mr. wicker: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi.

mr. wicker: i have one can request for a committee to -- one request for a committee to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. wicker: thank you.

the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. mr. cassidy: mr. president, i rise to speak to the nomination and the vote we're about to have on kyl dun duncan. the presiding officer: the senator is recognized. mr. cassidy: thank you. kyle has been nominated to be on the fifth circuit court of appeals. let me talk to his qualifications as to why i think we should support his nomination and vote yes. first i have a little bit of

pride in this. he is a graduate of l.s.u., my alma tatter and graduated from l.'s law school. graduated on the order of the coif and got a master's law degree from columbia university. he hayes the institution knowledge to be a successful judge. i have discussed his academic. let's speak about his experience. his breadth of experience makes him a great choice. he was certified as well-qualified by the american bar association. he has extensive courtroom experience on the 10th and 5th circuit court of appeals, the d.c. circuit court of appeals, the texas and louisiana supreme courts and he's twice argued in the united states supreme court. he has experience working in the public sector, private, and in academia. he pulls from diverse legal backgrounds ranging from criminal, maritime, american disability act regulations, section 1983 claims, health care law adoptions and contract law.

he understands the fifth circuit. after law school, mr. duncan clerked on the fifth circuit court of appeals under the honorable john m. dewey jr. he was the ment iser general at texas attorney general's office, a professor at the university of mississippi law school, he was the appellate chief of the louisiana department of justice, all states included in the fifth circuit court of appeals. again, this is the experience and background that we should look for when selecting a judicial nominee. and i will also add he is of high character. even those who are going to vote no are all impressed once they meet him and consider him a genuinely nice man whose body of work is reflected as someone who is decent. his body of work also demonstrates his high respect for legal precedent.

he understands that a judge is not an advocate for a particular case but instead an adjudicator upholding the law, applying the law to the facts. he is a man of high integrity, high character, and something sorely needed in this world but especially to be demonstrable in the federal judiciary. clearly mr. duncan is a qualified nominee having that which it takes to be a successful judge. i recommend mr. duncan without reservation and i urge my colleagues to join in supporting his nomination. mr. president, i now ask that my next remarks appear separately in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cassidy: and this relates to mike pompeo, who is the nominee for secretary of state. mr. president, if there's one thing everyone in washington seems to agree on these days and indicted in our country it is that we face very serious threats across the globe. from russian aggression in

eastern europe and syria to china's expansion in the south china sea, iran's increased threats against israel to a north korean dictator who likes to fire off missiles and test nuclear weapons, collapsing venezuela, transnational criminal organizations contributing to an opioid epidemic here at home, trade issues, our country faces big challenges. and as we face these global threats it, we need a well-qualified secretary of state who understands diplomacy and is working to keep our country safe. it is hard to think of someone who are qualified than mike pompeo, a director of the c.i.a., a former member of congress, a top graduate of west point, an editor of the "harvard law review." floor zero -- i say zero -- questions about his ability. and that's what's troubling about our colleagues across the aisle who appear ready to oppose

his nomination en masse for in other reason than that he is a republican nominated by president trump. it seems to be the latest example of washington democrats kowtowing to the so-called resistance movement, opposing anything and everything because they can't accept that donald trump was elected president of the united states. it used to be said that our partisan differences ended at the shoreline, that we presented a united face to the rest of the world. well, kind of an extension of that is who we select as secretary of state. and it's worth noting that the previous secretaries of state appointed under president obama had overwhelming support both from democrats and republicans precisely because we know it is important that we have a secretary in state in this challenging world but also partisan differences should not be reflected to the outside. in this case, that has been lost

in the name of the resistance. and when it comes to the critical position of secretary of state, mike pompeo in particular would be the man for the job as we deal with russia, iran, north korea, syria, and other challenges. so i urge my democratic colleagues to do the right thing for our country instead of catering to the most extreme elements of their party. most of my senate colleagues will support mike pompeo and supported mike pompeo when he was nominated to serve as c.i.a. director. they should support him now as secretary of state to show that while we may have our differences on many you number of issues, we stand united as americans when it comes to facing threats to our security abroad. mr. president, i yield the floor and i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. cassidy: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. mr. cassidy: i ask that the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report the motion to invoke cloture. the clerk: cloture motion: we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule 22 of the standing rules of the senate, do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the

nomination of stuart kyle duncan of louisiana to be united states circuit judge for the fifth circuit, signed by 17 senators. the presiding officer: by unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. of the question is, is it the sense of the senate that debate on the nomination of stuart kyle duncan of louisiana to be the united states circuit judge for the fifth circuit shall be brought to a close. the yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. the clerk will call the roll. vote:# vote:

vote:

vote:

vote:

vote: vote:

vote:

the presiding officer: have all senators voted? any senator wish to change their vote? on this vote, the yeas are 50, the nays are 44. the motion is agreed to. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the

majority leader of the senate. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the senate resume legislative session for a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the senate proceed to immediate consideration of s. res. 479 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 479, designating april 2018 as national donate life month. the presiding officer: is there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 480 submitted earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: senate resolution 480, expressing support for the designation of may 1, 2018, as

