Floor Statements

Mr. President, reserving the right to object.

Mr. President, I will try to be very brief as far as where I am coming from here.

We were told that Mueller may be imminently fired. The President said some things that were at times disturbing about the investigation. I was asked many times, let's make sure we protect Mueller and let him do his job. So I first introduced the Special Counsel Independence Protection Act on August 3, 2017, with Republicans and Democrats.

To my good friend from New York, I think Mueller is just about done.

To all those who are worried about Mueller not being able to do his job, he has. He is about to tell us what he found.

There is a regulation that determines what is disclosed and how it is disclosed. I have all the confidence that Mr. Barr will be as transparent as possible. That regulation is specific. You can look at it for yourself. I would like to know as much as possible and share it with the public. However, I have also been consistent in trying to find balance here.

In February of 2018, I called for a special counsel to look at the abuses, potentially, by the Department of Justice and the FBI regarding the Clinton email investigation and the handling of the FISA warrant process against Mr. Carter Page, someone associated with the Trump campaign.

So since 2018, I have asked a simple thing. If this stuff about Page and Strzok and Ohr doesn't bother you, then that bothers me. Were there two

systems of justice in 2016--one for the Democratic candidate and one for the Republican candidate, where the Republican candidate's campaign had a FISA warrant issued against somebody associated with it based on a document that was known to be unreliable, politically charged, on four different occasions? That should bother every American.

Rather than my telling you whether it happened or not, why don't we appoint a Mueller-like figure to look at how the Clinton email investigation ended up the way it did, what the tarmac meeting was all about between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton?

I can quickly say to my colleagues, if the shoe were on the other foot, if the Republican Party hired a foreign agent to go to Russia to investigate dirt on Hillary Clinton, gave it to the Justice Department, and it was used on four separate occasions to get a warrant against somebody working with or associated with the Clinton campaign, all hell would pay.

If a member of the Justice Department told the investigators: Before you get the warrant, the person who is involved in collecting this information hates Clinton; if there were exchanges between an FBI agent and a Department of Justice lawyer talking about getting an insurance policy to make sure that Hillary Clinton is never elected and how much they hated Trump, it would be front-page news all over the world.

I don't know what happened between Trump and Russia, but we are about to find out, and we will see if there is something there, and we will use a process to disclose it to the public.

But I ask the Democratic leader to modify his request and allow my amendment at the desk to make a simple change--and every Republican will be with me, if you wonder about how Republicans vote in the House--that this resolution be modified calling for the Attorney General to appoint a special counsel to investigate Department of Justice misconduct in the handling of the Clinton email investigation and in the handling of the FISA warrant process as it relates to warrants obtained on Carter Page and to publicly release the results of those investigations--be agreed to consistent with law. I ask that the resolution to be modified in accordance with this.

I object.

Mr. President, I thank Senator Schumer. I appreciate getting this done quickly.

I will just say, there are a lot of Americans, including Jim Jordan, who believe that what happened in 2016 with the Clinton email investigation and the FISA warrant against Carter Page showed corruption at the highest level of the government. I agree that there are more than smoking guns here. There is overwhelming evidence that somebody outside the political system should look into. I can't find anybody much on the other side who seems to give a damn about that.

Mueller, I get. Mueller has been allowed to do his job. We are going to find out what he found pretty soon, as much as we can, consistent with the law. But I am not going to give up on the idea that we are just going to look at one problem of 2016. I have been talking to myself for the most part; now I have a forum.

I will introduce a resolution asking you to do a simple thing. Ask somebody outside of politics--a special counsel--to look into how in the world the system got so off track, to use a document prepared by foreign agent, paid for by the Democratic Party, collected in Russia, to obtain a warrant against an American citizen that is garbage to this day? How in the world could the investigation get so off track that the two people in charge of it openly talked about making sure that there was an insurance policy against Trump if he won and openly espoused support for Clinton. How do you interview Clinton the way she was interviewed? Any American out there who did what Secretary Clinton did you would see in jail now.

The question I want to know is, Does anybody other than me believe that? I don't ask you to believe me. We let Mueller look at all things Trump related to collusion and otherwise. Somebody needs to look at what happened on the other side and find out if the FBI and the DOJ had two systems--one supporting the person they wanted to win and one out to get the person they wanted to lose.

Some of these people have been fired for lying, and it is now time to have a special counsel look at all things 2016, not just Trump.

Madam President, we are now debating the nomination of Mr. Barr to be the Attorney General.

All I can say is if America ever needed a steady hand at the Department of Justice, it is now. Mr. Whitaker has done a good job as interim Attorney General, but we are looking for a new person to bring stability, improve morale, and be a steady hand and mature leadership at a time when our country is very much divided.

I told President Trump, when he mentioned Mr. Barr to me as a potential nominee: The other names are impressive, but Mr. Barr stands out head and shoulders above the others.

If you knew who the others were, that is saying a lot.

Why not believe that? The best indication of what Mr. Barr will do as Attorney General in the future is what he has done in the past. He has actually been Attorney General before. He was approved by this body, under Bush 41, to be the Attorney General by a voice vote. He has been the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel and the Deputy Attorney General. He has been the chief lawyer for the CIA. In all of these jobs, he was confirmed by the Senate by voice vote.

In other words, he was so well qualified that nobody felt the need to vote. Yes, he is a fine man. Let's go ahead and confirm him by voice vote.

Now, here we are, in 2019, and I can say, without any doubt, that if you think Bill Barr has been auditioning for this job, you really haven't paid much attention to how this whole thing came about.

Once the President mentioned to me that he was considering Mr. Barr, I asked him: Well, does he want the job?

He says he doesn't know, but everybody tells me he would be one of the best picks I can make.

I said: Well, I agree with what everybody else has told you.

I called Mr. Barr, on several occasions, asking to please consider this: I know that you are at a good time in your life. Your children are grown. You have made it. You have done a good job. You have a stellar reputation, and you have done the work of several lifetimes. But having said that, seldom can somebody in their late sixties be able to contribute the most in their life, and I believe this is your time to make the biggest contribution. In terms of what you have done for the country, that is saying a lot. Again, very seldom does this moment come along where you can make the biggest contribution to the country later in life after having served before.

So he agreed to take the job, and we have cloture by, I think, 55 votes. He got voted out of committee along party lines.

Senator Biden told me something that stuck with me to this day: Never question the motive of a Senator. They got here their way. You can question their judgment but not their motive.

