Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, along with my colleague, Congressman Ro Khanna, I rise to recognize the Honorable Keith H. Fudenna on the occasion of his retirement after 28 years of serving as a judicial officer at the Fremont Hall of Justice.

Keith comes from a family that is dedicated to service. His father, Harold Fudenna, worked with U.S. intelligence forces in the South Pacific. Harold intercepted the message that exposed the location of Admiral Yamamoto, the Japanese military officer who planned the Pearl Harbor attack.

Following in his father's footsteps, Keith graduated from the University of California, Berkeley with a degree in mechanical engineering in 1971. He continued pursuing his education at the University of California, Hastings College of Law and earned his juris doctorate in 1974.

Keith was admitted to the State Bar of California in 1974, marking the beginning of his service to the community through both the public and private sectors. He began work at the Fremont City Attorney's Office before transitioning to private practice from 1981 to 1990.

After his time in private practice he became a Court Commissioner for the Fremont-Newark-Union City Municipal Court for seven years. In 1997, he was appointed Judge of the Municipal Court by Governor Pete Wilson. Keith was the first Asian American judge to serve on the Fremont- Newark-Union City Municipal Court.

Following his appointment, he was elected judge of the Superior Court of California. During his time as a Superior Court judge he has handled a variety of assignments, including criminal trials and arraignments.

Throughout his life, Keith has actively served his community outside of the courtroom. He has worked on the Board of Managers for the Fremont-Newark YMCA, the Board of Directors for the National Japanese American Historical Society, and as a member of the California State Bar Committee on Ethnic Minority Relations.

Keith Fudenna has served Alameda County and our country selflessly for more than 40 years. We congratulate Keith on a long and successful career, and we wish him health and happiness in retirement.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the distinguished service of Senior Deputy Sheriff Michael Durant of the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department and to thank him for his unwavering commitment to making California--and the United States--a safer place.

We owe a debt of gratitude to all of our nation's law enforcement officers, but Californians are especially thankful for the impact that Mike has made in his community and state. Over the course of his law enforcement career, which now spans more than three decades, Mike has held a number of important roles. He has been assigned to patrols and field trainings, conducted numerous investigations, and done extensive work with the canine unit.

At each step as Mike rose through the ranks, he gained experience and expertise that prepared him well for the position he currently holds with the Peace Officers Research Association of California, more commonly known as PORAC. PORAC's mission is to identify the public safety needs in communities and help to provide the services necessary to adequately meet those changing needs. After serving for seven years as the group's Vice President, in 2013 Mike was unanimously elected President and has since led the association with distinction.

As leader of the largest law enforcement organization in California and the largest such statewide association in the nation with over 70,000 active members, Mike has strengthened the association and enhanced PORAC's voice at the state and national levels. I have seen firsthand Mike's passion for enacting public policy aligned with PORAC's honorable mission, at both the state and federal levels.

When PORAC meets with Members of Congress this week, it will be the last time it does so under the leadership of President Durant. With Mike's productive tenure as PORAC President coming to an end, I want to thank him for his service to California, congratulate him on a job well done, and wish him the very best in all of his future endeavors. I would also like to extend my deepest appreciation to Mike's wife, Roxanne, and his three children--because as a son of a police officer and brother of two members of law enforcement myself, I recognize the sacrifices such families make while their loved ones serve in the line of duty.

Madam Speaker, happy birthday to you.

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the ranking member and our chair.

I think this IAA represents the best of what we do together in the committee, and I am really just thrilled on behalf of the men and women who serve this country in our military and in our intelligence services that they have an authorization, act, that respects what they do, that enables what they do and understands that we have trying days ahead.

Press reports right now are showing that North Korea may have just launched another ballistic missile, and so people who we represent at home are counting on us to do everything we can to protect this great country. It has been a privilege to work with Mr. Schiff and the chairman on this bill.

