Congressional Record, Volume 164 Issue 50 (Thursday, March 22, 2018)

[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 50 (Thursday, March 22, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H2032-H2037]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

NORTH KOREA DIPLOMACY

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 3, 2017, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) is
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to come to the American people
because I truly believe that when it comes to the national security of
this Nation, we are of one belief, one faith, and singularly committed
to the security of each and every American. I know that because our
hearts break when any of our men and women fall in battle while wearing
that uniform.
I have spent a lot of time with families who have lost loved ones
throughout the wars that have occurred during my tenure in the United
States Congress. I have been to the veterans' cemetery. I have joined
my neighbors on Memorial Day. I have held my own Memorial Day
commemoration for at least the last 5 years. Neighbors have come out
from all over the community to honor those who live and served our
Nation, but those who have fallen as well.
I believe it is important, then, to evidence in your congressional
work as well as evidence in this country, through the leaders who are
serving this Nation, being truthful as well as diplomatic. I have no
quarrel with the issues of diplomacy.

General Leave

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks
and to include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Texas?
There was no objection.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I have no quarrel with the idea of
diplomacy. I believe that even your enemies deserve the opportunity to
explain themselves.
So, as Secretary Tillerson had mentioned some months ago, he was
interested in some encounter with North Korea. He described that it
would take some time and that some initial meetings make sense.
We have not been able to change the minds of the North Koreans and
their attitudes toward nuclear proliferation for decades, though we
came close during the time of President William Jefferson Clinton, but
counsel advised him not to go further. I am sure he reflects on that.
All of us wonder. That was with the father, Kim Jong-un.
Diplomacy is a reputable and reasonable approach to safeguard and
secure the American people. I have taken on the responsibility as
someone who has served on the Homeland Security Committee since the
heinous, tragic terrorist act of 9/11--and I now serve on the
Counterterrorism and Intelligence Subcommittee and the Cybersecurity
and Infrastructure Protection Subcommittee, having served on the
Transportation and Protective Security Subcommittee as chair, and on
the Immigration and Border Security Subcommittee--and I share the
importance of our national security.
Now, as the ranking member of the Crime, Terrorism, Homeland
Security, and Investigations Subcommittee, where it is important as
well to assess the threats against United States, I have come to
believe the importance of developing an expertise in these national
security issues so that we can share with our constituents and also
advocate here in the Congress what more we should be doing. I truly
believe that we should be doing more.
So, before I frame the complete aspects of my discussion that will
involve Trump and the need to protect the independence of the special
counsel, but, more importantly, Trump and Russia and the intertwining
of the highest office in the land and the actions of Putin's Russia and
the actions of Vladimir Putin, most of us have known the idea of the
Soviet Union and Russia for most of our lives. Russia is somewhat of a
new phenomena, as the Soviet Union was broken up. The memories of the
Soviet Union and the Iron Curtain and the idea of an insulated,
frightening, frozen land that did not allow any of its subjects,
including the many countries that came under the Soviet Union, to speak
a word, silent or not, against the government, was a fearsome and
fearful place.

If history recounts, that was the Cold War. That was a moment in time
for schoolchildren taking cover under. That was the time of President
Kennedy's actions and almost the brink of war with Khruschchev. Those
were moments the American people could understand. They demanded that
the United States not be frail or a failure against Russia.
I do not ignore World War II, when Russia was a collaborator in the
efforts of the allies. I don't ignore that. But after that time, it was
their choice to stand up against the world and to stand up in a
frightening way until the doors seemingly began to crack open.
I, for one, as a student, welcomed and cherished that possibility
that Russia would turn to democratic ways--at least, ways of giving
opportunity to its people, giving them free speech, giving them the
ability to make decisions for themselves, and to vote in fair
elections.
For a period of time, that was seemingly the direction that they were
going after President Reagan said: ``Tear down that wall.''
What a bright light. I think it is important to note these Republican
and Democratic Presidents who understood what our role was and is.
What is America's role?
If you travel in the most limited way, no matter what continent you
go to, you will find that the people of the continent look to America
for hope, for the standard bearer of democracy and human rights.

