Transcripts For CSPAN Senate Judiciary Hearing On China Coronavirus Pandemic 20240712

Certainly china is to blame and has to be held accountable. View, doesr point of the sovereign immunity act need to be amended at all to allow you to move forward . We are moving forward because we believe that is how we proceeded on our lawsuit which we filed in the United States Federal District court of mississippi. That onportant to note the foreign sovereign immunities act, the commercial activity section is an act based on commercial activity in china that has a direct effect on the United States and they may not be immune. A reference to the nature of the court of conduct and a particular transaction or act. China was engaged in commercial activity, including the production, purchasing, import and export of ppes. Even essentially nationalizing the manufacturing. We believe this exception is workable and that is why i am proceeding with our lawsuit. Now, certainly the amendments of the Foreign Policy immune act would be helpful. Providing additional exceptions provides us broader avenues for states and i individuals to seek justice. Chair graham mr. Miller, what is your view on the argument she just made . Your knowledge of the act. Do you think the mississippi lawsuit is justified under the current law . Mr. Miller my expertise is not as strong in the area of the foreign sovereign immunities act as either of the madam attorney general or my colleague. My survey of that legislation and the relevant rules led me to wonder if in fact there is an uphill battle for the plaintiff in these cases. Both under the commercial activities provision or the territorial tort provisions. You are going to hear skepticism, i expect, about the functionality of those exceptions in this case from the professor, but all of that points to the necessity for amending the act if we want to move forward. Chair graham so the goal from your point of view would be to drive china in their consensual arbitration environment, is that what you are suggesting . Prof. Miller i dont share the professors view that these domestic civil suits are more harmful necessarily or futile. We have plenty of evidence that they can actually do what you just described, chairman. That they can move our foreign partners towards consensual negotiation. But we also have evidence they can turn towards providing actual compensation for american victims in a number of cases did the case against saudi arabia, justified under the exceptions is moving painstakingly through the process, but it holds out real promise for securing justice. I can think of one profound example in which civil litigation worked in tandem with the kind of International Law processes i described. That is the long and painful story of the pan am 103 terrorist attack. In that context, civil litigation worked profoundly to move libya towards a settlement at the International Law level. Chair graham my goal is to put as many levers on the table as possible to get china to change. Compensate people in a fair fashion. This is the third pandemic coming out of china and the consequences to our country and the world have been astounding. To go back to the old model, where you just, i dont know do you support a pandemic tariff . Senator, im not an economist. I do reference in the footnotes of my written testimony a report from the American Economic institute that explains in convincing detail why that would be a terrible idea. Chair graham ok, you dont support tariffs. Do you support sanctioning china . Yes, i think in appropriate circumstances. Chair graham can you tell me what you would do . I will get to the executive branch under the act has the ability to and has used that ability to impose sanctions both on a state level. Chair graham what about the congress . Prof. Keitner you could give the president further guidance on the types of sanctions he would like to impose, as he has done recently. I think those types of levers are less likely to boomerang back than the one your colleagues are proposing. Chair graham can you give me an example where sanctions against china have substantially changed their behavior . Prof. Keitner my expertise is not in china specifically but i would point to the progress we have made both with respect to economic espionage, as well as the trade deal. I was reassured to hear from the president this morning still in good shape. Chair graham absolutely no ofmple doing anything out the Current Situation has changed chinas behavior. Senator feinstein. Feinstein sorry. Out thatnt to point the chairman did not administer an oath, but the witnesses are under an obligation to tell the truth. Chair graham you are right. I will swear them in. My bad. Stand up. Raise your right hand. Solemnly swear the testimony you are giving and have given is the truth, nothing but the truth, so help you got . I do. Chair graham i dont know if that works. Sen. Feinstein thank you. On april 17 of this year, a Republican Communications firm i think it is by the name of odonnell and associates released a memo urging republicans running for office to blame china for covid and to responsibility away from the Trump Administrations planning for and response to the pandemic. So, i would like to ask this from both analysts. Are you aware of that memo . If so, how did you learn about it . Attorney general . A. G. Fitch thank you, senator. I am not aware of that document , nor have i heard anything about that. Sen. Feinstein thank you. Could we hear from our panelists here . Prof. Miller i have never heard about this memo. Never seen it. Prof. Keitner yes, i have done my homework. I am aware of the memo. I read about it in the press. I then read the memo and found it extremely striking that many of the allegations in the memo are repeated almost verbatim in some of the lawsuits that have been and are being filed. Sen. Feinstein before attorney general fitch, mississippi filed a lawsuit against china just days after the release of the memo. Before suing china, did you talk with anyone about the republican strategy to shift blame to china . A. G. Fitch i did not. I believe this legal action is worth it on behalf of the people of mississippi. We cannot ignore what china did. The Consumer Protection law, it is important. China engaged in unfair and deceptive acts, methods and practices. China covered up the seriousness of covid19. Sen. Feinstein i understand that. Thank you. I have another question. Before suing china, attorney general, did you talk with anyone about the republican strategy to shift blame to china . Has anyone ever expressed to you in any way, shape or form, they think your lawsuit is a good way to shift the blame to china . A. G. Fitch no, senator feinstein. Not at all. Sen. Feinstein and you know you are under oath. A. G. Fitch yes. Sen. Feinstein all right. I would like mr. Chairman to know more about that republican Communication Firm that released the memo. Chair graham i have never read it, along with everybody else. I figured this out all on my own. Sen. Feinstein ok. Heres another question. Does the foreign sovereign immunities act allow lawsuits against china related to the coronavirus . Prof. Keitner if that is directed to me, and i am a reporter on foreign sovereign immunity, although i dont represent the institute today, it does not. That is precisely why an amendment would be needed in order to allow the suit to be filed. They would not produce compensation and i would be glad to enter questions in the record to elaborate extensively on why they are not examples that are relevant, that paved the way to the glorious end we are all hoping for here. Prof. Miller i would qualify that only by noting the legal questions to be determined through advocacy and arguments over the nature of the standards activitiesommercial exception and territorial tort. Prof. Keitner im giving my Expert Opinion as a former lawyer. Sen. Feinstein could he finish answer . Prof. Miller a determination of lawful article iii, not the state Department Representative who would be a party to those, that advocacy, to