When it comes to Bill Barr, I can only tell my Democratic colleagues that there is nobody better that I know to recommend to you. This is as good as it gets on our side. I was happy when President Trump wanted to nominate Mr. Barr. I thought of all the people he could have chosen, and this was the top, by far.

I say that because of the way he conducted himself over decades of service at the highest levels of government. He is a man of the law. He loves the law. His ethics is beyond reproach.

When it comes to Mr. Mueller's investigation, the Barrs and the Muellers are friends, but it will be a business relationship. I can promise you this: Mr. Barr will make sure that Mr. Mueller can finish his job without political interference. He said that, I believe that, and that is the way this movie has to end.

As for the memo that he wrote about one of the theories of obstruction of justice, related to the firing of Director Comey, I share his legal analysis and concern. If firing somebody that you have the ability to fire, for almost any reason, becomes obstruction of justice, then anytime you fire a U.S. attorney or assistant U.S. attorney, you are turning it into a political football.

So as for the statute that he wrote the memo about, his reasoning about how you should be reluctant to use this for an obstruction of justice case made perfect sense to me. When he was asked about the President's obstruction of justice, he said: Of course, the President can be charged with obstruction of justice. If the President encourages somebody to give false testimony, that will be obstruction of justice. If they tried to hide evidence from the courts or the Congress, that would be obstruction of justice.

The question was this: Could you bring a case based on firing somebody who is a political appointee? He had great reservations about that, but he acknowledged that the President is not above the law, and to suggest otherwise is not really listening to what he had to say-- wanting an outcome rather than listening to what he had to say.

About sharing the Mueller report with the country at large, there is a regulation on point that basically requires Mr. Mueller to report to the chairman and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee of the House and of the Senate about the report. He has discretion to withhold information that he believes should be classified. He has to tell us-- the chairman and the ranking member--whether or not he disagreed with Mr. Mueller's decision in any fashion.

In other words, if Mueller wanted to bring a charge or make an accusation, and Barr said no, under the regulation he would have to tell us that he actually disagreed with Mr. Mueller and why.

As to how much he will release, we will know when he gets the report, but here is what I do believe. He is going to err on the side of transparency. I am not going to take his discretion away from him. I trust him to make a good decision, and his promising us to release the report before he gets it is probably a bridge too far. For anybody wanting the job to make a bargain with a Senator just to get the job-- that I will turn this report over even before I see it--is probably not the right answer.

Here is what Mr. Barr said that really stuck with me. I am not making bargains with editorial writers, with pundits, or with elected political leaders that I don't feel are right for the Department. I don't want the job that much. I don't need the job in terms of building a career. I have had a great career. I am doing this because I think I can provide some leadership at a time we need some.

We will have a vote here probably tomorrow. He is soon going to be Attorney General. I can tell all my Democratic colleagues that I cannot think of a better person to do this job at this time in our Nation's history. I know he will be devoted to following the law as the law is written. I know he will be fair to the President, but he will pick the rule of law over anything or anybody, including the Senate or the President.

He will be a shot in the arm for a Department that needs a morale lift. He is going to look at the abuses inside of the Department. How could a FISA warrant be issued on an American citizen based on a dossier? It is a bunch of political garbage.

As for what happened in 2016, he is going to look at that, too, I hope. But when it comes to Mr. Mueller, Mr. Mueller will be allowed to do his job, and there will come a day when his report is completed. I am confident that Mr. Barr will share it with the public to the fullest extent possible. I have every confidence he will.

To the people who are working at the Department of Justice, in a day or two, you are going to have a new leader. I think you should be excited about the reforms that will be coming. I think you should be excited about working for this good man. He has dedicated his life to your causes--a Department of Justice that is impartial, that goes after the bad guys, and that makes sure that the policies in place build up the country.

I think Mr. Barr represents that way of doing business in Washington that has sort of been lost. He is a ``handshake and phone call'' kind of guy. He has been up here for a very, very long time. He has earned a lot of accolades in the legal profession.

Some of the people who came forward to testify on his behalf definitely have a different legal philosophy and political philosophy than Mr. Barr, but they all said, without hesitation, that he is one of the finest people they have ever known and he will be a great Attorney General.

I want to thank President Trump for nominating Mr. Barr. I don't think he could have done a better job in picking someone than Mr. Barr. I want to let the people at the Department of Justice know that help is on the way. I want the American people to understand that this man has a record that should comfort you--that with Bill Barr, you know what you are getting. He has served at the highest levels of government for decades--former Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, and chief legal counsel to the CIA. He has done it all.

He is ready to take over, and he is mature in his judgment. He is calm in his demeanor. He is passionate about the law. He loves the Department of Justice.

To the American people, you can go to bed here soon knowing that the Department of Justice is in good hands.

To my colleagues that voted against him, give him a chance. I think he is going to deliver for the country.

To the committee, thank you for allowing the nomination to go through so quickly.

To Dianne Feinstein, who is a great partner, I appreciate the processing of the nomination. We may have differences of opinion about what the right answer is, but we could not have asked for a better process. Mr. Barr was challenged, but respectfully so.

Having said that, we are about to confirm a new Attorney General at a time when we need one. This is just not somebody for the job. This is a very special person for the job.

With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, the Committee on the Judiciary has adopted rules governing its procedures for the 116th Congress. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 2, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, on behalf of myself and Ranking Member Feinstein, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the committee rules be printed in the Congressional Record.

I just got off the phone with the President. I told him we were talking about a 3-week CR. All of us believe that if we had 3 weeks with the government open and all the discord coming from a shutdown, that we could find a way forward to produce a bill that he would sign that would be good for everybody in the country, but we need that opportunity.

He gave me some indications of things he would want for a 3-week CR that would be a good-faith downpayment on moving forward that I thought were imminently reasonable. Rather than me telling you about what he said, I think Senator Schumer and Senator McConnell will be talking about this.

The 3-week CR concept is a good idea, and what the President wants to add to it made sense to me, and it gets us back in the ball game. Here is what is going to happen. The TPS language that was sent over by the President is a move forward but unacceptable to my Democratic colleagues. It needs to be like what Tim Kaine did. The DACA provision sent over by the President is moving forward, but it needs to be what Senator Durbin did because they are both, I think, reasonable proposals that the President should be able to accept.

To my Democratic friends, money for a barrier is required to get this deal done. It will not be a concrete wall, and the money will be a program to a DHS plan that all of you know about and have been briefed on and should approve.

