Jim McGovern

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Khanna).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, this select committee has the potential to do some substantive work, and there is a bipartisan group here in this House that for years has been focused on holding China accountable and upholding a high standard of human rights. I don't want to close without acknowledging the incredible leadership of Speaker Pelosi in all of this. I traveled with Speaker Pelosi to China a few years back, and she insisted that we visit Tibet, a place that was blocked off for congressional visits for many years. She refused to take no for an answer, and we went to Tibet. Under her leadership, the legislation that I mentioned at the beginning of my remarks was passed, the most consequential legislation to hold China accountable passed in this Congress in history. The potential that this select committee has really is contingent on making sure that the words that were expressed by Speaker McCarthy and by incoming Chair Gallagher are actually upheld. The concern that you hear on our side really is concern that this devolves into something that is about promoting conspiracy theories and that tolerates racist language. We say that because we have been through all of this. The use of the words that the former President chose to employ resulted in hate crimes against Asian Americans in this country. It is unconscionable. If this committee goes in that direction, I assure you that the Democrats on that committee will push back forcefully. We want this committee to be effective. In theory, this is a committee that we should all get behind, and I hope that it is successful. I hope that it is bipartisan. I hope that it is all that we have been promised here today. As I said, I am going to vote for this because I think it is the right thing to do, and I have faith that our Members on both sides will do the right thing. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote their conscience. I am going to vote ``yes'' on this, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a CNN article titled: ``There are clear distinctions between Trump and Biden's two cases.'' [From CNN Politics, Jan. 10, 2023] There Are Clear Distinctions Between Trump and Biden's Two Cases (By Stephen Collinson) Republicans seized on revelations that several classified documents from Joe Biden's time as vice president were found in his former private office to create cover for former President Donald Trump's hoarding of secret records. The disclosures Monday about the material found last fall spun up an immediate political storm at a time when Trump is in increasing legal peril. The new GOP House majority is meanwhile rushing to undermine investigations against him and unleashing a wave of counter investigations against the current president. But there are clear distinctions between the two cases. The new controversy so far appears to be on a smaller scale than the more than 100 classified documents--some bearing the highest designations of government secrecy--taken from Trump's resort at Mar-a-Lago after a court-approved search by FBI agents. And Biden appears to be cooperating with the National Archives and the Justice Department in a way that Trump failed to do and unlike the former president he is not being investigated for possible obstruction of justice. But Trump, who brands attempts to make him face accountability for his conduct in office and afterward as political victimization, sought to capitalize on Biden's discomfort over the documents in a post on his Truth Social network. ``When is the FBI going to raid the many homes of Joe Biden, perhaps even the White House? These documents were definitely not declassified,'' he wrote. New House Oversight Chairman James Comer told CNN: ``This is (a) further concern that there is a two-tiered justice system.'' New House Speaker Kevin McCarthy also moved quickly to respond to the discovery of the documents in an office used by Biden after he left the vice presidency. ``Oh, really? They just now found them after all these years,'' he told CNN. ``What has he said about the other president having classified documents?'' Attorney General Merrick Garland has asked the US attorney in Chicago to review the material, some of which bore the marking ``sensitive compartmentalized information''--showing that it came from intelligence sources. Questions Biden must face Fairness and respect for the law dictate that Biden should answer many of the same questions that Trump is facing, regarding whether he was entitled to the records, why they were not previously turned over, whether they were securely stored and how they ended up in his office in the first place. Critics will also wonder why Biden didn't immediately disclose the discovery of less than a dozen documents last fall to the public, given the huge sensitivity of the Justice Department probe of Trump on a similar question. And the president will be sure to face accusations of hypocrisy given his sharp criticisms that Trump did not take the proper steps to secure classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. Still, even if there are adequate answers to these issues, any distinctions in the severity of the Biden and Trump documents will be obliterated in the political torrent that is already stirring and with conservative media likely to draw false equivalencies between the two cases. The report offers an immediate opening for Trump as he seeks to dodge culpability for his behavior and claims he's a victim of persecution to thwart his 2024 campaign. The former president is a master at turning one incident into an entire campaign narrative--as he did with former Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton's emails in 2016. And the report will give the new Republican House majority fresh material as it unleashes a multi-front investigative assault against the White House. And while there so far appear to be clear differences in the magnitude of the cases, the report--first carried by CBS--about Biden will inevitably raise political