HEATED CLASH! When Ben Ray Unleashed On Scott Bessent, Demanded Apology To Americans

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Besant, should Americans who illegally evade their taxes be investigated and prosecuted? Yes. Secretary Besant, should people and organizations facilitating money laundering for Iran, North Korea, or Hamas be prosecuted? Yes. What about laundering money for Mexican drug cartels? Yes. Should a person who traded and profited on insider information be prosecuted? According to the law, they should. I appreciate that. Mr. Secretary, as a result of President Trump's $10 billion lawsuit, the Department of Justice, on behalf of your department, settled with President Trump by creating a $1.776 billion slush fund to pay for his supporters and criminals. Were you either directly or through your staff asked to sign the original agreement? Again, Senator, you were not here at the early part of the meeting. I saw you on TV. Well, congratulations, and you would know that I'm unable to answer those questions and they should be referred to Attorney General Blanch. Mr. Secretary, what about the addendum to this agreement? Are you familiar with what the addendum is? I'm not sure what you're referring to. Are you familiar with this giveaway from the IRS that says President Trump and anyone that knows him or does business with him or part of a business, they get off scot-free? Are you aware of this? Again, I refer you to Attorney General Blanch. Are you Attorney General Blanch's client? The IRS and Treasury are a client of the Department of Justice. So is that a nice way of saying yes? You're a client he's your lawyer. He represents. You're the secretary are you the Secretary of Treasury? Yes is the answer. The Department of Justice Scott Besson, let me ask you this question are you the Secretary? In my personal capacity Tom Blanche is not my attorney. Correct sir. Are you for the U.S. Treasury Mr. Secretary, Scott let me ask you this way Scott are you the Secretary of treasury for the united states government yes appreciate that the Department of Justice represents the IRS of the Department of Treasury in this lawsuit correct correct are you aware of this addendum that it's you're telling me DOJ gave the president this without you knowing about it again they settle on the power all right that's not how the law works sir i'm not a lawyer but you have a bunch of them behind you you should see the faces they're making at me behind you They're all scowling at me back over here. Well, I think that's a different reason, sir. Well, for whatever it is, they're doing it. Mr. Secretary, my concern is that this addendum has not been getting a lot of attention. There's colleagues on this panel that think this slush fund is a bunch of bullshit. And they've called out to say, get rid of it. Now, people need to say, are you okay with one person in America, because the Secretary of Treasury, I'm guessing, conferred with the Department of Justice, because you're named on this lawsuit sir these are all the transactions from the president as well that i'm going to ask you this next question as well you were bragging to one of my colleagues that you've been sanctioning people doing bad things in america people that get sanctioned like iran or terrorists they're told not to do business in the united states with partners is that your understanding sir me as a layman it is you hold these bad people accountable i congratulate you for that so this little giveaway to president trump and his family gets him off scott free does every american become part of this addendum if someone didn't pay their taxes or violated tax law or did bad things are they told can't prosecute you're good everyone going back to the date of this or is this only for President Trump and his affiliates senator do you have specific knowledge that President Trump's being audited sir i have specific knowledge of this addendum that you don't know a damn thing about that is for the Department of Treasury that your lawyer at the Department of Justice signed you up for? The reason I'm asking this question is because President Trump's sons signed a deal, as you know, with World Liberty Financial with a bunch of folks you sanctioned. And now, as part of this, there's an addendum that says President Trump and his kids and anyone affiliated with him, I don't know if it's current wives, former wives, people that just did transactions with him, they're off scot-free that you know that has a new way a new ring to it this is scot-free because the Department of Treasury the IRS is not going to go after him sir this is wrong this is lawless i hope our colleagues will look at this addendum if i could offer this into the record mr chairman for those that haven't seen it yet without objection come on man there's a better way of doing this sir that's all we're saying here so look i appreciate it if you don't want to talk about a lawsuit that that's your prerogative to answer that way but to say that you as a client as Secretary of the U.S. Treasury does not know what the Department of Justice is giving away to people come on man that's just not on the up and up sir i sir