[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 109 (Thursday, June 22, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H3077-H3087]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
RELATING TO THE CONSIDERATION OF H. RES. 503, IMPEACHING JOSEPH R.
BIDEN, JR., PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, FOR HIGH CRIMES AND
MISDEMEANORS
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call
up House Resolution 529 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 529
Resolved, That House Resolution 503 is hereby re-referred
to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 1
hour.
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume.
During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the
purpose of debate only.
General Leave
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, last night, the Rules Committee reported a rule
to refer H. Res. 503 to the Committees on Homeland Security and the
Judiciary. H. Res. 503 lays out articles of impeachment against
President Joe Biden for his failure to secure the southern border of
the United States.
We do a lot of things in this body, and we say a lot of things--I
certainly do--about our beliefs and about what we think is happening to
our country. What we are talking about here is, indeed, solemn. We are,
in fact, talking about the mechanism provided by the Founders in the
Constitution of the United States to check and hold the executive
branch responsible.
The border crisis that we are experiencing today is extremely
significant for the people in my home State of Texas. It is significant
not just for Texas, of course, but for the entire country--but, in
particular, for the people in my home State of Texas.
Since President Biden took office, there have been well over 5
million illegal migrant encounters along the southwest border. More
than 204,000 illegal immigrants were encountered at the border in May
alone. Those numbers are changing post-relaxing enforcement of title
42.
Mr. Speaker, 2 million aliens have been released into the interior of
the United States, and 1.5 million, probably 1.7 million, maybe 2
million now, got-aways have successfully evaded border agents, by
relatively conservative accounting.
[[Page H3078]]
Most concerning right now is the data we have shows that 125
individuals from the terrorist watch list have been encountered this
fiscal year alone, and that compares to about 98 in all of last fiscal
year and about 10 in the last year of the Trump administration.
The fact is, the people I represent are sick and tired of a Federal
Government that is abdicating its fundamental duty to defend the border
of the United States. That is what is happening.
The Federal Government exists primarily, borderline entirely, but
certainly primarily, to defend the United States. That is why it
exists. It is failing to do so not through maladministration, not
through incompetence, but through dereliction of duty and a refusal to
actually follow the laws of the United States.
The laws of the United States are there, expressly and specifically
laid out, to ensure that our border will be protected, that our Nation
will be secure. That is the fundamental question before us. When the
executive branch fails to follow the law, when the executive branch
fails to adhere to its duty to defend the Constitution and the laws of
the United States, then what is it that the Congress, the people's
House, is supposed to do in response?
The Founders gave us a mechanism. Here today, we are talking about
putting forward and referring these articles to the Homeland Security
Committee for determination of the extent to which the homeland is, in
fact, not secure as a direct consequence of the refusal of the
administration, well beyond maladministration but very specifically the
refusal to follow the laws of the United States that is resulting in
the direct consequence of the death and damage to the American people.
That is the truth. That is what we are experiencing. That is what we
are experiencing in real time in Texas. My colleagues in Arizona, my
colleagues throughout this entire country, are experiencing that in
real time.
Just a few weeks ago, a Federal judge in the Northern District of
Texas, Judge Reed O'Connor, issued an opinion, an order, and in it, he
lays out: ``Defendants, illegal aliens, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to
transport and harbor illegal aliens. The sentencing information shows
that on behalf of the Juarez cartel, defendants participated in an
alien smuggling conspiracy. . . . The smuggling organization charged
$10,000 to smuggle an adult illegal alien into the United States and
between $12,000 to $14,000 to smuggle a child illegal alien.''
It goes on to lay out how they discovered that there was an illegal
alien in Baltimore who was being held for ransom so that his family
wouldn't be abused by the Juarez cartel in a stash house in Fort Worth.
The members told the husband that they would do things to his
daughter he would not like if he did not make this payment of $23,000,
which he had not bargained for.
This is the state of affairs in our country. This is the consequence
to those migrants who are seeking to come here, when my colleagues in
the false name of compassion state that open borders are somehow good
for them. This is causing crime to extend into our communities. This is
causing us to experience the dangerous hand of cartels.
Just this morning, we had more news about cartels and their reach
into Texas, into the United States. It is an everyday occurrence:
bailouts, damage to ranches, harm to Texans, death to Texans, fentanyl.
How many more fentanyl moms, how many more angel moms, how many more
Americans need suffer because this President refuses to follow the laws
of the United States that he raised his hand and swore an oath to
defend?
That is why we are here, and that is why I support the resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from
engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for
yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Oh my God, Mr. Speaker. Let's get real here. Nothing about this is
serious, not the process, not the intentions of the resolution's
sponsor, not the impeachment case, not a single damn thing.
Yesterday, Republicans dishonored this House and dishonored
themselves by bringing to the floor a ridiculous censure resolution
against Adam Schiff because Donald Trump told them to.
Today, they are dishonoring this House and dishonoring themselves by
bringing to the floor a ridiculous impeachment referral resolution
against Joe Biden because Donald Trump told them to.
This body has become a place where extreme, outlandish, and nutty
issues get debated passionately and important ones not at all.
In short, Mr. Speaker, the Republican Party is a joke. They talk
about law and order when their frontrunner for President has been
indicted on Federal charges.
They talk about respecting law enforcement. Then, they come in here
and downplay the rioters who came in here on January 6 and beat up cops
with fire extinguishers. I don't even know how they look the Capitol
Police officers in the eye when they walk into this place.
They talk about how important it is that we follow a good process.
Yet, the Rules Committee was called in late last night, literally at a
moment's notice, where they deployed emergency procedures so we could
refer this measure to a committee--what a spectacular emergency, truly
something that needed to be done immediately.
We all know the truth. The real emergency here was that the Georgia
wing and the Colorado wing of the MAGA caucus got into a fight right
over there on the House floor about who gets to impeach the President
first.
The truth is that Speaker McCarthy has lost control of this House,
and it is being run by the MAGA fringe. This is nuts.
Kids get shot in their classrooms. Nothing.
Environmental disasters destroy entire communities. Nothing.
Our air is clogged with smoke because half the Northern Hemisphere is
on fire due to climate change. Nothing.
But when the MAGA wing nuts say to jump, Speaker McCarthy says: How
high?
According to news reports, it sounds like this resolution's sponsor
is dictating to the Speaker which committees bills should be referred
to, when he should put legislation on the floor, and how he should run
this House.
That is who is in charge here, the MAGA extremists.
Frankly, they can try to impeach Joe Biden all they want, but all
they are doing is impeaching themselves and making a mockery of this
place while they are at it.
I get it. They don't like that their cult leader, Donald Trump, will
go down in history as one of the worst Presidents we have ever had.
They don't like that he was impeached twice and had a bipartisan
conviction vote in the Senate. They don't like that Democrats tried to
hold him accountable for trying to extort President Zelenskyy, who is
now trying to defend himself from Putin.
{time} 1100
They don't like that Congress tried to hold him accountable again,
this time for trying to overthrow the government on January 6.
They don't like that he had nuclear secrets in his bathroom and in
his desk, and God knows where else, and waved them around like it was
nothing.
You know what? They don't like themselves for having to stand by him
time after time and defend his lies. I know many of my Republican
colleagues say in private what they are not willing to say here in
public, which is that they think this is an embarrassment.
Still, they are here on the floor defending a three-time loser,
sexual abuser, ex-President that has been indicted more times than he
has been elected. It is pathetic.
Instead of dealing with their own issues, Republicans are going after
Joe Biden to try to distract and deflect.
H. Res. 503 claims President Biden is intentionally facilitating a
complete and total invasion of the southern border. This resolution
claims that foreign cartels have complete control of our border.
Seriously? It is insulting to the
[[Page H3079]]
Border Patrol agents that they claim to support, the ones that put
their lives on the line every single day.
By the way, just to talk facts for a second--which I know my
Republican friends hate to do--since the end of title 42 on May 11,
unlawful entries along the southern border have plummeted.
As of June 6, Customs and Border Protection has reported over 70
percent fewer encounters between points of entry or unscheduled
encounters per day.
Fentanyl seizures have increased under the Biden Presidency. To make
that clearer for my friends across the aisle, that means that more
fentanyl is getting picked up at the border before it makes it onto our
streets. They are attacking Joe Biden for stopping more fentanyl. It
makes no sense.
No, they would rather talk about building a stupid wall along our
southern border that they know won't work or about the nonbinding
resolution they put on the floor this week that demonizes migrants but
does nothing to fix our immigration system.
