YOU’LL WANT TO HEAR WHAT HE HAS TO SAY AT THE END OF THE HOUR
TONIGHT RIGHT BEFORE BRIAN.
FIRST, IT WAS A DAY OF ROBERT
MUELLER SURPRISES.
MUELLER SURPRISES. FIRST CAME THE SUDDEN SURPRISE
THAT ROBERT MUELLER HAD
SOMETHING TO SAY.
THE NEWS MEDIA WAS ALERTED ABOUT
90 MINUTES AHEAD OF TIME THAT
THE MOST ANTICIPATED PUBLIC
COMMENTS OF THE TRUMP ERA WERE
ABOUT TO TAKE PLACE.
SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER
WAS GOING TO SPEAK.
NO PUBLIC FIGURE OF ROBERT
MULERS’S LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE IN
WASHINGTON HISTORY HAS EVER
REMAINED SILENT AS LONG AS
ROBERT MUELLER HAS.
THAT SILENCE ENDED TODAY ON HIS
LAST DAY OF SERVICE AS SPECIAL
COUNSEL.
COUNSEL. HERE IS THE VERY FIRST THING HE
WANTED AMERICA TO KNOW.
>> RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS
WHO WERE PART OF THE RUSSIAN
MILITARY LAUNCHED A CONCERTED
ATTACK ON OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM.
THE INDICTMENT ALLEGES THAT THEY
USED SOPHISTICATED CYBER
TECHNIQUE TOSSES HACK INTO
COMPUTERS USED BY THE CLINTON
PAIN.
PAIN. THEY STOLE PRIVATE INFORMATION
AND THEN RELEASED THAT
INFORMATION THROUGH FAKE ONLINE
IDENTITIES AND THROUGH THE
ORGANIZATION WIKILEAKS.
ORGANIZATION WIKILEAKS. THE RELEASES WERE DESIGNED AND
TIMED TO INTERFERE WITH OUR
ELECTION AND TO BE DAMAGE A
PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE.
PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE. >> AND HERE IS THE OTHER BIG
THING THAT ROBERT MUELLER WANTED
AMERICA TO KNOW TODAY.
>> WE INVESTIGATED EFFORTS TO
OBSTRUCT THE INVESTIGATION.
THE MATTERS WE INVESTIGATED WERE
OF PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE AND
WHAT’S CRITICAL FOR US TO OBTAIN
FULL AND ACCURATE INFORMATION
FROM EVERY PERSON WE QUESTIONED.
WHEN A SUBJECT OF AN
INVESTIGATION OBSTRUCTS THAT
INVESTIGATION, OR LIES TO
INVESTIGATORS, IT STRIKES AT THE
CORE OF THE GOVERNMENT’S EFFORT
TO FIND THE TRUTH AND HOLD
WRONGDOERS ACCOUNTABLE.
WRONGDOERS ACCOUNTABLE. THE REPORT DESCRIBES THE RESULTS
AND ANALYSIS OF OUR OBSTRUCTION
OF JUSTICE INVESTIGATION
INVOLVING THE PRESIDENT.
IF WE HAD HAD CONFIDENCE THAT
THE PRESIDENT CLEARLY DID NOT
COMMIT A CRIME, WE WOULD HAVE
SAID SO.
SAID SO. WE DID NOT, HOWEVER, MACK A
DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER THE
PRESIDENT DID COMMIT A CRIME.
>> ROBERT MUELLER EXPLAINED THAT
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT POLICY
PREVENTED HIM FROM EVEN
CONSIDERING CHARGES AGAINST THE
PRESIDENT.
PRESIDENT. >> UNDER LONG-STANDING
DEPARTMENT POLICY, A PRESIDENT
CANNOT BE CHARGED WITH A FEDERAL
CRIME WHILE HE IS IN OFFICE.
THAT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
EVEN IF THE CHARGE IS KEPT UNDER
SEAL AND HIDDEN FROM PUBLIC
VIEW, THAT TOO IS PROHIBITED.
THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE IS
PART OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE AND BY REGULATION, IT
WAS BOUND BY THAT DEPARTMENT
POLICY.
POLICY. CHARGING THE PRESIDENT WITH A
CRIME WAS THEREFORE NOT AN
OPTION WE COULD CONSIDER.
THE DEPARTMENT’S WRITTEN OPINION
EXPLAINING THE POLICY MAKES
SEVERAL IMPORTANT POINTS THAT
FURTHER INFORMED OUR HANDLING OF
THE OBSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION.