Of particular interest for me is that this bill also has our intelligence agencies report back to Congress just what efforts the Russians are taking not just in America, but across the globe to interfere and meddle in other countries' elections. We have seen an escalating pattern of this over the past few decades, certainly culminating in our recent 2016 election.

It is very important that the Congress knows and that the American people and our allies know what continued efforts will look like. So I appreciate the majority's willingness to work with us.

We have seen, I think, in just the past few days, a bicameral effort to come together and say that we are not going to tolerate Russia's aggression in the world. The sanctions that were recently passed in this House and across the way in the Senate, I think, showed the world that we are serious, that this is our democracy, and it is still a democracy that is worth protecting. I think part of the IAA reflects that spirit as well.

So, again, I thank the chairman for his work. I thank the staff on the majority side and the Members on the majority side, as well as our ranking member and our own staff, for working so hard to put this forward to protect and defend this great country.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Glad Tidings Church of God in Christ on its ``Five Point Celebration'' and the congregation's continued service to our community.

Glad Tidings Church, celebrating its 39th anniversary, has been an anchor for the people of South Hayward, California since its establishment in 1978. Founder Bishop Jerry Wayne Macklin has worked tirelessly with local schools, government agencies, and nonprofit organizations to transform a neighborhood once overrun by drugs and crime into a community of faith and opportunity.

The efforts of Bishop Macklin and his congregation are to be honored at their upcoming ``Five Point Celebration''. The four-day event will celebrate the Church's 39th anniversary, the making of the final payment on the property's mortgage agreement, the groundbreaking of the Chester McGlockton Wellness and Family Life Center, the Inaugural Episcopal Elevation of Bishop Macklin as 2nd Assistant Presiding Bishop of Church of God and Christ, and last, but not least, the 65th birthday of Bishop Macklin.

Today, under Bishop Macklin's compassionate leadership, Glad Tidings Church has helped change perspectives on what a place of worship can offer its community. Bishop Macklin has sought to provide accessible healthcare through its Health and Wellness Department, organized food drives for our vulnerable citizens, and secured affordable housing for those most in need.

These and countless other examples are what make Glad Tidings Church of God in Christ a pillar of our community and worthy of our recognition today. I want to thank Bishop Macklin and Glad Tidings devoted congregation for the positive impact their services have created in our community, and I offer my heartfelt congratulations during this time of celebration.

Mr. Speaker, due to the birth of my first child I was unable to be present for votes taken May 18 through 19, 22, and 24 through 25, as well as for some votes on May 23. Had I been present, I would have voted as follows:

Roll Call Vote Number 263 (Previous Question on H. Res. 324): NO.

Roll Call Vote Number 264 (Passage of H. Res. 324): NO.

Roll Call Vote Number 265 (Passage of H.R. 115, the Thin Blue Line Act): YES.

Roll Call Vote Number 266 (Passage of H.R. 1892, the Honoring Hometown Heroes Act): YES.

Roll Call Vote Number 267 (Passage of H.AMDT. 117 to H.R. 1039 offered by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee): YES.

Roll Call Vote Number 268 (Passage of H.R. 1039, the Probation Officer Protection Act of 2017): NO.

Roll Call Vote Number 269 (Passage of H.R. 1862, the Global Child Protection Act of 2017): YES.

Roll Call Vote Number 270 (Passage of H.R. 1842, the Strengthening Children's Safety Act): YES.

Roll Call Vote Number 273 (Passage of H.R. 2288, the Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act of 2017): YES.

Roll Call Vote Number 274 (Motion to Table): NO.

Roll Call Vote Number 275 (Previous Question on H. Res. 352): NO.

Roll Call Vote Number 276 (Passage of H. Res. 352): NO.

Roll Call Vote Number 277 (Passage of H.R. 2052, the Protecting the Rights of IndiViduals Against Technological Exploitation (PRIVATE) Act): YES.

Roll Call Vote Number 278 (Passage of H.R. 467, the VA Scheduling Accountability Act): YES.

