Floor Statements

Madam President, in early May, President Trump proposed rescinding $250 million meant to combat the Ebola virus and other infectious diseases. Not only are these rescissions a slap in the face of the bipartisan budget process, but they are dangerous to our national health and security.

Just last week, a new case of the Ebola virus was confirmed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and at least two dozen people have already died in this most recent outbreak.

Let's not forget how vociferously our friends on the other side of the aisle criticized President Obama on how he handled the Ebola outbreak in 2014. Once again, Donald Trump totally contradicts what he said in the past with what he is doing now.

Here is what Donald Trump tweeted in 2014:

Ebola has been confirmed in NYC with officials frantically

trying to find all of the people and things he had contact

with. Obama's fault.

Well, does he now say that it is Trump's fault? What mind-bending hypocrisy.

Now President Donald Trump proposes rescinding the same funding that Congress passed to help handle the Ebola crisis in 2014 and that continues to keep America safe. God forbid this funding is rescinded and Ebola outbreaks reemerge. It would actually be President Trump's fault.

The President should withdraw his rescission request for this funding, as Senator Leahy and his colleagues on the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee asked in a letter this week. That funding should be free for USAID to use as Congress intended. And Donald Trump ought to learn from his past statements. If he can blame Obama for not fully going after the Ebola outbreak in 2014, why is he cutting money for Ebola now?

Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, first, some good news. As the majority leader noted, Senators Klobuchar and Blunt have agreed on legislation to overhaul the way Congress handles workplace claims to protect staff and others from harassment. It certainly needed an overhaul. Shamefully, the current system--soon, hopefully, the old system--didn't do enough to protect victims and hold perpetrators of workplace harassment accountable.

Among the other crucial reforms, the Blunt-Klobuchar legislation would do away with mandatory waiting periods that too often discouraged complaints and let them languish. It would also make important changes to ensure that Members of the House and Senate are held personally accountable and

liable if they have committed harassment.

So I want to commend Senators Klobuchar and Blunt, who worked with many Members, including Senators Gillibrand, Murray, McCaskill, Feinstein, Harris, and Cortez Masto, for putting this together. I also thank my colleague, the majority leader. He and I were involved and are both cosponsors of this legislation. It is an example, again, of the growing sprouts of bipartisanship coming forward in this body. I hope we can pass it quickly, with overwhelming, if not unanimous, support.

Mr. President, on another matter, this morning, with increasing desperation, President Trump tweeted several inaccuracies about the special counsel's investigation. No one should take the bait. I doubt very few who are looking at this in a nonpartisan way will.

The recent demands from President Trump and his allies are just another part of a shameful campaign of harassment, intimidation, and obstruction of the Russia probe. It is all too clear that President Trump and his allies want to change the subject away from the duly constituted investigation into Russia meddling in the 2016 election and toward another fabricated scandal.

It began with conspiracies cooked up by Representative Nunes from ``deep state'' leaks to unmasking requests, claims of phone taps at Trump Tower, Uranium One, Nunes's midnight run to the White House, and the infamous Nunes memo. Now House conservatives, with the aid of the White House, seem to have successfully badgered DOJ officials into giving them a briefing on sources and methods of an FBI investigation. That is unprecedented and so very wrong.

Everyone knows what they are doing. They are hunting desperately for any scrap of information or innuendo that might help them sully the investigation or provide them a sneak peek at any evidence the FBI may have against the Trump campaign. If they have to distort and spread falsehoods about what is revealed in any meeting, they will, and for the President of the United States to pressure the Justice Department to reveal details and documents pertaining to an active investigation of the President's campaign for the purpose of denigrating it is a gross and unprecedented abuse of power, unlike any we have seen in a very long time. That is why so many people don't trust this President.

The only thing more outrageous than this meeting occurring at all is the fact that it is partisan. It is crystal clear that Representative Nunes intends to interfere with the investigation. He is not a down- the-middle investigator looking for truth. Everyone has seen that. Nunes gave up any pretense of objectivity long ago in that ridiculous, late-night charade to the White House. Shamefully, someone I respect and someone I like, Speaker Ryan, is allowing this to happen. It will forever be a blot on his record. He can't be so afraid of the hard right and the President that he would allow this kind of ``banana republic'' behavior to go forward, and that is what Nunes is doing.

Regrettably, a few of my Senate colleagues seem to be allowing it to happen as well. Yesterday, I saw that a few of my friends on the other side sent a letter requesting to attend the meeting and supporting it but making no mention of the fact that not a single Democrat was invited.

