of continue on the theme of my good friend from North Carolina, apparently today or yesterday, the countries of Ireland, Spain, and Norway recognized a Palestinian State. Here is my question: Who is in charge of the state? Who is running the place? What are its boundaries? Did you recognize Hamas being in charge of Gaza? Do you want to keep the PA as we know it now in the West Bank, as old and corrupt? What did you recognize? These are allies, but they need to hear from a friend that what you did is reprehensible. You are rewarding terrorists. On October 7, Hamas attacked the State of Israel and murdered 1,200 innocent people, put babies in ovens, raped women, set people on fire, and recorded it all. And your response is to create a Palestinian State? You are rewarding terrorists. The way a Palestinian State will be created, if ever, is through direct negotiations between the State of Israel and Palestinians, not a unilateral recognition of a Palestinian State after the largest terrorist attack against the Jewish people since the Holocaust. To my friends in Ireland, Spain, and Norway, what you did was reward Hamas. Here is the message you are sending: Kill Jews, and you will get a reward. Again, tell me about the state you just recognized. Who is in charge, and what are the boundaries? You can't answer those questions, but you went ahead and recognized the Palestinian State for political reasons. The world has turned upside down. Madam President, you have been a stalwart defender of Israel, and we appreciate it. Here is what I would say: After October 7, Hamas is engaged in using the Palestinian people as human shields at a level I haven't seen in warfare. The response is to punish Israel, who is in a no-win situation. The battalions have to be destroyed. The tunnels are underground. Why do you need a 2,000-pound bomb? Because there are underground tunnels that only a major bomb will be able to destroy. When it comes to civilian infrastructure, the destruction of it has been in large part because Hamas has used schools, mosques, and hospitals as military sites, putting all that infrastructure in jeopardy by militarizing it. On top of all of that, the International Criminal Court has decided to issue an arrest warrant for the Prime Minister of Israel and the Defense Minister of Israel as well as Hamas leaders. Boy, has the world turned upside down. To consider Israel like Russia--Putin had an arrest warrant issued because there is no rule of law in Russia. People fall out of windows who are opposition leaders. People get poisoned. There is no rule of law in Russia. There is a robust legal system in Israel. It is probably the pride of the world. The most independent judiciary maybe on the planet lives and resides in Israel. So Israel is not Russia, and the Prime Minister and the Defense Minister of Israel are not Hamas, but in the ICC world, they are all the same. That is despicable. Here is what has happened: Apparently, a lot of legal experts, some well-known, famous people, advised the ICC that Israel needed to be charged--the State of Israel, the Prime Minister and the Defense Minister. They are legal experts under international law. I would not pay these people 5 cents given my undersigning of their own statute. I, along with seven members--four Republicans and four Democrats-- engaged the ICC weeks ago, arguing that for you to bring a charge against the State of Israel, you would have to believe that the judiciary in Israel is not independent and that Israel is not acting in good faith--they are acting in bad faith--when it comes to allegations against Israeli forces and policies of Israel. It is called complementarity. Israel is not a member of the ICC, nor are we. In 2015, the ICC recognized the Palestinians as a state for ICC purposes even though they are not recognized by the U.N. Why they did that, I don't know. But they took over jurisdiction of this conflict, and where do we lie now? On May 20, a couple of days ago, a representative of the ICC was supposed to land in Israel to set up a meeting between legal officials, government officials of the State of Israel and the prosecutor, Khan, next week. The group that I was involved in urged the ICC to sit down and talk with Israel--called complementarity. Under their own statute, the ICC cannot act unless the nation in question is unable or unwilling to proceed with an investigation or if the investigation is conducted in bad faith. There is no way you can find Israel is not acting in good faith when they were willing to meet you 2 days ago. So here is what happened: We were misled and lied to by the ICC. This group thinks they have jurisdiction of the entire world; they are going to roam the globe and right wrongs. They were created to deal with voids where there is no rule of law or rogue states like Russia, where the rule of law has been destroyed, not come and second-guess robust democracies like Israel and the United States. They threatened to come after our soldiers in Afghanistan years ago, and Senator Ernst, who was a member of the U.S. Army serving abroad. We objected to high heaven. We have a very robust military legal system. We have a very independent judiciary. Israel has the most independent judiciary on the planet. So they canceled the meeting. Israel called and said: When will you get here? The man in question for the ICC said: I have been told I can't come. And Israel heard about the arrest warrant on CNN. They had prerecorded this interview--Mr. Khan had--with a CNN reporter before the meeting. Senator Cardin has been awesome on this. We are trying to get Israel to engage with the ICC, listen to their complaints, and see if we can move forward. They acted in bad faith. A meeting was set up, the man did not attend, and before Israel knew anything, they heard it on CNN. So I am hoping that we can come together--and I want to applaud President Biden, Secretary of State Blinken, and Jake Sullivan for issuing strong statements condemning the actions of the ICC against the State of Israel. Now it is time to impose sanctions not only to help our ally but also to help ourselves. I want everybody to know that if you deal with the ICC in this sham trial against Israel, you will never come to this country. Your visa will be revoked, and if you have assets here, they will be lost. You have to pick what I think is an abuse of the rule of law over doing business with America. If we don't do that as a body, we are next. I have tried for months to find a way forward with my colleagues, who have been terrific, trying to find a way for Saudi and Israel to recognize each other, come up with a better deal for the Palestinians, to end this conflict in a permanent way. In the middle of this sensitive moment, the ICC, in a very deceptive way, brings charges against the Prime Minister of Israel and the Defense Minister, who are in a fight for their lives. They are surrounded by Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran. Where was the ICC when the Iranians drug a young girl off the bus and beat her to death? Where are they in North Korea? They pick Israel--a nation with one of the most robust, independent legal systems on the planet. They lied to eight U.S. Senators. They cannot get away with this. If you let them get away with this, then you are going to regret it. So I look forward to working with Republicans and Democrats and the administration to send a clear signal: We are not going to sit on the sidelines while the rule of law is politicized, turned upside down, to the detriment of our allies and our own Nation. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, thank you very much. I would like to be recognized. Can you let me know when it is 40 minutes? Thank you.

