First, let me just ask
how you're feeling.
You have finished cancer treatment.
Yes. You're in remission.
Yes. And I got a clean bill of health.
Amazing. I'm in remission.
They can't find any cancer.
Cells,
so I'm waiting for my hair
and my eyelashes and everything
come back.
Fantastic.
Well, it's important
that you're feeling better.
That's great news.
Let's talk about your reaction
to CNN's reporting this week
that federal prosecutors
have an audio recording
of the former president
talking about
holding on to classified documents.
At least one about a potential U.S.
attack on Iran.
He had that after he left office.
Do you think this tape could be
a smoking gun?
Well, apparently the recording
also reflects Donald Trump's knowledge
that he had not declassified
the document.
So he knew that it was still classified.
And that's
an additional element of importance to
this recording.
And can you
explain why that's an additional Well,
for a while at least,
there was a halfhearted effort
to claim by Donald Trump that he could
just magically declassify
you know, telepathically or mentally.
And this seems to reflect his clear
understanding that he had not
declassified this document
and that it was still classified.
And so
the document is missing at this point,
as I understand it,
according to published reports.
Do you believe, based on this
and of course,
everything else
that you've seen,
that the former president
should be charged, criminally charged?
I mean, that's
obviously a
decision for the Department of Justice
and for a grand jury.
But
the I mean, these charges are
very serious.
I mean, the allegations
that he took
all of these documents,
including top secret documents,
and then didn't return them
and deliberately withheld
them are very serious.
I mean,
I don't think any president
has ever been accused
of doing anything like that before.
And just quickly, how much does the fact
that he clearly in this tape
suggest that he knows that he can't,
as you
get to your words, magically declassify?
How much does that play
into the DOJ's case?
Well, a lot,
because I think a key ingredient in
determining the intent
with which a person acts
is consciousness of guilt.
And if a person acts with consciousness
of their own guilt
or consciousness,
of their own potential wrongdoing,
that demonstrates
that if they go forward, nonetheless,
there's intent. And,
you know, my
understanding is
is that there were hundreds
of documents taken.
Many of them were classified.
Some of them were Top-Secret secret,
and yet they were deliberately withheld.
And if the prosecutor, Jack Smith,
has information to that effect,
that's a very serious business.
I want to ask about something
that you're dealing
with on the Oversight Committee.
Republican Chairman
who worked with,
of course,
James Comey,
said he will hold the FBI
director, Chris Wray,
in contempt
over an FBI document
containing and unsubstantial
created bribery allegations
involving then-Vice President Joe Biden.
Wray offered to let you in Comber
view the document
and do it in a secure location.
Comber wants it
physically turned over
to the full committee.
What are your thoughts?
You're the ranking Democrat
on that committee.
So the FBI is coming tomorrow
to show Chairman Komar and me
the document that they're looking for.
In other words,
the Republican majority
in the committee is getting everything
they're asking for.
In terms of seeing the document,
which, by the way,
they say they have also already seen,
and yet they're still talking
about holding
the director of the FBI in contempt,
even though they're getting exactly
what they want.
Even though the FBI has been
overwhelmingly cooperative
and accommodating to this request.
So that demonstrates to me
that what they're really interested in
is in holding
the FBI director in contempt,
not in getting a document
that they've already seen.
And, you know,
I don't know what this document is
because the majority has closed us out.
The Democrats on the committee,
they are no longer
respecting a bipartisan agreement
that the committees had
for the last several.
Congress have no idea what's in it.
Well, there have been published reports
which suggest that
it has to do with Ukraine.
That was a period, remember,
when Rudy Giuliani was running around
with a Russian agent who later was found
to be sold by the Treasury Department,
Trump's Treasury Department,
and he was waving different kinds
of documents.
Attorney General Barr,
Trump's own attorney
general, was so skeptical that he created
a panel
to look at all of this information,
saying
you've got to take the Ukraine stuff
with a grain of salt.
So I think it probably has to do
with Ukraine and allegations
that went nowhere.
In other words,
this was looked at by the Trump
Justice Department,
and I think they ended all of it
in August with no prosecutions,
no indictments,
and they're going back to recycle
these unfounded accusations.
Let's go back to the initial question
about how much access
the Congress will get to this document,
whether you can actually have it.
If the roles were reversed
and you found out that
the FBI had a document
containing an allegation
about Donald Trump, wouldn't
you want unfettered access
to that document?
Well, of course, you always want
unfettered access.
But remember,
you're talking to somebody
who was in the majority
when Donald Trump was president,
when he ordered every Department of U.S.
government
not to comply in
any way
with requests of the House
Oversight Committee.