Roll Call Vote Number 279 (Passage of H. AMDT. 118 to H.R. 953 offered by Rep. Elizabeth Esty): YES.

Roll Call Vote Number 280 (Passage of H. AMDT. 119 to H.R. 953 offered by Rep. Jared Huffman): YES.

Roll Call Vote Number 281 (Motion to Recommit on H.R. 953): YES.

Roll Call Vote Number 282 (Passage of H.R. 953, the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2017): NO.

Roll Call Vote Number 283 (Passage of H. AMDT 124 to H.R. 1761 offered by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee): NO.

Roll Call Vote Number 284 (Passage of H.R. 1761, the Protecting Against Child Exploitation Act of 2017): YES.

Roll Call Vote Number 285 (H.R. 1973, the Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse Act of 2017): YES.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding.

I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question and allow an amendment to come forward so that we can debate having an independent commission on Russia's interference in our past election.

The events over the past few weeks have demonstrated that there is a high cost--a cost that is too high to bear with regard to the White House and its ties with Russia.

What is the cost exactly?

What is the cost of alleged abuses and the President's firing of Acting Attorney General Sally Yates and Director James Comey?

What is the cost of the question swirling around the President's ties to Russia?

Well, the cost, clearly, with the leaking that occurred in the Oval Office, is now our national security.

The cost is our democracy has been left in ruins. It is a mess right now here in Washington.

The cost is that this House is unable to bring forward legislation to do anything to help people put food on the table, to seek to put a roof over their home, and to provide opportunity to their children.

It is a high cost that we are paying right now for all these questions. It is too much for us to bear.

The best thing we can do is to charter an independent commission to take this outside of Congress so that they can follow the facts and the evidence and report back to the American people just exactly how we were so vulnerable this last election.

What was our response?

Were any U.S. persons involved?

And, most importantly, what are we going to do?

What reforms can we make?

What awareness should we all have so that we never find ourselves in a mess like this again?

It is not disputed, Russia attacked our democracy. It was ordered by Vladimir Putin. They used a multifaceted campaign of social media trolls, the dissemination of fake news, the hacking of Democratic emails, and the breaking into State voter registration systems. They had a preferred candidate in mind in Donald Trump. And they didn't do it because they were bored. They didn't do it because they were testing software. They did it because they wanted something in return. They saw a candidate who admired their President, they wanted sanctions rolled back, and they wanted to reduce the role of NATO.

But the most disturbing and the most bone-chilling finding that the intelligence community made was that Russia intends to do it again. And by the looks of things, they will be more successful next time because, since this past attack, we have done nothing to improve the structural integrity of our elections. We have done nothing to have a frank conversation with the American people about how we all need to be more aware about what a foreign adversary's intent is when they hack emails and then disseminate fake news.

This is a time for Republicans and Democrats to unite. Democrats may have been the victim of this most recent attack. If history has its way, another adversary perhaps could attack us and Republicans may be the victim.

But the constant should always be that both parties say we will never tolerate foreign interference. The first step to doing that is to defeat this previous question, allow an amendment to take place so we can debate having an independent commission, a commission that would be bipartisan appointed, have a wide mandate to follow the evidence, explore all the facts, and then report to the American people recommendations so that this never happens again. We have a discharge petition right now to also do that. There are a number of names on it.

I saw how our country responded after the last serious attack that occurred on September 11. Outside, on the Capitol steps, Republicans and Democrats joined hands. They sang ``God Bless America.'' But more importantly were the reforms that they undertook over the next few years to understand the vulnerability, to put policies in place to make sure we were never vulnerable again, and report to the American people what they had done.

We have an opportunity again to unite. Our constituents are counting on us to show that unity, to wear the same uniform, and make sure that this democracy is still one we protect.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

I am opposed in its current form.

Mr. Speaker, this is the final amendment to the bill. It will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. If adopted, the bill will immediately proceed to final passage, as amended.

Russia attacked our democracy this past Presidential election. This motion asks Members of this House: Do you want to do something about it? Do you want to do all you can to make sure it doesn't happen again?