{time} 1345

And if no one else turns on the light and shines it on the dastardly
behavior of the despotic leaders, they can always count on America to
make a difference.
That is what I have grown to know as a Member of the United States
Congress. That is the side of the line on which I have stood. Not out
of anger, not out of disregarding the differences of world leaders, but
of recognizing what America's responsibility is and how disappointed
and hurt I am that we find ourselves perplexed.
The world is perplexed. Ask any diplomatic traveler coming back from
any conference, country, meeting, outside

[[Page H2033]]

of the United States. Do a poll at the international airports from New
York to Washington to Houston. They will tell you that the world asks:
What in the world is going on? Because, for one, they don't have that
voice of reason in the United States foreign policy coming out of the
White House. They do not see that standard bearer of standing up for
human rights and women's rights, of understanding their plight. And in
particular, they don't understand why our voice is silence.
Now, let me compliment many of the former members of Cabinets, going
as far back, I guess, as Reagan and beyond, who are still speaking
about our true values, of the whole issue of dealing with those who are
evil and confronting them outright. Mr. Speaker, I am not suggesting
that we turn toward every moment. We all have our differences of
opinion on the Iraq war and Afghanistan, although we never disagree on
the blood that was shed by our soldiers and those who are on the battle
line. We ask the question: What was the ultimate result?
But still, people, even in those times of consternation, they said,
well, America was trying to do right, trying to bring democracy or
stability or speaking out against the despotic leaders and not shying
away from doing that. They were speaking out against Saddam, Gaddafi,
without any embarrassment. They weren't congratulating them on their
elections. They were acknowledging, from the continent of Africa, to
Asia-Pacific, to South and Central America, to the halls of Eastern
Europe and beyond, and any other place I have not mentioned, that
America would comment, either in the United Nations or elsewhere, on
its disappointment on how countries treated their people.
Before this recess wherein we will be working with our constituents,
we were working very hard to do one thing. Not to undermine the
executive branch. There are three branches of government. I pride
myself in the acceptance of the Constitution, I guess because my
predecessor was the Honorable Barbara Jordan. She trained us well, as
she held up that book during the Watergate proceedings, that this was
not personal; it was that she was not going to see the Constitution and
the rights of the people diminished.
That is where I stand today. This is not a personal commentary on the
executive, meaning the branch that is called the executive, or a
commentary on the branch that is the legislature or the judiciary, but
it is a critique, and it is to recognize that they have failed.
And so I was disappointed when there was no bill dealing with the
protection of the special counsel, Special Counsel Mueller in this
instance, but this bill is not directed toward a name. It is to ensure
that, if we select a special counsel, there be the guidelines and
protections that do not subject that office to the whims and
personalities of those who feel, ``I am being investigated.'' Wouldn't
all of us like to be able to stand and block anyone who makes us
uncomfortable?
My bill, H.R. 3654, will now be at the desk for a discharge petition.
It is a simple bill that is not an angry bill. It is to limit the
removal of a special counsel and for other purposes. It complements the
bill of Mr. Cohen of Tennessee. His bill deals with the after-review of
a firing. H.R. 3654 deals with the initial attempt to fire, so as not
to disrupt the investigation.
What would be required is that this individual would have the
opportunity, if they were sought to be removed, to file an action in
the district court, only if the Attorney General would do so, the
district court of the District of Columbia, and file a contemporaneous
notice of action with the Committee of the Judiciary in the House and
Senate. Therefore, the court would have to determine whether there was
cause for this individual to be removed, and that cause would include
misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or
other good cause in violation of the policies of the Department of
Justice--simple, not punitive, but factual.
There was no reason why the omnibus could not have included a simple
summary or a simple statement of that fact. One would argue, or one
would raise the question: Why?
Well, the question is well explained. The most immediate are the
rumblings coming from the White House and the White House counsel about
Director Mueller's investigation should end; Director Mueller is
conducting a witch hunt; Director Mueller has 13, or whatever number,
Democrats and no Republicans; Director Mueller is, in essence, not
doing what he is supposed to do.
I would take issue with that, and I would take issue because the
investigation started with the collusion question with the Trump
campaign. Unfortunately, the heightened question has grown
exponentially since the beginning of the current Presidential
administration. It has grown in such a way that it causes you to have a
number of questions.
The intelligence community, in January of 2017, stated that Russian
efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. Presidential election represent the
most recent expression of Moscow's longstanding desire to undermine the
U.S.-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a
significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of
effort compared to previous operations.
I applaud the omnibus bill, for it enhanced, by millions of dollars,
the amount, which I supported, that will be used for election security
in 2018. It is confirmed that the Russians are continuing their
interference and, as well, that they plan to continue it in 2018 and
2020.