They have a policy disagreement with President Biden and their first
impulse isn't to pass an immigration bill. Their first impulse is to
impeach him. Our Founding Fathers must be rolling over in their graves.
They are doing this all so they can distract from the fact that
Donald Trump stole top-secret information and stored it in his bathroom
and showed highly classified Iran attack plans to people and bragged
about stealing classified government documents on live TV.
Trump is the legitimate national security risk. Don't come to us with
this phony BS about how President Biden is the reason we have a crisis
at our southern border.
Republicans can yell and scream all they want. They can rant and rave
so that they get on FOX News tonight. It doesn't make them right. It is
doing untold damage to this institution. They have no respect for the
traditions of this House. It is grotesque. It is embarrassing. It is
shameful.
We aren't debating matters that help or uplift people, rather we are
debating garbage to make Trump happy. It is cowardly, and it is
sickening.
What we have here is a joke, just like this Republican majority--
which is clearly going to be a temporary majority.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I just note that this morning Texas DPS
troopers arrested a Gulf cartel operative in the Rio Grande Valley
smuggling people across the river. After having been paid thousands of
dollars, they were moving five illegal immigrants into the United
States.
This is somebody that had been affiliated with a dangerous cartel. It
is happening every day in the State of Texas because this
administration refuses to do its job.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentlewoman from Colorado (Mrs.
Boebert).
Mrs. BOEBERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my impeachment
bill that will hold Joe Biden accountable for the dereliction of one of
his most basic duties and allowing an invasion to take place across our
southern border that has compromised the safety and security of the
American people.
With the passage of House Resolution 529 today, the House is taking
historic action. For the first time in 24 years, a House Republican-led
majority is moving forward with impeachment proceedings against a
current President.
This bill allows impeachment proceedings to proceed through the
traditional institutional channels by building a body of evidence at
the committee level through the Committees on Homeland Security and the
Judiciary. They will report out impeachment based on the evidence, and
then the House adopting a resolution, so that when a trial occurs in
the Senate there is an existing evidentiary record to rely upon when
holding President Joe Biden accountable.
Since his first day in office, President Biden has trampled on the
Constitution through his dereliction of duty under Article II to take
care that the laws be faithfully executed.
Instead of enforcing our immigration laws, he has lawlessly ignored
them and released more than 2 million illegal aliens into the interior
of the United States without any enforcement mechanism to ensure that
they appear in immigration court.
His actions and open borders agenda demonstrate that he has no
intention of enforcing our current immigration and border security
statutes on the books. Rather, he is deliberately making a mockery of
the rule of law. By ignoring congressionally enacted statutes, Joe
Biden is threatening our constitutional Republic's sacred separation of
powers.
The National Border Patrol Union even noted that the leadership of
the Biden administration are ``straight up liars.'' They even said,
``We'd say they should be ashamed, but that implies they have a
conscience.'' This is the most corrupt administration in U.S. history.
Joe Biden's lawless disregard for our Federal laws have incentivized
more than 5.5 million illegal aliens to attempt to cross the border,
overwhelming Border Patrol, and allowing an invasion to take place that
is causing real harm to the American people.
The Biden border crisis and massive wave of illegal immigration has
fueled a record-breaking fentanyl crisis. Since President Biden has
taken office, over 100,000 Americans have died from fentanyl, including
1,800 Coloradans.
Under his failed leadership, Border Patrol agents have encountered
over 42,000 pounds of fentanyl at the southern border. That is just
what they have encountered. In addition to smuggling fentanyl, the
National Border Patrol Union has noted that ``the billions of dollars
that Biden's policies make for them'' support a criminal enterprise of
``rape, murder, torture, child sex trafficking, and kidnapping.''
That is enough fentanyl to kill every American 28 times over.
Innocent children are dying from fentanyl overdoses, and the
devastation this deadly drug is causing to families and communities
cannot be overstated.
President Biden's decision to cede operational control of the
southern border to criminal cartels has endangered our national
security. In just the first few months of fiscal year 2023, Border
Patrol has already caught 125 people on the terrorist watch list trying
to sneak into our country.
President Biden's lawlessness is threatening the very fabric of our
constitutional system. Under the Founder's carefully crafted plan,
Congress has the legislative power to pass the laws, and the President
has the executive power to enforce the laws. The President does not
have the power to arbitrarily overturn laws or to refuse to enforce the
ones he philosophically opposes.
Rather, he is under a strict duty to take care that the laws of the
United States are enforced. If a law is to be modified or overturned,
only Congress has such power, not a rogue President taking
unconstitutional, unilateral action.
By nullifying our immigration and border security laws through a
systematic lack of enforcement, President Biden has not only threatened
the lives of countless Americans with his fentanyl crisis and increased
crime, he has threatened the very foundation of our separation of
powers.
When a President tramples on the Constitution and ignores the laws on
the books, it is Congress' solemn duty to restore our constitutional
balance through articles of impeachment. Congress' power of impeachment
was meant as the ultimate check and balance on the President.
The Founders hardwired this important accountability mechanism into
our Constitution for such a time as this. To stand with the forgotten
men and women across America who are suffering from Biden's record-
breaking fentanyl crisis, to take action to secure the border, and to
protect our constitutional separation of powers every Member should
vote to hold President Joe Biden accountable.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from
engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, that was an awful lot. I don't have enough time to
respond to all the inaccuracies that were just stated.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Record an
article from Newsweek titled ``Fentanyl Surge
[[Page H3080]]
Started and Peaked Under Trump Despite GOP Blaming Biden.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
[From Newsweek, Feb. 11, 2022]
Fentanyl Surge Started and Peaked Under Trump Despite GOP Blaming Biden
(By Alex J. Rouhandeh)
A major jump in fentanyl seizures at the border between
fiscal year 2020 and fiscal year 2021 has placed President
Joe Biden at the center of GOP criticism. However, the
problem appeared to be mounting months before he took office.
The first time monthly fentanyl seizures saw a sizable
spike over the last four years was in June of 2020 under
former President Donald Trump when Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) seized 713 pounds of the drug, an almost 200
percent increase from the month before.
Only once before then, over fiscal years 2020 and 2019, did
the pounds of fentanyl seized in a month crack 400 pounds.
However, following the June 2020 seizure, the pounds of
fentanyl taken by CBP has surpassed the 700-pound mark each
month all but twice. The two greatest monthly seizures of
1,212 pounds and 1,193 pounds both took place in October and
December of 2020, just before Trump's turnover to Biden.
Nonetheless, certain Republican politicians have looked to
place sole blame for the issue on Biden.
``The Biden administration's weak stance on border security
and drug enforcement has enabled drug traffickers to send
enormous amounts of fentanyl into our country,'' Republican
Congressman Madison Cawthorn of North Carolina said in a
February 10 statement. ``The carnage and destruction caused
by these weak and incompetent policies must end now.
``This has everything to do with the open borders policies
President Biden imposed on day one of his term that has
allowed an unprecedented supply of this drug to enter the
homeland and devastate families and communities,'' Republican
Congressman Darrell Issa said in a February 8 statement.
So far, 117 Republicans joined together in signing a letter
demanding the president take ``immediate action'' to address
the crisis by supporting the classification of fentanyl as a
schedule 1 drug (with accepted medical use) instead of a
schedule 2 drug (substances with ``high potential for
abuse'').
Although fentanyl is used to treat pain in cancer patients,
according to Med Line, Republicans argue that the drug should
be reclassified to ensure law enforcement ``has the tools
they need to combat this threat.''
Funding for CBP drug enforcement activities through the
National Drug Control Program has looked consistent over the
past several years. Under Trump, almost $3.8 billion went to
CBP for drug enforcement in 2020, and over $3.1 billion was
allocated to the agency in 2019. Under Biden, over $3.4
billion went to CBP through the Drug Program in 2021.
Following the Trump peaks in October and December of 2020,
the fentanyl seized each month has generally hovered between
800 and 1,000 pounds. However, in December of 2021, CBP
seized 549 pounds of fentanyl, the lowest amount seized since
the June of 2020 uptick. The data for January and February of
this year has not come out yet.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about this accusation about
open borders. I don't know how many times we need to say it, but the
United States does not have open borders. We didn't have open borders
under Trump, and we don't have open borders under Biden.
Even the conservative CATO Institute knows that. Please stop
incorrectly saying that our country has open borders. We do not.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert into the Record an
article published by the CATO Institute titled ``Biden's Border Policy
is Not `Open Borders'.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
[From the CATO Institute, Sept. 23, 2021]
Biden's Border Policy Is Not ``Open Borders''
(By David J. Bier)
Practically since his first week in office, President Joe
Biden has faced repeated criticisms from Republicans and some
Democrats that his border policy amounts to ``open borders.''
