[Pages S3336-S3343]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

MOTION TO DISCHARGE--S.J. RES. 54

Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, pursuant to section 36(b) of the Arms
Export Control Act, I move to discharge the Committee on Foreign
Relations from further consideration of S.J. Res. 54, as provided under
the previous order.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:

Motion to discharge from the Committee on Foreign
Relations, S.J. Res. 54, a joint resolution providing for
congressional disapproval of the proposed foreign military
sale to the Government of the United Arab Emirates of certain
defense articles and services.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, I am bringing before the Senate an
opportunity for us to take a stand, to take a stand against the
corruption of American foreign policy.
The Senate will take a vote in just a moment to deny the President
the ability to move forward with two arms sales--one to Qatar and one
to the United Arab Emirates.
I believe that this Senate should join Republicans and Democrats
together in saying that any country that is willing to pay the
President personally, to enrich our President personally, in order to
receive favorable treatment from the United States of America in its
foreign policy or to receive national security secrets from the United
States of America shouldn't be able to do business as usual with this
Congress or with this country.
I want to tell you a story that is as heartbreaking as it is
aggravating. We give the American President enormous power, and
particularly we give the President enormous power when it comes to
managing the foreign relations of this country. The President decides
where we send arms. The President gets to negotiate peace treaties. The
President decides how millions of troops are deployed all around the
world. We trust that the President is going to use those powers for
good, that the President is going to use those authorities to protect
the United States of America.
But they are vast powers. They are immense powers. So there is always
the potential that those powers are going to be used for corrupt
purposes, that instead of using those authorities in order to gain
concessions from other nations that benefit the broad American public
or benefit American national security, the President may use those
powers in order to enrich himself personally.
Our Founding Fathers actually thought a lot about this problem
because they had watched their monarch. They had watched the King of
England use the powers that he had in order--not to protect the British
people but to amass enormous wealth. He used those powers both to
control dissents and protests domestically, but he also used those
powers in order to compel other nations and actors inside the empire to
pay him tribute.
President Trump has decided that he is going to use the powers that
we have given him to demand the same kind of tribute that Kings and
monarchs demanded.
The reason we have to stand together today to vote against these arm
sales to Qatar and UAE is because unfortunately these two countries,
who are admittedly often allies, important allies of the United States,
have decided to comply with President Trump's request to pay him that
tribute.
Shortly before the President went to the Middle East, he did not
dispense to the region his Secretary of State. Instead, he dispensed to
the region his business partners. Just before the President made his
first major foreign trip to the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and to Qatar, he
sent his son and their business partner--who, not coincidentally,
happens to be the son of Trump's Middle East Envoy--to the United Arab
Emirates.
Their request was pretty simple. Their request was not that the UAE
do something that would be in the interest of collective American
security; their request was that the UAE invest $2 billion in Trump's
new crypto business--in particular, his stablecoin venture. This is the
President of the United States going to the UAE and asking a foreign
government to invest $2 billion in his personal business. The company
is called World Liberty Financial. On World Liberty Financial's
website, it says the majority of the company is owned by Donald J.
Trump.
This was a pretty exceptional request to make because his crypto
business was brand new. At the time, it was a pretty minor player. So a
$2 billion investment from a country like UAE would vault World Liberty
Financial into the stratosphere. And, in fact, it

[[Page S3337]]