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, so our colleagues are talking today about how they are going to vote, why they are going to vote. I think the support of history will judge what we do here today. Let me say one thing up front: There is no border security in this package. I regret that. I wish there were. There should be. On the bill from the Senate, I voted no regarding the border security provisions. I thought it was sort of inadequate tabs on parole and on a few other things. My hope was it would get over to the House, and we could negotiate a stronger border security package. That did not happen, and I regret that. So to everybody who comes on this floor and says our border is broken, we should do something about it. You are absolutely right. And, unfortunately, we didn't get there. President Trump opposed the Senate bill. We couldn't find a better way forward that would get 60 votes. I hate that, but now we have to deal with what is left for us to take care of in the world. So the fact that we did not get provisions for our border, in my view, doesn't mean we can't deal with the other problems the world faces. We actually have to because, if we don't get Ukraine right and we don't get Taiwan right and we don't get Israel right, then our broken border is going to be a bigger problem. So the first thing I want to say is: To those who want border security, you are right. Don't give up. But this is not just about border security. This is a statement from the Minister of Defense in Israel: The supplemental package submitted to the U.S. Senate today is critical and urgent in supporting Israel's capabilities to face threats posed by Iran and its proxies. We thank our friends in Congress, and urge our partners to stand with Israel in the face of Iranian terrorism. Now what is he talking about? This was issued earlier today. This is the Minister of Defense in Israel. I know him very well. He is a very accomplished man, and he is urging us to vote for this package because Israel needs it because they have been threatened by Iran. Now, since we took up this debate in the Senate, a lot has happened. The Iranians attacked Israel from Iran. Over 300 drones and missiles were launched at Israel from Iran and successfully engaged. Nobody lost their life, but it wasn't because the Iranians weren't trying. We are voting today on a package to help our friends in Israel replenish Iron Dome. This is Passover. It is so ironic, right? We are having this debate on Passover. Here is my Passover gift to the Israeli people: More weapons--replenish the Iron Dome so that you can defend yourself and have another Passover, so that this won't be the last one. If you left it up to Iran, it would be. So to those who are wondering what we should do: We failed on the border; you are right about that. We should vote yes to help our friends in Israel. I can't think of a time since I have been here that they need more help than right now. They don't need any speeches. They don't need us to attend events. They need us to send them military aid that they are desperate to have. They have diminished their Iron Dome stockpile. They need it replenished. They are dealing with Hamas on one front, Hezbollah on the other, and now they have been attacked by the Iranian Ayatollah from Iranian soil. So the Defense Minister of Israel is asking us for a ``yes'' vote because it is urgent to help our friends in Israel. So if you are pro- Israel--which most people in this body are--they need you, and they need you now. The 20-something billion dollars of aid in this package is absolutely imperative to help the Jewish State survive against Iran and its proxies, as the Defense Minister said. So from an Israeli point of view, this is the most critical time maybe since its founding because the efforts to destroy the Jewish State are real. Here is what I worry about. If we don't help Israel now, we will be encouraging more attacks by the Iranians, and this war will get really out of hand. It is already out of hand. There are about 100,000-plus rockets in the hands of Hezbollah in Lebanon. If they were all unleashed at the same time, that would be a nightmare for Israel. They have about 300 drones and missiles, but that is a fraction of what is available. I want to deter Iran from going to the next step. Now, how do you do that? Let Iran know that we have Israel's back, that we are going to help them with their military needs in perpetuity so they can defend themselves, that we are not going to abandon Israel at this critical time. What does Israel have to do? Not only do they have to knock down the rockets that have come their way--they need weapons to do that--they have to create deterrence. The best way for Israel to deter the enemies of the Jewish State is to let the world and the enemies know that America has Israel's back. Now, I want to say something about Speaker Johnson and Democratic Leader Jeffries: Well done. Speaker Johnson and Hakim Jeffries worked together to pass a package we have before us. We need more of this, not less, in a time of great peril for our allies and the United States. So this was a moment where the people in the House rose to the occasion. They set aside their party differences. They focused on giving us a package that I think is stronger but needed now more than ever. Since we last had this debate in the Senate, what has happened? A direct attack on the State of Israel by Iran. They need the money, and they need it now. Vote yes. A great Passover gift to the Israeli people would be this aid package. Now, I want to put this debate in a greater context. I have had a lot of my friends come to the floor talking about whether or not Ukraine is in our vital national interest. I think it is. Here is what is happening in Europe as I speak: You have Russia who has launched an effort to destroy Ukraine--not just the Crimea, but to take Kyiv and turn it into a part of Russia. Ukraine, a sovereign nation that gave up 1,700 nuclear weapons they had in their possession after the end of the Cold War in the Budapest Memorandum in the mid-nineties. Ukrainians gave up 1,700 nuclear weapons with the assurance their sovereignty would be protected. The map used had Crimea as part of Ukraine. So what do we have then? We have a situation where, for the second time, Russia has invaded Ukraine. They did it in 2014. We had some kind of a peace agreement. It didn't hold. Why? Because Putin wants all of Ukraine. I will talk about that in a moment. He