If you do, support this amendment. If you don't, vote against it, and watch Russia and other adversaries of ours with similar cyber capabilities carry out similar attacks, and the very democracy that we treasure will erode before our eyes. But I believe we are a better body than one that would let another country attack us and then divide us.

What does this motion to recommit do? It requires any company-- particularly, I am concerned about financial institutions--to cooperate with all investigations into collusion between President Trump, his campaign, his family, his businesses, and anyone on his team and Russia's interference campaign during the 2016 election.

The evidence is overwhelming. In the 2016 election, Russia ran a multifaceted electronic interference campaign against our democracy. They used paid social media trolls. They hacked Democratic emails and disseminated the information in those emails through cutouts like WikiLeaks and Guccifer 2.0. They had a clear preference for Donald Trump as their candidate. It was ordered by their own President, Vladimir Putin.

And most concerning for every person in this House--should be--they are sharpening their knives, and they intend to do it again. That was the final finding in the intelligence report. They are sharpening their knives and intend to do it again not just to the United States, but to our allies like France and Germany, who are a part of the best check on Russia, the NATO alliance.

Why are we concerned about finances and companies cooperating with the United States in this investigation? Well, we know from the Kremlin's playbook that they use financial entanglements as a means to recruit individuals or to peddle influence.

Why are we concerned about financial ties among Donald Trump and his team? Because unlike any Presidential candidate in the history of our Presidential elections, there are an unprecedented amount of personal, political, and financial ties to a foreign adversary. They include, but are not limited to:

Paul Manafort, where it is alleged he was paid by pro-Russian Ukraine Government individuals and also paid up to $10 million a year by Vladimir Putin's associates;

Former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who should have known better as the former Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, should have known about Russia's playbook and their ability to influence people, but after leaving the DIA, went over to Moscow, sat next to Vladimir Putin, and was paid by Russia's propaganda tool, Russia Today, also known as RT, who General Flynn would have known is an arm of Russia's intelligence services;

Donald J. Trump, Jr., who said in 2008, in terms of high-end product influx into the United States, Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross section of a lot of our assets. In Dubai, and certainly with our project in SoHo, and anywhere in New York, we see a lot of money pouring in from Russia;

President Trump, who has invested in the past in Russia: over half a dozen trademarks granted to him in Russia, a vodka brand he tried to peddle in Russia, a Miss Universe contest that he held in Moscow in 2013, and Russia has invested in our President. There are Russian businessowners who have bought condos in his Trump Tower building. There are loans from banks that have paid fines for laundering money through Russia. There is a home sale in 2008 where the President reaped 129 percent in profit. He bought a home in 2004 in West Palm Beach for $40 million; sold it in 2008, as the real estate market was collapsing, for over $90 million; sold it to a Russian businessman known as the fertilizer king. No one else in that ZIP Code reaped a profit of 129 percent.

So why are banks particularly relevant for this motion? We know they are used by Russia to move money and extend influence. Their cooperation will be crucial to understanding how Russia finances its interference campaign.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this motion to recommit and get to the bottom of exactly what happened with Russia.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Colorado for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, Russia attacked our democracy this past election. I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question and for all of us to get to the business of forming an independent commission to find out how we were attacked, who was responsible, whether any U.S. persons were involved, and, most importantly, promise the American people we will do everything we can to make sure we never find ourselves in a mess like this again.

Congressman Cummings and I introduced H.R. 356, the Protecting Our Democracy Act, because we always believed that the only way to have a comprehensive understanding of what happened and who was responsible and to make recommendations was through an independent commission. However, it also now is an insurance policy against compromised investigations that we believe are coming from this House as well as the administration.

There is no question that, this last election, Russia meddled in our election. It is not disputed that that order came from Vladimir Putin. There is no dispute, among our intelligence agencies, that he had a strong preference for Donald Trump, and the most terrifying finding that our intelligence agencies made was that Russia is sharpening their knives and undertaking a lessons-learned campaign because they will go at us and our allies again.

