HARD TO ARGUE WITH THAT. AND THAT IS ALL FOR THIS
EVENING.
EVENING. THE RACHEL MADDOW STARTS NOW
WITH ARI MELBER.
>>> WE ARE IN A BREAKING NEWS,
WE HAVE GOT A RULING FROM THE
SUPREME COURT.
SUPREME COURT. IT’S NOT A FULL VICTORY FOR THE
ADMINISTRATION BUT IT DOES
REOPEN A DOOR, AND WE HAVE MORE
LATER.
LATER. DONALD TRUMP USING EXECUTIVE
POWER TO UNDERCUT SCIENCE.
THIS IS A STORY YOU MAY NOT HAVE
HEARD ABOUT ANYWHERE ELSE TODAY.
THE REPORTER WHO BROKE IT WILL
JOIN US LIVE THIS HOUR.
SO WE HAVE ALL OF THAT, BUT WE
BEGIN ON CAPITOL HILL WHERE
THERE ARE ACTUALLY NEW STEPS
TOWARDS AN IMPEACHMENT PROBE.
NOW, THAT IS NOT WHAT THE
CONVENTIONAL WISDOM HELD WOULD
HAPPEN WHEN SPECIAL COUNSEL
ROBERT MUELLER FINISHED
TESTIFYING WEDNESDAY BUT NOW AS
THE WEEKENDS, THE NUMBERS OF
DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS MEMBERS
BACKING AN IMPEACHMENT PROBE HAS
GROWN AS THE CHAIRMAN WHO WOULD
LEAD, JERRY NADLER IS FORMALLY
INVOKING THE I WORD IN A COUNT.
FIVE HOUSE DEMOCRATS HAVE
STEPPED OUT IN FAVOR OF AN
IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY, INCLUDING
CONGRESSWOMAN KATHERINE CLARK OF
MASSACHUSETTS, A MEMBER OF THE
HOUSE LEADERSHIP, AND THE
HIGHEST RANKING DEMOCRAT TO
PUBLICLY TAKE THIS STANCE.
THEN YOU HAVE THREE MORE HOUSE
DEMOCRATS TODAY ANNOUNCING
SUPPORT FOR AN IMPEACHMENT
INQUIRY.
INQUIRY. ANNIE CUSTER, CHRIS POMPOUS OF
NEW HAMPSHIRE, AND MIKE ELEVEN
OF CALIFORNIA.
OF CALIFORNIA. YOU THAT I CAN THAT TOGETHER,
AND NOW YOU HAVE ABOUT A HUNDRED
DEMOCRATS BACKING SOME KIND OF
IMPEACHMENT PROBE.
IMPEACHMENT PROBE. THAT IS THE RAW TALLY.
THE POLITICAL NOSE COUNTING
CONTEXT OF THIS, AND FOR THE
HOUSE DEMOCRATS, THOUGH, THAT’S
NOT ALL BECAUSE THERE IS A NEW
LEGAL MOVE AS THEY TRY TO PRY
MORE EVIDENCE LOOSE FROM THE
WHITE HOUSE AND JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT TAKING THEIR CASE TO
COURT TO GET REDACTED GRAND JURY
MATERIAL.
MATERIAL. THIS IS THE STUFF THAT ACTUALLY
INFORMED THE GRIST OF THE
NARRATIVES UNTIL THE MUELLER
REPORT, AND IT PICKS UP THE
FIGHT OVER THE VERY WAYS THAT
ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR HELD BACK
PARTS OF THIS REPORT.
WE ALL REMEMBER THE REDACTIONS
AND HE DID ALLOW MEMBERS OF
CONGRESS TO SEE BEHIND SOME OF
THESE REDACTED PAGES, SO MEMBERS
OF CONGRESS HAVE ALREADY SEEN
MORE THAN, SAY, AVERAGE
CITIZENS, BUT MR. BARR NEVER LET
ANYONE SEE THE GRAND JURY
INFORMATION.
INFORMATION. AND WHILE THIS MATERIAL IS
GENERALLY RESTRICTED FROM THE
PUBLIC, IT’S NOT ALWAYS
RESTRICTED FROM THESE MEMBERS OF
CONGRESS.
