[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 81 (Wednesday, May 10, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2862-S2864]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                         Firing of James Comey

  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I was, to say the least, shocked last 
night when I heard that President Trump had dismissed FBI Director 
Comey from his position as the Director of the FBI. To me, this 
decision by President Trump crossed the line. I have tried to 
understand what was going through the President's mind at the time he 
dismissed Mr. Comey. It is clear that he had memorandums written by the 
Department of Justice that were released at the time, but there is also 
a clear indication that President Trump had been considering this 
decision for over a week and that after he had reached the decision to 
fire Mr. Comey, he needed grounds from the Department of Justice and 
that that information was supplied to Mr. Trump for his decisionmaking. 
This was Mr. Trump's decision.
  At the time he dismissed Mr. Comey, President Trump's associates had 
been involved in the investigation being done by the Department of 
Justice. This is a criminal investigation that is being done by the 
Department of Justice because of Russia's interference that involved 
Mr. Trump's associates in the U.S. election system. We do not know 
where that investigation is going--we do not--but we do know now that 
the President of the United States has compromised the ability of that 
investigation by firing Mr. Comey. That should not happen in American 
politics. No one is above the law.
  The timing of Mr. Comey's firing is extremely suspicious. If the 
President were really concerned about the FBI Director's conduct in the 
Hillary Clinton email investigation, why didn't the President fire 
Director Comey when he took the oath of office in January? It just does 
not add up. No one is above the law.

[[Page S2863]]

  According to news reports, President Trump was also upset over the 
amount of media coverage that the FBI Director and the investigations 
were attracting, and the White House asked DOJ officials to come up 
with reasons.
  It is clear to me that the decision to fire Mr. Comey was a personal 
decision that was reached by President Trump and that it was known by 
him at the time that it would compromise the investigation that is 
being done by the Department of Justice.
  I have been approached by others in their saying that Mr. Comey was 
not popular with Democrats or Republicans and that he had done things 
during his term as Director that had upset a lot of us, which is true, 
but the Director of the FBI has a 10-year term for a reason--a term 
that is longer than the two terms of the President of the United 
States. This is not a partisan position. The FBI is not required to be 
popular with either Democrats or Republicans. What he is required to do 
is to uphold the law of the land for all Americans, and no one is above 
the law. That is what we expect from the Director of the FBI.
  President Trump has compromised the integrity and independence of the 
FBI. At this point, what can we do? I would suggest, with regard to the 
criminal investigation that is being done by the Department of Justice, 
that there is only one course of action that will maintain the 
credibility of that investigation, which is that it is incumbent upon 
the Department of Justice to name, as soon as possible, a special 
prosecutor to take over that role.
  If that is not done, in my view, it will be difficult to have the 
confidence of the American people that that investigation is not being 
directed by those who were supposed to be the subject of that 
investigation.
  I think it would also compromise the nomination process of the next 
Director of the FBI. If we do not have a special counsel named, then 
there will be so much focus on how that next Director will handle this 
investigation that we really will not have attention paid to the other 
responsibilities and talents of that individual to be able to handle 
the FBI's broad jurisdiction.
  If that is not resolved--the investigation and the appointment of a 
special prosecutor--it is difficult to see how we are going to have a 
truly bipartisan process for maintaining support for the FBI.
  I urge the Deputy Attorney General to name, as soon as possible, a 
respected person as an independent prosecutor to take over this 
investigation.
  There are deeper concerns than just the President of the United 
States' hampering a criminal investigation in which associates of his 
are involved because it also involves a country that is not a friend to 
the United States. All of this was triggered by Russia's involvement in 
our democratic election system. We know that Russia was directly 
engaged in trying to compromise our election system by calling into 
question the confidence of our system and trying to tilt the scales in 
favor of one of our candidates. Russia made contact with Americans in 
order to further its game at bringing down our democratic system of 
government.
  This is not unique to the United States. Russia has used similar 
tactics in other elections of democratic countries. In the Montenegro 
election, we saw that Montenegrins were voting on their government's 
accession into NATO and that Russia exported individuals into that 
country to try to disrupt that election. They were not successful, but 
they tried. Just recently, in the French election, we saw how Russia 
got directly involved in trying to help one of the candidates who it 
believed would help pull France away from the EU and create a vacuum 
for Russia's influence, but the French voters turned that down. It was 
not successful, but that does not mean Russia will not continue to try 
to bring down democratic systems of government.
  Mr. Trump's casual and consistent dismissal of the facts, as laid out 
by the entire Intelligence Committee, about Russia's engagement in the 
United States should set off alarm bells. It cannot be business as 
usual. Yet, today, President Trump and Secretary Tillerson met with 
Foreign Minister Lavrov. Today of all days, they decided to meet like 
nothing has happened, but a lot has happened. Did we see any indication 
that the purpose of that meeting was to raise our strong objections to 
Russia's interference in our election system or Russia's compromising 
Americans to try to help in regard to its campaign against our free 
election system or Russia's engagement and encroachment into other 
countries? Did we really hear a commitment by the President of the 
United States that we would not tolerate that type of behavior by 
Russia? No. Business as usual. The President wants to establish a 
friendlier relationship with Russia.

