REPORT THAT DONALD TRUMP TRIED TO FIRE BOB MUELLER.
THIS IS TRULY A BOMBSHELL.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP TRIED TO
ORDER THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TO
PROSECUTE NOT ONE BUT TWO OF HIS
BIGGEST ADVERSARIES, HILLARY
CLINTON AND JAMES COMEY.
THIS STORY BREAKING IN THE "NEW
YORK TIMES" LATE TODAY.
THE STORY IS THAT IN THE SPRING,
DONALD TRUMP TOLD HIS WHITE
HOUSE COUNSEL, DON McGAHN, THAT
HE WANTED THE DOJ OFFICIALS TO
EXPLICITLY PROSECUTE HILLARY
CLINTON AND JAMES COMEY.
SO THAT RIGHT THERE IS A
POTENTIALLY ILLEGAL ACT.
AND THAT IS QUITE IMPORTANT,
GIVEN THAT OBSTRUCTION IS STILL
UNDER INVESTIGATION IN THIS
WHITE HOUSE.
WHITE HOUSE. WHAT HAPPENED NEXT IS ALSO
IMPORTANT.
IMPORTANT. DON McGAHN, ACCORDING TO THIS
"NEW YORK TIMES" REPORT, REFUSED
AND THEN WENT ON TO TRY TO SHOW
DONALD TRUMP IN JAIL WHY THIS
WAS -- IN DETAIL WHY THIS WAS A
BAD IDEA, POTENTIALLY AN
IMPEACHABLE BAD IDEA.
WHITE HOUSE LAWYERS WRITE THIS
MEMO DESCRIBED IN THE "TIMES"
SAYING IF THEY WENT FORWARD, THE
CONSEQUENCES WOULD BE DAMAGING
AND, YES, WOULD INCLUDE, QUOTE,
POSSIBLE IMPEACHMENT.
POSSIBLE IMPEACHMENT. NOW THAT RIGHT THERE IS A BIG
DEAL.
DEAL. IT IS USUALLY DONALD TRUMP’S
CRITICS AND ADVER SATISFACTORIES
WHO ARE TALKING ABOUT HIS
POTENTIAL IMPEACHMENT.
POTENTIAL IMPEACHMENT. WE DON’T USE THE "I" WORD
LIGHTLY ON THIS SHOW BECAUSE
IMPEACHMENT IS AN EXTREME
CONSTITUTIONAL REMEDY.
CONSTITUTIONAL REMEDY. ACCORDING TO THE "NEW YORK
TIMES" IT WAS HIS OWN LAWYERS,
HIS CHIEF COUNSEL, DON McGAHN,
SAYING, MR. PRESIDENT, IF YOU DO
THIS, YOU COULD BE IMPEACHED.
THAT’S NOT ALL.
THE "TIMES" REPORTING THAT
DONALD TRUMP WOULD GO ON TO
CONTINUE TO PRIVATELY AGITATE
FOR THESE INVESTIGATIONS OF
HILLARY CLINTON, OBVIOUSLY HIS
CHIEF RIVAL IN POLITICS, AND
JAMES COMEY, HIS FORMER FBI
DIRECTOR.
DIRECTOR. THIS NEWS I WANT TO BE CLEAR IS
A SCALE WAY BEYOND ANYTHING ELSE
WE HAVE SEEN IN LEGAL
CONTROVERSIES WITH DONALD TRUMP.
AND THAT’S SAYING SOMETHING.
YOU MAY RECALL, OF COURSE THAT
HE DID ATTEMPT TO GET BOB
MUELLER FIRED.
MUELLER FIRED. THAT WAS WRONG.
IT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN LAWFUL.
THAT’S SOMETHING UNDER DEBATE.
BUT THERE IS A DEBATE TO BE HAD
THERE BECAUSE THE COMMANDER IN
CHIEF HAS SUCH BIG POWERS OVER
HIS AGENCIES LIKE THE DOJ.
TONIGHT I WANT TO TELL YOU,
BEFORE WE GET TO OUR GUESTS, AND
WE HAVE GREAT GUESTS ON THIS,
THIS IS A DIFFERENT CATEGORY
THAN EVEN THE REMOVAL OF SPECIAL
COUNSEL MUELLER.