You are not giving President Trump a bunch of money to do anything he wants to do. He has to spend it on a plan that the professionals have come up with. If you want $800 million for refugee assistance, you will get it. We all need more judges, and 250 more Border Patrol agents on the border would be good for us all.

I want to let the public know I have never been more optimistic than I am now if we can find a way to open up the government for 3 weeks. If we fail, everybody can say we did our best. This is one last chance to get this right. I am just hoping and praying that what the President is asking for, in addition to Senator Cardin's 3-week CR, he will entertain. Let's get to work. If we can get in a room, we will fix this, and it won't take 3 weeks.

Mr. President, I ask my fellow colleagues to join me in celebrating Ms. Holly Gatling's dedicated service as the executive director of South Carolina Citizens for Life.

Holly earned a bachelor's degree in journalism from the University of South Carolina in 1972. While at the University of South Carolina, she served as a copy editor for ``The State'' newspaper. She went on to work for several newspapers across South Carolina, including as a feature writer from 1976 to 1990 for ``The State.''

As a stalwart champion for the unborn, Holly has effectively lobbied the South Carolina General Assembly in support of pro-life laws. Some of these laws included Woman's Right to Know, Partial Birth Abortion Ban, and Safe Haven for Abandoned Newborns. She was also instrumental in ushering Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection to Governor Nikki Haley's desk for signature in 2016.

I am proud to have worked closely with her on many pro-life issues, including the Pain Capable legislation in the U.S. Senate. I know that one day we too will pass this important legislation into law.

I am extremely proud of her work for the unborn and know she has made a difference in the lives of thousands of South Carolinians. She is a model for public servants, and I am honored to congratulate my friend Holly Gatling on her 25 years of service to others in South Carolina, across the United States of America, and around the world.

Mr. President, I will be quick. I know we have a lot to do before we vote, but if you are from South Carolina, you have a lot to be happy about today. If you watched the football game last night, I thought you saw a real display of college football.

I am a South Carolina graduate. I went to the University of South Carolina. I have lived near Clemson most of my life, and I am here to congratulate the Clemson Tigers because after last night, the Clemson Tigers have become the gold standard for college football, both on and off the field.

What I like most about Clemson is, they believe you can't win on the field if you lose off the field, and it starts at the top. Coach Swinney is the very definition of ``all in''--with his family, his faith, his coaches and staff and his dedication and loyalty to his current and former players. He is one of the most beloved men I have ever met in the coaching profession. His players understand that he cares about them, and when he pushes them, it is only because he wants them to be the best they can be and the best the team can be.

Clemson University is not a football school, for those who are wondering. It is one of the top-tiered, academically challenging public universities in the entire country--and it is not bragging if it is true--which happens to have a great football team and a great coach.

To those who don't want to see Clemson versus Alabama part 5, I can understand that. I have some advice for you. Get better and beat one of them. Don't complain. These are the two best teams in the Nation.

To my friends from Alabama, your program is going to go down as one of the most historic programs in the history of college football, but last night, the best team in the Nation was the Clemson Tigers. They won decisively. They won with class. The 2018 season will be remembered as long as there is a Clemson University.

I live 5 miles from the stadium. I grew up in the shadow of Clemson University. I got an honorary degree from Clemson. That is about the only way I would have ever gotten a degree. I am very proud of what Clemson University has accomplished on and off the field. Tim and I will be introducing a resolution recognizing this great accomplishment by the Clemson Tigers.

I just want to end with this. In these troubled times, when there is a lot going on in the world, and there is a lot of bad news, this is a chance to celebrate something very positive. America is a football country, and college football is one of our most beloved sports. Last night, you saw two quality teams. I can say, without a doubt, if you are going to follow college football, get to know the Clemson Tigers because you are going to see them again. Go Tigers.

I yield the floor.

I ask unanimous consent to be recognized along with my colleague from New Hampshire, Senator Shaheen, to enter into a colloquy.

I thank my colleague from New Hampshire.

Let me ask the question, when we went to Syria and Iraq together, did anyone in the military suggest to you that withdrawing in the foreseeable future was a good idea?

Did they also not say that the Syrian Democratic Forces were some of the best allies we had since 9/11?

Did anyone suggest to you that the war against ISIS in Syria was over and had been won?

Do you remember being told that thousands of ISIS fighters had gone back into the fabric of Syria and that they will reemerge under the right conditions?

Well, I just want to state that this has been a long struggle. Most Americans, all things being equal, would like to get all of our troops home.

The Middle East is a very complicated place. I share the President's desire to withdraw our forces when it makes sense. As to the public at large, I want to stress that having been in the military for quite a while, I am very aware of the sacrifices required to go overseas and serve in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan. I have come to conclude that a presence over there is still necessary to keep us safe here.

There is a division in this body about whether we should have a wall as part of border security. I think we need a wall as part of border security to secure our southern border. Every Democrat is for border security; we just maybe have a different way of doing it.

What I tried to tell the President, with apparently very little effect, is that you are right to want to secure our border because drugs are coming across, criminals are coming across, and illegal immigration is a problem in the country, and securing the border is part of the solution, but I told him I don't know of any way to defend the Nation from radical Islam by building a wall.

There is no wall we can build between us and the forces of radical Islam that reside in Africa and the Mideast--places like Syria and Iraq. I tried to convey to him that our deployed forces, in partnership with others, is a virtual wall. It is the best hope we have of stopping another 9/11, protecting ourselves and our allies; that a forward deployed presence gives us eyes and ears on the ground, working with others to protect the homeland

and to destroy over time the scourge called radical Islam.

The partnership between us and the Syrian forces, which has been mostly Kurds, has been very successful.

I want to compliment the Senator from New Hampshire for taking the floor and expressing a resolve to maintain a fairly small military footprint in Syria and having connected to that our own national security interests. Maybe the good news--if there is any from today--is that Democrats and Republicans, after 16 or 17 years of looking at this war, are beginning to come together--that troops are necessary sometimes in some places where military action alone will not win the war but is certainly necessary, and that partners are a good thing.

I have come to conclude that when it comes to the war on terrorism, I would rather fight it in the enemy's backyard than ours. I would rather have partners than do it alone. I think the decision today by the President--and I think it was his alone--is disastrous to our own national security and those 2,200 whom Senator Shaheen talked about and the great job they have done; that by withdrawing them, we have basically taken a part of the wall down and have now an open-border policy when it comes to ISIS in Syria; that the consequence of this decision makes it far more likely that there will be a corridor from Tehran into Lebanon and to Hezbollah. Our presence there made it more difficult to the Iranians.