wants more than just Ukraine. He wants to reconstruct the Russian empire, the old Soviet Union. Listen to him, not me. I will talk about that in a moment. Go back in time to the thirties. If you could go back in time and you could talk to the leaders in the thirties, knowing what you know now, what would you tell them? ``You should stop Hitler as soon as you can.'' You have got opportunity after opportunity to hold him to account before he got too strong. You had plenty of chances to lay down the gauntlet. But every time there was a chance to stop him, people blinked. People believed that he wanted German-speaking territory and that was all. They did not believe he wanted to kill all the Jews. That was a big mistake, because he did. He wanted a master race. He wrote a book. The biggest miscalculation of the 20th century was not to understand what Adolf Hitler actually wanted. He didn't want German-language countries. He wanted everybody to speak German. He wanted a master race where there is no place for the Jewish people and others. And 50 million people died because we got it wrong. In 1941, in this body, Senator Nye--I don't know him: Getting into this return engagement of war to Europe is only as inevitable as we the people of America will permit it to be. Staying out of this war is inevitable if only the people will continue and multiply their forceful demands upon the Government at Washington to keep its promise to the people to keep our country out of this mess, which seems destined to wreck every civilization that lends its hand to it. He is on the floor of the Senate in June of 1941, telling his colleagues: This war in Europe, stay out of it. Well, how well did that age? Because in December of 1941, we were attacked by the Japanese. Here is a rule that has stood the test of time: When forces rear their ugly heads anywhere in the world wanting to dominate other people, destroy their religion, put them under the yoke of tyranny, it will eventually come back to us. When the Taliban blew up statues of Buddha, even though I am not a Buddhist, it came back to me. Evil unchecked and appeased, we always pay a heavier price than if we confront it. Charles Lindbergh--an American hero in many ways, a very brave guy-- this is what he said on April 24, 1941: When history is written, the responsibility for the downfall of the democracies of Europe will rest squarely upon the shoulders of interventionists who led their nations into war uninformed and unprepared. When history is written, the responsibility for the downfall of the democracies of Europe will rest squarely upon the shoulders of the interventionists who led their nations into war uninformed and unprepared. How well did this age? The democracies in Europe failed because we allowed Hitler to get strong. Every time he would go into the Sudetenland, you named the early intervention. We wrote it off. We appeased him. No, Mr. Lindbergh, you were wrong. The reason democracies in Europe were at risk and failed is because we did not stand up to Adolf Hitler while it really mattered. The reason that 50 million people died is because you didn't get it. Father Coughlin--the demagoguery from this guy is being used today: demonizing people, trying to convince the American people ``those people over there don't matter to you.'' Let me tell you what matters to the American people. When forces like Putin rear their ugly head to take Ukraine, they are not going to stop; they are going to keep going. And we have NATO commitments to countries around Ukraine. Vote yes for this package to help the Ukrainians continue to fight the Russians before Americans are fighting the Russians. And how does America get into this conflict? If a NATO nation is attacked. This is my favorite: September 11, 1941. Now, when I say ``September the 11th,'' most Americans kind of listen, because that day does live in infamy. So Charles Lindbergh made a speech on September 11, 1941, in Des Moines, IA. And here is what he said: When this war started in Europe, it was clear that the American people were solidly opposed to entering it. Why shouldn't we be? We had the best defensive position in the world; we had a tradition of independence from Europe; and the one time we did take part in a European war left European problems unsolved, and debts to America unpaid. It is obvious and perfectly understandable that Great Britain wants the United States in the war on her side. England is now in a desperate position. Her population is not large enough and her armies are not strong enough to invade the continent of Europe and win the war she declared against Germany. If England can draw this country into the war, she can shift to our shoulders a large portion of the responsibility for waging it and paying its cost. He is arguing that the Lend-Lease Program that President Roosevelt came up with to help the island nation withstand invasion by the Germans was a foolish endeavor, that this small group of people in England cannot possibly win and we are betting on a loser. The loser is Lindbergh. The winner is Churchill and the British people. This attitude exists today. People in this body, right before I spoke, talk about ``we can't help Ukraine because we have too many problems in other places. They can't win.'' They were supposed to fall in 4 days. Look what has happened: 200-something days later, they have destroyed half of the Russian army, taken back half the territory Russia seized, and now they need our weapons in a desperate fashion. They are trying to defend their homeland, and they are asking from us not troops, but weapons that can matter. And I will say to everybody in this body: You sell the Ukrainians short at your own peril. You are in the camp of Lindbergh trying to convince the American people: Pull the plug on England. They are in a fight they can't possibly win. What Lindbergh and others didn't realize was that their fight was our fight. Let me tell you why Ukraine's fight matters to us. If we don't stop Putin now, he will keep going. And let's talk about what he says. Just as people in the thirties--Lindbergh and Father Coughlin and Chamberlain, let's bring them back to light here: How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas-masks here because of a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know nothing. This is when Hitler annexed the Sudetenland in violation of all the agreements they signed in World War I. He was telling the British people: This is sort of a German thing. I know