The full transcript

Live from the Newberry Opera House in South Carolina, the South Carolina Republican Senate runoff debate.

Welcome back.

Obviously, we're in South Carolina, and thank you for joining tonight's event. I very much appreciate it. I'm Greta Van Susteren, and we are here under unusual circumstances. Many here in South Carolina lost a friend and are Nation, of course, lost a U.S. senator with the passing of Senator Lindsey Graham. In one week, in a special election here in South Carolina, voters will select the Republican candidate to replace Senator Lindsey Graham on the ballot in the midterm election this November. Newsmax is carrying this debate live across our main cable channel as well as Newsmax 2, which is our streaming channel. Both channels are in more than 100 million homes, and you can download the Newsmax app on your smartphone right now and watch us free anywhere in the world. I want to bring in my panelists, Van Hipp, a Newsmax columnist and a former chairman of the South Carolina Republican Party, as well as Gavin Jackson. Gavin's a reporter and host of South Carolina ETV. Thank you both for being here this evening.

Thank you.

And now let's bring in the candidates, Senator Darlene Graham and Congressman Ralph Norman. Following the death of Senator Lindsey Graham, who was Darlene Graham's brother. On July 13th, South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster appointed Darlene Graham to her brother's seat as U.S. Senator. One day later, on July 14th, Senator Darlene Graham was sworn in. Now to Congressman Ralph Norman. He is a 5-term congressman, and since 2017, Congressman Norman has served South Carolina's 5th Congressional District. Previously, Congressman Norman twice served as a member of South Carolina's House of Representatives. First, let's go over the rules for tonight's debate. Each candidate will have 1 minute to respond to a question, and each will be allowed to answer the same questions. Answers should be based on their positions and not include personal attacks. The candidates have agreed to maintain proper decorum and mutual respect. At the moderator's discretion, candidates will be given 30 seconds for rebuttals. And now to opening statements. The candidates will each have 90 seconds. Congressman Ralph Norman, let us begin with you, sir.

Thank you, Greta. Thank all of you for coming out. What an electric crowd. Greta, you kept 'em in suspense for a while. I'm Ralph Norman, I'm from Rock Hill, South Carolina. Been a real estate developer for 40 years. I'm married to the same woman for 51 years, 4 children, 17 grandchildren, and I turned 40 back in June. And we're doing very well. No, I, it's such an honor to be here under unfortunate circumstances, Darlene. You were a good sister and he was a good brother. But that being said, I am anxious and I'm excited about what we can do for South Carolina. My differences aren't with Darlene or really any of the Republicans. Our differences—

Oh, sure.

And who we're fighting are the socialist Democrats and the RINOs that go along with it. That's our real battle to save this country. It's not other Republicans. That being said, we have a task ahead of us. And the differences, I'm a proven— I've got a proven record, folks. You can look me up. For 8 years I've been in Congress. I'm the most conservative member. You know how I'm going to vote. My resume is my record. And whether it's all the agencies that that rate how you vote, I've been a taxpayer hero for as long as I can remember. Club for Growth, Heritage Foundation, the rating agencies, I'm conservative. What you see is what you get. The differences that I will point out, we have an unknown candidate who I am running against. What's clear, and loud and clear, I'm not the candidate for the Washington mainstream. Mr.

Congressman, sir, I've got to call time. I have the unfortunate— I know that your shot clock is not working, so I'm going to have to call time on you, sir. Senator, you have 90 seconds.

Thank you, and it is quite a lively crowd tonight, but thank you for having me. And I want to begin by saying thank you for the prayers. It's been a difficult month for me and my family, so the prayers are very much appreciated. I also want to thank President Trump for his endorsement and other state and national leaders like Tim Scott and Russell Frye. I also wanna thank Lindsey's staff because they have committed to staying with me, and they are the gold standard when it comes to providing constituent services. A little bit about me. Lindsey and I grew up in one room in the back of a bar and liquor store in central South Carolina, where my parents worked long, hard hours. That's where we learned a work ethic and the value of a dollar. For 30 years, I have served the people of South Carolina. For the past 7, I led a state agency. I turned it from a struggling agency into a national model. We had 130 employees and a $90 million budget. Because of that, I was elected president of a national organization for blind agencies. I was a member of the State Workforce Development Board. I served on that for several years. I'm a problem solver, a critical thinker, And a leader. I'm a volleyball mom. I love watching my daughter play volleyball, and I know that boys do not belong in girls' sports. They certainly don't belong in the girls' locker room. I'm pro-life. I was honored and excited today to get the Susan B. Anthony endorsement. That meant a lot to me. I strongly support the Second Amendment.

Senator, I'm going to do the same to you that I had unfortunately have to do to the congressman. I have to cut you off for the 90 seconds. So we get through the debate. I've now done this to both of you. So I'm going to go to the questions now and I'm going to ask the first question. Congressman, I give it first to you. Gas prices are record high. Americans are pinched at the gas station. Half the country is living paycheck by paycheck to paycheck. What can you do in the U.S. Senate to try to alleviate this economic pain for so many citizens?

First thing I'm going to do in the Senate is wake them up. Save America is my goal. Save America, save America is my goal. Save Act should have been passed. It hasn't been. That being said, on lowering gas prices, we got to get the Straits of Hormuz opened. And the president has done a good job. He inherited a wreck with Joe Biden. So what he will have to do is move forward to getting, making sure the war and the oil prices are low. I've got to make sure, and I will do as a businessman, go to the businesses, cut regulations, talk to exactly what is needed. Affordability is needed all over the country, and it's not happening in South Carolina. It's not happening— it's straining people all over the country. So with regulations and getting involved, I know what they go through from day one, and I will take the time to do that.

