« Stay Tuned with Preet

Intelligence (with Adam Schiff)

2018-03-08 | 🔗
Adam Schiff is the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. He talks about the notorious Nunes memo, and the Democratic response he helped draft. He also gives some advice for how Democrats should position themselves for the upcoming midterm elections. (Hint: don't focus on Russia) Do you have a question for Preet? Tweet them to @PreetBharara, email staytuned@cafe.com, or call 669-247-7338 and leave a voicemail. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
More and more people are trading full time jobs for the flexibility of the freelance life. And that means of fresh expiring. Talent ready to be hired? How will you find it effect you x, you, I designer tech support, Copywriter answer is upwards give up work as the world's work marketplace for finding great talent. It's basically a team leaders dream connect? with a range of independent talent. Fine exciting new collaborations and higher very specific role. You ve been looking to fail
your team on the world's work marketplace up work, dot, com, advertising, weak New York returns this October eighteenth, twenty first with a hybrid educational and entertaining experience, join great minds from brands, agencies, tech and media companies for four days of inspiration live from Hudson yards or stream all sessions from home in on your schedule, with alive podcast, recording of New York, magazines, Pivot C M, o keener presentations, fiery debates and interactive workshops on the latest trends. You won't want to miss this here's, a dummy New York for tickets are more information. Gonna advertising. We cannot come from CAFE and W N Y see studios welcome to stay tuned. I'm prepared This is the investigation as Speaker once done in the manner he wants. It done, that is to say very seriously.
And with a different objective than the american people. Have that's Adam ship, as you probably know he's the ranking Democratic House Intelligence Committee. Probably seen him on tv assembling congressmen. Issues shift has been largely defending Robert Mothers Investigation into Russia's interference in the twenty sixteen election and has thoughts about the investigation that his own committee is conducting is well that's coming up. So I really wanted to pieces of news from this week from Monday is that it was basically on cable television. It was SAM. None birthday, he appeared on multiple, shows, saying lots and lots different things about the money, instigation whether he was gonna comply with a subpoena. He may lot. Accusations about people. He gave a lot of opinions about a lot of things, but it is one to make sure that one of those opinions didn't slip through the cracks. This assent on bird on? Our remember show MSNBC on Monday that coastal,
with the paper, our who I'm sure you ve heard of the federal prosecutor very nice guy, like his podcast by yes, it's true. I will take praise from anywhere. I can get it. Well, the first question is: what does it mean if Sambre decides not to comply with Sabena and he was tv all day on Monday, asking literally the moderators of these- shows what can happen to me I go to jail out his laugh about it. Well, thank you laughing matter generous being prosecuted not to be trifled with, if you defy the grand jury, lots of people. Going to jail for periods of time after their held in contempt by decree and I have no doubt in my mind that if so Berger. Anyone else for that matter decides to flout the instructions of the grand jury to appear they will meet. The same fate, of course, were recording this. I the afternoon of Tuesday, and I have no idea their number has remained in his define posture
or, if he's gonna, do the right thing and smart thing and spend a few hours going through his emails and appearing for testimony, that's just how it works. That's out supposed to work, that's how it has to work. I got some other questions. Its hindenburg. There were, basically you know how does by mother, you think deal with this house. You treat such a witness. How do you think about the witness in terms of future use in the investigation or in some charges? So the first thing is, want to make sure they get his testimony. The second thing is for everything that I've seen, it doesn't seem clear. Me at all that he has that much more to add left a campaign in a fairly early point, he has an axe grind with withheld from now he's a witness. I don't have is, but if they ask for him They want to get information from him and he's gonna be compelled to do it or go to jail, and the third thing say based on the performance yesterday. It was at times a poignant, also sad,
people speculating about. What is mental state is at one point also I heard him say afterwards. But he was anti depressants. So you know he's not the kind of person separately, and how much knowledge has about the workings of the campaign or potential collusion. It is going to be very reliable, rely was not the word to comes to mind when you think about salmon Burg generally, and certainly after that performance yesterday as to whether or not mother can do anything about someone like this. The creation of a witness talk about what questions here she was asked or not to talk about the subpoenaed who was issued to him. There is as its obligation so your prosecutors delay when people go out to make a spectacle of requests for information from them, but there are a whole lot. They can do it, but they can make an assessment of judgment about how long able a witness that person might be in the future? Even if they have information and having to safe bet