did. When the UAE complied with that corrupt request, World Liberty
Financial--the stablecoin that it issues became the fifth biggest
stablecoin in the world overnight.
Now, the UAE felt like it had to comply with the President's request
because they had things they wanted from the United States.
First, they wanted a continuation of arm sales, including the sale of
Chinook helicopters that we will be voting on today. But they wanted
something more specific, something that they weren't able to get from
the first Trump administration or from the Biden administration. They
wanted some of our most vital, most significant national security
secrets. They wanted to be able to get their hands on computer chip
technology, the kind of technology that will power the next generation
of AI.
We as a nation--again, based on bipartisan consensus--had been
unwilling to give UAE that technology because it is a fairly open
secret that the UAE has a very close, very cozy relationship with
China, and there was a very real worry--there still is a real worry--
that that technology, if transferred to the UAE, would be quickly
transferred to China, allowing China to be able to outpace us, to
outrun us in the race to advanced AI.
But the UAE knew that there was a way to get what they wanted, that
there was a way to change the policy of the United States, and it was a
$2 billion investment in Trump's business.
Not coincidentally, just weeks after they announced they were putting
$2 billion into Trump's crypto business, his father--who, again not
coincidentally, is Trump's Middle East Envoy--went back to the region
and announced that they would be moving forward with the transfer of
these computer chips to the UAE--$2 billion into the Trump family's
pockets and the most sensitive American technology that had been
previously banned from going to the UAE, being sent to the UAE.
Apparently, we didn't make any demands that the UAE divest itself
from its security relationship with China. Instead, what we demanded
was that the UAE make a $2 billion investment in Donald Trump's
business.
As you can imagine, once the word was out that the Trump
administration was for sale, other countries decided to get into the
mix. Donald Trump barely had taken a look at a luxury plane that the
country of Qatar owned--reportedly the most luxurious plane in the
world: gold plating, a spiral staircase designed by a famed French
designer--and the President wanted it personally. So he dispensed the
Department of Defense, apparently, to go to the Qataris and asked them
to give him the plane, just like he had asked the UAE for a $2 billion
investment in his business--a $2 billion investment that nobody else
was going to give him except for a foreign power over which Donald
Trump had leverage because of his role as President of the United
States.
He went to the Qataris and asked them to give him this jet because he
liked it, because it was fancy, because he thought he deserved it, and
he knew they couldn't say no. Why? Because the Qataris also have
specific asks of the United States. More broadly, they were burned
during Trump's first term. When the Saudis and the Emiratis ganged up
on the Qataris and effectively implemented an economic and political
blockade on Qatar, the Trump administration, in the first term,
effectively took the side of the Emiratis and the Saudis. That was
devastating for the Qataris.
So first and foremost, they wanted to make sure that never again
would Trump abandon them if there was a contest like that in the Middle
East. So when he asked for the plane, just based upon their desire to
make sure they did not get abandoned again, they felt they had to say
yes.
But they also wanted an arms sale, and the arms sale they wanted was
a groundbreaking arms sale. Never before has the United States been
willing to send our most sensitive drone technology into the Middle
East, weren't willing to transfer our most sensitive computer chips. We
also weren't willing to send our most sensitive drone technology.
Qatar wanted that drone technology and once again, just like the UAE
knew that they could get our most sensitive computer chip technology if
they sent $2 billion to Donald Trump's business ventures, Qatar, having
learned that lesson, realized that if they gave a massive gift to the
President, maybe he would break with a bipartisan precedent not to send
this sensitive drone technology into the Middle East.
Guess what. They got what they wanted. The President has agreed to
move forward with sending our most sensitive drone technology, the
Predator drones, into the Middle East, selling them to Qatar. It is not
a coincidence that they are also willing to send him this jet.
I had the chance this morning to talk to the Secretary of Defense
about this jet because one of the claims the administration has made is
that the jet is actually being sent to the U.S. Government. But we
learned some important facts this morning. It is true that right now
the U.S. Government is buying two new Air Force Ones, and it is true
that this contract is expensive and it is taking a little bit longer
than both Republicans and Democrats had hoped, but both those planes
from Boeing are due for delivery sometime at the end of Trump's term.
What we learned today is that this plane that is being gifted
temporarily to the U.S. Government is going to take several years to
retrofit and will become available essentially at the exact same time
that the two Boeing planes are made available.
So we don't actually need this plane as a new Air Force One because
the Boeings are still under contract, and they are going to be ready
simultaneously. But the Secretary of Defense is committed to accepting
the gift of this plane and then spending upwards of $1 billion of
taxpayer money in order to retrofit this plane--$1 billion that we
don't need because we are already spending $4 billion on the two
Boeings.
So now, instead of having two Air Force Ones, we are going to have
three Air Force Ones. We don't need three Air Force Ones. But Trump is
solving this problem because what he has said is that, when he leaves
office, he is taking this Air Force One with him.
Now, that has never ever happened before. We have never just given a
President of the United States a gift on the way out the door. But we
are going to spend $1 billion getting this plane ready. It,
effectively, will not be used as an actual Air Force One because it
won't be completed until the very end of his term. And then Trump is
taking the plane, apparently, to his Presidential library, but who
knows.
And so this gift is actually going to Donald Trump, not to the
American taxpayers. The Department of Defense is, effectively, a straw
purchaser. It will hold the plane for a couple years; it will spend
your taxpayer dollars to retrofit the plane; and then the plane will
just be given to Donald Trump to take with him in his post-Presidency.
So $2 billion from the UAE into the President's crypto venture, a
plane that, when all is said and done, is probably going to be worth
about $1.5 billion, straight transferred to Donald Trump personally--
this is unprecedented in the history of the United States of America.
Never has a President of the United States, while in office, solicited,
sought, and accepted billions of dollars' worth of investments in his
private companies or gifts to him and his family.
Remember, our Founding Fathers thought about this problem. They
worried about this exact situation: a President using the vast power of
the article II authorities he is given in order to trade favorable
American treatment for foreign countries in exchange for personal
enrichment of the President. They literally wrote a clause into the
Constitution which, clear as day, says that a President of the United
States cannot accept gifts from a foreign Prince, King, or nation. That
is exactly what the President is doing. This plane is a gift. He
advertises it as a gift--a gift that will be in the American public's
hands for a nanosecond before it goes into his private hands.
If we don't take a stand, if we don't act together against this
unconstitutional corruption of our foreign policy, I don't know that we
can ever get this genie back in the bottle.
I understand that it is difficult for my Republican colleagues to
stand up to this President, but we have an independent responsibility,
as a coequal branch of government charged with upholding the
Constitution, to call out

[[Page S3338]]