Senator, same question to you. Gas prices are record high. Americans are pinched at the grocery store. living paycheck to paycheck, half of America. So what can you do in the U.S. Senate to alleviate that pain?

↳ P1 raised again here · first raised at U-011

Well, I know how that feels. There's 50 million people in South Carolina. Half of them live paycheck to paycheck. 60% of them don't have 3 months' savings to get by. I've been there before. I've struggled too. I trust President Trump to get the Strait of Hormuz open. Iran is the weakest it's been in 47 years, but we cannot let them get a nuclear weapon. But I tell you who voted to increase the gas tax, and that's my opponent, and I can tell you that doesn't help people at the pump.

Next question goes to my colleague, Than.

↳ evidence for the P2 verdict on Ralph Norman · ruling prints at U-014

On the economy, Senator Graham, the national debt is approaching $40 trillion, and interest payments are consuming an increasingly large part of the federal budget. What significant area of federal spending would you be willing to cut or reform to put the country on a more sustainable fiscal path?

I think President Trump has already done a great job cutting spending. He's cut a lot of fraud, but I think there's more fraud to be cut. When I worked in state government, one of the things I focused on was duplication of services. I worked to cut duplication of services to save taxpayers' dollars. I think there's more duplication going on in the federal government that we can work on cutting. So, I think we need to identify more fraud, wasteful spending, and duplication of services.

All right, Congressman Norman, same question. What areas of federal spending would you be willing to cut or reform?

↳ P3 raised again here · first raised at U-016

Well, the cancer in America is overspending. The fact is, we don't cut anything in Congress. I've been a lone wolf, lone voice for cutting. The Doge Commission identified over $100 billion, and we only got 9, only had $9 billion in cuts because politicians, both Democrat and Republican, cannot cut. You've got to live within your means. And we're facing a crisis not just at— on the national level, at every single agency. The Highway Trust Fund, Social Security is going to run out at the end of— actually before the end of the 6-year term that I'll serve in the Senate. So it's cutting spending, it's identifying the waste, fraud, and abuse that we already know, but we hadn't had the courage to do it as a body. And that's what I will be a voice for doing that and singling out exactly what items needed to be cut and bring it to, bring it back to South Carolinians and to the people all over the country.

Gavin, you have the next question on the economy.

Congressman, back to you, talking about Social Security. If you can elaborate on that. 1.1 million South Carolinians rely on Social Security, but like you said, the program faces a significant financial shortfall and insolvency in 6 years. At that point, the law requires a 22% cut. Do we keep Social Security? How do you fix it? And please be specific.

No, we can't keep it as the way it is. Again, it's kind of like the cuts. We just hadn't had the courage to tackle Social Security because we have worthless notes that it's not like the money that is the taxpayers that's accumulating for them to spend. And to say it's a— to face a 25% cut is outrageous. It ought to infuriate every American. What we will do is put up concrete bills that will let Americans spend more of their own money, and the politicians simply have not been willing to do that. Americans are perfectly capable of spending their own money. Money is one thing. The other thing is just calling it out for what it is. There are people on— that have a Social Security number that aren't even living. That's part of the waste, fraud, and the abuse that's taken advantage of the system. We'll have the courage to call it out. and, uh, to try to get this, this system solvent.

Senator Graham, to you, talk about Social Security, how you would save it.

↳ P4 raised again here · first raised at U-021

Social Security was put in place to protect our elderly from living in poverty, so we have to keep Social Security. Lindsey and I relied on Social Security when our parents died when we were younger, so Social Security is important. I have an aunt who's 90-something years old. She relies on Social At the agency I worked at, one of the ways we did it is we helped train individuals who are blind or low vision go to work. Our successful employment rates were trending up each year. What that meant is they were no longer relying on the government, on Social Security Disability Insurance and SSI, so they were less reliant on the government and earning wages to support their families. So the more programs we have like that, We'll turn from the economy now to healthcare.

Ben, you have the first question.

Congressman Norman, even though President Biden gave him a sweeping federal pardon, Dr. Anthony Fauci invoked the 5th Amendment at a recent Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing on COVID-19. The committee voted to hold him in contempt of Congress and refer him to the Department of Justice for potential prosecution. Do you believe Dr. Fauci should be held in contempt and prosecuted? And as a US senator, what would you do to hold Dr. Fauci and future Dr. Faucis accountable?

He ought to be in an orange jumpsuit. I mean, bottom line, I— folks, I was the only congressman that stood with the frontline doctors on the steps of the Supreme Court. And the fact is, That if you listen to the Senate hearings, him taking the fifth, he killed a million people. So yes, and if they prove an auto pen signed his his pardon, I hope they'll take him. They'll retry him and put him put him in jail. He has no remorse. That's the problem with this man: the ego, the the books, the money he made is outlandish. And when he even asked him for a you know for to apologize, he couldn't even he didn't have the decency to do that. We should have, and I got I didn't wear a mask. I got fined by. Stupid Pelosi for not wearing a mask. It was insane the whole time, but we have to call it out ahead of time. Then again, it gets back to politicians calling a spade a spade and making sure we don't fall for another virus which is coming down the pike.

Senator Graham, same question. Should Dr. Fauci be held in contempt or prosecuted? And what would you do to hold him and future Dr. Faucis accountable?