Unfortunately, we have seen that those charged with getting to the bottom of what has happened have been compromised. The American people are counting on us to defend this great democracy, a democracy that so many men and women in our armed services have fought for and sacrificed for and who are fighting for and sacrificing for today.

Unfortunately, the Attorney General, twice when asked under oath as to whether he had any prior contacts with Russia, said that he had not. We later learned that, indeed, during the Republican Convention and afterwards, he had met with Russia's Ambassador. He is now recused from any investigation into Russia. That is the executive branch.

Unfortunately, our investigation in the House has also been compromised. I have long enjoyed working with Chairman Nunes. I think he is a good man who has led our committee over the last few years to bipartisan results that have made us safer. For the last few weeks, Republicans and Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee have gone down an investigative road together. We had a very productive open hearing last week where we were able to connect the dots of Donald Trump's, his family's, his campaign's, and his business' personal, political, and financial ties to Russia that were converging with a Russian interference campaign. Those dots were validated by the FBI Director confirming that, indeed, President Trump's campaign was under counterintelligence and criminal investigations.

Unfortunately, the chairman, in the last week, exited this bipartisan investigative road to work with the White House; going to the White House to receive classified information before sharing it with any members on the committee, Democratic and Republican; and going again to the White House the next day to share that information with the President.

The actions of the Attorney General and the actions of the leaders in this House who are supposed to be undertaking this campaign demand that we take this outside of politics and that we take this outside of Congress. The only way to do that is to have an independent commission that can depoliticize this, that can declassify the facts to the extent possible, and that can debunk the myths that our

President has put forward about what happened with Russia.

Mr. Speaker, I was a 20-year-old intern in Washington, D.C., when we were attacked on September 11. I will never forget watching Republicans and Democrats stand on the House steps, arm in arm, singing ``God Bless America.'' But what was more moving than that moment of symbolism was the unity that Republicans and Democrats showed when they came together to make important reforms to ensure that never again would we be attacked from the skies, when they made many reforms that were put in place by an independent commission that was parallel to investigations that were being done in Congress.

Mr. Speaker, there is still time for Republicans and Democrats in this House to unite. There is still time for us to uphold that solemn duty to ensure that we always put our public safety and our sacred democracy first. The best way to do that is to bring before this House for consideration the Protect Our Democracy Act. This country is still worth defending.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition of the effort to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act.

Simply, my constituents will be stuck paying more. And if they are not losing their coverage, they will know somebody who is going to lose their coverage. And if they are over the age of 50 and not on Medicare yet, they are going to suffer a very cruel age tax.

I think not of politics when the President said some are going to pay a political price if they don't support this, I think about what they are going to pay at the doctor's office.

John Cameron of Dublin, California, told me that, before the Affordable Care Act, he could not get the double hip surgery that he needed. Because of it, he was able to get it last week. We need hardworking small-business owners like John to keep working and have affordable insurance.

Mr. Speaker, when this President put his name on a casino, he left its workers in the dust. When he put his name on a university, he left its students out in the cold. And when he puts his name on this healthcare plan, TrumpCare, he is going to leave all of us sicker and poorer.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Hayward resident Betty DeForest following the occasion of her passing on March 10, 2017.

Betty was a dedicated advocate and servant to the Hayward community, where she had lived since 1952. She devoted her life to fighting discrimination and seeking justice for persons of color as well as our poor, homeless, immigrant, and LGBTQ communities.

Betty was a member of the Westminster Hills Presbyterian Church and was instrumental in the formation of its interfaith assemblage, the South Hayward Parish, which provides food for individuals and families in need, along with housing and healthcare resources. She quickly became an integral component of the group's efforts to advocate for the rights of all persons, regardless of sexual orientation, religion, or race.

Betty was deeply committed to our children and their education, serving two terms on the Hayward School Board, as well as Executive Director of the Eden Youth and Family Center, which provides an assortment of services to children and families across Alameda County.