My Republican friends know we have a process for dealing with the highly sensitive information of this type. It is called the Gang of 8. It is bipartisan. It has worked well. Any meeting between the Justice Department and Capitol Hill about such information should only be attended by Members of the Gang of 8.

So this morning, Leader Pelosi and I are sending a letter to Attorney General Rosenstein and Director Wray to request they reconsider holding the meeting at all and, if they move forward, to do so in a bipartisan fashion with the Gang of 8. If the meeting goes forward as planned right now--only partisan, only the worst actors on the House side in the room--no one should trust anything they say coming out of that meeting. It will be a sham. It will be a sham.

In our letter, we remind Attorney General Rosenstein and Director Wray they have a higher responsibility. I know they are being pushed around by the White House and by the White House's puppets like Congressman Nunes, but they must resist for the grand tradition of impartial justice under the law that has been in the veins of this country, in the bones of this country since 1789. To let this happen is disgraceful, and the blame really falls on the President and his puppets like, unfortunately, Chairman Nunes and some of the others who seem to be going along with him.

One other thing I might say though that I think should give Americans some solace is, I do not believe for one second that Special Counsel Mueller will be deterred. All this sideshow, all this attempt to discredit him and his investigation with all kinds of frivolous, silly, and often false statements and activities will not deter Mueller. The American people have the utmost confidence in him. He is a strong man. He is a quiet man. He happens to be a Republican appointed by the President's own appointees--hardly some nefarious representative who came out of nowhere from the deep state.

Mueller is going to go right ahead and see this investigation through to its natural conclusion. He will follow the facts where they lead. Americans will have confidence that if he finds something, it is real and, if he doesn't, he is not whitewashing a thing. That is how he has gone about the investigation so far. It has resulted in dozens of indictments, several guilty pleas of top Trump campaign officials. When the President derogates Mueller and the investigation, he doesn't speak of any facts or knowledge; it is just wild allegations of something thrashing about, maybe because he realizes there might be something there. Who knows?

Special Counsel Mueller is a serious, quiet, diligent man, a lifelong Republican, a dedicated marine, universally respected. The American people can be assured that his investigation will not be blown off course by this hurricane of rightwing lies and intimidation coming from the President and his minions.

One final point on this topic, with several of his recent claims, it is clear President Trump lacks self-awareness. President Trump continues to peddle the myth that a deep state bias against his Presidency is driving the Russia probe, despite the fact that an active FBI investigation into his campaign was kept secret during his election while his opponent's was made public. If there was a deep state trying to hurt someone, they did a lot more to hurt Hillary Clinton than Donald Trump during the campaign. Everyone knows that. If the deep state were truly out to get President Trump, they would have made the active FBI investigation into his campaign's shady dealings with Russia a matter for the public record while he was running. This same lack of awareness--maybe hypocrisy--is apparent when the President reportedly uses an unsecured cell phone for some of his communications. Can you believe that after all the hay Donald Trump and his allies made about Secretary Clinton's handling of sensitive information, that the President--once in office--uses an unsecured cell phone, despite the fact that so many around him have told him that might be dangerous? It is bad for our national security, and his double standard is nothing short of outrageous.

Finally, Mr. President, gas prices. Few things matter more to the average consumer than the price of a gallon of gasoline. When gas prices go through the roof, it eats away at a family's income, leaving less to cover the cost of anything else--groceries, medicine, tuition, a nice summer vacation, which families cherish. Recent data suggests that gas prices are about to climb even higher this summer, and experts suggest that actions and inactions on the part of the Trump administration are a major piece of that story.

According to energy analysts and experts, President Trump's decision to pull out of the Iran deal led to higher oil prices. OPEC has decided to cut production, also raising prices. Even though President Trump tweeted that OPEC's decision ``will not be accepted,'' the American people are still

awaiting action from the President that will help America's motorists. He is good pals with the Crown Prince, who is running Saudi Arabia with the heads of the United Arab Emirates. He seems to have a good relationship with Putin. Why doesn't he jawbone them to at least stop constricting production so prices can come down? He isn't. He will talk to them about other things but not about something so vital to the middle class.

As a result, gas prices are headed toward $3 a gallon, and the U.S. Energy Information Administration estimates that the average American family can expect to pay $200 more this driving season than last driving season and $250 more than the 2016 driving season. Prices are up more than 60 cents, on average, from the last day Obama was in office until today. Where is President Trump?