wrong when we see it, to call out illegality when we see it. This is
wildly unconstitutional. This is wildly illegal.
So we have a chance today, with these resolutions, in order to make
clear that we are not going to accept or make normal this kind of
corruption of American foreign policy.
Now, Mr. President, I will finish with this because my colleague from
Maryland is going to add some remarks.
I admit that these are imperfect vehicles. It is all part of the same
story. Trump would not be moving forward with these arms sales if he
wasn't getting what he wanted personally from these two countries. But
I also admit that the UAE and, most especially, Qatar have been allies
of the United States. We have worked together in our efforts, for
instance, to combat terrorism in the region. Qatar specifically has, at
times, been a heroic partner of the United States. We would never have
been able to rescue thousands of Americans and American allies from
Afghanistan without Qatar's help.
Qatar has consistently acted as an interlocutor between warring and
conflicting factions in the region. Qatar has taken risks on behalf of
the United States. We, of course, have thousands of American troops and
soldiers and airmen in Qatar today.
And so what we need to say here is not that we are going to
permanently pause our military relationships with these countries, but
for the time being, while these two nations are willing to pay the
President tribute, we cannot endorse or condone business as usual.
These are important partners of the United States in the region. They
will be important partners in the future. But this is an exceptional
moment where the corruption and our effort to stop the corruption has
to take priority and has to take precedent. And so I am going to vote
for both of these resolutions while also still believing that we are
going to have a continued, important bilateral relationship with Qatar
and with the UAE.
But if we start to endorse and grease the wheels of this kind of
corruption, then there will be no end because once it becomes accepted,
once it becomes implicitly endorsed by the U.S. Senate that foreign
governments can put money into the personal treasury of the President
in order to gain favorable treatment from the United States of America,
that becomes the way our foreign policy works.
So I appreciate my colleagues' time and attention to this matter, and
I encourage them to support these motions when they come up for a vote
later this afternoon.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, I want to start by thanking my friend
and colleague Senator Murphy for shining a light on this issue of
corruption because the corruption that we are seeing from President
Trump is unprecedented in scale and scope in our Nation's history. It
is infecting our democracy here at home, and it is corrupting our
foreign policy around the world.
We will soon be debating here in the U.S. Senate what President Trump
calls his Big Beautiful Bill. Well, it is a big bill, but it is only
beautiful if you are a billionaire or a very wealthy American because
he gives those big tax breaks to very wealthy people at the expense of
everybody else in America.
We have heard of the cuts to the Medicaid and the food and nutrition
programs and the fact that, even after that, it will drive a huge
upward hole in our deficit.
But there is one billionaire that President Trump is especially
focused on making sure does well, and that is himself and his family
and his family's business. And we have seen a great example of that
corruption here at home with the meme coin, right? This is the coin
that Trump put together, and he said that he is going to reward the
people who buy the most of this meme coin by meeting with them
personally at his golf course in Virginia.
And so people all over the world scurried to purchase that meme coin
in order to get an audience with the President because having an
audience with the President means you get a chance to influence the
President. And many people from around the world, including China,
purchased those meme coins to buy that influence.
And people should understand that the President's business makes
money whether the value of that meme coin goes up or whether it goes
down. Every time there is a transaction to buy or sell that meme coin,
the Trump business makes money. So other people can get totally hosed,
but it is a win-win for President Trump and his family. In fact, it is
estimated that in the early days of launching this, they made about
$350 million. So that is the meme coin here at home.
What brings us to the floor today is how this personal corruption is
infecting the foreign policy of the United States--because all of us
hope and expect that, when the President of the United States goes
overseas to conduct American foreign policy, they have the interests of
America first. Donald Trump says it himself: America first.
That is not what President Trump has foremost in his mind when he
travels overseas. What he has foremost in his mind right now is the
bottom line for his personal profit--literally selling the office of
the Presidency. He might as well open the White House and make it an
Airbnb.
So let's talk about the details of how this is unfolding and how it
is hurting the United States of America.
On his first major overseas trip, Donald Trump went to three
countries in the Middle East, Gulf countries. He went to Saudi Arabia;
he went to the United Arab Emirates, the UAE; and he went to Qatar.
Now, normally, before the President of the United States takes one of
these important overseas trips, they send out the diplomats to help
work out important U.S. foreign policy objectives and goals with these
countries to make sure that the interests of the United States of
America are put first.
In the case of this trip to these three Gulf countries--again, the
first major overseas trip that President Trump took--it was his son
Eric Trump who went out to the region 2 weeks in advance. And what did
Eric Trump do when he was there? Was he talking about foreign policy?
No. He was talking about doing deals for the Trump family business. So
let's zero in on some of the deals that he worked on.
Let's start by what happened in Qatar, because it was about 2 weeks
before President Trump arrived there that Eric Trump worked with Qatar
to partner the Trump Organization on a $5.5 billion Trump-branded golf
course and real estate development deal.
It should be pointed out that Qatar has also invested over $1 billion
in a private equity fund for Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner in a deal
announced in 2024 after Donald Trump's most recent election victory.
And now, as Senator Murphy pointed out, then Trump asked Qatar to
give him, as a gift, this jumbo jet plane to use as Air Force One and
potentially to keep for later on as part of his Presidential library.
And so Qatar, for the reasons that Senator Murphy indicated, felt
apparently compelled to comply with this wish from the President of the
United States. The President of the United States has a lot of
influence in the region, and Qatar has been on the losing end of that
influence in the first Trump administration. And so Qatar gave Donald
Trump, at Donald Trump's request, a $400 million jumbo jet, what the
President calls the palace in the sky. It is complete with a 55-inch
TV, leather sofas, wood paneling--the works.
And during this whole period of time, Qatar has also wanted to make
sure it establishes a solid relationship with the United States and,
specifically, with the Trump administration, and the Trump
administration had noticed a major arms sale to Qatar, a $1.9 billion
weapon package, complete with Predator drones, 500-pound bombs, and
Hellfire 2 missiles.
So all of this gets caught up together in the major corrupt deals
that are being put forth in order to enrich the Trump family, not
advance the national security interests of the United States.
Now let me turn to the United Arab Emirates, the UAE, because in this
case, the corruption is at least as bad--probably more so.
So, once again, in the case of the UAE, before President Trump went
to the region, it wasn't the State Department emissaries that went out.
It was

[[Page S3339]]