↳ P7 raised again here · first raised at U-026

Dr. Fauci stared at the floor basically the whole time they asked him questions. 111 times he refused to answer the questions. I think that's absurd. So yes, I think he should be in jail as well. Here's my concern, though. My opponent received $600,000 in COVID bailout money and convinced President Trump or tried to convince President Trump not to extend the $600 unemployment money for laid-off workers. So that's a bit concerning for me.

Gavin, you have a healthcare question on Medicare. Yeah.

Does he want a rebuttal?

Congressman, do you want to respond to the Medicare, the COVID question? Respond. Do you want to respond to the COVID the $600,000 and the allegation about President Trump?

Look, COVID was a disaster, man-made, put up with by the government. It's got me not believing anything the government says with what they perpetrated. World Health Organization, we should have withdrawn from that for a long time. There's other viruses that they're going to try to put on the American people that we can't put up with, and I would just say we cannot have a repeat of COVID is my only response.

↳ evidence for the P8 verdict on Ralph Norman · ruling prints at U-032

You have a question on Medicare.

Senator Graham, talking about Medicare, like Social Security, Medicare's also facing a pending shortfall, which would lead to an 11% cut in payments. So what is your message to 1.27 million South Carolinians who rely on this program that faces insolvency in 7 years?

One thing we have to work hard to do is maintain Medicare for our elderly. They rely on that, and Social Security I've already addressed. We have to maintain the Social Security benefits for the elderly. Here's where I have a problem with the Democrats. If it were up to the Democrats, they would have Medicare for All, and that would bankrupt our country.

Congressman Norman, same question about Medicare.

↳ P5 raised again here · first raised at U-035

Yeah, if you look at the Medicare and actually Medicaid rolls, you've got that you have illegals that are drawing benefits and not just that program and, you know, trying to have some checks and balances. And what the American people want are consequences for these people. You've got to have the willingness to identify who they are and get them off the rolls. It's a— it is a program that it's not if, it's just when it's going bankrupt. And for us not to even touch the ones that should never have been on the payrolls anyway. It's just wrong to do.

Congressman, what would you do to improve access to healthcare across the country? Because it's very uneven. A lot of people don't have access.

Obamacare was a wreck. It was a one-size-fits-all. There again, Ms. Pelosi and her, her, her comment that you got to pass it before you read it. Every congressman, every senator should have stood up and said, we're not going to do that. We're going to read it first and understand it. No, it's a— as a business owner, you expand HSA accounts where businesses can deduct it. You let the patient pick the services that they want, not have, again, one size fits all. You ought to shop across state lines for your policies and make it competitive. There's no one in this audience that when you get a doctor's bill you can't read it and you can't understand it. That's— it's not that difficult. It's done for a reason. We've got to hold the insurance companies accountable and make sure we can read it and understand it and know what we're paying for. That's why these concierge doctors who don't want to deal with insurance companies because— and the government because of the delays, they want to be able to go pay cash and go home.

Senator, what would you do to get greater access to people across the country who don't have access to healthcare to make it more even? accessibility even easy.

↳ P6 raised again here · first raised at U-039

Right. I'm worried about South Carolina. A third of our rural hospitals are in danger, at risk of being closed. President Trump allocated $50 billion for rural hospitals. $200 million of it went to South Carolina. I currently sit on the Appropriations Committee, so I would make sure that more money comes into South Carolina to help save support these rural hospitals because we can't deny access to people in rural communities.

All right, turning to national security, Gavin, you have the first question about the war in Iran.

Yeah, we'll go to you, Senator. President Trump signed a 60-day deadline for ending the war with Iran and reaching an accord on its nuclear program. That deadline passed on Monday. Do you support continuing this war with Iran? You have both voted against a war powers resolution. containing the president. So what does victory look like? What is a win for you when it comes to Iran?

You know, I fully trust President Trump when it comes to the war in Iran. 47 years this has been going on. Iran is the weakest they have been in 47 years. The one thing that concerns me is we cannot let them get a nuclear weapon. So I trust President Trump and everything he's doing. I think he's got this and I trust him on it.

Congressman, what does a win look like in Iran for us?

↳ P9 raised again here · first raised at U-044

A win looks like, I mean, he took them out militarily as far as getting a nuclear weapon where you had Obama paying cash bribes in the middle of the night. So he did the job to take them out. They were a severe threat and he had the courage to do that. Now, I think that we've got to end it. I think he's going to have to tell the American people What's it going to take? If the Straits of Hormuz are still dominated by a country that's supposed to be decimated, we've got to have some understanding on that because I'm not for endless wars. You win them and you get out. And so I think once he explains that as what's going to have to be done—

Let me follow up on that, Congressman. So what would you recommend to the president that he do?

↳ P9 raised again here · first raised at U-044

Well, I think he needs to, you know, he sees what's happening in Congress. It's codified. If you have to put, if you put boots on the ground, after 60 days you have to get approval from Congress. He doesn't have the approval. The Democrats hate him for anything he does, so he can't get approval from Congress. But I think he just needs to, if it's more air power, if it's more taking out the, you know, whoever the lunatics are that are running the country. Now what makes it difficult is they have no regard for human life. I mean, they made the comment that they will outlast this president, President Trump. And so, you know, how are they able to do that? So that, he's gonna have to go ahead and do whatever it takes to get them out.

Senator, how would you answer that? What would you tell the president to do?

↳ P9 raised again here · first raised at U-044

Well, he's already decimated the leadership over there. I think he's doing a great job. The Strait of Hormuz obviously is not open yet, but I think it will be. Again, I trust him to do what he can to end the war in Iran. Again, they're the weakest they've been in 47 years. I know they're still dangerous, but his goal is to make sure they don't have a nuclear weapon. We cannot let these people get a nuclear weapon. So we— I think we have to pay a little bit now, but ultimately in the endgame, if we prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon, We have to pay. weapon, which is his goal, I think he'll be successful and our country will be much better off.