he is violating the agreements we had to end World War I; but, you know, it really doesn't matter. Boy, were you wrong. He didn't want the Sudetenland. He wanted the world. He wanted a master race. And guess what? Mr. Chamberlain's analysis of Hitler is not aging too well in history. To the people of this body who are going to vote today: You are miscalculating Putin if you think it is just about some dispute with Ukraine or he is threatened by NATO. No. Yes, I am sure he is threatened by NATO, but he has an ambition here. Putin in 2016: The borders of Russia never end. Putin in 2022: [When Peter the Great] was at war with Sweden taking something away from it. . . . He was not taking away anything, he was returning. When he founded the new capital, none of the European countries recognized this territory as part of Russia; everyone recognized it as part of Sweden. He is telling you, in Russian history, because you claim it, he wants it, the Russians are going to take it. This is Medvedev: One of Ukraine's former leaders once said Ukraine is not Russia. That concept needs to disappear forever. Ukraine is definitely Russia. This is the former President of Russia. He is telling you--and you are not listening--that they want more than Ukraine. Ukraine is part of Russia. The Ukrainians don't believe that. They are fighting like tigers. I don't believe that. If you give him Ukraine, he will want Moldova and then the Baltic nations. He will make claims to them because they used to be part of the Russian Empire. Hitler wrote a book, and nobody believed him. Putin and Medvedev, to their credit, are telling you exactly what their ambitions are, and you are not getting it. You are making the same miscalculations that they made in the thirties. You are making the same arguments: They can't win. It is not our problem. Stay out of it. Don't help people fighting for their freedom. That gets you more war, not less. Fifty million people died in World War II because they got it wrong in the thirties when they could have gotten it right. We haven't lost one American soldier, but if you don't help Ukraine now, that will change unless you want to completely abandon NATO. I am saying it as loudly as I can say it--that if we don't help Ukraine now, this war will spread, and Americans who are not involved will be involved. You think this war costs a lot now? Wait until you are in a war with Russia and NATO, and see what that costs. I am not telling you things that I made up. I am quoting people who are in charge of Russia. Nobody believed Hitler. You should have. You should believe these people. They have a mission. Isolationism leads to more war, not less. Isolationism takes off the table confronting evil at a time it is the weakest. Isolationists, in the name of peace, create more war than they ever avoid because the bad guy won't stop. Here is what you have got to understand: The Ayatollah, what does he want? He tells us he wants to destroy the Jewish State. I believe it. He tells us he wants to purify Islam in his own image--the image of Shiism. I believe it. He tells us that we are the Great Satan, and he is coming after us. I believe him. So the Ayatollah has an agenda that Israel can't accommodate. You cannot accommodate somebody who wants to kill you. Hamas doesn't want to advocate for the Palestinian people a better life; they want to kill all the Jews. The agenda of Hamas is not to make the Palestinian people more prosperous; it is to destroy the Jewish State--``from the river to the sea.'' These people are religious Nazis. What do you expect Israel to do? October 7 was an attack not to restore the dignity of the Palestinian people but literally to rape and murder and kill the Jews. Isolationism allows that to go unchecked. ``America First'' says: Let's help Israel. Let's help Ukraine. Let's turn it into a loan rather than a grant. Let's get Europe to do more and pay more. That is a big difference to me. To the people in this body, if you don't help Israel now, you are sending the worst possible signal to the Ayatollah. If you believe as I do, that he wishes to destroy the Jewish State, how can you vote no? I know our border is broken, but voting no to Israel doesn't make our border more secure. It makes us less safe. If you believe Hamas wants to destroy every Jewish person they can get their hands on and destroy the Jewish State, how can you vote no? If you believe, as I do, that Putin won't stop in Ukraine, how do you vote no? You have to believe that Putin won't go any further when he says he will. To vote no to Israel, you are taking off the table money they desperately need because they are under attack from forces they haven't been under attack from before. Hamas and Hezbollah have attacked Israel, and they are proxies of Iran, but the Iranians launched an attack toward the Jewish State from Iran. Don't vote no. Israel needs you now. Nothing we can do will fix the border, but we can help Israel, and we can help Ukraine. Helping Ukraine means we are less likely to get in a war with the Russians. Helping Israel means we are helping an ally, and the same people who want to kill Israel want to kill you too. So there is 20-something billion dollars to help Israel replenish the Iron Dome. There is $60 billion--some of it is in the form of a loan--to help replenish our stockpile. Most of this money is for us, but some of it goes to Ukraine to stay in the fight; they need an air defense capability. So to the isolationists--and I know you don't want to be called an isolationist, but you are. When you don't support your allies from threats because you don't want to get involved and you think it doesn't matter, I think you really are an isolationist. You would have to believe that Putin does not mean what he says. I believe him when he wants to take over the old Russian Empire and reconstruct the Soviet Union. I believe it. I want to stand up to it. I believe the Ayatollah wants to kill all the Jews. I want to help the Jewish people. This is Passover for God's sake--we are taking this vote on Passover--and not one of the people we are talking about here of the countries wants one American soldier. Have we learned nothing? We withdrew from Iraq in 2011. Senator McCain, Senator Lieberman, and myself--we all spoke up. Well, those two are gone, and I miss them desperately at times like this, but we told the Obama administration: If you pull all the troops out of Iraq, you are going to regret it and that ISIS was not the JV team. They came