settle that question definitively. You asked whether it was possible to suit, and it is possible in the legal standards have to be resolved by a judge. Sen. Feinstein please continue. Prof. Keitner just to clarify, i am not here on behalf of the state department. But it did give me insight and experience that nobody else on this Witness Panel has. What i will say to reassure the attorney general, if the problem a ppe defects, that could be straightforward, contractbased claim that would fall under a sovereign immunity exception. You can get your money back, but that does not give you a hook to start litigating the Public Policy of the chinese disease prevention and regulatory agencies, just as we would not want a foreign countrys courts to screwed hi scrutinizee actions of the fda. Chair graham senator grassley. Sen. Grassley i am the author of the antiterrorism act and the subsequent amendments. I know how difficult it is for victims in cases against foreign states or entities to get compensation. This is especially true when congress clearly says one thing but the court still do another. I also know the lengths the Chinese Government and its agents and subsidiaries will go through to avoid u. S. Justice. Last congress, i introduced the state owned entities transparency and accountability reform act which would amend the foreign sovereign immunity act to prevent the shell games that Chinese State owned Enterprises Play in our own justice system. Heres the first question. Igncongress amended the fore sovereign immunity to prevent americans to sue china for covid19 damages, are you concerned about the victims ability to collect in their judgments . Envisionwords, do you victims actually Getting Compensation from china . Why or why not . Start with the attorney general from mississippi. A. G. Fitch thank you, senator. No, we fully believe that we are moving towards monetary damage and compensation for the state of mississippi. Again, this is very much about deterrent. Entering into a lawsuit on behalf of the state of mississippi, we are Holding China accountable. They have been a bad actor. They had willfully acted, they have been malicious so we intend not only to go for monetary mississippians, but certainly to set an example that we will not tolerate this. Setting an example in her deterrent manner throughout lawsuit. Sen. Grassley professor miller. Prof. Miller obtaining compensation for american victims by way of foreign sovereign immunity act is a very difficult prospect. We have a number of cases in which american victims of unlawful activity by foreign sovereigns can be given compensation, can receive justice. It is my advocacy today that we imagine how the foreign sovereign immunities act as amended by some of the legislation in consideration, in combination with consensual International Law leverage can actually move us towards that goal. Sen. Grassley in 2016, i worked with other sponsors on the act. Importantly led two amendments to my antiterrorism act of 1992 to reopen the courthouse doors for american victims of International Terrorism. Through it all, congress was consistently told by the Foreign Policy crowd to not move ahead for fear of this or that reciprocal action overseas, but never passed those bills to get justice for american citizens. My first question, i will start with the attorney general from mississippi. Would you agree that Congress Acts for the American People and it should not be swayed by foreign threats or speculative retaliation . A. G. Fitch absolutely. We should not be swayed by any threats coming from a foreign nation. I think the amendment and adding the additional exceptions are important. This will provide us broader avenues on how we proceed and receive justice for states and individuals. Theres no reason to restrict and no reason to give into their threats or demands. Sen. Grassley before i call on you, professor miller, let me give another question and you can answer, two at a time. China has long made clear its intention to aggressively use domestic and International Legal systems as part of what it calls three warfares. If china is already using our legal system against americans, is that only appropriate americans have full legal resource against chinas actions and failures . Prof. Miller yeah, senator, thank you. Im advocating for us to open up the possibility of american domestic civil litigation as a way of adding leverage to the mechanisms of the International Law level, consensual mechanisms that have produce compensation. I find that a compelling concern. I want to also underscore that it is a Unanimous Supreme Court that recently endorsed the kinds of amendments this committee is considering with respect to foreign sovereign immunity and extending punitive damage coverage on the basis of some amendments this body has pursued. Prof. Keitner may i correct a statement in that testimony . Sen. Grassley you may. Prof. Keitner the Supreme Court by no means endorsed of the kind of exceptions we are discussing here, interpreting this bodys choice of statutory language. There is very good basis for distinguishing the terrorism exception that it would be glad to get into. Sen. Grassley ok, im done. Chair graham senator cowans. Thank you, senator graham, thank you to our panel. There is broad bipartisan concern about chinas early response of the covid19 pandemic. It is clear that the whos initial response was an adequate. However, that does not change the reality in the u. S. We have seen more than 120,000 americans die and an economic crisis at moments rivaling the great depression, largely because of a disorganized and chaotic federal response. We should find ways to hold china accountable but we also must honestly assess our own response and how the administrations actions will or will not bring us out of this ongoing pandemic safely and prepare us for working with the world to address the next pandemic. So, professor keitner, if i might the principal sovereign immunity faces reciprocity. If congress were to create a cause of action against china for its response to covid19, what would stop other countries from trying to hold the United States liable, for example, damages related to our own response to the pandemic or other actions . Prof. Keitner in the first instance, what would stop them his customary International Law, and their own domestic immunity statutes. What would happen because the u. S. Is a trend center and does have a tremendous influence on the development of customary International Law, it is not simply a question of fearing threats from china. That is not my concern. We can stand up for ourselves. However, it will have an effect of eroding the protections we enjoy, particularly in the pandemic context where we dont even actually know for sure right now whether, for example, the influenza pandemic in 1918, where that started. Where the 2009 pandemic came from. There are indications and may have been the United States. We dont want to be put on the hook for those sorts of things in foreign courts either. Sen. Coons are there other recent examples of congress stripping a Foreign Government of sovereign immunity where it was not related to terrorism . Prof. Keitner not to my knowledge. I have looked at this issue very comfort hands of lee. Sen. Coons mr. Miller, are there other examples you can cite recently of congress stripping foreign immunity . Prof. Miller no, but i would qualify that answer only by noting that the scale of the harm done by this pandemic might justify departure from that tradition. Sen. Coons what are, professor keitner, the diplomatic rules the u. S. Could use to impose costs on china for his lack of transparency and suppression of information . How has the administration used all of these tools . Have we use our own tools and cordon aided with our allies and partners . Prof. Keitner again, my expertise lies in our use of courts. On your latter point, we have not effectively coordinated with allies. My observation, as a former, not current government official,s we have not done a very good job coordinating among domestic agencies