i hope you don't understand the way the protocol works and we the we receive advice and accept their settlement you're telling me as the Secretary of U.S. Treasury you don't know that the President of the United States who i think you work for got a sweetheart deal from the Department of Justice who's your lawyer i do know You're in line for the presidency, Scott. I do know that the president of the United States and 400, many of his employees, had the largest tax leak in history. And I know here's his filing share of all the insider trading. Do you want to apologize on behalf of the American government? Scott, you should apologize to the American people for fleecing them and giving this away to Donald Trump, man. That's what you should do. We can agree to disagree. Senator Warnock. That we'll agree on. Thank you, Brother Chairman. last month i asked the president's nominee to lead the federal reserve what i thought was a simple question but he tried to dodge it his answer was cute i'm not sure the american people who are struggling were laughing so i'll ask you the same question to see if i can get a clearer answer president trump has said that his grade of the economy his words is a quote plus plus plus plus plus. He said this before he sent energy and gas prices soaring with this illegal war in Iran, a war that's costing taxpayers billions of dollars, a billion dollars or more per day, turbocharging inflation. So I'll ask the Secretary of the Treasury the same question. Given all of the challenges facing ordinary Americans, our political differences aside, What grade would you give the U.S. economy right now? Which challenges other than temporarily elevated prices would you identify, Senator? I'm asking you what grade would you give the economy? I think we have the makings of one of the strongest economies in history. We've had 2.6% growth, and core inflation had dropped. Food inflation, since President Trump began, as much as you all may want to disagree, I got it. It's 2.5%. So you agree with the president. You would give the economy a plus, plus, plus, plus. I think we have all. From where you sit. I think we have all the making for a very strong economy. I think that we have temporary elevated prices that will come back down. I got it. So you're telling Americans it's not so bad. Americans give the Trump economy, a failing grade. You and I can disagree, but this is not about us. They give the economy a failing grade because they can't afford anything. Folks back at home at Georgia, whom I represent, are struggling, let me finish, to just make their lives work. And they know President Trump's Iran war and the tariff taxes are only making things worse. Talk to farmers in Georgia, they'll tell you that. But I'm not so sure folks fully grasp the long-term crisis that's also brewing for our children and our grandchildren. Wars do not pay for themselves. And this year, under the Trump administration's economic policies, the $31 trillion national debt exceeded GDP for basically the first time since World War II. Think about that. Now, to be fair, debt did exceed GDP during the COVID-19 pandemic, but that was only briefly as GDP crashed as a result of a once-in-a-century pandemic. The big ugly bill alone will add nearly $5 trillion to the national debt, something that I do care about, and I think it matters. I think it's interesting that Republicans talk about it when Democrats are in charge, But I haven't heard much discussion about the national debt lately. According to our nonpartisan scorekeepers in the Congressional Budget Office, it will add $5 trillion to national debt. Do you still think that driving deeper into debt to extend billionaire tax cuts were a good investment? Sir, that 90% of the filers who availed themselves on President Trump's signature policies make below $100,000. dollars. And if you want to know who is responsible for the American people, you all torts them during the Biden administration. I'm not sure if you were part of that. But we had 21.5% of the increase. Look, Joe Biden has been out of office two years. And the fact that you all keep talking about him tells you everything. We had real negative wage growth. And- Sir, I'm asking you a basic question. Do you think that going into debt to extend billionaire tax cuts was a good investment? Yes or no? I disagree with the categorization of billionaire tax cuts when, in fact, most of the tax cuts went to working Americans. No, all of those, the tax, the tax, according to the, according, according to the. Senator, you are quoting the Congressional Budget Office, which. According to the Yale Budget Office, the Yale Budget Lab. The Yale Budget Lab is a bunch of Biden hacks. Oh, yeah, okay. Well, you should talk to the people in Georgia. They will tell you, sir, that whatever tax relief you think you gave them was more than taken up by these tariffs. According to the Yale Budget Lab, the administration's tariffs cost families three times as much as they got back in tax cuts. I don't want to talk to folks at Yale. I talk to the folks in Georgia. How about the Iran war, which is costing tens of billions of dollars and counting? You previously