.
>>> ANDREW, YOU WRITE THAT HAD
WE GIVEN IT OUR ALL, USED ALL AVAILABLE TOOLS, UNDETERRED BY
AVAILABLE TOOLS, UNDETERRED BY
THE PRESIDENT’S UNIQUE YOU POWPO
THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE WE
INDICTED, I KNOW THE HARD ANSWER
TO THE SIMPLE QUESTION, WE COULD
HAVE DONE MORE.
TO WHICH ROBERT S. MUELLER
RESPONDED TODAY.
IT IS NOT SURPRISING THAT
MEMBERS OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL’S
OFFICE DID NOT ALWAYS AGREE, BUT
IT IS DISAPPOINTING TO HEAR
CRITICISM OF OUR TEAM BASED ON
INCOMPLETE INFORMATION.
THE OFFICER’S MISSION WASHINGTON
TO
WAS FOR FOLLOW THE FACTS.
THAT IS WHAT WE DID KNOWING THAT
OUR WORK WOULD BE KRUTSCRUTINIZE
FROM ALL SIDES.
I MADE THE DECISIONS.
WITHOUT FEAR OF THE
CONSEQUENCES.
I STAND BY THE CONCLUSIONS OF
OUR INVESTIGATION.
I’M GRATEFUL TO THE MEN AND
WOMEN WITH WHO WORK FOR THE SPK
OFFICE AND
SPECIAL COUNSEL OFFICE AND SERVE
THE NATION.
YOUR RESPONSE.
>> SO I AGREE WITH MOST OF WHAT
SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER WROTE
THERE.
I TOO THINK THAT HE OPERATED
COMPLETELY OUT OF INTEGRITY AND
I’M GRATEFUL TO THE COLLEAGUES I
HAD THERE.
THAT BEING SAID, I THINK THAT IT
IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER WHY I
WROTE THIS BOOK.
IT COULD HAVE BEEN EASY TO WRITE
A BOOK THAT SAID EVERYTHING WE
DID WAS RIGHT AND EVERYTHING WE
DID RESPONDED TO THE ONSLAUGHT
COMING FROM THE WHITE HOUSE OR
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.
BUT I WAS TRYING TO WRITE
SOMETHING FOR THE AMERICAN
PUBLIC AND FRANKLY FOR THE
HISTORICAL RECORD AND TO TRY TO
BE AS CAN DID AS POSSIBLE ABOUT
WHAT WE DID RIGHT AND WHAT WE
COULD HAVE DONE BETTER.
AND I TRIED TO HOLD UP A MIRROR
TO MY OWN CONDUCT AND THAT OF
OUR COLLEAGUES SO THAT THERE
WOULD BE SOMEONE FROM THE INSIDE
RECORDING WHAT HAPPENED AS
OPPOSED TO PEOPLE FROM THE
OUTSIDE SPECULATING.
AND I DO HAVE MY OWN PERSONAL
VIEWS AS TO DECISIONS WE MADE,
WHETHER IT IS THE FINANCIAL
INVESTIGATION THAT WE DIDN’T DO
A COMPLETE INVESTIGATION OF,
WHETHER IT IS SUBPOENAING THE
PRESIDENT WHICH I THINK WE SET A
PRECEDENCE THAT I’MSSCEDENT THAT
ABOUT.
GOD FORBID THAT THEY LOOK BACK
AND SAY SEE, DON’T NEED TO DO
IT.
OR WHETHER IT IS MAKING A
CONCLUSION AS TOSTRUCTED JUSTICE
THOSE ARE ONES WHERE I
RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE AND I SET
OUT THE PROS AND CONS AND WHAT
HAPPENED ON THOSE ISSUES.
>> THE TOPIC OF FINANCES, DID
YOU HAVE DONALD TRUMP’S TAX
RETURN DATA THAT IS REPORTED IN
THE "NEW YORK TIMES" THIS WEEK
IN?