either. The kind of teamwork we need, both to impose consequences on china and to solve the massive problems we are all facing is something we need to do through leadership and do together. Sen. Coons so, President Trump has decided we should withdraw from the World Health Organization and we should stop our financial support. We should withdraw as a member of the agency because he thinks china has too much influence over the who. Our withdrawal would prevent us from participating in improving the agency and holding it accountable and making positive changes. In our absence, chinese influence will likely only increase. In our absence, having threatened or withdrawn, will you see ways that likeminded nations like the United States could actually lead reform or does it strike you more likely that china will end up having a greater role in response to pandemics . As a result, we will end up more vulnerable to future outbreaks . Prof. Keitner the absence of the United States from the who, if that does come to pass, would be devastating for the health of americans and for the health of individuals around the world. What we have seen with this pandemic, precisely the scope of harm that my colleague professor Miller Richard referred to is that notwithstanding the intent or scale of the original act, unlike flying airplanes into the twin towers, an act of International Terrorism on u. S. Soil as you defined it as a statute whe. This is something that could happen, it had come from the United States, it has come to the United States. We will not be able to suppress and identify these threats if we are not part of the global body charged with doing so. Sen. Coons thank you, mr. Chairman. Keitner, where did the covid19 virus come from . Prof. Keitner i personally have no idea. I have read reports. Do you have a security clearance . Prof. Keitner it is no longer active. Ok. So, you dont know whether it came from china or not . Prof. Keitner personally, under oath, no, i do not. I would be happy to recite reports. Ornyn you said you have insight and expertise that no one else has. Does that extend to the virus . Prof. Keitner it is limited to the origins of the virus and it covers issues of foreign sovereign immunity Come International tribunals, dippel mostly and. Sen. Cornyn it sounds like you were saying it was the United States governments fault and not china. Did i misunderstand . Prof. Keitner you absolutely misunderstood. Sen. Cornyn i heard somebody on the panel suggest this is part of a republican Public Relations effort to shift blame from the United States government and away from china. Do you subscribe to that view . Prof. Keitner i have no knowledge of whether or not anybody read the memo. I note senator grahams comment that he did figure this out all on his own. So, the motivations here are unclear to me, but the main point remains china failed in its obligation to the international community. The who, because it is an international organization, can be bullied as a way to prevent that from happening is to be a partner with our allies, to step up and show by example that we are transparent, that we are honest. That we know how to do testing and tracing. That we can conquer this endemic together. Sen. Cornyn i know you know this, but there is a precedent for congress amending the foreign sovereign immunity act to provide a cause of action. Or at least allow american citizens to sue foreign nationals for damages sustained by them on american soil. Of course, i am talking about prof. Keitner there may have been some words in there. Weeken can sure foreign states. At points, they are officials for damages on u. S. Soil. Theres a difference between immunity and cause of action. If the question is whether under u. S. Law, congress has the power to do whatever it wants, the answer is yes. Sen. Cornyn we did in passing it back in 2015 or 2016 . Prof. Keitner indeed. The reason this guy did not fall was because of the limited language on that statute. Sen. Cornyn so, congress clearly has the authority to do that. And i assume would have the authority, in your opinion, to craft a similar narrow statutory exception to sovereign immunity in this circumstance . Prof. Keitner again, i see no dispute about the authority of congress here. Chairman, mymr. Own experience was as the lead sponsor for a bill that passed unanimously in the senate, was actually Foreign Countries hired lobbyists on k street to come in and lobby the United States government not to pass jasta, which passed unanimously. I know the ranking member, chairman grassley, chairman graham and others are working on some changes to the Foreign Agent registration act, which would make it easier for the u. S. Government to identify Foreign Countries hiring american lobbyists to come here and lobby us to change u. S. Law in a way that benefits these other countries to the detriment of the United States and its citizens. I hope we can continue to pursue that. I think that is an important piece of this, because we know that china also has been very aggressive in its Public Relations campaign and propaganda efforts. I think i heard one of the panelists sort of repeat what had been said, that there was some published reports that this actually emanated from the United States. I think china made the argument there was actually u. S. Military which was the source of the coronavirus. So, this is very prof. Keitner just to clarify my testimony, there is no question this did not originate in the United States. I understood your question. To put an issue whether it originated in the wildlife market, perhaps it originated elsewhere in china and migrated to the market. Just so we know, we are on the same page. This this virus originated somewhere in china, i do not know where precisely. Thank you for that clarification. Senator whitehouse. Sen. Whitehouse thank you, chairman. I dont know if we are running a Republican Campaign to Committee Chair or not. If you want to dip defend china, you are welcome to do so. Actually, i was interested in other stuff going on at the department of justice which we have oversight over, while we are here together. The first is that it turns out the attorney general has fired the u. S. Attorney for the Southern District of new york. Doesnt seem to be any reason for it. None was stated. The department of justice seems to have forgotten mr. Berman was a judicial apartment, not a department of justice or president ial appointment. So when they try to fire him, they ran into a problem that gave him leverage to impose that his deputy would be his successor and not the attorney general from new jersey, which alone is a bizarre circumstance. The u. S. From new jersey. Jersey, butnst new if you are the sovereign district of new york and you are told there will be the u. S. Attorney from new jersey as a parttime effort, something bizarre is going on. When you havent figured out mr. Berman is a judicial appointees, something bizarre is going on. When you havent figured out this Committee Still enforces its blue slip on u. S. Attorney nominees, you think youre going to put jay taylor in without realizing you have to go through Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand to go through, this is part of the associate quality for preparation. Something weird happened in the department of justice to cause knucklehead, stumble bum errors like that to be done by the attorney general of the United States, and i submit we be better off with our time looking into what that was. Heres another one. Of the antitrust division here for a hearing. We asked questions about patently preposterous antitrust investigation that he had happened to align extremely well with political interests of President Trump and marathon petroleum, trying to bust up the california fuel efficiency standards. So we got nothing in the way of serious answers at the hearing. I followed up with q if r, questions for the record have of policy,matter ignored by the department of justice whether they come from my side or yours. So we sent a followup letter saying, whats up with the