As we well know, the company based in Europe that snatched and used
the technology of Facebook and the data of millions and millions of
Americans in an abusive manner and to skew the election toward one
candidate versus another--in this instance, the Trump campaign--we know
that that is still an open book. The company still exists. We know as
well, even though the CEO was suspended, to the applause of the CEO and
leader of Facebook, who has expressed his concern, that this is still a
real possibility. We look forward to Mr. Zuckerberg engaging with the
United States Congress and also the creativity to deal with that
crisis.
But the ICA, intelligence community, assesses that Russian President
Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016--let me be very
clear, ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S.
Presidential election--not stood by as a leader of a particular nation
and ignored, if you will, the individuals who were doing it but, in
fact, ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S.
Presidential election. Russia's goals were to undermine public faith in
the U.S. democratic process, denigrate the former Secretary of State,
and harm her electability and potential Presidency.
The intelligence community further assesses that Putin and the
Russian Government developed a clear preference for our President-
elect, who is now the President of the United States. The ICA has high
confidence in these judgments.
The intelligence community also assesses Putin and the Russian
Government aspired to help elect the present President and to increase
that President-elect's chances, Mr. Trump, when possible, by
discrediting the former Secretary of State and publicly contrasting her
unfavorably to him.
Now we know Putin has been attempting to do this for a long time. In
2014, the Russian Government pursued a campaign called The Translator
Project, which endeavored to use social media to manipulate and engage
in information warfare, plain and simple. And as I will mention later,
Putin has been engaged in truly despicable acts for many years. But
since before the election and over his time in office, the President
has never criticized him.
Now, the basis of not criticizing another head of state is not the
basis of Special Counsel Mueller's investigation, and I am glad of
that. Because you disagree with a personality or someone's behavior,
that is not what should be the basis of any investigation. But let me
give you what the special counsel has accomplished in the time that he
has been engaged in the work that he was assigned to do.
Madam Speaker, I would inquire of the time I have remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Tenney). The gentlewoman from Texas has
40\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I think I was in the middle of saying
that, because of different personalities or the different way that an
individual leads, that is not the basis of anyone having to be
investigated.

[[Page H2034]]

I was talking earlier about The Translator Project. We know that Mr.
Putin has been attempting to intrude in our elections for a very long
time, and in 2014, the Russian Government pursued a campaign called The
Translator Project. This is the Russian Government's campaign, not the
campaign of the United States, which endeavored to use social media to
manipulate and engage in information warfare, plain and simple.