said we have plenty of money for the war. War has increased the national debt. Is that spending still a good idea, sir? Yes or no? Sir, do you think it's a good idea to spend so that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon? Sir, I'm not... Sir, sir, do you think it's a good... So you do think it's a good idea? I think preventing... You think the Iran war makes... I think just as many people historically, when President Obama was in office, said that Iran may not have a nuclear weapon... President Obama left office in 2016, sir. I know, but I'm saying there are many people on this committee who said Iran should never have a nuclear weapon at any cost. I agree with that. They should not have a nuclear weapon, and they're closer, thanks to this administration's policy. Absolutely not, sir. And the Strait of Hormuz is still closed. And you should tell the people in Georgia that this war is a good idea. I think they'll disagree. Senator Cassidy. Hey, Secretary Vesson. Thanks for being here, sir. We know Social Security is going unsolvable in six years. uh ask your predecessor in trump one what was the plan to do about it he said that would be a second trump administration deal now we're in the first half of the president's second term and obviously we're now only six years away at that time we were like 12 years away from insolvency uh social security will account for 20 percent of federal expenditures and i was told once that it accounts for 20 percent of our long-term accrued liability uh accrued debt um what's the president's plan to address social security insolvency sir we have to get our short-term house in order first we inherited a mess 6.9 if i may if i interrupt i don't mean to be rude if we wait to get our short-term house in order we will be three years away from insolvency i've been working on this it is amazing since i've been working on this over the last five years it is amazing how much it's already deteriorated it's just amazing uh in five years it's gotten so worse are we really going to wait until we get i'm not challenging i'm just asking are we really going to wait until we're not going to do anything i'm just not sure about that, yeah and Senator you got a crawl walk run that they we with these deficits with this debt that was run up in the previous administration with 6.9 percent deficit to GDP but but but highest ever when we weren't in war weren't we're in recession we brought it down to 5.4 if i may if i may the the social security trust fund is funded by the social security tax which is segregated from general revenue now if we speak about the debt and deficit whatever the i'm not touching that right now except in so far as context we have to do something that is general revenue but wherever that comes from if we're speaking about social that is segregated that is a social security revenue problem and expenditure issue um so to me that's segregated again so is there a plan to do anything about the segregated fund with the segregated revenue stream and a segregated expenditure pattern well senator part part of it is it's the revenues aren't the the source of the revenue is not segregated because the more americans who work the more the higher paying jobs they have, the more it goes into the Social Security Trust Fund. I accept that, but that's an indirect effect. And is that the only plan the administration has currently to hopefully increase the number of jobs and the better paying jobs and hope that that, because I've run, I got a big spreadsheet on this. That is inadequate to address the problem. Every day, 10,000 boomers become eligible for social. And the drain on this is just incredible. It's just going down. That will not solve the problem. And again, I don't mean to be at all confrontative. I'm just trying to say. I remember my first visit to your office, you were kind enough to share the spreadsheet on a screen with me. Yeah. So so so I'm gathering that the administration does not have a plan to address. And I'm saying that not in any way except to say by your answers that the only response so far would be the indirect indirect side of it. Now, on a bipartisan basis, we have been working on something that would attempt to address this it is going to take the president the administration at some point being involved at this point it's in congress um it involves creating an investment fund much as we have already done with the federal railroad retirement system a plan that senator wyden voted for when he was in the house of representatives that took the federal railroad retirement system from going insolvent and now it's paying benefits with fewer workers and more retirees and doing extremely well. It's also based upon what the Canadians have done with their Canadian pension fund, which was also going insolvent, and they've been able to address that. Knowing that you'd have to vet it, but would the administration conceptually be okay working with Congress to find a solution such as this? Again, Senator, we will work on anything, but we are going to guarantee that the benefits remain as they are. Subscribe to OneIndia and never miss an update. Download the OneIndia app now.