>> SO IT SEEMS THAT IS ROBERT
MUELLER WAS SAYING THAT THE
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT’S RULE
AGAINST INDICTING A PRESIDENT
WAS AT LEAST A MAJOR FACTOR IF
NOT THE DECISIVE FACTOR IN THE
OUTCOME OF HIS VISION OF THE
PRESIDENT AND THEN ROBERT
MUELLER ADDED THIS.
>> THE CONSTITUTION REQUIRES A
PROCESS OTHER THAN THE CRIMINAL
JUSTICE SYSTEM TO FORMALLY
ACCUSE A SITTING PRESIDENT OF
WRONGDOING.
WRONGDOING. >> THAT PROCESS IS, OF COURSE,
IMPEACHMENT.
IMPEACHMENT. AFTER MUELLER SPOKE TODAY, THE
CHAIRMAN OF THE HOUSE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE WAS ASKED ABOUT
IMPEACHMENT.
IMPEACHMENT. >> WITH RESPECT TO IMPEACHMENT
QUESTION AT THIS POINT, ALL
OPTIONS ARE ON THE TABLE.
AND NOTHING SHOULD BE RULED OUT.
WHAM SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER
SAID LOUD AND CLEAR TODAY FOR
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IS THAT
PRESIDENT TRUMP IS LYING WHEN HE
SAYS NO COLLUSION, NO
OBSTRUCTION, AND THAT HE WAS
EXONERATED.
EXONERATED. IF MUELLER WANTED TO EXONERATE
THE PRESIDENT FROM HAVING
COMMITTED A CRIME, HE WOULD HAVE
SAID SO.
SAID SO. >> TODAY AN HOUSE SPEAKER NANCY
PELOSI SAID THIS ABOUT
IMPEACHMENT.
IMPEACHMENT. >> NOTHING IS OFF THE TABLE.
BUT WE DO WANT TO MAKE SUCH A
COMPELLING CASE, SUCH AN
IRONCLAD CASE THAT EVEN THE
REPUBLICAN SENATE WHICH AT THE
TIME SEEMS TO BE NOT AN
OBJECTIVE JURY WILL BE CONVINCED
OF THE PATH THAT WE HAVE TO TAKE
AS A COUNTRY.
>> ROBERT MUELLER STRESSED THAT
NOTHING IN THE MUELLER REPORT
EXONERATES THE PRESIDENT
INCLUDING VOLUME 1 OF THE
MUELLER REPORT THAT DESCRIBES
ACCOUNT RUSSIAN ATTACK ON OUR
ELECTION.
ELECTION. >> THE FIRST VOLUME OF THE
REPORT DETAILS NUMEROUS EFFORTS
EMANATING FROM RUSSIA TO
INFLUENCE THE ELECTION.
THIS VOLUME INCLUDES A
DISCUSSION OF THE TRUMP
CAMPAIGN’S RESPONSE TO THIS
ACTIVITY AS WELL AS OUR
CONCLUSION THAT THERE WAS
INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO CHARGE
A BROADER CONSPIRACY.
>> INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE, NOT NO
EVIDENCE OF A BROADER
CONSPIRACY.
CONSPIRACY. JUST INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO
PROVE IT BEYOND A REASONABLE
DOUBT.
DOUBT. THAT PHRASE INSUFFICIENT
EVIDENCE IS NOTHING CLOSE TO
EXONERATION.
EXONERATION. BUT IT WAS GOOD ENOUGH FOR
DONALD TRUMP TODAY AFTER ROBERT
MUELLER SPOKE, THE PRESIDENT
TWEETED NOTHING CHANGES FROM THE
MUELLER REPORT.
MUELLER REPORT. THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE
AND THEREFORE, IN OUR COUNTRY, A
PERSON IS INNOCENT THE CASE IS
CLOSED!
CLOSED! THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. LEADING OFF OUR DISCUSSION
TONIGHT IS DEMOCRATIC
CONGRESSMAN ADAM SCHIFF OF
CALIFORNIA.
CALIFORNIA. HE IS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE HOUSE
INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE.
INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE. CHAIRMAN SCHIFF, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH FOR JOINING US ON THIS
IMPORTANT NIGHT TONIGHT.
AND I WANT TO BEGIN WITH WHAT
DONALD TRUMP SAID THERE ABOUT
INEFFICIENT EVIDENCE.