Van, you have a question on munitions supply.

Yeah, yes, Greta. Senator Graham, the war in Ukraine and the conflict with Iran have shown that modern warfare can rapidly consume artillery ammunition, missiles, drones, air defense interceptors. What should the United States do to ensure that it can manufacture enough weapons and ammunition to sustain a major conflict while maintaining adequate reserves for our military and our allies?

Well, one of the things I would do is work with President Trump to get the defense bill passed. It's being held up by the Democrats right now. I do believe my opponent in the past has voted against the defense spending bill.

Congressman Norman, same question. What would you do to ensure that we've got adequate supply of weaponry to keep this country safe?

↳ P10 raised again here · first raised at U-053

Well, first of all, you know, the fact that we are having to pass continuing resolutions because we can't get the Democrats on anything, they're for total disarmament. And so that's what complicates it. But our defense budget for the coming year is over $1 trillion. And by the way, our interest alone is exceeding our military budget. We can't sustain it. We had to pass a, what was it, $320 billion pared down to a $90 billion bill just to maintain and get the weapons that we need to have air superiority. So, you know, it's a, it's got, military has gotta be front and center stage, but we've gotta explain to the American people where we are. And I don't know what her comment was about me voting against a, some defense bill. With the big beautiful bill, we made it better. I voted against it because we cut things, and the president even agreed when we went in there. So I don't— it's silly season, folks. All these attack ads, it's laughable what— how she's doing that.

Senator, Senator, you can reply to that if you wish.

I'm sorry.

You can reply to that if you wish.

It's kind of ironic when you talk about the big beautiful bill because it's my understanding that you were the holdout on the big beautiful bill and Trump had to call you in and convince you to sign it.

Let me move on to a national security question of mine.

I can respond to that.

Well, we can go back and forth on this. All right, I'll let you respond and I'll let you respond if it—

That is just not true. It's like all these ads you're placing. It's fake. No, what happened was I was on the Budget Committee. We had another bite at the apple. When you're in the business arena, you drive the hardest bargain as long as you can. I held out, and when we came to the office, it wasn't anything like what you're talking about. It was— he says, what are you holding it up for? I said, well, the subsidies for electric cars is dumb. The subsidies for passive solar and wind are stupid. I was cutting it out, and we made it better. He agreed, and so we got it passed. And I would do that over again. I don't apologize for it.

Senator, Senator, if you want to respond, or we can move on, it's your choice. That's okay.

We'll move on.

Okay, we'll move on. All right. Okay, go ahead. On the national security questions, well, Senator, are Taiwan and the Are Taiwan and the South China Sea national security issues for the United States? If so, why?

I'm sorry, could you repeat the question?

Are Taiwan and the South China Sea national security issues for the United States? And if so, why or how?

↳ P13 raised again here · first raised at U-067

+2 C-4.1 · Acknowledged uncertainty on national security · Darline Graham

I'm just going to be honest here. I'm not on national security that— I'm not that informed on national security. But I do support the military. My brother was in the Air Force for 33 years, so I will do everything I can to support the military. My, my dad was in the Army. I'm not a polished politician up here. National security is not my thing, not my area of expertise, but I do support the military.

Congressman, I'll give you a chance to respond, and I'm sure he recognizes that Taiwan's a definite ally.

↳ P13 raised again here · first raised at U-067

And, you know, we have a trading relationship with them that is beneficial to the United States, chips being one of them and others. So what the president is doing right is he's enabling Taiwan to defend themselves against China. But it's peace through strength that he's showing with Iran that China, Russia, others are looking at it so that they don't want to deal with America. And that's why they haven't attacked Taiwan, if they had some weak Democrat in office like Biden or another Obama, yeah, they'd take it over. But we can't let that happen. We gotta take a strong— peace through strength is working.

All right, now to Israel, which of course Senator Lindsey Graham had enormous amount of support for. We talk about Israel. Van, first to you, you have a question about Israel.

Yes, Congressman Norman, to you first. President Reagan once said, America has never fought from the commitment to the State of Israel, a commitment which remains unshakable. How do you view Israel and its relationship with America today?

Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. Israel, if you go there, that's God's country. And, you know, we have continued to maintain good relations. And the President, I think, has paid many a trip over there. If you go over there, it changes you. It just does. So yes, we will maintain a great relationship with them and we support them. And from what we're hearing in Congress, they are ready and willing and able to take out Iran if it means putting troops on the ground. They're trained soldiers and they are true patriots. And yes, they are a friend and we have to remain a friend.

Senator Graham, 1 minute.

↳ P14 raised again here · first raised at U-074

Yes, I think we should stand with Israel. They're one of our strongest allies, so I definitely support Standing with Israel. I am a little concerned about troops on the ground. I don't know that that's necessary just yet. I would like to make sure that we try all economic solutions before we put troops on the ground.

Okay, we're taking a quick break, but stay right where you are. In just a few minutes, we're gonna hear more from South Carolina Republican Senate runoff candidate, South Carolina Senator Darlene Graham, and South Carolina Congressman Ralph Norman.

Visit the all-new Watch page on scetv.org to stream your favorite shows on demand and on your schedule.