The rising gas prices will, as one Goldman Sachs economist put it, roughly cancel out the 2018 consumption boost from tax cuts. Big touting of the tax cuts, but when gasoline prices take it all away, where is our President? Whatever benefit working families might have seen from the Trump tax scam for the rich, if they got any benefit at all, is being wiped out by gas prices, and what about our Big Oil executives and oil companies? They got huge tax breaks--huge tax breaks. Why isn't the consumer seeing any of that at the pump? At the same time our oil companies get huge tax breaks, they raise prices on everybody. How is that helping the middle class? Why isn't President Trump jawboning them like he does on other issues? Where is he?

It is time for the President to stand up to OPEC, to stand up to Big Oil, and do what is necessary to lower gas prices. Remember, once again, the hypocrisy of this President. This is the same President who tweeted multiple times that President Obama was to blame for rising gas prices. So I would remind the President that the final price of gas under President Obama was an average of $2.36 a gallon, and the current price under President Trump is $2.92 a gallon and going up.

I hope, for the sake of the middle class and those struggling to get there--the folks for whom gas prices really make a difference--that President Trump takes immediate action to bring down the cost of gas. He has the power. He can force OPEC to do things by jawboning them. He can force the Big Oil companies to consider lowering their prices, given all the profits they got from his big tax bill. Where is he?

I yield the floor.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, first let me thank my friend from Georgia for being able to go first and also thank my friend from Illinois, who has been passionate, strong, and effective when it comes to these for- profit colleges. He laid out a strong case.

Let me just make one more point which sometimes my colleagues on the other side of the aisle and the Trump administration and Ms. DeVos seem to forget. Who loses money when these for-profits take advantage of the kids? The Federal taxpayers do because the vast majority, the overwhelming percentage of funds that go to these for-profit colleges are from Federal student loans. So this is a waste of taxpayer money. Somehow our Republican colleagues--not all but some--and the Trump administration are willing to have the Treasury basically, in certain ways, be looted. They shrug their shoulders and let the for-profits keep doing it. It is an amazing contradiction. So I thank my colleague Senator Durbin.

Now, on the issues that I came to speak about here, Mr. President, it was reported by the Wall Street Journal that the Trump administration has agreed to relax sanctions on the Chinese telecom giant ZTE and remove the ban on ZTE from selling components and software in the United States. Instead, ZTE will be required to pay a fine and reorganize its board. It appears that, in exchange, China will lift some tariffs on U.S. agricultural products.

First, let me say this. I said this repeatedly, but I will say it again. I feel much closer in my views on China and how they treat us in terms of economic issues to President Trump and his views than I was to President Obama and President Bush and their views, who I don't think did enough. I had public arguments with both President Obama and President Bush on this issue.

When Donald Trump started talking about going after China and making them play fair, I felt that was a good thing. When his administration fined ZTE and then put sanctions on them so they couldn't get American components, I said: Finally, we are doing something tough on China.

You can imagine my disappointment with the reports last night that President Trump, being advised so wrongly by people like Treasury Secretary Mnuchin, is backing off on this toughness and just giving them a slap on the wrist, a fine. If the reports are true, the Trump administration will have suffered a great defeat. The fines and board changes do absolutely nothing to protect American national or economic security.

It is my view that China proposed this because they know it doesn't do the real job. When President Trump shows weakness and backs off on the area where he has been toughest with China, it signals to them that they can roll over us issue after issue, where they have been rapacious in terms of how they deal with our economy, our intellectual property, and the ability of great American companies not to sell things in China.

The April 2018 commerce order penalizing ZTE says plainly that past fines have not and will not deter ZTE because they are financially backed by China's government and putting in place board changes doesn't coerce a company that takes its orders from China's Government.

The proposed solution is like a wet noodle. It is outrageous. I hope that Democrats and Republicans will join together in making sure, as House Republicans did in the Appropriations subcommittee, that the proposed sanctions against ZTE of not letting them buy American products and not letting them sell here will stick, but I don't think they will. All the handwriting is on the wall.

I will not divulge anything, but I did have a half-hour conversation with President Trump about this on Friday and with some of his advisers. So I am truly worried.

The penalties that are proposed by Secretary Mnuchin are penalties in name only. They are a diversion from the fact that it seems President Xi has outmaneuvered President Trump and Secretary Mnuchin. It should be President Xi who writes the book ``The Art of the Deal'' because he has taken us to the cleaners on ZTE.

Let me explain why this is such a bad deal. ZTE was sanctioned in 2016 for violating U.S. sanctions against North Korea and Iran. The company was further sanctioned when the Commerce Department discovered that ZTE had lied to the United States about its plans to rectify the violations. President Trump and Secretary Mnuchin, according to reports, have inexplicably

excused ZTE of these inexcusable violations.