back in full force, and they established a caliphate. Al-Qaida and ISIS didn't even exist. This idea of leaving radical Islam unchecked and thinking it won't hurt you is insane. These people are not going to stop fighting us or our allies. You may be tired of fighting them. They are not tired of fighting you. I would rather fight them over there before they get here. Every one of these terrorists whom Israel kills is one less terrorist who will attack us. Containing Putin and Ukraine means it is less likely for us to get in a war. Here is what I said: I feel all we have worked for and fought for and sacrificed for is very much in jeopardy by today's announcements. I hope I am wrong and the President is right, but I fear the decision has set in motion events that will come back to haunt our country. Well, I was right, and I didn't want to be. Al-Qaida came back, and Iraq fell apart. We had to go back in. The Yazidi people were pretty much wiped out. Thousands of people were slaughtered. ISIS, you know, attacked the French, and they killed people all over the world because we let them come back. So here is what I would say to the people who vote no: Not one country we are helping wants any of our soldiers to come in and fight; they just want the weapons to do the fighting. If you don't give them these weapons at a time of critical need, you are setting in motion America being deeper involved in conflict, not less. If they take Israel down, I promise you, you are next, and if you don't help Israel replenish their conventional weapons, there will be a day when Israel, if they have to, will play the nuclear card. I promise you this: The Jewish people are not going down, this time, without a fight. The State of Israel will do whatever it takes to survive. I want to let the Ayatollah know America has Israel's back, which I think will create deterrence, but if the Ayatollah ever thought we pulled the plug on Israel, then I think it would be more emboldened, and you have got 100,000 rockets--precision-guided--to be fired at Israel en masse. That is a nightmare for the Iron Dome. So Israel has to tell the region, when it comes to defending the Jewish State, all bets are off. This thing could escalate big time. So, when you vote no today, you are making it more likely the Ayatollah does more, not less. When you vote no today, you incentivize Putin to do more, not less. When you vote no today, you make China wonder if we really are serious about helping Taiwan. I understand that the American people have needs here at home. I get it. Our border is broken, and you are right to want to fix it, but we are not right to abandon our allies in great need. If history has taught us anything--for those who are willing to learn from history--it is that, when evil rears its head, stand up; be firm; be unequivocal. It will save a lot of lives and a lot of heartache. I am going to end where I started: What does China want? They want to turn world order upside down. They don't believe in the rule of law. They steal our intellectual property; they intimidate their neighbors; and they will go after Taiwan if they believe we are weak and not helping Taiwan. If you want to avoid a war between Taiwan and China, give Taiwan the capability that would deter China. Eighty percent of the semiconductors in the world are made in Taiwan, and the digital economy would be dominated by China. We have a chance here to harden the defenses of Taiwan to deter China. We have a $24 billion package to replenish the weapons that Israel desperately needs to stand up in the face of multiple threats from Iran and its proxies. They need the money. They need it now. This is Passover. Help our friends in Israel. We have a chance to replenish the stockpile of the Ukrainians, who fought like tigers--but not just give them 155 rounds; give them the ATACMS that can reach out and knock the bridge down between Crimea and Russia. The bill before us allows us to go after Russian sovereign wealth funds that are frozen all over the world--about $300 billion. It allows us to take money from the Russian invader to pay for the reconstruction of Ukraine. This is a package worth your support. It makes Russia pay more. There is a loan component in this: Pay us back if you can because we are in debt. I get that part of it. This package coming back from the House was not only bipartisan, I thought it was smart. The component in this package to allow us to seize Russian assets I think will have a deterrent effect all of its own. The oligarchs around Putin are now in more jeopardy, not less, and it is proper to go after Russian sovereign wealth assets when Russia has brutally invaded Ukraine in violation of every agreement they made with Ukraine and the world at large. The bottom line for me is that this package doesn't address the border, and I am sorry it doesn't. This package addresses threats that exist to our allies, and it is in our national security interest to meet the needs of those allies before it gets worse. Whether you want Iran to stop or not, they will not. Israel needs the weapons, and they need them now. Our friends in Ukraine, with the right set of weapons, can go back on the offensive, and if you don't stop Putin now, you will regret it later. This is one of the moments in history that really matters. I always wondered, How could the people in the thirties not get it about Hitler? Now I know. It is complicated. I have very good friends who are going to vote no. I have very good friends who do not see Putin in the same way I see him. I see him as a guy with ambitions that won't end in Ukraine and that he will get us into a bigger war if we don't stand up now. I believe him when he says the thing he says about taking more territory. I have friends who are strongly supportive of Israel but who are going to vote no. The bottom line is, Israel needs you now more than ever. The Ayatollah upped the ante by attacking Israel directly from Iranian soil. For God's sake, let's help Israel and help them now. There is a chance here to seize Russian assets to pay for the war to take the burden off the taxpayer. Let's vote yes. As for Taiwan, there is almost universal acknowledgment in this body that China will keep going until somebody stops them and that we want to deter war between Taiwan and China. In this package, we have vital military assistance to Taiwan to make it harder for the Chinese to attack and take it over by military force. Do you think the Chinese are watching what we do with