{time} 1400

They, obviously, were more than successful in the 2016 election. And
as I will mention later, Putin has been engaged in--I said this before,
but it is worth repeating--truly despicable acts for many years.
I just paused for a moment to say that many people don't realize the
kind of direct involvement that Vladimir Putin has over the most minute
things happening in Russia as it pushes out to what is perceived as
Russia's enemies.
The Russian people are wonderful people. I look forward always to
engaging with them. There is a large Russian population in Texas and
all over the Nation. We welcome them who have come, some fleeing
persecution, others in other matters. But I think it is important to
note that there are Russian spies here in the United States every day
trying to co-opt and turn an American citizen to work for them.
Tragically, there were any number of individuals, seemingly, that
wound up in the campaign of Mr. Trump that warrants investigation by
Mr. Mueller.
These despicable behaviors are not just with elections, because
elections are won and lost. We don't like losing elections. But if we
do lose them, we like to lose them fair and square. When you run for
President of the United States, you run on your own merits, your own
strategy, your own outreach, your own missteps and mishaps. But how
impossible is it to run when a foreign nation is conspicuously, with
money, collaborating and working to skew the election to one candidate
versus another?
Now, let me be very clear. This is not looking backwards. Nothing I
say today will alter who the President is of the United States, and as
Americans, we adhere to the order of government, regular order. That
gives me such great pride that we are not a nation that marches up to
the home of the executive and asks--or not asks--but demands that
person leave in a coup d'etat. That is not the American way. But it
does bear well that we know who we are dealing with, and that we are
honest about the fact that the election was turned and won on a simple
fact, not three States, or not--I didn't go there--not who is a blue
collar and who is not--because I love all of the people. It was
squarely skewed because of the direct intrusion of Vladimir Putin and
his data. And the question is: What kind of collusion, collaboration,
or criminal elements happened?
But in the course of those kinds of actions, I would make the point
on my comment about truly despicable acts. How do you welcome,
guarantee, give applause to an individual whom I am glad to say that
the former President Obama stared down in the midst of our election and
said, ``Cut it out,'' cut it out from interfering in our elections? And
from the words and the reaction of Mr. Putin, I didn't see a denial. I
didn't see a: Hey, let's sit down and talk about it; if you think I am
doing this, let me find out who is doing this in my country and I am
putting a stop to it immediately.
None of that happened. It continued to intrude, and skew, and
manipulate the data of millions of Americans of what they were
receiving on Facebook, and many others who were getting poison pills in
their inboxes about the election, skewed against the former Secretary
of State.
It never stopped. But at the same time, the ions and ions of persons
who disappear in Russia, who are imprisoned in Russia, and the
individuals, the long list of individuals who have been poisoned, I
have met with some of them; miraculously, even one who was poisoned and
survived, was still fighting for human rights, went back again, and, as
my memory serves me, was poisoned again.
But his passion for civil rights and human rights and saving Russia,
the beautiful Russia that he loved, and bringing her into the 21st
century, made him drive toward the danger.
But what about right now in the last 2 months? Not on Russian soil,
but on our friend's, Great Britain, in London, two Russians: one a
father, one a daughter. The daughter left Russia to celebrate or to
visit her father. Poisonous gas took them down. Took them down. No mea
culpa. No comment.
I thank Prime Minister May for standing up and saying, eye-to-eye:
You will not do this in my country. I believe it is important for our
foreign policy to be both diplomatic but forceful. For if you are in
meetings with Russians who are able to speak openly, they will tell you
that Vladimir Putin listens to nothing but power. Not any glad-handing,
and I am a genius, and he is a genius, and he called me a genius. He
doesn't respond to that. He only responds to looking you in the eye and
showing that you have power.
And as I just heard over the last couple of days, most of the Russian
people don't have internet. They can only hear what is given to them.
They don't see what is going on. And they are living in their world
without the exposure to the beauty of democracy, the beauty of human
rights, and women's rights, and the freedom to go anywhere I want to
go. And they get their thrills through what is told to them, to maybe
the wins and losses in an Olympic game, or the exploits and expeditions
of their leader who they just voted for. Maybe that is the level of
their excitement. I don't believe, however, that we as Americans can
fall into that trap.
In the instance of the Commander in Chief, he refuses to criticize
the geopolitical belligerence of Vladimir Putin and the Russian
Federation. And to add insult to injury, just this week, as I
indicated, here comes a congratulations on an election that many
observers of elections admit was rigged. I think we all saw a video
where it looked like someone was stuffing the ballot box. I have no
reason to know why it was stuffed, but the opponent was popular that
was running, but, of course, that opponent did not win.
But I just step back for a moment on despicable acts. I have been to
Ukraine. It broke my heart to see the war that was going on, Russian-
backed rebels, and to have the representation that the small part did
not want to be in Ukraine, so Vladimir Putin was not going to encourage
the unity of Ukraine. They were going to implode Ukraine. Let them
fight. But how sad that he was never held accountable for the shooting
down of a civilian airplane full of hopeful travelers, baby shoes, and
suitcases of hopes and dreams.

That is what we are contending with. And that is why the overall
investigation of Director Mueller is not personal. It is not purposely
chosen to pick on an executive that someone does not like. It is done
for the integrity of this Nation.
Let me tell you how we can look back over more recent actions. Russia
occupied cities in the Republic of Georgia in 2008. They have
imprisoned and suppressed journalists and dissidents. They have been so
brazen so as to use, as I just said, a nerve agent, a chemical weapon
on the soil of our great ally, a true partner for peace and progress.
Look at the actions that we took, including Russia, in Syria when the
charges were using a nerve gas. What deadly silence from this
executive, this administration, except for some other line officers--
not lying, line, l-i-n-e--who probably said some things. They were
obstructive in President Obama's efforts to bring peace in the
devastating civil war in Syria by propping up Assad, which had killed
untold numbers of people, including so many innocent children. That gas
was used many years ago.
In an even greater escalation, they launched a missile at a civilian
passenger plane, killing 298 on board, Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, as
I said.
While they were doing all this, the Russians were impervious to
criticism, beyond reproach, as far as they were concerned. Power is
what they understand, firmness and sternness, and a solid policy. Oh,
we will negotiate. We will deal with diplomacy, but you have to stop
your bad behavior.
While they were doing all this, people were suffering. In 2011,
Russians went to the polls for seats in the Duma. After the election,
there were allegations and questions surrounding the integrity of the
vote. This soon turned to