Who would be celebrating this decision? Everybody whom we hate likes what is going on. The Russians are up to no good all over the world. Their statement says everything you need to know about this decision. The only reason they are not dancing in Tehran and ISIS camps is they just don't believe in dancing. They are as happy as they will ever be-- and they are not into being happy.

To the President, you won the election. You beat me and many others. You have the right to make this decision, but the Congress has the duty to hold you accountable. I wish we had done more of this in a bipartisan fashion when President Obama withdrew from Iraq. If I am nothing, I am consistent. I want this President to be successful. I will help him at every turn.

Generally speaking, I am very pleased with his domestic policy and most of the time his foreign policy. I am shocked by this. I think this is a decision that is against sound military advice. I intend to do our part as a Congress to make sure that history records how this decision was made.

There is a clear record that President Obama's decision to withdraw from Iraq and not leave a residual force proved to be wrong and was against military advice at that time. I have yet to find one person in the administration of the national security team who thinks this decision was a good decision. This was made against sound military advice.

I don't think ``General Trump'' is going to be any better than ``General Obama.'' I don't think ``General Graham'' is the answer to this problem. I think those who are in the fight, who have been doing it for 17 years--the national security team the President has--are the experts. Mr. President, if you don't like them or trust them, fire them. What you have done, in my view, is set us back.

The chatter out there is pretty disturbing. I talked with General Mattis today. It is pretty clear that the ripple effect of this is going to be as bad as we think it will be.

To our Kurdish partners, I am sorry. I don't support this decision, and I am hoping it will change.

President Trump, leadership is about adjusting and being able to change your mind when circumstances warrant it. I am not saying we need to be in Syria forever. I am saying now is not the time to leave, and Senator Shaheen made a very compelling case about conditions on the ground.

The winners are Russia, Iran, ISIS, and Assad. The losers are the Kurdish people, who came to our aid when almost nobody would. The Arabs who are part of the Syrian Democratic Forces are big-time losers. I can only imagine what it is like tonight in Manbij.

I saw in the eyes of the people that we were partnered with, hope and trust: America is here. America is good. Maybe our suffering is over.

When I look at the flag and the soldiers who wear it on their sleeve, we are not a perfect country, but we are a damn good country. What makes us a good people is that we do the hard things.

We are not the policemen of the world. I understand that, but we are the glue that holds this world together. We have betrayed our Kurdish allies if this decision stands. If it is reversed, I will be the first one to applaud the President because that is true leadership. To those who say that we have defeated ISIS in Syria, that is an inaccurate statement. They have been hurt. They have been degraded.

I give the President all the credit in the world for changing our policies regarding the fight against ISIS, but I will not buy into the narrative that they have been defeated in Syria and Iraq.

I just got back from Afghanistan and haven't slept in 2 days. I really appreciate the chance to visit our troops and talk to our generals, but, sure as hell, ISIS is not defeated in Afghanistan. So to say they are defeated is an overstatement, and it is fake news. It is not true. They have been severely damaged, but they will come back unless we are there to stop it.

I don't intend to outsource our national security to any foreign power. This idea that Turkey is going to be the good guy, that Turkey is going to come into Syria and protect us against the rise of ISIS, is just crazy. What Turkey is going to do is unleash holy hell on the Kurds. In the eyes of Turkey, they are more of a threat than ISIS.

This decision is a disaster on multiple fronts, and I hope it can be changed. There is a resolution urging the President to make a withdrawal decision based on conditions on the ground after a vigorous interagency process.

Mr. President, I, too, want our troops to come home, but I don't want to tell the American people that we are secure when I don't believe we are. And what is odd is that the troops who are actually doing the fighting believe in this more than anybody. They were proud to be partners with the Kurds. Most of them had been to Iraq and Afghanistan numerous times and were heartbroken when we left Iraq and all of the gains lost. Many of them went back to the fight to take it yet again.

So to the body who loves the troops, that is good. The American people respect our troops. If you truly love them, let them win. They are not asking to come home. They do this voluntarily. They understand why they are there. They understand the benefits of being there.

I know it must be tough as Commander in Chief to write a letter to the family of the fallen. I know it is a hard decision for any President to make to put people in harm's way, but I just want the President to understand that the troops who do this embrace their mission and believe they are defending their Nation and protecting their families. They accept the risk. If we do follow through with this withdrawal, I am afraid Americans all over the world and here at home are going to be more at risk, not less.

I can't imagine winning this war without allies. If this decision stands, I can't imagine being able to sign up many people in the future to serve with us to defeat enemies that threaten us after today. What hurts so much is to have been on the ground--to see it get bad, to see it get better--and to look into the eyes of the people who are willing to fight with us and see the hope they have that we are finally here.

It hurts so much to know that everybody that we talked to in Manbij-- many of them--are going to get killed. They did the honorable thing to come to our aid, to help destroy a common enemy of mankind, ISIS. We have been dishonorable. This is a stain on the honor of the United States.

I hope and pray the President will reconsider this. I know that every National Security Advisor understands that the time is not right to withdraw, that the situation described by Senator Shaheen as to what will happen is more likely than not.

If he does not decide to reconsider, then it will be incumbent upon the Congress to speak and hold him accountable. If you are concerned about today's decision as a Member of the Senate, please join this resolution. It is

very evenly worded. We all want the troops to come home, but we want to make sure they come home with honor and that the conditions warrant them leaving.

Right now, we are withdrawing in a dishonorable fashion. We are putting our own Nation more at risk. Just as sure as I am on the floor of the Senate, ISIS will reemerge, and all those who helped us are going to be in jeopardy. It will be harder to get allies in the future. As for these 700 prisoners who were captured on the battlefield, we will hear from them again.

Yes.

One of two things will happen. No. 1, the Syrian Democratic Forces had a very ethical view of treating prisoners. I was astonished at the compliance with law and their desire to take their enemies and treat them better than they were treated. The jail was, quite frankly, very impressive.

Here is what is going to happen. They are going to shoot them or they are going to get out. If Assad takes over before Turkey gets there, they will kill everybody in the jail. So what does it matter if a bunch of ISIS fighters get killed? It is about us. Once they are captured, it matters how we treat them. I want them tried. I want them held off the battlefield. We are not executioners. But the most likely scenario is that ISIS reemerges and they break out.

