August 4, 2020 - Issue: Vol. 166, No. 138 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 2nd Session

[Pages S4722-S4724]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                PROTESTS

  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I want to start by doing something that 
has become a little controversial. It shouldn't be, and the fact that 
it is reflects a sad time in our Nation's history. Here it is:
  To our Nation's police, sheriffs, and all other law enforcement 
officers out there--State and Federal--thank you. I appreciate you and 
am grateful for your service.
  Why has that become controversial? Because all of a sudden, 
criticizing and demonizing our Nation's law enforcement has become the 
popular liberal thing to do.
  Over the last few days, you have probably seen the liberal mainstream 
media making wild claims and accusations that President Trump has 
deployed so-called secret police to Portland. These allegations got 
even more attention over the last few weeks because some of my 
Democratic colleagues came down to the floor and made the wildest 
accusations about how the Federal officers were the worst in the world.
  Some of the words they used were: ``bold,'' ``sadistic,'' 
``Gestapos,'' ``storm troopers,'' ``paramilitary''--words designed to 
stir the emotions of everyone watching. They were talking about the law 
enforcement community. They were talking about sheriffs and police. 
Rather than letting these wild allegations go unchecked, let's remember 
how we got here.
  For over 60 days, violent demonstrators have laid siege on Portland. 
That is not an exaggeration. They have specifically and deliberately 
attacked a Federal courthouse, attempting to destroy it. Let's be 
clear: These are not peaceful protesters. Everyone agrees in the First 
Amendment and the support for peaceful demonstrations. We all agree on 
that. That is not what we are talking about here. That is not what 
happened when the anarchist groups co-opted the peaceful protests with 
the fires, the lasers, the bricks, the Molotov cocktails, the 
sledgehammers, and more.
  See the chart. This chart we have here, the one on the right says:

       Day 53. Federal facilities and law enforcement officials 
     targeted and attacked overnight. One officer injured and 5 
     arrested.

  The one on the left says:

       Day 56. Last night six DHS law enforcement officers were 
     injured in Portland. To be clear, criminals assaulted FEDERAL 
     officers on FEDERAL property . . . and the city of Portland 
     did nothing.

  The response from local leaders? They have caved to the mob and will 
not allow local law enforcement to protect Federal property. In fact, 
they have demanded Federal law enforcement leave and surrender to the 
mob. Can you imagine? This is in America that this happened.
  So that leaves us two options: One, completely give in to the mob and 
let them burn down the taxpayer-funded courthouse--and we all know that 
they will not stop there--or, two, send additional Federal resources to 
Portland.
  We are a nation of law and order. Additional Federal resources is the 
only correct answer here. The Department of Homeland Security doesn't 
have a choice. They are legally required to protect these facilities.
  Contrary to what has been reported in the media, these Federal 
officers are acting in accordance with the law. They have the legal 
authority and responsibility to protect Federal property, as well as 
detain, question, and arrest anyone in accordance with that. 
Specifically, that is found in 40 U.S. Code 1315. So they aren't some 
sort of secret police; they are legal law enforcement doing what local 
law enforcement wasn't being allowed to do locally there, so they took 
up their responsibilities and performed.
  Last week, Governor Brown finally conceded. I guess he just got to 
the point where he was willing to be fearful for the people and their 
injuries and the terrorist activity that was going on. But he conceded 
and allowed the Portland Police Bureau to clear out the downtown parks 
that were a base for the agitators and let the State police officers 
defend Federal properties.
  That is the responsible thing to do, and it shows the President's 
commitment to working with State and local law enforcement when 
additional resources are needed.
  It could be easy to think that this is an outlier, but, sadly, the 
national ``defund the police'' movement--it is a movement in this 
country now. Everyone is talking about it, defund law enforcement. The 
movement is having a real impact throughout America.
  The result? Shootings have increased in New York by 277 percent this 
year; in Chicago, by 50 percent this year, and in May, they saw the 
most violent weekend in modern history; and in Minneapolis, the murder 
rate is expected to surpass an alltime high.
  In fact, as President Trump mentioned recently, the 20-most dangerous 
cities in America are run by Democrats. I have to mention this because 
the Washington Post tried to fact check the President's statement. And 
do you know what? It is a good thing that they did. The result? The 
Post showed that, per capita, 19 of the 20 cities with the most violent 
crime per 10,000 residents were controlled by Democrats, and the one 
that wasn't controlled by Democrats was an Independent, but that 
Independent is a Democrat.
  I guess they hoped we would only read the headline and not see the 
data that shows the impact of the lack of leadership. In case you can't 
tell watching at home, the blue lines on the chart that will go up 
here--what we have here is the claim ``that the most dangerous cities 
in America all run by Democrats. They aren't.'' But then they found out 
that they are. Here they are. The blue lines are run by the Democrats; 
the red lines, Independents. So that is a problem.
  Honorable, good law enforcement officers are enduring severe budget 
cuts from spineless politicians who want to concede to the far left 
``defund the police'' movement. They are being overstretched and 
overburdened
  That doesn't even get into the injuries law enforcement has endured 
during these violent protests recently. In Portland alone, three 
officers are facing possible permanent blindness after having high-
intensity lasers shown in their eyes. Other officers have faced 
injuries from being hit with bricks and fireworks. They have endured 
verbal assaults, been spit on, and called the most offensive names. At 
least 30 officers have been victims of a doxing, where anarchists share 
where their families live online so they can have access to them. In 
fact, since July 4, over 245 Federal law enforcement officers have been 
injured in Portland.
  Fortunately, President Trump is taking action, standing up for our 
police