silver star service banner day. the presiding officer: there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 354, s. 2325. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 354, s. 23, 25, a bill toincentivize the hiring of united states workers in the commonwealth of the northern mariana islands and for other purposes. the presiding officer: there objection proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the murkowski amendment at the desk be agreed to and that the committee-reported amendment as amended be agreed to. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous

consent the bill as amended be considered read a third time. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i know of no further debate on the bill. the presiding officer: question is on passage of the bill. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed, say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the bill is passed. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 360, h.r. 4300. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: 360, h.r. 4300, an act to establish a commemorative display to honor members of the united states armed forces who served in the pacific theater of world war ii and for other purposes. the presiding officer: there objection to proceeding to the measure? without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent the bill be considered

read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10:00 a.m. tuesd tuesday, april 24, following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day and morning business be close. i further ask that following leader remarks, the senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the duncan nomination. further, that all time during recess, adjournment, morning business, and leader remarks count postcloture on the duncan nomination. finally, i ask that the senate recess from 12:30 until 2:15 to allow for the weekly conference meetings. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: so if there is to further business to come before the senate, i ask that it stand adjourned under the previous order following the remarks of senator durbin and senator whitehouse. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: mr. president? the presiding officer: senator illinois.

mr. durbin: i thank the majority leader for allowing senator whitehouse and myself to conclude this session. i want to first salute my colleague, senator whitehouse, who will be on the floor momentarily. he's come before us many times to talk about issues relative to climate change and global warming. on so many occasions, i've lost track. but it shows his dedication to this issue. he's also been outspoken on the issue of campaign financing and what is happening in america today. we all know that it takes big known run big campaigns. and we all know that many people are put off by politicians who are waiting on wealthy donors to give them the money to make it across the finish line. that's a fact. i've always said that in this business of politics, there are two categories. there are multimillionaires and mere mortals. and i am in the second category,

never having enough money to finance my own campaign, prevailing on my friends to help. it's too bad that politics has reached the level where campaigns are so long and so expensive. but tonight senator whitehouse and i will highlight one aspect of that that is particularly worrisome and really should be front and center, and that's the so-called secret contributions, the dark money, money that's being spent on political campaigns with no fingerprints. it is a growing phenomenon and it is troublesome to think that our democracy has reached that point. i'm going to speak about one aspect of it. senator whitehouse will follow me o on the top top -- on the topic. i think thank him for negotiating the opportunity this evening. let me tell you what my topic is about. one aspect of it. we know the united states leads the world in medical research. and because the u.s. scientific community, h.i.v. aids is no longer a death sentence, polio

has been eradicated, people survive heart attacks in record number, and child born trade likely live to be 78 years of age, nearly three decades longer than a baby born in 1900. we know the true dangers of tobacco and now we're learning about the dangers related to e-cigarettes. but it was not always the case that the dangers of cigarette smoking were commonly accepted knowledge. for years the tobacco industry claimed to be interested in rigorous, independent science. they wanted to sell less harmful products, and they wanted to support scientific research. evidence has now been disclosed which unequivocally demonstrates that tobacco companies, by funneling money into front organizations to do their bidding, have literally corrupted the science on this issue. they produced products they knew were no less hazardous and

sought to influence elections to ensure the friendliest voices supporting tobacco were elected to office at federal, state, and local levels all across the country. if this tactic sounds familiar, it should. it is exactly what the koch brothers are currently doing with respect to sowing seeds of doubt about the causes of climate change and helping to elect republicans who are climate change deniers. i've said repeatedly on the floor of the united states senate, i will repeat this evening, the republican party of the united states of america is the only major political party in the world today that denies climate change. i've stayed repeatedly -- if i've said that repeatedly expecting some republican to come to the floor saying it's not true. one of them whispered to me in the elevator, i think there's a party in australia that denies climate change, too. that's the best they could do.

there was a time when republicans were the leader in environmental protection. i think it was richard nixon who created the environmental protection agency. i look back on my own experience in congress. there were republicans who stood up, spoke up on the issue of climate change. i remember when john mccain and joe lieberman were the two lead sponsors on a bill dealing with global warming. it's been within my period of time serving in the senate but not anymore. it has changed dramatically. the koch brothers, i think, are behind it. they didn't come up with this strategy on their own. they were able to look at big tobacco's playbook from years gone by. the first thing that big tobacco did was to question legitimate science. the koch brothers got right in line. they have been questioning legitimate science when this comes to global warming. and they pioneered efforts to use dark money to influence america's public opinion. and to sway elections without

ever really revealing the true identities or motivations. i look back on tobacco and cancer. i'm one probably like most americans who has lost a dearly loved member of my family to tobacco and cancer. my father died when he was 53 years of age from lung cancer. i was 14 years old. he smoked two packs of camels a day. it was a horrible death. he lingered for 100 days in the hospital before he died. it's something you will never forget. there is hardly a family in america that doesn't have a similar story to tell. by the early 1950's, evidence linking smoking to lung cancer was growing. tobacco companies could have responded by taking steps to protect american consumers. what they did was to launch a conspiracy to challenge the science behind tobacco. in 1953, tobacco companies hired the p.r. firm hill and knowlton