[[Page H2035]]

protest. Mr. Putin, for some bizarre reason, blamed the former
Secretary of State for this. This has been a grudge he has held against
her, and he was committed to doing anything to destroy her.
The former Secretary has said before on the floor of the Chamber--or
I have said--she is a stateswoman. If the words that she provided gave
any comfort to those protesting, that is fair game. There were no
weapons. There was no nerve gas. It was people clamoring and holding on
to positive words by a person of status during the time of her
leadership that what was happening in Russia was wrong.
And the reaction of President Putin should have been, let me move my
nation into the 21st century, let me not attack a woman of stature and
excellence, a true public servant. Because she was not shy to point out
injustices and improper behavior, which we should do for despots around
the world.
While she was Secretary of State, this body passed and Obama signed
the Magnitsky Act which imposed sanctions on many Russian oligarchs,
long overdue. 2013 was a big year for the United States' relationship
with Russia. It was in 2013 that Secretary Clinton left her post. Also
in 2013, a company named the Internet Research Agency registered in
Russia, and they are a social media troll farm. The IRA would form the
basis of the translator project announced in April 2014.
The IRA's job is to spread disinformation and misinformation through
fake social media profiles. They were at their peak in the 2016
election. This was done in order to manipulate public opinion and
engage in information warfare.
Later that year, the present President decides to have a beauty
pageant. While in Moscow in November 2013, Donald Trump meets with
Agalarov and Rob Goldstein in order to try to build a tower in Moscow.
The sanctions President Barack Obama imposed following Russia's
annexation of Crimea stopped the Trump Tower deal.
How dare anyone say that the past administration was weak on Russia.
Yes, power is what they understand. But it has to be a persistent,
determined power, not power that is stopped by a new election. I assume
this was not a happy time for those who wanted that Trump Tower.
While this was going on, the present President is developing a track
record, trafficking conspiracy theories for his birtherism, the ugly
smear that Barack Obama, the 44th President of the United States, was
not born in the United States, and, therefore, was ineligible to be
President.
I watched this smear through videos and interviews, and just to the
point that many of you recall, that in the midst of his Presidency--
only because he desired to do so--President Barack Obama showed his
birth certificate. What an ugly attack.
I was also there at the television, radio, and journalists event when
both President Obama and the present President were there. When the
President--with a sense of humor--had a video played of ``Lion King''
and said to the laughing audience: There is my birth place.