CONGRESS. YOU CAN THINK ABOUT RECENT
HISTORY, REPUBLICANS WELCOMED
IT, THAT SAME KIND OF GRAND JURY
MATERIAL WHEN KEN STARR HANDED
OVER NOT ONLY A REPORT BUT ALL
OF HIS GRAND JURY MATERIAL, NO
REDACTIONS, NO DELAYS THAT TIME,
SO NOW YOU HAVE HOUSE DEMOCRATS
INSISTING THEY NEED THE SAME
TOOP
TOOP TYPE OF MATERIAL FOR THEIR WORK
AS A COEQUAL BRANCH OF
GOVERNMENTS THIS IS NOT A
THEORETICAL DEBATE.
THEORETICAL DEBATE. THIS IS THE BASIS OF THE
HARDBALL OF HOLDING MR. BARR IN
CONTEMPT, AND FOR THE LEGAL
CASE.
CASE. DEMOCRATS PRESSING THEY MUST GET
THE MATERIAL SO THEY CAN
PROPERLY CARRY OUT THEIR
INVESTIGATIONS OF THE PRESIDENT
AND HIS CAMPAIGN.
>> YOU ALSO DESCRIBED IN YOUR
REPORT THAT THE THEN TRUMP
CAMPAIGN CHAIRMAN PAUL MANAFORT
SHARED WITH A RUSSIAN OPERATIVE,
KILIMNIK, THE CAMPAIGN STRATEGY
FOR WINNING DEMOCRATIC VOTES IN
MID WESTERN STATES, AN INTERNAL
POLLING DATA OF THE CAMPAIGN,
ISN’T THAT CORRECT?
>> CORRECT.
>> CORRECT. >> DID YOUR INVESTIGATION
DETERMINE WHO REQUESTED THE
POLLING DATA TO BE SHARED WITH
KILIMNIK?
KILIMNIK? >> I WOULD DIRECT YOU TO THE
REPORT.
REPORT. WHAT WE HAVE IN THE REPORT WITH
REGARD TO THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE.
>> WE DON’T HAVE THE REDACTED
VERSION.
VERSION. THAT’S MAYBE ANOTHER REASON WHY
WE SHOULD GET THAT VERY VOLUME
ONE.
ONE. >> WE DON’T HAVE THE REDACTED
VERSION.
VERSION. MAYBE WE SHOULD GET THAT,
BECAUSE IN THE REPORT OR THE
VERSION THAT CONGRESS GOT AND WE
HAVE SEEN PUBLICLY, THERE IS
INFORMATION POTENTIALLY
INFORMATION POTENTIALLY REVEALING WHO IT WAS THAT
REQUESTED TRUMP CAMPAIGN
CHAIRMAN PAUL MANAFORT SHARE
THIS PRIZE INTERNAL POLLING DATA
WITH THE RUSSIAN OPERATIVE, AND
PERHAPS WHY, BECAUSE YOWU SEE
THERE, WE KNOW WHAT WAS ALLUDED
TO.
TO. IT IS REDACTED.
THE REASON IT WAS REDACTED IS
BECAUSE OF GRAND JURY MATERIAL.
NOW, IN THE COURT FILING TODAY,
THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
ARGUES THERE ARE SEVERAL
EPISODES THAT HAVE THIS KIND OF
INFORMATION REDACTED AND THE
COMMITTEE NEEDS IT.
THEY NEED IT BECAUSE THE DOJ
WILL NOT ALLOW PROSECUTION OF A
SITTING PRESIDENT AND THEY
EXPLAINED THE HOUSE IS THE ONLY
INSTITUTION OF THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT THAT CAN NOW HOLD
PRESIDENT TRUMP ACCOUNTABLE FOR
THESE ACTIONS.
THESE ACTIONS. THEY ALSO POINT TO THE PLANNED
QUESTIONING OF FORMER WHITE
HOUSE COUNSELLING DON McGAHN,
THE STAR WITNESS OF THE MUELLER
REPORT CITED OVER 150 TIMES.
