[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 110 (Friday, June 28, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4673-S4674]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     FOREIGN ELECTION INTERFERENCE

  Mr. REED. Mr. President, today I want to discuss Russia's sustained 
campaign of attacks on our democracy and how the President's inability 
to take these threats seriously harms our national security and the 
integrity of our elections.
  In the run up to his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin 
this week at the G20 Summit, the President showed no signs that he 
planned to warn Russia against interfering in our democratic elections 
in 2020. In press interviews, he said that he ``may'' ask Putin not 
interfere in 2020 and told another group of reporters, ``I will have a 
very good conversation with him . . . what I say is none of your 
business.''
  Following today's meeting with Putin, an autocrat who continues to 
conduct hybrid warfare operations against our democracy, President 
Trump made light of this threat in a joking manner. In response to a 
reporter's question, he apparently grinned as he told Putin, ``don't 
meddle in our election.''
  This is not a joke. This is about deterring the Kremlin from 
continuing to attack our democracy. He should be using every tool at 
his disposal to direct a whole of government and whole of society 
effort to counter these attacks, not emboldening Putin to escalate his 
aggression. It is exactly the business of the American people to know 
that our elections are free from interference and that we can trust the 
President of the United States to deliver tough messages to deter 
foreign adversaries.
  Relatedly the President can't seem to grasp what's wrong with 
accepting ``dirt'' on his political opponents from foreign adversaries. 
In a recent interview with ABC News, the President made it clear that 
he sees nothing wrong with compromising our national security if it 
advances his own political interests. When asked if his campaign would 
accept information on his opponents from Russia, China, or other 
countries during the 2020 campaign, the President responded: ``I think 
you might want to listen . . . there's nothing wrong with listening.''
  He denied that this type of assistance from a foreign adversary was 
interference, adding: ``They have information. I think I'd take it.'' 
It was only after being heavily criticized that President Trump 
reversed course, telling Fox and Friends ``Of course, you give it to 
the FBI or report it to the attorney general or somebody like that . . 
. You couldn't have that happen in our country.'' But, of course, it 
already happened. President Trump's inability or unwillingness to 
recognize it is both completely wrong-headed and dangerous.
  The President's response belies the undeniable fact that Russia 
attacked our democracy in the 2016 election with an information warfare 
campaign, and tried to do it again in the 2018 midterms.
  Trump initially made Russia's interference sound like run of the 
mill, opposition research--``oppo research'' he called it--and claimed 
everyone does it, but this is not about politics as usual. This is 
about Russia advancing its strategic interests and using tools from its 
hybrid arsenal, including information warfare and malign influence 
operation, to do so. Russia seeks to inject itself into our political 
process to achieve its goals of promoting the candidates favorable to 
Russia and discrediting those that are not, weakening the American 
public's faith in the integrity of democracy, and undermining the 
United States' standing globally.
  President Trump's failure to grasp that there is a problem with 
someone in his high office--or any candidate for public office for that 
matter--accepting dirt on political opponents from a foreign government 
or national is troubling on many levels, but importantly, it harms our 
national security. It undermines our ability as a nation to counter 
Russia and other adversaries and our ability to protect our elections. 
The President should be leading a comprehensive, meaningful approach to 
deter Russia and others who seek to target our democracy. Instead, he 
is announcing to the world that our elections are open to manipulation.
  Some would have you believe that, with the release of the Mueller 
report, the case of Russian interference in the 2016 election is 
closed, that our work is done, and that Congress can stop caring about 
the attack on our democracy and the integrity of our political system. 
The White House, the Attorney General, and congressional Republican 
leaders are sending a coordinated message that there is nothing to see 
here, folks.
  But no matter how they try, we can't forget that Russia attacked our 
democracy in 2016, that Russia tried to do it again in 2018, and that 
it continues to deploy hybrid operations against us, our allies, and 
our partners. Just recently, a report issued by the European Union 
concluded that Russia conducted ``continued and sustained'' information 
warfare campaigns against the EU Parliamentary elections this spring. 
We must continue to work to highlight these types of findings including 
those made by the special counsel and their implications going forward. 