Eric Trump on behalf of the Trump family businesses. In this case, it
was a new cryptocurrency stablecoin enterprise launched by the Trump
family called World Liberty Financial.
Now, World Liberty Financial is 60 percent owned by the Trump family.
As Senator Murphy pointed out, one of the cofounders is actually Zach
Witkoff--a last name that you might know because his dad Steve Witkoff
is Donald Trump's--President Trump's--major Middle East envoy, going to
places like Qatar as part of the Middle East negotiations with both
respect to Iran and Gaza.
So 2 weeks before Donald Trump goes to the region, his son, Eric
Trump, goes on behalf of the family business along with Zach Witkoff,
the son of the President's Middle East Special Envoy.
So what happens when Eric Trump, the President's son, goes to the
UAE? Well they soon after announced that MGX, which is a UAE
Government-backed investment firm, would use Trump's new stablecoin--
his new stablecoin--called USD1, dollar one, to close a new $2 billion
investment in the cryptocurrency exchange Binance.
So by putting $2 billion into the Trump stablecoin enterprise--
putting that into circulation--the UAE turned an unknown stablecoin
company into one of the biggest players in the world overnight.
Overnight, the value of that company shot up with the action that the
UAE took with the $2 billion.
And the Trump family stands to make tens of millions of dollars every
year from that deal alone.
Now, I doubt that the Emirati investment firm went with a Trump-
branded cryptocurrency for its $2 billion investment because Eric Trump
put together the best slide deck for the pitch meeting. Somehow, I
think it is because he was the son of the President of the United
States who was going to be arriving in the UAE 2 weeks later.
So I want everybody to hold that deal in their head, just put a pin
in it for a minute. Eric Trump, the President's son, goes to the UAE 2
weeks before President Trump arrives and does this crypto deal--$2
billion crypto deal.
So 2 weeks later, the President of the United States arrives in the
UAE. And what happens? President Trump gives away some of the most
sensitive advanced American technology--in fact, the crown jewels of
American AI technology in semiconductors.
The previous administration, President Biden, had restricted the flow
of this very sensitive AI technology to places like the UAE because of
the fear of what is known as diversion; that that technology would not
be safe in the hands of the UAE without really important safeguards in
place because the UAE has a partnership with the United States, but it
also has very close relations with China, the PRC.
So there has been well-documented concern about the real risk that
very sensitive American AI technology would go to China.
I would also point out that the UAE has made it its ambition to
become one of the AI leaders in the world. So they obviously will
benefit greatly from getting the very best technology, the highest
compute power that the United States can provide them.
Now, interestingly, it was the day before President Trump departed to
the UAE and Qatar and Saudi Arabia that the Trump administration rolled
back the important safeguards the Biden administration had placed on
the transfer of this very sensitive AI technology. They rolled it back
as the President was about to take off to go visit the UAE.
Now, this deal--this deal--that was cut where the United States
agreed to lift its limitations on the transfer of this technology
really does compromise the national security interests of the United
States.
A group of us wrote a letter led by Senator Warren. It was signed by
Leader Schumer, also by the ranking member of the Armed Services
Committee Senator Reed, the ranking member of the Intelligence
Committee Senator Warner, Senator Coons, and others.
Here is what we wrote:

These deals greenlight the sale of sensitive U.S.
technology in exchange for illusory promises of foreign
investment. If completed, they will present an immediate
threat to U.S. national security, and over the long term, may
irreversibly erode U.S. leadership in artificial intelligence
(AI) by offshoring American jobs.

So that is what the President did just 2 weeks after the UAE said it
would invest $2 billion in the Trump family business crypto exchange,
letting that skyrocket to very valuable levels.
I will point out that it wasn't only Democrats who have expressed
concern about the risks of transferring this sensitive AI technology to
the UAE. In fact, during the Biden administration, the Republican
chairman of the House Select Committee on China wrote to the
President--actually wrote to the President's then-National Security
Advisor Jake Sullivan expressing exactly these kinds of concerns.
It was a letter dated July 10, 2024. It is a short letter.
(Mr. MULLIN assumed the Chair.)
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

Congress of the United States,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, July 10, 2024.
Hon. Jake Sullivan,
National Security Advisor,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Sullivan, On April 15, 2024, Microsoft announced a
major partnership with Group 42 Holding Ltd. (G42), the
United Arab Emirates' (UAE's) artificial intelligence holding
company chaired by national security advisor His Highness
Sheikh Tahnoun bin Zayed Al Nahyan. According to Microsoft,
this $1.5 billion partnership will ``help enhance the UAE's
position as a global AI hub,'' furthering the UAE's ambition
of becoming ``the world leader in AI by 2031.''
This deal may be one of the most consequential investments
by a U.S. technology firm in the Middle East in decades, and
as such, deserves continued special scrutiny by both the
Executive Branch and our Committees to ensure that our
strategic and national security interests are protected. Our
Committees share the overarching goals of limiting the
People's Republic of China's (PRC) influence, but we remain
deeply concerned by attempts to move quickly to advance a
partnership that involves the unprecedented transfer of
highly sensitive, U.S.-origin technology, without
Congressional consultation or clearly defined regulations in
place.
It is vital we do all we can to limit the PRC's malign
influence around the world, including in the Middle East.
Should this deal proceed further, we must be clear eyed about
the risks. It is important to note that, just earlier this
month, UAE president and ruler of Abu Dhabi His Highness
Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan traveled to Beijing and
reportedly discussed UAE-PRC cooperation in ``artificial
intelligence''--the same technology the United States is now
considering transferring to the UAE.
Concerns around G42's links to the PRC are not new. Earlier
this year, then Chairman of the Select Committee on the
Chinese Communist Party, Mike Gallagher, wrote to Secretary
Raimondo highlighting G42's ties to the PRC, citing, in part,
G42's CEO Peng Xiao and G42's ongoing affiliations to
problematic PRC-linked entities. G42 and its affiliates
furthermore maintain active ties to PRC-linked entities,
including ones working to evade U.S. sanctions and export
controls. Since then, we have had numerous productive
conversations with Microsoft regarding the need to take steps
to mitigate these concerns, as well as others related to G42
activity in areas including digital surveillance, defense,
and biotechnology.
We recognize that Microsoft will restrict the transfer of
sensitive technology to G42 during the first phase of the
agreement and understand negotiations regarding the second
phase involving the export of sensitive U.S.-origin
technology to the UAE are now underway. If this second phase
is to proceed, it will require significantly more robust
national security guardrails than those included in Phase 1.
Given the ties between the PRC and G42, as well as the
PRC's continued interests in the UAE, we ask that the
National Intelligence Council prepare an official
Intelligence Community assessment on the ties between G42,
including its subsidiaries and affiliates, to the Chinese
Communist Party, the People's Liberation Army, or any part of
the PRC's apparatus, before this partnership proceeds
further. This assessment should also assess the risk of
sensitive U.S. technology, including but not limited to
hardware, as well as so-called intangibles such as research
and engineering advancements, being transferred directly or
indirectly to the PRC or PRC-linked companies because of this
partnership. We request that the results of this review be
shared with the undersigned Committees before any technology,
services, or research is transferred to G42 or its
affiliates.
As you have rightly emphasized, we are in the early years
of a ``decisive decade'' that will shape the terms of great
power competition for years to come. To ensure U.S. interests
are protected, there must be close coordination between the
public and private sector, leveraging the full suite of
national resources. In this, we support your efforts to work
hand in glove with U.S. companies like Microsoft to
strengthen our dominance in AI; however, we must also be
clear-eyed about the risks posed by transferring our

