[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 103 (Wednesday, June 3, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2684-S2685]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Russia Investigation
Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, since the Federal Bureau of
Investigation launched the Crossfire Hurricane counterintelligence
investigation in July of 2016, there has been no shortage of media
coverage of Russia's involvement in our 2016 election. For the better
part of 3 years, there has been news; there has been speculation; there
have been rumors; there have been partisan accusations made about that
topic.
Trying to keep up with the names and the dates, the allegations left
you feeling like an old-school detective show--names and photos pinned
to a board, with strings of yarn connecting all the pieces. Everyone
expected the release of the special counsel's report to be the moment
when those dots were finally connected and it explained what happened
and who was responsible.
It is safe to say that did not happen. Even though the Mueller report
did not find any collusion or obstruction, there was a lot of
information that since has been made public about its origins, its
motivation, and the means by which that investigation occurred. In
fact, rather than settling the matter, these revelations have prompted
a whole new range of questions about the investigation itself.
First of all, we had Rod Rosenstein in the Judiciary Committee. He
was the Deputy Attorney General. I asked him whether he was aware of
any precedent for what happened in 2016 when, at the same time, both
major parties' political nominees for President of the United States
were the subject of open FBI investigations. He said: No, there is no
precedent for that.
First, of course, it was the Hillary email scandal, after which
Director Comey made another unprecedented move and had a press
conference saying that even though she had been essentially grossly
negligent in handling this private email server, he thought that no
reasonable prosecutor would bring charges against her.
As much as Secretary Clinton might have appreciated that
announcement, or not, a few weeks later, the FBI Director wrote another
letter and said: Hey, we have some Anthony Weiner emails that came up
on his laptop, so we need to reopen the investigation just a few days
before the general election.
Well, you can imagine Secretary Clinton didn't appreciate that. Many
people have said that it is because of the FBI's unprecedented
involvement in the middle of a Presidential election that it damaged,
if not decided, the election in 2016.
And then, of course, there is the Trump-Russia influence
investigation, better known as Crossfire Hurricane, leading up to the
Mueller investigation and where we are today. In the time since the
special counsel completed his investigation and issued his report more
than a year ago, we have learned more about the behind-the-scenes work
that guided the Russia probe.
Thanks to Inspector General Horowitz and his team at the Department
of Justice, thanks to the DNI, the Director of National Intelligence,
and others for declassifying important information, we have a whole lot
more insight and transparency into exactly what happened. But these
revelations have given all of us pause for grave concern. They have
highlighted a pattern of sloppiness and outright abuse of power at the
highest levels of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and beyond and
raised red flags that must be addressed.
In the Senate, it is our duty to get to the bottom of how and why
this happened. I can't imagine any Democrat, any Republican, any
American saying what happened in the 2016 election to Hillary Clinton
and to Donald Trump was OK. Our law enforcement agencies should not
play a starring role in an election leading up to the Nation's highest
office.
This morning, the first step in our investigation into the origins,
means, and methods of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation occurred in
the Judiciary Committee. That is where we heard from Deputy Attorney
General Rod Rosenstein. He wasn't the Deputy Attorney General until the
spring of 2017, but he did play a key role in the investigation. He
signed one of the applications for the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act warrant that allowed the FBI to essentially surveil an
American citizen. He was the one who appointed Special Counsel Bob
Mueller. He ended up being not only an investigator but also a witness
in the process.
His account of what happened in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation
is important to understanding both the actions and the motivations that
drove that investigation. In fact, he said this morning, in response to
Chairman Lindsey Graham's question, if you knew then what you know now,
would you have signed, sworn to this verified application for a warrant
to surveil an American citizen, Carter Page? He said: No. To his
credit, he said no. ``If I knew then, what I know now.''
Some of my greatest concerns stem from the Department of Justice
Inspector General's report about those FISA abuses, as they are
called--Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This is extraordinary
authority given by Congress under very strict rules, and they are
supervised by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which was
established to provide oversight of these surveillance activities,
including surveillance of American citizens under very narrow and
restricted guardrails.
If the U.S. intelligence authorities, or law enforcement agencies,
believe surveillance is critical to a national security investigation,
they submit an application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Court to receive that authorization. This is an important step in
protecting the rights of American citizens and making sure that our
intelligence and law enforcement authorities perform their job
consistent with congressional intent and direction. But these verified,
in other words, sworn documents are critical, in which accuracy is
paramount. That is why they are required to be verified--that is, sworn
to--by the top officials at the Department of Justice.
We now know that the applications of the former Trump campaign aide
Carter Page were riddled with errors. In the initial Carter Page FISA
application, Inspector General Horowitz identified what he called seven
mistakes. In the three renewals, he had found an additional 10. These
weren't necessarily honest mistakes. In fact, they included significant
and material errors, including the deliberate falsification, lying--
lying to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court about Carter
Page's past service to the U.S. Government.
To make matters worse, even as new and exculpatory material came to
light, this information was not reflected in renewal applications. It
was sort of a cut-and-paste job. Those agents who prepared those
materials that were signed by people like Rod Rosenstein lied to
deceive the court so they could continue to surveil, or spy, on an
American citizen--something we do not want to happen unless they are
truly an agent of a foreign power and there is probable cause to show
that they are such.