INEFFICIENT EVIDENCE. IT IS STRIKING THAT THE
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
IS CLAIMING THAT THERE IS JUST
INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO FIND
THAT HE PARTICIPATED IN AN
INTERNATIONAL CONSPIRACY WITH
RUSSIANS TO ATTACK THE
PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN IN A WAY
THAT WOULD BENEFIT HIM AND WORK
TOWARD HIS ELECTION, THE
PRESIDENT THEN SAYS THAT
INEFFICIENT EVIDENCE EQUALS
INNOCENT WHICH I DON’T THINK IS
TRUE IN ANYBODY’S LEGAL
DEFINITION OF THESE TERMS.
BUT YOUR REACTION TO THAT.
LET’S START WITH THAT,
CONGRESSMAN, THAT THE PRESIDENT
IS STANDING ON THE POINT TONIGHT
OF INEFFICIENT EVIDENCE.
THAT’S GOOD ENOUGH FOR HIM.
>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, BOTH BARR
AND THE PRESIDENT MAKE THE SAME
MISDIRECTION, THAT IS THEY SAY
BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT WASN’T
CHARGED THAT MEANS HE’S
INNOCENT.
INNOCENT. HERE WE’RE IN A CIRCUMSTANCE
WHERE THE PRESIDENT CANNOT BE
CHARGED.
CHARGED. SO HE’S NOT A TYPICAL DEFENDANT.
IS HE A VERIES A TYPICAL ONE.
HE’S THE ONLY ONE IN THAT
POSITION AND SO THAT LINE OF
REASONING DOESN’T WORK AT ALL.
RATHER WHAT BOB MUELLER SAID AND
I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT
POINTS HE WANTED TO GET ACROSS
TODAY WERE THE RUSSIANS’ EFFORT
TO INTERFERE IN OUR AFFAIRS WAS
SYSTEMIC, IT WAS SOPHISTICATED
AND ALL AMERICANS NEED TO PAY
ATTENTION TO IT.
THAT IS WE NEED TO PROTECT THE
COUNTRY GOING FORWARD AND
THERE’S A LOT MORE THAT WE NEED
TO DO THAT FIRST BEGINS BY
UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE RUSSIANS
DID, BUT SECOND AND CONTRARY TO
WHAT BILL BARR HAS BEEN
SUGGESTING FOR WEEKS AND WEEKS
NOW, IF WE COULD HAVE EXONERATED
THE PRESIDENT WE’D HAVE.
WE DIDN’T INTEND FOR THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL TO ARROGATE IT
TO HIMSELF TO DECLARE THE
PRESIDENT HAD NOT COMMITTED THE
CRIMES OF OBSTRUCTION OF
JUSTICE.
JUSTICE. WE INTENDED THIS TO BE
PRESENTEDED TO CONGRESS AND MORE
THAN THAT, TO PRESERVE THE
EVIDENCE FOR OTHER POTENTIAL
ACTIONS AND I THINK THAT SHOULD
BE READ AS MEANING SO THE
DEPARTMENT CAN CONSIDER WHEN HE
LEAVES OFFICE WHETHER THE
PRESIDENT SHOULD BE CHARGED.
>> ROBERT MUELLER BEGAN TODAY
TALKING ABOUT WHAT IS BASICALLY
VOLUME ONE OF HIS REPORT WHICH
IS HIS INITIAL DECLARED
RESPONSIBILITY INVESTIGATING THE
RUSSIAN ATTACK ON OUR ELECTION.
THAT’S YOUR JURISDICTION IN
THESE INVESTIGATIONS AS CHAIRMAN
OF THE HOUSE INTELLIGENCE
COMMITTEE.
COMMITTEE. YOU HAVE BEEN SEEKING ROBERT
MUELLER’S TESTIMONY ABOUT THIS.
WHAT DID ROBERT MUELLER SAY
TODAY THAT HAS CHANGED OR HAS IT
IN ANY WAY CHANGED YOUR VIEW OF
YOUR COMMITTEE’S NEED TO HEAR
FROM ROBERT MUELLER?
>> IT HASN’T CHANGED IT IN ANY
WAY.
WAY. I THINK BOB MUELLER AS RELUCTANT
AS HE CLEARLY IS TO TESTIFY HAS
ONE MORE DUTY TO PROGNOSIS FOR
THE COUNTRY AND THAT IS TO COME
BEFORE THE CONGRESS AND ANSWER
THE QUESTIONS THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE ABOUT HIS REPORT.
THERE IS A LOT WE STILL DO NOT
KNOW.