Ukraine? If you don't think they are watching, you don't know much about China. They are sizing us up, and if we pull the plug on Ukraine, you are inviting more aggression from China to Taiwan. If we send a signal that we are not--if you vote no and we are not giving the package to Israel to replenish their defenses, it will make the Iranians more emboldened to keep going. This vote you are about to take is probably one of the most important votes we have had since I have been here. This is the defining moment in world history. The world is on fire. It all started with Afghanistan. Once we pulled out of Afghanistan, people thought we were weak, and they took advantage. Here is what I would say: If you agree with me, don't vote no; vote yes because a ``no'' vote, I think, continues that theme that America is unreliable. A ``no'' vote will make Russia believe that there is a growing sentiment in America that, if we just outlast Ukraine, we will not only get Ukraine, we will get more. A ``no'' vote emboldens the Ayatollah to think support for Israel is being diminished. A ``no'' vote to help Taiwan would encourage China, in my view, to be more aggressive. Now, how does this all end? Here is my fear: These are the Twin Towers. This is what happens when something over there gets out of hand, and we don't deal with it. This is what happens when you ignore the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan, and you sit on the sidelines and think it doesn't matter to you. This is what happens when a group of people take women in a soccer stadium and kill them for sport, thinking it won't bother us. The 18 to 19 hijackers who were able to do this were able to do it because they had a safe haven in Afghanistan. We didn't get involved. We looked the other way, thinking it doesn't matter to us. We missed all the warning signs. Remember when they said the lights were blinking red before September 11, 2001? Let me tell you what the FBI Director says: I have never seen so many blinking lights as I do now. Wherever I turn, I see threats. I have never seen a time in American history that I have been involved as FBI Director with this many threats all at once. Everywhere I look, I see blinking lights. The response to that is to help our allies, not turn away. How can you say we are under great threat, and we are not willing to provide aid to people who are on the tip of the spear? So this aid package coming back from the House is better than it was when it left the Senate. It has more for Israel. It has the ability to get Russian assets to help the American taxpayer and reconstruct Ukraine with Russian money, not American money or other money. It has a component in here to let the Ayatollah know we are not going to bend in Israel, and it reinforces Taiwan's military defense at a time when they are very vulnerable. This is a good package. It has a loan component, recognizing that we are in debt. It is not a perfect package. I wish it had border security. I was hoping it would, but it doesn't. Since we last had this discussion about what to do, Iran launched an attack on Israel--300 drones--and everything is really getting out of hand here. The Ukrainians are down to their last artillery shells. That can all change when we vote yes. They will get not only more artillery shells, they are going to get more advanced weapons. And we are going to go after Russian money. We are going to put Putin on his back foot. If you vote yes, it is a bad day for Putin; it is a bad day for the Ayatollah; and it is a wake-up call to China. If you vote no, you are going to encourage everybody I just talked about to do more. We are friends. I respect everybody in here, no matter how you vote. I just see this as clear as a bell. There were people in the 1930s, like Churchill and others, who saw Hitler for who he really was. And a lot of people didn't want to confront that because they were weary of the war they just fought called World War I. They wanted to believe that Hitler was just all talk. They didn't want to get in another war because millions of people had died. The last thing they wanted was another war. What they didn't realize is that Hitler wanted things they couldn't give them. We have been at war since September 11, 2001. We are in debt. We are all tired. The last thing we want is to keep it going. Well, let me tell you about our adversaries. They are not going to stop. It is wise for us to help people do the fighting so we don't have to, to have their backs at a time of great need because if we abandon them and say this doesn't matter to us, everything you saw happen in the 1930s is going to happen again. If Russia believes we can't stick with Ukraine, they are going to keep going. If the Ayatollah believed that American support for the Jewish State was deteriorating, he is going to up the ante. These college campus protests make me sick to my stomach. You have people on college campuses in this country supporting the terrorists, supporting Hamas. They are not supporting a better life for the Palestinian people; they are supporting the destruction of the Jewish people. Hamas doesn't want a better life for the Palestinians; they want to kill all the Jews. My good friend from Connecticut just walked in. His grandparents were involved in the Holocaust. I know where he is going to be. So what is going on in America is very similar to the 1930s but in many ways worse. To those who are out there protesting to stop aid to Israel: You are fools. You are progressive. Do you think Hamas is progressive? Do you think Hamas will tolerate a society that you have come accustomed to, where women can do whatever they want, people can live their lives? You are empowering people who are despicable. They are religious Nazis. You are dumb as dirt if you think abandoning Israel makes us safer and that Hamas gives a damn about the Palestinian people. They don't. I am urging a ``yes'' vote. I understand this is not a perfect package, but this is a really good package at an important time in world and American history. So I would urge a ``yes'' vote. And a ``no'' vote, in my view, makes it more likely we spend more money and Americans die who are not dying now. I yield the floor.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Would the Senator yield?

Mr. GRAHAM. Are you aware--here is the question: Are you aware of the fact that President Clinton was impeached? And one of the charges against him was lying under oath in a civil lawsuit. Are you aware of that?

