[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 91 (Thursday, May 25, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3165-S3167]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Russian Investigation
Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I join my colleague from New York in
expressing the special respect and passion that we all feel in honoring
this great holiday that remembers the service and sacrifice of great
Americans, to make sure we sustain and preserve and enhance our
democracy. Part of that democracy is indeed the rule of law, as well as
protecting the institutions that make us great as a Nation, including
our elections system and its integrity.
Today should also be a time to observe and commemorate the continued
respect for the law that makes us great. Part of that respect was
demonstrated recently when the Deputy Attorney General appointed a
special counsel to investigate possible coordination between the Trump
administration and the Presidential campaign with the Russians as they
interfered with those democratic institutions. Make no mistake, there
is consensus and unanimity in the intelligence community, and more
broadly among us in this body, that the Russians purposefully and
relentlessly interfered in the 2016 election through a cyber attack on
this Nation. In my view, it was an act of cyber warfare.
The questions now are who and how in the Trump team may have colluded
with the Russians in that illegal, outrageous activity and, indeed,
whether there has been obstruction of justice since then. Mounting
evidence indicates that there has been.
I have joined many of my colleagues in praising the appointment of a
special prosecutor because it is vitally necessary for a fair and
impartial, as well as aggressive, investigation. The special prosecutor
must follow the evidence wherever it leads, and I have confidence that
Bob Mueller is the right person for this assignment. He has the grit
and backbone to stand up to pressure. He has the prosecutorial
experience and expertise to conduct a truly professional investigation.
I called for a special prosecutor back in February. I was one of the
first, if not the first, among our colleagues to do so because the
conflicts of interest raised by the recusal of the Attorney General and
the potential involvement of the Deputy led me to think that such an
appointment was absolutely necessary.
I now call on the President to support this investigation. With the
utmost respect for the Office of the President, it should be
unnecessary to call for that cooperation and support. My hope was that
the President would say as soon as the appointment occurred that he
would indeed cooperate. But, instead, he has continued to characterize
this investigation as a witch hunt and a charade. He has demeaned and
disrespected it and indicated that, if anything, there will be less
than full cooperation. That would be a grave disservice to our
democracy and to the American people.
The integrity of our electoral system is bigger and more important
than any single electoral contest or even any occupant of the White
House. It is about the freedom and independence of this Nation,
something we cherish and celebrate on this Memorial Day weekend.
I urge President Trump to demonstrate his adherence to the rule of
[[Page S3166]]
law by cooperating and articulating fully his cooperation with this
investigation. I hope that not only President Trump but all of his
associates will do so and that they will provide whatever testimony and
documents are necessary to complete this investigation as quickly and
effectively as possible.
I also believe that the Attorney General of the United States owes
the American people his adherence to the rule of law by committing
himself to follow the guidelines that respect the press. Indeed, we
would know very little, if anything, about many of the events that
prompted the appointment of a special prosecutor without the free press
reporting development after event after development that have led to
this day.
There are guidelines and regulations that protect the President
against any kind of compulsory process or punishment. If there is
punishment to be accorded to lawbreakers, the press should be
recognized for the special role they have in our democracy and the
special protections, the constitutional guarantee they enjoy under the
First Amendment. There are guidelines under 28 CFR 50.10 that provide
legal guidance and regulations that should be observed, and I hope that
the Attorney General will demonstrate in deed and word his adherence to
those guidelines rather than threatening to lock up reporters--as the
President has unfortunately done currently in conversations with
Director Comey--or punishing them.
Whatever the violations of government officials may be, there should
be an articulate, clear, and explicit adherence to those regulations by
the Attorney General.
Let's take a moment to go through where we are right now.
Last July, after a disturbing series of reports suggesting the
attempt by a foreign power to influence an American election, the
Federal Government began to investigate the Russian Government's
interference in the Presidential election.
We learned just yesterday from a published report that this activity
included conversations among Russian officials regarding how best to
sway individual Trump officials and that the FBI's early handling of
this matter may have been influenced by an unreliable document
traceable to Russian intelligence--a form of interference in our
justice system that is stunning.
In December of 2016, U.S. intelligence officials concluded that the
Russians had orchestrated the theft of electronic materials from the
Democratic National Committee and John Podesta in an attempt to
undermine Hillary Clinton's Presidential campaign. The Obama
administration responded by implementing sanctions on the Russian
Government.
Shortly after President Trump took office, Attorney General Sally
Yates warned the White House that National Security Adviser Michael
Flynn had lied to officials about discussing sanctions with the
Russians and was vulnerable to Russian blackmail. The White House
waited 2\1/2\ weeks to take action and did so only after a March 9
Washington Post report and, in fact, days after Sally Yates' warning,
fired her.
We also know that Director Comey was warned or asked--in fact,
demanded by President Trump that he pledge his loyalty and that he
would be in jeopardy of losing his job if he did not. Shortly
thereafter, the President clearly expressed to Director Comey his sense
of that warning when he asked Director Comey to shut down, in effect,
the Flynn investigation. As we all know, Director Comey resisted both
of the President's requests.
In early March, following sharp criticism about his failure to
disclose meetings with Russian officials under oath, Attorney General
Jeff Sessions recused himself from the Department of Justice
investigations.
Later that month, President Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, became
the third high-ranking Trump administration official caught
misrepresenting potentially his ties to an admitted meeting with
Russian officials from his security clearance application.