HOUSE JUDICIARY MAKING THE CASE
IF THERE IS GRAND JURY TESTIMONY
OF THE PRESIDENT’S KNOWLEDGE OF
THESE EVENTS AND HOW HIS
CAMPAIGN APPROACHED ALL OF IT,
THAT WOULD SHED LIGHT ON WHAT
THE PRESIDENT MIGHT HAVE BEEN
TRYING TO COVER UP WITH HIS
REPEATED ATTEMPTS TO OF COURSE
INTERFERE WITH AND OBSTRUCT THE
MUELLER INVESTIGATION.
MUELLER INVESTIGATION. THOSE ATTEMPTS MADE, YES, BACK
THROUGH MR. McGAHN.
HIS TESTIMONY HAS BEEN BLOCKED
BY THE WHITE HOUSE.
JUDICIARY CHAIRMAN JERRY NADLER
ANNOUNCING TODAY, COMPELLING
McGAHN’S TESTIMONY IS THE NEXT
LEGAL BATTLE.
LEGAL BATTLE. ALL OF THAT TOGETHER IS THE
WHAT, THE EVIDENCE.
IN COURT, MORE THAN IN POLITICS,
IT’S NOT JUST THE WHAT, IT’S THE
WHY.
WHY. WHY DO YOU GET TYPICALLY SECRET
EVIDENCE?
EVIDENCE? WHAT IS THE AUTHORITY.
WHERE IN LAW OR THE CONSTITUTION
DOES IT GIVE CONGRESS THIS KIND
OF POWER?
OF POWER? AND IS IT SO CLEAR THAT A JUDGE
CAN THEN ORDER AROUND THE DOJ OR
WHO’S TO PROVIDE.
THIS IS AN INTERESTING PART
TODAY BECAUSE THE WHY, IN THIS
POTENTIAL ARCANE LEGAL BRIEF,
THE WHY WENT OFF LIKE A ROCKET
TODAY.
TODAY. THE WHY IS THE IMPEACHMENT
POWER.
POWER. WHICH IS IN THE CONSTITUTION.
IT’S ONE OF CONGRESS’S GREATEST
POTENTIAL POWERS RIGHT UP THERE
WITH MAKING WAR OR TAXES, WHICH
ARE TWO OTHER THINGS, BY THE
WAY, THE FOUNDERS PUT MOSTLY IN
CONGRESS’S HANDS.
CONGRESS’S HANDS. SO YOU HAVE THE DEMOCRATS BRIEF
TODAY STATING CLEARLY THE HOUSE
MUST HAVE ACCESS TO ALL THE
RELEVANT FACTS AND CONSIDERED
WHETHER TO EXERCISE FULL ARTICLE
ONE POWERS INCLUDING A
CONSTITUTIONAL POWER OF THE UP
MOST GRAVITY.
MOST GRAVITY. APPROVAL OF ARTICLES OF
IMPEACHMENT.
IMPEACHMENT. THERE’S THAT WORD, AND IN THIS
NEW FILING, THE COMMITTEE ARGUES
HERE BASICALLY FOR THE FIRST
TIME IT IS ENTITLED TO THE GRAND
JURY MATERIALS UNDER THIS VERY
SPECIFIC EXCEPTION TO GRAND JURY
SKEEK
SKEEK SECRECY.
SECRECY. THE COMMITTEE SEEKS TO USE THEM
PRELIMINARILY OR IN CONNECTION
WITH A JUDICIAL PROCEEDING, THE
COMMITTEE INVESTIGATING WHETHER
TO RECOMMEND ARTICLES OF
IMPEACHMENT AND THIS WHY
ARGUMENT EXPLAINS CONGRESS HAS A
STRONGER HAND WHEN DEMANDING
INFORMATION WHEN IT HAS A
COMMITTEE THAT SEEKS TO USE THAT
VERY INFORMATION LINKED TO A
JUDICIAL PROCEEDING.
JUDICIAL PROCEEDING. THE COMMITTEE HERE CONDUCTING
THIS INVESTIGATION.
THIS INVESTIGATION. SO THIS IS CRUCIAL.
THIS IS NOT AN ASIDE.
THIS IS NOT A THROW EVERY
REFERENCE AT THE WALL KIND OF
ARGUMENT.
ARGUMENT. THIS IS NOT, WE REALLY WANT THIS
STUFF.
STUFF. LET’S MENTION ANY POTENTIAL
RATIONALS AND MAYBE FOOTNOTES OR
ARGUMENT IN THE COURT.