to head a pioneering effort to study the science of keeping people smoking. there was controversy by insisting there were two sides to the debate about cigarette smoking and cancer. tobacco companies identified and paid scientists who expressed skepticism about the health risks of cigarettes, who were critical of methods, who had throrn theories about what was causing cancer among smokers. they also formed a research entity that claimed to support independent research. instead the organization's main purpose was to serve the industry's public relations interest. namely, sew seeds of doubt about the health risks of smoking and not advance scientists. sound familiar for the scientists sowing seeds of doubt about global warming? as more and more found independent research between smoking and disease, tobacco

companies used their independent research organizations to insist there was a great deal of uncertainty about whether smoking caused cancer. these entities supported scientists who showed a willingness to generate data and provide testimony that would support the industry. meanwhile, tobacco-friendly elected officials were happy to accept this bogus fake science while also receiving generous campaign contributions from big towpath -- tobacco. the tobacco industry industry reached new lows when in the early 1970's there was growing concern about the impact of secondhand smoke. arizona became the first state to restrict indoor smoking in some areas in 1973 after the surgeon general report mentioned that secondhand smoke could be harmful to nonsmokers. by 1981, eight years later, 36 states had some type of smoking restriction in place. i know this issue personally because as a member of the u.s. house of representatives, i decided to offer an amendment to

ban smoking on airplanes. at the time i was opposed by the leadership of both the republicans and the democrats in the house of representatives, and of course anyone from a tobacco-growing state or from the south opposed my efforts to ban smoking on airplanes. well, it turned out that we had a good, lucky break here and there in the house rules committee and got to bring the measure to the floor of the house for a vote, and i succeeded in passing the first restriction on smoking on airplanes. and it turned out the reason was obvious. the largest frequent flier club in america is the united states congress. we spend half of our lives on airplanes. we know better when people say oh, you are sitting in the nonsmoking section on an airplane. everybody was in the smoking section if the back of the airplane was puffing away. and so that measure passed. i called my friend frank lautenberg of new jersey, then a senator, and said frank, can you take this up in the senate. he said he would and he did.

the two of us passed the basic prohibition on smoking on airplanes. by the 1980's, evidence had accumulated about the health risks of secondhand smoke. in 1986, the surgeon general concluded secondhand smoke caused lung cancer in nonsmokers and was associated with respiratory illness in children. once again, the tobacco companies didn't accept the obvious. they responded to the evidence of harm from secondhand smoke and restrictions on smokers by launching an effort to undermine the scientific evidence. they identified trained and subsidized friendly scientists and sponsored symposia all around the world that featured these scientists without revealing they were paying them to come up with these conditions. in 1988, tobacco companies began funding the center for indoor air research. this is after we started banning the use of cigarettes on airplanes, for example. like the other so-called

independent research organizations funded by tobacco companies, c.i.a., the center for indoor air research, allowed tobacco companies to fund and control the use of research favorable to their market position so they could continue to sell addictive, cancer-causing products to more and more people, especially to kids. to shift emphasis away from secondhand smoke, this so-called research institute supported studies to weaken the case for regulation of tobacco. why is it important to reflect on history of 30 years ago? it's happening all over again. tobacco companies continue to provide funding to third-party organizations that advocate policies that align with the interests, such as e-cigarettes, without ever publicly disclosing their ties to these tobacco companies. in recent years, tobacco companies have sought to advance the idea that bringing to market so-called lower risk tobacco products will actually benefit

public health. they have warned that overregulations can hurt their business. tobacco companies have provided funding to an array of think tanks. the heartland institute, the r. street institute, the national center for public policy research, just to name a few. these tobacco industry-funded groups have sent letters to policymakers, they publish op-eds, they write reports, and they issue press releases that mirror the tobacco industry's position. warning that any future f.d.a. rules will burden the tobacco industry and undermine efforts to bring a so-called lower risk product to market. many of these groups have historically been silent or opposed the policies that have proven effective in reducing smoking rates. you know what reduces smoking more than anything else? cost of the product. as we have seen states and the federal government raise the tobacco tax, we have seen the use of the product diminish.

they haven't supported that, of course. they don't support smoke-free laws or mass media campaigns. last year, philip morris, notorious as a tobacco company, established the foundation for a smoke-free world. let me repeat that. philip morris, a tobacco company, established the foundation for a smoke-free world. they're going to fund research to end cigarette smoking and provide $80 million a year for 12 years. given their history and their continued opposition to prove policies to reduce cigarette use, excuse me if i'm skeptical. that's the problem, isn't it? research from the foundation for a smoke-free world or tv ads from the national center for public policy research just may seem harmless, but if the american public and elected officials knew that r.j. reynolds, altria or philip

morris, some of the biggest tobacco companies, were behind this research and p.r., they would be as skeptical as i am. one more examples. corporations and wealthy donors flooding cash into efforts to influence the american public and american political officials. in addition to funding bogus research, we know that tobacco companies have poured millions of dollars into nonprofit dark money organizations, which in turn spend millions of dollars to influence elections, never disclosing who they are, where the money's coming from. dark money makes it nearly impossible to find the true sources behind the attack ads and political campaigns these organizations fund, but sometimes, thanks to the news media and transparency organizations, the donors are revealed. in 2013, the center for public integrity reported that the tobacco giant reynolds america, incorporated, funded several dark money groups during the