You will not see sand on Burg appearing in the courtroom near you in Kenya, With the mother investigation as a star witness. Another item in the news recently was that jarred Kirshner security, Instead, the White Ass was downgraded. That price twitter user, a Davis to write in question- is out Lee? Does it matter Trump controls to let him see whatever right, how the internet, I suppose that's true, the president himself has I did on the show before did not have to go through any hopes to get clearance. No backer for him. He has access to more sensitive information. The present also, and argued by prior presence can by simply and design reveal something declassify information and presumably lettered christmassy materials that it wasn't supposed to see, but we had a very clear signal from downtown but that's, not how it was gonna go about. It he said on television in front of cameras that the question of what
not chaired cushion, would retain a high level security clearance. He was gonna leave to the chief of Staff John Kelly, and it seems that he did aloud even more interesting with respect to Mercosur, though I think, is the reporting of last week that the mother team is looking it Prisoners ties to overseas businesspeople and whether or not he had any involvement in the request, for receipt of never get loans. At the same time that he was a White House ever if he did that's a big problem hi my name is Leslie, Colleagues from Laramie Wyoming there's been a lot of talk lately about arming teachers, and I
Is there any legal precedents or rulings that might mitigate for or against that move by state or local school board? So if you could speak about that, I'd be really interested, particularly as a long time Highschool English teacher and an english teacher here, thanks. So much I was he thinks requesting are not aware of any federal certainly that prevents the army of teachers of. Local or state laws either. I think much as people may not like it, depending on your perspective, I think there's nothing prevents a local community from deciding that it wants to have teachers subsidy teachers at any school armed. I tend to agree with a sigh that says teachers should be teaching a teacher shouldn't be having to deal with the responsibilities like how to build a firearm and not just a firearm, but understand that the tactical Considerations in going out
an armed, possibly mentally ill shooter with an air of fifteen. That seems too much to ask our teachers, some suggested once that, if you want to think about this issue of arming teachers go back in your and other teachers, you had and I had a lot of terrific teachers in high school and middle school, and I can't think of one, whether it's mine literature. Teacher. My history teacher, my chemistry teacher, my calculus teacher that I would want armed to teach and what further inform my view on this is a car. Section I had not too long ago with the enemy He d, please Mister Jimmy O Neill, who will be a future guest on his podcast and his view from thirty five years and law enforcement, as a police officer detector, a public safety everywhere, and putting the schools? Is it that's a recipe for not good things to happen, I guess this week is California congressmen, Adam Schiff, here
Ranking Democrat on the House, intelligence Committee and ones the time was a subtle prosecutor talk about what is going on in the rush investigation and what it's like to be in the middle of it. Statehood Carbs Schiff, so pleased to have you on the show. Thank you it's great to be with you so. I have so many things to ask you about, and so many things I think want me to ask you about to do, and I will show, but rarely you up to and the other a congressmen like things so try to get to the to the meat. Matters as quickly as we can, but the first, the personal and ask you just on a human, because this is something that happens to people who run across the president. These days you are the the remembrance of the house Our committee and you have a job to do, and sometimes
The way in which you do your job makes a certain person unhappy who lashes out on twitter among other places, he has a lot of nicknames for various people. I think he's got a nicknames for you think he's called you. Little spelled with these leaky various other things. How does it feel time. You, you look at your phone or an aid. Tells you like this one Wrote about you. I have to say that this time it happened, it was quite surreal. I think I got a call from my communications d, to early one morning to say the present had just attack me and the first thing he gave me was sleazy, Adam chef initially reaction? Is that's absurd. There's no way. President I'd states is love insults at the Congress or anybody else. But, of course, it's quite routine
so little getting used to use do, although I've had to, because I think five nicknames since that one, but I do remember picking up my son from Camp because this happen over the summer, and I wanted him to from May, rather than from a classmate in sure how he would react tonight, and I said you know something happened during camps, not a big deal, but I once heard for me the present your father sleazy and he paused. Many to kind of think about what that really meant. But with a, A consequence of that was another. He looked at me and he said I call, you lazy, that's what I was gonna be. Ok, I told my only if you want me to come. Sleazy junior, but it kindly sleazy for years, my predominant reaction. Is it- really sad to see the office of the presidency brought so low it just can't
