[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 120 (Tuesday, July 17, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5006-S5010]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TRUMP-PUTIN SUMMIT
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, at the Helsinki summit yesterday,
President Trump embarrassed our country, undermined American values,
and openly sided with Russia's authoritarian leader Vladimir Putin
against the U.S. intelligence community's unanimous assessment that
Russia interfered in our 2016 Presidential election. John McCain is
right when he says it was ``one of the most disgraceful performances by
an American president in memory. The damage inflicted by President
Trump's naivete, egotism, false equivalence, and sympathy for autocrats
is difficult to calculate. But it is clear that the summit in Helsinki
was a tragic mistake.''
That is not Bernie Sanders. That is former Republican Presidential
candidate Senator John McCain of Arizona.
Today, after a strong international backlash, Trump, in a bizarre
statement, claimed he misspoke and of course blamed the media for
reporting what he said. Even now he could not help but suggest that the
electoral interference ``could be other people also,'' not just Russia.
Today, we face an unprecedented situation of a President who, for
whatever reason, refuses to acknowledge an attack on American
democracy. Either he really doesn't understand what has happened or he
is under Russian influence because of compromising information they may
have on him or because he is ultimately more sympathetic to Russia's
authoritarian-oligarchic form of society than he is to American
democracy. Whatever the reason, Congress must act, and must act now, to
demand that the President of the United States represent the interests
of the American people and not Russia.
Let us be clear. Russia has been meddling not only in U.S. elections
but in the elections of other democracies--the United Kingdom, France,
Germany, to name just a few. Russia's goal is to advance its own
interests by weakening the transatlantic alliance of democracies that
arose after World War II, while also inflaming internal divisions in
each of these countries.
We should also be clear that this interference is directed from the
very highest levels of the Russian Government. Last week, Special
Counsel Robert Mueller announced a set of indictments of 12 members of
Russia's military intelligence service, the GRU. There can be no doubt
that given the nature of the Russian Government, Vladimir Putin was
directly involved in this effort, but our concern is not only what has
already happened, it is what could happen in the future.
Last week, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, a former
Republican Senator, raised the alarm on growing cyber attack threats
against the United States in a range of areas, including Federal,
State, and local government agencies, the military, business, and
academia, saying the situation is at a ``critical point.'' He said:
[Russia is the] most aggressive foreign actor, no question.
And they continue their efforts to undermine our democracy.
Coats compared the warning signs to those the United States faced
ahead of the September 11th terrorist attacks. This is a clear and
present threat to our democratic system and those of our allies.
Ultimately, of course, we want a
[[Page S5007]]
peaceful relationship with Russia. We do not want a return to the Cold
War, and we surely do not seek conflict, but at the same time, we must
be very clear that we oppose what Putin is doing, both in terms of his
foreign policy and his domestic policy.
On foreign policy, we will not accept Russian meddling in the
elections of democratic countries, stoking political tensions by
promoting hatred and suspicion of immigrants and minorities and trying
to undermine longstanding alliances between democratic allies.
In 2014, in violation of international law, Russia invaded
neighboring Ukraine and annexed the Crimea region. Russia has
assassinated political opponents abroad, most recently through the use
of poison in Salisbury, England, on a former spy and his daughter, a
chemical attack that endangered the lives of many civilians. The
British Government concluded that this atrocious attack was likely
carried out by Russia's military intelligence service.
Domestically, Putin has undermined democracy in Russia, crushing free
speech, jailing political opponents, harassing and assassinating
journalists who criticize him, and increasing persecution of ethnic and
religious minorities and the LGBT community. President Trump had an
opportunity to speak out on all of these issues, to confront Putin
about these destabilizing and inhumane policies, but he chose not to.
If the President of the United States is not going to do it, Congress
must.
The Congress must make it clear that we accept the assessment of our
intelligence community with regard to Russia's election meddling in our
country and in other democracies. The Congress must move aggressively
to protect our election systems from interference by Russia or any
foreign power and work closely with our democratic partners around the
world to do the same. The Congress must demand that the sanctions
against Russia that were passed last year be fully implemented. The
Congress must make it clear that we will not accept any interference
with the ongoing investigation of Special Counsel Mueller, such as the
offer of preemptive pardons or the firing of Deputy Attorney General
Rod Rosenstein, and that the President must cooperate with this
investigation.