  Russia has not just tried to bring down free elections systems; they 
have invaded other countries. We know about the active campaign in 
Ukraine, the annexation of Crimea, the Russian presence in Moldova and 
Georgia. I met with the Prime Minister of Georgia with Senator Wicker 
earlier today, and he can tell you firsthand about how their country is 
trying to deal with the Russian presence in their sovereign country.
  We all know about Russia's engagement in other parts of the world. 
Their engagement in Syria is bringing about serious challenges to 
trying to resolve the crisis in that country. The Russian Government 
supporting the Assad regime, war crime activities targeting 
humanitarian convoys, targeting hospitals, the use of chemical 
weapons--all of that is facilitated by Russia. That is well known, but 
it might be not as well known that Russia is ambitious in going into 
many more parts of the world. Russia is now engaged in Afghanistan. We 
have had one of our longest wars ever in Afghanistan and our commitment 
to the people of Afghanistan to have a democratic government. So Russia 
is now engaged with the Taliban, trying to upset our ability to bring 
all of the parties together in unity in the government.
  That, to me, is totally counter to history. We know about Russia's 
presence in Afghanistan. Does anyone believe Russia is really sincere 
in maintaining peace in that country?
  Then we see Russia's fingerprints in Yemen, trying to get a naval 
base on the Yemeni coast, showing no concern for the humanitarian 
crisis that has been created in that country. We see Russia's presence 
in Libya, supporting General Haftar, who has committed his own human 
rights violations and war crimes and has disrupted the Government of 
National Accord, which is our best chance for peace in Libya.
  We see Russia's presence in Nicaragua, sending troops and equipment 
to that country and now building a major compound that many believe is 
being built to spy on the U.S. compound. That is Russia.
  So to President Trump: It is not business as usual with Russia. There 
is a reason we need an independent commission to investigate what 
Russia was doing in the United States because Russia is trying to 
create space where they can expand their influence, and expanding their 
influence is for values that are just the opposite of ours--a corrupt 
government, no respect for human rights, no respect for democratic 
institutions, and opposition to a free press. That is what Russia is 
trying to expand. We know that in their involvement in the United 
States, they are trying to find a way to expand that opportunity.
  So it is for all of those reasons it cannot be business as usual, and 
when the President of the United States interferes with a criminal 
investigation that was precipitated by Russia's engagement in the 
United States, every American should be alarmed. Every American should 
be asking what we can do to make sure we have an independent review so 
we can take steps to protect our national security.
  It is not acceptable for the Senate to say business as usual. We need 
to come together and facilitate the independent review of potential 
criminal involvement of Americans in facilitating the Russians and what 
they were doing, and we need to have an independent review of all of 
what Russia was doing in this country so we can take the necessary 
steps to protect our national security.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.

[[Page S2864]]

  

  Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cotton). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to display water 
samples from the State of Montana on the Senate floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.