help, would undermine people's view of the? U S presidency in a way that this great office doesn't deserve and I guess at the the day. Had kind of makes me grieve for he's doing to the office. Why do you think can settle on one nickname for you, it's a good question here, opposed to be really good at this, and the first rule that I learned on the playground? Is you stick with it nickname or or doesn't work, so I dont know I keep moving around, but maybe later It is harder is harder with your name, Well, actually, with my name, I could tell you he could take a lot of lessons for my my friend some great school, because they did much better shifty. If one of those who use them going look you're, not low energy, which electronic name he gave to job and we're gonna get Yes, we're gonna talk about other things. You ve been spending your energy on, but before we get to the entire committee, and the investigation about mothers overseeing you and I sure something in common and everyone who listens to the show knows that the format,
into my life was being an assistant, use attorney and then being was a turning the southern district of New York and you Baroness Ashton, you his attorney in the central district of California for number of years. How'd you like that up. It was fantastic job. As you know, it's a great group of people. You're working there's a lot of camaraderie in a real sense of mission. I think is one of the most fun jobs, an interesting jobs in the law that you could ever hope to have an previous shape this in a way that folks may men have less appreciation for the didn't work in the office, I've been given up motion ever since I left the office, because people have hard time that didn't work in the Justice Department, distinguishing between a you attorney and assistant you ass. I was only an assistant- U S attorney, but I'm frequently referred to as a former. U S attorney, go politician the exactly
inflating the resolute now look. I get called D. I called the attorney general. I get a different though it is what the titles mean. Your experience, because I've watched you and as have most Americans and see how you can exercise and questioning of witnesses and how you present arguments in the committee, and I will do Frankly, the first time I saw you do that I didn't your background. I do not know if you had been in the USA, and I was not surprised is your experience as a fellow prosecutors to go to court all the time informed how you conduct yourself- in Committee. I it is been enormously helpful to have that background and in some ways it feels might like my life has come full circle. When I was an essay probably the biggest case I had was involve a and FBI agent that we indicted for spying for the Russians. I was working with a great deal at Bay
on case involving soviet espionage- and it feels very familiar now to be hang on a similar investigation, Broadly, I just found the scheme was that I developed as a prosecutor as a lawyer useful, Congress and one of the things that I learned as a prosecutor as you go in the courtroom you fight it out with opposing council, keep it. Professional level, and when the cases over you walk out of the court room, you have a beer with opposing council and you leave dispute in the courtroom that work very well in Congress. Also, if you don't make the disputes personal, if you keep them, for policy at the the day, someone who is your most vigorous opponent on one bill ends up in your ally on the next. If you dont make personal, I think a very important general lesson in a more particular to the russian astrogation. It's been very useful to know really how to conduct a large, essentially
color investigation a question witnesses, how do I know a doctor indeed to get what the right processes are, how to ask the right questions wonder when you're getting the run around Those are very useful skills and it's a petition the challenge on the intelligence committee, because we have a finance all staff, but there for the most part, to be analysed? The bread and butter of Intelligence Committee is really overseeing the intelligence agencies. It's not conducting this kind of investigation. So we are in and if it, by a number of great lawyers on the committee and some spectacular analysts who are combining hard to do the work and rush investigation, but it certainly has in handy to have the investigate. Spirits said I I gained as an assistant when I have observed also the part of people who have actually try case important, particularly of poor done. Criminal cases is You make their arguments, they don't give them
when they make their arguments. It's about facts, and it's about how persuasively- could recite the facts if everyone on the old you're, saying in mild office was you should have the court on your side by the time that, I just on reinstatement of facts even before you major legal arguments, because you can be very persuasive without reckon without bombast and I find that a lot of members of Congress, many of whom I have great respect for and I worked in the senate- have not learned the lesson. They think that rhetoric carries the day when actual. What and carrying the Danes, persuasive people and we'll get you credibility over time is reasoned measured argument give a view on how your colleagues approach that I think that's Zack right and it's a good thing to keep in mind in the entire political sphere enter. To persuasion, there's an awful lot of hyperbole that goes on in politics, and I think people find it off putting. I think people find
and those who go on television or make arguments in committee that are just reciting a bunch of really tired. Talking points to be. We also off putting I find You know a very sometimes stated recitation of the facts of much more powerful and people tease me for being com all the time. You know what I find is if you're hysterical people just two new out, and they won't hear what you have to say in its heart and frankly, to get anyone to hear what you have to say in an environment that has become so partisan it so Balkan stir where people's views of the same facts differ. Dramatically pending on their party affiliation. I often use the experiment with people that what would you think if I told you that former now Security adviser Susan Rice had met currently with the russian ambassador?