I'm Gavin Jackson, your host of This Week in South Carolina. SCETV's weekly public affairs program. Join me each week as we dive into key topics, bringing you insightful interviews with political leaders, newsmakers, and policymakers of South Carolina. From legislative updates— tell us what reforms are in play right now and where that's all going— to economic developments. I think we know for certain that this battle against inflation is, is not done yet. Healthcare. This week we're discussing healthcare in South Carolina, and I'm joined by 2 heavyweights, Dr. David Cole, President of the Medical University of South Carolina, and Dr. Patrick Cawley, CEO of MUSC Health. Thank you all for both being here. To environmental impacts. Global temperature changes of a half degree Celsius or degree Fahrenheit are extraordinary kinds of rises in terms of an average global temperature.

That's a lot of energy.

This Week in South Carolina covers the critical topics that impact our communities. With expert analysis and in-depth discussions. What, what are you watching here? What's the big themes coming up for June 11th?

I think I'm watching, I think you're watching, I think anybody who's paid any attention to the State House over the last couple of years is watching what happens between the members of the House GOP caucus, which is a more established caucus, and then the 16, 17 members of the House Freedom Caucus.

We ensure you're well informed and engaged with the Palmetto State. Tune in to This Week in South Carolina every Friday at 7:30 PM on SCETV.

Welcome back to our debate coverage. I'm Greta Van Susteren, and we are here in the absolutely gorgeous town of Newberry, South Carolina, at the Newberry Opera House. Newberry is just about 45 minutes outside Columbia, South Carolina, which of course is the state capital. And I wanna welcome back my panelists, Van Hipp and Gavin Jackson, and of course, most importantly, I also wanna bring back our candidates, South Carolina Senator Darlene Graham and South Carolina Congressman Ralph Norman. Thank you both for agreeing to take our questions tonight. Senator Graham, to you, we left at the first break talking about Israel. Anti-Semitism in this country seems to be growing, at least in my opinion, unbelievably. What, as a US senator, should you get reelected, can you do to help resolve that issue that's growing?

Well, as I was saying, to me, Israel is one of our strongest allies. We have to stand with Israel. Lindsey had a great relationship with Prime Minister Netanyahu. I met with his wife and him personally a few weeks ago, and he was so appreciative of the relationship they had. One promise I made to the Prime Minister, I'm gonna continue supporting Israel any way I can because they are such a strong ally of ours. And we have to fight against Iran. Like I've said before, they cannot have a nuclear weapon. So I will stand with Israel.

Congressman, the same question to you. Anti-Semitism, at least in my opinion, is growing in this country. What can the Senate do to try to slow that down?

↳ P15 raised again here · first raised at U-085

Israel is a friend of ours. Well, we've got to address anti-Semitism. I mean, you've got to stop, not permit that on college campuses and other places. It's wrong. Yeah, Israel is a friend of ours and we have to maintain that friendship and support them. And that's why we have to get our debt under control, our spending under control, and major into major things. And remaining a friend with Israel is a major thing that America needs to focus on and, and, and follow through with it.

All right, turn to China. Gavin, you have a question about farmland in China.

Congressman, more than 40 million acres of farmland in the United States is owned by foreign entities according to the Department of Agriculture. Chinese investments amount to less than 1%. What does Congress need to do to restrict our adversaries from owning American land in our region?

What South Carolina needs to do is find the land that's owned by China and either get it back or make it so hard so they can't develop it. You don't put up with that. They bought land in Columbia that is near our military institutions. You stop that. Same thing on the Confucius Institute where they had colleges were letting Chinese students come in under the guise of majoring in one one major and then switching to get our secrets. They sent the brightest and the sharpest over here. You gotta stop that. I called them out. Guess what 2 were guilty of it? Carolina and Presbyterian College, my alma mater. I called them out. Guess who called me? The lobbyists. We're making all this money. I said, yeah, but you're giving the country away. And they changed it, but we have to be aware of that and stop it and not let them form these LLCs where they buy it and then then move forward. And I'll tell you, TikTok, you hadn't heard it yet, but TikTok is still controlled by China. We would never be able to have a TikTok into China as they're into our country.

Time.

Senator Graham.

↳ P16 raised again here · first raised at U-090

I think China is destroying our businesses. So President Trump has been the strongest president we've had against China. It's kind of scary. They have bought up too much farmland. The military base he's talking about is Shaw Air Force Base. They bought farmland right next to Shaw. They're interfering with our food supply chain. That's a national security threat. AI, and they're becoming leaders in the AI industry. This is dangerous for our children, interfering with AI and businesses. There have been instances where children are committing suicide because of AI. So we cannot let China win. We have to continue to fight against China. I would support a federal ban to prevent them from buying farmland because we, we cannot let China win.

Ben, your China question.

Senator Graham, staying on the same issue, Senator, one of your colleagues, Senator Jim Banks, recently has sounded the alarm on the threat of communist Chinese nationals working in our AI labs here in America. And currently there's a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act that he put in requiring American companies, AI companies doing business with the Pentagon, to report insider threats and, and, uh, uh, uh, some of the security breaches. My question is, do you support Senator Banks' effort to safeguard against Communist Chinese infiltration in domestic AI labs, and would you ban Communist Chinese nationals from working in our AI labs here in America?

Yes, it scares me. Like I said, China leading AI is a scary situation. So I would work, I would support any federal ban to prevent them from buying farmland. I would support a ban against them taking over labs, data centers, AI labs. We can, again, I can't say it enough, we cannot let China win the war when it comes to taking over our businesses, buying our farmland, winning in AI. It's very dangerous. It's a national security threat. So I would support any type of bans against China.

Congressman Norman?