What the President and Secretary Mnuchin are doing sends a dangerous signal to businesses around the world that the United States is willing to forgive sanction violations or reduce penalties. It emboldens foreign companies to play fast and loose with U.S. sanctions when we should be putting the fear of God into these companies, especially one that is as brazen as ZTE. If we don't uniformly enforce sanctions--a critical diplomatic tool used by administrations of both parties to pressure our adversaries--then, they will be far less effective. None other than Secretary of State Pompeo and Interior Secretary Zinke wrote a letter to President Obama in 2016 making this point, urging him to crack down on ZTE for this reason.

Imagine if Obama were President today and doing this? You can be sure that our Republican colleagues would be hollering. You can be sure that President Trump--he wouldn't be President then--would be hollering.

Even more important are the national security implications of removing the ban on U.S. companies selling ZTE components and software. This is the No. 1 reason that I am opposed to any change in the sanctions against ZTE. Allowing ZTE to make deals with U.S. companies to sell its products here would allow a foreign, state-backed firm access to our telecommunications network, prying open the door for ZTE to steal American data, hack our networks, and even conduct espionage, both economic and national security.

Don't take it from me. Here are what some of our leading Republicans have said in the administration.

The Republican-led FCC has said that allowing ZTE into the United States would pose a national security threat, saying it would give state-backed Chinese companies ``hidden backdoors to our networks'' that would allow them to ``inject viruses and other malware, steal Americans' private data, spy on U.S. businesses, and more.''

We all know that China is involved in stealing our intellectual property. There is no better way to do it than through ZTE, and we are going to let them be here and slap them on the wrist with a fine? That is a dereliction of our duty here in the Congress and the President's duty to protect us.

The Pentagon has banned ZTE phones, saying in a statement that ``ZTE devices may pose an unacceptable risk to the Department's personnel, information, and mission.'' If our Defense Department is banning these phones, why are we allowing them to come into our country to do industrial espionage and steal our intellectual property from our companies?

Here is what FBI Director Chris Wray, appointed by President Trump, told the Senate Intelligence Committee in February. He was saying that we shouldn't use ZTE products or services, period. Here is what he said:

We're deeply concerned about the risks of allowing any

company or entity that is beholden to foreign governments

that don't share our values to gain positions of power inside

our telecommunication networks. That provides the capacity to

exert pressure or control over our telecommunications

infrastructure. It provides the capacity to maliciously

modify or steal information. And it provides the capacity to

conduct undetected espionage.

The head of the FBI says letting ZTE in here will provide ``the capacity to conduct undetected espionage.''

After all those statements and so many more, every American should be alarmed by the reports that President Trump may allow ZTE into American markets. Putting our national security at risk for minor trade concessions is the very definition of shortsighted. Frankly, it would be a capitulation on the part of the Trump administration.

President Trump's instincts are to be tough on China. He should not let Secretary Mnuchin lead him astray, or others in the administration who may be urging it. I know that there are some--Mr. Lighthizer and Mr. Navarro--who understand the dangers here, and they are in the administration too. From press reports, they are arguing on the other side.

President Trump ought to come to his senses and stick with being tough on ZTE, stick with his instinct.

That is what I say to you, Mr. President. Please stick to your instincts and be tough on ZTE. Don't let these other members of your Cabinet lead you astray for short-term reasons that will hurt America dramatically in the long run.

The deal President Trump seems to be making is exactly the kind of deal that Donald Trump, before he was President Trump, would call weak or the worst deal ever. I hope these reports aren't true, but if they are, Democrats and Republicans must do something about it.

I know there are Members on the other side--I saw Senator Rubio's tweets this morning--who are concerned about the national security of the United States with respect to ZTE. I will be reaching out to my Republican colleagues and to Members of my caucus and to anyone who is willing to turn this ship around to see what we can do legislatively.

The Chinese are worried about their security. It is a different type of security. They don't want their citizens to get information. So they exclude our best companies, our Googles, and our Facebooks. Now they are raising a fuss when we want to exclude ZTE, which has violated our sanctions and would allow the Chinese Government to spy on us--what hypocrisy. Are we going to go along with that? I hope not.

Mr. President, over the past few days, the White House has put extraordinary, unusual, and inappropriate pressure on the Department of Justice and the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

On Sunday the President demanded a counterinvestigation of the Russia investigation, breaking longstanding and critical norms against political interference in law enforcement matters. Then, yesterday the President summoned the leaders of the Russia probe to the White House to pressure them into releasing sensitive and classified documents pertaining to the investigation by congressional Republicans. The White House planned to arrange a meeting where ``highly classified and other information'' will be shared with Members of Congress. It is highly irregular, inappropriate, and unprecedented. The President and his staff should not be involved in the reviewing or the dissemination of sensitive investigatory information involving any open investigation, let alone one about the activities of his own campaign. It is amazing. It is what you hear happening in third world countries. The leader says: No, I am above the law, and interferes with the process of law.