along the lines of undermining the bipartisan policy that I'd states and had gotten caught and it put guilty to a felony offence, would you consider that to be colluding with the Russians and, of course, they would but because its MIKE flan and not Susan Rise, they have, our time saying that- and you know that's just I think, sadly, a function of much. We have now come occupied these different camps that so color our perception of the same facts. My observation of the day between a criminal investigation, prosecution, of the type that united in the prior life verses. National investigation would, you are doing now, and I in the different prior life so worked on his work Differences and one is that in the criminal case in court, theirs and someone decides, and so, if you haven't gimme that you make, can you write the brief than the other side writes a brief and then the judges
I do not agree with the judge, but there were two finality in their sort of a path, as we have public acceptance that one side is more correct and the other side. Meanwhile, in your case with respect to doing memos with respect to devise application on Carter page the majority put in a memo which is it I'll of brief. I guess for the public to consume put in one, and everyone can just take the position that they the one versus the other, because there's no better- to decide as at first reading- that's exactly right. More than straining its deeply concerning, because for once in this particular case- and this is different than the kind of court model you mentioned- were violating a compact between the intelligence committee and intelligence community and that is when these committees were formed. It was actually agreed that the intelligence agencies would begin sharing their most secret,
highly sensitive, classified information with the committee and the committee, Would respect that would protect that do its oversight? Yes, and wholly agencies responsible, yes, but not make medical use intelligence it was getting that was really broken with the publication of this noon. As memo when facts were cherry pick from five application to make the FBI. Bad and very misleading way and This happened here with our first Action when this was taken up in committee was let's not go down this road. This is a really bad idea, and it will mean intelligence. Agencies will be loath to share things with us in the future you're concerned about everything that happened in defies court. Let's bring the FBI in Vienna. First of all, it sick access to the underlying five applications, almost all The committee members had never read them so
before we send out a memo characterizing them. Let's read the underlying material, so you can see what I have been able to see, because I had read them that the memo. Would be very misleading. Yet let me you're gonna get that ask more questions about the memo, but, let's, as a backdrop, spend a couple of It's been listeners talking about the entire committee itself, how it's different from other committees in the house. In the Senate, you meant, second ago that there has been a tradition of of or bi partisanship historically intel committees in another committees is that true, and what's the reason for that, true, and it was one of the things that I really loved about the committee and made me gravitate towards the committee. This The matter was really not a particularly partisan subject matter. It was overseeing these said a very mammoth intelligence agencies making sure that they had the resources to do their job and protect the country make sure they were talking to each other, post nine eleven so that we didn't
miss something before our eyes, because, sir, we word connecting the dots and that really didn't. Lend itself happily to the kind of partisanship that you see in committees that are, cast on a hot button issues like abortion or guns, any other innumerable issues that really get people's said. Dandler up, it was less part and because our meetings were not conducted, an open session we had less opportunity to grandstand. It will Yes, you, Europe, people grandstand and the intelligence committee. Other action would be hey Joe. You know what gives of this nobody here, it's just. There's nobody watching into what. What's the chauffeur, there is less grandson in our committee hearings, the other thing I'll say pre that really thing, wishes the entire committee and makes it a very challenging one. Is that because so much of our work is done in closed session because it deals with higher costs. When information, we don't have the bene
of outside validated boys who can see in and help us do our oversight. So, if you're on the transport in committee and the ministry comes in and they say that high speed rail is doing great and thunder budge. Two things are going swimmingly. You have any number of outside groups, get that could come in and say that just True, there are enormous cost overruns or these, please don't out up. We don't get that in the internal coming it's very rare that we have outside parties who can way and in test The arguments that are being made by the agencies, so it really requires to know the right course. To ask to be able to press for answers to have staff that are really familiar with the ins and outs of the agency's, make among the most challenging oversight. Jobs begin with an that's, obviously, something quite wholly separate, and apart from They are the responsibilities of the rush investigation.
Talk about your relationship with the chairman. Devin. Relationship at the moment, it's As you can imagine, we had a very positive relationship for years with served on the committee to get I've been unacquainted now, for I think ten years, so he has been on the committee somewhat less, but for quite a while time as well, and we were you get around that we, social friends, you know we didn't necessarily get together outside of work, but we would frequently call or two each other. We both found an unusual. The factor in and that we are both open raiders fans and, given how very few of those there are especially in Congress. That was certainly something we would compare. Our our team was from time to Time Devon, really isn't an idea log in the sense of right left where the changed was I think, on March, twenty first of light
fear on March twenty. If we had the first and hearing in the rush investigation when James Commie came to testify, we laid out among the democratic members on the committee and that first public hearing what we knew from public reports with the allegations were that needed to be investigated and why we thought that they needed to be thoroughly investigated and this needed to be done in a viper. And indeed non partisan way. There was at that hearing that He dropped the bombshell that in fact he if the I had been investigating. The trunk campaigns alive the election year and its association with Russia that hearing. My republican colleagues would later tell me they consider day unmitigated disaster. It was very next day that the term went to some disclosed location and what's become known as the midnight run, an absurd
information that the following day he would go to the White House and with great fanfare, prison. Saying it was evidence of an unmasking conspiracy and the Obama administration. Very soon learn thereafter that the information he went presented. Why does it actually gotten from the White House and kind of certain? That's gonna circular it was very circular, but more than that, it really impeached. Credibility of the house until astrogation, if it's chairman was somehow in Cahoots with a White House, and he was to step aside the problem thereafter was that he never really did step aside and months later. When he form they came back to the investigation. He admitted that he had never really reduced himself The memo business, I think, was really a sequel to the midnight run. It was something lay down again in the service of the president, not in the service of the aid, instigation, and when we,
asked him whether this also had been done in conjunction with a White House, he D, the answer the air, was, I had Senator White House on the show a few weeks ago, and it was a principle point of new aggravation on his part the answer the question of whether or not Nunez in the rest of the staff on the inside. Made it serve him. I don't use a word which is a charge. In these days, colluded with the White House putting it together, even though and he said as said technically White House didn't have did not have any role in drafting. Do you think work together and coordinated the board product. That's the memo. I don't know. All I can say is that Initially refusing to answer the question multiple times he literally read a one sentence. Statement at the White House had not been involved in drafting the memo met with
phrase in such a loyally way, the implication was ok, they didn't write it, but they certain work involved, puts about about that. You have Nunez, whose Republican and has no political viewpoint, and the White House has republican President what's wrong, with lawyers in the White House, where the present himself talking with the the entire committee about the kinds of issues in what should be made public. Well, the problem is that if the White House is trying to push out a story line that the rush Investigation is just a hoax a and the real controversy. The real scandal is that failure to investigate his vanquished rival. Hillary Clinton anyway, with the chairman of the committee S to be investigating what Russia did in our election, we're together to further that narrative, that's a real problem. The public is never.
