Executive Session

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCHUMER. Madam President, as the House of Representatives continues to hold hearings as part of the impeachment inquiry into President Trump, it is incumbent on all of us here in the Senate to review the evidence, keep an open mind, and avoid prejudging the case. If impeachment articles are served to the Senate, Senators must act as judges and jurors, take an oath to do impartial justice, and see to it that the Senate conducts a fair trial.

So I have been hugely disappointed in the partisan conduct of some of my colleagues on the Republican side, who, in their rush to defend the President, have attacked career public servants and former members of the armed services because they didn't like their testimony, and then they spread baseless conspiracy theories and use their powers of a congressional office to play defense for the President.

The Republican chairman of the Judiciary Committee, for example, has attempted to send the State Department on a wild fishing expedition for documents to support an already debunked rightwing conspiracy theory.

Meanwhile, the State Department is blocking or delaying the production of documents related to several legitimate and ongoing investigations, many of which were requested months ago.

I would expect that Senator Graham's request, outlandish as it is, would go at the back of the line. It would be another total debasement to the process if Secretary Pompeo were to further politicize the production of documents to Congress and say it is OK to release the documents that Senator Graham wants but not the ones that the House committee wanted. Privilege is privilege. I don't believe it applies in each case, but it is privilege. You can't do it to one and not the other.

Also, it is appalling that, in recent days, certain Members on the other side of the aisle have repeated the lie invented by Vladimir Putin's intelligence services that Ukraine was somehow involved in 2016 election interference.

I have a simple message for my Republican colleagues: Stop spreading Putin's propaganda.

By spreading the false and unsupported narrative that Ukraine, not just Putin, was responsible for interfering in the 2016 elections, Republicans are endangering our democracy and empowering Vladimir Putin at the same time. Even wondering aloud about the debunked Ukrainian interference theory helps Putin muddy the waters and deflect the blame away from his country, which our intelligence services have all agreed--I think it is 17 of them--that he interfered in the election. He is trying to create a diversion, and our Republican colleagues are going along.

Republicans need to stop putting the wind into the sails of Putin's propaganda. More than that, Republicans need to forcefully and unequivocally refute the lie that Ukraine had anything to do with election interference in 2016. Election Security and Defense Appropriations

Madam President, on election security and the NDAA, earlier this year, FBI Director Wray, Trump's appointee to run the FBI, said: ``The Russians are absolutely intent on trying to interfere with our elections.'' That is what Mr. Wray said in response to a question from the senior Senator from South Carolina. Director Wray went on to say: ``My view is, until they stop, they haven't been deterred enough.'' As a reminder to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, Director Wray is a Republican and Trump appointee.

It is the testimony of Director Wray and other national security leaders over the past 3 years that has reinforced our commitment on the Democratic side to secure passage of legislation that includes tough, mandatory, and deterrent sanctions against Putin and against any foreign adversary who would seek to interfere with our elections.

This wasn't a figment of our imagination; this came from our own intelligence and security agencies, that Russia interfered and that they are going to keep interfering until we stop them. So it is not a radical idea; it is a bipartisan idea. It is a part of bipartisan legislation introduced by Senators Van Hollen and Menendez and supported by Senators Rubio and Graham. This legislation needs to be included in the Defense authorization bill. Defending our democracy is at the core of our Nation's defense. But at the moment, it is being blocked by Republican Leader McConnell and several Republican committee chairs.

I am sure Leader McConnell and his colleagues, rather than explain their opposition, will do what they usually do: point their fingers at Democrats and say ``They are holding up the Defense bill; we are not.'' That is a time-honored Republican tradition, to deflect blame, and it just doesn't hold water.

Just this morning, we heard the Republican leader claim that Democrats are not supporting the defense programs needed to counter Russia. This is laughable coming from the other side when it is Leader McConnell who has fought so often to prevent funding to protect us from Russian interference. It is my Republican counterparts who green-lit the President's treating the Defense Department as a personal piggy bank, including raiding funds from the European Deterrence Initiative-- a program designed to counter Russia--to build the President's wall.

Democrats are ready to roll up their sleeves and work with our Republican colleagues to clear any substantive objections they might have to election interference sanctions legislation, as well as any other issue they might have with the Defense authorization bill, but we need to get serious soon about including these provisions. The annual Defense bill might be our last chance to pass significant reforms to secure our elections.

So, Leader McConnell, are you for securing our elections against Russia or not? Because if you are for it, we can move this Defense bill forward much more quickly.

What is holding it up, in good part, is Leader McConnell's opposition to spending the funds necessary and the legislation and sanctions necessary to stop Russia from interfering. Tribute to Johnny Isakson

Madam President, on a bittersweet note, Johnny Isakson--what a fine man. Today, Members of this Chamber will hold a bipartisan lunch to say goodbye to one of our most beloved colleagues, Johnny Isakson of Georgia, who is retiring before the end of the year.

Over the last few months, there have been numerous tributes to Johnny on the Senate floor. He has been called ``a real friend,'' ``a mentor,'' ``more than a colleague,'' ``humble and tenacious,'' ``they don't come any better''--and that is just by Democrats. That is one of the reasons I suggested to Leader McConnell that we have a lunch for Johnny Isakson, which we are having this afternoon.

Just as there is good reason to praise Johnny Isakson in the ways Democrats did, there is good reason that during his chairmanship, Isakson's committee passed so many bipartisan bills--57, to be exact-- to help veterans. It is because he treated everyone--Democrat, Republican, Independent, newly elected or committee chair--with respect. Johnny never let the cynicism of our political times dim his faith in our ability to get something done.

Johnny Isakson didn't have the loudest voice in the room, but it was often the most influential. That is because he built years' worth of trust. You never doubted his word. He was an honest broker. So whenever a chasm seemed to separate the parties on a certain issue, Isakson was often the one spanning the divide. I know that from experience, over and over again. As an example, when families in New York struggled to recover from disasters, like Sandy, only to find that flood insurance rates were crushing them with enormous debt, it was Senator Isakson, whose State has suffered its fair share of disasters, who worked with my office to find a solution.

We made enormous progress working together to strengthen media shield laws, protecting fearless and independent journalism at a time when we needed to stand up for a free and open press.

In this most recent important appropriations process, we worked together to help the widows and children impacted by 9/11 gain access to a special terror victims' funding. I want to thank him personally for that, and more broadly, I want to thank him for the example he set for many other Senators.

There are many fine adjectives that will be used to describe Senator Isakson, and all of them will be well-deserved, but one word used to describe Senator Isakson is not often found in the Halls of Congress: ``kind.'' Johnny Isakson is one of the kindest, most thoughtful Senators I have known in my time here. He is a true statesman. That is why I know that independent of any party or politics, everyone here will miss Johnny.

I will have more to say about our friend at the bipartisan lunch this afternoon, but for now, I would like to note for the record Senator Isakson's many years of faithful service to his beloved State of Georgia and his country. We wish him and Dianne the very best as he enters the next chapter of his life.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source