COUNSEL MUELLER. THIS IS A REPORT TONIGHT FOR THE
FIRST TIME THAT THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES ACTIVELY AND
EXPLICITLY TRIED TO PROSECUTE
HILLARY CLINTON, A POLITICAL
OPPONENT, AND JAMES COMEY, THE
KEY WITNESS IN THE OBSTRUCTION
PROBE.
PROBE. THAT REQUEST, IF IT HAPPENED,
THAT ORDER, IF IT WAS GIVEN, IS
BLATANTLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
BLATANTLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL. WHICH IS WHY, OF COURSE, TRUMP’S
OWN LAWYERS, ACCORDING TO THIS
REPORT, WARNED HIM THAT IT WAS
NOT ONLY UNLAWFUL BUT
IMPEACHABLE.
IMPEACHABLE. JAMES COMEY IS OF COURSE AT THE
CENTER OF THE RUSSIA PROBE.
TRUMP FIRED HIM THEN LINKED HIM
IN THAT FIRING TO THE PROBE.
WE KNOW NOW TONIGHT, FOR THE
FIRST TIME, ALSO WAS TRYING TO
PROSECUTE HIM.
PROSECUTE HIM. THIS REPORTING IS RIGHT IN BOB
MUELLER’S STRIKE ZONE WHICH WILL
GET INTO TONIGHT.
HE CAN INVESTIGATE THIS NEW
ACCOUNT, THAT DONALD TRUMP WAS
TRYING TO FIRE THAT MAN THAT HE
ONCE EMBRACED, JAMES COMEY, AND
THEN GET HIM PROSECUTED, AND
PROSECUTING HILLARY CLINTON.
THAT IS ALL POTENTIAL GROUNDS
FOR OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.
TRUMP’S OWN LAWYERS WARNING HIM
NOT ONLY THE INVESTIGATION
REQUEST WAS UNLAWFUL, BUT AGAIN,
I WANT TO READ FROM THIS REPORT
THAT IT COULD QUOTE LEAD TO THE
BEGINNING OF IMPEACHMENT
PROCEEDINGS.
PROCEEDINGS. ONE WAY TO LOOK AT THIS STORY
BASED ON DONALD TRUMP’S OWN
LAWYERS, NOT MY REPORTING BUT
HIS OWN LAWYERS, IS THAT IF THIS
WENT THROUGH, THE ODDS OF THE
IMPEACHMENT OF DONALD TRUMP
WOULD HAVE RISEN DRAMATICALLY.
MEANWHILE, CONGRESS IS GOING TO
LEARN A LOT MORE ON THIS MATTER.
THAT WILL LIKELY COME WHEN
FORMER WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL DON
McGAHN SPEAKS OUT IF HE GETS
PAST THE MUELLER PROBE AND IS
CALLED TO TESTIFY, AS FORMER
OFFICIALS CAN BE CALLED TO DO,
BEFORE WHAT WILL BECOME A
DEMOCRATIC HOUSE.
DEMOCRATIC HOUSE. THE LAST POINT, EVERYTHING WE
JUST TOLD YOU, EVERYTHING WE’RE
LEARNING TONIGHT, WHICH IS
OBVIOUSLY BIG, THIS IS NEWS TO
US.
US. I ADMIT IT WAS BIG NEWS WHEN IT
CAME INTO THE NEWSROOM.
IT MAY BE NEWS TO YOU.
IT IS NOT NEWS TO THE SPECIAL
COUNSEL.
COUNSEL. BECAUSE WHATEVER DON McGAHN
KNOWS, BOB MUELLER ALREADY
KNOWS.
KNOWS. WE’VE GOT A RANGE OF EXPERTS.
WASN’T TO BEGIN WITH A FORMER
U.S. SENATOR, ROBERT TORRICELLI,
FORMER WATERGATE SPECIAL
PROSECUTOR NICK ACKERMAN.
SENATOR, I GAVE YOU AND THE
VIEWERS MY TAKE ON WHY THIS IS
SO SIGNIFICANT.
SO SIGNIFICANT. ON A SCALE OF 0 TO 10, WHERE
DOES THE STORY FALL FOR YOU?
WHAT DOES IT SAY ABOUT THE MAN
OCCUPYING THE WHITE HOUSE
TONIGHT?