2012 election cycle, including conservative activist, grover norquist's americans for tax reform, the koch brothers' americans for prosperity, a conservative political advocacy group, and the partnership for ohio's future, an antiunion organization backed by the ohio chamber of commerce. the only reason we know that reynolds was the secret source is because it was disclosed at the behest of an unnamed shareholder. otherwise, these donations and the involvement of tobacco companies would have remained a secret. whether they are quietly funding attack ads or the release of supposedly unbiased reports, corporations and wealthy donors are using anonymous dark money contributions to influence america's public, casting doubt on legitimate science, trying to sway elections without ever revealing true identities and motivations. it's not just limited to big tobacco and their campaigns to turn public opinion against tobacco taxes and smoke-free laws. the koch brothers have built on this model and expanded the big

tobacco playbook. they are pushing faulty research in an attempt to obscure the reality of global warming and using dark money to influence our political system. why would koch brothers care so much? they are in the oil business. so a rich few can benefit financially at the expense of everyone else if they invoke the koch brothers line. it's time to put an end to dark money influence on elections. i yield the floor to the leader on this issue on the senate democratic caucus, senator white house. the presiding officer: the senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: i ask unanimous consent that i be allowed to speak for up to 20 minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. whitehouse: thank you, and i thank senator durbin, who is a leader in our caucus but also a very important leader on these issues. we are here this evening because a group of us now embarks on a

series of speeches on the senate floor to shine some light into a network of phony front groups, a web of deceit conceived and bankrolled by the koch brothers and other self-interested billionaires to advocate for very selfish and unpatriotic policies. this web of deceit has infiltrated and populated the trump administration, and it's swamping the interests of everyday americans. i won't dwell on its policies. the billionaires having to hide behind these front groups tells you all you need to know about their policies. now, there are plenty of billionaires these days, and a bunch of them do pretty good stuff, but there is an extremist

subset trying to quietly remake america to their ideology, and they are behind the web of deceit. when an issue affects some hyperwealthy special interest group, the web activates. in the halls of congress, on cable news, in opinion pages, on social media, the front groups will be everywhere, with fake news, bogus studies, and phony science. this is a well-studied phenomenon. two speeches ago, i had a stack of books about this high here on the desk with authors who had written about it. there is also excellent academic research by robert brule and riley dunlap, nancy mclean, gerald mark owe witnesses, michael mann and many others who

deserve credit for shining light into these front groups. the graphic behind us is actually a diagram from the work of professor brule. to the uninitiated, it might appear that these are all actual different groups and that they might actually represent, who knows, thousands, maybe even millions of real people across america. that's the scheme. these front groups are designed to provide a simulacra, a manufactured artificial appearance of public support for ideologies and policies that actually just benefit the richest of the rich or the pollutingest of the polluting. got a tax scam to sell? call in the front groups who will parrot falsely that the middle class will benefit when it's the billionaires and big corporations that actually make

out like bandits. want to block action on climate change and let fossil fuel companies keep polluting for no charge? quick, activate those front groups to spread climate denial, the original fake news. climate change isn't happening. or okay, maybe it is, but we don't really know how human activity is the cause. or okay, maybe it is, but who knows how bad it will really get? okay, really bad, but it's too hard, so let's leave it to some other generation. never mind what the real scientists have to say. the web of deceit has fake scientists, and it doesn't matter to the web if their phony scientists are right or wrong. they couldn't care less. they just have to keep their

fake scientists talking, make it seem like there may be a real question about the science. in essence, pollute the public's mind. and while these phony front groups are out working their p.r. magic, connected lobbyists and electioneering groups stalk the halls of congress here ready to kneecap republicans who might, like bob inglis did, have the tame airity to think about acting on climate. they have infected the republican party with climate denial. that is part of the creepy billionaire ideology behind the web of deceit. of course, a web like this has its stooges and quizlings, and in the trump administration they can get to high places.

imagine if you've been building this web of deceit for decades and one day you get to plant your phony minions into real high-level government positions. what wonderful legitimacy. and what would you not then do to defend your stooges? well, we just saw this web of deceits spring into action to defend fossil fuel stooge scott pruitt, our ethically challenged environmental protection agency administrator. you all may have seen the steady stream of news about pruitt's ethical lapses, huge bills for taxpayers for first-class flights and 24/7 security, even

on family trips, a $43,000 maxwell smart secret phone booth, a jaunt to morocco, a condo deal with lobbyists, massive raises to cronies from oklahoma through a loophole and of all things, the safe drinking water act. he was even caught firing or resigning people who told him he could not sign up for perks like a private jet service at taxpayer expense. talk about lights and sirens. this guy is lights and sirens on a front -- affront to any concept of decency. after scandal after scandal scandal piled up, press usual mounted to fire the scoundrel.