↳ P17 raised again here · first raised at U-096

Yeah, of course. Yeah, you would naturally do that, but you gotta, you have to go further than that. Like the balloons that flew over this country for as long as they did, and when we went into SCIF to find out what the Biden administration and the generals knew, They denied it. As a body, we should have screamed about it and stopped them from doing things like that. But it's all being aggressive and letting the American people know that we're representing them. Yes, we're not going to let China in. Yes, we will go to the military and the ones that really have the intel and take the steps to stop it. It's not going to happen by itself. They're aggressive. They play the long game. It's an easy— it's not easy to do, but we as senators and House members have got to force the issue because there's so many, they fight you on so many different fronts.

Senator Graham, in light of the fact that key chemical components that make generic drugs, life-saving drugs for people in America come from China, what should we do to protect How would you protect our supply of drugs because we are so dependent on these components from China?

I think we need to bring back all manufacturing to the United States. The fact that they manufacture our medical supplies, our drugs, again, is a very scary situation. We cannot let them manufacture our drugs. Whether it's AI or drugs, they are destroying America. They're destroying our American companies. Again, President Trump has been the strongest president against China, so we have to continue. It's a battle against China.

Congressman?

↳ P18 raised again here · first raised at U-100

Yeah, I mean, we bring back manufacturing. We have to have the environment in the United States that incentivizes companies to come back here. which we're doing. President Trump has done a good job on that. The tariffs had to be in place with China. You got to have reciprocal trade and fair trade. It wasn't that way under the Biden administration. It wasn't that way under the Obama administration. But you use everything you can to make sure that the Americans are producing what we can make. China depends on our cancer drugs, many cases we make here. But we've got to use our leverage with them. They don't do anything voluntarily. You've got to make it and you've got to be smart enough to do it.

All right, artificial intelligence has been brought up, so we're going to turn to artificial intelligence. Gavin, you had the first question on whether to regulate or not.

Yeah, that goes to Congressman Ralph Norman talking about AI. There are currently no regulations on AI. It's truly the Wild West. Uh, is AI too powerful to be left to companies to regulate at this time?

Absolutely, it's too powerful. Anybody who, who has grandchildren, when what you see on TV and the dangers that it has when they can make images exactly and imitate your voice. Now it's gonna be tough to do because the internet is unregulated anyway for the most part, and government hadn't been able to do it. It doesn't mean you stop trying, but yeah, you try to regulate what you can and find out what you can so that it's used in a good way instead of hurting Senator Graham, regulating AI?

AI is definitely out of control. There have been so many nightmare stories and situations. There have been situations to where AI has gotten out of control and hacked into businesses and taking over accounts and systems. Um, this is very concerning. AI is growing smarter and smarter. So there has to be some federal bans put on this. We have to step in and get control of AI. It's against China, but I mean, AI itself is becoming smarter. So I'm very concerned. It's a scary situation. I'm personally very scared of AI.

↳ P19 raised again here · first raised at U-105

Van, you have a question on artificial intelligence?

Yes, Senator Graham, multiple South Carolina counties Colleton, Newberry, Greenwood, and others have passed or are advancing moratoriums on AI data centers because of concerns about the power grid, awarding ratepayer bills, and so forth. President Trump and his administration, however, views AI data centers as a top national security priority in the AI race versus China. As a senator, where would you come out on this, and how do you balance the state and the federal interests?

Well, we were just talking about how dangerous AI is, how China is leading in this. So we can't let China beat us in this AI battle. That's a national security issue. It becomes very concerning to me. So when it comes to data centers, I think it needs to be heavily involved by the communities. There needs to be guardrails in place, regulations in place. But again, we have to have data centers because we can't let China win in this AI battle. But the way to do it is to put guidelines on these companies to where they have to build their own water and power supplies or either subsidize utilities so that the rates decrease, not increase. Again, it's more about community involvement. It's about having a transparent transparent framework in place to protect the environment. So it's putting the guidelines and guardrails in place for communities, and they should decide.

Congressman Norman.

↳ P20 raised again here · first raised at U-109

Yeah, but you changed your position because you originally said you were for just data centers in general. That's what you said. Here's where I stand on this. I believe in the 10th Amendment, states' rights. I think that for that data center data center that's being built where it causes diminution in value of homes around it, the community does going to have, is going to have to take ownership and use what they can and find out what's the water usage do for their community. What is electricity needs? The big thing I would do is not let the politicians in local communities or advocate for them not to give the farm away and not to do, have incentives for these data companies. Let them pay their own way. and if it has a return on investment for them, but it's gotta have a return on investment for the community, and they've had a free ride. So I will call attention to it, and I will do whatever it takes to educate the public on what's going on.

Senator, do you wanna respond to the comment he made about you?

Yes, I do. Obviously, I just said I'm for data centers, but I also said that there needs to be community involvement, community guidelines, community guardrails. Maybe you didn't hear that part. But what about Silfab, that you negotiated a deal in your backyard where a company that mixes chemicals was built near several schools? And I believe one school has been shut down because there was a leakage into the groundwater near the school.

Silly season again. Silly season again. This was a company that took over a vacant building. The school was already in process. Henry McMaster and his group gave them money. They approved it. So that's just not true. All that stuff that was put out was not true. But it's something that is not an issue now. Those communities did the right thing to sue them. It'll end up in the courts. It's actually more of a zoning issue that they are operating a business that maybe didn't fit the zoning. I'm not on the county council, I'm not on city council. I didn't approve any funding that they went— that they got.

Senator, can I rebut that? Do I get a rebuttal to that? Okay, well, okay, let's, let's say that you didn't negotiate the deal, it was up to the county council. I don't necessarily believe that, but you did take money from the lobbyist for Silfab, thousands of dollars from SEIA. That's a lobbying group for Silfab.