TONIGHT? >> WELL, FIRST, THERE IS A
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT
PROPOSING THIS, WHICH WOULD BE
OUTRAGEOUS IN ITSELF, AND
ACTUALLY CONTACTING THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT AND ATTEMPTING TO
ORDER IT.
ORDER IT. THE FIRST IS BAD GOVERNMENT,
UNETHICAL, INEXCUSABLE.
UNETHICAL, INEXCUSABLE. THE SECOND WOULD BE AN
IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE.
IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE. SO LET’S TRY TO ASSUME THAT THIS
IS A THOUGHT THAT HE HAD,
SOMETHING HE WANTED TO DO --
>> I’M NOT ASSUMING THAT,
SENATOR.
SENATOR. SENATOR, I’M NOT ASSUMEING THAT.
I GOT A REPORT FROM THE NEW YORK
TIMES THAT SAYS HE USED HIS
LIAISON TO THE DOJ, WHICH IS DON
McGAHN, AND TOLD HIM, LET’S DO
THIS, AND DON McGAHN PUT A STOP
TO IT.
TO IT. THAT’S THE RECORDING.
UNLESS YOU HAVE SOMETHING OTHER
THAN "THE NEW YORK TIMES" --
>> NO, NO, I’M JUST HOPING THAT
THE SYSTEM WORKED ENOUGH THAT HE
WAS BLOCKED OR SHUT DOWN -- THE
QUESTION WILL BECOME NOT ONLY
HIS INTENT, WAS THERE ACTUALLY
ANY ACTION TAKEN WHICH BECAME AN
ABUSE OF POWER?
>> I’M ONLY PUSHING YOU -- I’M
ALL FOR GIVING PEOPLE THE
BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT IN LIFE,
BUT THE FACTS OF WHAT THEY ARE
UNLESS YOU HAVE SOMETHING
DIFFERENT FROM THE TIME"S.
>> NO, I’M HOPING McGAHN NOT
ONLY GAVE ADVICE BUT STOPPED HIM
SHORT OF AN ACTION WHICH WOULD
HAVE SET THIS IN MOTION AND
BECOME AN ABUSIVE POWER.
IT WILL BE A QUESTION OF, DID HE
TALK ABOUT IT?
DID HE ATTEMPT TO DO IT?
OR WAS THERE ACTUALLY AN
AFFIRMATIVE ACT THAT SET THIS IN
MOTION?
MOTION? IF THERE WAS, YOU ARE RIGHT, IT
IS AN ABUSE OF POWER.
WHAT I THINK IT REALLY RAISES, I
HOPE FOR THOSE AROUND DONALD
TRUMP, IS, WE HAVE A PRESIDENT,
RIGHT OR WRONG, WHO IS THE MOST
INEXPERIENCED IN THE CULTURE OF
THE OFFICE, THE LAWS OF THE
COUNTRY, THE OPERATIONS OF THE
CONSTITUTION.
CONSTITUTION. HAVING A CHIEF OF STAFF AND A
COUNSEL IN WHOM HE HAS
SUFFICIENT CONFIDENCE AND ENOUGH
STRENGTH TO STOP THESE
EXTRA-CONSTITUTIONAL IMPULSES OF
HIS IS SO IMPORTANT.
AND TONIGHT AS WE SIT HERE
TONIGHT, HE DOES NOT HAVE A
COUNSEL.
COUNSEL. HE DOES NOT HAVE ENOUGH
CONFIDENCE IN HIS --
>> RIGHT.
>> RIGHT. --
-- >> -- IN HIS CHIEF OF STAFF.
>> SENATOR TORRICELLI, SOUNDS
VERY CLASSIC, WASHINGTON
DEMOCRAT, WHICH IS BENDING OVER
BACKWARDS TO FIND SOME BRIGHT
SPOT IN A VERY DARK STORY.
AS FOR DONALD TRUMP’S
INEXPERIENCE, HE HAS BEEN VERY
CLEAR ABOUT WHAT HE WANTS TO DO.
I WANT TO PLAY HIM IN A DEBATE
WITH YOUR OLD BOSS AND GET YOUR
ANALYSIS.
ANALYSIS. TAKE A LOOK.
>> IT’S JUST AWFULLY GOOD THAT
SOMEONE WITH THE TEMPERAMENT OF
DONALD TRUMP IS NOT IN CHARGE OF
THE LAW IN OUR COUNTRY.
