[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 14, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1136-S1137]



                                 RUSSIA

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, November 8, 2016, was not just election 
day. It was a day that will live in cyber infamy because it turns out 
that one of the leading enemies of the United States, the nation of 
Russia, was directly engaged in the Presidential campaign that resulted 
in the election on November 8. This is not speculation. It is a fact 
based on conclusions that came from 17 different intelligence agencies 
that confirmed this reality. This is the first time we can point to 
where a foreign power has tried to influence the outcome of a 
Presidential election in the United States. Their goal was clear: to 
elect Donald Trump, to defeat Hillary Clinton. They hacked into 
computers. They released information on a selective basis. They created 
fake news stories. They used WikiLeaks--everything within their cyber 
power to influence the outcome of the election. That was the reality.
  This morning we were awakened to the headline that President Trump's 
head of the National Security Council, LTG Michael Flynn, has resigned. 
That is an incredible blockbuster of a story. And what was the reason 
for his resignation? It turns out that he had a direct conversation 
with the Russian Ambassador to the United States, Mr. Kislyak, and that 
conversation included references to sanctions that President Obama was 
imposing on Russia because of their involvement in our election. What 
led to his resignation, of course, was that he misled both the Vice 
President and the President about that conversation. When the facts 
came out, he was forced to resign.
  This is not business as usual in Washington. What we are dealing with 
here is, in fact, a historic event--a powder keg in history--when it 
comes to the United States and its security. The obvious question is, 
Will this Congress of the United States, this branch of our government, 
respond? Will we initiate thorough investigations as to the involvement 
of the Russians in that election campaign and, specifically, any 
involvement with any Presidential campaign during that time?
  Twenty years ago, when I was elected to the Senate, there was an 
investigation initiated by the Republicans at the suggestion--the 
suggestion--that the Chinese Government played some role in the 
Clinton-Gore campaign. The Governmental Affairs Committee of the Senate 
was entrusted with the responsibility to do a thorough investigation of 
that allegation, and Fred Thompson, the Senator from Tennessee, was the 
chairman of that committee, with John Glenn as the ranking Democrat.
  The hearings went on for weeks--ultimately, for months--and then 
there was a formal report issued. No credible evidence was found of the 
suggestion, but it was taken that seriously by the Republican-led 
Congress that the Chinese may have been involved in a Democratic 
Presidential campaign.
  How seriously is the Republican Congress taking the allegations and 
statements from our intelligence agencies that the Russians were 
involved in this last Presidential campaign?
  It is time for us to have an independent, bipartisan commission 
beyond Congress to look into this and give us solid answers. We need to 
appoint people to head this commission of the stature of GEN Colin 
Powell and Sandra Day O'Connor, who served on the Supreme Court, who 
are credible people to lead this effort and this investigation and give 
America the truth.
  A week or so ago the New York Times published the results of a recent 
poll that asked Americans what other nations they considered to be our 
closest allies and worst enemies. The results weren't surprising. 
Canada, the UK, and Australia topped the list of our best allies. Of 
America's enemies, the top nations were different, but they included 
North Korea, Iran, and Russia. That makes me wonder why President 
Trump, in the span of a week, managed to insult and hang up on the 
telephone call with the Prime Minister of Australia and then go on 
national news to once again defend Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, in 
light of what I just said earlier. Just a few days later, it is 
revealed that his National Security Advisor, General Flynn, the one who 
was fired by the previous administration and led chants unworthy of a 
great democracy about locking up a political opponent, was, in fact, 
speaking to a Russian official as a private citizen before President 
Trump took office.
  Monday, we learned that former Acting Attorney General Sally Yates, 
whom President Trump abruptly fired, had warned the White House that 
General Flynn had misled senior administration officials about his 
communications with the Russian Ambassador and warned he was 
potentially vulnerable to Russian blackmail. Understand what I have 
just said. The man who was picked by President Trump as his top 
National Security Advisor misled the President and the Vice President 
about a telephone conversation with the Russian Ambassador and, in the 
opinion of our top law enforcement officials, left himself vulnerable 
to Russian blackmail.
  In the last days of the Obama administration, then Director of 
National Intelligence James Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan 
reportedly shared Yates' concerns and concurred with the recommendation 
to inform the Trump White House. Now that General Flynn has resigned, 
leaving an already chaotic National Security Council in even greater 
disarray, perhaps this isn't all that surprising anymore, but it 
certainly should be.
  This President has a troubling habit of lashing out at everyone and 
anyone involved in a perceived slight--dangerous and unbecoming 
behavior when granted the privilege to become President of this great 
Nation. In fact, the number and range of those attacked or insulted by 
Twitter is so significant I wouldn't even start to list them, but it is 
important to note the list includes Republicans, Democrats, labor 
leaders, businesses, retired generals, and others in almost every 
conceivable category. Actually, one looks at the list and you quickly 
realize the only unifying factor is not about putting America first or 
America's image but instead about protecting a deeply fragile ego.
  Listen to this excerpt from a vast list of those who have been 
attacked by President Trump: President George Bush, President George W. 
Bush, Speaker Paul Ryan, Florida Gov. Rick Scott, Federal judges, 
former Governor of New Hampshire John Sununu, the Republican 
establishment, NATO, Major League Baseball, Macy's Department Store, 
European leaders, Britain, Germany, New Jersey, the American delegate 
system, the ``Today'' show, ``Saturday Night Live,'' ``The View,'' 
Chief Justice John Roberts, Colin Powell, President of United 
Steelworkers Local 1999, ABC News, NBC News, FOX News, and seemingly 
every other media outlet.
  Now that we are in the category of those who have been attacked, we 
can't leave Nordstrom off the list. The President even insulted the 
former Governor of South Carolina, then chose her to be U.N. 
Ambassador. In fact, there are hundreds upon hundreds on this list--a 
list that in a foreboding, Nixonian way keeps on growing.
  So if you make any criticism or joke about President Trump, make any 
perceived slight, run a department store that doesn't carry his 
daughter's products, lead a labor union, or do just about anything, be 
prepared for an attack by a Trump tweet--except if you happen to be the 
former Communist KGB official who now leads the one nation that 
actually recently attacked our Nation. That would be Vladimir Putin.
  How is it possible?
  Russian President Putin launched a cyber attack of war on the United