On May 9, President Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, a stunning
event amidst these unprecedented revelations. After clumsy and
contradicting explanations seeking to advance a false narrative that
the firing was a result of Director Comey's handling of the Hillary
Clinton email matter, the White House essentially abandoned that
conflicting series of stories, and President Trump admitted publicly
that he was thinking about the FBI's Russia investigation when he
decided to fire Comey. He boasted the next day in his meeting with the
Russian Foreign Minister that he felt greatly relieved of pressure
resulting from that investigation.
The New York Times has reported that Comey was seeking increased
funding and resources to expand the Russia probe. The Times also
subsequently revealed that Director Comey had discussed with others and
wrote memos detailing how President Trump asked him to pledge his
loyalty and shut down the Federal investigation into Mr. Flynn.
We must wait for all the facts to emerge, but even if only some of
these reports are accurate, the conclusion is almost inescapable that
the President of the United States fired the FBI Director in an attempt
to shut down the investigation into ties between his associates,
including Michael Flynn, and the Russian Government. The names of these
associates have been well documented--Paul Manafort, Roger Stone,
Carter Page, as well as Michael Flynn.
There is, unfortunately, more. Just in the past few days, additional
disturbing facts and press reports have surfaced, including testimony
by former CIA Director John Brennan before the House Intelligence
Committee. He said that before he left office, he became deeply
concerned that Russian intelligence services were attempting to
manipulate Trump associates to influence the Presidential campaign. He
noted that many Russian contacts of individuals linked to the Trump
campaign emerged in those reports. The Washington Post reported that
Comey had informed Congress about the FBI Russia investigation late in
March and that Trump had asked Director of National Intelligence Daniel
Coats and National Security Director Michael Rogers to push back on
that investigation--in effect, to clear the President--and deny Trump
campaign collusion with the Russians. According to this report, both
officials, to their credit, refused to do so.
In the Armed Services Committee, I asked Director Coats whether he
discussed with Director Rogers any attempts by the administration to
interfere with the investigation. He refused to answer--a pause and
silence that spoke volumes.
Revelation after revelation shakes our confidence in this
administration's truthfulness and confidence. This investigation by the
special prosecutor is vitally necessary.
We must not lose sight of the damage that has already been done.
These reports paint a deeply disturbing picture of possible
obstruction, a mosaic pieced together by facts that show not only
events and conversations but also motives. After a series of these
events and conversations, they can no longer be seen as isolated or
accidental or inadvertent. The cumulative effect, like threads in a
fabric, is to establish a picture of motive, intent, mens rea, and
criminal activity.
Special Counsel Mueller must have the mandate and all of the funding
and resources that he needs to follow the facts wherever they may
lead--resources, independence--but also support.
That is why, again, I call on the administration to express its
support and its intention to cooperate.
This kind of investigation can mean the difference between the
upholding of our democratic institutions and placing them in jeopardy.
Therefore, I urge that we as a body remain vigilant and continue the
Judiciary Committee's oversight, inquiry, and investigative activity so
as to assure that we know the reasons then-FBI Director Comey was
fired--we have that responsibility as a matter of oversight--and
continue that kind of scrutiny in order to assure the independence and
resources the special prosecutor needs. Likewise, the Intelligence
Committee's activities are absolutely necessary.
Almost certainly, the special prosecutor will produce no report or
elaborate public explanation. He will bring criminal charges if they
are warranted by the evidence. He will seek convictions in court if
those prosecutions are
[[Page S3167]]
justified under his finding. A report with recommendations and finding
as to how we can avoid this kind of interference with our democratic
institutions in the future must be the work of the Intelligence
Committee and of an independent commission, which I have supported. An
independent, bipartisan commission can do the kind of public,
transparent, vigorous, and independent work that is necessary, just in
the way that we have done in the wake of other crises.
I urge that we proceed on all of these fronts. They are vital to our
democracy. They are an essential, inextricable part of freedom, the
rule of law, and freedom of the press.
I hope that the press will continue its unfettered use of its First
Amendment freedom to give us the truth and to continue those reports
that have brought us to this day, because the truth will be uncovered
in the course of the criminal process. It will be uncovered by the
Intelligence Committee and, hopefully, by an independent commission.
The essential role of the free press in fostering government
accountability is recognized by existing regulations, and the Attorney
General of the United States should leave no confusion that the
Department of Justice will adhere to those regulations.
Indeed, 28 CFR 50.10 recognizes the ``essential role of the free
press in fostering government accountability'' and, therefore, sets
parameters and procedures, for approval by the Attorney General of the
United States, under standards that are set forth for any government
action that may, in any way, inhibit or impede the press.
We will probably never know the real impact of Russia's intervention
in the outcome of the 2016 election. These investigations are not about
assessing the impact. They are about determining who participated
criminally with the Russians in that interference. The American people
deserve a thorough and impartial investigation into the Trump team's
ties to that interference and the effort by President Trump and others
to cover it up.
In the wake of Watergate, the saying arose that the coverup was worse
than the crime. It was then, and it would be worse--or at least as
heinous--in the crime here. Make no mistake that the crime is,
actually, a theft of our democracy--an interference by the Russians in
our democratic institutions--which they will repeat if we do not make
them pay a price and, likewise, if we do not make the Americans who
cooperated with them pay a price as well. This principle is central to
our democracy and our rule of law.
In closing, I urge my colleagues to join me in calling for the
cooperation of the Trump administration as well as for recognizing the
importance of the investigation--its independence, its resources--for
the free press and the rule of law.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.