>> BECAUSE YOU’D BE IN JAIL.
>> HOW DO YOU VIEW THE REPORTS
HERE THAT DONALD TRUMP TOOK THAT
LONG-STANDING PLEDGE, LOCK HER
UP, YOU’D BE IN JAIL, I’LL
INVESTIGATE HER, AND TRIED TO
MAKE IT REAL?
>> I MEAN, I THINK THIS IS A
SCANDAL OF 15 ON A 1 TO 10
LEVEL.
LEVEL. I THINK THE IDEA THAT THE
PRESIDENT IS NAIVE OR HE IS
INEXPERIENCED IS RIDICULOUS.
HE WAS ESSENTIALLY TRYING TO USE
THE APPARATUS OF THE STATE TO
PUNISH HIS POLITICAL ENEMIES.
HILLARY CLINTON AND JAMES COMEY.
AND IF THIS HAPPENED IN ANOTHER
COUNTRY, WE’D HAVE THE STATE
DEPARTMENT SAYING, IT’S NO
LONGER A DEMOCRACY.
JUST BECAUSE HE WAS STOPPED BY
HIS COUNSEL INFORMING HIM IT WAS
AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE DOES NOT
TAKE AWAY FROM THE FACT THAT THE
PRESIDENT ESSENTIALLY WANTED TO
BREAK THE LAW.
AND I FOR ONE THINK IT IS
SOMETHING THAT DOESN’T WARRANT
AN INVESTIGATION, I MEAN, THE
REPUBLICANS SHOULD BE
INVESTIGATING THIS TOMORROW
BEFORE THE DEMOCRATS COME IN.
BECAUSE THEY’RE A BLANK CHECK
FOR THIS GUY, THEY WON’T.
BUT IT IS ONE OF THE MOST -- I
THINK IT IS AMONGST THE MOST
OUTRAGEOUS THINGS THAT HAVE COME
OUT OF THIS WHITE HOUSE IN TWO
YEARS OF OUTRAGES.
THE THINGS PEOPLE THOUGHT WERE A
FANTASY THAT COULD OCCUR ARE
ACTUALLY THINGS DONALD TRUMP
WANTED TO DO, TO NOT JUST
HILLARY CLINTON, A PERSON WHO
WON THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE AND
WAS HIS COMPETITOR, BUT JAMES
COMEY, WHO WAS A CENTRAL PART OF
THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION.
I DON’T THINK THERE’S ANY WAY TO
LOOK AT THIS THAT ISN’T -- THAT
SHOULDN’T SCARE EVERY SINGLE
AMERICAN.
AMERICAN. >> ARI, THIS IS ABSOLUTELY OFF
THE CHARTS.
THE CHARTS. DONALD TRUMP IS BASICALLY
RUNNING HIS OFFICE LIKE HE’S THE
HEAD OF A BANANA REPUBLIC.
TRYING TO PUT HIS FORMER
OPPONENT IN JAIL, TRYING TO PUT
JAMES COMEY IN JAIL.
AND WHAT IS REALLY CONCERNING IS
THIS ISN’T JUST AN ISOLATED
EVENT THAT OCCURRED LAST SPRING.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT’S GOING
ON RIGHT NOW WITH HIS
APPOINTMENT OF THIS HACK
WHITAKER AS THE ACTING ATTORNEY
GENERAL.
GENERAL. WHY DID HE PUT WHITAKER IN
THERE?
THERE? WHY DIDN’T HE GO THROUGH THE
SENATE CONFIRMATION?
SENATE CONFIRMATION? BECAUSE HE’S LOOKING FOR
SOMEBODY THAT WILL DO HIS
BIDDING TO GET RID OF THE
MUELLER INVESTIGATION AND TO
UNDERTAKE THE KINDS OF ILLEGAL
INVESTIGATIONS THAT HE WANTS
DONE.
DONE. THAT’S WHY WHITAKER WAS PUT IN
THERE.
THERE. THAT’S WHY SESSIONS WAS FIRED.
IT’S ALL ABOUT HIM TRYING TO
UNDERMINE THE RULE OF LAW, WHICH
IS THE BASIS OF THIS COUNTRY,
WHICH WAS THE FOUNDATION OF THIS
COUNTRY.