q frs . No answer. I put a hold on the bill and suddenly i got their attention. I brought it to the chairmans attention. To his credit, he brought the Deputy Attorney general over to sit down and talk through what the heck is going on with all the questions for the record and all the letters the department of justice isnt answering. I the does certain, this is a pattern, this is the practice. Why would they be avoiding answering questions about this antitrust thing . Why we are doing this, they are having a hearing at house judiciary right now, whats going on in the department of justice. Here is the New York Times reporting from just minutes ago about the whistleblower from the , his name isision elias. The report is mr. Elias is statement, the antitrust review, the one youre talking about about the deal with automakers from california to voluntarily produce submissions on new cars despite the Trump Administrations role rollback is standards as y motivated rather than grounded in the facts and the law. Mr. Trump had attacked the on twitter and the division began its review without going through normal procedures, mr. Elias said. The day after the tweets, antitrust division political leadership, the guys who set right there wouldnt answer questions, instructed staff to , he wrote. T day something is very wrong at the department of justice, western antitrust regime running political errands for President Trump against , oricas Oil Companies whether it is u. S. Attorneys investigating Trump Associates and being fired without apparent reason and such a clustered mass mess that they managed to overlook he was a judicial appointment and he is a blue slip, managed to lie twice, and either barr or berman was lying about whether there is an agreement to resign and either aboutor barr is lying whether to fire him. You have two lies that have not been assigned to the individual liar. You have to admit, this is weird or this is not the department of Justice America counts on and my time is expired. I apologize for going over a minute. You have to admit, this is weird. If you want to hear weird, we will tell you about Loretta Lynch and all those other people. I think theres a lot of weird going on. But the blue slip process will stay in place. There is nobody coming to be the Southern District of new york u. S. Attorney. Thats a policy that will not change. We appreciate that. Thank you. You dont need to thank me, thats a fair way to do business. We have all the confidence in the world, she will continue to do her job. In terms of firing mr. Berman, it was the ability to do so and it was used. If someone suggests it was done and appropriately, we will talk about it. But we will still keep talking about china. I think senator hawley . Are you there . Thank you. Thank you for holding this hearing. China has what we might describe fairly as a long and very civilbing history of rights abuses including civil rights abuses against its own citizens. This is a pattern of abuse and it is one that is somewhat starting legally startlingly evident, given the airbrushed picture we have been given from china on its own internal reaction to the covid19 Global Pandemic. Perhaps most egregious are the reports of chinas sealed whichment of the virus, led to communist Party Officials welding inside people inside of their homes and apartment buildings. This is not something a responsible government does. Not is something we should countenance as any way. As barbaric as that is, welding people into their homes, it is the tip of the iceberg. I think somebody over there might have their microphone on. Even though the Chinese Government new or at least strongly had reason to suspect that the virus was spread human to human contact, a wuhan doctor was disciplined for ordering her staff to put on masks. Another wuhan physician was also punished by the Chinese Government, in that instance for trying to warn others about the deadly nature of the virus. Unfortunately, he lost his life to covid19. That asence suggests early as september 31, china december 31, china could have taken preventative measures to protect the rest of the world. Instead, china repeatedly lied its own citizens, the world organization, and the rest of the world about the nature of the virus, extent of the spread, advising infection rate in china. The Chinese National Health Commission even went so far as to Outlaw Publishing information related to the outbreak. This is the public Health Commission whose job it is supposedly to protect Public Health within china. The effort to cover up the severity of the situation extended beyond wuhan and across chinas borders. Its a problem inherent to communism. Eventually, the propaganda and political whitewashing become deadly and did this circumstance. From on representations chinese officials, the World Health Organization did not recommend any specific measures for travelers, and even went so far as to advise against any travel or trade restrictions on china. In fact, the World Health Organization which itself failed andonduct its own research instead mr. Finally relied on representations from china ly relied onstifying representations from china itself. Yet chinese officials shut down domestic flights out of wuhan and surrounding municipalities to avoid spreading the virus throughout china and within china. This is alarming considering they continued to allow International Flights and thus allowed the virus to continue to be spread until march 29. Thank goodness President Trump restricted travel into the United States from china as early as he did or the situation mode would have been worse. I would like to start with you. In written testimony, you acknowledged chinas damming actions and omissions. Do you stand by that statement . Absolutely, senator. As i indicated, i am not here to defend chinas actions. I appreciate that. Attorney general fitch, if under u. S. Law that we lack Civil Jurisdiction over china in this instance, what avenues of relief are available to us to allow us to hold china accountable for lying to the World Health Organization into the rest of , to prevent the spread of this virus across the world . There you go. We can hear you now. Thank you, senator. We will proceed with our lawsuit based on the exception. Any additional exceptions are important. The world today is very different from 1976. No law should be static. It is an opportunity to amend these laws and give us other tools. To your point, in ways we cant understand in society, to see these doctors, these experts that were forced to confess to to prepare selfcriticism and stop committing unlawful acts, we looked at it on social media, it was censored, we know these are bad actors in china and we have to hold them accountable so we will move readily on our lawsuit with the exception at hand and we look forward to additional exceptions brought to congress. Fitch. K you, general mr. Chairman, can i ask one more question . Absolutely. I have a question for professor miller. Of the World Health Organization, i would like to know first of all what duty china might have had to accurately report information to the World Health Organization and related to that point, if china did in fact knowingly mislead the World Health Organization, under that agreement, what action can we expect the World Health Organization to hold china accountable . Senator lee, im sorry i wont be able to answer that question. Im not fully versed on the obligation states confront as part of their duties to the World Health Organization on their participation. I can say there is a spectrum of public International Law commitments to the United States and that also china are responsible from fulfilling the range from Global Health concerns to Human Rights Concerns like the issues you raised and security concerns, at the International Law level, which could be picketed here as well. The details of obligations under the World Health Organization regime, im not confident to comment on. I would be happy to chime in if you would like, senator. Thats ok. Senator blumenthal. Sen. Blumenthal thank