I promise the President this--and I told President Obama the same thing--if you will stick with it and listen to the generals, no matter whether it hurts me or not, we will be with you. We will give you the political support a Republican can give a Democrat to see this thing through. I promise the President one thing: I will help you where I can, but I am going to hold you accountable. I am going to do everything in my power--if you don't change this decision--to make sure you own it, so the next President will learn from your mistakes.

I yield.

This is as close to McCarthyism as I hope we get in my lifetime. You are guilty until you are proven innocent. Whatever it takes to take you down, we will do. If one allegation is not enough, how about five? To the people who have come forward, we will do whatever we have to do to you to get the outcome we want.

There are two ways of doing this: Senator Collins's way or what we have seen in the committee. If you want to go down the road of the committee, God help those who will follow.

The biggest winners today are those who still want to be judges. You may have saved those who want to come after Judge Kavanaugh from humiliation to the nth degree because you rejected it today.

For every woman who comes forward about a sexual assault, only God knows how many never say a word. But to right one wrong, seldom does it help to create another.

Senator Collins explained the dilemma we face as a society and rejected the idea that sacrificing Judge Kavanaugh's good name would make anything better.

To the extent that individuals matter in America, you rose to the occasion. To the extent that you rejected the mob rule and accepted the rule of law, we will all be better.

You have to have some way of judging. Yes, we want people to come forward. They deserve to be heard. But there needs to be a process, for the good of us all, to make sure it is disposed of right. If this is enough, to be accused of something that happened 36 years ago and nobody can corroborate it, God help us all in any line of public service.

All I can say is that it is not about you. I have never admired you more, and we often agree, and sometimes we don't. It is about the system that you stood by today that has stood the test of time. I don't know what kind of pressure there has been for you. I can only imagine because you are in a purple State.

I remember what Sotomayor and Kagan were for me--not very comfortable, but I tried to embrace a system that has stood the test of time. But whatever happened to me, it has been 100 times worse for you.

Senator Flake, thank you. Without Susan Collins and Jeff Flake, we would not have heard from Dr. Ford, maybe, but you stood up and said that she needs to be heard. Without their insistence that the FBI check the committee's homework, we wouldn't be where we are today. So you did a good thing.

The one thing you wouldn't do is be intimidated. The one thing you wouldn't do is destroy Judge Kavanaugh's life for no good reason. The one thing you wouldn't do is play politics with the law. God bless you. I doubt if I will ever hear anybody more courageous in my political life.

So when they write the history of our times, you will be in it. If John McCain were here, he would be your greatest cheerleader.

Mr. President, I have been thinking about this, I have been dreading this, and now I am going to do this.

To all of my colleagues who have come before me, you have done right by our friend Senator McCain. The family appreciates all the good words, the kindnesses, and the antidotes that have come their way. This is a tough time for the family.

John has seven wonderful children.

Cindy, as a devoted wife, you really did well by John.

I am going to try to make this somewhat fun even though I don't feel in a funny mood right now.

Let's start off with the tie. To anybody who may be watching on television, this is a Naval Academy tie.

I wore this today, John, to honor you and to annoy you all at the same time.

He would constantly tell me: Lindsey, I wish you were in my Naval Academy class.

I would say: Well, that is very nice, John.

Do you know why, Lindsey?

No, John.

If you would have been in my class, I would have been sixth from the bottom, not fifth.

Thank you very much, John.

Humiliation and affection were constant companions. The more he humiliated you, the more he liked you, and in that regard, I was well- served.

To my colleagues, thank you again so much for what you have done. The only way I know to put this in words that maybe John can relate to is that after a military operation is over, after a mission is complete, the pilot comes back and debriefs. If there is a military operation, you do an after-action report. I thought to myself, what would it say? What would the after-action report for John McCain say? The purpose of these reports is for lessons learned so that we will benefit and make sure that we remember--remember the things that went well and the things that did not so that we will be better off as a unit and as a nation.

The title of the operation was pretty easy--you can say a lot of things about me but ``clever'' is not one of them--``Operation Maverick.'' It began in the fall of 1954 at the Naval Academy--the year before I was born--and it ended August 25, 2018. And what can we learn? The source of the report is me, his political wingman, code named ``Little Jerk''--you all have your names, and you earned them like I did--who was lucky enough to walk in his shadow and to witness history up close, to be in the presence of a giant at a time everything around us was so small.

What did I learn? I learned that a few dumb jokes told over and over again actually become funny and can take you a long way in politics, Marco. I am going to give them to you because John liked you.

He said: Lindsey, how hot is it in Arizona?

John, I don't know.

It is so hot that the trees chase the dogs.

Well, isn't that funny, John.

He said: What is unique about Arizona?

I said: I don't know, John. I would imagine a lot of things.

Barry Goldwater ran for President and lost. Mo Udall ran for President and lost. I ran for President and lost. Lindsey, it is the only place in the Nation where mothers tell their children: You can never grow up to be President.

I say to the Senator from Oregon, remember that. Maybe you can break the string.

He said: Lindsey, aren't you a lawyer?

Yes, I am, John.

Do you know the difference between a lawyer and a catfish?

No, I don't.

One is a bottom-dwelling, scum-sucking creature, and the other is a fish.

No wonder we did so poorly with lawyers, John.

He said: Do you know why I didn't join the Marines, Lindsey?

No.

My parents were married.

I am going to miss these dumb jokes.

What else did I learn? I learned how to fight a lot, everything and everybody. I learned how to forgive. And from him, I saw how to heal.

On the fighting side, I learned that the captured warrior who was tortured became the statesman who forgave and healed a relationship between his former adversary and our Nation.

I went to the Hanoi Hilton with John. That is one of the highlights of my life. It is now a museum, and we are the bad guys because they get to write how the museum reads. I remember being in front of his cell, and you could see the wheels turning and the memories coming back. As we walked forward, surrounded by a bunch of handlers--and John McCain was like Elvis in Vietnam. It was the most amazing thing in the world how people adored him in Vietnam. I saw a bunch of photos on the wall of the prisoners playing volleyball and sitting in the Sun with sunglasses on.

I said: John, it must not have been that bad after all.

With a wide smile, he said: I don't remember it this way--which allowed us to get out of Vietnam.