Mr. GRAHAM. OK. So you can be impeached for lying under oath in a civil lawsuit, but apparently you can't be impeached for lying to Congress about how you do your job. So here is what I--I will give Senator Schumer the benefit of the doubt, Senator Kennedy. He is saying that the fact pattern here apparently doesn't rise to the level of high crime or misdemeanor; that it is a policy disagreement. We have taken a policy disagreement in the House and tried to turn it into impeachment. Well, here is a question for you, Senator Lee. Are you aware of the fact that 2 days ago--2 days ago--Secretary Mayorkas was asked about the parole of the man alleged to have killed Laken Riley, Mr. Ibarra: Why was he paroled and how was he paroled? Under the parole statute, 212(d)(5), there are two ways parole can be granted: unique humanitarian need circumstances. Your mother is dying. Something is going on bad. You need to get into the country on a temporary basis. Or a special benefit to the United States--that means you are a witness in, probably, a cartel trial. Those are the only two reasons you can be paroled. And 2 days ago--no, yesterday--Secretary Mayorkas said he did not know why Mr. Ibarra was paroled. Which one of the two was it? This was a question from Congressman Bishop. He said: I didn't know. At the same time he said, I didn't know, I had the file, and it says: Subject was paroled due to detention capacity at the Central Processing Center in El Paso, TX. In the file, he was paroled because they didn't have any space for him. Senator Schumer, this is illegal. The Secretary of Homeland Security cannot just add a condition to the statute. The statute doesn't allow you to give parole because you are full. And the reason this man was given parole is not because of the statutory requirements, but because we had run out of space, because we have got more illegal immigrants than we can handle. And the rest is history. He gets paroled. He goes to New York. He gets convicted of a crime. He goes to Georgia, and he is accused of murdering this lady. It seems to me that would be something we should argue over, as to whether or not you should lose your job because you have got a statutory requirement limiting your authority to parole people, and in your own file, exhibit A, you paroled him because the place was full. This happened 2 days ago. So this gives kangaroo courts a bad name. This is a frigging joke. We have a nation under siege. Madam President, 1.9 million people have been paroled. Are you telling me they do an individual analysis on all the people? In November 2023, I asked him: Secretary Mayorkas, do you do a case- by-case analysis? Senator, we comply with the law. So you are telling me that for all of the 240,000--the ones in front of us--you determined that they meet the criteria of urgent humanitarian need or significant public benefit? And he said: Yes. This was in November, under oath, to me when I questioned: I don't believe you. I don't believe you are doing an individual analysis on this stuff. You are doing blanket parole, and you are paper-whipping this stuff. It turns out he gave false testimony to the Congress. Whether he lied or he just doesn't know what he is doing, I don't know. You should be impeached either way. If you don't know what you are doing, you should be kicked out because you don't know what you are doing. But the man that we are talking about is the one charged with murdering this young lady who was going on a jog. If that is not important to the American people--to find out how that happened and should somebody be held responsible--what the hell is? You can talk about why we impeached Trump and Clinton? Was it worthwhile? Did it matter? Was it all political? You cannot say this is not important. To say that how he is doing his job is not important to the American people--tell that to the Riley family. This is not an academic debate. The policies of this administration being carried out by Secretary Mayorkas are illegal. The man charged with killing Laken Riley was illegally released into this country by DHS. That should be something we argue about in the Senate, as to whether or not you keep your job. It has been swept under the rug. There will be an election in November. This is the only chance you have to get this right, to the American people. We had a chance today to hold somebody accountable, finally, for all the rape and the murder and the drugs. The largest loss of life in America is fentanyl coming through the border, for young people. How many more people have to die, be raped or murdered before somebody is held accountable? We had a chance here, and our Democratic friends swept it under the rug because they are more concerned about the November election than protecting the American people, and this is a sad day for the Senate.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, at a later date, I will respond to my colleague from Maryland about UNRWA. But just to let people know who are following this today, I am the ranking Republican on the State, Foreign Ops Appropriations Subcommittee, and I work very well with Senator Coons. Senator Van Hollen is on the committee. There will not be one dime for UNRWA in any bill I support, period. And that is not just me; that is Senator Collins. She is the ranking member who worked very well with Senator Patty Murray to get the supplemental moving. Why is that? Because we believe UNRWA is compromised. I will come and show you the textbooks that UNRWA uses in the Palestinian community to teach the destruction of the Jewish people. I will show you texts from people in charge of UNRWA on the ground celebrating October 7. The case has been made over here that UNRWA is no longer a credible organization worth American taxpayer dollars to fund--not one penny for UNRWA. Helping the Palestinian people begins with changing the way they are taught in school. After we defeated the Germans and the Japanese, it took us a long time to deradicalize a population that was taught from birth to be radical. So what I hope will happen over the course of time is that new people in charge of the Palestinian community in the West Bank and Gaza will stop teaching the death of the Jews, trying to give the Palestinian children a more hopeful life. I hope that happens one day soon. The reason I came to the floor is I have been asked--probably like the Presiding Officer has--

Mr. GRAHAM. Let me finish. We will come and debate. I have a plane to catch.

Mr. GRAHAM. We will come down, and we will have a discussion about everything I said. Let me finish my thought.