you paired a want to express my appreciation to the chairman for the policy and also his suggestion just now that if anything inappropriate occurred with the dismissal of United States attorney berman, that we should ask for further inquiry. I am going to suggest to the chairman respectfully that we should ask attorney general barr to appear before this committee. He promised, literally sitting there in his confirmation hearing in response to questions from me that he would not fire United States attorney in the Southern District of new york. He promised he would not dismiss for anything but some discernible and provable misconduct. In effect, he made that commitment. I think he has raised very severe questions about his truthfulness under oath. He was under oath and that proceeding. Blumenthal, can you get me that from the record . I would appreciate that. Sen. Blumenthal i would be happy to. In fact, i included in the letter i wrote to attorney general barr today asking him for an explanation in writing. I would be glad to provide it to the chairman and i again appreciate his interest in this toter and his willingness adhere to the policy. I want to say, the issue has been raised about a commission. I think you raised it. Actually, i proposed legislation to establish a commission, objective and independent, nonpartisan to look back and learn lessons. We have to learn lessons from the mistakes that were made. Frankly, the misconduct that may have occurred. The chinese are far from blameless. Concealment of the true magnitude of this pandemic no doubt contributed to the scope and scale of the loss. At the same time, the administration downplayed the fact,or preparedness, in fired the team that was responsible for pandemic response. It dismissed early evidence about the magnitude of this insidious, deadly disease and delayed use of the defense production act. It denied the need for testing and masks and gowns and face masks, other kinds of preparedness. And vaccines and therapeutics. There is a lot of blame to go around, but that kind of commission ought to be established at some point so we can learn lessons. I want to say to the attorney general of mississippi, certainly admire any attorney general who is willing to battle the odds in court, and my mind goes back to my own experience with attorneys general, a post i held for 20 years, in particular my joining the then attorney general in mississippi in a lawsuit against a Tobacco Company that everybody said could not be won. Court,ve us no chance in including than the United States department of justice, which would not join us in that lawsuit. I encourage you to continue an thell battle to indicate rights and losses of the people of mississippi and any other attorney general who joins you. Let me just ask you a couple of questions. Here, it that you are not attorney general, to say a change of the laws necessary for the success of your lawsuit, because you fit within the exception of the commercial activities law of the foreign sovereign immunity act. Thats correct, isnt it . Thank you senator, it is. We certainly would appreciate any additional avenues and tools to move forward. Thank you for those words. I take all of our litigation series. Imap thing i am acting on forlf of all mississippians justice and thats why i have this lawsuit against china. Thank you for the Committee Review and i think its beneficial and i appreciate moving forward on that, but we can hold them accountable now and thats what we should do. Sen. Blumenthal and you are not relying on some of the publish reports that i have seen including from the secretary of that thelying coronavirus might have been produced in a laboratory in wuhan and allowed to escape by the chinese, thats not part of your claim, is it . No, my claim, i am proceeding under the mississippi Consumer Protection act and mississippi antitrust act. Thats a good thing because i can tell you from my review of and itelligence here, think it has been acknowledged by most scientists, there is no evidence to support that kind of , but thatar as i know is not to say china does not bear some blame here. Read you some quote from the president of the United States on january 24 where he said it will all work behalf of the American People, i want to thank president xi. 27, he said, i think hes going to handle it, hes had handled it really well. Through midmarch, he continued to issue tweets and statements like a want i just read. The ones i just read. He began to change his tune in midmarch. How do you deal with those quotes from the president , in effect thanking the chinese president for his great handling of this crisis . Senator, again, mica my pursuit is under Consumer Protection laws and antitrust laws. Consumer Protection Laws and antitrust laws often hold these actors responsible. For me on behalf of all mississippians, im considering what trey nodded. They silenced china did. They silenced medical professionals. They censored social media. They nationalized the manufacturing and porting of ppe. That is and hoarding of ppe. That is a tremendous issue for have issuesd us to under the Consumer Protection act. They took advantage of us. They knew and they failed to warn us. Sen. Blumenthal thank you. One last point. I want to join senator cornyn. I was the lead emma craddick sponsor of the act and sub just doing it is certainly possible for us to amend this law to protect the American People and the people of mississippi and all the people who have suffered disastrous harm here, if in fact your theory, madame attorney general, needs that kind of support. I know you can always amend your complaint. Just to say those lobbyists are because they are preventing treatment of the people who suffered, the families who suffered ring 9 11, and i hope we as a committee will join together as many colleagues have in the past and continuing bipartisan support for those families. Thank you very much. Senator cruz. Sen. Cruz thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you for holding this hearing on this topic. I believe the communist government of china bears enormous responsibility and culpability for this Global Pandemic we are seeing. Chinas conduct can be understood at two different phases. Number one, chinas conduct concerning the origin of this pandemic and number two, chinas conduct after the beginning of this outbreak. Lets talk about the origin. There are a lot of questions that have not yet been answered. What we do know is in wuhan, china where this pandemic began, there were not one but two state owned and statecontrolled laboratories that were both studying not just coronavirus is what coronavirus is derived from is notrom a species that found within 800 miles of wuhan, the same species of a bat that now scientists tell us they believe this virus may have originated with. The senator from connecticut responded to that as some in the media responded by saying theres no evidence the virus was created in a laboratory. I agree i have heard no evidence to suggest it was created in a laboratory. There is circumstantial evidence to conclude one or both of these laboratories were studying the virus and that the virus may have accidentally escaped from those laboratories. One of those labs was within a few hundred yards of the wet market where the first outbreak occurred. We also know prior to this were multiplee u. S. State Department Cables raising concerns that these labs had exceptionally shoddy security protocols and raising concerns specifically that because of the poor security, there was a real risk of a Global Pandemic originating from these labs. As i noted, we dont know that for sure. Part of the reason we dont know for sure is the Chinese Governments behavior after the outbreak was to go into these labs and destroy all their prior settings. Cases,litigated a lot of when you see someone destroying evidence and trying to hide the entific record, it rises raises inference that the evidence they are destroying is something they dont want people to know. The second phase of culpability we do no more facts