COUNTRY. HE WANTS TO GO BACK TO THE TIME
OF THE ENGLISH KINGS WHERE
ANYTHING GOES.
ANYTHING GOES. AND THAT’S WHERE WE’RE HEADED.
>> I WOULD JUST SAY THAT DONALD
TRUMP EXHAUSTED THE BENEFIT OF
THE DOUBT ABOUT 18 MONTHS AGO.
SORRY.
SORRY. >> MIRA, WE TALKED ABOUT YOUR
BOSS, HILLARY CLINTON, AND THEY
HAD A PITCHED BATTLE IN THE
CAMPAIGN.
CAMPAIGN. JAMES COMEY SPENT MOST OF HIS
TIME RISING THROUGH GOVERNMENT
IN REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATIONS.
HE IS ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS WHO
APPEARED TO STAND UP TO DONALD
TRUMP IN THOSE EARLY MONTHS.
TO NICK’S POINT, WHEN PEOPLE
WERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, DO
YOU GO THE WHITAKER ROUTE OR DO
YOU GO THE COMEY ROUTE?
AND WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED.
HERE WAS DONALD TRUMP MAKING
WHAT LAWYERS CALL AN ADMISSION
AGAINST INTEREST, ADMITTING THAT
HE WAS ANGRY WITH AND FIRED
COMEY BECAUSE COMEY DID HIS JOB
IN THE INVESTIGATION, APPARENTLY
TONIGHT WE LEARN THAT’S WHY HE
THEN TRIED TO GET THE FORMER FBI
DIRECTOR JAILED.
DIRECTOR JAILED. WHICH, AGAIN, IS NOT SOMETHING
THAT WE LIKE TO THINK ABOUT AS
HAPPENING INSIDE THE UNITED
STATES.
STATES. IT’S HAPPENING.
IT’S HAPPENING. TAKE A LOOK.
>> I WAS GOING TO FIRE COMEY.
KNOWING THERE WAS NO GOOD TIME
TO DO IT.
TO DO IT. AND IN FACT, WHEN I DECIDED TO
JUST DO IT, I SAID TO MYSELF, I
SAID, YOU KNOW, THIS RUSSIA
THING WITH TRUMP AND RUSSIA IS A
MADE-UP STORY, IT’S AN EXCUSE BY
THE DEMOCRATS FOR HAVING LOST AN
ELECTION THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE
WON.
WON. >> MIRA?
>> MIRA? >> I MEAN, I DON’T UNDERSTAND
WHY THIS ISN’T JUST ANOTHER
EXAMPLE OF OBSTRUCTION OF
JUSTICE.
JUSTICE. USING THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
TO ESSENTIALLY RETALIATE AND
PUNISH A CENTRAL WITNESS TO YOUR
POSSIBLE CRIME?
POSSIBLE CRIME? I MEAN, REMEMBER, COMEY IS THE
PERSON WHO TRUMP WAS BASICALLY
TALKING TO TO DISCOURAGE HIS
INVESTIGATION.
INVESTIGATION. I DON’T KNOW WHY -- I MEAN,
OBVIOUSLY THIS IS PART OF A
PATTERN OF OBSTRUCTION OF
JUSTICE.
JUSTICE. AND I AGREE WITH YOUR EARLIER
ASSESSMENT THAT THIS IS LIKELY
TO HAVE BEEN SOMETHING THAT
SPECIAL PROSECUTOR MUELLER KNOWS
AND SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER
KNOWS.
KNOWS. BUT I THINK FOR THE AMERICAN
PUBLIC, THIS IS ANOTHER ELEMENT
IN A CRIME COMMITTED BY --
POSSIBLY COMMITTED BY THE
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,
WHICH WE SHOULD OBVIOUSLY BE
DEEPLY WORRIED ABOUT.
>> RIGHT.
>> RIGHT. SENATOR, I’M GOING TO GIVE YOU A
FINAL WORD.
FINAL WORD. LET ME SHOW YOU ONE MORE ITEM
AGAIN IN THE CONTEXT OF DON
McGAHN, WHICH IS, DONALD TRUMP,
BY "THE NEW YORK TIMES"
REPORTING, DID TRY TO REMOVE BOB
MUELLER.