This criticism is not simply inaccurate: it is unhinged from
reality in a way that distinguishes itself from normal
political hyperbole. Indeed, U.S. immigration policy is
effectively closed borders, and Biden's immigration policies
and goals are largely the same as those of President Donald
Trump.
Under U.S. immigration law, it is illegal for anyone in the
world to travel or immigrate to the United States unless they
fall into very narrow exceptions. Like Alcohol Prohibition--
which had exemptions for religious, medicinal, or industrial
purposes--America's immigration prohibition's small
exceptions are irrelevant for the vast majority of potential
immigrants. Effectively, if they don't qualify as a select
few high skilled workers or family members of U.S. citizens,
they can't come legally.
President Biden has not suddenly ended America's
immigration prohibition and opened up U.S. borders to almost
anyone who wants to come (as was largely America's
immigration policy from 1776 to 1924). Instead, he has far
more vigorously enforced immigration prohibition than the law
requires, narrowing the few exceptions to the universal ban
on legal immigration.
For example, one exception is for those facing persecution
in their home countries. Biden has undisputed authority under
the law to admit as many refugees from abroad as he wants.
The president sets the limit and picks whoever he considers
``of concern'' to the United States. Yet Biden is on pace to
admit the fewest refugees in the history of the U.S. refugee
program, fewer than 10,000.
He won't let refugees in from abroad. But the law
explicitly allows refugees to ask for asylum at U.S. borders
even if they don't have permission: anyone ``who arrives in
the United States (whether or not at a designated port of
arrival . . .), irrespective of [their legal] status, may
apply for asylum.'' In 1996, Congress clarified that agents
``shall refer [any asylum seeker] for an interview by an
asylum officer.''
Yet Biden won't follow that either. He has continued a
Trump ban on ``nonessential travel'' at U.S. land ports of
entry and requesting asylum isn't essential. So because they
can't come in legally, they cross illegally, and since the
law says they can apply ``whether or not at a designated port
of entry, irrespective of their legal status,'' they should
still have the right to request asylum.
But Biden is using another Trump policy known as ``Title 42
expulsion'' to immediately deport as many asylum seekers and
border crossers as possible without hearing their asylum
claims. He's mostly dumping them in Mexico, just as Trump did
with ``Remain in Mexico,'' just with a different name and on
a much larger scale. Biden's still using the pandemic as a
reason for this policy, despite the easy availability of
effective vaccines for Americans who want them. But whatever
the excuse, his goal is the same as Trump: immediately deport
as many as he possibly can.
So what explains the reports of some immigrants being
released into the United States? Is this ``open borders''?
Not at all. The numbers of arrivals so far exceed the
government's capacity to turn them away that it has resorted
to releasing a few of them as a last resort, but they are not
``free.'' They are arrested, detained, and charged as
removable. They are illegal immigrants subject to re-arrest
at any time.
The Biden administration has smashed all records for
immediate expulsions without due process, increasing the rate
from 62,000 per month under Trump to about 100,000, but
Mexico will only take back its own citizens, Guatemalans,
Hondurans, and Salvadorans, and even for the Central
Americans, it will not take back young kids with their
parents if it has no place for them to stay (how logical!).
So everyone else must be put on planes and flown back, but
this takes far more time and resources than the government
has. Immigrants must be detained, checked over much more
thoroughly, and shipped to airports. There aren't enough
detention facilities, agents, and airplanes to get this job
done in enough time to avoid having to release some
immigrants. The Biden administration has repeatedly said as
much.
Don't believe them? Well, the Trump administration faced
the exact same constraints, and they too released many
thousands of immigrants from the border. But Biden has a much
greater challenge now to keep up his closed border policies.
The number of immigrants arriving from outside Mexico and
Central America has exploded in the last few months,
increasing from about 10,000 to more than 62,000 per month,
requiring farther flights and more resources. Yet despite the
releases, the number of removals or those sent to immigration
jail far outnumber the number of releases about 3 to 1.
The illegal immigration problem would disappear if
President Biden would simply let immigrants enter the country
legally at ports of entry to request asylum, grant them work
visas at consulates, or admit them from abroad under the
refugee program or through ``humanitarian parole''--a
discretionary legal immigration authority that he has chosen
only to deploy sparingly, mainly for Afghans. Yet Biden is
keeping consulates closed and wasting more than 42,000 H-2B
seasonal work visas that Congress authorized him to issue.
Ultimately, Biden has made a policy choice to let in as few
immigrants as possible. He's not simply ``enforcing the
law.'' He's finding every way possible to keep out
immigrants. Yet despite this fact, he's still facing the same
tired claims that he's for ``open borders.'' If he's going to
get that claim regardless, he should just own it. Open
America's doors, and let immigrants come legally.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, let me read an excerpt from the article--
this is from CATO.
``Practically since his first week in office, President Joe Biden has
faced repeated criticisms from Republicans and some Democrats that his
border policy amounts to `open borders.' This
[[Page H3081]]
criticism is not simply inaccurate: it is unhinged from reality in a
way that distinguishes itself from normal political hyperbole. Indeed,
U.S. immigration policy is effectively closed borders, and Biden's
immigration policies and goals are largely the same as those of
President Donald Trump.
``President Biden has not suddenly ended America's immigration
prohibition and opened up U.S. borders to almost anyone who wants to
come (as was largely America's immigration policy from 1776 to 1924).
Instead, he has far more vigorously enforced immigration prohibition
than the law requires, narrowing the few exceptions to the universal
ban on legal immigration.''
Mr. Speaker, I point this out because this is crazy what is being
talked about here on the House floor. This is not about a policy
disagreement; if it was, maybe my friends would actually pass a bill
that had an alternative policy.
The bill that they brought up on immigration this week was a bill
that was a nonbinding resolution. It did nothing. It was just their
opinion that expresses the sense of Congress. It was a
``nothingburger''. If they wanted to, they would legislate in a way
that would change a policy, but that is not what they want to do.
This is about protecting Donald Trump. Donald Trump says to them, you
know: Jump. And they ask: How high? That is what this is about. This is
about covering up for the former President. It is about deflecting from
the former President's criminality, the 37 felony counts that he has
been indicted on, and they don't like it. Unfortunately, that is who he
is.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania
(Ms. Scanlon), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.
Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I cannot overstate the solemnness and
sadness that I feel right now.
To see the House so debased by the invocation of our most grave
constitutional duty--impeachment of a President--should disturb every
patriotic American.
Just 49 years ago, Barbara Jordan, the great gentlewoman from Texas,
invoked the solemnity with which any serious Member of Congress must
approach our duties, and particularly the circumstances under which we
should consider impeachment.
{time} 1115
That solemnity has guided the majority in this House in recent years
as we have tried to navigate an extraordinarily tumultuous time in
service to our Nation and our constituents--a time in which we have
seen a rogue former President run roughshod over the guardrails of
democracy and decency, compromising our national security and
disparaging the courts, the free press, law enforcement, Congress, and
anyone who would try to hold him accountable.
During that time, we impeached former President Trump twice, but we
did so based upon a careful and close study of law, history, our
Constitution, and rigorous factfinding, as well as consideration of the
impact upon our country. We prayed. We prayed for guidance to discharge
our duties to our country, our constituents, and our Constitution with
fidelity.
Today, as we confront this deeply unserious effort to impeach a
President to serve partisan political posturing and political
profiteering, I have to return to the words of Barbara Jordan.
She cautioned: ``Common sense would be revolted if we engaged upon
this process for petty reasons. Congress has a lot to do:
appropriations, tax reform, health insurance, campaign finance reform,
housing, environmental protection, energy sufficiency, and mass
transportation. Pettiness cannot be allowed to stand in the face of
such overwhelming problems.''
Jordan's words could not ring more true today. Common sense is
revolted by the political grandstanding and petty stunts allowed by the
House majority. Days on end are wasted catering to the whims of an
extremist minority.
We are marking 6 months of one of the least productive Congresses in
history. Under the control of this MAGA majority, we have made no
progress in addressing the most pressing issues facing America, whether
gun violence, hunger, opioid abuse, housing, immigration, health costs,
tax reform, or the environment.
So I must oppose both this rule and the resolution, because in the
words of Congresswoman Jordan: ``My faith in the Constitution is whole;
it is complete; it is total. And I am not going to sit here and be an
idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction, of
the Constitution.''