{time} 1415

I am glad he had a sense of humor, but it was an ugly attack on a
legitimate President of the United States who will have a wonderful
history to look back on.
The present President rode this lie of his birth--President Obama's
birth and concluded he could use it to win the Republican nomination
for President, so he announced it. And in that announcement, he
dismisses Mexicans as drug dealers and rapists.
Everyone has all kinds of people as their neighbors, and who would
ever say that?
But shortly after his announcement, questions about his connections
to Russia continued. It is right around then, in September 2015, the
Democratic National Committee is told that its computers have been
hacked.
Despite all the information that we knew and, more importantly, all
the information that only Donald Trump knew, he continued to deny any
involvement with Russia.
Meantime, corporations were gathering the information of Americans
through Facebook and poisoning the well, and sending biting,
wrongheaded misinformation to many voters all over the Midwest and
elsewhere.
While he was denying his connections to Russia, we now know that
agents working with this President, Michael Cohen and Felix Sater, were
trying yet again to build a tower in Moscow.
Let me repeat this fact. While he was actively running for President
of the United States, there were business agents actively pursuing a
real estate project in Russia and denying it.
As I have said in my commentary, it is well known that the only thing
that Vladimir Putin understands is power; and any time you are going to
beg, you can be assured he will use that against you or use that to
manipulate you and anyone else that is associated with it.
Mr. Speaker, I am concerned about the safety and security of the
American people. This Congress should be concerned. Republicans should
be concerned. Today, I said that the investigation by Special Counsel
Mueller is not a red line being drawn or a blue line. It is red, white,
and blue lines, which represent the American people.
None of us should, for political reasons, attempt to quash the truth.
And the truth about Mr. Putin is all he wants is power, and all he
wants is to dominate the democracy and the greatest democracy in the
world, and to quash the leadership position that America holds, and the
admiration that the world has for America, and the desire for most of
the world not to be Russia, but to be America. And all we do is fuel
his ability by subordinating ourselves to him, his so-called greatness,
his phony election, and his tampering with our election.
This is a difficult time. Many of you remember the name of General
Flynn. He was a senior adviser to the Trump campaign, and one of his
most unfortunate episodes was his time at the Republican National
Convention, shouting ``Lock Her Up, Lock Her Up.''
That might be the core reason why some of my colleagues, even today,
are sneaking through a subpoena to try and sneak through and bring back
documents to attack the former Secretary again, a unilateral subpoena,
not one that was joined in or even asked to be joined in by Democrats
and Republicans. That is unfortunate because we have never, in the
Judiciary Committee, issued subpoenas without a vote.
But now, to make havoc because of the very fine work of Special
Counsel Mueller, it is going to be a tit for tat. So here we are with
the tit for tat.
But if we recall, in December 2015, Mr. Flynn went to Moscow, sat at
a dinner with Mr. Putin and Jill Stein, the 2016 Green Party candidate,
to mark the 10-year anniversary of RT, the Russian TV. Just months
later, in February 2016, the Translator Project, the endeavor to
weaponize social media information revealed their theme, to support a
number of candidates and to ruin the former Secretary.
March 2016 was a critical month, too. March 2016 was the month when
the campaign manager of the former Secretary had his emails hacked.
March 2016 was also when the present President had a meeting of his
national security team. Present was this famous man, George
Papadopoulos, unfortunately, one of those indicted, sitting in a famous
meeting of great leaders for national security and foreign affairs. He
was a foreign affairs aide and even mentioned publicly as a great mind
of foreign affairs by the present President.
But in May of 2016, he got drunk, a little inebriated at a London
wine bar and told a diplomat of a friendly country of ours that the
Russians had dirt on the former Secretary.
Then, in June 2016, we have the infamous Trump Tower meeting, where
operatives of the Trump campaign were told about derogatory information
about Russia, and one of them said, famous words: ``I love it.''
At the GOP convention, the GOP actually changed its platform to be
more friendly to Russia, a foreign despotic power that is aggressive
around the world, that has shot down airplanes, support rebels to
undermine governments, and even prop up the leader in Syria as people
die in the streets.
It is a question of how a Republican platform at their convention,
quite contrary to all of what most know of Republicans, to be friendly,
and have a friendly pro-Russian platform, and friendly to a Ukraine
that would oppress her people.

[[Page H2036]]

Then, after another operative name appears on foreign logs, that
person resigned from the campaign. Another Trump associate encourages
WikiLeaks to hack the Clinton emails. We know this because we have
heard of direct messages between WikiLeaks and operatives of the Trump
campaign. Their names are famous.
Even predicted that leaders of the former Secretary's campaign would
have their time in the barrel. This tweet was sent on the same day as
the infamous Access Hollywood tape, where Trump boasted about actions
that all of us find appalling.
The election happens in the backdrop of the poisonous emails, the
tampering by Russia, the spewing out of millions of Facebook
connections, skewing the election, and the person they wanted to win
wins. Yet, even after the election, the connections to Russia do not
stop.