↳ P22 raised again here · first raised at U-114

Silfab. There again, it's silly season again. The lobbying group, Silfab was one out of, they had hundreds of clients. Solar panels, I've investigated because I'd rather get it from the sun than I had from buying it from one of the companies. So again, that's misinterpretation.

↳ P23 raised again here · first raised at U-116

It's— All right, let's move on. Let me ask a question. Senator, I'll go to you. It's sort of an extension of the AI question, also the economy. AI has been incredibly helpful in many areas like medicine and, and so many other areas, but at the same time that it, uh, it's destroying jobs. And, and although it creates jobs, it does not appear that it's creating jobs outpacing the number of jobs it destroys. So what is the role, if any, of the US Senate in this issue?

I've been in workforce development pretty much my entire career. So when it comes to job development, that's one of the things that I'm most interested in. Um, I'm not sure about the connection to workforce development when it comes to AI, but one of the things I did when I ran the state agency for 7 years, like I mentioned, to help people who are blind or low vision go to work— our successful employment rates increased dramatically while I was there.

+2 C-4.1 · Acknowledged uncertainty · Darline Graham

Mm-hmm.

And I think we need to bring our jobs back to the United States. Under President Trump, in the big beautiful bill, He's created, he's expanded the Pell Grants into in-demand jobs in HVAC, heating and air, and electricians, so I think that's one way to grow our workforce, is more programs like that. Again, I don't believe my opponent supported the Big Beautiful Bill despite what he said.

↳ evidence for the P24 verdict on Darline Graham · ruling prints at U-119

Congressman, your response. You get to answer that same question anyway, but we'll give you a little extra time to respond.

↳ P24 raised again here · first raised at U-118

I voted for the big beautiful bill. I made it better in the Senate. Look, the way you have quality growth in South Carolina, and we'll have a— we've got a lot of people moving in, you empower the tech schools. People don't— the young people don't realize that the opportunity's there for that carpenter, that electrician, that person that uses his hands. You also have to Go to the businesses and cut regulations along with taxes and make sure that we're empowering the backbone of South Carolina, which is small business. And I will do that 'cause I've been a— I've owned a business, unlike my opponent. I've owned a business. I've signed the front and back of a paycheck, and I know some of the issues that businesses have, but you have to go to 'em and reach out, and I will do that when I become senator. In every part of this state, we'll go to and get opinions from people who have been successful and who need help on cutting regulations and other things.

Can I rebut? He mentioned me. So, I know that you own your own business, but your workforce apparently has— you've hired illegal immigrants to, instead of taking advantage of the technical college schools where the Pell Grant programs are actually Democrat talking line years ago.

Look, I've supported immigrant, you know, illegal, I've stopped and voted for everything the president has done to stop illegal immigration. I don't hire illegal immigrants, and it's just a false, falsehood that you're trying to say that's not true.

All right, we're moving on then. Might as well move on to immigration since you both raised that question. Gavin, Um, you wanted to talk first about pathway to citizenship.

Congressman, let's start with you and talk about this. Do you support the rights of those— and I've asked you this question somewhat before in a previous debate— but, uh, do you support the rights of those in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, DACA, uh, also migrants with valid visa status, green card holders, asylum seekers, naturalized citizens, and others who are legally going through the citizen— citizenship process? Do you believe in a pathway for— to citizenship for those folks? folks?

Here's what I believe in: legal immigration, not illegal immigration. The president has got, you know, we have to have a pathway, but you have to get the illegals out of the country now. You're either legal or you're not, and you get them out of the country. And then you have an expedited area for those workers who have been here and have not caused trouble and provide work and for different companies, you have an organized way to do it. But this president has had his hands full with trying to unwind 4 years of everybody in this universe coming into America. And the Democrats did it because they wanted a power base, and it didn't work, and the president's taking actions to do it. So it's gotta be legal immigration, not illegal.

Senator, to you, talk about these folks that do have status. How's that pathway look to you?

↳ P25 raised again here · first raised at U-127

Yeah, and this is where I differ a little bit. People have asked me how I differ from my brother. I differ from my brother, it's real clear to me. If you're here illegally, you need to be deported immediately. So, yeah, that's a clear one for me, but I think President Trump has done a great job protecting our borders. And again, I'll support deporting any illegal immigrants. One thing I did vote for was the Save America Act. That's one of the— I co-sponsored the Save America Act. That's the first bill I co-sponsored, because I think if you need to have an ID to check out a library book, you certainly need one to vote. I'm worried about our elections and people voting. There were 6,600 noncitizens that registered to vote in New Jersey, and several hundred of them voted. So we have to get the Save America Act passed. I'll end the filibuster to get it passed. I even voted to stay in recess.

Time has passed. I'm sorry, Senator. Turn to Van for your question.

Yeah, Senator Graham, the Supreme Court recently rejected President Trump's executive order restricting birthright citizenship. Do you agree with the court's decision? And if a future Supreme Court nominee took the position of this court, meaning that they believe that the 14th Amendment guarantees birthright citizenship under this court's interpretation, would you vote to confirm that nominee?

I am definitely against birthright citizenship. We have women coming to this country, staying in hotels to have children because— just for them to be citizens and for them to be able to stay stay here and take care of the children. I'm definitely against birthright citizenship, and I will vote any way possible to prevent it from happening.

Congressman Norman?