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I am moved by the references to solemnity after
the chanting on the floor of the House yesterday for 5 minutes
disrupting the Speaker of the House from carrying out his duties. I
find it extremely moving.
I am also moved by the references to how we have not passed
legislation, despite the fact that we passed H.R. 2, the most impactful
border security legislation that has been moved off the floor of the
House, without a single Democrat vote because they are ignoring what
the administration is doing to the State of Texas, to migrants, and to
the security of our country.
I am moved by the concerns for climate change which I am sure will
assuage the angel moms and the fentanyl moms who have lost loved ones
and the 72,000 Americans dead from fentanyl because my colleagues on
the other side of the aisle and the President of the United States
refuse to secure the border.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Crane).
Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today in support of the
rule to consider Representative Boebert's Articles of Impeachment
against the President of the United States before the House Homeland
Security Committee.
Under Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution--the document
Joe Biden swore an oath to defend--the President of the United States
is charged with serving as the Commander in Chief, defending the Nation
against threats, and ensuring the safety and security of all American
citizens.
Joe Biden has utterly failed to fulfill his responsibility to we the
people.
Our southern border faces a daily barrage of illegal aliens, human
trafficking, and deadly fentanyl. It is an outright invasion, and Joe
Biden is not only letting it happen, he is encouraging it.
Back in 2019, Joe Biden during his Presidential campaign said this:
``We are a nation that says: `If you want to flee, and you are
fleeing oppression, you should come.' ''
He invited this invasion by sending up a flare signaling that anyone
from anywhere could come exploit and abuse the American homeland.
Now, 2\1/2\ years into the Biden regime, we are seeing the effects of
his complete dereliction of duty. Since he took office, more than 1.5
million illegal aliens have evaded apprehension. In fiscal year 2022
alone, 150,000 unaccompanied children crossed by themselves. This
fiscal year nearly 100 members of the terrorist watch list have been
incentivized to cross so far, and I remind the people in this House
that it only took 19 individuals to commit the attacks on 9/11.
Tons of fentanyl have poured across the border with more than 17,000
pounds coming across since just October 2022.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the
gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. CRANE. Joe Biden is the patriarch of a perverted and corrupt
political dynasty who is more interested in profiting off his position
than protecting our Nation. His time in the Oval Office has been a
disgrace, and he deserves to be impeached, which is why I support the
passage of this rule.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from
engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an
article from Politifact titled: ``Are Biden's border policies to blame
for fentanyl deaths? Experts say no.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
[[Page H3082]]
[From Politifact, Feb. 10, 2023]
Are Biden's Border Policies To Blame For Fentanyl Deaths? Experts Say
No
(By Maria Ramirez Uribe)
President Joe Biden may have been seeking a bipartisan
solution to America's staggering fentanyl crisis when he
raised the issue at his State of the Union address Feb. 8.
But some lawmakers in the audience immediately tried to lay
blame at his feet.
``Fentanyl is killing more than 70,000 Americans a year,''
the president said after introducing a father who lost his
20-year-old daughter to the drug.
There was an immediate uproar from Republican lawmakers,
with some shouting ``border'' at Biden. Rep. Andy Ogles, R-
Tenn., yelled, ``It's your fault!''
It was a sentiment echoed by many Republican politicians
and others on social media in the aftermath of Biden's
address.
Kayleigh McEnany, a former press secretary for Donald Trump
and now a Fox News contributor, wrote in a Feb. 7 Facebook
post, ``Joe Biden: `Fentanyl is killing more than 70,000
Americans a year.' Why? Because of Joe Biden's wide open
southern border he has done nothing to fix!''
The post was flagged as part of Facebook's efforts to
combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read
more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and
Instagram.
Although U.S. deaths from fentanyl, a powerful synthetic
opioid, have risen sharply since Biden took office, data
shows they've been increasing for the past decade, including
during the Trump administration. Immigration encounters at
the southern border have escalated under Biden, but the
southern border is not open. Experts say the vast majority of
fentanyl being smuggled in comes through ports of entry, not
people trying to sneak into the country.
Sanho Tree, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, a
progressive Washington, D.C.-based think tank, said
conflating migrants and drugs is an ``old script'' pushed for
political advantage by Republicans.
Fentanyl ``is not carried on the backs of migrants. Drug
traffickers deal with professionals, not amateurs, and they
prefer U.S. citizens,'' he said.
Alexandra Coscia, a Fox News spokesperson for McEnany,
pointed us to several articles, including one from
PolitiFact, that show the scope of the fentanyl crisis, as
well as data showing yearly increases in the amount of the
drug seized at the border. In 2021, according to a Washington
Post article Coscia sent us, more than 100,000 people died
from drug overdoses in the U.S.--two-thirds were from
fentanyl--and the number of people killed by the drug has
climbed 94% since 2019.
But that article, an overview of a multiple-part
investigation by the Post, also blamed ``successive
administrations'' for failing to detect the growing problem.
It links to another Post article that said, ``Presidents from
both parties failed to take effective action in the face of
one of the most urgent threats to the nation's security.''
There were 71,238 U.S. deaths from synthetic drugs, mostly
fentanyl, in 2021, according to the most recent data
available from the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. That is a 23% increase from 2020, Trump's final
year in office, when there were 57,834 deaths. Overdose
deaths from fentanyl and other drugs have been rising since
2014, according to CDC data. Why is fentanyl so deadly? Adam
Isacson, defense oversight director at the Washington Office
on Latin America, a research and human rights advocacy group,
said the U.S. seems to be in what he called ``the third wave
of the 21st century opioid crisis.''
After prescription opioids, ``pill mills'' and heroin, he
said, ``traffickers have found fentanyl even easier to
produce--no need to plant poppy fields,'' he said.
``Each wave of opioid is even more concentrated than the
last, requiring smaller and smaller amounts to get high--or
to overdose. It's just too easy and cheap now to accidentally
administer a fatal dose,'' Isacson said.
Drug users often don't know exactly what they're taking, he
said. ``It's not like there's a label'' showing the contents.
Most illegally sourced fentanyl in the U.S. comes from
Mexico through the southern border. Fentanyl seizures at the
border have been rising since fiscal year 2015. Most
recently, fentanyl seizures climbed from 11,200 in fiscal
year 2021 to 14,700 in 2022, U.S. Customs and Border
Protection data shows.
So far in fiscal year 2023, which started in October,
border officials have seized more than 9,400 pounds of
fentanyl. In November alone, 4,500 pounds were seized, nearly
as much as was seized in all of fiscal year 2020.
Most fentanyl is smuggled at ports of entry by U.S.
citizens, not by immigrants crossing the border illegally.
About 9,100 pounds of the 9,400 seized so far this fiscal
year were seized there. ``The drug cartels have no need to
send the drugs with people who are crossing the border
without authorization,'' said Michelle Mittelstadt,
communications and public affairs director at the Migration
Policy Institute. ``They are able to reach the U.S. market
with ever-rising quantities of fentanyl by going through
official crossings.''
Immigrants who seek asylum and tum themselves in to
authorities at the border are ``not suitable contraband
carriers,'' said Josiah Heyman, director of the Center for
Inter-American and Border Studies at the University of Texas
at El Paso. Neither are people who sneak into the country
between ports of entries. Those immigrants are often
arrested, and some get lost or die in the desert, he said.
``Drug smuggling operations don't want that sort of loss,''
said Heyman, adding that they prefer to smuggle the drugs in
vehicles through ports of entry.
Although a lot of fentanyl is seized at ports of entry,
some obviously gets through. Even a limited rate of smuggling
success ``is easily enough to supply U.S. demand,'' Heyman
said. Isacson said although ``we can't know what's not
getting caught,'' it's likely that seizure data at the border
``points to trends by showing a small share of total
traffic.''
There have been 4.5 million encounters with migrants at the
southern border between February 2021, Biden's first full
month in office, and December 2022. But McEnany is wrong to
suggest that's because the border has been ``wide open''
since he took office, a claim we've tackled several times.
The Biden administration continues to enforce immigration
laws and policies at the border, including Title 42, a public
health policy that has so far quickly expelled more than 2.1
million immigrants. There are also fences, drones and
surveillance technology, as well as about 20,000 U.S. Border
Patrol agents who help limit who and what comes into the
United States.