about, which is the cover up. Regardless of whether this this wasd in nature or a naturally occurring virus that was being studied and a chinese lab that escaped accidentally, regardless of which origin is communistnow the government of china actually covered up and silenced Early Intervention to stop this pandemic. Heroicill where chinese physicians, whistleblowers who blew the whistle on the pandemic that said this is dangerous and we need to stop it and the Chinese Communist government arrested whistleblowers, they silenced and punished them, and the Chinese Government behaved like any responsible government, had they come in, sent and Health Professionals to wuhan and quarantined the affected people, theres a real possibility this could have been contained as a than al outbreak rather Global Pandemic, but instead because of the lies of the Chinese Communist government and because of the censorship and over 474 we have today thousand people who have died worldwide. We have over 123,000 americans who have died. The Chinese Communist government bears direct responsibility for those stats and for the trillions of dollars of economic devastation that has flowed. This hearing is focusing on what next. My question is, number one, a clear, objective, trustworthy accounting of chinas that accounting would, among other things, answer questions about the lab yard where they studying this coronavirus . We know they were starting coronaviruss from bats. They refused to answer whether there were studying this virus. What is the best way to achieve an accounting, and number two, what is the best way to achieve accountability . We know they are responsible for the coverup. What is the best way to ensure they are held accountable for the deaths and devastation that resulted from their misconduct. If we can go through each of the andesses, and we will start go from there. Can i trust amend your kuester amend your question and say what is the best way to deter future behavior . A, make it a threepart question. Thank you, mr. Cruz. I find myself agreeing wholeheartedly with virtually everything you said. But the available avenue of relief we keep hoping for is not in u. S. Court. I am a former trial lawyer. I used to work with tobacco lawyers who were in the business before. So if i can ask what is the best avenue . I keep civil procedure and evidence. We will not be able to get in a u. S. Court proceeding even if missouri antitrust law and consumer law applies to china, which it doesnt. I will try again to see if i can get you to answer my question about the best avenue. You are saying what you think is in. Correct. I feel like theres a false hope and false conception of what the u. S. Proceeding would do and what their u. S. Proceeding would not do is get information. What an International Investigation would do is put sufficient pressure on china in combination with the sanctions he already started to levy, in combination with intelligent on the groundots if we can send Public Health experts back to china, where they were to begin with and then we pulled them out. As senator feinstein said, that will give us answers and enable us to respond to the next pandemic the way we did to ebola. Senator cruz, i think we should pursue as my colleague suggests, an International Independent commission, but i dont think it would exclude a robust inquiry by domestic institutions, a commission in the domestic space as well. Those could operate in tandem. I am less pessimistic about the civil process ability to both set a narrative about what needs to be accomplished and develop some evidence, or at the very least the expertise we would need to discover the truth of would add thati combination of tools, a domestic commission, participation in the International Investigation, backed by civil litigation might be the kind of framework that would point toward the last part of your questions, bringing in the chairmans question, both accountability and they hope for preventing Something Like this happening in the future. These commissions have to be backed by some Legal Mechanism. I would add not only the civil litigation possibility but Legal Mechanism of public International Law as well. I would like to see both investigations but supported by the enforceability of a Legal Mechanism. General fitch. Thank you. The strongest way to move forward is to go after china legally. What we also do is deter. Do turn deter bad acts. I am in favor of moving to a very strong legal posture in regards to this account. Thank for. This is helpful. Senator booker. Im sorry, i was told after i was after hirono. I apologize, i did it again. Sorry, senator booker. I apologize. Senator hirono. Thank you. i would like to follow up about what would be the best way for us to get to the independent way to determine the cause of this virus. Heard from obviously the professor who explained that and the professor says we should have domestic commission, but i did not hear from attorney general fitch, that you still believe a lawsuit is the best way to proceed . Thank you paradigm believe that is the strongest pathway we have moving forward, but we know this has affected everyone. Certainly a commission would be to holdt, but we need them accountable through legal actions, discovery, monetary damages, penalty, and deter actions. Deterrencetand about value of these lawsuits. On the other hand. Not likely you will prevail in that lawsuit. Then i would say an independent panel would be a good way to determine what china would do. China was doing. Nobody sitting here is saying china is without fault, but we have to say that President Trump thanked president xi jinping on the way china handled the virus. Declared covid19 to be a Public Health emergency in january this year. I would like to ask the panel, when do you think the president s responsibility kicks in to deal with the healthcare care crisis in our own country . I will start with professor kietner. Thank you. The causation is complex. Wouldre were an award, it need this countered by the intervening factors between fabric of the virus sen. Hirono i dont mean to interrupt, but my question is when does the president s responsibility kick and, regardless of what happens in the lawsuit . The declaration of a Public Health emergency was in january of this year and when does the president s responsibility kick in . Prof. Keitner it kicks in prior to that, as soon as there were reports in our Intelligence Briefings that a new outbreak was emerging. Sen. Hirono attorney general . Theirch im focused on actions. We move forward from the time we knew they were compromised and aware and then moving what was happening with ppn hoarding and the selling of sub Standard Equipment to america, particularly mississippi. Sen. Hirono , professor miller, when does the administrations responsibility kick in once the Health Secretary announced a Health Emergency . Professor miller i view this as a political question really. It is a question of the president s political responsibility to people of the u. S. To act and if legislation was necessary, to trigger authority, it would be the president s responsibility to seek support for that. As soon as the American Public was compromised, jeopardized or threatened by Something Like this, the president needs to act. That was true before january. So attorney general fitch, i know in your complaint, you say that china was engaging in unfair and deceptive trade practices related to hoarding off necessary personal protective equipment and reselling substandard ppe to the rest of the road at inflated prices. Are you aware in january, Thetrump Administration turned down an offer from a u. S. Manufacturer to produce millions of n95 masks in america . This would be ppe. Were you aware of that . A. G. Fitch not about the president , but about chinas acts. I was very aware of when it affected mississippians. We knew when the fallacy began, the coverup and the hoarding. Sen. Hirono the thing is when you claim your unfair practices, that is basically consumer law law. Asically antitrust you have to show somehow