Confidence in the investigative result that comes out of that committee if the chairman essentially working and leg. With the White House and not doing an objective fact fighting You know whether the White House was involved in drafting the memo or merely concocting the idea or or what have you, the farmer, our problem is that the investigative focus of some of my colleagues, including the chairman, is really not placed on what Russia did, I understand a timeline he described with respect respected German Nunez is changing last march, though think I really understand what what really happened in his head was it the fact Hearing went so badly for the president or for him they had anticipated. The kinds of things are coming would say why hearing a trigger for
you seem to be describing as definite is becoming a bit more partisan as compared to the past, my first reaction, when I learned that the Republicans felt that that hearing was a disaster, nothing disastrous about that hearing for the Republicans on our committee, unless you, considered that their job was protecting the president, not finding out the truth of what she's dead or what the Trump campaign they have done it wouldn't. Tragedy of if they view the present as their client he's, not their client How can people are our client Democrats and Republicans? I think that the close relation ship that the chair developed with the present with a white house during the campaign and continued they played a role in the transition team thank you didn't want to lose and it was difficult to navigate being a surrogate friend of the White House
running injected investigation and one had to give way- and unfortunately, I think for the, many in and for a country. What gave way was the knee Two run and objective investigation. We have Soldier Delong anyway, the reins were turned over. Substantial part to my Conaway of Texas and he and I have worked together. Very well on a bipartisan basis. Not that's not been without its difficulties, because still the critical this genes are being made by the chairman, but at least- the day to day running of things has, I think, measurably improved when MIKE, took over the the leadership on it your piece side been able. Do, I think, do some good and important investigative work and make a lot of progress quickly the issue relating to the refusal. Why was it as many as an official matter that
point seventeen is stepped away and then was a process by which he came back. That's that's confusing for a lot of people You will understand that at all stepped away after the midnight run When it was revealed that that he'd gotten his materials actually from the White House, but three that he gave for stepping aside or accusing himself was that an ethics complaints have been filed against not on the basis of the midnight run, but on the basis of disclosing classified information now that ethics, charge was later drop by the committee or the committee decided not to pursue it and Sherman said. Ok, I'm no longer stepping aside or refusing myself. But the problem really hadn't been the ethics complaint. The problem had been his working, the service of the White House and so that
never went away and any, even during that period of time when he had said he was stepping aside. Even then continued to make key decision, The committee rules give the chairman. The authorities issues subpoenas and The period in which he was supposed to be were cues. We that we go to the other mechanism in the committee role that allowed the committee to vote on the approval of subpoenas or that my car play be designated as the person to take over that responsibility. The German wouldn't allow that they continue to insist on having that important responsibility? Why is it not a blue ethical violation to remain in control of various things, including subpoena process. During the time what you have said publicly, because of another ethics complaint that you stepped aside
well at the end of day, the only arbiter of that, because I dont think it say: that's a matter for an ethics committee to decide that kind of issue is the issue for the speaker, decide what of investigation does he want want intelligence committee to conduct our serious does he wanted to be and have been a number of entreaties to the speaker over the last year, but they have essentially fallen on deaf ears This is the investigation as Speaker once done in the manner he wants it done, that is to say very seriously- and they different objective than the american people have, and that is when that's not really focused on right intervention are democracy or what we need to do to protect ourselves in the mid term sore thereafter or what the Trump campaign and may have done in conjunction with the Russians, but rather how and we seek to either embarrassed the Obama administration or you and I saw as prosecutors. The old defence tactic of when they have
starts to look increasingly incriminating of the defendant. Put the government on trial and of what we have seen from the midnight run to the memos to countless other attacks now on the state Department is an effort, government on trial dont, look at what the Russians did? Let's put the gun? on trial summit happen with respect to the debate defies application in connection with court age and memos that we ve been talking about what he show. The people of clay that defies a court. Was in some way misled by the Department of Justice Well, they weren't misled. The Pfizer court was made aware of a long history involving Carter page and reasons why the FBI, was concerned that Carter page might be acting as the agent of a foreign power is agent of Russia. They later Does some of the history involving Carter page They also included information that have been obtained from Christopher Steel.