KNOW. WE DON’T KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT
HAPPENED TO THE COUNTER
INTELLIGENCE INVESTIGATION INTO
WHAT PEOPLE WERE COMPROMISED,
WHETHER THERE WERE RHYMES THAT
ARE COMMITTED OR NOT.
POINTED OUT EXACTLY RIGHT AND
THIS IS A POINT THE PRESIDENT
TRIES TO OBSCURE, THE DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE POLICY AS MUELLER
MAKES CLEAR IN HIS REPORT BUT
DIDN’T GET A CHANCE TO TALK
ABOUT TODAY REQUIRES BEFORE ANY
CHARGING DECISION IS MADE AND
CLEARLY HERE HE COULDN’T MAKE A
CHARGING DECISION TO BE ABLE TO
SATISFY A JURY BEYOND A
REASONABLE DOUBT.
REASONABLE DOUBT. SO WHEN HE TALKS ABOUT THERE
BEING INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE, HE
ALSO MAKES CLEAR IN THE REPORT
THAT THE FACT THEY COULDN’T
ESTABLISH SOMETHING BEYOND A
REASONABLE DOUBT DOESN’T MEAN
THERE WASN’T EVIDENCE OF THAT
FACT.
FACT. AND HERE THERE’S A LOT OF
EVIDENCE OF THESE ILLICIT
CONTACTS WITH THE RUSSIANS,
COMPROMISING CONTACTS THAT
MUELLER SHOULD TESTIFY ABOUT.
WE SHOULD HAVE QUESTIONS
ANSWERED WHY HE DIDN’T PRESS FOR
THE PRESIDENT’S TESTIMONY, WHY
HE DIDN’T SEEK TO PRESS TO
DETERMINE WHETHER COUNSEL FOR
THESE OTHER PEOPLE WERE
PARTICIPATING IN THE LIE MICHAEL
COHEN TOLD TO THE CONGRESS.
THERE ARE A LOT OF UNANSWERED
QUESTIONS THAT MUELLER SHOULD
COME IN AND ANSWER FOR THE
AMERICAN PEOPLE.
AMERICAN PEOPLE. >> I WANT TO, LET’S LISTEN TO
ROBERT MUELLER REFERRING TO ONE
POINT I KNOW YOU’RE INTERESTED
IN AND CHAIRMAN NADLER’S
INTERESTED IN.
INTERESTED IN. AND THAT IS THE UNDERLYING WORK
PRODUCT, THE INFORMATION THAT
WENT INTO BUILDING THOSE
PARAGRAPHS OF THE MUELLER
REPORT.
REPORT. LISTEN TO WHAT HE SAID ABOUT.
>> ACCESS TO OUR UNDERLYING WORK
PRODUCT IS BEING DECIDED IN A
PROCESS THAT DOES NOT INVOLVE
OUR OFFICE.
OUR OFFICE. >> ARE YOU INVOLVED IN THAT
PROCESS?
PROCESS? >> YES, I AM.
I’M A LITTLE SURPRISED TO HEAR
HIM SAY THAT HIS OFFICE IS NOT
INVOLVED IN THAT BECAUSE IT WAS
CERTAINLY OUR IMPRESSION THAT
THERE WERE DISCUSSIONS BETWEEN
HIS OFFICE AND THE DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE ABOUT WHAT THEY SHOULD
TURN OVER TO CONGRESS OR WHAT
MIGHT BE PRINTED BUT NOW THAT
THAT OFFICE IS SHUTTING DOWN,
IT’S CERTAINLY GOING TO BE TRUE
THIS WILL BE LEFT ENTIRELY TO
THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.
WE REACHED AN AGREEMENT TO
PROVIDE INITIAL DOCUMENTS ON A
ROLLING PRODUCTION BASIS TO OUR
COMMITTEE.
COMMITTEE. WE’RE GETTING AND HAVE RECEIVED
ALREADY SOME DOCUMENTS AS A PART
OF THAT PRODUCTION AND WE’RE
GOING TO PRESS TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE GET ALL THE INFORMATION THAT
WE NEED.
WE NEED. BUT AGAIN, THAT SUPPLYING OF
UNDERLYING EVIDENCE TO OUR
COMMITTEE DOESN’T RELIEVE BOB
MUELLER OF THE OBLIGATION I
THINK TO TESTIFY TO THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE.