Congress has a right to oversight and to know what is going on after an investigation is complete. While an investigation is open and active, demands for oversight are tantamount to interference, especially when the folks demanding the information are the most biased, irresponsible actors. A man like Devin Nunes--I hear privately from my Republican colleagues that they think he is off the deep end-- is going to get hold of this? We think that is fair, unbiased oversight?

Give me a break. If such a meeting occurs--and I don't believe it should, but if it occurs--it must be bipartisan to serve as a check on the disturbing tendency of the President's allies to distort facts and undermine the investigation and people conducting them.

Democratic Members of the House and Senate, the analogs of the Republicans selected to be in the room, should be in the room as well. So if Devin Nunes is there, Adam Schiff should be there. To me, it is just amazing that it is happening.

One further point on this, again, the contradictory statements and opinions--the virtual hypocrisy of President Trump on these issues--are just mind-boggling.

President Trump, for instance, has been peddling the myth that a deep-state bias against his Presidency has animated the Russia probe. Of course, the idea is ridiculous. If there was such a deep state aligned against President Trump, why then was the active investigation into his campaign communications with Russian intelligence kept secret during the campaign? The deep state could have killed him in the election. If there was such a conspiracy against Donald Trump, why was the FBI investigation of his campaign under wraps, while at the same time, the FBI investigation into his opponent was in full view of the public eye? Whether or not you agree, Secretary of State and Presidential nominee Clinton believes that those comments by

the FBI about that investigation hurt her chances to win the Presidency. You may agree or you may disagree, but one fact is incontrovertible: The FBI talked publicly about the Clinton investigation and was silent about the Trump investigation. Yet the President says the deep state is out to kill him. It is not fair. It is not right. It is contradictory.

The truth is that the President and his allies only concoct these conspiracies--totally contradicted by well-known facts--to kick up dust, to obscure and obfuscate, to distort and distract, and when that is not enough, the President and his team directly interfere with the Russia investigation by asking its leaders to turn over documents to the most irresponsible actors in Congress--his ardent political allies. It ought to stop. It ought to stop.

The Justice Department doesn't take demands from the President. The special counsel's investigation must continue in search of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, on Friday morning there was yet another shooting in a school in America. Another community was torn apart by senseless violence. It was another week when parents must bury their children. We are still learning the tragic details of what happened in Santa Fe, but the basic reality in America remains unchanged: Far too many people are dying from gun violence.

What we need now more than ever is real, substantive debate on gun violence in America--a real debate about universal background checks, a real debate about protective orders, and a real

debate on regulating assault weapons, which are often the weapon of choice in the most deadly mass shootings.

In the wake of Parkland, it looked like President Trump would finally get religion on this issue. He promised a serious debate on gun violence, but as soon as the NRA and their special interest cronies closed ranks around him, he backed off. That seems to be the pattern of this administration. The President says something one day, and then some powerful interest says: Don't do it, and he backs right off. That is not the kind of strength he wishes to show, and he sure hasn't shown it on this issue.

After this most recent tragedy in Santa Fe, we have heard no new calls for commonsense gun safety from the White House, but this Chamber can still act. I implore my friends across the aisle to take up this debate. We owe it to the people of Santa Fe, TX, to the people of Parkland, FL, and to every other community that lives at the mercy of the gaping loopholes in our gun laws.

Mr. President, on the matter of ongoing trade negotiations with China, as I have said many times, when it comes to being tough on China's trading practices, I am closer to President Trump than to either President Obama or President Bush. I think the President recognized that fact in a tweet this morning.

When President Trump threatened tariffs and investment restrictions in the face of China's blatant theft and extortion of our intellectual property, I gave the President a pat on the back. Our companies need to be able to sell our goods and services in China without having to turn over intellectual property.

I have mentioned this before, but here is one example that pains me, and it is so typical. GE employs thousands in Schenectady. They have intellectual property and know-how to make turbines spin very fast and not overheat, but China wouldn't let them sell them. So what did they do? The Chinese blackmailed them, and GE went along. There is a 51-49 company that now makes those turbines in China. That is great for the heads of GE, great for their board, and great for the stock for a few years. But after that, once China--now in this 51-49 company--has learned how to make these turbines themselves, we are gone. More good- paying jobs could be lost in upstate New York, as they have been throughout America.