Caviar added it by saying that he was hired by a person who was hired by law. Firm. This was likely done as opposition research. Now they did what they're supposed to. And this is ironic- that the Republicans take issue with it. They mask the name, of the individuals involved, so Heller Hunton and Donald Trump appears candidate, one and candidate to and often isn't mentioned by its name. It's mention as law firm, and this is what they are supposed to do visa applications. When they're talking about, U S, persons and entities who are not them on the subject of the investigation, to protect the privacy people, but can the following two things both true one that they did they're supposed to do and it didn't unmask. By name Hillary Clinton and her campaign On the other hand, the arguments I have also heard is they didn't have to identify them. My name because reasonable smart people like
court judges who live in the world would have under though that the likely parties were who had an interest in this derogatory information about the Trump campaign was gonna, be the Clinton Camping, Daddy Square. Those two things I think that's very true and, of course, we're talking about October of action here there, were no longer these. Sixteen opponents of Donald Trump that had been there in the primary there wasn't much mystery about who would be interested in undermining Donald Trump campaign. One other important file though, is what's Ralph to the a court judge is the credibility of the source of the information and the bias that the source may have, which meet once more important is for the court to know what had come. For steel know about who is paying him? Not what Others may know because if Christ or sale is unaware of who is paying for. It then, Knock it off the same influence necessarily over the virus. The information is providing and Chris
steel. We know from the public now public testimony glimpse since and wasn't told who the client was so the was given more information frankly about the likely client, then Christopher Steel was it looks for steel may have had same suspicions about who is Damn it lay the client here but the long and short of it is the defies. The court was given the kind of information it should have been given if I was acting appropriately and you know you- and I can appreciate, but but others may be less aware of- is compared to men. Sources, in whether it is a search warrant, application or wiretap obligation or Pfizer court application. Relying on a proven and trust. Former member british intelligence is now A strange thing to do often the resources are informants who have long criminal records, or have been applied guilty to various Vienna perjuries conduct.
Have a financial motivation or any kinds of other illicit history, having a said former intelligence, Sir sir is a pretty high standard. Sources go any chance that the came testimony can become public. I would hope that at some point, and it may have to wait until the conclusion of the investigation that will Papa, all the transcripts of the witnesses, so the public can see the actual testimony in fact, themselves this'll be all the more important if were unable to reach a unified conclusion things that I said that March hearing last year was that the the real service. If we were able to perform, it would be to present a united conclusion to the trees so that they wouldn't have to choose between a democratic government of events and republic. Unwanted gets back to the point you are making earlier but the two memos and how in court, you have a judge who ultimately rules here
won't be judged ultimately rule and I said in March that I thought that the best service would be if we could present a single report and not force the country to choose that. I didn't know whether we would be able to get there are not. Of course, a lot of things happen, that far more difficult now, if we can't get there, there the next best thing is to present all the facts, the american people and let them draw their own conclusions, from having the full benefit of information. One other point to make on this pre is. We know, certain amount about what the Russians did. What the Trump campaign did the Senate and towed Nets committee, Simile. And Bob mother knows a different set of information. I would but the end mullahs investigation that the Congress will have the benefit of his work so that the for that. We make publicly will be the most inclusive I am concerned that Mahler
not be able to speak outside of the four corners of an indictment and there may be very important evidence that he uncovers that may not reach the level of proof beyond reasonable doubt may nevertheless be clear and convincing on issues like collusion or obstruction of justice that both the car this and the public should be aware of. I wasn't an event with and there were members of Congress not too long ago and One member asked me the question with despair the rush investigation, both what Mother is doing and what kind of doing it asked the question of? How does this end and though the question was saying you know I don't know because it depends on what members of Congress do assuming similar issues, some report, the tickets forwarded to the house We were kind of oversight, role, Congress seas for itself and whether the
do you, like you have suggested, would be good if you something that is by partisan and unified. So let me ask you: the question is: how does this end Frida. I remember listening to your presentation, which was excellent by the way, and I was struck by something you said because had reached very much the same conclusion, although from a slightly different point of view,. And that is. Is there any chance that Bob Mahler within Diet, the President of the United States- and I think you came to the king given that that was unlikely because it would really device country, be very controversial. There's a split among scholars about whether that's even possible and and such a controversial. Divided result would probably not be some. About my would gravitate too. I think there's no constitutional prohibition on indicting even a sitting president, but for very similar, prudential reasons Bob. I would be unlikely to do it even if he found sufficient evidence.
