
If the Inspectors General can't do their job, we can't do our job, and this is why it is imperative.
On the public record
Every politician on the site, every statement on file. Search, filter, and read the public record.
8,900+·quotes on file

If the Inspectors General can't do their job, we can't do our job, and this is why it is imperative.

Inspectors General serve the American taxpayers as the first line of defense against waste, fraud and abuse by government agencies.

I've been asked and will certainly be asked again if there are any circumstances, whatsoever that might develop, that could change my mind. That seems unlikely. Accordingly, I'm not organizing the PAC or taking donations. I'm not hiring a…

Applying that discretion across the board to entire categories of individuals has the same effect of changing the law itself.

Had you been Attorney General, you would not have stopped that.

the Constitution requires us to work together, and that the Justice Department has actually facilitated this pattern of behavior, some people believe.

I will reintroduce the Defend Trade Secrets Act in the coming days with Senator Coons to provide an efficient Federal remedy for trade secret owners.

I also appreciated our visit recently when you came to my office.

So you are guilty, in essence, until proven innocent, at least guilty in the sense that your property is gone.

Are you aware that there is a program called Operation Choke Point within the Department of Justice?

I want to personally thank you for your advocacy and leadership for police people all over this country.

should you be confirmed, you will work with me to make sure that legitimate law-abiding Americans are not targeted for their exercise of their Second Amendment rights.

Do you think it is fundamentally just and fair for the Government to be able to seize property from a citizen without having to prove that the citizen was guilty of any crime?

we really ought to find ways to stop Federal law enforcement agencies from helping State governments to circumvent their own State law restrictions on civil forfeiture?

Would that, under that hypothetical scenario, not be tantamount to a usurpation of the legislative role that belongs to the legislative branch?