[[Page S4723]]

and also for law enforcement in our communities. Last week, he launched 
Operation Legend, a Federal law enforcement initiative that will work 
with State and local officials to address the spike in violent crimes 
that we are seeing in too many cities. This is the right approach to 
restore law and order.
  The last thing I will leave you with on the floor is, 2 weeks ago, in 
the midst of sensationalizing statements, the junior Senator from 
Oregon challenged me, basically, implying that if what was happening in 
Portland was happening in Oklahoma, I would feel differently. Well, 
that isn't--the difference isn't how I would feel. The difference is 
between Oklahoma City and Oregon, I guess. In Oklahoma, we respect our 
police and the sheriffs and the State troopers.
  This is a good one here. This is in the Springlake Division. This is 
in Oklahoma. I walk past this every time we come and go from the 
station. What a wonderful community we see serving here in Oklahoma 
City. You can read statements of people saying how much they appreciate 
our law enforcement officers. This is the door that was there, and it 
is covered with hearts on the door. That tells the story.
  The sacrifice they make daily is real. They put their lives on the 
line to protect and serve our communities, but they also work long 
hours in difficult conditions. Here is a reminder of that sacrifice.
  I will put up two officers here. There are two officers whom I am 
going to show you. Last month, two Tulsa police officers were 
conducting a routine traffic stop, pulling over a car with expired 
tags. As any veteran officer will tell you, there is no such thing as a 
routine anything in law enforcement. This is no exception. Officer 
Zarkeshan, a rookie, and Sergeant Craig Johnson had no way of knowing 
that the man they had just pulled over was armed. The man on the left 
is Craig Johnson. Both officers were shot multiple times. Sergeant 
Johnson, who has two young sons, died. Officer Zarkeshan, after 
enduring multiple surgeries, is blessed. He is now stable and making 
good progress.
  ``Protect and serve'' isn't just a phrase for the hundreds of 
thousands of law enforcement officers around the country; it is a 
calling, a sacrifice for them. Too often, officers have to sacrifice 
their lives for their communities. That is why, when liberal 
politicians are tripping over themselves, trying as hard as they can to 
demonize all police officers, I want to make it clear that some of us 
are standing up against defunding police and in favor of defending 
police.
  I will always stand with President Trump in defense of our good, 
honorable law enforcement officers. They will sacrifice anything for 
those of us here, and to not stand up and defend them is to dishonor 
them.
  In Oregon, politicians are clamoring to defend the terrorists who are 
trying to destroy law and order. On the other side, our President is 
trying to defend it. God bless America's law enforcement officers and 
our President.
  The police and our law enforcement aren't the only things the new 
cancel culture has come for more recently. While not a literal mob 
trying to burn down buildings, the online liberal mob is still seeking 
to destroy our American icons by canceling them, subjecting them to 
public backlash fueled by the progressive ideology.
  Just before July Fourth--our national holiday--they came for the 
National Anthem. The Yahoo music editor-in-chief wrote that the 
``'Star-Spangled Banner' seems to be striking a wrong note.'' The Los 
Angeles Times wrote an op-ed titled, ``It's time to cancel the `Star-
Spangled Banner.''' This is America we are talking about.
  Why do they do that? Because in the fourth stanza of the song--and I 
didn't even know until a month ago that it had more than one stanza. 
They knew it was more than just one stanza. But in the fourth stanza, 
there is a couplet that reads:

       No refuge could save the hireling and slave
       From the terror of flight in the gloom of the grave.
  Now, because of that, they want to cancel the Star-Spangled Banner. 
Marc Ferris, who literally wrote the book on the Star-Spangled Banner, 
stated that Key was likely using the term loosely, contrasting the 
free, patriot Americans against the British soldiers subjected to the 
yoke of the monarchy.
  But Yahoo's article even says if there is ``a tradition that hurts 
any part of society,'' it is time to just throw it away. That throwing 
it away has extended to statues of our Founders, like George Washington 
and Thomas Jefferson. It also includes Mahatma Gandhi and Ulysses S. 
Grant.
  It even includes historical items from popular culture like ``Gone 
with the Wind''--yes, ``Gone with the Wind.'' They wanted to do away 
with ``Gone with the Wind.'' The organization that has a program where, 
online, they can dial up any movie that they want to do, one of them is 
``Gone with the Wind,'' and they want to do it because of--they say--
the culture. That happens to be the one that Hattie McDaniel was the 
first Black American to win an Oscar for.
  This is, again, what is going on right now. Like so many American 
families, I watch with shock and dismay as to how many are setting 
aside critical thinking in favor of an emotional mob that moves closer 
and closer to a total Cultural Revolution takeover.
  Should we have expected anything less from the Democratic Party as 
they continue to run toward socialism and proudly embrace communist 
beliefs?
  Remember, we have seen this before. Chairman Mao knew that, to fully 
seize control and build a socialist country, he needed to destroy our 
``four olds": old ideas, old culture, old customs, and old habits. The 
Communists in China needed the Orwellian control of ``History has 
stopped'' in 1966, and the Communists here in America need it today.
  How else can they erase our ideas, culture, and customs in order to 
impose their radical policies on all of us?
  How much longer do we need to wait for their cries of ``Abolish 
rent'' to become ``Jail the bourgeois landlord''? We already see 
professors accused of wrong thinking for having the audacity to teach 
or advocate for anything unapproved by the progressive mob. How long 
until they are denounced as class traitors?
  Does our Nation have flaws? Of course. But what is unique and is 
perhaps the most beautiful part of our Nation is that we have the 
ability to see those flaws, to change them, and to grow. And we do it 
under the promise of liberty and justice for all.
  We did that after the Civil War. We saw it again after World War II. 
We saw that growth in the civil rights movement.
  The reality of this leftwing ``cancel culture'' mob is that there is 
no goal of debate. The goal is to shame, humiliate, and ridicule into 
conformity through a vicious attack reminiscent of the Chinese 
Communist Party struggle session. Liberty is under siege.
  Just remember what happened in the opinion pages of the New York 
Times for merely publishing an opinion that was held by the majority of 
Americans but rejected by the progressive mob. Senator Cotton put 
forward a well-researched op-ed--requested by the Times--that advocated 
the President, only as a last resort, should use the Insurrection Act 
to put down the terrorist activity we saw in too many cities over the 
past few months.
  Again, a national poll held that 58 percent of registered voters 
agreed with Senator Cotton, but some reporters at the New York Times 
and the progressive mob didn't. They raised such a protest that the 
head of the editorial page issued an apology, claiming that it wasn't 
to the standards of the Times, that it was too extreme. And that wasn't 
enough for the mob. He was fired.
  Before the ``cancel culture'' mob goes further still to embrace their 
Presidential candidate--who has gone through enough twists and turns to 
make sure that he, too, conforms to the progressive demands--we should 
all remember our Nation was founded on liberty, and it will only endure 
with true liberty. That means being willing to live together in the 
midst of all kinds of diversity, especially diversity of thought.
  So, as we began, we can't forget what this is all about: The 
terrorists ran, unchecked, in Portland for 60 days. No one raced to 
stop them. Federal officials had to step in because the State and local 
governments wouldn't allow their law enforcement to police the riots.
  Scenes like we saw in Portland will not happen in Oklahoma, but they

[[Page S4724]]

could happen in other cities where lawlessness is pervasive. 
Thankfully, we have a President who stands up for law and order and for 
our law enforcers.
  Where would we be without our brave police and sheriffs? I hope we 
never find that out.
  With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Lankford). The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________