These revelations were very troubling in December of 2019, and they
are just as troubling today. It does also raise questions about the
motivations for the investigation, in the first place. Falsifying a
FISA application is clearly not an action one would take if you were in
pursuit of the truth. We need to know why the initial application and
three renewals were riddled with lies and omissions and how these
inaccurate applications were approved by high-ranking officials at the
Department of Justice.
Second, this raises serious questions about the way investigations of
average Americans are being handled. If these agents were able to break
every rule in the book to spy on a Presidential candidate--who
ultimately was elected--and are facing no consequences, no
accountability, what protections exist for the rest of us in America?
Who is going to notice their error-ridden FISA applications if it is
John or Jane Q. Public?
What is even more disconcerting is, if this happened once--and it did
happen more than once--what is to stop it from happening again? The
American people need and deserve answers to
[[Page S2685]]
these questions, and today's hearing in the Judiciary Committee was the
first step in getting the answers to those questions and hopefully
corrective action.
Chairman Graham has been clear that we will look at this
investigation from all angles--covering the FISA abuses, unmasking
requests, and the origins of both Crossfire Hurricane, and the
appointment of special counsel.
The trove of declassified transcripts that recently were released by
the House Intelligence Committee--actually, declassified by the
Director of National Intelligence--only underscores the important need
for oversight by the Senate and by the Congress. In reading these
transcripts, which were taken in secret, in a secure facility, and only
recently made public, I have been shocked at some of the statements
made by former Obama administration officials.
Based on the way Chairman Schiff repeatedly claimed to have direct
evidence, you would think these officials would provide the smoking gun
to the committee. But no--witness after witness confirmed they had no
evidence of collusion, coordination, or conspiracy between anyone in
the Trump campaign and Russia. What did they do? They walked outside of
that secure facility, and they spoke to the TV cameras assembled there,
and they lied. They misrepresented what was said during that classified
testimony.
This really begs the question: Why did this investigation begin and
how, without evidence, did it last for nearly 2 years?
Additionally, I have a lot of questions about the sloppy and
incomplete investigative work surrounding Crossfire Hurricane when it
came to the use of something called a confidential human source.
Christopher Steele, former intelligence officer from the United
Kingdom, was hired by Fusion GPS to do opposition research against the
Trump campaign for the Hillary Clinton campaign. Yet, at the same time,
he was considered by the FBI as a confidential human source.
Inspector General Horowitz's report makes clear Mr. Steele and his
FBI handler did not even agree on the terms of their arrangement.
Steele said: I am a businessman collecting information. The FBI said:
Well, this is just between us, and you can't talk to the public, which
he clearly did, and he did so at the same time he was supposed to be a
confidential human source.
The FBI background check into Christopher Steele was so sloppy, they
didn't even understand that his loyalties were not with the FBI and the
U.S. Government, they were with his paymaster--Fusion GPS, his
employer. That is one reason there were such inaccuracies throughout
this investigation, including in the FISA applications.
So we need answers, and we need accountability. Based on what I have
seen so far, one conclusion is that there was a coordinated effort to
manipulate our intelligence community and justice system for vindictive
and biased purposes against a Presidential candidate and elected
President of the United States. I realize that this is a grave and
serious charge, but I think it is one conclusion you could draw based
on what we know.
It is high time we learned the truth. If this kind of misbehavior and
deception becomes routine, it will jeopardize important legal
authorities that we rely on to protect our national security. It is
counter to our values and is a direct blow to the foundation of our
democracy.
I appreciate Chairman Graham's prioritizing these oversight hearings.
I know we have a lot of work to do in order to restore public
confidence in our justice system as well as in our intelligence
community--the people charged with protecting the American people. We
need to learn what really happened so we can make sure this never ever,
ever happens again.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Will the Senate advise and
consent to the Tipton nomination?
Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The clerk will call the roll.
The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. THUNE. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator
from North Carolina (Mr. Burr).
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Minnesota (Ms.
Klobuchar), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), the Senator
from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Schatz), the
Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Smith), and the Senator from Montana (Mr.
Tester) are necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cramer). Are there any other Senator in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 52, nays 41, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 111 Ex.]
YEAS--52
Alexander
Barrasso
Blackburn
Blunt
Boozman
Braun
Capito
Cassidy
Collins
Cornyn
Cotton
Cramer
Crapo
Cruz
Daines
Enzi
Ernst
Fischer
Gardner
Graham
Grassley
Hawley
Hoeven
Hyde-Smith
Inhofe
Johnson
Kennedy
Lankford
Lee
Loeffler
McConnell
McSally
Moran
Murkowski
Paul
Perdue
Portman
Risch
Roberts
Romney
Rounds
Rubio
Sasse
Scott (FL)
Scott (SC)
Shelby
Sullivan
Thune
Tillis
Toomey
Wicker
Young
NAYS--41
Baldwin
Bennet
Blumenthal
Booker
Brown
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Coons
Cortez Masto
Duckworth
Durbin
Feinstein
Gillibrand
Harris
Hassan
Heinrich
Hirono
Jones
Kaine
King
Leahy
Manchin
Menendez
Merkley
Murphy
Murray
Peters
Reed
Rosen
Schumer
Shaheen
Sinema
Stabenow
Udall
Van Hollen
Warner
Warren
Whitehouse
Wyden
NOT VOTING--7
Burr
Klobuchar
Markey
Sanders
Schatz
Smith
Tester
The nomination was confirmed
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to
reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the
President will be immediately notified of the Senate's actions.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic whip.