[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.
____________________