I remember him embracing a war that nobody wanted to talk about because he understood what it would cost to lose it. I remember him supporting the surge when everybody was willing to get out of Iraq because they were so tired of it and saw no way forward. I remember the fighter. I remember the 2008 campaign when, in 2007, John McCain was fifth in a four-person race; written off as politically dead; no money. The ``Straight Talk Express'' had no wheels.

After a visit to Iraq in July, where General Petraeus allowed him to talk to 600 people who were going to reenlist in a war that they did not have to continue to fight, and about an equal number were becoming citizens because they were fighting for their country and had expedited citizenship--there were two empty chairs in the front with boots, and John asked: What is that all about? Two didn't make it to the ceremony, but they were given their citizenship that day. I remember

about 2,000 soldiers wanting a photo, and every one of them got it. I remember it being so hot that I couldn't breathe, but we stayed anyway.

I remember coming back and him getting the nomination, only to lose. I remember that night very well. He had wanted to be President, he was prepared to be President, but it was not his to have. I remember above all else the speech he made that night. John taught us how to lose.

When you go throughout the world, people remember his concession speech as much as anything else. There are so many countries where you can't afford to lose because they would kill you. John said that night: President Obama is now my President. So he healed the Nation at a time he was hurt.

I learned that serving a cause greater than yourself hurts. Anybody in the military can tell you the risk you take. He couldn't put his jacket on and he couldn't comb his hair because he got hurt serving a cause greater than himself.

I remember how easy it is to say and how hard it is to do, how hard it is to tell your base ``I think you are wrong'' and how hard it is to solve problems that nobody else wants to talk about.

I learned that failure and success are different sides of the same coin. John told me: I have become better from my failures because it teaches me, and I have been tempted by my success, and without my failures, I would have never been successful.

So to those who are striving as a young person, remember John McCain. He failed a lot, but he never quit. And the reason we are talking about him today and the reason I am crying is because he was successful in spite of his failures.

For family and friends, the after-action report would say: A relationship with ``Maverick'' brought joy and difficulty. Both were your constant companions. He was a difficult man. He could be tough. But the joy you received from being with him will sustain you for a lifetime. And I am so lucky to have been in his presence.

He taught me that principle and compromise are not mutually exclusive and are the foundation of a great person, as well as a great nation. He taught me that immigration--as hard as it is to solve, somebody has to do it. He said to me, along with Ted Kennedy: You are going to learn, Lindsey, that the other side has to get something too. I have learned that lesson.

To my friends on the other side, as long as I am here, I am going to remember that you have to get something too.

He taught me that when good ignores evil, it may be convenient, but it seldom works.

He talked about what would happen in Iraq if we left. He was right. He talked about what would happen in Syria if we didn't get involved. He was right. Why? Because warriors are the best, I believe, at making peace, and the warrior understands the difference between a false peace and real peace.

To those who accused him of wanting endless wars, you had no idea what you were talking about. He wanted sustainable peace and understood the consequences of not seeing it through. The soldiers adore him.

To those who have traveled with John, you seldom had two meals in the same country. You met more people than you could remember. But you were struck by one thing: We are going to really bad places a lot. And those in the military adore this man.

He taught me that boldness and practicality must be practiced in equal measure.

I say to the Senator from Rhode Island, he believes in climate change, and so do I. But there is a practical streak about John that I think made him very successful. He told me time and again: You have to let people catch up with you. You have to have a rhythm and a pace. There are 100 people in this body from different walks of life. You may think you are right, and if you are, it will be proven over time, but give your colleagues the time and the understanding to catch up with you.

He taught me that honor and imperfection are always in competition. I do not cry for a perfect man; I cry for a man who had honor and who was always willing to admit his imperfection.

If you are thinking about getting in politics, the one thing I would ask you to look at when it comes to the life of John McCain is that it is OK to tell people: I screwed up. I got this wrong. I want to make it right.

In my view, honor is doing the right thing at your own expense, and he did that time and again.

He taught me that life without passion and love is a sad life. He had a happy life. He had 10 lives. He was involved in five aviation accidents. If we sent John a bill for all the planes he crashed, he could never pay it off. He lived life to its fullest. He was often disappointed, but he was never deterred from getting back up and going at it again.

``Love''--not a word often associated with Senator McCain, but it should be because if you were loved by him, you knew it. You were loved with all of your faults. And I was lucky to have been loved by him.

So how would I characterize ``Operation Maverick''? Wildly successful. It made the world a better place. It gave the Nation something to talk about at a time when we can't agree on anything. It is not universal acceptance of a life of John McCain, but it is pretty damn close. It is the only time that MSNBC, CNN, and FOX are saying the same thing.

The only way that happened is because those of us who had the pleasure of being in his presence and those who covered him in the media business want to tell the story.

I have been approached since his death by cab drivers, waiters, and cops, and they all said: Sorry for your loss.

My name is Graham, not McCain, but I feel like a McCain. I don't know if I have earned that honor, but I feel like one.

The average man and woman in this country got John McCain. What will it mean for the future? It means there will be generations of politicians coming along who will be influenced by him. The McCain Institute is alive and well, and its goal is to attract young leaders throughout the developing world, expose them to democracy, and teach them the art of compromise and the rule of law. What a legacy that is.

John will inspire courage. He will reinforce the idea that nothing is inevitable as long as a few people are willing to fight for what they believe is right.

It is going to be a lonely journey for me for a while. I am going to need your help. The void to be filled by John's passing is more than I can do. Don't look to me to replace this man. Look to me to remember what he was all about and try to follow in his footsteps. If you want to help me, join the march. If you want to help the country, be more like John McCain. I believe there is a little of John McCain in all of us, and the little of John McCain practiced by a lot of people can make this a really great nation.

So, my friend, you did good. You lived in the shadow of a four-star father and a four-star grandfather. You always worried if you disappointed. You did not.

To Cindy and the children, thank you for making me a part of the clan. To Team McCain, you taught me what loyalty is all about. To my colleagues, thank you for your kindness.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to complete my remarks before the vote.

Mr. President, in a few minutes, we are going to vote on Marvin Quattlebaum to be a circuit judge for the Fourth Judicial Circuit in Richmond, VA. He is a South Carolina native and a district court judge in South Carolina. I have known Marvin for well over 20 years. He is one of the most capable lawyers I have ever met. He has a great reputation as a district court judge.

I thank President Trump for nominating him. I thank my Senate colleagues for moving his nomination forward. He will be a great addition to the Fourth Circuit. He is a very sound, conservative judge who is incredibly fairminded. To my Democratic colleagues who moved his nomination through the Judiciary Committee, thank you.