As Special Counsel Mueller's powerful press statement from his 
investigation underscored: ``there were multiple, systematic efforts to 
interfere in our election.'' Mueller added, ``And that allegation 
deserves the attention of every American.''
  The special counsel' s report and related indictments described these 
operations in great detail. Let's look specifically at key aspects of 
the Russian information warfare campaign that the report laid out.
  First, Mueller makes clear that Kremlin-linked operators sought to 
help the candidate the Kremlin favored and whose election would serve 
Russia's interests. The report describes how ``A Russian entity carried 
out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald 
J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.'' It 
also found that ``[a]s early as 2014, the [Kremlin-linked Internet 
Research Agency] instructed its employees to target U.S. persons who 
could be used to advance its operational goals.''
  Second, Mueller describes in detail the Russian spying operation to 
steal ``dirt'' on the opposition candidate and then use that stolen 
information against her. The report states unequivocally, ``[a] Russian 
intelligence service conducted computer intrusion operations against 
entities, employees and volunteers working on the Clinton Campaign and 
then released stolen documents.''
  Third, the Mueller established multiple contacts by Russian 
Government officials or their proxies with the Trump campaign to 
establish relationships. The report states: ``[t]he investigation also 
established numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump 
campaign.''
  Finally, the Mueller report definitively concludes that Russia saw 
its interests as aligned with and served by a Trump Presidency, that 
Russia conducted a campaign to interfere in the 2016 election for the 
purpose of helping the Trump campaign, and that the Trump campaign 
hoped to benefit from the fruits of that foreign election interference. 
Ultimately, however, the Mueller investigation could not prove beyond a 
reasonable doubt that the Trump campaign or its associates conspired 
with the Russian Government in its election interference.
  As the report states: ``[a]lthough the investigation established that 
the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump 
presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign 
expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and 
released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish 
that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with

[[Page S4674]]

the Russian government in its election interference activities.''
  As the special counsel's report details, Trump did not shy away and, 
in fact, sought to benefit from help from Russia in the 2016 election. 
Trump campaign associates, including his son, son-in law, and campaign 
manager, met with Russian agents to hear potential dirt about Secretary 
Clinton, which was presented to the Donald Trump, Jr. as ``part of 
Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump.'' Even in hindsight, 
Trump said he most likely wouldn't have contacted the FBI about that 
meeting, telling ABC News, ``I have seen a lot of things over my life. 
I don't think in my whole life I've ever called the FBI. In my whole 
life. You don't call the FBI.''
  Think about that statement for a moment. Here is the President of the 
United States, who has taken an oath to faithfully execute the laws of 
the United States, declaring that people should not go to law 
enforcement with evidence of foreign interference in our political 
process.
  But, of course, candidate Trump went further than simply not 
reporting foreign attempts to influence our elections. The special 
counsel detailed how Trump embraced the support of a foreign adversary 
by calling on Russia to hack his political opponent and disseminate the 
stolen information. On July 27, 2016, Trump announced publicly during a 
press conference, ``Russia, if you are listening, I hope you're able to 
find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will be rewarded 
mightily by our press.'' The Mueller report confirmed that a Russian 
military intelligence unit, commonly referred to as the GRU, tried to 
assist Trump with those efforts, finding, ``within approximately five 
hours of Trump's statement, GRU officers targeted for the first time 
Clinton's personal office.''
  The special counsel also detailed how the Trump campaign ``showed 
interest in WikiLeaks's releases of documents and welcomed their 
potential to damage candidate Clinton.'' Furthermore, the Trump 
campaign continued to promote WikiLeaks after it was apparent that 
WikiLeaks was being used by the GRU to disseminate information stolen 
by the Russians. On October 7, 2016, the Department of Homeland 
Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued 
a joint statement naming the WikiLeaks disclosures as ``consistent with 
the Russian-directed efforts'' to influence public opinion. If not 
prior to the release of that joint statement, certainly by that point 
the President and his campaign should have known better. Instead of 
calling the FBI, the Trump campaign strategized how to benefit from 
Russia's stolen information. The Mueller report states: ``by the late 
summer of 2016, the Trump Campaign was planning a press strategy, a 
communications campaign, and messaging based on the possible release of 
Clinton emails by WikiLeaks.'' A related indictment from the special 
counsel detailed how the Trump campaign applauded WikiLeaks's release 
of John Podesta's emails starting on October 7, 2016. In the last month 
of the campaign alone, the President publicly boasted of his love of 
WikiLeaks at least 124 times.
