[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 104 (Thursday, June 21, 2018)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E888-E889]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY AND COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT 
REFORM JOINT HEARING ON OVERSIGHT OF THE FBI AND DOJ ACTIONS IN ADVANCE 
                          OF THE 2016 ELECTION

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. SHEILA JACKSON LEE

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, June 21, 2018

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to discuss the implications of 
the Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee on Oversight and 
Government Reform Joint Hearing on the FBI and DOJ Actions in Advance 
of the 2016 Election.
  The Report of the Department of Justice's Inspector General regarding 
these actions does not vindicate the President or conclude that the 
Trump Campaign did not collude with Russians to influence the outcome 
of the 2016 election.
  Nothing in this report changes the fact on March 31, 2016, Mr. Trump 
met with George Papadopoulos at Trump Tower.
  This is significant because as we speak, Paul Manafort, the chairman 
of the Trump Campaign, sits in jail as an indicted money launderer, and 
an unregistered agent of a foreign government.
  Donald Trump is the first sitting president in history whose campaign 
chairman spent his time behind bars during his own presidential 
administration.
  But Manafort is not the only member of the Trump Campaign staff 
indicted or to have pleaded guilty to felonies arising out of the 
Russia investigation.
  He is joined by Michael Flynn, former National Security Advisor; Rick 
Gates, Deputy Campaign Chairman; and George Papadopouls.
  Now that we have discussed what is not present in this report, we can 
turn to what is included.
  This report is clearly the product of attention to detail as well as 
a commitment to sharing with the American people information about the 
FBI's investigation into Secretary Hillary Clinton's emails in the 
days, weeks and months leading to the 2016 election.
  I have spent the last few days studying this report which is 
comprehensive and answers a lot of questions that the American people 
have about the election.
  I would like to acknowledge that I take a back seat to no one when it 
comes to standing up for law enforcement--they do a difficult job under 
difficult circumstances.
  But I cannot help but notice some glaring things about this report.
  The report concludes that while political bias was apparent in the 
atmosphere leading up to the 2016 election, political bias was not 
influential in individual decisions which were made.
  There exist some operative dates and facts relevant to this inquiry 
that might cause some Americans to question that conclusion.
  First, the announcement by the Inspector General's office that it 
would be conducting its investigation occurred on January 12, 2017, one 
week after then-President-elect Trump was briefed by the Intelligence 
Community about the existence of the FBI's counterintelligence 
investigation into Russian attempts to meddle into the 2016 election.
  Many Americans will find this timing very troubling.
  Second, in Chapter 7 of the report, the Inspector General cites all 
the reasons for concluding that Secretary Clinton did not break the law 
or have any basis to conclude that she broke the law for her use of a 
private server.
  So it was the Inspector General office's finding that while it did 
not make any pronouncement on whether the decision was correct, it did 
say that the decision not to take any action was reasonable, and 
grounded in the law, facts and applicable DOJ precedent.
  Moreover, the decision to on one hand decline prosecution, but on the 
other to editorialize Secretary Clinton's behavior as extremely 
careless, appears to be a political decision and one that had the 
foreseeable effect of harming Hillary Clinton and helping Donald Trump.
  The month-long delay between the discovery of additional emails, in 
late September 2016, and the public announcement of this fact, on 
October 28, 2016, had the foreseeable effect of harming Secretary 
Clinton and helping Trump.
  Secretary Clinton's campaign was not the subject of a federal 
counterintelligence investigation by our nation's law enforcement.
  But the same is not true with respect to the Trump Campaign, which 
was under investigation for colluding with a hostile foreign power to 
influence the outcome of the 2016 election.
  So, millions of Americans are left with painful realization that 
there was actually a pretty persistent double standard in favor of 
Trump and prejudicial to Clinton.
  Under these circumstances, it is reasonable for Americans to conclude 
that Secretary Clinton was the victim of a double standard.
  When the IG's Report was released, the president indicated that this 
report was a total vindication of him and his campaign in the election.
  In fact, nothing in this report exonerates the Trump Campaign of 
colluding with the Russians.
  This is because the IG office did not investigate any aspect of the 
Russian government's interference in the 2016 election.
  One of the concerns the Report had with leaks is both the total 
universe of people privy to information, and the fact that guidelines 
about talking to the press were often flouted.
  In that section, the Report references the improper disclosure of 
non-public information specifically as it relates to October 2016--and 
we seem to have a concern that the weeks that passed between the 
initial discovery of emails on the Weiner laptop led to their public 
disclosure in part because DOJ management was concerned that the 
information would leak anyhow.
  In fact, we have documented reports of Rudy Giuliani going on Fox 
News and claiming to have information about this very subject.
  Both in the Executive Summary and in the body of your report, leaks 
from April 2016 and October 2016 are cited.

[[Page E889]]

  The Clinton campaign was the principal subject of these leaks and was 
harmed by these leaks.
  We know this because the FBI did not start its counterintelligence 
investigation of Trump until late July 2016 and we know through this 
report that a major portion of the investigation was the leaks from New 
York through October 2016.
  At the conclusion of the report, the IG's office lists a series of 
recommendations that it believes the FBI should follow when it comes to 
lessons learned from this saga.
  One of them is ensuring a uniform system of ensuring that only those 
with the authority to speak on a topic do so.
  This is the first of many steps needed to ensure the errors of this 
oversight of the FBI and DOJ are not repeated in the future.

                          ____________________