Later in the day, we will vote on cloture on the nomination of Jay Richardson, also from South Carolina, to be on the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, VA. He was reported out of committee 20 to 1. Both gentlemen are rated unanimously ``well-qualified'' by the ABA. Jay is one of the great legal minds of our time, and I think he is going to be a great addition to the Fourth Circuit.

He prosecuted the Dylann Roof case, the man who killed the nine parishioners at the Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, SC. I recommend that you take time to listen to his arguments about that case if you ever get a chance. It is very eloquent.

Both of these fine men come from South Carolina, and I urge my colleagues to vote affirmative when that time comes. I do want to again thank President Trump. Senator Scott and I both highly recommend to our colleagues ``yes'' votes for Mr. Quattlebaum and Mr. Richardson in just a minute.

I thank Senator McConnell for moving these nominations forward and Senator Grassley for making sure they got out of committee.

With that, I yield.

Mr. President, today the Senate voted 87 to 10 to pass the National Defense Authorization Act named for John S. McCain, Senator McCain.

I want to do two things. I want to tell you a little bit about what is in the bill and a little bit about John S. McCain.

This increases the size of our military by 24,000, which is desperately needed. Too few have done too much for too long. Having a larger military means people can stay with their families longer and takes a lot of pressure off those who are serving. And we need more troops, given the threats we have.

The equipment they are going to be receiving is the most modern that we have available. We are buying 77 F-35s, which will make enemies of our Nation think twice. We are improving the F-18, which has been a great airplane.

The bottom line is that we are helping the Ukraine, which is standing up to the Russians.

There is so much in this bill to relieve the pain and suffering from the defense cuts of the last 6 or 7 years. This begins to restore a hollowed-out military and improve their equipment, gives them more training, more time at home, and the largest pay increasing in 9 years--2.6 percent is the largest pay increase in about 9 years, and God knows they deserve it.

There are a lot of good things in this bill to make our military stronger. There are reforms in this bill to make the Pentagon act more efficiently.

In terms of Senator McCain, when you mention John McCain, most people think American hero. They are right to do so. He suffered for his country in a way that few have. He was in prison for over 5\1/2\ years. He came back home with honor and dignity, like every other POW he served with. He had a chance to leave early because his father was a four-star admiral, and he said: ``I will wait my turn.''

Since then, he has been a force of nature as a Senator. He has taken on the Pentagon to make it more efficient. He has never lost sight that his primary obligation as a Senator is to defend the Nation. The men and women in uniform have never had a better friend than Senator McCain. The Pentagon has never had a more worthy adversary than John McCain. Reform and commitment to those who serve go hand in hand.

From a personal point of view, I want to thank all of my colleagues for bestowing this honor on Senator McCain. He is in a tough fight. Never count John McCain out.

I have had the pleasure of traveling the globe with this man, hours and hours on airplanes going to some of the most difficult places in the world to carry the message of what America is all about. I have never known anybody in my life--and very few in the history of this country could explain to others what America is all about. John McCain has been in love with this country since he was 17 years old and he went off to Annapolis. He has been willing to die and suffer for his country, like many others. But when it comes to explaining America, I have never known anyone as articulate and as sincere as John McCain.

John, I hope you understand that the reason we named this bill after you is that we all love you. I hope you understand that this bill, my friend, repairs

a lot of the damage you have been talking about for the last 6 or 7 years.

This is the best way I know to honor John McCain--to take care of those who are fighting and dying for this country and pushing the Pentagon to be more efficient. That is the best honor one could bestow on Senator McCain.

I hope and pray that he comes back to this body, but I want him to know that even though he is physically not here, his presence is alive and well in the Senate.

I yield.

I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. President, I wish to make a few comments about the topic in the news today and yesterday and, hopefully, will result in some action by Congress; that is, the threats we face as a Nation regarding our electoral system.

First I would like to recognize the Presiding Officer of the Senate, Senator Rubio, for working with Senator Van Hollen to come up with a piece of legislation called the DETER Act, which I think will serve us well. If the Director of National Intelligence certifies that a foreign power--Russia or anyone else--is trying to attack our electoral infrastructure, they will pay a heavy price.

Today is July 17, 2018. On Friday, last week, I think it was July--I don't know the dates; I just got back from traveling. So on Friday of last week, a few days ago, the Director of National Intelligence said the following: ``The warning lights are blinking red again. Today, the digital infrastructure that serves this country is literally under attack.''

How much more do we need as a body and as a nation to rally ourselves to act while there is still time?

He indicated that our cyber space strategies emphasize only defense, not offense as well, evoking President Reagan's Cold War approach to the Soviet Union. Mr. Coats suggested that if Russia continues to try to take on the United States in the cyber arena, then the administration should throw everything we have into that exercise.

Every Member of Congress, every Member of the Senate, as well as the President, has an obligation to defend the Nation against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I am 1,000 percent convinced that the Russians meddled in our election in 2016. They did not change the outcome, but they did disrupt our election. The bottom line is they are still up to it.

If you don't believe me, just ask Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, who is a former Member of this body.

In August of 2001, the 9/11 Commission found statements from the CIA that indicated there was something afoot, that ``the lights are blinking red,'' but they couldn't point to bin Laden specifically. As we look back, how much accountability should the Bush administration have had and how much accountability should Congress have had back then? Did we miss the warning signs regarding the September 11 attack? I would suggest that the chatter was strong and the threat was real, but nobody could really pinpoint it.

Here is what I am suggesting: The chatter is strong, the threat is real, and we know exactly where it is coming from. The question is, Will the House and Senate, working with the President, do anything about it? Senator Rubio and Senator Van Hollen have chosen to try to do something about it.

We are all eventually going to be in the history books. President Trump said today that he believed our electoral infrastructure needs to be made more secure--not just electoral infrastructure; energy and financial services are under threat, and not just from Russia.

So I want to look forward. I heard Senator McConnell say today that he would like to find some bipartisan legislation that could come forward sooner rather than later to try to harden the infrastructure before the 2018 election. The bottom line here is that we all owe it to every voter in the country and all of those who are serving in the intelligence community and in the military to secure our election the best we can.