pressure on Special Counsel Jack Smith's investigation into Trump's retention of classified material. Smith is also now reaching even deeper into the ex- president's inner circle by subpoenaing his former lawyer Rudy Giuliani as part of a federal grand jury probe looking at Trump's fund raising, among other issues related to the 2020 election. Garland's dilemma The Biden document disclosures will also deepen the already intense political headache facing Garland as he contemplates an eventual decision on whether to charge Trump, whose status as an ex-president and an active 2024 candidate carries huge political implications. Garland insists that investigations will go where the evidence and the law demands as he seeks to stress the independence of the Justice Department--which was perpetually in question when Trump was president. But now, inevitably and however the Biden vice presidential documents issue is resolved, a decision to charge Trump over the classified documents case but not to take the same action against Biden would incite political uproar among conservatives who would be sure to allege double standards. The former president's legal team issued a temperate response to the Biden report that sought to broaden openings that could shield their client. One lawyer said that the Biden story was ``indicative of a larger problem with trying to keep track of classified information in the offices of the President and the VP. There is an over classification problem, and at the end of an Administration, things get packed up and moved and it's hard to keep track.'' The lawyer also warned that if Trump were to be charged, his representatives would demand all communications between the National Archives and Biden's team on the matter. The Biden discovery Biden's attorneys found the documents in a locked closet in a private office in Washington the future president used as a visiting professor with the University of Pennsylvania. The White House Counsel's office notified the National Archives and officials at the agency took control of the documents the morning after they were found. Biden wasn't aware the documents were in the office until his personal lawyers reported their existence and remains in the dark of the content of the material, a source familiar with the matter told CNN. Federal office holders are required by law to relinquish official documents and classified documents when their government service ends. Unlike in Trump's case, Biden doesn't appear to have tried to assert ownership of the files, to obstruct their handover or make outlandish claims that he had previously declassified them based on an undisclosed private thought. Trump is being investigated by Smith to see whether he infringed the Espionage Act by keeping classified material and for the possible obstruction of justice. Republicans muster for investigative assault on White House The Biden documents case will intensify the showdown already emerging between the new Republican House majority and the White House. For two years, Trump has been rocked by blow-after-blow from congressional and criminal probes over his conduct during and after his presidency that have nudged him ever closer to accountability. But help is on the way. The new Republican majority in the House is ready to unleash a vast investigative machine apparently designed to discredit and distract from Trump's alleged transgressions and to wound Biden's nascent reelection race. Such an offensive was always coming, given the extent to which the deeply conservative House GOP remains in thrall to the ex-president. But the intensity, scope and financial muscle of the investigations was bolstered by the concessions offered by McCarthy as he caved to right-wing hardliners in order to win his speakership last week. And it represents a fast-expanding challenge for the White House, which has already spent months preparing its defense. A new House rules package passed on Monday for instance will set up probes into alleged political bias in agencies like the FBI and the Justice Department and what Republicans see as political weaponization of such agencies. The move cements the GOP's sharp turn away from the FBI, once seen as one of the most conservative agencies in the US government following Trump's repeated claims he was illegally targeted by investigations and his failure to enlist the bureau as a weapon to advance his political grievances. Rigorous scrutiny and oversight are inevitable and desirable as part of the constitutional duty of Congress and responsibility to ensure accountability with taxpayer money. And in the first two years of the Biden administration, there are multiple questions that merit further investigation and over which the public deserves more clarity. This includes the chaotic management of the withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, the way that Covid-19 mitigation funds were spent or the administration's unwillingness at least until recently to consider the rising numbers of migrants crossing the southern border as a crisis. Proper oversight can avoid the repeat of errors and inform better policy in future. But as always in Congress, there are questions over when genuine oversight stops and hyper-partisan politically motivated witch hunts begin, especially in the case of key Republicans who have a long record of crossing over the line. Incoming House Judiciary Chairman Rep Jim Jordan, for instance, was a leading player in a previous investigation by a GOP House into the death of US ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and three other Americans who were killed by Islamic militants in Benghazi in 2012. The two-year GOP-run House probe found a perfect storm of bureaucratic inertia, rapidly worsening security in Libya and inadequate resources led up to the killings. But Jordan was not satisfied when the final report did not bear out conservative attacks on the conduct of Hillary Clinton--who was Secretary of State at the time of the deaths. The Ohio lawmaker released his own far more critical report, along with then Rep. Mike Pompeo, who