[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 153 (Thursday, September 21, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4643-S4644]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                             Credit Suisse

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, earlier this year, Chairman Whitehouse 
and I began bipartisan work to investigate Credit Suisse's historical 
servicing of Nazi-linked accounts. Today, I would like to discuss this 
important bipartisan work and thank Senator Whitehouse and his staff 
for their assistance on this very important topic.
  In March of 2020, Simon Wiesenthal Center notified Credit Suisse that 
it found previously undisclosed information relating to the bank's Nazi 
ties. The bank, to its credit, initially took steps in the right 
direction and agreed to investigate. It even retained a research firm 
to conduct a forensic review. It even retained former TARP Inspector 
General Neil Barofsky to oversee that review as an independent 
ombudsman, and they also had U.S. Envoy Ira Forman as an independent 
adviser.
  But after Credit Suisse hired a new general counsel--so a new person 
stepped in--the bank paused its review, limited experts' access to 
records, and terminated Barofsky and Forman; very odd acts to take 
compared to the positive start of this investigation.
  Anyway, the bank cited performance issues for the termination. Well, 
the then-general counsel's predecessor never expressed those concerns, 
and the bank's research firm described Barofsky as professional. And I 
happen to know some of Barofsky's work, and he is, in fact, a 
professional.
  Barofsky drafted a report about what he observed at the bank and 
found, as he was contractually obligated to do. So Chairman Whitehouse 
and I issued the Budget Committee's first subpoena since 1991 to obtain 
that report.
  Credit Suisse had prevented Barofsky from providing us a fully 
unredacted report. Ultimately, we not only obtained that report fully 
unredacted but also the bank's own report.
  So then what did Chairman Whitehouse and I find? Credit Suisse did 
not review and investigate all relevant records. For example, Credit 
Suisse did not use a full dataset from its predecessor's bank.
  It inconsistently collected and reviewed information such as account 
balances. Credit Suisse failed to review allegations that Nazi heirs 
had sought access to bank accounts.
  When the review pointed to evidence of wrongdoing beyond Argentina, 
Credit Suisse stated the information was ``out of scope'' and then 
didn't do any investigation.
  Now, even after those limitations, the reports revealed new 
information, including nearly 100--and let me emphasize ``100''--
previously undisclosed Nazi-linked accounts. Some accounts remained 
open as recently as the year 2020.
  And when we finally got an unredacted version, it showed evidence 
that 64,000--let me emphasize ``64,000''--sets of potentially relevant 
records related to Nazi-linked accounts were not part of the 
investigation.
  Credit Suisse claims that they are irrelevant without giving us a 
sufficient explanation. Credit Suisse also blocked its independent 
oversight that included Barofsky, Forman, and also a historian hired to 
assist the investigation from accessing critical evidence.
  The reports also raised brandnew questions about the bank's potential 
support for Nazis fleeing justice following World War II via the 
infamous ratlines.
  Until pressured by Chairman Whitehouse and me, Credit Suisse had 
refused to fully investigate allegations of its potential role aiding 
Nazis' escape from justice via the ratlines.
  So, today, despite multiple requests, Credit Suisse still refuses to 
share exact details on the scope of its ongoing ratlines review. This 
is unacceptable.
  And do you know what else is unacceptable? Credit Suisse's actions 
after we made those reports public are unacceptable. The bank issued a 
press release on April 19 of this year filled with one excuse after 
another. The bank's press release essentially ignored its own report. 
It also incorrectly claimed

[[Page S4644]]