THIS IS NOW TODAY FOR THE FIRST
TIME, THE CORE OF WHAT THE HOUSE
SAYS IT’S DOING.
WE COULD PUT THESE HEADERS BACK
UP AND YOU’LL SEE FROM THE NEW
FILING, AN INVESTIGATION
REGARDING IMPEACHMENT IS
PRELIMINARY TO JUDICIAL
PROCEEDING THE DEMOCRATS SAY, OR
THIS OTHER HEADING, JUDICIARY
COMMITTEES INVESTIGATING WHETHER
TO RECOMMEND ARTICLES OF
IMPEACHMENT.
IMPEACHMENT. AND JUST TO DRIVE THE POINT
HOME, THEY EVEN QUOTE THE
CHAIRMAN OF THE HOUSE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE IN 1974, ALLOWING THE
JUDGE TO REQUEST GRAND JURY
MATERIALS, AND THE JUDGES 74
ORDER RELEASING GRAND JURY
MATERIAL.
MATERIAL. AS A STRATEGY, THIS WHOLE OPTION
HAS LONG BEEN AVAILABLE AND
THAT’S KNOWN NOT ONLY TO LAWYERS
OR WATERGATE EXPERTS, IT’S
PROBABLY KNOWN TO YOU AS A NEWS
CONSUMER.
CONSUMER. RACHEL HAS REPORTED ON HOW THE
BEST LEGAL ARGUMENT FOR GETTING
THE GRAND JURY MATERIAL IS FOR
DEMOCRATS TO ESTABLISH THAT THEY
ARE IN THE AM BIT OF A JISH
PROCEEDING, AKA AN IMPEACHMENT
PROBE.
PROBE. CONGRESS IS GIVING ITSELF A SIX
WEEKS RECESS AND LET’S BE
HONEST, THIS ISN’T MAYBE THE
TYPICAL WAY THAT POLITICAL
PARTIES ANNOUNCE A FORMAL
IMPEACHMENT PROBE, ESPECIALLY
WITH A SPEAKER WHO KEEPS TAMPING
DOWN EXPECTATIONS FOR ALL OF
THIS.
THIS. SO WHAT IS THIS.
IS THIS A STEP TOWARDS AN
IMPEACHMENT PROBE OR A
PREIMPEACHMENT STRATEGY?
PREIMPEACHMENT STRATEGY? OR SOME KIND OF ONRAMP TO
IMPEACHMENT.
IMPEACHMENT. IS IMPEACHMENT A SPECTRUM?
WELL, THE EXPLANATION AT TODAY’S
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE PRESS
CONFERENCE SORT OF RANGED.
>> GIVEN WHAT YOU HAVE SAID
ABOUT THIS FILING, COMMENTS THAT
YOU HAVE MADE IN HEARINGS IN
RECENT WEEKS, ARE YOU ALL
BEGINNING TO SHADE INTO AN
IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY EVEN IF YOU
HAVEN’T HELD THE FORMAL VOTE OF
THE HOUSE?
THE HOUSE? IS THAT WHAT’S GOING ON HERE?
>> WHAT’S GOING ON.
>> WE DON’T NEED IT.
>> WHAT’S GOING ON IS I THINK
TOO MUCH HAS BEEN MADE OF THE
PHRASE, AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY.
YOU MAY WANT TO CALL THAT AN
INQUIRY OR NOT.
WHETHER YOU CALL THAT AN INQUIRY
OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT,
THAT’S WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING
AND ARE DOING AND WILL CONTINUE
TO DO.
TO DO. >> YOU’RE SAYING THERE’S NO
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT YOU’RE
DOING NOW AND AN IMPEACHMENT
INQUIRY, RIGHT?
INQUIRY, RIGHT? >> IN EFFECT.
A LOT OF PEOPLE BELIEVE WE HAVE
BEEN IN AN IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY
EVER SINCE WE STARTED LOOKING
INTO POTENTIAL HIGH CRIMES AND
MISDEMEANORS AND THE MISCONDUCT
OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH.