I don't think that very unlikely right. I don't think he would want to delegate the responsibility for determining the fate of their people, the twelve lay jurors somewhere. So even while idle, because the constitution, prohibition on- and I think should he reached that point, He would be far more likely to refer the matter to Congress, for consideration of impeachment of facts warranted obviously no weather, Bob Mahler finds that he has the evidence to support that kind of referral. Recommendation? If he did, there is a real political standard and the political standards in a GEO be congresses, whether republican them. Can go back republican districts and make the case of the presents conduct was so in camps. Both office with the office that they voted to. Remove him, and it wasn't about nullifying an election that those other people didn't like. If those GNP members can't make that argument. There is no impeachment regard
so, how high the crime or how serious the misdemeanor and that political bars very high, you not in favour of impeachment. Just yet I am not in favour of really talking about impeachment. At this point, While the investigation still very much on going if it ultimate. Is the case that the evidence rises, level to the level of putting the country through what would be? incredibly wrenching experience. It ought to be. Something we embrace reluctantly and not be seen as rushing ahead with for one thing: if evidence does warranted down the road perception that, while this is what Democrats wanted from the very beginning, only makes that case more difficult, I dont think it wise to really be talking about a push, impeachment well, they investigation is still ongoing. Do you think that repeated lies to the public
not too investigators, but to the public by sitting. President is a basis four impeachment, because I believe can star seems to be that view. I I think that would be really stretching What the founders had in mind with the peach, my car is that a present two told her it falsehoods. The american people, committed crime or misdemeanor out true that what the found meant by misdemeanours, is something different than what we consider them today. We we would look at. Demeanor is as something less serious than a high crime, but I think they had mind, was serious malfeasance in office, whether as criminal or not, and you could say that in oak cereal aligned to the people fits in that category. Do you think that your fellow Democrats talk too much about Russia in the investigation? Obviously it is argued by allowed your time are the ranking member of Intelligence Committee impact
Ass truism experience on some of these things, so it's not. In that crazy for some You were in a different context. Someone like me to be taught about these issues. Lot. But as a matter of bread, butter politics? Should your colleagues stick to other issues? First of all, I always try to emphasise not just with my colleagues but more generally with public, then talk about Russia. We need to view the whole issue in its far broader context- and that is this wasn't, about helping Donald Trump or hurting Hillary Clinton The Russians really were, after Is undermining our very democracy and not just our democracy, but they ve been doing this around the world. Back in the very idea of liberal democracy, but I also sure colleagues look, I talk about should because its central to my committee responsibilities and I think, what's going around around the world is, is really
serious and needs confronting. But you be talking about Russia. New, should be talking about the economy you should be talking about, what you're gonna do to improve people's lives. I think that to the kind of mid term is that we need, and we have a good good mid term, no matter what we do, but we need a great mid term, the kind of mid term that takes back the Congress to put a real CAN right on this administration and what that's gonna work I was giving people a positive and compelling reason to turn out and vote for Democrats and not just of the reason to vote against the other side. I think the three things frankly Democrats should be campaigning on right now are the economy, and the fact that we're going through some serious structural change an economy that automation is gonna, do aggravated the trends that we have seen over the last ten or twenty years, if we don't face it, then up with good solutions, and I think we are campaigning on support for family, which means being able to
send your kids the school at not having chase down the hall with some of them salt weapon and means allow parents to get at it health care for themselves and their kids and make sure that kids aren't deported countries, they ve never lived, and, finally, I think, should be campaigning on a return to decency, so what we like Jeff Lake has been on. The show was a proponent of decency, normalcy, pray has no shot at retaining his seat. I want to say something about: Jeff Flake who I have great admiration for he and I came the Congress together people. Rachel flight because they say well, you know he's not ready for election and he was gonna lose anyway Jeffrey, It is a good enough politician and a smart enough guy that, if all cared about, was being reelected. He would have been easily on the path, real action and the reason that he isn't and wasn't is that during the campaign, when
he could see as we all could that Donald Trump was unfit for this office. He said so and lay the campaign, when it became clear, nonetheless that he was gonna, be the GEO P nominee and so many other Republicans fell in line. He refused to fall in line. The only cared about getting reelected. He would have fallen in line like everybody else his party in Congress, and he would have been coasting to re election, but something more important him and I think that was looking is kids in the eye and he will if the Senate, I think, with great pride in his service Many others will leave the Congress with shame about what they did and more important, they didn't do when our institutions were at such grave risk. The I agree with you I heard a lot of people say after he was on the show you. Otherwise he him speak. The talk is cheap, he's overwhelmingly in the way that you would expect a Trump supporter to vote, but, to my mind