china had the core of the market for ppe. A u. S. Manufacturer perfectly capable of manufacturing these equipment, i think you have a hard time making an antitrust claim. So, i just have to wonder whether, ms. Attorney general, you think the president did what he should do in terms of his own response. I realize you are going after china. What about in your view, was the president s response to this virus, this pandemic, adequate in your view . A. G. Fitch as im proceeding along the lines in my lawsuit on the protection ask for mississippians and the mississippi antitrust act, we are moving forward in that regard. We can show china did engage in unfair and deceptive acts. Also under antitrust we are looking at how they are attempting to restrain freedom of ppe and by hoarding it and not providing it to mississippians. It created a very unjust environment sen. Hirono ms. Attorney general, youre having a really hard time, i think. Theres a general consensus our own country could have done a lot more so we dont see tens of millions unemployed, in mississippi also by the thousands, and over 100,000 people dying. I think theres enough blame to go around and as far as your i use to practice antitrust law myself and i think it would be difficult for you to show there is some kind of effect on trade. Thank you. Thank you. Senator hawley . Or excuse me, i apologize. Wait a minute. It is senator hawley. Im sorry. You. Hawley thank general fitch, thank you for being here and all the witnesses. I want to give you an opportunity to respond a little further to some of the questions you were being asked. You are being asked by my democrat colleagues that the United States and china are roughly equivalent bad actors when it comes to the coronavirus. While. Ow. Sounds a lot like a lot like the Chinese Communist propaganda that has been shoved down our throats for the last few months. Is the your impression that the chinese suppressed information about the nature of this disease . A. G. Fitch thank you, senator hawley. I do respectfully disagree with the senator because we do have a case and it is important we move forward with this case and i believe under mississippi law, we will prevail. But if we dont act, we have been irresponsible on behalf of americans and mississippi. Thats why im bringing this suit and i think it will move and it is an important deterrent. Sen. Hawley absolutely. We know china lied about the importance of the virus. We know they lied about what they did and when. We know it was at least as early as december and did not inform the public. Did not inform their own public. They jailed doctors trying to blow the whistle. Lied to the World Health Organization, although they later colluded to the who to rug. It under the i think your case is very strong that as somebody who has been targeted by the chinese regime, and the Chinese Government threatened to sanction me personally and my state, im proud of what youre doing and the fact that the state of missouri is right there with you and i want to thank you for your leadership on this. Let me ask a little bit about your suit. Brought suit under the tomercial activity section the foreign sovereignty immunity act. A. G. Fitch thats correct. Sen. Hawley the commercial exception, and you made a good argument, i have to say, the courts usually construe that narrowly. Is that fair to say . A. G. Fitch thats true, we believe our action is in that exception. Hawley i do, too. If congress were to take action, this is a bill i would propose to make it clear states and individuals had an action in court, actionable case under the foreign sovereignty immunity to make sure theres no immunity for china in the circumstances, would you welcome that additional clarification . Absolutely. Any additional exceptions to provide a broader avenue for states and individuals to seek justice, thank you to consider you continue to pursue additional evidence. Sen. Hawley absolutely. My bill also states we should have a right to pursue chinas role in spreading the coronavirus, and gives our courts authorization to freeze chinese assets to make sure the states and people they represent can get judgment. Would that be helpful for you to have that authority to attest those assets in order to get more damages . A. G. Fitch yes, that would be extremely helpful to collect monetary damages in the civil panel. You. Hawley thank mr. Miller, thank you for being here. Its my understanding from your testimony, your previous work that part of the argument here is the prospect of state and private suits against china to help bring china to the negotiation table and create leverage useful from an International Relations perspective, i look at the basic rights. Can you clarify . Prof. Miller i dont want to excuse or eliminate the possibility that these civil suits might generate some measure of justice for victims by way of civil remedy, but they forcehave the additional of supplementing International Negotiations and International Law measures and weve seen , whether itsat pursuing settlements against iran and settlements there, i expect the suits proceeding against saudi arabia for example , based on the atrocities of 9 11, will also have some effect in International Law negotiations and it will be true with respect to the east African Embassy bombings and those suits us well. Why the civil log remedy cant also be a contribution to those public International Law mechanisms. Sen. Hawley very good. Well said. I agree completely. Thank you p senator booker. Sen. Booker thank you, mr. Chairman. I would like to focus my questions to professor keitner. It exciting there is so much bipartisan sentiment and agreement on how we know china has been one of the maligned under theire planet statesponsored espionage, forcing our companies to Share Technology and secrets, their corporate espionage, i can go on and on, currency manipulation. China is a bad actor threatening and so many ways our economy. Now i want to talk to you about them threatening our health. We know the information flow is extremely restrictive. Theres no doubt china should have been transparent regarding the extremely dangerous nature. F the virus last december there was emergence of an atypical pneumonia linked to a wholesale market in china. Late december, members of the medical community were reprimanded in china by the state for speaking out against the truth about the truth of what was happening as they try to put a chill on what was happening. It had horrific and lethal consequence for the u. S. And the rest of the world. But the problems go deeper than chinas Immediate Response to. Ovid19 itself in april, i led a bipartisan letter with chairman graham and colleagues calling for an immediate ban on wet wildlife markets, socalled wet markets, and the international. Trade of wildlife this is the kind of market where the covid19 outbreak is believed to have originated. Live andshoppers, and dead species all jammed in close quarters and the markets are ideal and terrible places for diseases to jump, socalled zoo nautica diseases, to jump to humans. Professor keitner, some questions. What legislative tools can congress use to push for the global ban on wildlife markets and the International Wildlife trade . The second part of the question is earlier this year, it announced it was banning the trade and consumption of wild animals, but a number of analyses show chinas band has a significant amount of loopholes, including the exception for trading wildlife for medical purposes, socalled medical purposes. What tools can congress use to push china and other countries to impose strong bans on wildlife markets to really save from potential pandemics in future . Prof. Keitner thank you paired i commend you and senator graham for that letter and the International Forum to which you address the letter, the idea that we need international cooperation. If the United States were willing to take a step forward and make whatever agreed commitments countries signed up for, to make them enforceable, which is something we are often hesitant to do because what