Finally, the Congress must make it clear to President Trump that his
job is to protect the values that millions of Americans struggled for
and died to defend--the values of democracy, justice, and equality.
Tweets, comments, and press conferences are fine, but we need more
from Republican Senators now. It is time for the Senate to rein in the
President's dangerous behavior. If their leadership will not allow
votes on dealing with this extraordinarily important matter, then my
Republican colleagues must join with Democrats to make it happen, or
all of their words are worthless.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Daines). The Senator from Florida.
Mr. RUBIO. Mr. President, the events of the last 36 hours,
particularly the issue that now dominates the media coverage in
America, and our political debates on the floor cause me to come today
to the floor of the Senate to speak for a few minutes to my
constituents in the State of Florida but also to anyone else who
clearly should care about this issue across our country, for it is one
that impacts our Nation in ways that I don't think have been fully
vetted or are clearly understood by enough people.
The idea that the Russian Federation, at the command of Vladimir
Putin, interfered in our election is something that most Americans are
now familiar with. It has been a topic of ongoing conversation,
discussion, debate, argument, and dispute, pretty much since the fall
of 2016 and to the present day. It has morphed into something that has
become domestically more of a partisan issue. It is hard to believe. If
you were able to get in a time machine and go back just 5 years and
tell someone that Russian interference in our election would become a
partisan issue, along the lines in which we see it play out now, few
would believe you.
I will spend very little time today talking about the past and saying
``you guys did this on the other side of the aisle before we did'' and
vice versa because it isn't constructive and means nothing to the
future.
It wasn't long ago, in a major Presidential debate where the
Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, pointed to Russia as the greatest
geopolitical challenge of the United States, that he was roundly mocked
not just by President Obama, who was running for election and
subsequently won, but by many in the press. I don't say that for
purposes of drawing a ``you guys were wrong back then'' kind of
argument. I say it solely for purposes of understanding how far we have
come and where we are today.
By the way, I wouldn't necessarily agree with that statement. I
believe, by and large, that the greatest geopolitical challenge for the
United States and the world in the 21st century will be whether China's
rise is peaceful and productive or not.
When the story of the 21st century is written, there will be some
chapters in that book about Vladimir Putin and Russia, and it is a
topic that increasingly dominates our domestic debate today in ways
that I think require more careful examination and understanding if we
are to make from it good public policy and good decisions for the
country.
I think it begins with something that I talked about last week; that
is, understanding the nature of this conflict. It begins with a man,
Vladimir Putin. I don't know the man, but I know enough about him and
have certainly learned enough about him to make some pretty clear
assessments that I believe in deeply. The first is that this is a man
who was raised in the Cold War Soviet Union, where people were trained
to be suspicious about each other, and who then went on to a career in
the intelligence agency of that country, the KGB. The result is that he
is, by nature and by all accounts, both a suspicious and a paranoid
individual, as someone probably would be if they spent their whole life
lying to other people. You begin to assume that everyone is a liar.
This is a man who made his living by deceiving westerners and
manipulating them.
He also grew up in a society where neighbors spied on each other and
kids turned their parents in, and you never really knew who the other
person you were talking to was. But if you were reported as someone who
was against the government, your career, your ability to go to school
and the quality of life for your family would be deeply impacted. There
is no way that you grow up in a society like that and in an environment
like that and, then, later on, go and work as a spy and it does not
somehow frame the way you operate or think for years to come.
The other thing that is pretty clear--for reasons I don't fully
understand because I don't know him, I don't know his family, and I
don't know his upbringing--is that he takes everything deeply personal.
Any sort of effort against Russia is not a geopolitical decision or
something that he can depersonalize. He seems to absorb all these
things as a personal attack on him. As a result, he, I think, has come
to view himself as Russia--as the embodiment of the Russian Federation.