She also was a champion for the LGBTQ community. As President of her local PFLAG chapter and proud mother of a gay son, Betty helped establish the annual Hayward Gay Prom in 1995, creating an atmosphere for LGBTQ youth to feel safe and protected, without fear of judgement or reprisal.

I had the privilege of working personally with Betty on numerous occasions. Betty devoted not only her time, but also precious resources, to accommodate interfaith meetings addressing gun violence within our community. Most recently, Betty allowed me the honor of participating in the South Hayward Parish's Martin Luther King Jr. Day March, an annual event highlighting the strides our country has made and bringing focus to the work yet ahead.

Betty's commitment to the Hayward community touched the lives of countless individuals and was truly extraordinary. I want to acknowledge Betty's remarkable accomplishments and pass along my condolences to her family and friends--our community will certainly feel her absence.

Mr. Speaker, in every chapter from the story of America's success, we find countless examples of the contributions made by immigrants. In fact, it begins in our prologue: we are a nation founded by immigrants.

Yet, over the weekend, a Member of this House, Mr. King of Iowa, said: ``We can't restore our civilization with somebody else's babies.''

There is nothing to restore. We are the greatest country in the world. But, worse, by disparaging the value of somebody else's babies, Mr. King argues for an America void of people of color or who worship differently than he does. That is not who we are.

Behind me are a few small examples of somebody else's babies: people who immigrated to America or whose families immigrated to America, practicing many different faiths, coming from many different countries.

They include the daughter of Chinese immigrants who became one of America's most celebrated and best-selling authors, Amy Tan; the son of a Syrian migrant, Steve Jobs, who founded Apple; and the son of a Kenyan student, who recently finished two terms as the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama.

These are not somebody else's babies. These are immigrants and the children of immigrants, and they are our babies.

I was born and baptized in Sac City, Iowa, located in Mr. King's district. It is where I learned from Exodus 22:21, ``You must not mistreat or oppress foreigners in any way. Remember, you yourselves were once foreigners.'' And from the Iowans I know, they were raised to accept and love the same way.

I hope my colleagues join me in denouncing bigoted, hateful, and divisive rhetoric, and let's celebrate the beautiful diversity that has always made our Nation shine: these beautiful ``somebody else's babies'' who are America's babies.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize John Creighton on the occasion of his retirement after 33 years of dedicated public service as a Deputy District Attorney for Alameda County.

John's life of service began in 1971, when he enlisted in the U.S. Army. He served in the Intelligence Corps, operating out of the U.S. Army headquarters in Vietnam providing counterintelligence work. In 1973, he worked in Psychological Operations at JFK Special Forces Center at Ft. Bragg, North Carolina, eventually being honorably discharged with the rank of Sergeant in 1974.

In 1979, he enrolled at the University of California at Berkeley, and graduated with a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science. John would go on to receive his Juris Doctorate from the University of San Francisco School of Law in 1984. During his time in college, John worked as a union laborer, truck driver, auto mechanic and paralegal.

In 1984, John was hired by the Alameda County District Attorney's (DA) Office in Oakland. John's distinguished career spanned over three decades, and he prosecuted hundreds of cases, including murder, domestic violence, sexual assault and major narcotics trafficking.

In the DA's office, John was tasked as a Gang Violence Prosecutor, handling complex gang-related felonies at all stages of prosecution, as well as serving as a DA representative to the nationally recognized Gang Intervention Program. John received the Neighborhood Champion Award in 2014 for his work.

John not only served his community in the courtroom, but also devotes his time as a soccer referee with the Jack London Youth Soccer League. Additionally, John previously served as a member on the Board of Directors for both Planned Parenthood Golden Gate and Golden Gate Community Health.

John has fostered lasting, productive partnerships in the East Bay and laid the foundation for others to succeed. His legacy is one of selfless service and tireless justice and compassion, leaving our community and nation safer for all of us. I wish to congratulate John on a long and distinguished career, and I wish him health and happiness in retirement.