Border security funding under Biden is comparable to
funding under Trump's administration. An omnibus spending
bill passed in December will provide $16. 7 billion for
Customs and Border Protection in fiscal year 2023. That
includes $88 million to increase personnel between ports of
entry and $60 million to hire hundreds of border patrol
officers and other staff.
McEnany didn't say what specific border policies Biden
should change. Ogles, who shouted that the fentanyl deaths
were Biden's fault, later told The Hill that Biden could
``close that border with a stroke of a pen.''
Mittelstadt said closing the southern border as Ogles
suggests would require shutting down all entries and
crossings along nearly 2,000 miles, including to legal
traffic. She said the ``policy conversation would have a
better chance of succeeding'' if it focused on better
detection at ports of entry, better intelligence collection,
disruption of drug cartel activities and more anticorruption
efforts.
The Biden administration is touting investments to scan
more vehicles at ports of entry and enlisting help from
Mexico and other countries to disrupt suppliers.
``It will require a highly sustained and well-resourced set
of operations to make a dent in fentanyl trafficking,''
Mittelstadt said. ``There clearly is an incentive for
Congress and the administration to work cooperatively
together to provide adequate resources to respond
effectively.''
Mr. McGOVERN. Fentanyl deaths in the U.S. were rising before Biden
took office, and, in fact, he is intercepting more fentanyl than the
previous administration did. I think we need the Republicans to get
their facts straight.
The other thing I want to point out to my friends--and maybe they
need to read their history books or read the Constitution--impeachment
is about high crimes and misdemeanors. It is not about policy
disagreements.
Mr. Speaker, it is clear that Republicans would rather the American
public pay attention to anything--literally anything--other than the
latest charges that their leader has been slapped with.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an
article from The Washington Post titled: ``Here are the 37 charges
against Trump and what they mean.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
[From the Washington Post, June 9, 2023]
Here Are the 37 Charges Against Trump and What They Mean
(By Rachel Weiner)
A court on Friday unsealed the federal indictment against
Donald Trump and an aide over classified documents found at
his Mar-a-Lago home and the men's alleged efforts to keep the
government from finding the materials. Here's what we know
about the charges against the former president, brought by
special counsel Jack Smith.
How many charges does Trump face?
Trump is accused of violating seven federal laws but faces
37 separate charges. That is because each classified document
he is accused of holding on to illegally is charged in a
separate count, and his alleged efforts to hide classified
information from federal investigators is charged in several
ways. His longtime aide Walt Nauta faces six charges, five of
which are also lodged against Trump.
What are the charges against Trump?
Espionage Act/unauthorized retention of national defense
information: Trump is charged with 31 counts of violating a
part of the Espionage Act that bars willful retention of
national defense information by someone not authorized to
have it. Such information is defined as ``any document,
writing, code
[[Page H3083]]
book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative,
blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note
relating to the national defense, or information relating to
the national defense which information the possessor has
reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United
States or to the advantage of any foreign nation.''
Technically, that information does not have to be classified,
but in practice the law is almost exclusively used to
prosecute retention of classified material. In Trump's case,
prosecutors say that all but one of the 31 documents he is
charged with illegally retaining were marked as classified at
the ``secret'' or ``top secret'' level. The unmarked document
concerned ``military contingency planning,'' according to the
indictment.
A conviction does not require any evidence of a desire to
disseminate the classified information; having it in an
unauthorized location is enough. But the crime requires a
``willful'' mishandling of material ``the possessor has
reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United
States or to the advantage of any foreign nation.'' Charges
are generally not brought without some aggravating factor
making clear the retention was not accidental--such as
evidence of intent to share the information, signs of
disloyalty to the U.S. government, or simply the volume of
documents taken.
Unlike other government employees, the president does not
go through a security clearance process that includes a
pledge to follow classification rules. But Trump received
requests from the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA) and subpoenas from the Justice
Department indicating that the documents in question were
classified and needed to be returned to the U.S. government.
Prosecutors say he instead sought to hide them from federal
investigators. And while the president can declassify most
information, there is a process for doing so. According to
the indictment, Trump twice showed classified information to
others, once while saying that the document was still
classified and lamenting that he no longer had the power to
declassify it.
Conspiracy to obstruct justice: Trump is charged with one
count of conspiring with Nauta to hide classified material
from federal investigators, by lying to the FBI about what
was found at the Mar-a-Lago and moving boxes of documents out
of a storage room before agents searched the home. Trump
specifically is accused of suggesting that one of his
attorneys lie to the FBI and help hide or destroy documents.
Tampering with grand jury evidence: Trump and Nauta face
two--counts of trying to keep evidence out of grand jurors'
hands: one count of withholding the classified documents and
one of corruptly concealing them. As part of those charges,
Trump is accused of trying to persuade one of his attorneys
to help conceal the documents, while Nauta is accused of
hiding the evidence by moving the boxes of classified
documents.
Concealing evidence in a federal investigation: For the
same alleged conduct of hiding the classified information at
Mar-a-Lago, Trump and Nauta separately face one count of
concealing evidence with the intent to obstruct an FBI
investigation.
False statements: Both Trump and Nauta together face one
count of scheming to making false statements for allegedly
hiding from the FBI and the grand jury that the former
president still had classified documents in his possession.
Trump faces a separate count for causing his attorney to
falsely claim in June 2022 that all classified documents in
the former president's possession had been handed over in
response to a subpoena, according to the indictment. Nauta
alone accused of lying to the FBI by falsely claiming that he
had nothing to do with moving any boxes.
What possible penalties does Trump face?
The maximum punishment for each count of unlawful retention
of national defense information is 10 years in prison.
Conspiracy to obstruct justice, tampering with grand jury
evidence, and concealing evidence in a federal investigation
all carry punishments of up to 20 years. Each false statement
charge is punishable by up to five years in prison.
If Trump was convicted on all charges, the sentences could
run consecutively, amounting to hundreds of years in prison.
But federal defendants are rarely given the maximum possible
punishment. He does not face any mandatory minimum sentences.
Sentences in unlawful retention cases vary widely,
depending in part on how sensitive the material is, how much
of it there is, how long the person held on to it and his or
her cooperation with investigators. A Defense Department
employee in Manila who took home a small amount of secret-
level information to work on a classified thesis project
served only three months behind bars. Kenneth Wayne Ford Jr.,
who was found guilty at trial of bringing home national
defense information after leaving the National Security
Agency and lying about the case, received a six-year
sentence. A former NSA contractor who over two decades
amassed a huge trove of highly sensitive material, including
hacking tools and details of overseas operations, was
sentenced to nine years in prison. A Navy sailor who took
pictures of classified areas of a nuclear-powered submarine
and then destroyed the evidence was sentenced to a year in
prison for retention and obstruction; Trump later pardoned
him.
Retired Gen. David H. Petraeus was given probation after
pleading guilty to sharing classified information with his
biographer. At the time, the crime of mishandling classified
information--as opposed to national defense information--was
a misdemeanor with a maximum punishment of a year behind
bars. It became a felony during Trump's presidency.
What other criminal charges does Trump face?
Trump is charged in New York State Court with unrelated
crimes for conduct that predates his presidency. He is
accused of falsifying business records to hide payments
during the 2016 campaign made to an adult-film star to keep
her from saying publicly that she had an affair with Trump.
Trump is also under investigation by a state prosecutor in
Georgia, who is looking at his efforts to overturn President
Biden's 2020 victory in that state. Smith is also
investigating Trump's attempts to stay in office after losing
the presidential election, including his pressure on
officials in battleground states and fundraising off false
claims of election fraud.
Has Trump responded to the charges?
The former president described himself as ``an innocent
man'' being treated unfairly in comparison with Biden.
Classified documents from the Obama administration were
discovered in Biden's Delaware home late last year by lawyers
cleaning out his home office. Biden's attorneys turned those
documents over to NARA, and the president gave the Justice
Department permission to search the home, as well as his
beach house and think tank office. The White House has said
that only ``a small number'' of documents from Biden's vice-
presidential tenure were found. A special counsel has been
appointed to oversee that investigation.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would love to insert in the Record the
entirety of the charges, but, apparently, I am told it is too long to
be able to be put into the Congressional Record.
Let me say a couple of things. Trump is charged with 31 counts of
violating a part of the Espionage Act that bars willful retention of
national defense information by someone not authorized to have it.
He is basically charged with, among other things, conspiracy to
obstruct justice, tampering with grand jury evidence, concealing
evidence in a Federal investigation, and false statements.