OTHER PEOPLE THINK AN
IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY DOESN’T
BEGIN UNTIL YOU HAVE ARTICLES OF
IMPEACHMENT, I WOULD SAY WE’RE
IN AN IMPEACHMENT INVESTIGATION.
>> GOING TO COURT TODAY IS THIS
AN ESCALATION IN YOUR
INVESTIGATION?
INVESTIGATION? >> IT’S THE NEXT STEP IN OUR
INVESTIGATION.
INVESTIGATION. AND YES.
AND YES. I DON’T KNOW IF YOU CALL IT AN
ESCALATION.
ESCALATION. >> WE ARE NOW OFFICIALLY
ENTERING INTO AN EXAMINATION OF
WHETHER OR NOT TO RECOMMEND THE
ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT, SO WE
HAVE CROSSED A THRESHOLD.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT REAL
CLEAR.
CLEAR. >> DO YOU BELIEVE PRESIDENT
TRUMP WILL ULTIMATELY LEAVE
OFFICE BEING IMPEACHED BY THIS
HOUSE REGARDLESS OF TIME LINE?
>> I DON’T KNOW.
>> YOU HAVE A MOMENTOUS BRIEFING
THERE ENDING WITH THAT SHRUG AND
THE CHAIRMAN WALKING OFF STAGE.
ONE WAY TO LOOK AT IT IS IT’S
VIVIDLY HONEST, YOU ASK HIM WHAT
IS THIS, HE SAYS CALL IT WHAT
YOU WANT, YOU ASK HIM WHAT WILL
IT LEAD TO.
AND HE SAYS I DON’T KNOW.
ARE THERE MORE ANSWERS HERE?
WELL, WE HAVE AN EXTRAORDINARY
GUEST RIGHT NOW, TO HELP
UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE IS DOING RIGHT NOW,
AND WHY IT MIGHT MATTER
REGARDLESS OF WHAT IT’S CALLED.
JAMIE RASKIN, A MEMBER OF THE
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE IS
HERE ON THE SHOW.
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.
>> I’M DELIGHTED TO BE WITH YOU.
>> IS THIS AN IMPEACHMENT PROBE?
>> SURE.
>> SURE. WE WERE JUST CONFRONTED WITH
OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE WITH HIGH
CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS, TEN
EPISODES OF OBSTRUCTION OF
JUSTICE, A PRESIDENTIAL
CANDIDATE IN HIS CAMPAIGN
WELCOMING WITH OPEN ARMS,
FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN OUR
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. YOU KNOW, IF BILL CLINTON CAN BE
IMPEACHED FOR TELLING ONE LIE
ABOUT SEX THAT’S LOW CRIMES AND
MISDEMEANORS, THIS IS IN THE
CATEGORY OF HIGH CRIMES AND
MISDEMEANORS, AND WE’RE
INVESTIGATING IT, AND WE’RE
TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER
THESE ARE HIGH CRIMES AND
MISDEMEANORS THAT JUSTIFY
IMPEACHMENT, BUT I WOULD SAY
THAT OUR INVESTIGATIVE FUTURE
INVOLVES A LOT OF OTHER ISSUES.
YOU KNOW, I THINK THE AMERICAN
PUBLIC HAS THE SENSE THAT MONEY
IS REALLY AT THE HEART OF THE
TRUMP WHITE HOUSE, AND HE HAS
ESSENTIALLY CONVERTED THE
PRESIDENCY INTO AN INSTRUMENT OF
SELF-ENRICHMENT, A MONEY MAKING
ENTERPRISE MORE HIMSELF AND HIS
FRIENDS.
FRIENDS. WE NEED TO INVESTIGATE WHETHER
THE FOREIGN ARTICLE 1 SECTION 9
CLAUSE HAS BEEN VIOLATED.
THERE ARE REPORTS THAT 24
FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS HAVE BEEN
FILLING DONALD TRUMP’S POCKETS
THROUGH THE TRUMP HOTEL, THROUGH
THE OFFICE TOWER, THROUGH THE
GOLF COURSES, THERE’S THE
DOMESTIC EMOLUMENTS CLAUSE WHICH
SAYS HE’S LIMITED TO EARNINGIZE
SALARY, WE CAN’T INCREASE AND
DECREASE IT, YET EVERY TIME THEY
GO TO MAR-A-LAGO, THEY’RE
SPENDING 75 OR $100,000 THAT
GOES DIRECTLY FROM FROVLTEDERAL
GOVERNMENT AGENCIES TO THE TRUMP
HOTEL.