never fee, the web of deceit is here. nearly two dozen phony front groups came to the rescue urging the president to keep pruitt on. here's the letter. as you can see, all of these groups logos are on it. they praised pruitt for helping fossil fuel polluters pollute. they are happy that it will raise drivers fuel costs. they applaud him getting rid of independent snints and -- scientists. it's with actually the reporting of pruitt scandals, they write, that is the conspiracy. this whole ordeal is nothing more than an orange straighted -- arc straighted -- orchestrated political campaign,

they pry. an orchestrated political campaign say the polluters, orchestrated political campaign to save pruitt's political hide. if you want to seeing is about orchestrated political campaigns, this is it. the web also went to war this the press and on social media for pruitt. the so-called heartland institute defended pruitt as the single most effective appointment of the president of the united states and went after republican representative carlos whiter by calling pruitt to resign. another tool of this web is a front group called a media research center. they are also on this letter. the media research center's job, when stooges are caught stooging, is to go on the attack and accuse the journalists of

bias. so this media research center has a website called news busters devoted to attacking honest reporting that it doesn't like. in articles and on twitter it attacked abc news and other networks for reporting -- for reporting on pruitt's expensive first-class travel. other groups on this letter also took to twitter to defend their boy pruitt, including the energy and environment legal institute, the american energy alliance, and the conservative partnership institute. orchestrated political campaign indeed. when i saw this orchestrated protect pruitt letter, it reminded me of this one which i received in the summer of 2016. back then a group of us

delivered speeches exposing this web of deceit's role in blocking action on climate change. we called it the web of denial because climate denial is the web's recipe for delay and inaction on carbon pollution. more than 20 organizations in the koch brothers network with lengthy records of climate change denial objected to being called out as koch-linked climate change deniers. to challenge our assertion that they were an orchestrated bunch of front groups, they responded with this orchestrated letter from all the front groups. then they went on it call it tyranny that we would call out who actually pays them. and what interests they actually front for. i can't wait to hear them

from -- to hear from them now. why are the polluter fronted front groups so desperate to protect pruitt? well, that question sort of answers itself, doesn't it? but they do a good job hiding. unfortunately, our laws allow wealthy donors to funnel money through opaque brokers and anonymous shell companies. the dark money could be from the ultra wealthy right-wing mercer family from the coke brothers em -- koch brothers empire or from whoever. we only get occasional glimpses into these dark money challenges of influence in our political system, often through leaks or mistaken filings or extraordinary painstaking research. it's not easy.

for the 22 front groups that signed this recent letter, we have figured out one common denominator, the koch brothers empire. so let's go down the list. we'll start with the heartland institute. we know that heartland received at least $100,000 from foundations connected to the koch brothers, and it received at least $7 million from donors -- donors trust. what is donors trust? it has no business purpose. it is an identity concealing device whose entire purpose is to launder donations to front groups so you won't know their real backers.

journalists have learned, however, that the koch brothers are among the largest, if not the largest, contributors to donors trust. so back to our list. al ic, koch-connected foundations gave alic $600,000. committee for a constructive tomorrow. wow, there's a good name. who could possibly be against a constructive tomorrow? certainly not the koch whose foundation gave it at least $45,000. that will buy a signature on a letter for sure. american energy alliance, koch-connected organizations

gave american energy alliance at least $1.7 million. 60-plus koch-backed organizations have given 60-plus more than $42 million. now, this is bl a little bit -- now, this is a little bit interesting because 60 plus is actually a front group that advocates for senior citizens, so its presence on this pruitt letter is weird and telling. idaho freedom foundation, it received at least $570,000 from the koch-backed donors trust. and that media research center that i talked about, at least $1 million from donors trust. independents institute,

koch-connected foundations gave the so-called independents institute more than $40,000 while koch-backed donors trust provided more than $2.5 million. conservative partner institute. this is a relatively new group and we don't yet know who is funding it, but we do know it is staffed by folks from other koch backed groups. this web of deceit not only shares common funding but common personnel. american commitment -- american commitment received at least $21 million from koch affiliated organizations. center for security policy received at least $1.9 million from koch-back donors thursday. like 60 plus, this centers for security policy doesn't usually

work on environmental issues. it lists its areas as defense, homeland security, sovereignty and national security and new media. huh, so its presence on the pruitt letter is also weird and telling. institute for liberty. at least $1.8 million from koch agreated organizations -- affiliated organizations. americans for limited government, at least $5.6 million for koch groups. tea party patriot affiliate fund. we the don't know how much money this received directly from koch affiliated organizations, but we do know that tea party patriots was created by yet another front group called freedom works. we are getting into front groups

within front groups here, folks, and freedom works received at least $12 million from koch-affiliated foundations. mountain states legal foundation, at least $90,000 fro koch- -- from koch-backed donors trust. energy and environment legal institute, at least $16,000 from koch-affiliated foundations and at least $500,000 from koch-backed donors trust. this, by the way, energy and environmental legal institute is a particularly creepy group whose function, hold your breath, is actually to harass legitimate scientists. georgia public policy foundation, at least $125,000 from koch-backed donors trust.