Mr. Speaker, I get it. If I were they, I would want to talk about
anything other than that, but those are the facts. No matter how you
want to distract and deflect, Mr. Speaker, the American people are not
going to ignore what I believe will ultimately prove to be criminality
of the former President.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr.
Thompson).
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman
from Massachusetts giving me time.
Mr. Speaker, this resolution is simply the latest attempt by extreme
MAGA Republicans to distract from the legal peril facing their twice-
impeached, twice-indicted party leader.
This cynical resolution has nothing to do with border security, it
does nothing to stop fentanyl deaths, and it has nothing to do with
constitutional law.
Extreme MAGA Republicans hoped for chaos at the Southwest border when
title 42 pandemic restrictions ended, but migrant encounters last month
actually decreased 15 percent according to Customs and Border
Protection.
Now, since MAGA Republicans have no policy solutions, they are
attempting a backdoor maneuver to advance a baseless impeachment of
President Biden--something they openly admit they wanted to do from day
one.
Under this rule, my committee will have to put aside its homeland
security oversight and authorization activities to deal with the
Boebert resolution, which is predicated on phony policy differences
rather than any allegation that the President committed a crime.
Let that sink in, Mr. Speaker. The House Homeland Security Committee
is going to become a venue for a political Presidential impeachment.
I have proudly served on the committee from its creation, and I guess
if you are around long enough, Mr. Speaker, you will see everything.
Is this distraction for a disgraced ex-President the best way for the
Homeland Security Committee to spend its time?
No, it is not. We know the answer, and it doesn't have to be that
one.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the rule.
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida
(Mr. Donalds).
Mr. DONALDS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution
529.
[[Page H3084]]
Let's be very clear. The issue that is happening at our southern
border--not the name-calling or talking about former President Trump--
what is happening at our southern border today and for the last 2 years
under President Biden has been a dereliction of duty with respect to
immigration law in the United States.
If the other side wants to speak to the actual issues at hand, it is
the fact that the asylum provisions under Joe Biden are a
bastardization of asylum procedure as set forth in Federal law by
Congress.
Mr. Speaker, Congress never anticipated that you would have 6
million-plus people come through the asylum process in 2 years.
Congress never contemplated that you would have an asylum procedure
where you would have people on a 7- to 10-year waitlist to actually go
through an asylum procedure.
The President knows this is the case, and it is being done on
purpose.
That is a congressional purview, and it actually is a dereliction of
his duty to faithfully execute the laws of the United States.
So if the minority party wants to ask about why we are here, it is
that. It is my belief and the belief of many Members on our side of the
aisle that this resolution should go to the Homeland Security Committee
so they can fully debate and go through the depths of which Joe Biden
has been derelict in his duty to execute the laws with respect to
immigration in the United States which has major impacts on the
American people.
There are 100,000 Americans who have died from fentanyl overdoses
because of his dereliction of duty. We have the drug cartels on our
southern border who have operational control of the southern border
because of his dereliction of duty.
If the President and congressional Democrats actually took the time
to investigate this--like going to the southern border--then they would
know this, too.
Mr. Speaker, I support this resolution, and Members should be in
support of it, as well.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from
engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me say to the gentleman who just spoke that I know
exactly why he is here. I don't think this is--and the American people
know--this is not a serious effort. I know my friends don't want to
talk about Trump. They want to talk about Biden. So let's talk about
Joe Biden.
I want to make something clear: Not only is any talk of impeaching
President Biden completely absurd--as many House Republicans know--but
President Biden has been a historic success over the first 2\1/2\ years
in office.
He took office in the throes of the pandemic and in the midst of the
chaos caused by his predecessor trying to illegally hold on to power,
but that hasn't stopped Democrats from making huge strides to improve
the lives of every American.
Democrats jumped into action by enacting the American Rescue Plan in
the President's first months in office. That law changed the course of
the pandemic and set the course of our economic recovery to be the envy
of the rest of the world. It lifted more than 5 million children out of
poverty, it safely reopened our schools, and it put money back in the
pockets of middle-class Americans.
Every Republican voted against those things.
President Biden signed the bipartisan infrastructure law which makes
historic investments in our roads, our bridges, and our transportation
networks while improving public safety and creating jobs all across the
country.
We passed into law the biggest piece of gun safety legislation in
decades, and we enacted the Inflation Reduction Act less than a year
ago.
President Biden is now busy implementing that law which will cut
prescription drug costs for our senior citizens, lower the cost of
healthcare for millions of Americans, make historic investments in
clean energy, and make American-made solutions to our climate crisis.
It will do all of that while lowering our deficit, unlike so many of
the bills this Republican majority has brought to the floor which would
do the opposite.
This isn't just me saying how great all of this is. During the
Financial Services Committee hearing yesterday, Fed Chairman Jerome
Powell was asked about inflation.
He said: ``Everybody has very high inflation, the E.U., the United
Kingdom, and many countries within Europe.''
He made one more important point: ``Our recovery is by far the
strongest of any country.''
Just look at the results more broadly. More Americans have jobs right
now than at any point in American history. Over the past 2 years, more
small businesses have been created than at any other period on record.
More Americans have health insurance right now than ever before in our
history.
{time} 1130
I could go on and on, but let me be clear. No one is saying things
are perfect. There is a lot that we need to do.
We need to do more to keep our children fed. We need to do more to
ensure every child gets the education they deserve. We need to do more
to make sure the richest Americans pay their fair share. We need to do
more to get guns off the streets.
I would love to see this Republican majority do anything at all to
reach those goals or do anything that means anything to anybody.
Instead, we are here today debating this latest attempt by the
Speaker to keep the most radical members of his party behind him. Quite
frankly, it is embarrassing, and it is pathetic.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Good), my good friend.
Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, it is refreshing to hear my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to be so sober about the
issue of impeachment coming after being in the majority for 2 years
when, for the first time in the history of the country, there were two
impeachment charges brought in this very House.
Impeachment should not be political. It should not be cavalier. It
should not be flippant. That would be bringing impeachment charges
based on a phone call, where there was questionable content to a phone
call, something that this current President is actually being
investigated for by the House Oversight Committee as we speak.
It would be a cavalier, flippant impeachment investigation with just
1 week left in someone's term just to tarnish or attack their personal
legacy with no opportunity for that to move forward other than just the
charges.
It would be cavalier to announce right after an election that: We are
going to impeach the MFer.
That is what happened with our friends on the other side of the
aisle.
There does need to be more consideration about whether or not
impeachment is justified for depleting our Strategic Petroleum Reserve
on the eve of an election for political reasons.
There should be more consideration as to whether or not a President
should be impeached for taking authority that he says he doesn't
constitutionally have the power to do, such as the eviction moratorium
or the student loan transfer scheme.
More consideration might be warranted for the very things that are
being investigated by the current Committee on Oversight relative to
bribery allegations and influence peddling allegations.
What more investigation is needed for the border invasion? What more
investigation is needed for the violation of Article IV, Section 4,
responsibility to protect the States from invasion?
How long will we let this border invasion continue? Are we to let it
go on for another year and a half? How many is too many after 7 million
illegals have invaded this country?
There are 1.5 million got-aways. Of those criminal got-aways, if only
1 percent are dangerous individuals, that is 15,000 reckless, dangerous
individuals intending harm on this country. Would anyone take those
odds that only 1 percent of those 1.5 million got-aways are, indeed,
bad actors?
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
[[Page H3085]]
Mr. Speaker, I will say to the gentleman that we are well aware that
the previous President was impeached twice and justifiably so.
The first impeachment dealt with his effort to try to extort
Zelenskyy into getting dirt on Joe Biden in exchange for assistance so
that they could defend themselves against Putin. I guess no one should
be surprised because the President seems to have this--the former
President seems to have this obsession with Putin.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record a 2020
Roll Call article titled: ``Senate report outlines `grave' Russian
threat in 2016 election interference probe.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Senate Report Outlines `Grave' Russian Threat in 2016 Election
Interference Probe
(By Gopal Ratnam)
The report details ties between the Trump campaign and
Russia but doesn't find evidence of coordinated scheme.
The Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday released the
final report on its investigation into Russian interference
in the 2016 election, finding numerous contacts between the
Trump campaign and Moscow posed a ``grave''
counterintelligence threat.
``We found irrefutable evidence of Russian meddling,'' Sen.
Marco Rubio, R-Fla., acting chairman of the Senate
Intelligence Committee, said in a statement, directly
refuting President Donald Trump's repeated assertions that
Russian interference was a ``hoax'' perpetrated by Democrats.
The committee, however, did not find any evidence of a
coordinated scheme between the Trump campaign and Moscow,
Rubio said.