HOTEL. THAT I WOULD SAY SHOULD BE THE
BEGINNING OF FOLLOWING THE MONEY
BUT WE REMEMBER THAT DONALD
TRUMP SAID THAT HE WOULD
BASICALLY BLOW UP THE SPECIAL
COUNSEL INVESTIGATION IF THEY
LOOKED AT HIS FINANCES.
HE’S NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO
HAMSTRING THE U.S. CONGRESS IN
THE SAME WAY.
WE’RE GOING TO GET TO THE BOTTOM
OF ALL OF IT.
>> DO YOU THINK THERE’S A HIGH
CRIME THAT THE PRESIDENT
OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE.
OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE. >> CERTAINLY.
>> CERTAINLY. MULTIPLE TIMES.
MULTIPLE TIMES. EACH ONE OF THOSE EPISODES
DESCRIBED --
DESCRIBED -- >> IF THAT’S THE CASE, LET ME
PRESS YOU ON THAT.
EVERYTHING YOU JUST LAID OUT
VIEWERS WOULD SAY, YEAH, THAT
SOUNDS BAD AND CERTAINLY IN THE
CONGRESS’S AMBIT TO DO SOMETHING
ABOUT IT, BUT WHY WOULD THAT
REQUIRE ANY FURTHER DELAY?
THERE IS A CONCERN THAT THE
DEMOCRATIC PARTY IN THE HOUSE
TALKED A LOT ABOUT WAITING FOR
THINGS, WAITING FOR MUELLER TO
FINISH, AND WAITING TO GET THE
REPORT AND WAITING TO GET
MUELLER TO TESTIFY.
WE ARE NOW PAST ALL OF THAT, AND
SO A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE
TRUMP HOTEL OR, YOU KNOW,
LEGITIMATE CONCERNS ABOUT
CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITS ABOUT
FOREIGN BRIBES MAKES SENSE BUT
NOT NECESSARILY HAS A REASON TO
WAIT FURTHER TO DEAL WITH
WHETHER OR NOT THERE’S
CONSEQUENCES FOR WHAT YOU DEFINE
AS OBSTRUCTION.
AS OBSTRUCTION. >> I’M NOT TALKING ABOUT
WAITING.
WAITING. I’M TALKING ABOUT AGGRESSIVELY
ACCELERATING OUR INVESTIGATION
INTO ALL OF THE CORRUPTION AND
CRIMINALITY THAT PERVADE THE
WHITE HOUSE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCH
OF GOVERNMENT.
OF GOVERNMENT. MOST PEOPLE UNDERSTAND DESPITE
DONALD TRUMP BEING ABLE TO
GERRYMANDER THE SUBJECT MATTER
OF THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION
THAT ALL OF THAT STARTED BECAUSE
DONALD TRUMP WANTED TO BUILD
A -- MAKE A BILLION DOLLAR DEAL
FOR TRUMP TOWER IN MOSCOW AND
MEANTIME WAS COLLECTING MONEY
THAT WAS BEING LAUNDERED FROM
RUSSIAN OLIGARCHS THROUGH THE
HOTELS AND THROUGH THE VARIATION
BUSINESSES.
BUSINESSES. THAT WAS THE GENESIS OF THE
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE RUSSIANS.
IT WAS NOT A POLITICAL
CONSPIRACY AS MUELLER FOUND, YOU
KNOW, VIEWED AND RUSSIAN
INTELLIGENCE DID NOT NEED DONALD
TRUMP JR. AND ERIC TRUMP TO
EXECUTE THEIR PLOT AGAINST
AMERICA.
AMERICA. THEY JUST USED THE TRUMPS BUT
THEY DIDN’T CONSPIRE WITH THE
TRUMPS TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.
UNFORTUNATELY THE TRUMPS NEVER
CALLED THE FBI.
THEY JUST SAID COME ON IN, AND
YOU KNOW, FIND THE E-MAILS AND
DUMP THE WIKILEAKS AND SO ON.