[[Page S3340]]

most critical AI technology particularly when it comes to
countries where the PRC is active.
Lastly, it is clear that model weights and GPUs are
technologies coveted by our partners and adversaries alike.
As such, the U.S. must develop a framework for if, when, how
and with whom these technologies are shared. Given the
extensive national security ramifications, the criteria and
conditions for the international transfer of key U.S.
artificial intelligence systems must involve Congress working
in close bipartisan collaboration with Executive Branch
agencies and the private sector. As the Microsoft-G42 deal
moves toward Phase II, our Committees intend to play a
proactive and constructive role.
With this in mind, we ask that the appropriate Executive
Branch officials brief the undersigned Committees on
underlying intelligence assessments related to the G42-
Microsoft deal prior to approving the deal's transition to
Phase II as well as the safeguards that will be in place to
protect U.S.-origin goods and technology, and other areas of
ongoing national security concern. Thank you for your ongoing
attention and assistance.
Sincerely,
Michael T. McCaul,
Chairman, House Foreign Affairs Committee.
John Moolenaar,
Chairman, Committee on Strategic Competition with the CCP.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, here is an important thing for
everybody to understand. When Eric Trump went 2 weeks before Donald
Trump's trip and when he did that deal where a UAE-owned company put $2
billion into the Trump family stablecoin business, that was with a
company called MGX.
The chairman of that company is a member of the royal family. His
name is Sheikh Tahnoun. He is also known as TBZ. He is a real
entrepreneur, and he does look out for the interests of the UAE.
So he does this deal with Eric Trump, but guess what else he is the
chairman of. He is the chairman of G42, which is the, again, Emirati
state-owned business that cut the AI deal with the Trump
administration.
So the guy who is the chairman of the company that put $2 billion
into the Trump family stablecoin business is also the chairman of the
company G42 that was the beneficiary of Donald Trump's giveaway of very
sensitive U.S. AI technology.
Now look, when it comes to Sheikh Tahnoun, you know, I have met him.
He is a good businessman. He was looking out for the interests of the
UAE when he got that deal when the U.S. Government will give the UAE
all this AI technology. So he was looking out for the interests of the
UAE.
The problem is that it was President Trump who wasn't looking out for
the interests of the United States of America. He was looking out for
the interest of his family business and literally gave away the
sensitive technology 2 weeks after the UAE invested $2 billion in the
Trump family's newly launched stablecoin.
At the same time, like in the Qatar situation, this was accompanied
by a request from President Trump for a $1.3 billion dollar arms sale
to the UAE. Now, that arms sale is part of the overall corrupt bargain
that the Trump administration struck with the UAE.
It also ignores what the UAE is doing right now, as we speak, with
respect to the terrible war and conflict in Sudan because the UAE has
been sending weapons to an organization--a murderous organization--
called the Rapid Support Forces.
The Rapid Support Forces have been engaged in all sorts of
atrocities. And during the Biden administration, President Biden met
with the UAE leaders and asked for assurances that they would no longer
be providing weapons to this murderous group and thought he received
those assurances.
But the reality is, right at the end of the Biden administration, at
my request, I asked for a briefing. And it turns out the United States
has determined that the UAE is continuing to provide weapons to this
murderous group, which the U.S. Government has found is committing
genocide in Darfur, as we speak.
So on top of all the corruption that is part of this deal, we have
the Trump administration green-lighting an arms transfer to the UAE. At
the same time, the UAE is transferring weapons to a murderous group in
Sudan that is committing genocide.
Here is what the State Department's own assessment says:

The [Rapid Support Forces] and allied militias have
systematically murdered men and boys--even infants--on an
ethnic basis, and deliberately targeted women and girls from
certain ethnic groups for rape and other forms of brutal
sexual violence. Those same militias have targeted fleeing
civilians, murdering innocent people escaping conflict, and
prevented remaining civilians from accessing lifesaving
supplies.