You add to all of that his views as a leader, and it is interesting
because, if you go back to Vladimir Putin 15 years ago, he wasn't
nearly as confident or as bold as he is at this moment. There are a lot
of reasons for it, but this is a person who accidentally became the
leader of Russia. He is kind of almost the guy who stumbled into the
role because of a series of circumstances. He was hardly known before
he started his career as Prime Minister but went on to the Presidency,
nonetheless. He is someone who wound up in this position almost by
accident, but since then, he has solidified his hold.
There is the Vladimir Putin from the first time around and the
Vladimir Putin from the second time around, but one thing is abundantly
clear from his public statements, and that is that he viewed the end of
the Cold War as a disaster for Russia, and not for the reasons some
people think. It is not an ideological rationale, but because Russia,
which already has a deep and long history in its geopolitics of feeling
ignored by Europe and Asia and disrespected by the world--at the end of
the Cold War, Russia was a nation that faced incredible challenges.
[[Page S5008]]
Imagine for a moment that you are in the government or living in the
Soviet Union and you oversee this incredible empire that covers all of
this territory and have all these nations within your sphere of
influence, and overnight, it all evaporates. Overnight, all of the
countries in your periphery begin to join NATO. They start having
elections. They start becoming allies of the United States. Your
territory shrinks. One day, Ukraine is part of the Soviet Union; the
next day, it is its own country.
Then add to that, over the next 12 to 15 years, the sort of emergence
of the United States for much of that period of time as the world's
sole superpower, while Russia was struggling to have an economy or even
be relevant in the global discourse.
Then you come to see that Vladimir Putin viewed that period of time
in world history, up to the present day, as an example of the strong
America and strong West abusing a weak Russia, because this is
ultimately how he views life and how he views the world. It is a battle
between the weak and the strong, where the strong prey on the weak. You
know who he wants to be. So because of all of that and because he is
paranoid and because he is suspicious, he believes the United States,
for example, was behind the protests in 2011 that broke out on the
streets against his rule. He believes the United States is behind
everything that is happening in Ukraine. All of this leads him to the
two goals he has, and there are two goals that have become crystal
clear, especially beginning his second time around as President.
A lot of people forget that he was President, he left, and his
handpicked successor served for a period of time. Then he came back for
the second time. It is the second Putin we are now dealing with.
Since that time, two things have become pretty clear about his goals.
The first is that he wants to reestablish Russia once again as a world
power, like the time when the Soviet Union was on par with the United
States of America. He can't do that economically. A lot of people don't
realize this, but Russia is the 9th or 10th largest economy in the
world. To put it in perspective, the Italian economy--Italy is a great
country--the Italian economy, with less territory, less oil, fewer
people, is bigger than the Russian economy. It is about equal to the
Spanish economy. I would dare say--for example, my home State of
Florida has an economy now at about $1 trillion. Russia is at $2
trillion. There are States in this country that have a bigger economy
than Russia's. So he is not a global economic superpower. The only
thing that makes him a global superpower is the fact that they possess
thousands of nuclear weapons and conventional military capabilities
that are significant and have improved as he has invested in them. He
quickly realized: The way I am going to become relevant in the world
again is not through my economic or diplomatic prowess; the way I am
going to become relevant in the world again is I am going to use my
conventional weapons, my conventional capabilities, along with some
asymmetrical ones, to inject myself in the discussion in different
parts of the world and show people that Russia and Vladimir Putin are
strong again.
That is what he has done. It actually began back in 2008 with the
invasion of Georgia--we now commemorate the 10th anniversary of that--
but it also plays out in his intervention in Syria or the annexation of
Crimea. I believe he would have moved forward into Kiev and broader
Ukraine had there not been the EU and U.S. sanctions against him as a
result.
The first objective is to make Russia a world power again. The second
objective, which he thinks is tied to the first, is that he has to make
America weak. Vladimir Putin is a strong believer in zero-sum
propositions--not in the idea that somehow we can both be better off or
that there can be a win-win but a true believer in the idea that in
order for me to be stronger or us to be stronger, you have to be
weaker.
It plays out that in order for Russia to be stronger, America, which
he views as his greatest geopolitical competitor, has to be weaker.
That is why they chose to interfere in the 2016 election.
Let me say this: I don't think Vladimir Putin interfered in our
elections; I don't believe he interfered in our elections; I know it
for a fact. By the way, so does everyone who has looked at this issue
and knows anything about it. There is zero doubt about it. What I think
we are missing in our debate is the why and the how.