BUT LOOK, MONEY WAS AT THE HEART
OF IT, AND MONEY CONTINUES TO BE
AT THE HEART OF IT, AND THERE’S
A VERY IMPORTANT CONSTITUTIONAL
PRINCIPLE HERE.
PRINCIPLE HERE. OUR FOUNDERS WANTED THE
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,
AND EVERY MEMBER OF CONGRESS TO
BE 100% DEVOTED TO THE PUBLIC
INTEREST OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
AND NOT TO SAUDI ARABIA AND
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES AND TURKEY,
AND ANY GOVERNMENT THAT COMES
OVER THAT DECIDES TO FILL THE
PRESIDENT’S COFFERS.
PRESIDENT’S COFFERS. THE PRESIDENCY IS NOT SUPPOSED
TO BE A MONEY MAKING OPERATION.
WE’VE GOT TO VINDICATE THAT
PRINCIPAL, BUT I AGREE WE’VE GOT
TO DO IT QUICKLY.
>> DID YOU LEARN ANYTHING FROM
BOB MUELLER’S TESTIMONY THAT WAS
NOT IN THE REPORT.
>> NO, I READ THE MUELLER REPORT
I THINK THREE OR FOUR DIFFERENT
TIMES AND HE STUCK EXTREMELY
CLOSELY TO THE TEXT.
I THINK HE OPENED UP A BIT IN
THE AFTERNOON WHEN HE WAS
WILLING TO SAY THAT ALL OF THE
PRESIDENT’S CONDUCT WAS
UNPATRIOTIC AND UNETHICAL AND
IMMORAL, THERE HE STRAYED, YOU
KNOW, A COUPLE OF FEET BEYOND
THE FOUR CORNERS OF THE TEXT,
BUT BASICALLY WHAT HE RECITED TO
US AND CONFIRMED FOR US WERE ALL
OF THESE EPISODES OF OBSTRUCTION
OF JUSTICE WITH MICHAEL COHEN,
WHERE THEY CALLED HIM UP TO TRY
TO BUTTER HIM UP TO SAY, YOU
KNOW, STAY ON THE TEAM, STICK TO
THE PARTY LINE, AND WHEN HE
DECIDED HE COULDN’T LIE ANYMORE
AND SPILLED HIS GUTS AND TOLD
THE TRUTH ABOUT DONALD TRUMP AND
THE PAYOFFS TO STORMY DANIELS
AND SO ON, AT THAT POINT THEY
TURNED ON HIM AND, YOU KNOW,
TRUMP BASICALLY THREATENED TO
DROP A DIME ON HIM SAYING WE
KNOW ABOUT YOUR FATHER-IN-LAW,
AND WE KNOW ABOUT THIS MEMBER OF
YOUR FAMILY AND THAT MEMBER OF
FAMILY.
FAMILY. YOU KNOW, IF THE PRESIDENT’S GOT
EVIDENCE OF CRIMINALITY AMONG
HIS STAFF OR FRIENDS, HE SHOULD
TURN IT OVER TO THE FBI AND NOT
HOLD IT IN STORE AS A FORLM OF
LEVERAGE AGAINST HIM TO KEEP
THEM FROM TESTIFYING AGAINST
HIM.
HIM. THAT’S WHAT MOB BOZSSES DO.
>> CONGRESSMAN JAMIE RASKIN, ON
A NIGHT WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN BUSY
AND THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.
>> THANK YOU FOR SHARING THE
STORY.
STORY. I HOPE EVERYBODY GETS COMFORT
NL, AND IN THE ARTICLE ONE
BRANCH WE ARE GOING TO ZEALOUSLY
UPHOLD AND DEFEND THE
CONSTITUTION.
CONSTITUTION. >> YOU HEARD IT HERE.
AND I WISH YOU A GOOD EVENING AS
WELL.
WELL. LET ME TELL YOU WHAT WE HAVE IN
STORE TONIGHT, THE DEMOCRATS ARE
LOOKING AT A COURT BATTLE.
WE HAVE EXPERTS ON HOW IT’S
GOING ON.
GOING ON. LATER AS WE MENTIONED, BREAKING
NEWS LATER ON FRIDAY ABOUT THE
BORDER WALL FROM THE SUPREME