MUELLER. IT’S DON McGAHN WHO BASICALLY
STOPPED THAT WHEN IT WAS
ATTEMPTED IN DECEMBER, AND
MUELLER KNOWS ALL THAT.
ANALYZE THAT AS WELL IN THE CON
CONTEXT WHAT WAS WE’RE LEARNING
AS A FINAL THOUGHT.
>> I DON’T KNOW THAT THERE’S
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.
CLEARLY WE’RE ON THE LINE OF
ABUSE OF POWER.
THIS IS SOMETHING WE DON’T DO IN
THE UNITED STATES.
WE DON’T USE THE MECHANISMS OF
GOVERNMENT AND THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT TO PUNISH POLITICAL
ENEMIES.
ENEMIES. IT IS NOT SOMETHING WE DO IN OUR
POLITICAL CULTURE, IT’S NOT
SOMETHING WE DO IN OUR LAWS.
BUT IT DOES RAISE, AGAIN, RIGHT
NOW THERE’S ONE THING TO HAVE
DONALD TRUMP, IF HE HAS -- IF HE
IS SURROUNDED BY PEOPLE WHO
CONTAIN HIS INSTINCTS.
WITH WHITAKER AS ATTORNEY
GENERAL
GENERAL GENERAL, McGAHN GONE, KELLY
POTENTIALLY GOING OUT THE DOOR
AS CHIEF OF STAFF, THERE’S A BIG
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DONALD TRUMP
SURROUNDED BY CAPABLE PEOPLE WHO
RESPECT THE CONSTITUTION, AND
DONALD TRUMP ON HIS OWN.
AND WE ARE FACING TONIGHT THE
NIGHTMARE OF DONALD TRUMP
REVISITED ON HIS OWN WITHOUT
RESTRAINTS.
RESTRAINTS. AND THE STORY YOU’RE CARRYING
TONIGHT IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT AN
UNRESTRAINED DONALD TRUMP CAN
LOOK LIKE.
LOOK LIKE. AN ABUSE OF POWER ON THE SCALE
TO WHICH THIS COUNTRY IS NOT
ACCUSTOMED.
ACCUSTOMED. >> RIGHT.
>> RIGHT. THAT IS SO MUCH MORE SEVERE.
MY THANKS TO SENATOR TORRICELLI
AND MIRA TANDEN.
NICK, STAY WITH ME, I WANT
REACTION TO CONGRESS TONIGHT,
DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSMAN MIKE
QUICKLY, LYLY WHO SERVES ON THE
INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE, THANKS
FOR BEING WITH US.
WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE IN THIS
"NEW YORK TIMES" REPORT?
DO YOU SEE CONDUCT THAT COULD BE
AN ELEMENT OF OBSTRUCTION OR
THAT IS UNLAWFUL?
>> I SEE -- IT DEPENDS EXACTLY
WHAT MR. McGAHN SAYS TO US.
I’M VERY INTERESTED IN MR.
McGAHN TESTIFYING BEFORE
CONGRESS.
CONGRESS. WHAT WERE THE CIRCUMSTANCES?
WHAT EXACTLY WAS SAID?
HOW DID HE RESPOND?T TALK TO ANY
ELSE?
ELSE? HOW FAR DID THIS ACTION GO?
OBVIOUSLY WHAT PEOPLE NEED TO
UNDERSTAND IN THE BIGGER PICTURE
IS, WHEN THE PRESIDENT SAID THAT
HE HAD COMPLETE CONTROL AND
AUTHORITY OVER THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT, IT WASN’T JUST HIS
BELIEF THAT HE COULD STOP AN
INVESTIGATION OF HIMSELF OR HIS
FRIENDS.
FRIENDS. IT ALSO MEANT, LIKE A TRUE
AUTOCRAT, HE COULD ATTACK HIS
ENEMIES, OR THOSE WHO DISAGREED
WITH HIM.
WITH HIM. THIS IS EXTRAORDINARILY
DANGEROUS.
DANGEROUS. >> CONGRESSMAN, YOU MENTIONED
McGAHN, WHO’S A LAWYER.
THEY MIGHT TRY TO INVOKE
EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE THE WAY THEY
ABOUT WITH STEVE BANNON AND
OTHERS TO BLOCK THAT.