full cooperation with the committee's oversight, despite the bank 
objecting to the committee receiving a fully unredacted copy of the 
Barofsky report until July 31 and despite failing to provide a full 
report of the ratlines review.
  Then, the bank petitioned a Federal court against the Simon 
Wiesenthal Center. The bank says that litigation from the 1990s 
provided full disclosure in all matters related to the Holocaust and 
World War II.
  Now, this seems to me that the bank is trying to silence a 
prominent--very prominent--Jewish human rights organization. 
Ironically, as the bank continues down this road, it appears to be 
creating a modern-day ``David versus Goliath'' story.
  Notably, it was the bank that initiated the new review that I have 
discussed with my fellow Senators here today. Credit Suisse 
acknowledged the potential for the investigation to result in 
settlements or restitution. The fact that the bank has since agreed to 
fully review its reported role with the ratlines also shows that we are 
dealing with a whole new set of facts. But now let's take a step back.
  I have listed numbers, and I have listed figures. Let's not forget 
that we are talking here about, not facts and figures, we are talking 
about real people, victims of atrocities perpetrated through the 
Holocaust. Credit Suisse--and now UBS as the new owner--must embrace 
the sunlight, which, of course, we all know in government is the best 
disinfectant.
  So here is my advice: Accept the historical facts and own those 
facts. They ought to play a positive role in exposing the historical 
evils of the Nazis once and for all.
  Credit Suisse--and now UBS--has a responsibility to expose all 
information related to its historic servicing of Nazis during and also 
following World War II. They owe it to the Holocaust victims, 
survivors, and to the world community.
  This information is very critical to a more complete record, and it 
will also allow us to learn from history, to create a more peaceful, 
just future. We must learn from history to prevent the mistakes of the 
past, from those mistakes being repeated again.
  Simon Wiesenthal once said:

       Justice for crimes against humanity must have no 
     limitations.

  So I encourage Credit Suisse and UBS to bring this matter to a 
positive conclusion worthy of history's eyes.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, this year, with full bipartisan 
support, the Senate Budget Committee issued its first subpoena in more 
than 30 years.
  Ranking Member Grassley has just recounted how his office received 
credible information about Credit Suisse's historical servicing of Nazi 
clients and their enablers, and the Budget Committee responded by 
issuing a subpoena compelling the production of relevant documents.
  Senator Grassley and his team brought this request to me and my team, 
and I thank him for bringing this to the committee and for his 
commitment to pursuing justice for Holocaust survivors and their 
families.
  When we first launched this investigation, I said and I will say it 
again: When presented with credible evidence of Credit Suisse's Nazi 
ties, the Budget Committee had an obligation to investigate.
  The subpoenaed records shined new light on the extent of Credit 
Suisse's Nazi ties, uncovering nearly 100 previously undisclosed Nazi-
linked accounts and related information. Our investigation revealed the 
servicing of many of those accounts until as recently as 2020.
  For all that this investigation revealed, it also raised new 
questions about Credit Suisse's role in supporting Nazis fleeing 
justice following World War II via so-called ratlines. Because of the 
Budget Committee's investigation, Credit Suisse has expanded the scope 
of its internal investigation to look into those questions. The bank 
has committed to producing followup reports prepared by its forensic 
accountants, ombudspersons, and the bank itself in the coming weeks. We 
stand ready on the committee to pursue whatever information will fully 
shine light into this dark chapter.
  I will take this opportunity to talk about the importance of strong 
congressional oversight. Many see Congress only as our Nation's 
legislative body. While legislating is certainly our most recognizable 
function, our oversight and investigative functions are not to be 
overlooked.
  As the Supreme Court recognized in 1927, ``The power of inquiry with 
process to enforce it is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the 
legislative function. . . . A legislative body cannot legislate wisely 
or effectively in the absence of information respecting the conditions 
which the legislation is intended to affect or change.''
  Recently, in the case of Trump v. Mazars, the Supreme Court said of 
Congress that ``[w]ithout information, Congress would be shooting in 
the dark, unable to legislate wisely or effectively.''
  So investigations like ours demonstrate what good congressional 
oversight can achieve: advancing transparency, pursuing justice, 
ensuring corporate accountability.
  Whether it is holding companies responsible for their involvement 
with the Nazis, as in this case, or shining light on companies that are 
poisoning our planet while making hard-working Americans foot the bill 
or just promoting good, transparent corporate citizenship, I pledge, as 
chairman of the Budget Committee, to determine who is complicit in the 
looming systemic risks to the Federal budget and the U.S. economy.
  Especially where we work together across the aisle, we can accomplish 
big goals on behalf of the American people. That is why I partnered 
with Ranking Member Grassley on this investigation, and that is why our 
staffs continue to work together on other investigations.
  Senator Grassley, thank you again for bringing this matter to the 
committee. Thank you for your passionate pursuit of this issue. I share 
your commitment to leaving no stone unturned.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.