PEOPLE. THERE’S NOTHING AS POWERFUL AS
HEARING FROM BOTH MUELLER AND
OTHER WITNESSES DIRECTLY, THEIR
OBSERVATIONS, THEIR FINDINGS IN
TERMS OF PRECIP YENT WITNESSES,
WHAT THE PRESIDENT ASKED HEM TO
DO AND HOW HE ASKED THEM TO DO
IT, THE LIES HE WANTED
PROPAGATED TO TRY TO OBSTRUCT
THE INVESTIGATION, ALL OF THAT
SHOULD BE BROUGHT OUT AND NOT
SIMPLY PROVIDED IN DOCUMENTARY
FORM.
FORM. >> WHAT HAPPENED TO THE
IMPEACHMENT PROCESS IN THE HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES TODAY AS A
RESULT OF ROBERT MUELLER GOING
PUBLIC?
PUBLIC? >> I DON’T THINK THAT THERE’S
ANYTHING IN HIS STATEMENTS TODAY
THAT REALLY MOVES THE NEEDLE IN
ONE DIRECTION OR THE OTHER.
A LOT OF WHAT HE SAID WAS REALLY
TO UNDERSCORE WHAT HE HAD SAID
IN THE REPORT TO DISPEL SOME OF
THE CONFUSION THAT BILL BARR
TRIED TO CREATE.
HE CERTAINLY I THINK MADE IT
CLEAR AGAIN THAT THIS IS BEING
LEFT TO CONGRESS NOW BECAUSE HE
DIDN’T HAVE THE POWER TO INDICT.
BUT HE WAS ALSO NOT WILLING TO
SAY CONGRESS SHOULD IMPEACH.
I THINK THAT’S CONSISTENT WITH
HIS FAIRNESS ARGUMENT THAT HE
MADE THAT IF HE WASN’T GOING TO
SAY THE PRESIDENT SHOULD HAVE
BEEN INDICTED AND NOT WITH
STANDING THE DEPARTMENT POLICY,
THEN HE PROBABLY WASN’T GOING TO
SAY THE PRESIDENT SHOULD BE
IMPEACHED BUT RATHER THAT
CONGRESS SHOULD CONSIDER WHAT
REPERCUSSIONS SHOULD FOLLOW,
WHAT COURSE TO TAKE WHETHER IT’S
THROUGH AN IMPEACHMENT ENQUIRY
OR THROUGHITY OVERSIGHT
FUNCTION.
FUNCTION. IT LEFT THAT TO THE CONGRESS.
>> I JUST WANT TO CLOSE OUR
DISCUSSION WITH ROBERT MUELLER’S
FINAL WORDS TODAY THAT WERE --
HE ADDRESSED THEM TO THE COUNTRY
BUT THEY WERE DEFINITELY AIMED
AT YOU BECAUSE YOU HAVE
JURISDICTION OVER OF THESE
ELEMENTS THAT HE WAS TALKING
ABOUT IN HIS FINAL WORDS OF THE
DAY.
DAY. LET’S LISTEN TO THAT.
>> I WILL CLOSE BY REITERATING
THE CENTRAL ALLEGATION OF OUR
INDICTMENTS THAT THERE WERE
MULTIPLE SYSTEMIC EFFORTS TO THE
INTERFERE IN OUR ELECTION.
AND THAT ALLEGATION DESERVES DID
THE ATTENTION OF EVERY AMERICAN.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. >> YOUR REACTION TO THAT,
CHAIRMAN SCHIFF?
CHAIRMAN SCHIFF? >> I’M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP
BECAUSE THIS IS WHERE HE BEGAN
AND THIS IS WHERE HE ENDED.
AND I HAVE TO THINK ALTHOUGH I
DON’T KNOW THIS TO BE THE CASE,
THAT HE AND HIS TEAM MAY BE
FRUSTRATED WITH ALL OF THE FOCUS
ON DONALD TRUMP.
AND HIS CONDUCT.
AND NOT AS MUCH FOCUS ON WHAT
THE RUSSIANS DID TO INTERFERE IN
OUR AFFAIRS.
OUR AFFAIRS. PART OF HIS DISCUSSION OF
OBSTRUCTION TODAY WAS THE REASON
WHY THE OBSTRUCTION WAS SO
SERIOUS IS, IT WAS OBSTRUCTING
AN INVESTIGATION INTO A HOSTILE
POWERS INTERFERENCE IN OUR
DEMOCRACY AND HE IS EFFECTIVELY
SAYING AT THE BEGINNING AND END
OF HIS RASHES TODAY, LET’S NOT
LOSE SIGHT OF WHAT THIS
ADVERSARY DID AND I THINK IMPLY
IMPLIED THERE IS LET’S NOT LOSE