later became Secretary of State himself. And at the time, McCarthy boasted that the investigation harmed Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign, apparently revealing partisan motivations behind the probe. As well as the building storm over classified documents, a key focus of the new GOP House majority will be to investigate the House Select Committee in the previous Democratic-run House that painted a damning picture of Trump's behavior following the 2020 election and before the Capitol insurrection. The fact that many of the current members of the House voted to deny certification of Biden's election victory based on lies about electoral fraud Trump was using to try to steal power underscores why many observers are raising new questions about the partisan nature of Republican investigations. But after the revelations about documents found in Biden's office, Republicans know a political gift when they see it.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the difference is clear. Unlike in Trump's case, Biden doesn't appear to have tried to assert ownership of the files to obstruct their handover or make unhinged claims that he had previously declassified them through his thinking. Trump is being investigated to see whether he infringed the Espionage Act by keeping classified material and for the possible obstruction of justice. I would just say to my colleague who spoke before, the American people also have expectations of elected officials, such as respecting the Constitution and respecting free and fair elections and not trying to overturn free and fair elections. Unfortunately, a majority of my friends on the other side of the aisle chose to ignore that. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Goldman).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record an article from The Guardian titled: `` `It's going to be dirty': Republicans gear up for attack on Hunter Biden,'' and an article from Politico titled: ``It's not just Hunter Biden: Prepare for a 2023 packed with House GOP investigations.'' [From the Guardian, Jan. 8, 2023] `It's Going To Be Dirty': Republicans Gear Up for Attack on Hunter Biden (By David Smith) When Borat--alias British actor Sacha Baron Cohen--told risque jokes about Donald Trump and antisemitism at last month's Kennedy Center Honors in Washington, Joe Biden was not the only one laughing in a red velvet-lined balcony. Sitting behind the US president was Hunter Biden wearing black tie and broad smile that mirrored those of his father. The image captured the intimacy between the men but also the sometimes awkward status of Hunter as both private citizen and privileged son of a president. It is a dichotomy likely to come under a harsh public glare this year as congressional Republicans set about making Hunter a household name and staple of the news cycle. ``The right wing is licking its chops at the chance to go after him,'' said Joshua Kendall, author of First Dads: Parenting and Politics from George Washington to Barack Obama. ``The level of venom is going to be over the top and really, really dirty. The Republicans' rhetoric might get so heated that it detracts from some of the actual behaviour.'' Republicans have been waiting a long time for this moment. After regaining control of the House of Representatives in last November's midterm elections, they used their first press conference to promise to investigate the Biden administration and, in particular, the president's allegedly errant son. Hunter has long faced questions about whether he traded on his father's political career for profit, including efforts to strike deals in China and reported references in his emails to the ``big guy''. Hunter joined the board of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma in 2014, around the time that Joe Biden, then vice- president, was helping conduct Barack Obama's foreign policy with Ukraine. Hunter earned more than $50,000 a month over a five-year period. Senate Republicans claim that his appointment may have posed a conflict of interest. Last year more than 30 of them called for a prosecutor to be given special counsel authority to carry out an investigation into alleged ``tax fraud, money laundering, and foreign-lobbying violations''. But they have not produced evidence that it influenced US policy or that Joe Biden engaged in wrongdoing. House Republicans and their staff have been studying messages and financial transactions found on a now notorious laptop that belonged to Hunter. Having gained the majority, they now have the power to issue congressional subpoenas to foreign entities that did business with him. Richard Painter, who was chief White House ethics lawyer in the George W Bush administration, believes that Joe Biden should have recused himself from matters relating to Ukraine. ``The Ukrainian gas company wanted to curry favour with Joe Biden so they put his son on the board,'' he said. ``It's pretty clear what's going on there but the missing link the Republicans are looking for--but I don't think they're going to find--is any kind of a quid pro quo, Joe Biden for the Ukrainian gas company. Still, it would have been better if Joe Biden had said: `Look, my son is going to be on this board, maybe the secretary of state or somebody else could handle Ukraine,' and he'd step aside.'' Hunter's taxes and foreign business work are already under federal investigation with a grand jury in Delaware hearing testimony in recent months. There are no indications that this involves the president, who insists that he has never spoken to Hunter about his foreign business arrangements. Republicans are pulling at another strand. Ethics experts have accused Hunter of cashing in on his father's name as he pursues a career as an artist. He is represented by the Georges Berges Gallery in New York, which reportedly struck an agreement with the White House to set the prices of the art and not reveal who bid on or bought it. Berges said in an lnstagram post in November that Republicans on the House oversight committee had written to him with ``certain requests'' and