President Trump's actions at first helped bring China to the table, but now President Trump and his team have to stick with it, be strong, and negotiate a strong, concrete agreement. The worst thing to do would be to sell out for a one-time, temporary purchase of goods without addressing the real issue: the theft of intellectual property and know- how, which costs us millions of American jobs.

Unfortunately, it seems too strong a possibility that President Trump is headed down the road of not being strong. The President said this morning: ``China has agreed to buy massive amounts of ADDITIONAL Farm/ Agricultural products.'' Secretary Mnuchin, hardly a tower of strength on this issue, has said that the administration would ``follow this up'' on this vague commitment and that $150 billion in proposed tariffs would be put ``on hold.''

It is deeply disappointing that thus far President Trump has won no concessions on intellectual property and has locked in no new market access. In reality, there were not even specific commitments of U.S. good purchases, not that such a commitment would undo the damage China continues to do to us in its other activities.

If nothing else changes, this deal is a win-win for China. They avoid tough actions on intellectual property and give us some temporary and relatively small relief by buying some goods. China's trade negotiators must be laughing themselves all the way back to Beijing. They know what they are doing. They are playing us for fools. A temporary purchase of some goods, while China continues to steal our family jewels, the things that have made America great, the intellectual property, the know-how in the highest end industries--it makes no sense. China is pushing the President around, and he seems to accept it.

Worse still, the President's team is still talking about giving relief to China's state-backed telecommunications giant, ZTE, a company that violated our sanctions laws and is considered a national security threat. It is totally backward. The way to win real concessions from China is to stay tough, not to bluster and then back off at the first sign of friction.

So I say to President Trump, who knows I genuinely want him to succeed with China: Stay strong. Don't back off sanctions on ZTE. You have to pursue the course, or China will continue to enjoy the upper hand.

Congress also has a say on this issue. I was gratified to see that last week, Democrats and Republicans, in a House Appropriations subcommittee, approved a measure that would block the President from weakening sanctions on ZTE. Senate Democrats will also consider additional measures, if necessary, to block relief for ZTE, and we hope our Republican colleagues will join us in that effort.

The United States cannot let China continue to steal America's lifeblood, our intellectual property, and flout international trade laws. If President Trump doesn't get tough with them now, China will know he is willing to back down at the first sign of resistance. It will be a sad day for America--for America's workers, for our future wealth, and for our future prosperity. It will help make China replace us as No. 1. It is crucial.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to use leader time.

Thank you, Madam President.

Before I get into the substance of my remarks, I always listen diligently to my friend from Kentucky. There is a number that is missing in his charts; it is 1.5 trillion. The reason we don't like government spending is--he thinks--a lot of it is wasteful, but, ultimately, the reason is also that there is a huge deficit.

Our side scratches our heads not only with our friend from Kentucky, but with everyone on the other side who rails about too much government spending and creation of the deficit when they created the deepest hole they could have with the tax break that could have been paid for by closing loopholes. A group--a bipartisan group--had put something together that would have reduced the corporate rate to 25 percent, brought the money from overseas at 8, 9 percent, increased the child tax credit, left the individual side alone, and would have barely increased the deficit. So our side, at least, rankles when we hear these budgets that relate to deficit spending when, on the tax side, that doesn't seem to apply at all.

I say that with due respect to my good friend, who I know is sincere in his beliefs. He will argue with me that cutting taxes increases the economy. I would say that spending money on education and infrastructure also increases the economy. It is a slippery slope once you say: We can cut all the taxes we want; the deficit doesn't matter. It would be like our side saying: You can spend all the money you want; the deficit doesn't matter. We don't quite say that.

I thank my friend.

Net Neutrality

Madam President, yesterday was a good day for the future of the internet. Democrats forced the Senate to take an important step closer to restoring net neutrality. It is another step closer to ensuring that large internet service providers don't get to hold all the cards, another step closer to protecting equality of access to the internet. In doing so, Senate Democrats stood with the 86 percent of Americans who oppose the repeal of net neutrality.

I am proud to say that Senator Markey's Congressional Review Act resolution passed yesterday afternoon with the votes of every single Democrat, as well as three of our Republican colleagues. I thank Senators Collins, Murkowski, and Kennedy for supporting this fine legislation.

Here is what my friend the Republican Senator from Louisiana had to say after the vote:

If you trust your cable company, you won't like my vote. If

you don't trust your cable company, you will like my vote.

He is right. It is that simple. So you have to wonder why 47 Republicans voted no yesterday. Do they trust the cable companies and the large ISPs to do what is level best for the average American family? Do they believe that cable companies are really popular with the American people? I don't think so.