is good for the goose is good for the gander, but if we were able to negotiate the treaty and make those enforceable, we can ashamed china and congress can take a leading role, particularly through your appropriations power, and ensure funding went through the bodies administering in that regime. Sen. Booker thank you. And its problematic because we see this cycle happening, the sars outlook pandemic into thousand three, there was a temporary ban that china later rolled back this is a time we should be leading a global effort against this. The last question is, its clear china has been downplaying and of a skating the threat posed by covid19 that has had impact, but wey have to also acknowledge that was not the only reason we see death rates in our country that are so staggeringly high, especially relative to peer nations. The World Health Organization in january declared covid19 to be a Public Health emergency of international concern, but it took six weeks for us as a nation to declare it a national emergency, six weeks for the act. Administration to the first case for covid19 in the United States was january 21. Taiwans first reported case was actually on the same day. South korea was one day earlier. All three countries had the same information regarding genetic characteristics and lethality of the virus. Taiwan has lost seven people to covid19. South korea, 281. This country has passed 122,000 people. I know the committee is considering proposals to amend the foreign sovereignty immunities act to enable covid civil rights lawsuits, but you wrote in your testimony something we should highlight, which was the catalog of the shortcomings in u. S. , local, state and federal responses to the threat that was reportedly highlighted by the intelligence smmittee and in the president daily briefings in january brings up competitions. I want you to put it on the record while you have to approached why the approach guidelines in these is misguided because it has to be subject to discovery and error by the Trump Administration and other entities. Sovereignty is based on reciprocity. We respect the rentable of sovereign immunity in our courts and in return expect to see them in other countries. Doesnt this dredge up complications and vulnerabilities to mistakes that were made by the Trump Administration . Pairedeitner thank you on the specific point of discovery, i will say of course discovery is a twoway street and information is much more readily available from u. S. Sources, so that would absolutely come in court. The only exception of of course classified information which would be another problem for the plaintiffs as we have seen in the 9 11 litigation. Sen. Booker thank you. Thank you, senator ernst. Sen. Ernst thank you. In response to that as well, hindsight is always 20 20 20. Faced with a pandemic, i think this administration did an doirable job in trying to the absolute best they can to protect our population, when the Chinese Government was lot not forthcoming with information on how to protect ourselves, i think it was the Chinese Government. I know this administration faced pretty serious criticism very early on in the pandemic for not allowing people to travel from affected countries to our country. Upmany things were brought about that period of time. A huge amount of could assist him on this administration. Yet it was the right thing to do. Again, hindsight is 2020. Now we have those questioning why didnt he do this sooner . Maybe because of all the criticism placed on the administration for trying to do the right thing in the first place. A study from the United Kingdom indicated if those chinese authorities had acted three weeks earlier, the number of coronavirus cases could have been reduced by 95 at the geographic spread would have been severely limited. Know china vastly downplayed again the emergence of the coronavirus as early as the fall of 2019. If china had acted three weeks earlier, tens of thousands of beencan lives could have saved and potentially millions of americans could still be going to work. The Chinese Governments lying at obstructionism hasnt just impacted our ability to respond to the virus. It has also escalated to the level of blatant theft with a goal to erode u. S. Military leadership. In april, the leader of u. S. Pay comp pacific command, admiral davidson, he believed china was stealing technology and just heut every domain, as testified. This is an addition to ongoing Cyber Operations targeting our intellectual property. China has absolutely no respect for the law. They will do anything they can to get a leg up. Whether thats military sensitive or letting people die to avoid taking this possibility to the spread of covid19. Majority ofat the iowans want to see is for china to pay for this deadly obstruction, to allow the Chinese Communist party to go unpunished would be a travesty and will result in the cycle of lying go on. For having. Chairman this hearing and attempting to tackle the issue. Say we are having a conversation of how to best bring critical supplies home. I am working on legislation on that front and looking forward to ensuring that if this happens again, and it will im sure if this Chinese Communist Party Continues like it has, that we are not subject to the whims of china. To start with attorney general fitch. Thank you so much for being with us today and being the first woman to serve as ag of mississippi. Thank you for being a strong role model. Mississippi was one of the first states to file suit against china due to their failure to inform us about covid19. We have heard a lot about retaliation lawsuits regarding covid19 and ive even heard really insane statements coming out that their legislature would be willing to allow chinese actors to of course then turn. Round and sue americans can you talk a little bit about retaliation china might have against your state and if so, what can congress do to help alleviate that concern . A. G. Fitch thank you you. I appreciate that. Its an honor to serve us the first woman attorney general and represent all mississippians. Certainly, china is known for repetitive bad action and we have to hold them accountable. Certainly they will come after all of us who are looking to do that. So we are prepared and if we continue to hold them accountable, if we do towards monetary damages and civil penalties, they will stop and it wel be a sign to all nations will not tolerate that on behalf of americans, mississippians, everyone across our states. I understand there is a possibility but we have to stand strong and united. Sen. Ernst era thank you. My time is expired. China has been a darn bad actor for a long time and i think americans are sick and tired of taking it in the shorts from china. Its about time we stand up for ourselves and let them know we will not tolerate it any longer. Thank you. 8 presiden trump today speaks at a students for trump rally hosted by turning point usa in phoenix, arizona. Watch live coverage at 6 45 p. M. Eastern on cspan, online at cspan. Org or listen live on the three cspan radio app. Do you remember any moment you say to yourself this man is unfit to serve as commanderinchief early on . I think the most disturbing moment in the early days is that as nato summit in brussels described at some length in the toks, he was close withdrawing from nato. I thought he really was on the verge of doing that. Natot for all nido needs substantial reform, trump is correct that they have not borne fair share of the costs, the answer is not to withdraw, the oceans do not protect americans like they do two or three centuries ago, and nato in my judgment is the most successful military political in Fact Alliance in history. With mike pompeo and jim mattis who were also there in brussels, john kelly, the white house chief of staff, we all worked in various ways and i recount the helpes and the book to persuade the president not to withdraw. Turns out he didnt withdraw. That over a perhaps 48hour period was unnerving to me. Probably the first point i joint the white house, i thought i would have to resign