Rather than using the power that Putin needs to see from the United
States to protect the American people, we just fall into the molasses
and continue to throw sugar on this leader. We hire the National
Security Advisor, who was sitting at the table with Mr. Putin. In some
way related to advocating for Mr. Putin's high level of respect in the
country, he was accused of lying to the FBI about meetings with
Russians. When that news was made public, he was fired.
In between, of course, a person known as a public servant with no
other agenda but to serve in the Department of Justice briefed the
President of that information and other information 2 or 3 weeks
before. They ultimately were fired, Deputy Attorney General Sally
Yates, and it took a long time for there to be an acknowledgment to
fire the National Security Advisor.
Don't you think Mr. Putin watches this and says, Boy are we
successful? Boy, are we doing well?
We are not only inside the White House; we are entrenched.
After the former FBI Director testified that the FBI was
investigating connections between the present President and the
Kremlin, that same person who had offered a letter regarding the former
Secretary a couple of days out of the election, an unheard action, and
no pronouncement was made about other investigations regarding the
present President, but, unfortunately, he was fired.
I want to pause for a moment. I have said that this cannot be about
personalities or who has wronged one person or the other. I disagree
with General Sessions. I disagree with his blocking of real, fair,
criminal justice reform, his opposing civil rights, his supporting bad
voter ID laws, his eliminating community consent decrees, and his
attack on cities because they don't want to harm innocent families
labeled the city as sanctuary cities.
But I would not hold to the position of supporting his firing,
undermining the rule of law and the Constitution. The law and the
Constitution will be undermined if, for some reason, during this
recess, while the special counsel is doing their in-depth work, that
the Attorney General is fired, an interim appointment is made, that
person fires the Deputy Attorney General, may fire the FBI Director,
and may fire the special counsel. That is the midnight massacre of the
21st century, 2018.
I hope it does not happen. I hope that we, as members of the
Judiciary Committee, today, in our press conference, have put the White
House on notice; even though I understand now that one of the White
House lawyers, Mr. Dowd, who was known as the reasonable lawyer, just
resigned. That frightens me even more.
What more is going to happen? What else is going to be our lot?
That is why we have the discharge position on Mr. Cohen's bill and my
bill, and my members will be getting letters to join those two bills
together and sign them upon their return; though they can also ask
their office to sign them, or they can be signed during the pro forma
session.
This is the journey that we have taken. After former FBI Director
testified that the FBI was investigating connections, I have said that,
we note that that FBI Director was fired.
Thereafter, the special counsel was appointed because that is what
you call obstruction of justice possibly. The special counsel was
appointed to begin his investigation around that firing.
But if anyone understands prosecutors and special counsel, they can
go where the facts lead them because they do not work for any elected
officials. They work for the American people.
The special counsel was threatened by termination, as reported by the
President, only to have this move blocked by the White House Counsel.
Early in his tenure he was threatened with termination.
Last summer, the President indicated the special counsel should keep
his family's private business dealings out of the investigation. Red
line.
This month, Mr. Mueller subpoenaed business records from the Trump
organization implicating the President's red line on the issue. This
news coincides with an increase in erratic behavior, tweets. But most
importantly, one of the lawyers saying, yes, it should end. He should
be closed down.
The House Intelligence Committee singly, not in a bipartisan manner,
decided to shut down the Russia investigation without any consultation
with our friends on the other side of the aisle, the Democratic
members.
Just as I indicated, a subpoena may be being issued by Republicans of
my committee, the Judiciary, with no consultation of Democrats. We
don't know what Mr. Mueller may discover, but we do know that there has
been much discussion on a number of operatives.

{time} 1430

We also know that the minority had to release their own report for
the House Intelligence Committee. In the opening paragraph, it says:
``The HPSCI majority's move to release to the House of Representatives
allegations against the FBI and the Department of Justice is a
transparent effort to undermine those agencies, the Special Counsel and
Congress' investigations. It also risks public exposure of sensitive
sources and methods for no legitimate purpose.''
It goes on to say: ``DOJ met the rigor, transparency, and evidentiary
basis needed to meet FISA's probable cause requirement, by
demonstrating: Contemporaneous evidence of Russia's election
interference''--I am reading from an unclassified document concerning
Russian links and outreach to Trump campaign officials--``Page's
history with Russian intelligence''--and that, we would assume, would
be Carter Page--and Carter ``Page's suspicious activities in 2016,
including in Moscow.''
These are all individuals affiliated with the Trump campaign.
It further says: Christopher Steele's raw intelligence reporting did
not inform the FBI's decision to initiate its counterintelligence
investigation in late July 2016.''
By the way, it reinforces my statement that they were investigating
the Trump campaign. No one bothered to offer that in a public setting.
That was seemingly unimportant to the American voters.
But this document is unclassified, and most Members have had a chance
to peruse it, as I have done, and, frankly, it is tied up into our weak
response to the despotism of Vladimir Putin.
So as I said, this is not about a personality challenge. It is
important to take note of the fact that we have an obligation, just as
the Cold War Presidents had an obligation, to protect the American
people at what they perceived to be an attack from the Soviet Union,
although they collaborated in World War II, the attitude changed. The
people were frozen in time.
Those Presidents, Secretaries of State, Secretaries of Defense,
although they did not clamor to go to war--and I, by no means, in this
commentary today, in any way, am suggesting any form of war dealing
with Russia. It is, though, saying that power must be met with power.
Sanctions must be kept, and sanctions must be strong, and strong words
must be clear.
Mr. Putin, your interfering with the elections and the desires and
the decisions of the American people will stop. Your intelligence
agencies and your operatives will be booted out, en masse, of the
United States, and your attack, if you will, on individuals attempting
to secure them as agents will cease.
I have every confidence in the intelligence community of this Nation.
I do not look at them as political or partisan. From Mr. Clapper to Mr.
Brennan, formerly, and to those who serve us now, their job is to tell
the truth. In