Mr. Speaker, regarding the question considered yesterday, Wednesday, March 8, on passage of H.R. 1301, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2017, Roll Call Number 136, I am recorded as voting Yes. I intended to vote No.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. McGovern for his work on this issue. I love my country, and I don't doubt that every one of my colleagues in this Chamber also loves this country. I admire every man and woman who has so bravely fought to defend it. After all, this is a country, this is a democracy worth defending. That is actually what defeating this previous question would take us to, the question of is this democracy still worth defending.

This past election, our democracy was attacked. The attack was electronic, and it was nearly invisible. It came from a foreign adversary in Russia, ordered by Vladimir Putin. It was intended to help Donald Trump. Most concerning, the public intelligence report about this attack, the last finding is, Russia intends to do this again. They are undertaking a lessons-learned campaign so they can attack the United States again and attack our allies, the best check against Russia through the NATO alliance.

Yesterday, the President removed a rotten plank in what is a compromised platform, Michael Flynn. In 2015, he went to Russia and sat next to Vladimir Putin, was paid for it, and, The New York Times reported yesterday, did not disclose that in the proper way he is supposed to to the Department of Defense. Because Russia attacked us, President Obama issued sanctions against Russia on December 28. Michael Flynn called Russia, its Ambassador, five times, at least five times, and discussed those sanctions, likely in violation of the Logan Act. He lied about it, lied to the Vice President about it, who went on national TV and defended Michael Flynn, saying it never happened.

But here is what we also learned. We learned that 3 weeks ago the White House knew, because acting Attorney General Sally Yates told the White House, that Michael Flynn had lied and had put himself in a position where he could be compromised through blackmail by the Russian Government. Yet, despite knowing this, the White House allowed Michael Flynn to remain as the National Security Adviser, receive security briefings at the highest level, and advise our President on our security.

All of the arrows continue to point to the Russian Government. We have more questions today than we did yesterday about whether there were any personal, political, or financial connections between President Trump, his family, his businesses, his campaign, and the Russian Government before the election and whether there are any efforts right now going on to pay back the Russian Government.

All of the arrows continue to point to Russia. It is not disputed that Russia carried out this attack. It is not disputed that it was ordered by President Putin. It is not disputed that they sought to help Donald Trump. It is not disputed that Donald Trump admires President Putin and can't say a single bad thing about him. Despite disparaging our allies in Australia and Mexico, he can't say a bad thing about Putin. In fact, he wants to ease some of the sanctions against Russia and wants to roll back the influence of NATO.

Of course, while all of this is going on, the President will not show us his tax returns. With all of those arrows pointing to Russia, the American people deserve to know what was the political, personal, and financial relationship between the President and his team and Russia. The only way to get there is to have an independent, bipartisan- appointed commission.

Defeating the previous question and bringing up the Protecting Our Democracy Act will get us one step closer. I believe that my Republican colleagues--who love this great country as much as I do--can join us, and this can be a bipartisan quest to say that never again will we allow a foreign adversary to interfere in our elections.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 387, the Email Privacy Act.

As I said last Congress, current law is woefully out of date when it comes to protecting privacy in electronic communications. I support H.R. 387, just as I supported the same legislation previously, because it is long past time we afforded Americans the privacy they are due online.

At the same time, I am disappointed this bill has come straight to the Floor, and not through the Judiciary Committee, a committee on which I sit. Nor are any Members able to offer amendments on the Floor. Going through the committee process and allowing amendments on the Floor would have enabled us to address some of the concerns raised by law enforcement about H.R. 387, such as its view that the bill fails to enable personnel to expediently obtain critical evidence. As a former prosecutor I share its interest in making sure that while we improve privacy protections we do not impede the ability to bring people swiftly to justice. I urge the Senate to work to address the points raised by law enforcement so we can continue to improve H.R. 387.

I encourage all Members to support H.R. 387.