  As I mentioned, the special counsel did not find sufficient evidence 
to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the Trump campaign's embracing 
of the benefits of Kremlin or Kremlin-linked operations constituted a 
crime. But is it okay for a candidate to get elected President, or 
elected to any public office, by capitalizing on information stolen by 
a foreign adversary? Will that be acceptable the next time around? Will 
foreign information warfare campaigns targeting our elections be 
accepted as normal from now on?
  Based on his public remarks, it certainly seems acceptable to 
President Trump and his defenders. This is not theoretical. It happened 
in 2016. Now the President put it out there that he would meet with 
foreign adversaries again in the 2020 campaign to hear what information 
they have on his opponents. He is emboldened to do it again. While, as 
I mentioned, he later changed his position, it still leaves room for 
doubt about his true intentions and invites our adversaries to try and 
compromise our election. Trump publicly undermined his own FBI 
Director, Christopher Wray, who testified in front of the Senate that, 
``If any public official or member of any campaign is contacted by any 
nation-state or anybody acting on behalf of a nation-state about 
influencing or interfering with our election, then that's something 
that the FBI would want to know about it.''
  When asked about Wray's testimony, President Trump bluntly said ``The 
FBI Director is wrong.'' Trump's statements were so disturbing that the 
FEC Commissioner responded by saying ``Let me make something 100% clear 
to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is 
illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value 
from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election. This is not 
a novel concept.''
  The President's actions also clearly aided ongoing Russian 
information warfare operations. This is not the standard of conduct and 
the public trust that goes with political office. The willingness to 
embrace a foreign adversary in this fashion is unpatriotic and defies 
the basic norms of this Nation.
  The Trump campaign's series of foreign contacts in the 2016 election 
and the President's continued willingness to accept assistance from a 
foreign government make it clear that Congress must act to prevent 
future interference efforts. That is why I am a cosponsor of the 
Foreign Influence Reporting in Elections Act, or FIRE Act, introduced 
by Senator Warner. The FIRE Act would require all campaign officials to 
report, within 1 week, any contacts with foreign nationals attempting 
to make campaign donations or otherwise collaborate with the campaign 
to the Federal Election Commission. The FEC would in turn have to 
notify the FBI within 1 week. It is in all our interest to ensure that 
we can defend against foreign attacks on our democratic institutions 
and reporting these kinds of contacts to the appropriate authorities is 
our first line of defense. I am disappointed that my Republican 
colleagues blocked Senator Warner's attempt to pass the FIRE Act, even 
after many of them insisted that politicians should contact the FBI if 
ever contacted or offered help by a foreign government.
  This is not a Democratic or a Republican issue. This is an issue of 
our national security and the integrity of our free and fair elections. 
Russia exploited vulnerabilities in our open society to advance its own 
interests and the Russian tactics were encouraged and amplified by a 
candidate who was seeking our nation's highest office. We have every 
indication that the Russians are poised to do it again, and the 
President has shown time and again--including today for the world to 
see--that he doesn't see anything wrong with foreign interference if it 
works to his advantage.
  We cannot let this moment pass without speaking up for the integrity 
of our democracy and our values. Congress, as a body, and we, as a 
country, must speak out and say this is not acceptable. It is not 
acceptable for our candidates for political office to seek to engage 
with our adversaries or foreign authoritarian regimes to advance their 
political campaigns. It is not acceptable to meet with foreign agents 
about getting stolen information on your opponents, information 
acquired by foreign espionage. This is a violation of the public trust 
that is inherent in any political office and which any candidate for 
public office must uphold to be worthy of the American people's 
support. I urge my colleagues to speak out in condemning this conduct 
for the sake of our democracy and to preserve the American people's 
faith in the integrity of our electoral system.

                          ____________________