The why is not what people think. He may have had a personal
preference in an election, but his interference and his efforts to
interfere in our elections began well before the President of the
United States descended down those escalators in New York in the summer
of 2015. They intended to do this long before that period of time.
His No. 1 objective was to ensure that no matter who was elected
President of the United States, that person would assume office under a
cloud of nagging and persistent controversy. He wanted to weaken them
internally because, as an intelligence officer, he understood the power
of being weakened from within. He understands it so much that he
jealously protects his image in Russia, he guards it, disclosing very
little about himself or about his personal life. He never puts himself
in a position to appear vulnerable. He only shows pictures of things he
wants people to see and actually allows no dissent--to the point where
a substantial number of the people who opposed Vladimir Putin are not
out of politics or even in jail; they are dead. Sadly, the world is
littered with story after story of a Russian opposition figure found
dead in his hotel room, strangled, fell out of a window, poisoned. It
happens over and over again. These things are not a coincidence.
He wanted to weaken whoever was the next President of the United
States. No matter how this election turned out in November, whether the
President was named Trump or Clinton, we would be dealing with a
President right now under a cloud of controversy because he had it
lined up either way.
The second thing he wanted to do as part of the first part is
undermine confidence in our institutions--I mean all of our
institutions: our elections, the media, our political figures,
everything. It has extended to important institutions like the FBI and
our intelligence agencies. He undermined confidence so that no one
could be believed. And the President is under controversy. Divide us
against each other so that there are no authorities in which we trust.
Some of this, by the way, was already happening in our country, but
they had the nuanced understanding of it to be able to exploit it.
The third, as part of the first and second, is to really drive
divisions--not just to weaken the President and undermine confidence in
our institutions but look for ways to do so by exacerbating preexisting
tensions in our society.
These were the aims of the Russian interference campaign beyond
everything else. It was not about electing one candidate or another; it
was about these things. It would be hard to see what happened yesterday
and the reaction to it and not conclude that this effort succeeded his
wildest expectations. Today, the President of the United States has
operated for the better part of a year and a half under a persistent
cloud of controversy.
On the one side, his political opponents are intimating that his
Presidency is illegitimate, that his election was not real. I heard
words like ``treason'' thrown around yesterday.
On the other side is complete denial that there was any interference
and the undermining publicly of important institutions in this our
country, such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which, by the
way, is made up of thousands of employees, the vast and enormous
majority of whom are patriotic Americans who keep us safe every single
day. Undermining confidence in our institutions is tied to the point I
just made, not to mention the fact that, increasingly, Americans get
their news and information from someone who tells you what you already
believe and confirms your bias even further, which drives our
divisions.
There is no way you could see what was happening in this country over
the last year and a half--which was already happening, by the way, and
for which all of us in American politics are somewhat responsible--and
not conclude that Vladimir Putin's plan to undermine the Presidency, no
matter who it
[[Page S5009]]
was, to undermine confidence in our institutions, and to drive
divisions in our country has been wildly successful, at a very low
price.
Interestingly, yesterday one of the interviews that he did--I think
it was Mr. Wallace at FOX News who asked him about this, and his
response was that none of the things that were leaked are untrue, as if
to almost say with a wink, even if we colluded--or not colluded--even
if we hacked and even if we did all these things and interfered, so
what? We didn't lie. These are all true things.
So what have I heard in response to some of this? I will not spend a
lot of time addressing some of the arguments made by the President's
opponents. There is an ongoing investigation being conducted by Mr.
Mueller, which I believe should reach its conclusion naturally as he
continues to do his work. I have said this, and I will repeat it: It is
in the best interest of the President of the United States and of our
country for Mr. Mueller to do his work without interference and be able
to conclude it. No matter where you line up or whom you voted for, we
should all want to know the truth. That truth will ultimately have to
be proven in a court of law.
From his history, I have no reason to believe that Mr. Mueller will
not conduct a full, thorough, and fair investigation. Ultimately, it is
truth and the light of the truth that will help us overcome a lot of
these controversies we find today. Until that has happened, any
accusations are unfair, unwise, and counterproductive.