mississippi center for public policy, at least $500,000 from koch-backed donors trust. carbon sense solution. we don't yet know how much money this group received from koch affiliated organizations, but we know it works in close concert with the other groups in the koch-funded webb of -- web of deceit. american family association received at least $50,000 from koch affiliated organizations. this beauty of an organization has been identified as an anti-lgbt q hate group by the southern poverty law center, but here it is signing a letter boasting -- boos ting troop's

e.p.a. -- trump's administrator, but telling conservative h.q. -- hq.com, we don't know how much money they received from koch organizations, but its job to have show favorable -- signs climate coalition of america. they received at least $45,000 from koch affiliated organizations. mr. president, if you do the math, that's actually a grand total of at least $$87,281,000 received by these 22 front groups from koch-affiliated considerations. and that's only the part that has leaked out through the

screens of secrecy. who knows how much dark money remains hidden behind those screens. here's the point. this is a scam. so much money and so many front-group tentacles. once you see what's going on, you realize these front groups are just tentacles of the creepy billionaires, of giant polluting corporations, and of the other special interests that fund them. the tentacles don't represent america. they represent a bunch of polluters and billionaires. the pollution angle keeps rearing its ugly head in all of this. and guess what? koch industries is a very big polluter. in 2014, koch industries dumped

more than 6.6 million pounds of toxic pollution into our waterways. that same year koch industries spent almost $14 million lobbying the federal government. one of koch industries' biggest targets has been the e.p.a.'s clean water rule. 6.6 million pounds of toxic pollution into our waterways, millions in lobbying targeting the clean water rule. well, since the clean water rule protects our rivers and streams, sources of drinking water for millions of americans, when pruitt promised to repeal the clean water rule, that could mean big bucks for polluters, like koch industries. koch industries has major

holdings in the emergency industry, refining gasoline and other petroleum product, operating pipeline, and manufacturing petrochemicals. so when pruitt promised to repeal the clean power plan and undo fuel economy standard, that could mean big bucks for koch industries. protecting clean water, reducing carbon emissions, and saving consumers money at the pump may be good for the planet and it may be good for the american people but these things are not good for polluters. so queue the web of deceit for scott pruitt to write letters and bombard social media and the press with front-group disinformation. if the public could see its' just a couple of billionaires and oil companies and coal

barons defending pruitt, the jig is up. americans could see the special interest motive. but add on this web of phony front groups and hide the special interest funding in dark money channels, and it it's mony well spent if koch industries and companies like it can go right on polluting. polluted water, polluted air, climate change unchecked. some victory. but that's who they are. americans need to get a good look at these phony front groups. so we'll explain who these

groups are, where they get their money, and how they've installed operatives throughout the trump administration. once upon a time donald trump said he didn't want koch money or anything else from them. well, it turns out dozens of koch ap ratchets are running the trump administration. the kochs probably have more control in this administration than the trumps. they are making the trumps their chumps. and keep in mind as we spotlight this web of deceit, this one simple truth.

this is not democracy. this is the corruption of democracy. it is the corruption of democracy to benefit narrow special interests at everyone else's expense. it is the enemy of our vision of america as a shining city on a hill. we face a choice now in this country to reclaim our destiny as that shining city on a hill that john winthrop and ronald reagan spoke of or to sink into the corrupting ooze of special interest dark money, hidden influence, phony front groups, and fake news.

mr. president, history is watching. i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senate stands

>> we are people with those here to enable that personally

mentioned american. the visit on monday i cannot give you all the details what will happen but they will be arriving here on this day in the evening and taking a fee to the ground and it will be a private fee to speak to and we are very honored and looking forward to having them here for mac our shuffle did the cooking mac have you been to mount vernon before? >> president trump has not been to mount vernon yet and neither is the president the first 80 visited a few weeks after the inauguration when she brought out the spouses of the governors for their

luncheon out here in our library that george washington presidential library. i was at that luncheon. a fun time was had by all and the first lady gave wonderful remarks mac when george washington was president how often did he have foreign visitors dying? >> how often did he ask? i think there is any record specifically inviting someone to come to mount vernon when he was president of course he lived in new york where the capital was during his first term then he was in philadelphia the rest of the time so the majority of the state visit would have happened in philadelphia or in the two different presidential houses in new york city.

there were a lot of foreign dignitaries who visited but necessary did not appear before the president after the revolution ends in 1783 he comes back to mount vernon and resigned his commission and is visited by foreign dignitaries and he is the most famous person in the nation so it was regular visitation from ambassadors all over the country they wanted to come see the great george washington and where he lived. lafayette visited again and the ambassador and other dignitarie dignitaries. >> what about the foreign head of state? >> visiting from the very beginning since john adams of course in bringing those dignitaries to mount vernon

was a big part of what they had done particularly in the 20h century the first one that i know was the prince of england at the time who would go on to become edward the seventh but he came out in the full congress came out at that moment and it was an incredibly important moment that america broke free from visiting the tomb of the general from the first independence movement against the british empire. that was important in the 20th century for foreign visitors and dignitaries to come to mount vernon or to lay a wreath at the two -- the tomb so after world war i when we had the new generals from the world war i here in the french

marshall and other foreign visitors but to be visited by the head of state which happened here during the kennedy administration he had been writing out that mount vernon with the superintendent as he was called and she came up with the idea to host the state dinner at george washington's house and they did that july 11, 1961, and in some cases was referred to as pakistani george washington the great leader of that movement. >> what was the scene like that night? >> there is wonderful video it was a lot of pomp and circumstance that brought out the dignitaries.