So it would have been remarkable
if every time we requested the document,
they brought it over to show it to us,
much less give it to us.
So they keep changing the demand
in order to find some reason
to find fault
with the FBI Director Wray,
which is why I say
what they're really going after
is a contempt citation against him.
And it's all part of what Chairman
Colmer
admitted was an effort
to get Donald Trump's poll numbers up.
It's all about the 20, 24 campaign.
Let me ask you something
about what happened this past week
where you work
in the House of Representatives,
Congress in general, the debt
ceiling deal
The president said that
Kevin McCarthy worked in good faith.
Do you give him credit
for this bipartisan deal?
The president that excuse me,
Kevin McCarthy, the speaker.
Well, look, there is mega
extreme elements
within the Republican caucus
which really wanted to plunge the country
into default, an economic crisis.
That's the chaos caucus.
I mean, these are the same people
that supported Donald Trump's.
What about Kevin McCarthy? Because he's.
Well, right.
So, yeah,
but I'm distinguishing him from them.
I think
he recognized
and he listened to the voices
on Wall Street
and in corporate America
who said you cannot crash the economy
just because you have an extreme element
that is heckling
you and hectoring you to do that.
And so in that sense,
the center
held briefly
because we were able to avert
going over the cliff,
but we should never come remotely close
to that again.
The Constitution says
that the validity of the public debt
shall never be questioned.
That's in the 14th Amendment.
Should that be change?
Well, I know you know, the answer
is you think the Constitution
already establishes a backstop
against what they wanted to do.
But I think, yes,
having a debt ceiling
statute is a threat to us
because they will keep trying
to careen the whole country over a cliff.
A few other topics
I want to get to first.
You saw, I'm sure,
what happened at the Air Force
Academy this past week.
President Biden tripped over a sandbag.
He fell hard on the stage.
He says, over
and over
to people concerned about his age.
Watch me now.
We want to be clear.
He wasn't hurt, which is great.
Also want to be clear,
presidents have tripped.
Everybody trips.
I've tripped you've probably tripped.
But we also know you've never tripped.
Okay.
But you also, as a politician
know about how events
feed into a perception
that already exists.
Questions about his
age are already there.
Are voters wrong to
be worried about reelecting
a man
who would be closer
to 90
at the end of his second term than 80?
You know,
America is a country that loves youth
and vitality, you know,
which is why we have laws
against age discrimination,
because we tend to favor,
favor youthfulness.
And the new thing in a lot of countries,
people who've been in office
a longer period of time are praised
for their wisdom.
And I think that Joe Biden rightly
says that he has grown very wise
in his many decades
in public office, and I respect that.
So I think that he deserves to be judged
by the results
of his administration
and what he's gotten done
in terms
of a bipartisan infrastructure law.
The Inflation Reduction Act
lowering prescription drug prices,
I mean, really, that's
what should matter to us as the people
you have a decision to make,
and that is whether or not
you are going to run for Senate
and in Maryland for Ben Cardin seat,
he is retiring.
Have you decided
are you going to run for Senate?
I've not decided.
I you know,
I love the House of Representatives.
I love the people I serve with
and I love being in the people's House.
But as some of my House
colleagues have pointed out,
these Senate seats only open up
every 25 or 30 years.
A lot of people are encouraging me
to check it out
because there are certain
constitutional functions
the Senate has that the House doesn't
have, like advice
and consent, Supreme Court nominations,
judicial confirmations,
a lot of things that I'm interested in,
and that's why
I'm seriously considering it.
But I've not decided.
When will you decide
I'm hoping
before the 4th of July
I will have an answer for everybody.
The election's not until May.
24th. 20, 24.
So it's still 11 months away.
The primary
and then the election is a year
and a half.
Your fellow Marylander, Steny Hoyer,
who is a leader of your party
for a long time,
you endorsed a different candidate.
Will that affect your decision?
Well, obviously you're my friend.
And so I've talked to him.
I've talked
to all of my colleagues about it.
I mean, we've got awesome
political leaders in Maryland and
I would not run against anybody else.
I mean, it's
totally based on the experience
I've had trying to defend our democracy
and our freedom
and the bill of rights
against the Trump movement,
which I think is like the death sentence,
like you're
you're getting ready
for your campaign message there.
Well,
I suppose you can never be too ready,
but I really haven't decided in there
compelling reasons on both sides
that my constituents
are presenting me with on a daily basis.
And I love hearing from people.
Congressman,
thank you so much for coming in.
And again, such great news
about your recovery.
You're very kind. Thank you, Dana.