echoing what you're saying is any voice Republican, a Democrat in particular, can because it goes against self interest, often in the course of people saying no decency is important and institute. Are important should be welcomed. By the other side. I think that's exactly right. In the one last point on making than I probably should run one of the real Appointments of the last year, for me, has not been what kind of president Donald Trump, turned out to be. I think that was sadly to predictable, but rather how few be willing to stand up to him. How quick he'd, be able to remake the party in his deeply flawed image, and how seldom my colleagues would be willing to confront him a terrible realisation. Our democracy turns out to be far more fragile, then we might have imagined it far more dependent on the goodwill of the people and the condition of the people who are serving
at any given time. It should have been self evident, but its becoming all too apparent right now. I Irish frankly the voices like Jeff Lakes, these very conservative and without completely differently on most issues, but he as a strength of character about him and integrity about him. That you don't see displayed by many in the European Congress right now and I admire that. Thank you very much really appreciate you with. Greater greater Jonah big Fan, So this is the point that the show rhetoric about something's happened in the news in the last week that maybe get so much attention. So this week one of the things that happened was we have you Certainly the ninetieth Oscars in history, the country While there is a lot of unfair over that's picture and best director less attention always to the category of documentary film. So it turns out that over the last year,
I have only seen one of the films in the dark category nominated for best film and it's a movie called Icarus that was recommended to me by one of our punkahs guests from the past been witness, turns out, then what is is a very good predictor of Oscar success to this movie. One best documentary and took on the asker and it's a fascinating story- There is all the elements of things that I think about in care about. It is about russian. It's about criminal activity in misconduct- and it's about the truth, I could buy men in brine photo who thought he would of into the shady world of doping in professional sport and in particular he starts trying to investigate doping in baking you ve been so disappointing what had been review? but Lance Armstrong and, as a matter of luck would have it, he decided to self dope to see if you can get away with it.
To a little bit blow the lid off of what was happening around the world and specifically in Russia, and it was connected to a very colorful russian Olympic after by the name of Gregori, retching cuff, and only give too much of it away. But as these story unfolds, you see that Grushenka who had participated in bad conduct in the doping of athletes the course of time made a fateful decision that he would be whistleblower over the russian like programme. I think an urban start asking questions and knew the answer. Yes or no were you the mastermind that cheated the Olympics is unwanted. Folds in the film is a story of bad conduct of lying of cheating, but also a little bit a reduction on the part of somebody who had participated in that bad activity as a director.
And when he accepted his Oscar, he said quote hope Icarus as a wake up. Call yes about Russia, but more than that about the importance of telling the truth. Close quote the documentary, big impact on the ability of Russia to participate in the last Olympics and has happened pact on how people are thinking about the issue of drugs in sports and is just another example of so many that are sometimes unsung. The visuals, we're not in government or private citizens who buy use of their voice or there making ability songwriting ability shine, a light on something: that's important. This isn't it all of that and it to see them being recognised, So my congratulations to the film makers of acres. Well, that's it Sarasota stay tuned thanks again to my guest congressmen, Adam ship, and thank you for listening. If you like this,
rate and reviewed and apple podcast, every positive review, helping you list find the shell stems questions. As always about using politics, tweet them to me, preparing for give me a call, it's six thousand six hundred and ninety two for seventy seven thousand three hundred and thirty, eight, that six thousand six hundred and ninety two for Preet or send an email to stay tuned, cafe darker state, and is presented by CAFE and W N Y see studios is produced by the tea Pineapple street media crisper, Ruby, Henry Malarkey, generalise, Berman, Joel Level and MAX Linsky, Our music is by Andrew Dust and special thanks to Julia Doyle, Jeff eyes in me and Jake Mcafee and this week
thanks to City Box and Lizzie Peabody, I'm pre Ferrara stay to advertising. Weak New York returns this October eighteen to twenty first, with a hybrid educational and entertaining experience, join great minds from brands, agencies, tech and media companies for four days of inspiration live from Hudson yards or stream all sessions from home in on your schedule, with alive podcast, recording of New York magazines, pivot, see him: ok, no presentations, fiery debates and interactive workshops on the latest trends. You won't want to miss this. Here's a dummy New York for tickets and more information go to advertising weak dot com
Transcript generated on 2021-10-12.