The nearly 1,000-page report outlines the ``breathtaking
level of contacts between Trump officials and Russian
government operatives that is a very real counterintelligence
threat to our elections,'' Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the
committee's top Democrat, said in a statement.
The bipartisan congressional report closes the panel's
three-year probe into the Kremlin-led operation to influence
and interfere in the 2016 presidential election. The fifth
and final report involved interviewing 200 witnesses and
examining more than 1 million documents, the committee said.
Previous volumes examined Russian attempts to break into
U.S. election infrastructure, the Kremlin's use of social
media to divide American public opinion, the Obama
administration's failures to counter Moscow's push, and a
review of the U.S. intelligence agencies' assessment.
The extensive final report nevertheless hides important new
findings that have been ``needlessly classified,'' Sen. Ron
Wyden, D-Ore., said in a separate section of the report.
``That is unfortunate, not only because the
counterintelligence concerns that surround Donald Trump
constitute an ongoing threat to national security, but
because this report includes redacted information that is
directly relevant to Russia's interference in the 2020
election,'' Wyden said.
In a recent warning, William Evanina, director of the
National Counterintelligence and Security Center, said Russia
is actively interfering in the 2020 election, and ``some
Kremlin-linked actors are also seeking to boost President
Trump's candidacy on social media and Russian television.''
China and Iran are also attempting to shape the election, he
added.
Top Democratic lawmakers, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi
and Rep. Adam B. Schiff, D-Calif., chairman of the House
Intelligence Committee, have asked Evanina to release more
information.
The Senate Intelligence Committee report found that Trump
campaign chairman Paul Manafort's presence ``created
opportunities for Russian intelligence services to exert
influence over, and acquire confidential information on, the
Trump Campaign.''
Manafort worked for Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska and
other Kremlin-affiliated Russians to mount influence
campaigns in Ukraine, and in the process also hired and
worked with Konstantin Kilimnik, a former Russian
intelligence officer, the report said.
``The Committee obtained some information suggesting
Kilimnik may have been connected to the GRU's hack and leak
operation targeting the 2016 U.S. election,'' the report
said, referring to the Russian military intelligence service
by its initials.
U.S. intelligence agencies have said hackers working for
GRU were directly involved in breaking into the Democratic
National Committee's servers as well as breaching the email
account of John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's campaign manager.
Manafort shared Trump campaign's internal polling data with
Kilimnik prior to the 2016 election. And in the months after
November 2016, Manafort continued to work with Kilimnik and
other Russians ``to undermine evidence that Russia interfered
in the 2016 U.S. election,'' the report said.
``Manafort's high level access and willingness to share
information with individuals closely affiliated with the
Russian intelligence services, particularly Kilimnik and
associates of Oleg Deripaska, represented a grave
counterintelligence threat,'' the report said.
The hack and breaching of the DNC and Podesta email account
were ordered by Russian President Vladimir Putin, the
committee report said.
The stolen information was then exposed on WikiLeaks, and
Trump campaign senior officials worked with Trump confidant
Roger Stone to ``obtain advance information about WikiLeaks's
planned releases,'' the report said. Stone was later found
guilty of lying to Congress, but Trump commuted his prison
sentence.
The report said the committee uncovered previously unknown
links between the Kremlin and the Russian lawyer Natalia
Veselnitskaya, who arranged a meeting with Trump associates
at Trump Tower in June 2016. After initially saying that the
meeting was about Americans adopting Russian kids, Trump and
his associates admitted the Russians offered to help the
Trump campaign.
Veselnitskaya and Rinat Akhmetshin, who was present at the
meeting ``have significant connections to the Russian
government, including the Russian intelligence services,''
the report said. ``The connections the Committee uncovered,
particularly regarding Veselnitskaya, were far more extensive
and concerning than what had been publicly known, and neither
Veselnitskaya nor Akhmetshin were forthcoming with the
Committee regarding those connections.''
The report also faulted the FBI for botching its
investigation into the Russian influence and hacking
operations, as well as the DNC for its response.
``The FBI could have, and should have, escalated its
communications to the DNC much sooner than it did, but also
that the DNC interlocutors did not assign appropriate weight
to the FBI's warnings,'' the report said. ``Communication on
both sides was inadequate, further confusing an already
complex situation.''
The agency also placed ``unjustified credence'' on a
dossier by Christopher Steele, a former British spy, and used
that information to obtain a surveillance warrant on a Trump
campaign aide, the committee said. The agency did not budge
from its position even as contrary information emerged later,
the report found.
``During both of these matters, the FBI did not quickly
identify the problem and adjust course when it became clear
its actions were ineffective,'' the report said.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, despite the former President's repeated
claims that Russian interference in our 2016 election was a Democratic
hoax, a bipartisan Senate investigation and report released in 2020
made clear that there were extensive communications between senior
Trump officials and people with strong ties to the Kremlin.
Senator Marco Rubio--the last time I checked, he was still a
Republican--said: ``We found irrefutable evidence of Russian
meddling.''
The report is damning. The facts are clear. Russia interfered in an
election.
The second impeachment was really in response to what happened here,
and everybody saw what happened here: A violent mob broke into this
Capitol.
Mr. Speaker, 140 Capitol Police officers were injured. The mob
destroyed sacred property in this building. They tried to overturn a
legitimate election. They attempted an insurrection.
I was in the chair, one of the last people off the House floor. I saw
some of my Republican colleagues here, hiding, cowering behind Capitol
Police because they were afraid of what was going on that day.
Now, they come to the floor and say nothing happened, that it was a
perfectly wonderful day, a typical day of tourism at the Capitol. It is
disgusting, the revisionism that we see here.
So you are damn right that he got impeached a second time. He
deserved to be impeached. If that is not an impeachable offense, I
don't know what is.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona
(Mr. Biggs), my good friend.
Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I find it fascinating to listen to someone who lives in the
Northeast, in a nice enclave protected from the border, stand up and
say nothing about this is serious. Tell that to the victims of this
border-crossing invasion. Tell that to them. They say: Oh, all the
fentanyl is being stopped at the border.
It is just incredible.
What is going on between the ports of entry? Sure, we catch it at the
ports of entry. Why? We have massive amounts of resources there.
Between the ports of entry are wide open spaces.
The last time I was down there--when was the last time you were
there? I go down often. I live in Arizona. I get down to the border.
[[Page H3086]]
The last time I was there, we were driving along and didn't see
Border Patrol for miles. Do you know what we came upon? We came upon 21
individuals.
There is no town. There is no village. We asked them how they got
here. The coyotes dropped us off and told us keep walking north. In
that group were two babies under the age of 1 year.
I am telling you, this is a result of the dereliction of duty that
has put this country in jeopardy. That is why this needs to go to the
Committee on Homeland Security, so they can further investigate this.
That is why it needs to be there.
Laugh if you will. That is the reality. You don't appreciate the
seriousness of this, the gravity of it.
Laugh at it if you will, but you get to go to the angel families and
explain to them why their kid or a member of their family was killed by
an illegal alien who came into this country. You get to go to the
parents.
You get to go to the parents of individuals who have lost their lives
due to the fentanyl that you apparently claim is all being interdicted.
It is dangerous. We have terrorists and criminal gang members coming
in.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South
Carolina (Mr. Norman), my good friend.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks
to the Chair.
Mr. NORMAN. Mr. Speaker, I find it humorous, for those watching on TV
and for those in the balcony, that they keep talking about President
Trump. They won't talk about the current President, Joe Biden.
I am going to start off with a compliment. He has been able to
accomplish being the worst President and has replaced Jimmy Carter as
the worst President this country has ever had of all time, and it is
because of his policies.
I support this going to the Committee on Homeland Security because,
as has been said, the border is wide open. The gates are open.
How many more deaths do we have to have? How many more of our young
people have to die? Mr. Speaker, there were 100,000 last year of
record. As a Border Patrol agent said, there are no drug treatments in
a morgue.
How long are we going to have an administration that is going to take
the handcuffs and put them on the police?
How long are we going to have an administration that is going to
deplete our oil supplies and buy it from countries that don't like us?
How long are we going to have an administration that is going to
support abortion regardless of the term? How long?
Ask the average businessowner in this country if he is having a good
year or a bad year. Are prices coming up or going down? We have the
worst inflation that we have had in a long time, and it simply cannot
go on.
The election cannot come quick enough. This man has sold out. This
man has to be replaced.