ARE YOU PREPARED WHEN YOU TAKE
THE GAVELS IN JANUARY TO
SUBPOENA MR. McGAHN ON THESE
ISSUES IF HE WON’T COME
VOLUNTARILY?
VOLUNTARILY? >> AS A TRUE TEAM PLAYER, I’M
GOING TO WORK WITH THE CHAIRMAN
TO BE, ADAM SCHIFF, ON THE
INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE AND MY
COLLEAGUES TO COME UP WITH A
WORKING PLAN.
WORKING PLAN. HOW DO WE GO FORWARD?
WHERE IS THE MUELLER
INVESTIGATION AT THAT TIME?
WHERE’S THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE
INVESTIGATIONS?
INVESTIGATIONS? >> I TAKE THAT AS A TBD.
AND I UNDERSTAND MOVING
JUDICIOUSLY.
JUDICIOUSLY. LET ME PLAY AS WE LOOK AT THE
IMPORT OF THIS STORY JAMES
COMEY, WHO WHATEVER EVERYONE
THINKS OF HIM, AND I’VE
CRITICIZED HIM WITH REGARD TO
SOME OF HIS GOVERNMENT TENURE,
THERE HAS NEVER BEEN ANY
EVIDENCE CONTROVERSY, ANY
GROUNDS FOR ANY KIND OF CRIMINAL
INVESTIGATION.
INVESTIGATION. IT IS ONLY ACCORDING TO THIS
REPORTING THAT DONALD TRUMP
WANTED TO BLACKBALL AN OPPONENT
AND SOMEONE THAT WAS DANGEROUS
TO HIM IN THE PROBE, THE PROBE
YOUR COMMITTEE IS INVOLVED WITH.
TAKE A LISTEN TO JAMES COMEY’S
TESTIMONY.
TESTIMONY. >> IT’S MY JUDGMENT THAT I WAS
FIRED BECAUSE OF THE RUSSIA
INVESTIGATION.
INVESTIGATION. I WAS FIRED IN SOME WAY TO
CHANGE OR THE ENCUSTOMERDEAVOR W
CHANGE THE WAY THE RUSSIA
INVESTIGATION IS CONDUCTED.
THAT IS A VERY BIG DEAL.
I DON’T THINK IT’S FOR ME TO SAY
WHETHER THE CONVERSATION I HAD
WITH THE PRESIDENT WAS AN EFFORT
TO DISRUPT.
TO DISRUPT. I WAS HONESTLY CONCERNED HE
MIGHT LIE ABOUT THE NATURE OF
OUR MEETING, SO I THOUGHT IT
REALLY IMPORTANT TO DOCUMENT.
>> JAMES COMEY PROVIDING THE
FACTS AS HE KNEW THEM REGARDING
THE PRESIDENT’S MOTIVATIONS FOR
THE FIRING.
THE FIRING. IN YOUR VIEW, BASED ON WHAT WE
KNOW, IS IT REASONABLE TO PROBE
WHETHER DONALD TRUMP WAS NOW
TRYING TO GET JAMES COMEY
PROSECUTED AND JAILED FOR THAT
SAME CRIMINAL PURPOSE, AND IF
SO, IS THAT AN IMPEACHABLE
OFFENSE?
OFFENSE? >> LET’S TAKE IT ONE STEP AT A
TIME.
TIME. OBSTRUCTION OFTEN COMES IN A
PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR.
I DO BELIEVE THAT THE FIRING OF
MR. COMEY WAS FOR THAT RUSSIAN
THING.
THING. IT IS PART OF A PAPER OF
OBSTRUCTION BY THE WHITE HOUSE,
AND THOSE COMPLICIT WITH HIM AS
PART OF THE HOUSE INTELLIGENCE
COMMITTEE, UNFORTUNATELY,
COMMITTEE, UNFORTUNATELY, REPUBLICAN SIDE.
REPUBLICAN SIDE. THIS IS ONE MORE ELEMENT OF
THAT, IN ADDITION TO HIS VARIOUS
TWEETS AND OTHER ACTIONS BY THE
PRESIDENT TO OBJECT.
I ASK THE AMERICAN PUBLIC TO BE
PATIENT.
PATIENT. YOU TALKED ABOUT THE "I" WORD.
LET THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION BE
COMPLETED.
COMPLETED. LET US FINISH THIS.