So there are lots of reasons we shouldn't go forward with this arms
sale--partly because it is part of an overall corrupt deal with the
Trump administration but also because of the UAE's ongoing actions.
Let me close with this. We do expect the President of the United
States, when he travels overseas, to be looking out for American
interests. In this case, it is very clear President Trump was going out
to look out for his own interests.
In the case of the Middle East, it doesn't even seem that he raised
the issue of the genocide in Sudan during his trip to the UAE while he
was following up on the corrupt deals. And the President also--I think
people remember--said he was going to end the war in Gaza on day one,
that he was going to bring back the hostages, and end the absolutely
awful humanitarian disaster we are witnessing right now with literally
hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of innocent Palestinians dying
of starvation--civilians.
But instead of looking at working the Gaza issue or these other
foreign policy priorities, the President was there for himself. And it
is sending a terrible message. Other countries are getting that
message. Reports say that Vietnam is making way for a Trump golf
complex to get lower tariffs and that Serbia is demolishing a historic
building to fast-track a Trump hotel in Belgrade.
We cannot allow our foreign policy to be corrupted in this way. And
the one way we can send that signal and that message right now is by
voting yes on these joint resolutions of disapproval on these arms
sales because they are part of the overall corrupt package.
Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to vote yes, and I now yield the
floor to my friend the Senator from Vermont.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. SANDERS. Let me thank Senator Van Hollen for his leadership on
this issue, as well as Senators Murphy, Kaine, Merkley, and Schatz, who
are leading the effort to make sure that we pass these joint
resolutions of disapproval.
Joint resolutions of disapproval are about denying military
assistance to countries that break U.S. and international law. That is
all they are about: Respect the law; don't break the law.
These resolutions before us today would prevent multibillion-dollar
arm sales to both the UAE and Qatar, precisely because both of these
countries have violated U.S. and international law, and allowing these
sales to go forward would be a dereliction in the duties of the U.S.
Senate.
Let me take a moment to say a few words about these countries--
countries that would receive billions of dollars in military aid. As it
happens, both of these countries have strongly authoritarian, anti-
democratic governments that repress any forms of dissent.
We talk a lot about protests here in the United States. Well, they
don't have protests in Qatar. They don't have protests in the UAE. You
protest; you go to jail.
These are countries that exploit migrant labor, and these are
countries that treat women as third-class citizens.
In the UAE and Qatar, where the ruling families are worth many
hundreds of billions of dollars, there are no elections, there is no
freedom of the press, and there is no freedom of speech. The ruling
families of both of these countries are among the wealthiest and most
powerful oligarchs in the entire world.
In the UAE's case, in recent years, they have provided extensive
military assistance to the so-called Rapid Support Forces in Sudan, or
the RSF. This paramilitary group started the bloody civil war in that
country and is responsible for numerous horrific atrocities that, among
other things, have contributed to the famine and starvation that is
currently taking place in that country.

[[Page S3341]]

In January, the U.S. State Department concluded that the RSF,
supported by the UAE--the country that would get weapons, if we are not
successful in opposing that--has committed ethnic cleansing. I am not
quite sure why we would support arms to a country involved in ethnic
cleansing.
Clearly, the actions of the UAE are in violation of U.S. and
international law. There is no reason, therefore, that we should be
providing billions more in arms sales to this country.
The other arms sale we are objecting to today would go to Qatar, a
country which has also broken U.S. and international law.
Qatar has channeled hundreds of millions of dollars into a wide
variety of political organizations in the Middle East, including the
Hamas terrorist organization. And I have no understanding as to why
anybody in the U.S. Senate would be voting to support a nation--
providing military aid to a nation--that has provided financial
assistance to Hamas.
And while Qatar deserves credit for attempting to facilitate a cease-
fire in Gaza, it should also be noted that the political leaders of
Hamas have resided in Qatar for many years.
But there is another very serious problem regarding military aid to
both Qatar and the UAE. Both of these countries, in a variety of ways,
have attempted to corrupt our political system and the President of the
United States in violation of the emoluments clause of the Constitution
and U.S. anti-corruption laws.
I find it interesting, as I am sure millions of Americans do, that
President Trump's first major foreign policy trip was not to Europe to
reaffirm our longstanding alliances with other democratic countries. It
was not to visit our neighbors in Canada or Mexico. No, instead, he
chose, on his very first foreign trip, to go to Saudi Arabia, Qatar,
and the UAE.
Now, why was that? Why would the President of the United States go to
visit countries that are run by oligarchs, that are strongly anti-
democratic and oppress the rights of women?
They are kind of funny places for a President--the so-called leader
of the free world--to visit on his first foreign policy trip.
Well, I think we now know the answer to that question. Trump went for
the money and to secure business deals for himself, his family, and his
cronies.
Shortly before Trump's visit to the Gulf, an investment firm owned by
the UAE announced that it would use the so-called stablecoin issued by
World Liberty Financial to facilitate a $2 billion cryptocurrency deal.
World Liberty Financial just happens to be 60 percent owned by Trump
and his family. So by making this deal, the UAE was effectively giving
the Trump family $2 billion in cash to invest as it wishes and keep the
proceeds.