Homeland Security is the right way for this resolution to go because
we will get the facts. I fully support it. I thank Mrs. Boebert for
taking the lead on this.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman said something that I agree with: The
election cannot come soon enough.
I think people are just sick and tired of my Republican friends
defending a three-time loser, sexual abuser, ex-President that has been
indicted more times than he has been elected. It is pathetic.
We should be working on matters that actually help people. That is
why Democrats have been fighting not only for commonsense gun safety
legislation and investments in job creation and environmental
protection, but we have also been insisting that we get a guarantee
from the majority here that they don't go after Social Security and
Medicare.
Mr. Speaker, I urge that we defeat the previous question, and I will
offer an amendment to the rule to provide for consideration of a
resolution assuring our constituents that the people's House will
protect and preserve Social Security and Medicare for our future
generations and reject any cuts to these essential programs.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my
amendment in the Record along with any extraneous material immediately
prior to the vote on the previous question.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I will say to my friends that while you want to distract
and deflect from all of Donald Trump's legal problems, they continue to
mount.
I think there will be probably more charges, I expect, in the coming
weeks and the coming months. While my colleagues do not want to talk
about things like Social Security and Medicare because they are the
party of privatization, the party of trying to undercut Medicare, we
are going to fight them on those things.
We are going to continue to be a voice for the people of this
country, for our senior citizens, for those who believe that Social
Security and Medicare are important. We will not be deflected or
deterred by whatever this circus is that is going on here today.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Tennessee (Mr. Ogles), my good friend.
Mr. OGLES. Mr. Speaker, Joe Biden's border policies have led to an
all-out land invasion at our southern border, which is why the Homeland
Security Committee should be investigating.
Joe Biden's border policies have led to a drug crisis and thousands
of fentanyl overdoses across our Nation--again, the jurisdiction of the
Homeland Security Committee.
Joe Biden's border policies have led to the murders of countless
Americans at the hands of illegal aliens--again, a priority for the
Homeland Security Committee.
His blatant dereliction of duty to preserve, dereliction to protect,
and dereliction to defend the United States of America and the American
people deserves impeachment.
Instead, Joe Biden has demonstrated time and again, in policymaking
and political decisions, that he prioritizes illegal aliens over
American citizens, over our wives, our daughters, and our children.
His gross neglect and refusal to take action at the border warrants
removal from his post--again, why the Homeland Security Committee must
investigate.
That is why I support Congresswoman Boebert's Articles of Impeachment
and referral to committee.
The CBP had a record number of encounters with terrorists at the
southern border. The security of our Nation is being undermined by
foreign enemies because they know we have weak leadership.
We need to remove Joe Biden from the Oval Office and ensure that
Americans are safe. We need a leader that puts America and its people
first, not illegal immigration.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Boebert, Speaker McCarthy, and
Chairman Green for taking this up, and I urge all my colleagues to
support the referral of Articles of Impeachment to committee.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from
engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I have to say that my friends on the other side of the
aisle look small and pathetic and like losers. When they lose this
House, this is going to be a reason why.
Mr. Speaker, my friends keep talking about open borders. That is an
insult to the men and women in our Border Patrol who are risking their
lives to protect our borders. It is just not true.
I entered in the Record an article by the conservative think tank,
the Cato Institute, but facts don't matter. It is what plays on FOX
News and how we can distract and how people can make up things.
I will also say, Mr. Speaker, that try as they might to deflect from
the former President, we can't turn our back on what he has done.
Look, Trump literally can't help himself. He has admitted multiple
times on air, during interviews, and to
[[Page H3087]]
others that he stole and shared top-secret government information. Talk
about a national security threat. The call is coming from inside the
house.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record an
article from Rolling Stone titled: ``Trump All But Confesses to
Mishandling Classified Docs on FOX News.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
[From Rolling Stone, June 19, 2023]
Trump All But Confesses to Mishandling Classified Docs on Fox News
(By Miles Klee)
A week after his second post-presidential arrest, this one
for his alleged mishandling of classified documents after
leaving the White House, Donald Trump turned to Fox News host
Bret Baier on Monday to make the case for why he should lead
the country again. But he ended up essentially confessing to
the crime of which he's accused: stealing and sharing top-
secret government information.
Before that, however, Baier pressed Trump to explain why he
kept the boxes of classified materials at Mar-a-Lago and
refused to comply with government requests to return them, as
described in his new felony indictment. In between dismissing
the case as ``the document hoax'' or accusing other
presidents of illegally hoarding their own sensitive
documents, Trump offered the bizarre explanation that he
couldn't give up the boxes to authorities because they also
contained . . . his clothes.
``Like every other president I take things out,'' Trump
said. ``In my case, I took it out pretty much in a hurry.
People packed it up and left. I had clothing in there, I had
all sorts of personal items in there. Much, much stuff.''
After a brief digression to call his former attorney general
Bill Barr a ``coward,'' Trump reiterated, ``I have got a lot
of things in there. I will go through those boxes. I have to
go through those boxes. I take out personal things.''
Finally, he clarified what those items were: ``These boxes
were interspersed with all sorts of things: golf shirts,
clothing, pants, shoes, there were many things,'' he said.
While not wanting Dark Brandon to seize your golf shirts
may prove a compelling argument in court, another of Trump's
evasions seems less likely to hold water. Baier also brought
up one of the most damning parts of the federal indictment, a
recording from July 2021 in which Trump is heard showing off
a document detailing an attack plan against Iran, revealing
that it's still officially secret and he no longer has the
power to declassify it. Trump blustered for a moment about
what he actually said, then pivoted to the claim that he
wasn't even holding a particular document--despite
corroborating testimony from others in the room when it
happened. No wonder this guy's lawyers keep quitting on him.
``Bret, there was no document,'' Trump insisted. ``That was
a massive amount of papers and everything else, talking about
Iran and other things. And it may have been held up or may
not. That was not a document. I didn't have any document per
se. There was nothing to declassify, these were newspaper
stories, magazine stories, and articles.'' When Baier
referred again to the facts of the recording laid out in the
indictment, Trump said, presumably of the prosecutors:
``These people are very dishonest people, they are thugs.''
He also suggested they could be ``stuffing'' the boxes with
incriminating material.
Later on, the pair got into a debate on the results of the
2020 election, with Baier trying in vain to remind the former
president that he lost while Trump rambled on about fake
ballots. The rest of the conversation involved Trump bashing
Biden's international diplomacy, from Ukraine to the Middle
East to China, and musing about how much better things were
with him in office.
Afterward, Fox News chief political analyst Brit Hume said
that Trump's answers regarding matters of the law were ``on
the verge on incoherent,'' and specifically mentioned the
bizarre detail of not returning the boxes of classified
documents because they hadn't been ``separated from his golf
shirts or whatever he was saying.'' Overall, Hume said, it
sounded as if Trump was making the argument that the papers
were his to do with as he liked, ``which I don't think is
going to hold up in court.''
{time} 1145
Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida
(Mr. Mills), my friend and an Army veteran.
Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to be here today to support
Representative Boebert's request for this to be referred to the
Committee on Homeland Security with regard to the dereliction of duty
under this administration and this President's policies.
As a United States Army combat veteran, I have fought abroad for the
majority of my adult life. I have spent over 7 years of my life in
Iraq, over 3 years of my life in Afghanistan, Kosovo, Pakistan, and
northern Somalia. I have been blown up twice, and I am a Bronze Star
recipient.
I went overseas for the purpose of protecting this Nation and
ensuring that terrorists do not have the ability to come to threaten
our lives and threaten our children, but under the failed policies of
this President just this last year, in the last 7 months, we have had
over 96 people who are on the known terrorist watch list who have
crossed our borders.
I would love to know from this President and from everyone else here:
Why did my brothers go and die in the thousands? Why did we waste 20-
plus years of our lives fighting terrorism? Why did we go ahead and
botch the Afghan withdrawal and leave our allies behind if we were just
going to open our borders anyway to them?
Tell me why it was that we were going to vote to fight in these wars
to protect this Nation when this President and his failed policies were
going to do nothing but open up our borders to the terrorists who are
coming across daily.
We will see another 9/11-type attack if we continue this type of
unsafe policy and do not get ahold of this right now.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I want the record to reflect that the previous President
of the United States supported an insurrection to basically steal the
election.
My friends think it is funny, but I will tell you this: Laugh in the
face of the Capitol Police.
Mr. Speaker, 140 of them were injured. People lost their lives, and
the best you can do is laugh--is laugh--about what happened that day? I
mean, that is disgusting.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
____________________