and when he arrived with the command from the pacific they arrived here than they were brought by limousine up to the mansion the area here. then there was a performance that was by revolutionary soldiers and then there was a wonderful banquet on the east lawn it was a beautiful thing to see. >> everybody wants to know about the state dinners and what they wore and the gas besides the president. >> i don't know the top of my head what gowns they were wearing i'm sure you can see from the images what they looked like you can see those that were there like lyndon

johnson and many other american dignitaries even a great mentor to jacqueline kennedy helping to decorate the white house. it was a star-studded evening but also there was controversy aching after the fact certainly it was an expensive affair probably the first date dinner outside of washington d.c. and so there was criticism with the expense that they should not have gone to but also an effort to keep the mosquitoes down from what i understand so they sprayed ddt all over the area and then there was concern the food may not be good and that is all from the memoir from the

social secretary of jacqueline kennedy. >> how was the weather that night? you make it held up from what we can see from the pictures people were smoking and having a good time it was the 60s. >> so with the state dinner expected on tuesday of next week with this private dinner on monday but what do you take from that experience to be here at mount vernon? >> a couple of things that this is an answer by the first lady to the experience at the eiffel tower to be in paris so it is extraordinary for us that she selected mount vernon that there is an opportunity to have very different views and extraordinary place and important place as the resting place george washington and

the father of our country i am interested in telling them the story of the central passageway of lafayette of course the great revolutionary hero who went on to great fame in the french revolution and commander of the national guard in paris and beth diehl who was famous and to represent the regime and tyranny against the revolution so when the bastille falls lafayette takes the key and send it to washington and says he is sending him the key as the general and the adopted son the missionary liberty to the patriarch which george washington displayed in the mansion he brought it back to mount vernon and that is where it has been in the passageway for the last 220 years.

that is an extraordinary connection between the french with their revolution and our revolution and that's why i think the visit of the french president is so crucial to come to a place like this with the stories of the long connection of our relationships to think about the future and mount vernon has always been a place to talk about the past and present and future with all the dignitaries we are seeing. >> thank you. >> thank you very much

>> it isn't just the things that you like but it is aggregating in an warmest amount of information. you change your mind and type it? it analyzes those why didn't you continue typing that? so the deal we think we are making is limited information but with reality it click and track across the web all the information about you from third parties and puts it together

wore black arm brand to school to protest the vietnam war violating the school policy for students and the 14th or siblings challenge the school board restriction and the resulting supreme court decision established the students can keep their first amendment rights on school grounds we will discuss this landmark case of very beth tinker one of the five students to challenge the des moines school district was 13 at the time after two decades as a pediatric nurse she worked as a free-speech advocate touring nationally as a speaker at schools and youth centers. an independent federal litigator with experience at the supreme court including work on more than 100 cases for the supreme court clerk

for clarence thomas watch tonight at 9:00 o'clock p.m. eastern on c-span and join the conversation with landmark cases. we have resources on our website and a companion book in the national constitution center's and the landmark cases podcast. >> the council for islamic relations with the 2018 civil rights report. this is about 20 minutes. speefive. [inaudible conversations]

>> and the national communications director for the council of islamic relations. first we have a word from the national director then we will have an explanation of what we are releasing today with litigation attorneys in the civil rights department and the report authored that we will hear from the muslim american veterans association. and that care national executive director.

>> thank you. good morning. the national executive director of the council on american relations. i would like to express my appreciation those who put together this important book and those who assisted by providing that data the comprehensive look of muslim civil rights that is included in this report. and with the leading advocate for justice we provide legal services free of charge to the muslim community and anyone who believes they have been

targeted because of the religious freedom. those freedoms are some of the best in the world and have to be protected. that is why we call them the supreme court civil liberties are granted to strike down the unconstitutional muslim man one -- band. on wednesday, many of us with the civil rights will be arriving there and those attorneys that are representing many muslims the supreme court has to assure american muslims in the world that the liberties that have been the foundation of this nation will continue to be so by protecting them at the next

hearing. we are here today to talk about the civil rights report that is unique in its nature the only report an american muslim organization puts together and to give an idea of civil rights in the united states they talk about hard figures of how american muslims are treated because of their faith in the past years since the trump administration conducted for the presidency through the presidency itself american muslim have been singled out and this administration has employed white supremacist theology with the image of the minority of the muslim community. who is the story of this

targeting? see that with a number of hate crimes talking about an increase in the legal talk more about this. that with those agencies that the government has been targeting muslim communities and the agency from the american muslims and that is why we are concerned the religious liberties are at stake in the muslim community have to be assured that this administration will not be given a free hand and be

targeted because of their faith. fortunately we had independent judicial and that is an opportunity for the courts to assure american muslims and unconstitutional practices by this administration or other agencies or relations against or the hate crimes against families and children will not be tolerated in american muslims need to hear from the court that if this administration practices it will ensure religious freedom for all americans. so we call on all of our partners civil liberty organizations to assure that the religious freedom for all including american muslims and also we are nationwide we will

defend your right we have profiled more than 20 briefs in anticipation so the muslim children in schools don't give up your faith if you are bullied then reported to your families. don't allow this administration or bullying to prevail we are here to help you and protect you. and simply this administration's purpose is to isolate you and to stigmatize you, and this will not be tolerated. we are together because i fear this administration has ties my faith in the muslim band

and lawsuit so with that understanding this country has given all of us which is religious freedom so don't give up or hide your faith and be proud and come forward to be engaged and the stigmatization of his mom and now i will turn it back. [applause] this is an indictment of this administration because it has singled out the community because of its faith and this should be rejected by all americans above all by the courts including and above all of the cream court. it has a golden opportunity to assure muslims and the world that muslims are here to say and they are protected.