[[Page S1137]]

States. He interfered in our election and tried to affect the outcome 
and pick the winner. The evidence is overwhelming. It has been 
available in increasing amounts over the last several months. Yet we 
have a President who not only denies the Russian attack but has a 
strange infatuation with President Putin--but is also suggesting 
policies that dangerously puppet those of Putin.
  It is now revealed that Trump's National Security Advisor, LTG 
Michael Flynn, lied about discussing sanctions with the Russian 
Ambassador immediately after the Obama administration announced new 
sanctions for the attack on our election. Not only had General Flynn 
and the White House suddenly remembered the facts differently, but more 
dangerously, did Flynn's conversation undercut U.S. sanctions, 
especially after Russia's assault on our election? And who instructed 
General Flynn to have these suspiciously timed conversations with the 
Russian Ambassador?
  It is deeply troubling to imagine what might have been insinuated in 
those talks, but given the blinders this President has shown in 
ignoring President Putin so far, I worry about a suggested or hinted 
trading for U.S. sanctions on Russia for little in return.
  Quite simply, you don't make America great by selling out to a former 
Communist KGB official. You only negotiate with such a dictator from a 
position of strength, not denial or naivete.
  So what has been the response to the cyber attack of war on America, 
Flynn's dalliance with the Russians, and the dangerous disarray at the 
Trump National Security Council from the party of Ronald Reagan, who 
knew the Communist mind pretty well? Near silence. The party of Ronald 
Reagan has spoken zero times about the Russian attack or Flynn's 
actions on the floor of the Senate since early October. I waited this 
morning for the Senate Republican leader to raise the obvious front-
page story across America about the resignation of President Trump's 
National Security Advisor, and not a word was mentioned.
  Compare this to the 36 times the Republicans have come to the floor 
to talk about stripping health care away from millions of Americans in 
the last several weeks. Even President Trump's new Attorney General, 
who brazenly changed his tune on Russia once having joined the Trump 
campaign, said he had not yet read intelligence reports on the Russian 
attack--a position even more stunning in light of the recent reports of 
Sally Yates' warnings. Yet, incredibly, his colleagues were ready to 
confirm him for the highest law enforcement position in the land.
  I see the Democratic leader here, and I want to yield the floor to 
him, but I will close with this. Are we going to have a fulsome, 
honest, independent investigation of the Russian involvement in this 
election campaign? We know it happened. Seventeen of our intelligence 
agencies confirm it.
  We also know that an investigation is underway by the Federal Bureau 
of Investigation about this campaign and the involvement of the 
Russians, and we know as well now that because of the conversations of 
our National Security Advisor with the Russian Ambassador, he was 
forced to resign in the first 4 weeks of this administration.
  This calls out for a thorough investigation. The Republican Party in 
Congress, which spent hours and days and weeks and months in 
investigations involving Hillary Clinton, should at least acknowledge 
the gravity of this matter and bring this to a full investigation--an 
open and public one that can be trusted, an independent investigation--
that stands up for our basic democracy and does not allow the invasion 
of the Russians or any other country into our democratic process.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________