>> WE DID NOT.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I RECOUNT
IN THE BOOK IS WHEN WE ISSUED A
GRAND JURY SUBPOENA FOR TOICHDEU
BANK, WE GOT A CALL IN THE WHITE
HOUSE SAYING ARE YOU DOING AN
INVESTIGATION INTO THE
PRESIDENT’S FINANCES.
WE OF COURSE AT THAT POINT,
WEAPON NOT.
THAT GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION
WAS INTO PAUL MANAFORT AS TO
WHOM WE DID DO A FULL FINANCIAL
INVESTIGATION IRONICALLY.
AND THAT IS WHEREAS I MENTIONED
THE SPECIAL COUNSEL HAD A HARD
DECISION TO MAKE.
SO WE NEVER DID THAT FULL
FINANCIAL INVESTIGATION.
AND ONE.
THING
OF THE THINGS THAT IS IMPORTANT
NEXT TIME AROUND IS THAT FOR THE
SPECIAL COUNSEL RULES TO BE
CLEARER THAT THERE IS A PUBLIC EDUCATION FUNCTION OF THE
EDUCATION FUNCTION OF THE
SPECIAL CUMBENT TO TALK AND BE C
BROKE WHAT
ABOUT WHAT WAS LOOKED AT AND
WHAT WAS NOT.
ONE OF THE WAYS THAT THE ZG IS
ABLE TO SPIN THE REPORT WAS TO
GIVE THE IMPRESSION THAT WE HAD
LOOKED AT EVERYTHING.
SO IF WE DIDN’T FIND ANY
WRONGDOING, THERE WASN’T
ANYTHING TO BE FOUND.
BUT OUR REPORT DIDN’T ACTUALLY
COVER A FULL FINANCIAL WORKUP OF
THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES.
AND AS YOU NOTED AT THE OUTSET
FROM A COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
PERSPECTIVE, THAT LEAVES A LOT
TO BE DESIRED.
>> AND YOU AIRED THE CLIP OF
PETER STRZOK, SAID THAT WOULD BE
OF THE MOST CLASSIC WAYS TO
COMPROMISE SOMEBODY IS TO
LEVERAGE THEIR DEBT.
DOES DONALD TRUMP TODAY
REPRESENT A COUNTER INTELLIGENCE
THREAT TO THEUNITED STATES OF AM
IN.
>> WHAT I WOULD SAY TO THAT IS
THAT WE DON’T KNOW BECAUSE ONE
OF THE THINGS THAT HAS NOT BEEN
LOOKED AT IS WHO DOES HE OWE THE
420 ODD MILLION DOLLARS TO
ASSUMING THE "NEW YORK TIMES"
REPORT IS CORRECT THAT IT IS
IMPORTANT TO KNOW WHO HAS THAT
KIND OF LEVERAGE.
>> SO YOU NEVER TRIED TO ANSWER
THAT QUESTION?
>> ABSOLUTELY.
MY VIEW IS THAT THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT OUR OFFICE AND
THE FBI WERE TASKED WITH DOING.
I GO THROUGH IN THE BOOK SORT OF
THE PROS AND CONS ABOUT WHY IT
WASN’T DONE INITIALLY, BUT I
WANTED PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND
THAT, A, THAT WASN’T EVEN
ULTIMATELY DONE.
AND THAT THE THINKING BEHIND NOT
DOING IT INITIALLY TO MY MIND
DOESN’T HOLD UP IN TERMS OF
CARRYING YOU THROUGH TO THE END
OF THE INVESTIGATION AS TO WHY
EITHER THE SPECIAL COUNSEL OR
THE FBI DIDN’T CONDUCT THAT KIND
OF INVESTIGATION.
AND TO PUT IT VERY SIMPLE POINT
ON IT, WHICH IS YOU KNOW IF I
PERSONALLY HAD $420 MILLION IN
DEBT, THERE IS NO WAY THAT I
WOULD BE GIVEN CLEARANCE AND