thank you. >> we have our speakers here today but also the audience groups in support media and communications manager for the american legal defense and education fund and senior communications manager for the institute for social policy and understanding. and now we will hear from the attorney from the national civil rights department to give some more background and content. >> this report indicates the muslim land has create

additional sentiment the purpose to foment animosity towards islam and muslims and that is exactly what it has done. this plays out in clear detail with numbers and increase muslim incidents and hate crimes. it isn't just the volume that has increased but also the character so throughout the united states regularly referred to as the exclusion of his mom and the administration those that seek to marginalize muslim and he humanizes mom. unpopular religious groups in america and they have all relied upon the religious

liberties that are protected from the first amendment the supreme court this week will hear argument in a case that is the first of its kind the president has wielded his authority that has been calibrated towards stigmatizing muslims and is there any doubt or any question the desire of the trump administration to create excluding muslims from america would be building animosity from this administration relies upon frequently? the supreme court later this week may have the opportunity that they said before on the side of religious liberty to ensure the muslim community but then to use his authority to stick with tight.

>> thank you now we will hear song details of the content of the report form our islamic phobia department. >> thank you. good morning like to find all of those whose hard work from the report we are releasing 23 civil rights report titled targeted several offices across the nation will release the findings of this report provide evidence that the trump administration efforts to ban muslims has stigmatize muslims and resulted in more

hate and violence across the country. the supreme court of the united states is trying to see if there is evidence what has contributed to animus that we are here to highlight this evidence from the 2018th of all right report. the supreme court must strike down the unconstitutional message that the promise of the constitution will cover generations never before has reported intimate time the sim number is 2017. throughout 2017 there was almost daily reports targeting an american those who were muslim or perceived to be. shot, severely beaten or killed. in most incidents the perpetrator use the same slurs

that were repeated daily in media headlines also from candidates and politicians the section titled invoking trump and provoking fear and precedented nature of the 45th president as a simple atc evidence with his display of animosity and prejudice has emboldened to those seeking to express their bias in using the very word trump as they assemble of widely racial animus. both adults and children have begun to use trunk to harass angry colleagues and classmates american muslim child was insulted with the slur at school and told that trump is going to kick out terrorists like him because all they did was bomb. vandal vandals spray painted white sony usa trump number

one at the events surrounding salem state university baseball field people are invoking the name of a sitting american president the highest executive office in the nation as a symbol of hatred and prejudice to inspire fear into racial and religious minorities this is unprecedented in american history. this report provides data showing increase in anti- muslim sentiment caused by that and here are the findings of the report. >> increasing violent in 2017 reporting 17% increase in anti- muslim over 2016 during the same time. if we noted a 15% increase in crimes including children youth and families federal

government agencies instigated the single greatest number of anti- incident 35% of the total incident reported in 2017 and a 70% increase as compared to the number of government incident in 2016. of these we documented those that were related to the anti- muslim band. number three, with frequent type of incidences documented by care involve harassment as a nonviolent incident customs and border protection shows employment discrimination. number four the most prevalent

triggers of the bias is documented in 2017 was victims perceived ethnicity the headscarf, and constitutional ban and the what is been documented was that the air bus or train terminal a commercial building a school and in the streets. as you can see they are being targeted and increasing numbers it is critical that the freedom to practice religion and is enshrined in our constitution is protected and for that the supreme court must strike down the unconstitutional band. thank you mom --dash ban thank you. >> and with that context with

the member and leader in our community with the muslim american veterans association. >> good morning. my name is lyndon i am the national commander of the muslim american veterans association. many of you maybe have never heard of our association or you may have but we began over 20 years ago in washington d.c. founded as a pow in the korean war and i am here today to give my support with what care is doing to prevent the van and prejudice against muslims because myself being a member of united states military and the commander of a veteran organization understand the need to have

good, watery among the military members and the veteran and we know we have several members in the military that are not necessarily born in the united states and at least today there are 8000 muslims registered as muslims in the military. overseas, we would like to make sure those that are serving overseas that are loyal to our country are not discriminated against because of the policy that are now in the fact by the government that target muslims unfairly and i don't think that was a well thought out policy because they have served this country with loyalty from the beginning of its founding and

we definitely will continue to service and strive to make america better to keep it great. thank you and i that is all we have in terms of speakers if anyone has questions? if not thank you for coming and thank you again and thank you again speefive. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

connect tonight to des moines independent committee school district against hunger in 18655 students from des moines iowa wore black armbands to school to protest the vietnam war. violating local school policy the students and the 14th or siblings challenge the school board to free speech restriction with the resulting

supreme court decision established that the student can keep their first amendment right on school grounds our guest to discuss the case is mary beth tinker one of the five students to challenge the des moines school district who was 13 at the time and has two decades as pediatric nurse working as a free speech advocate for students touring nationally and an independent federal litigator with experience at the supreme court including working in more than 100 cases and clerked for supreme court justice thomas in 1996. watch landmark cases tonight 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. join the conversation # landmark cases we have resources on the website with background in the companion book and a link to the national constitution center and the podcast at c-span

b10/landmark cases

. . . . today we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court and public policy events in washington dc and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. >> this week on "the communicators" we want to introduce you to the associate professor of information and

library science at the university of north carolina. she the staff member of the harvard burkland