subsequently got into a Twitter debate with Painter about money and influence in art. Berges wrote: ``If you're going to scrutinize a profession then scrutinize all of them and every position that children of Congress take in DC and elsewhere.'' Painter said in an interview: ``I don't think there's anything corrupt about the White House or anything corrupt about President Biden. But keeping the identities of the art buyers secret was a bad idea. It leads to suspicion that people are passing money under the table. It's hard to keep who buys the art secret in the close-knit world of Hunter Biden's friends or Hunter Biden himself so the secrecy was a bad idea.'' Fox News and other rightwing media may relish an opportunity to demonise the president's son ahead of an election in 2024. But Republicans are in danger of overreach. Trump's attempt to get Ukraine to examine Hunter's business dealings led to his first impeachment. His efforts to weaponise Hunter's troubles in the 2020 presidential election fizzled. David Brock, a veteran political operative and president of Facts First USA, a new group set up to combat the congressional investigations, said: ``What we're going to see in the hearings is a recycling and a rehash of old discredited stories and conspiracy theories. They're doing it for political reasons. [Congressman] Jim Jordan is on the record saying that the investigations are all about 2024 and electing Donald Trump again. That's his own words, not mine.'' Hunter's 2021 memoir, Beautiful Things, generated sympathy in some quarters for a man who 50 years ago last month survived a car crash that killed his mother and sister and who has been honest about his struggle with alcoholism and drug abuse. Brock believes that a fresh Republican onslaught will backfire. ``Going after someone who has an addiction and has had mental health issues is sadistic politics and I don't think it will work with the American people,'' he added. ``There are so many people who have family members who've suffered in one way or another and will identify with Hunter; they won't identify with the attackers. The Hunter-hating narrative has been out there for three years. It hasn't really gained any traction outside of the far right and I don't think it will.'' Republicans could also lose credibility by focusing on Hunter and other retreads of the past instead of advancing a plan for domestic issues such as inflation, jobs and taxes. Kurt Bardella, a Democratic strategist who served as a senior adviser for Republicans on the House oversight committee from 2009 to 2013, said: ``For all the talk about Republicans saying they want to return to regular order, they want to have better stewardship over taxpayer dollars, they want to act more responsibly with legislative power, well, OK, but how does investigating Hunter Biden do anything to help the American people?''

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, without a doubt, Mr. Jordan will use this subcommittee to go after people MAGA extremists see as their opponents. All the MAGA Republicans seem to want to do is create a forum for settling scores and pushing conspiracy theories. They are not interested in governing. They want to go on FOX. They want to investigate Hunter Biden's laptop. They want to try to steal elections. They want to shut down the government if they don't get their way. We are at a very dangerous moment in this country, and it is one of the reasons why many of us were so stunned that the new Speaker gave away so much of his authority to a group of extremists in the Republican Conference who have spent their entire careers trying to blow this place up. The bottom line is this committee is basically an assurance that we are going to see these very partisan, political, MAGA-driven investigations go forward. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote ``no.'' Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, here is a curious thing. The legislation that creates this select committee, we were first given this on January 2. Then, it changed on January 6, and we didn't get that until 10 p.m. on January 6, after 13 Speaker votes. What changed in this legislation--and this is really curious--is they expanded the select committee's authority to investigate ongoing criminal investigations--think about that--in an unprecedented way. I don't know how many votes that got, but clearly, it was important enough because we went through 13 Speaker votes before we got to this. The reason why this is included, and I am sad to say this, is because we have Members in this Chamber who themselves may be subjects of investigation. There are ongoing investigations against the former President. So, this was added. Why was this added? To try to frustrate those investigations. When we talk about corruption, when we talk about undermining the rule of law, let's understand what just occurred here. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would simply say in response to that that there are oversight committees that are equipped and ready to look into all the issues that the gentleman just raised, and into all the conspiracy theories that they want to raise. But they went ahead and created this additional committee, and there is a reason for it. This new committee they are creating has the authority to basically investigate ongoing criminal investigations. It is unprecedented. In any event, I would remind the gentleman, you have oversight committees. You are in charge now; you can do whatever you want to do. But there is a reason for this committee and there is a reason why after 13 roll call votes for Speakership they added an additional line giving this committee the authority to look into ongoing investigations. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman just got up and made all kinds of assertions that things were just said that weren't said. I don't know what the hell he is talking about. Mr. Speaker, I will, again, urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' against the creation of that committee because this is unprecedented. This is a witch hunt. This is a committee designed basically to protect those who, quite frankly, are under investigation right now. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me just make this clear for my colleague. A change was made in this legislation, and it was not just to allow the committee to investigate ongoing criminal investigations which is quite nefarious in and of itself. Originally it was only supposed to be able to have investigative authority over the Department of Justice, DHS, and the FBI; the CIA and the IRS were added. This was all done after 13 Speaker votes at 10 o'clock at night clearly in an attempt to win more votes. The people who are asking for these changes are the same people who want to investigate the people who are investigating them. This is really, really unprecedented. I don't know what the hell is going on here, but this isn't right. This isn't openness, and this isn't transparency. My friends talk about corruption. This is corruption. This is unacceptable. The American people ought to know it, and reasonable colleagues on the Republican side ought to say no to this. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would say what the gentleman just said is terrible, but this committee has absolutely nothing to do with that. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would just say in response to the gentleman who said that he hopes that we populate this select committee with serious Democrats that he populate the committee with Republicans who did not ask for a pardon and who did not have their phones seized by the FBI. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record an article from The Hill titled: ``Perry won't agree to stay off new House committee investigating January 6 probes.'' [From The Hill, Jan. 8, 2023] Perry Won't Agree To Stay Off New House Committee Investigating Jan. 6 Probes (By Julia Mueller) Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) on Sunday wouldn't pledge to stay off the possible new House committee that would investigate probes into the Jan. 6, 2021, attack at the U.S. Capitol despite being a subject of a Department of Justice (DOJ) inquiry into the matter. ``Why should I be limited--why should anybody be limited-- just because someone has made an accusation? Everybody in America is innocent until proven guilty,'' Perry said on ABC's ``This Week.'' Host George Stephanopoulos pressed Perry, asking, ``Doesn't that pose a conflict to you, since you're also part of the investigation?'' ``So, should everybody in Congress that disagrees with somebody be barred from doing the oversight and investigative powers that Congress has? That's our charge. And again, that's appropriate for every single member, regardless of what accusations are made. I get accused of things every single day, as does every member that serves in the public eye,'' Perry countered. Newly elected Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) has indicated the Republican majority just sworn in plans to review the work of the House select committee that last year probed Jan. 6 and look into the federal investigations. DOJ investigations seized Perry's phone in connection with the rioting, and obtained email exchanges between Perry and former Trump attorney John Eastman, among others. Perry also introduced former President Trump to Jeffrey Clark, whom Trump considered appointing as attorney general in order to propagate his claims of election fraud during the 2020 presidential contest.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, the American people want us to roll up our sleeves and get to work. They want us to make progress and deliver results that help them in their day-to-day lives. They don't need Congress to bend and break to the will of MAGA extremists, and they definitely don't need us to push crazy conspiracy theories and go on witch hunts to settle political scores. My friends in their rules package gutted the Office of Congressional Ethics, and here they are with this new subcommittee which threatens our safety, our security, and our freedom. It is an unprecedented attack on our Nation's law enforcement agencies, our justice system, and our intelligence community. Mr. Speaker, I would just say to my colleagues who spoke before about the intelligence oversight, we have an entire Select Committee on Intelligence that has oversight responsibilities on those matters. I am sorry the gentleman who spoke doesn't have confidence in whom the Republicans are going to propose as chair. This committee is deranged. It is a bad idea, and it will go down in history as one of the worst committees that a Congress has ever put forward. It will be in the same category as the Joseph McCarthy Committee on Un-American Activities or the Benghazi Committee which now Speaker McCarthy admitted was an attempt to try to take down Secretary Clinton. But here is the deal, and here is what it is all about: There are six on the other side of the aisle who asked for a pardon from President Trump. They did his dirty work, but Trump left them hanging. He did not give them a pardon. So now they are effectively trying to pardon themselves with the creation of this select committee. This is unconscionable. It is so blatant. Again, the changes that were made to give them the ability to pardon themselves were done after the 13th Speaker vote in the dead of night to try to win their votes over. This is not the way this Congress should run. This is not the way Republicans or Democrats, or any majority should behave. People should be ashamed of themselves that this is in the rules package and that this is what my friends are pushing right now. We are better than this. We should not be going down this road. My friends said that they want to combat inflation and that they want to make the lives of the American people better. Let's focus on those things. Let's focus on areas that actually improve the lives of the American people. This is a colossal waste of time. But even worse, it is to me the epitome of what corruption is all about. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.