But one of the arguments I have heard from people on my side of the
aisle is that this is not a big deal because everybody does it. And if
by ``everybody does it'' you mean everybody spies, yes, virtually every
nation on Earth has an intelligence agency, and some do a better job
than others. But do not be misled--everyone does not do what we saw in
2016. Our problem in 2016 was not that the Russians spied on Americans
or that the Americans spied on the Russians or that the Chinese spied
on us; our problem in 2016 is that the Russian Federation, under the
command of Vladimir Putin, weaponized information. One thing is to
gather information; another thing is to strategically leak it in an
effort to influence the domestic politics of another country. And that
is what Vladimir Putin ordered done for purposes of undermining the
next President, whoever it was, and undermining confidence in our
elections and our institutions.
They hacked into emails. They released these emails through a third
party. It was picked up in the media, it was reported, and then we
fought about it. That is what they have done. They have done it in
other countries for years. They did it somewhat in the Cold War. They
did it in 2016. And they will do it again. Let there be no doubt--they
will do it again. Then after they released all this stuff, they used
their army of bots and trolls to drive this information online, on
platforms, particularly trying to drive it to certain groups and people
to divide us even further against each other.
One of the most dangerous things they did, which is now open record
in the indictment issued last week by the Mueller investigation, is
they probed the electoral systems of our States and counties. A lot of
people are saying: They didn't get in the ballot box. Absolutely. I
tell you with full confidence that the reason President Trump won had
nothing to do with Vladimir Putin--nothing. But I think we are wrong if
we think all we should be worried about is the ability to change votes
at the ballot box because if they can somehow change people's
registration and enough people on election day go to vote and are told
``You aren't allowed to vote,'' their trolls will be ready to drive
that news out there on election day. Then come election day, no matter
who won, the other side will say that there were these weird things
that happened down there in some county or some State, so the election
is not valid.
Imagine that for a moment. Imagine an election in 2000 in my home
State that was decided by less than 600 votes. Imagine that in a
Republican county, a bunch of Democrats went to vote on election day
and were told: You can't vote today because you are not registered. If
that happened to enough people, the Russian trolls would jump all over
it. They would start driving it on the news. It would be featured on
cable news that day.
That night, if they lost, they would be arguing ``The election was
rigged. The electoral officials in the Republican county rigged the
elections''--all driven by the Russians, and vice versa, by the way.
That is the danger, that we can one day potentially elect a President
of the United States who swears into office with a substantial number
of people believing that the election was stolen, undermining not just
the President at that point but our very system of democracy. That is
what they did. Anyone who tells you that everyone does that is lying.
Everyone does not do that. The United States does not do these things.
I am a big critic of the Chinese, but the Chinese don't do these
things. I have other problems with them. The Belgians don't do this,
and the Japanese don't do this. Only one country in the world has
weaponized information in this way in order to interfere in an
adversary's election, and that is the Russian Federation under Vladimir
Putin.
The other argument I have heard is: What is wrong with better
relations with Russia? Nothing is wrong with better relations with
Russia. I will tell you right now that the world would be a better
place, a more peaceful place, and our lives would be a little easier.
We would be stronger if, somehow, we had a partner in the Russian
Federation with whom we could work to deal with things like terrorism
and the proliferation of nuclear weapons and Iran and all sorts of
issues--North Korea. We all wish we had that.
The reason that isn't happening, frankly, is not because of us. It is
because of Vladimir Putin. For Vladimir Putin, better relations are not
what he is interested in. He is not seeking a partnership with the
United States. What he is seeking is geopolitical, perceptional
equality. He wants to be viewed as being on par with America, both as a
leader and his country as a whole, and he believes the only way he can
do that is to pull himself up and tear us down. I, frankly, have to
tell you that it is very difficult to have better relations with
someone who believes that the only way for him to be better off is for
you to be worse off. As long as the Russian Federation is led by
someone who has total control of his government and has these views, it
is going to be very difficult to have better relations.