Even conservative estimates of such a sum would generate somewhere
around $85 million in profit a year for the Trump family. Think about
that. The UAE is directly giving the Trump family some $85 million a
year.
Now, what did the UAE get in return? They don't give away $85 million
for nothing.
In Qatar's case, that government announced, during Trump's visit,
that they would give him a $400 million luxury jet for use as Air Force
One, which he plans to keep for personal use after he leaves office.
Necessary security and communications updates will cost the taxpayers
of our country millions of dollars and take several years. So if this
plane is actually ever used by the U.S. Government, it will only be for
a year or two. But that is really not Donald Trump's concern because he
gets to keep this flying palace--this $400 million plane--for use for
himself and his family forever--not a bad gift, a $400 million plane.
Once again, it is pretty obvious what Trump gets from this deal. It
is not quite so clear how the American people benefit.
Qatar also announced that it was just, coincidentally, financing a
$5.5 billion Trump-branded golf course and invested another billion
dollars in Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner's company, just for good
measure.
Now, what are these authoritarian governments getting in return for
the many hundreds of millions of dollars they are funneling to Trump
and his family?
Well, it could be the arms sales we are talking about today. It could
be other policy priorities of these governments.
For example, just 10 days after the UAE crypto deal with Trump, he
lifted restrictions on the export of advance AI microchips to the UAE,
which had previously been limited over security concerns. That
delivered on a longstanding UAE priority worth billions of dollars to
its leaders.
But the deeper truth is we really don't know what these authoritarian
foreign powers are getting for their bribes. But we shouldn't have to
be asking these questions. This is precisely why the Constitution of
the United States and U.S. law make it illegal for Presidents to accept
gifts from foreign powers.
The truth is that the autocratic leaders of Saudi Arabia, the UAE,
and Qatar have perfected the art of channeling money to Trump and his
family as a way to buy influence and get what they want. Our job is to
say no, to say no to providing military aid to one country which is
involved in horrific policies which are resulting in famine and
starvation and another country which is making huge amounts of money
from side deals with the President.
Let us support these resolutions.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.

Unanimous Consent Requests--Amendment Nos. 2349 and 2350

Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, President Trump is engaged in massive
corruption. There is a ``government for sale'' sign flashing its lights
on the lawn of the White House. He is selling access and influence
through two types of cryptocoins: a meme coin which is a digital
baseball card, and he invited the 220 people who gave him the most
money for these digital baseball cards called a meme coin to come to a
dinner where he would feed them at his fancy Virginia golf club, held 2
weeks ago.
And he said: Oh, and the top 25 buyers of my meme coin, those buyers
will get some other special access and special tour.
And 220 people gave the President $148 million, approximately, and
they didn't give him $148 million in order to have a digital baseball
card. They gave it because he was conveying that this would give you
access and influence.
As the president of Freight Technologies, Inc., said, I bought $2
million of these coins. I am hoping to buy $20 million of these coins
because I want the President to change a policy related to freight
transportation between Mexico and the United States of America.
That CEO was saying out loud what everyone else understood: that the
President was selling access and influence.
And that is not all. There is another type of Trump coin--
cryptocoin--that is inducing these corrupt practices. It is called a
stablecoin. And a company associated with the United Arab Emirates
said: You know, we are going to buy $2 billion of your coins. And guess
what. You get to keep the value of everything earned on that $2 billion
deposit.
Even at 4 percent, that is $80 million a year.
And what did the UAE want?
The UAE wanted advanced AI chips in order to have an advanced AI
center in the United Arab Emirates.
Well, what did we see transpire?
The UAE repeatedly advocated for having access to these chips that
the United States had previously said were a security risk.
Then a company closely associated with the UAE buys $2 billion of
Trump's USD1 stablecoin. And then President Trump says: Oh, do you know
what? You can have these AI chips after all. We will help you establish
an advanced AI processing--artificial intelligence--center in Abu
Dhabi, one of the UAE Emirates. That is corruption laid out as black
and white as you could ever see it. This is incredible. This is what we
expect of very poor, impoverished countries with dictators running the
place, taking a cut of everything, but instead it is the President of
the United States doing it.

Our Founders said this should never be allowed. Hamilton noted the
reason that there is an emoluments clause in the Constitution. In
Federalist 22, he

[[Page S3342]]