Now Republicans in the House have to take up this bipartisan resolution. We hope they will.

This isn't some partisan stunt. Absolutely not. It is a real, bipartisan effort to right the FCC's wrong and protect the free and open internet. It is very crucial to the future of the country.

House Republicans don't have to choose the same path that the vast majority of Republicans in the Senate decided to follow. Speaker Ryan should bring this up for a vote immediately. The American people have spoken. The Senate has spoken. Speaker Ryan should listen and bring the net neutrality CRA to the floor of the House.

Russia Investigation

Madam President, 1 year ago, former FBI Director Robert Mueller was appointed to lead the FBI's investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election. Of course, the investigation began long before that. According to the New York Times, it began in the middle of 2016 as a result of information we received from the Australian Ambassador, who told the FBI that Russian intelligence was working to share information with the Trump campaign.

At that time, we heard a lot about the FBI's investigation of Hillary Clinton's emails, but remarkably, we heard nothing about this other investigation. Now we know that one of those two investigations is much more serious than the other one was. We also know that if it were a witch hunt--as the President seems to think it is--if they were out to get him, they certainly would have leaked information about that during the election campaign. They didn't.

The probe led by Special Counsel Mueller, a Republican and decorated marine veteran, concerns the campaign of a hostile foreign power to interfere in and influence the outcome of an American election. There is nothing--nothing--more serious to the integrity of a democracy than the guarantee of free and fair elections.

The Founding Fathers warned about foreign interference. When I used to read that clause in high school, I said: What do they mean? That is not going to happen. Well, they were a lot smarter than we are--as always. They knew this danger. Here it is, 2018, and we see how real it is. It is the core of the special counsel's investigation.

The investigation has already yielded multiple indictments and guilty pleas. Yesterday the Senate Intelligence Committee, in a bipartisan manner, confirmed that Russia sought to interfere with our elections, sow discord, and tip the scales toward Donald Trump and against Secretary Clinton. The Trump administration itself has even taken punitive action against Russia's actors named in Mueller's investigation.

I salute the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, the Republican Senator from North Carolina, for being straightforward about this. Not so many on the other side of the aisle are.

Yet, again this morning, President Trump called the investigation a ``disgusting, illegal, and unwarranted witch hunt . . . the greatest witch hunt in American history.'' The rhetoric this man uses is amazing.

I say to the President: It is not a witch hunt when 17 Russians have been indicted. It is not a witch hunt when some of the most senior members of the Trump campaign have been indicted. It is not a witch hunt when Democrats and Republicans agree with the intelligence community that Russia interfered in our election to aid President Trump.

Any fair-minded citizen, even the most ardent partisan, should be able to look at the facts and say that this investigation is not a witch hunt. The FBI Director, Christopher Wray, appointed by President Trump, a Republican, said as much yesterday.

Truly, we should all be aghast, on this 1-year anniversary of Mueller's appointment, at the smear campaign by the President and his allies. We should all be aghast at the relentless parade of conspiracies manufactured by the most extreme elements of the Republican Party and conservative media to distract from the special counsel's investigation. From ``deep state'' leaks to unmasking requests, phone taps at Trump Tower, Uranium One, Nunes's midnight run to the White House, and the Nunes memo--these are all attempts to derail a legitimate and important investigation.

Now House conservatives are badgering DOJ officials for classified documents, hunting desperately for any scrap of information that would help them sully the investigation. By the way, for all of their ranting and raving and interfering, they don't have a scintilla of evidence to support that this is a witch hunt, that this is unfair, or that this is politically motivated.

The President and his allies don't quit with all these conspiracy theories, with all these ridiculous fomentations. Frankly, it is because they are afraid of what Mueller's investigation will reveal.

Every American who looks at the President's actions says that he is afraid of what the Mueller investigation will reveal. Yet the volume of mistruth, the weight of all the distortion and fabrication is hurting our democracy.

The double standard is enormous. The Times article shows no leaks when Trump was under investigation during the campaign; obviously, it was made public when Hillary Clinton was. Again, if this were a witch hunt, why didn't the FBI, which the President seems to feel is politically motivated with no scintilla of proof--why wouldn't they leak it?

One more point before I leave the floor--yesterday, the words of former Secretary Tillerson were these: ``If our leaders seek to conceal the truth or we as a people become accepting of alternative realities that are no longer grounded in facts, then we as American citizens are on the pathway to relinquishing our freedom.''