I am hoping that we will become ``Team America'' just for a few minutes. I am not asking my Democrat friends to give President Trump a pass, and I am not asking my Republican colleagues to stop fighting for our agenda. I am asking both parties to calm down and focus on the common enemy. The common enemy is Russia, and countries like Russia, that want to undermine our democracy, pit us one against the other, and they did it in 2016. If you believe Dan Coats, they are going to do it again. This meeting recently with President Trump and Putin--in my view, we missed an opportunity to really put the Russians on notice. But rather than look back, let's look forward.

Today, President Trump expressed confidence in our intelligence community. I am glad to hear that. I trust them far more than I trust Putin. It is not just America that Putin has been trying to interfere with; it is in France and Germany and everywhere else there is a democracy. President Putin is trying to destroy alliances like the European Union, which, I think, has value to the United States. He is trying to break NATO. He is attacking us here at home: fake news--truly fake news--made-up news article to try to pit one American against the other and trying to steal emails from party officials and dump them into the public domain at critical times in the election.

What do I say to my Republican colleagues? It was the Democrats last time; it could be us next time. It was Russia last time, and they are still up to it this time, but Iran, North Korea, China--fill in the blank--we are all exposed.

Article 5 of the NATO Charter says that an attack against one is an attack against all. So I would ask my colleagues tonight to think about that in terms of our democracy. An attack on one party should be an attack on all parties.

The Republican Party should take no comfort or glee in the fact that our Democratic friends were compromised in a very embarrassing way that hurt them. Nobody changed vote totals. But can you imagine how we would feel if the inner circle of the President was hacked and, at a crucial time in the election, the information was exposed?

To my friends in the media, you have to make a hard decision: How much do you empower this? How much do you aid a foreign government by publishing this information?

I believe we are at war in many ways. We are not at war in a direct way with Russia, but these cyber attacks are, to me, a hostile act against our country just as much as if they had launched a conventional attack. They are going to continue to do this until they pay a price.

I would like for us to come together to not only harden our infrastructure to make sure that 2018 cannot be compromised by a foreign power but also to make countries like Russia pay a price.

Senator Van Hollen and Senator Rubio have a very good piece of legislation which basically says that if the Director of National Intelligence certifies that a foreign power like Russia is continuing to interfere in our election, then we will up sanctions. We will make it harder, not easier, on that foreign power. It is Russia today; it could be somebody else tomorrow, and it probably already is.

So rather than taking the moment and dividing us about what President Trump said or didn't say, why don't we use this as an opportunity to listen to the professionals, not the politicians.

Senator Rubio is on the Intelligence Committee. I am very proud of the work they have accomplished. They made a bipartisan finding that Russia did meddle in the 2016 election with the view of trying to help Trump over Clinton, but there is no evidence it changed the outcome.

The bottom line for me is that if we don't come together now--this is the end of July, July 17--we have precious days left to take action that could protect the 2018 election cycle.

The worst thing that could happen in a democracy is if somebody's vote could be stolen or the information provided to the public could be tainted in a fashion by some foreign entity to pit

one American against another. We do enough of that ourselves; we don't need anybody else's help. And the record is clear, in terms of 2016, that Russia was all over the place spreading disinformation, trying to create conflict within the Democratic primary, within the Republican primary, and during the general election.

November will be here before we know it. Here is what we have to ask ourselves as a body--and eventually be held accountable by the public and history. What did we do in July to answer the alarm raised by Director Dan Coats about the warning lights blinking red? I see attacks on critical infrastructure going on today, and I will expect them to continue. We need to up our game as a nation.

I don't know how any of us can go to our constituents in November and say that we answered Dan Coats' call if we do nothing. So I hope that Senator McConnell and Senator Schumer can find a way to come up with a common agenda--maybe starting with the Rubio-Van Hollen bill--to see if there is common ground to deal with a common problem.

I would ask President Trump not to look backward, but to look forward. I have no doubt that you won the election, Mr. President, in 2016. The Russians didn't beat Ms. Clinton; you did. But what they are up to now can jeopardize our democracy.

We are just a stone's throw away from their changing vote totals. Senator Rubio knows this better than I because he is on the Intelligence Committee. They are already infiltrating voter registration files. It would not be much of a leap to have some votes flipped through cyber attacks. So we have a chance in the coming days-- working together, not against each other--to find solutions to this problem. I am sure whatever we come up with will not be perfect, but at least we tried. The one thing I cannot live with is not trying.

I have known Dan Coats for well over a decade, Secretary Pompeo, the entire national security team, Senator Burr, Senator Warner, Senator Rubio--they all tell us the same thing: Our critical infrastructure is under attack by foreign powers, Russia being the leader. The question for us is, What do we do about it?

I am hoping that next week the President will call the Congress together, in a bipartisan fashion, to come up with some preventive measures to protect our infrastructure, when it comes to the November election, and that we, as a nation, try to figure out what the rules of engagement are going to be, not to just defend ourselves from aggression but punish the aggressor.

I don't have all the answers. I am not suggesting this is my area of expertise, because it is not, but I am smart enough to know Russia is going to continue what they did in 2016, until somebody makes them pay a heavy price, and it is just not Russia; be it Iran, China, North Korea, or other bad actors.

I don't know how, as a body, we can live with ourselves if we don't try to heed Dan Coats' warnings. They are not just given by him but by those who work for him, who are nonpolitical, who have made it their life's work to find ways to protect this Nation.

So, Mr. President, we have a chance to bring the Congress together. Challenge us to work with you to find solutions to this looming threat, better ways to defend America's critical infrastructure when it comes to our 2018 election, and challenge us to work with you. I hope we will be smart enough to meet that challenge, and I hope you will issue that challenge. You are the most special person in our constitutional democracy when it comes to national security. You are the Commander in Chief. You rightly criticized President Obama for being slow when it came to reacting to Russian interference in 2016. I am sure that was a hard call for President Obama, but there is no doubt in my mind that you, the Senate, and the House are now on notice--by your own intelligence services--that Russia is interfering now and will continue to do so up to 2018 and beyond unless somebody stops them. At a minimum, we should come up with defensive measures available to us. As a nation, we need to deal with this threat.

I am not worried about a foreign power taking over our country in a conventional military fashion. I am worried about foreign powers and terrorist organizations using cyber attacks to cripple our country, our economy, our finances, and our energy, but, most importantly, the heart and soul of democracy, which is free and fair elections. Putin wants no part of free and fair elections. All of us should very much want to have a free and fair election in 2018. We are not going to have one unless we push back together and push back now.

I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate resume legislative session for a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 6042 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.