LET’S GO -- WE’RE GOING TO GET
ONE SHOT AT THIS TO DO THE RIGHT
THING.
THING. LET’S COMPLETELY INVESTIGATE
THIS RECENT ALLEGATION AND THE
INFORMATION FROM MR. McGAHN AND
TAKE THE AMERICAN PUBLIC -- GIVE
THE AMERICAN PUBLIC ALL THE
INFORMATION IT NEEDS.
>> CONGRESSMAN, I KNOW YOU’RE
SPEAKING CLOAK WALLY ARE.
WE RARELY USE THE "I" WORD ON
THIS NEWSCAST.
THIS NEWSCAST. WE’RE USING IT IN THE CONTEXT OF
REPORTING TRUMP’S OWN TOP LAWYER
WARNED HIM ABOUT THE "I" WORD.
WARNED HIM THIS COULD LEAD TO
IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS.
IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS. THAT’S WHAT BROUGHT IT INTO THE
DISCUSSION.
DISCUSSION. >> SURE.
>> SURE. >> BEFORE I LET YOU GO, AND I’M
OVER ON TIME, BUT I DO WANT TO
ASK YOU, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT
HAPPENS IN CONGRESS, THEY SET UP
SPECIAL COMMITTEES TO
INVESTIGATE THINGS.
INVESTIGATE THINGS. THERE’S BEEN A LOT OF TALK ABOUT
RUSSIA, COLLUSION IN 2016, AND
MUELLER IN THE LEAD ON THAT.
DON’T YOU THINK, AND I WONDER
WHAT YOU AND YOUR COLLEAGUES ARE
GOING TO DO, IF WE LEARN THAT A
PRESIDENT, STANDING ALON, WAS
TRYING TO THE FORMER FBI
DIRECTOR AND THEIR POLITICAL
OPPONENT, IF THAT WAS LEARNED
ABOUT BARACK OBAMA AS A GOAL
AGAINST JOHN McCAIN OR MITT
ROMNEY, WOULDN’T THAT ALONE
REQUIRE SOME GREATER
INVESTIGATION?
INVESTIGATION? IS THAT SOMETHING THE HOUSE
DEMOCRATS SHOULD LOOK AT AS
THEIR OWN SPECIAL COMMITTEE?
ARE WE BEING NORMALIZED INTO
THIS BANANA REPUBLIC CONDUCT
THAT IS ANYTHING BUT NORMAL?
>> I DON’T WANT TO DIMINISH WHAT
THE HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ON
INTELLIGENCE CAN DO.
I HAVE COMPLETE FAITH THAT IF
GIVEN SUBPOENA POWER AND THE
ABILITY TO INVESTIGATE THIS,
THEY WILL GET TO THE TRUTH.
I THINK ANY PRESIDENT THAT DOES
WHAT MR. McGAHN WARNED AGAINST
ACTUALLY COMPLETED, THAT IS AN
EXTRAORDINARY ABUSE OF POWER.
I AM NOT MINIMIZING THIS AT ALL.
WHAT THE PRESIDENT IS DOING IS A
PATTERN OF OBSTRUCTION.
BUT I WANT US TO BE THOROUGH AND
COMPLETE.
COMPLETE. LET’S GO THROUGH WITH THIS
INVESTIGATION AND TAKE ITS
NATURAL COURSE.
NATURAL COURSE. I HAVE FAITH THAT WE DON’T NEED
A SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
I DO BELIEVE THE HOUSE COMMITTEE
ON INTELLIGENCE CAN DO THE WORK.
>> TO WRAP THE NEWS, BECAUSE WE
HEARD SO MUCH FROM YOU,
CONGRESSMAN, I APPRECIATE YOU
JOINING US ON THE BIG STORY.
YOU’RE SAYING, NUMBER ONE, YOU
WANT TO HEAR FROM McGAHN, BUT
WHETHER OR NOT YOU’D ISSUE A
SUBPOENA IS A LARGER
CONVERSATION WITH THE CHAIR.
NUMBER TWO, YOU THINK THE
CONGRESS WILL GET TO THE BOTTOM
OF THIS, YOU DON’T NEED A
SPECIAL COMMITTEE.
SPECIAL COMMITTEE. NUMBER THREE, YOU VIEW THIS TYPE