He is exactly right. When distortion, lies, and intimidation come repeatedly from the other side and some conservative news media, and that becomes the accepted way, when it is just he said, she said, where one side is blatantly lying, and that becomes accepted, our democracy is at risk.

We are a beautiful thing here--founded on facts, real facts. What we have seen from the President and some of his allies, the way they are behaving, makes you worry about the future of this democracy.

Ultimately, I have a firm belief that they will not succeed. The Founding Fathers were geniuses--geniuses--when they set up a system of checks and balances that we read about in our classes and we study, but it is almost mystical. It always rises to the occasion. It will again, despite the efforts of the President, despite the efforts of some of his allies who have gone way overboard; I might mention Chairman Nunes on the other side. I believe the checks and balances of this country will hold, and we will eventually find out the truth, no matter where it leads.

Today is a good day to remember that the special counsel's investigation is serious, it is nonpartisan, and it is critical to the integrity of our democracy. We must allow it to proceed without political interference, without intimidation, to follow all the facts in pursuit of the unvarnished truth on such an important issue.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, this week is National Police Week. It is a time to honor the brave men and women who put their lives on the line every day to keep our streets safe.

Every morning, police officers all across the country wake up, put on their uniform praying for the kind of day the rest of us typically enjoy: a routine one. Praise God, most days that is the case, but sometimes our police officers are asked to put their own lives at risk in defense of others. Back in my hometown, New York, we are protected by the finest law enforcement organization in the world--the NYPD. Just 2 weeks ago, two rookie New York police officers, Flavio Chauca and Jason Truglio, rushed into a burning apartment building and up nine flights of smoke-filled stairs to pull several people to safety. It was an extraordinary act of heroism--and just another day in the line of duty for the over 35,000 men and women of the New York Police Department.

All of us in Congress are indebted to the U.S. Capitol Police who spend long hours protecting us every day. We saw their bravery in action last year when a gunman attacked a congressional baseball practice. If it weren't for the grit and valor of Officers David Bailey and Crystal Griner, things would have gotten much worse.

We should all take a moment to thank the hard-working law enforcement officers at the FBI. Over the last year, our Nation's top law enforcement officers have been unfairly maligned by this President. It is unheard of, particularly on the Republican side, to be so anti-law enforcement, and it maligns the brave men and women who work under them too. Our FBI agents are patriots, just like the men and women out on the beat.

So, today, I salute the men and women in blue, particularly my friends at the NYPD and our fine Capitol Police, as we commemorate the lives of their colleagues lost in the line of duty.

Mr. President, last night, we received reports that Kim Jong Un is threatening to pull out of a planned meeting with President Trump as a result of the routine and scheduled joint military exercise by American and South Korean forces.

After weeks of halting progress, it is a reminder that the North Korean regime has not suddenly moderated. Remember, all that has happened so far is, North Korea has announced it is closing a nuclear test site that was defunct anyway and returned American citizens they never should have detained. We are all thankful those three Americans have returned home, but it was not some major give by Kim Jong Un. Americans should never be imprisoned unlawfully by a foreign power and treated as diplomatic bargaining chips, and we, as a country, should not be giving huge kudos to a leader who does just that.

President Trump, on the other hand, made a significant concession when he agreed to meet with Kim Jong Un. We are rooting for the President's gamble, with this mischievous and dangerous regime, to work. Now that push is coming to shove, Kim Jong Un is baiting the President into making more concessions to ensure a meeting that was a concession to them in the first place.

I strongly urge President Trump: Mr. President, don't give Kim Jong Un anything for free. North Korea is threatening to cancel the summit over our joint military exercises with the South. That would be a mistake. It would be a mistake for the President to cancel this exercise, to begin making further concessions before Kim has dismantled a single nuclear weapon or agreed to a single inspector. If we show weakness--if the minute Kim Jong Un threatens, we go along, he will continue to take advantage of us. We must show strength and fortitude. By continuing these military exercises, we will do just that. I urge the President to not even blink an eye but say we are going forward with these exercises. We have seen North Korea play these games before. When North Korea wants or needs something, exercises are a problem. When they don't need something, the exercises are not a problem. Kim is clearly testing the United States and President Trump, trying to see if there is any weakness or desperation or division on our side. We must be strong. We must be resolute. This exercise should move forward.

The best way to head into these negotiations with the North is to make clear that we will not be bullied and to show strength. We have to be willing to walk away from an insufficiently robust deal, and making concessions before we even sit down at the table would send the opposite signal. To achieve an enforceable, verifiable, and enduring agreement to denuclearize the North Korean Peninsula, the United States cannot give away leverage before even getting in the room.