said ``many mortifying examples of the prevalency of foreign corruption
in republican governments.''
So here were our Founders, putting together this series of checks and
balances, separation of powers between a judiciary, an executive, and a
legislative branch, but they knew it could all be corrupted if you had
an Executive--that is, a President--who could be bought.
Well, folks, we have a President who is being bought, who is
advertising it to the world, and we haven't acted to stop it. Our
Founders acted. They put a clause into the Constitution that said that
``no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them''--that,
of course, included the President of the United States, the Vice
President of the United States, all of us here who are elected--
``shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present,
Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King,
Prince, or foreign State.''
Well, the head of MGX is the National Security Advisor of the United
Arab Emirates. This company is absolutely intertwined with this foreign
government. Our Constitution forbids this type of gift to a President
or a Vice President or any one of us.
So here is the fact: We are right now debating a bill dealing with
cryptocurrencies, so this is the time to debate and vote on an
amendment that bans these corrupt practices.
For that reason, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate resumes
consideration of amendment No. 2307 postcloture, that the pending
amendment No. 2310 be set aside so I may offer my amendment No. 2349,
which would stop the corruption in stablecoins for any elected Federal
official of the United States of America.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there an objection?
The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. President, reserving the right to
object, I think it is pretty rich for the party of President Biden to
talk about improprieties.
I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, I hear an objection from my friend and
colleague, the head of the Banking Committee. Would my friend and
colleague explain why we shouldn't, while we are on a cryptocurrency
bill, consider and debate an amendment to honor the emoluments clause
of the U.S. Constitution.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. President, I think it is pretty
clear that the underlying assumption is that there is already something
nefarious going on, and I simply object to casting aspersions toward
the President of the United States, particularly given the fact that
this is the party--not Jeff but the party--that had cocaine in the
White House, that had a problem with Hunter Biden's laptop.
My point is, I am not going to cast aspersions on the President of
the United States without any clear evidence that any law has been
broken, and I do not believe that there has been.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, I ask to be recognized. We are in the
middle of a series of presentations here.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. He recognized you.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. I recognized you.
Mr. MERKLEY. Thank you.
I could understand if my colleague was objecting because that
amendment only covers one type of cryptocurrency that is being used in
this fashion, and therefore I will present a different option, which is
to say we should address both the sale of meme coins as a way to profit
from people wanting to give us money and we should also cover the
stablecoins as well.
So this broader amendment is a more comprehensive way, regardless of
what conclusions you might have about President Trump currently, a
broader way to ensure as we go forward that this body and the executive
branch, the House down the Hall, will not be corrupted by us making
personal money by selling something like a stablecoin or a meme coin, a
digital baseball card--a way for people to essentially channel us cash,
pretending to buy digital baseball cards.
So I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate resumes consideration
of amendment No. 2307 postcloture, that the pending amendment No. 2308
be set aside so that I may offer my amendment No. 2350, which more
broadly covers the set of corrupting risks that we would be addressing
not just for the executive branch but for the legislative branch as
well.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from South Carolina.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The objection is heard.
Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, I am disappointed. I was very present
when the majority leader said that on this bill, there will be an open
amendment process, and we made it very clear that this was one of the
issues that we felt we should be debating while we are on a
cryptocurrency bill.
There are other amendments that should be considered as well. One of
them is to stop a form of scam that bypasses a bank teller by getting
older folks to think they are wiring money to perhaps a nephew or
grandchild in distress, but instead of wiring the funds, they go and
get digital coins at an ATM as instructed, but, in fact, they are just
giving the money to crooks overseas. That amendment should be
considered.
There are other amendments that address creating more sideboards so
that this bill, which purports to regulate an industry, actually
regulates it in an effective fashion rather than essentially endorsing
an unregulated industry, which is what, in sum, this bill is currently.
So I am disappointed. I would, as I asked earlier, ask for the
majority leader to honor his previous commitment to have an open
amendment process so that we can pursue the people's work, fighting for
a better America, including ending corruption in cryptocurrencies.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.

S.J. Res. 53 and S.J. Res. 54

Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to oppose the two
resolutions we are about to vote on. What they are is they have to do
with arms sales to Qatar and UAE.
These flawed resolutions aren't really about arms sales to our allies
in Qatar and UAE. If they were, the discussion would be about how Qatar
is one of our designated, major non-NATO allies, how it hosts the
largest U.S. military base in the Middle East, and how it is our 12th
largest foreign military sales customer. It would be about how the UAE
has fought alongside the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq, is a
participant in the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, and is working
against Iran and its terror proxies. The debate would mention that the
UAE was the first Arab state to join the Abraham Accords when it
normalized relations with Israel in 2020. The discussion would be about
how these proposed sales will support the national security objectives
of the United States by improving the security of two allies that
continue to be important forces for stability in the Middle East. We
would talk about how these agreements will lay the foundation for
investment, innovation, and good-paying U.S. jobs that will boost our
economy.
But, no, these joint resolutions do not conduct oversight or provide
congressional disapproval. Instead, they make arms sales to some of our
closest allies in the Middle East about partisan politics. As such, I
would urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and I object to
the resolutions and urge a ``no'' vote.
Mr. President, I yield back all time and request to proceed to the
vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is yielded back.

Vote on Motion to Discharge

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to
discharge S.J. Res. 53.
Mr. PETERS. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.

[[Page S3343]]

Mr. BARRASSO. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the
Senator from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Gallego),
the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Ossoff), and the Senator from California
(Mr. Padilla) are necessarily absent.
The result was announced--yeas 39, nays 56, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 306 Leg.]

YEAS--39

Alsobrooks
Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Blunt Rochester
Booker
Cantwell
Duckworth
Durbin
Fetterman
Gillibrand
Hassan
Heinrich
Hickenlooper
Hirono
Kaine
Kelly
King
Klobuchar
Lujan
Markey
Merkley
Murphy
Murray
Peters
Reed
Sanders
Schatz
Schiff
Schumer
Shaheen
Smith
Van Hollen
Warner
Warnock
Warren
Welch
Whitehouse
Wyden

NAYS--56

Banks
Barrasso
Boozman
Britt
Budd
Capito
Cassidy
Collins
Coons
Cornyn
Cortez Masto
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Curtis
Daines
Ernst
Fischer
Graham
Grassley
Hagerty
Hawley
Hoeven
Husted
Hyde-Smith
Johnson
Justice
Kennedy
Kim
Lankford
Lee
Lummis
Marshall
McConnell
McCormick
Moody
Moran
Moreno
Mullin
Murkowski
Ricketts
Risch
Rosen
Rounds
Schmitt
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Sheehy
Slotkin
Sullivan
Thune
Tillis
Tuberville
Wicker
Young

ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

Paul

NOT VOTING--4

Blackburn
Gallego
Ossoff
Padilla
The motion was rejected.

Vote on Motion to Discharge

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. MOODY). Under the previous order, the
question is on agreeing to the motion to discharge S.J. Res. 54.
Mr. MURPHY. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. BARRASSO. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the
Senator from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Gallego),
the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Ossoff), and the Senator from California
(Mr. Padilla) are necessarily absent.
The result was announced--yeas 39, nays 56, as follows:

[Rollcall Vote No. 307 Leg.]

YEAS--39

NAYS--56

ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

Paul

NOT VOTING--4

Blackburn
Gallego
Ossoff
Padilla
The motion was rejected.
(Mr. Moreno assumed the Chair.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Justice).
The Senator from Ohio.

____________________