Mr. GRAHAM. Yes. We will have a very vigorous discussion about how wrong you are to empower this group that has been perpetrating all of the wrong things, not the right things. Now, having said all that--

Mr. GRAHAM. Let me finish my thought. Senator Schumer, whom I have worked with on immigration, on a bunch of things--I have tried to be bipartisan when it comes to foreign policy. My colleague, the President of the Senate, has been one of my best friends in trying to find a way forward to get Saudi and Israel to recognize each other. That would be a big blow to Iran. I have been asked, like everybody in the body: What do you think about Senator Schumer's speech? I am dumbfounded. I have always respected him. I disagree with him politically. What he said today was earth-shatteringly bad. The majority leader of the U.S. Senate is calling on the people of Israel to overthrow their government. Whether you like Bibi or not is not the question. The question is, Is it appropriate for anybody in this body telling another country to take their government down? We are going to have an election here. I hope we take the Biden government down through the election process, but that is for us to decide. This has been very hurtful. I have been on the phone almost all day trying to explain to people what happened, and I don't have a good explanation. We are trying to get Saudi Arabia to recognize the one and only Jewish State. That is no easy thing for the Crown Prince to do given this environment. We are trying to get Israel to take a leap of faith here that it doesn't have to be this way all the time, to do some things that would allow the Palestinian community to reorganize. Seventy-five percent of the Israeli people do not support a two-state solution now. They have been terribly wounded. There is no support by any politician in Israel--Gantz, Lapid, anybody--to unilaterally declare a Palestinian State. Five Presidents of the United States have said that if there is ever a Palestinian State, it will come through direct negotiations, without conditions, between the parties. In the Trump administration, Jared Kushner had a plan to establish a Palestinian State that Prime Minister Netanyahu actually agreed with. The point here is, what should America be doing now? America should be helping Israel without qualification. We should be trying to find a way to ease the suffering of the Palestinian people, and the best way to do that is to destroy Hamas. The reason so many Palestinians have been killed is because Hamas uses them as human shields. We live in a world that is literally upside down. We are having prominent Democratic Members--people I respect--calling on the Israeli people to take their government down. I can't believe it. I thought it was a joke. I thought somebody was pranking me this morning. This is a departure in a very serious way about how the United States interacts with its allies. I think it has done enormous damage to very delicate negotiations. I hope that Senator Schumer will revisit this. I don't know who he is trying to please by saying that, but they are not worth pleasing. I don't know who you are trying to please by saying that the Israeli Government needs to cease to exist as it is today and the Israeli people need to find somebody better, in the eyes of Senator Schumer. I am not asking the Israeli people to elect somebody I like; I am asking them: Whenever you have an election, elect somebody you like. I am not asking the people of Israel to bow to my view of how to settle this matter after the largest loss of Jewish life since the Holocaust. I want to give unconditional, unqualified support to the people of Israel to destroy Hamas. After World War II, if anybody had suggested to America that we need to take our foot off the gas when it came to destroying the Nazis and the Japanese, you would have been run out of town. What won the Oscar? A film called ``Oppenheimer'' talking about how the atomic bomb was created and used by our country to destroy two cities in Japan to end the war. You have to understand--and the Presiding Officer does; you have done your homework--you have to understand that October 7, to the Israeli people, is Pearl Harbor and 9/11 on steroids. It is not just a tit-for- tat with Hamas; it was an attempt by Hamas to break the back of the Jewish people, to brutally rape and murder in a fashion they want the world to see. So the Israeli perspective on what to do is similar to what we thought we should do after World War II: total, complete victory; everybody mobilize and do what you have to do to end the war, to take the Nazis down; and the Imperial Japanese Army--destroy it unequivocally. Millions of people were killed in World War II. War is literally hell. But when you have been attacked the way we were on Pearl Harbor and 9/11, you have to respond forcefully. You have to make sure it never happens again. And the only way Israel can do this is to destroy the military capability of Hamas. So why did this happen? I believe that the great Satan, which is Iran, wanted this to happen to prevent a reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and the State of Israel, ending the Arab-Israeli conflict. A nightmare for the Ayatollah is that the Arabs and the Jews make peace and economically integrate, leaving them behind. Israel has signed agreements with six of their Arab neighbors under Bibi's leadership. When I go, I meet with Lapid, I meet with Gantz, and I meet with Bibi. I meet with everybody because it is not about Bibi; it is not about Gantz; it is about our relationship. If it is Gantz or Lapid next time, I will meet with them. I know them all. Mr. Lapid and I are very good friends. I have known Bibi for 25 years. It is about, what should we do to help our friends in Israel? Nothing would please me more than to find a way to end this war sooner rather than later and get back on track for their normalization process, but we cannot expect Israel to stop now. It is like putting 80 percent of a fire out--the 20 percent is going to start it all over again. We are down to six brigades, organized military units that Hamas has to wreak havoc on the Palestinian people and the State of Israel. It is nonnegotiable: Hamas will be destroyed militarily. I am hoping, in the middle of all this chaos, we can still find a way for Saudi Arabia and Israel to normalize. That would be the ultimate death blow, I think, to the Iranian ambitions in the region. Part of that deal, as the Presiding Officer knows, would be the Palestinians would have a better life eventually; that Saudi Arabia and UAE would invest heavily into Gaza and the West Bank; new, younger, less corrupt people running the place, trying to find a pathway forward where the Palestinians and Israel can coexist in a way that is beneficial for all. That can never happen until Hamas is destroyed. If Hamas is still in place, they will kill everybody who wants to make peace with Israel. They did it before. They have no desire, as Senator Van Hollen said, of recognizing the Jewish State. But I will close where I began. What Senator Schumer said on the floor of the Senate is taking the country and the Senate down the wrong road. This is not something any of us should be saying--calling on a government to be toppled, basically, by its own people. At the end of the day, Bibi is not the problem. The problem is radical Islam wanting to kill every Jew they can find. The problem is Iran, which has its mission to destroy the Jewish State and to purify Islam. I could spend hours talking about the Biden-Obama policy of empowering the Ayatollah, but that is not for today. So what I would say to what Senator Schumer said today--my response to Senator Schumer: I am disappointed. You have done a lot of damage, my friend, and you need to fix this. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Madam President, I believe we have 15 minutes, and just for the order of battle here, I would like to recognize Senators Grassley, Cornyn, and Hawley to make some brief remarks. I will make some brief remarks, and we will make a unanimous consent for the bills that I have indicated we are trying to call up. With that, I would turn it over to Senator Grassley.

Mr. GRAHAM

Mr. GRAHAM. Before I turn it over to Senator Durbin and the Senator speaks, Senator Durbin has been terrific. The committee worked together to get these bills passed unanimously. Thank you for your leadership.