↳ P27 raised again here · first raised at U-132

Absolutely, birthright citizenship is wrong. They're advertising signs in Mexico, pay $4,000 or maybe more to have a baby in America. That's flat out wrong, and I would use a litmus test for a a judicial candidate. And Lindsey did a good job on Kavanaugh, and he was a conservative judge who ended up to be a conservative judge, unlike Amy Coney Barrett, which switched colors.

Senator, 2-part question. Is our immigration system broken, and if true, are you committed to an overhaul of the system legislatively, top to bottom, so we have some sort of certainty?

Well, I mean, again, I think President Trump has done a great job protecting our borders. The Democrats are the ones I worry about, especially the socialist Democrats. They just don't want to even have any borders. I just mentioned birthright citizenship. I'm definitely against that. I made it clear that anybody who's here illegally needs to be deported immediately. But yeah, I think President Trump again has done a great job and improved— he's strengthened our borders, and I think he's done a great job.

Congressman, sir.

↳ P28 raised again here · first raised at U-136

Yes, he has, and it's interesting that my opponent mentions Democrats. The ones that are funding her campaign are the Democrat PACs. The $2 million, that's— And you can bring them up, but the Main Street Washington, I'm not their favorite, I'm not their candidate, you are. The money they're putting in this race ought to be alarming for every American. Every ad that you see trying to tear me down is paid for by a Democrat donor who's put up— one guy, one billionaire put up a million. I got $2 million going against me this next week. I gladly take that, but it's coming from Democrats who are supporting her candidacy for some reason. It's very alarming.

+6 R-2.1 · Whataboutism · Darline Graham

Senator?

Yes, absolutely. I got several points there. Well, first of all, if we're talking about a Democrat There was a Democrat that you contributed to in Charleston that was running for an office, so there's that. And also, you've received millions of dollars in PAC money. I think you started a PAC ad today, so that's the pot calling the kettle black.

Look, let me tell you, the money that the PAC, the difference, mine, I take zero money from Democrat PACs. Bernie Sanders' PAC, the PAC that supported Kamala Harris is putting the $2 million in your campaign. You know where my money's coming from? South Carolina. And I'm— it's between my money and South Carolina money. It's not the Democrat Party who sees something in you that they like. They do not like me, and I will, It ought to be alarming. Every ad you see is paid for by Democrat PAC money. None of my PAC money.

↳ P29 raised again here · first raised at U-139

Senator, you have 30 seconds, then we're gonna end this discussion.

I'm not sure what Democratic PAC he's talking about. I haven't even seen the ads, so I don't know what you're talking about. But I do know that you gave to a Democratic candidate in Charleston, so I know that much. And again, you've received millions of dollars in PAC ads, PAC money as well. And in addition, you know, you have million dollars, millions of dollars of your own money. I'm a working person. I don't have millions.

↳ P30 raised again here · first raised at U-141

↳ evidence for the P29 verdict on Darline Graham · ruling prints at U-141

And I'm sorry, I gotta call time because it is now, I'm sorry, to both of you. No, we got, we have to do closing statements. You can, you can do that. You each have 90 seconds to respond to that. Congressman Ralph Norman, we're gonna begin with you for 90 seconds.

First of all, it's a privilege being here. I wish we had another debate like this. We had one tomorrow, you canceled it. You didn't want to come. All that to say is, all that to say is that, you know, we have a— we're at a turning point in America. We're at a turning point where the Democrat socialists are taking it over. We've got to stop it. Again, I mentioned the fact where her money's coming from. The Main Street Washington is with her. They're not with me, nor do I want them. I've never been subservient to anything in Washington. Washington is broken. Look, I will, I will use whatever I can to break the filibuster. I will take— make sure that the Senate wakes up and votes on the SAVE Act. But other than that, we're gonna call 'em out for what they're doing to this country. Faith, family, and freedom are what the Democrats are against. The people supporting you are against that, and we got— we have to stop that. I will recruit more solid business people to run, and I'll put South Carolina first.

↳ P32 raised again here · first raised at U-008

Thank you.

Senator Darlene Grimm, your closing argument— closing remarks, please.

Yes. First of all, I'd rather be out in South Carolina meeting the voters than here on this stage with you, but the fact is I've done more in 20 years 20 days than you have done in 20 years. I did a lot of research to try to find out exactly what you have done. You named a post office, so good job. That's all I can find out that you've done. And we have spent $1.7 million on your salary for the past 10 years, and you named a post office. So, yeah, I've done, again, more in 20 days. I've got the Russia sanctions bill passed. I've cosponsored the Save America Act. I've cosigned 7 anti-abortion bills. I was the deciding vote in President Trump's AG pick, Todd Blanche. So, again, more in 20 days than you have done in literally 20 years, and I think you're confused because I don't know if you wanna be in South Carolina or Washington.

↳ evidence for the P32 verdict on Darline Graham · ruling prints at U-144

I'm not.

'Cause you said you wanted to go to Washington to clean up the swamp, then you wanted to come back to South Carolina to run for governor, now you wanna go back to Washington again to clean up the swamp. So what is it you want to do?

And with that, I thank both candidates. I'm sure you'll get a chance to speak to each other again and a chance to go out and campaign and talk to of the voters. I wanna thank South Carolina. They've been wonderful to us here since we've gotten here, and the debates, the debates is a wonderful opportunity for us to get to meet candidates. Always though, grossly incomplete to tell the whole picture, so I regret we don't have more time, but I certainly appreciate the time you've given us, and I wanna thank my panel here, Van, Gavin, and, Good luck one week from tonight. It's a big night.

Thank you.

There you go. Now it's up— they're gone. They're both headed out the door. It's up to the voters in this state to decide which of these 2 candidates are going to be the next senator.