[[Page H2037]]

fact, even those in the Trump administration, in the intelligence
community, have enthusiastically and loudly declared that Russia
interfered with the 2016 election, and they may and are preparing to do
so in the 2018 election and 2020.
So the President's private behavior and efforts to cover it up have
now generated three separate lawsuits. I don't particularly call upon
that as a crucial element, except for those of us who know security and
intelligence issues. Anything that can weaken you makes you vulnerable
to individuals who need your information or need you to work for them.
That is a well-known fact. If it is not well known, go to any spy movie
and know that the vulnerability is what your operatives attack.
Now we have no fewer than three separate lawsuits dealing with his
inappropriate behavior. In each case, his exposure grows. A
particularly unseemly aspect of this silencing campaign is the
enforcement of onerous nondisclosure agreements. So we will see a long
journey of these particular items, these particular individuals coming
before the cameras.
But I do want to say that there are women across the Nation who may
not have this high-profile perpetrator, and I want to say to them and
to the athletes who told their story in a Michigan courtroom that the
Me Too movement is not temporary and fleeting, and the Me Too movement
will continue to embrace you and secure you and safeguard you, and we
hope that you will continue to do and tell the truth so that you can be
healed and that you can be heard.
Over the last couple of days, the constant berating--constant
berating of this special counsel has been frivolous, and let me tell
you why. Although the special counsel has since indicted--or let me
rephrase that. The special counsel is not doing frivolous work. The
special counsel has since indicted three companies and 19 individuals,
including the President's former National Security Advisor, his former
campaign chairman, his deputy campaign chairman, and secured guilty
pleas from five individuals, including three senior members of the
Trump campaign. Trump continues to decry the special counsel's
investigation as a hoax.
Republican colleagues would not even allow simple language in the
omnibus bill to protect the special counsel to allow him to do his
work; although, Trey Gowdy has indicated that his work should go on.
And then, to attempt to suggest that the special counsel is going after
him personally as a Republican, a Democrat, or that it is a witch hunt,
I argue vigorously against it.
We need to find out the truth about Russia. We need to find out the
truth about those who are surrounding this administration. We need to
have an administration, whether it is his or anyone else, to be pure in
their commitment to the American people. And the truth should come out,
and no one, regardless of their party affiliation, should try to
undermine Special Counsel Mueller.
So I would make the argument: We leave on a recess; we are on our
phones; we are on our emails ready to launch back to Washington to
respond to any constitutional crisis; but over and above that issue,
though that is juxtaposed right alongside, is the plea to this
administration that we cannot and you cannot adhere to two leaders or
two bosses. Either you adhere to the boss of the American people, whose
safety and security are in your hands, or you play footsies with a
dictator who is not unwilling to kill his own citizens with nerve gas
on foreign soil.

Which will you choose, to be associated with this person who has
wounded his own nation with human rights violations, women's rights
violations, with an economy, with people locked up in jail, with family
members who can never be found, with poisoning his own citizens, or are
you going to stand with the American people and the men and women in
the United States military who are on the front lines every day
fighting against those despots and standing for the American people?
That is what we need to hear. And until we hear something different--
and a mea culpa about the 2016 election, no one should put their hands
on Director Mueller. All I can say is that his work should continue. I
should not be involved with it; committees should not be involved with
it; other leaders should not be involved with it.
Mr. Mueller should proceed with his work. It is painful. All of us
would say so. But, frankly, it is the red, white, and blue. It is on
behalf of the American people, Mr. Speaker.
And with that and my plea for power towards Mr. Putin on behalf of
the American people and for dignity for this President on behalf of the
American people, I yield back the balance of my time.

____________________