[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 125 (Wednesday, July 24, 2019)]
[House]
[Page H7251]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        OUR COUNTRY'S ATTENTION IS FOCUSED ON THE MUELLER REPORT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Speaker, today much of our country's attention is 
focused on the hearing happening across the street from where we stand. 
For weeks, pundits have been speculating: What else would the special 
counsel reveal? Where is that smoking gun or the viral moment?
  These questions are understandable, but they also obscure a powerful 
tool already at this body's disposal as we consider whether or not to 
hold the President accountable: what we already know. And for that, we 
turn to the special counsel's report.
  Volume I details a ``sweeping and systematic'' attack by the Russian 
Government on our democracy, an attack that our President still refuses 
to acknowledge. Volume II describes 11 different occasions--11--where 
the actions of the President may have obstructed justice.
  The legal framework is pretty straightforward. In criminal cases, an 
individual must meet the so-called elements of an offense, essentially, 
a checklist of actions, which, if each is proven, means that a crime 
was committed. What follows in the special counsel's report is an 
exhaustive detailing of facts uncovered and a thorough analysis as to 
whether the elements of obstruction of justice were met in those 11 
instances.

  The special counsel instructs, on page 9 of Volume II, that ``three 
basic elements are common to the most relevant obstruction statutes: 
one, an obstructive act; two, a nexus between the obstructive act and 
an official proceeding; and three, a corrupt intent.''
  In a few of the occasions investigated, the special counsel indicates 
that the evidence is not sufficient to reach that standard. In several 
others, however, his analysis is crystal clear.
  On page 84, the report begins to detail how the President directed 
White House Counsel Don McGahn to remove the special counsel. ``Mueller 
has to go.''
  ``Call me back when you do it.''
  The special counsel then applies the law:
  One, an obstructive act: page 88, ``Substantial evidence supports a 
conclusion that the President . . . directed McGahn to call Rosenstein 
to have the special counsel removed.''
  Two, a nexus: page 89, ``Substantial evidence indicates that . . . 
the President knew his conduct was under investigation by a Federal 
prosecutor.'' In fact, the President had tweeted about it.
  Three, corrupt intent: page 89, ``Substantial evidence indicates that 
the President's attempts to remove the special counsel were linked . . 
. most immediately to reports that the President was being investigated 
for potential obstruction of justice.''
  Substantial evidence to show that all three elements of the offense 
are met; substantial evidence that the President obstructed justice; 
substantial evidence that the President of the United States committed 
a crime.
  There are countless other troubling facts which the special counsel 
indicates may meet the obstruction threshold.
  Page 91, just days after pressuring McGahn, President Trump directs 
his former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski to deliver a message to 
Attorney General Jeff Sessions to limit the scope of the Mueller 
investigation to future election interference alone.
  Page 92, the President follows up with Lewandowski with the same 
request a month later.
  Page 96, the President writes Chief of Staff Reince Priebus, ``Did 
you get it?''--referring to Sessions' resignation. ``Are you working on 
it?''--which leads Mr. Mueller to conclude, on page 97, that ``taken 
together, the President's directives indicate that Sessions was being 
instructed to tell the special counsel to end the existing 
investigation into his campaign.'' And, the same page, that 
``substantial evidence indicates that the President's efforts to have 
Sessions limit the scope of the special counsel's investigation . . . 
was intended to prevent further investigative scrutiny of the 
President's and his campaign's conduct.''
  These are the findings of the report, the facts as they were 
uncovered and applied to the relevant statutes of our criminal law. 
This is the information already in our hands today.
  Summed up by Mr. Mueller's devastating conclusion: ``Our 
investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of 
exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations, including 
the Russian interference and obstruction investigations.''
  The special counsel has done his job. We must do ours.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from 
engaging in personalities toward the President.

                          ____________________