That does not mean we don't meet with Vladimir Putin. Anyone who says
that the meeting, alone, is wrong is not being wise and is being
disingenuous. As 90 percent of the nuclear weapons on this planet are
possessed by the United States and the Russian Federation, that alone
is reason for us to engage with Vladimir Putin. We have to. We have no
choice. Yet we should engage with him with clear eyes and a clear
understanding of what he is up to and what he is trying to do. We
should engage with a very clear understanding that this is a man who,
throughout his life as leader of the Russian Federation, has never
passed up an opportunity to exploit the weakness of an adversary or a
competitor. Every time he sees weakness and the opportunity to gain an
advantage, he will take it, and any engagement with him in which that
is not understood is a dangerous one.
So I have no problem with having better relations with Russia.
Frankly, I am not one of these people who is over the top on Russia to
the extent of the threat it poses. It does have nuclear weapons, but we
have bigger threats than Russia. Yet it is a very significant one that
needs to be addressed.
Our moving forward is what, I hope, we will focus on. Mueller will
continue his work, and the Intelligence Committee, which I sit on, will
continue its work. Yet we are going to have an election in a few
months. We are going to continue to have elections every 2 years,
hopefully, forever, and there is no reason to believe that they will
not try to do this again.
That is why, earlier this year, along with Senator Van Hollen, I
proposed the DETER Act, which is the only thing that Vladimir Putin
understands--deterrence. The DETER Act says here is a list of
sanctions, and these sanctions will go into effect immediately if the
Director of National
[[Page S5010]]
Intelligence, after an intelligence assessment, determines that Russia
is, once again, interfering in our elections so that before he even
does it, he has a very clear understanding of what the price is going
to be.
Men like Vladimir Putin operate as cost-benefit analyzers. They weigh
the costs against the benefits, and then they decide what action to
take. There is no doubt, in 2016, he saw that the costs of what he did
were very low. He thought he could hide it. He thought, by the time we
would have figured it out, it would have been too late. He thought that
America would be in such disarray that it wouldn't be able to get its
act together and actually impose any additional sanctions. He saw the
benefits as extraordinary, so he took action, and he will do it again
if he doesn't think the costs are high enough.
My hope is, over the next few days and in a short period of time, we
will figure out a way, in working together as Americans on this issue,
to set aside all of the stuff about yesterday--that probe will
continue, and our work on the Intelligence Committee will continue--and
focus on the future.
No matter how you feel about 2016, who among us would say that if
Russia interferes in 2018--or in any year for that matter--it shouldn't
be punished? Who among us would say, if we had the opportunity to put
into law strong consequences for interference that could deter such an
attack, we wouldn't want to do it? That is why I hope that no matter
how you may feel about the other things that are going on that the
Senate can come together and work together to pass this law, because,
otherwise, we are leaving our Nation vulnerable.
I will close with something I said back in October of 2016, which is
that Vladimir Putin is not a Republican, and he is not a Democrat, and
he is not a conservative, and he is not a liberal. Do not ascribe to
him any of the attributes of American politics. He interfered in 2016
in order to create chaos and controversy, not to elect any particular
party or individual. By far, that was his strongest motivator, and he
will do it again.
I believe, if left unchecked, he will target Members of the Senate
who he thinks are his opponents. He will target Members of Congress.
Eventually, he will even target our debates outside of elections. I
believe, if left unchecked, he is going to take the next step and not
just leak information but will make it up. He is going to come up with
9 emails that will be real and will embed a 10th that will be fake. It
will be reported, and it might cost one an election or might cost
someone enough heartache that one has to resign.
Information is a very powerful weapon. If you go online, you will
already see the ability to produce these deepfake videos that look
real, videos that only an expert could tell are fake. They are of
people saying or doing things they never said or never did. Imagine
those being in the hands of a nation-state and being leaked 2 days
before an election. A nation-state is going to do these things. It is
going to happen if we do not deter it from happening and if we do not
prepare our Nation and the American people. If you think this is
chaotic, then allow that to happen without informing us and preparing
us and strengthening us and putting in place a deterrent against that.
Then you will know chaos--a chaos that will shake us to our core.
I hope that we can take this small but important step of coming
together as Americans and protecting our elections for years to come
against an adversary who is determined to tear us down in order to
build himself up. This is reality. This is the world and the threat we
face. The sooner we address it the safer our Nation and our people will
be.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
____________________