MSNBC "Hardball with Chris Matthews" - Transcript: Russian Investigations

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

MATTHEWS: Well, I`m joined now by Democratic congressman Mike Quigley who  sits in the House intelligence committee, Julia Ansley is an investigative  reporter for NBC News and Kim Wehle is a former federal prosecutor. Thank  you all for joining us.

Let`s start. There`s so much that happened today. But let`s start with  the fact that the Rick Gates is now available to the prosecution. He has  been with this campaign as deputy campaign chair all the way through, all  the Russia meetings, all that stuff, all the meetings with the ambassador  from Russia. He sat in on everything Manafort sat in on. What do you  think he has got for Mueller? How much can Mueller squeeze out of this  guy?

REP. MIKE QUIGLEY (D-IL), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Look, Mueller is a  master at this now. He did the same thing winning general Flynn. He  didn`t even indict his son. He had the ability, the maximum exposure on  general Flynn instead he only him on one count. He is doing the same thing  with Gates. And when you do that, you are not going laterally, you are not  going down, you are going up.

MATTHEWS: Do you think he can go to the President, Gates?

QUIGLEY: I think this is a periphery moving toward the middle.

MATTHEWS: What`s between him and the President? What`s stopping Gates  from testifying that he has heard the President say with all these  meetings?

QUIGLEY: I wouldn`t know the specifics. I think he would know and Mr.  Manafort would certainly now.

MATTHEWS: What do you think? Julia, first. I want the reporting first.  We`ll get the jurisdiction later. Jurisprudence next. Go ahead.

JULIA AINSLEY, NBC NEWS NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Well, obviously, you  have got to set up a proffer. So Mueller knew what Gates could offer  before he made the sweeping decision to dismiss a lot of these charges. So  whatever does Gates was offering probably wasn`t just on his boss, Paul  Manafort. He also probably used his position on the campaign. Remember,  he stayed on longer than Manafort, his boss, did. He worked on the  inauguration. He had conversations during the transition. It is clear  that Mueller thinks that there`s enough to get from Gates that he is  willing to drop what we saw was a sweeping and serious slew of charges.

MATTHEWS: You know, I think I see a John Dean on the horizon here from  Watergate days, you know. I think just start with the guy. As a  prosecutor in this case, special counsel Mueller, able to just say OK,  thank you for cooperating. We are going to make life good for you if  you`re good for us. Tell me every single thing you did this day, every  single thing you heard that day, day after day after day, everything you  heard from Manafort, every conversation you ever heard, every document you  have got in your hand, everything I need. You know I need to get the  President.

KIM WEHLE, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Yes. I think he`s already asked all  of that and already knows probably what the witness knows. And if you read  the plea agreement, this is -- he is large and in charge. Mueller has all  the cards here. And if he doesn`t cooperate with turning over documents  with saying what he says he is going to do, then the gauntlet comes down. 

And he is holding all of that at bay here. The charges were dismissed without prejudice. They can always be brought back. And Gates has to be very, very careful to tow the line. But the carrot at the other end is huge. It`s not just dropping a lot of charges. But if you read it carefully it could be a 5k letter to actually get probation. So you are going from years and years of prison to possibly probation. That`s --.

MATTHEWS: Guys, I always think back to Colombo days. It always great  nights watching Colombo. And you always knew the bad guy was some snooty  big shot, you know, some sophisticated actor playing him. But that guy  knew he was guilty from the beginning of the show, we knew he was guilty.  The joy was watching a guy like Colombo in that raincoat asking one more  question. Do you think the President knows everything that happened?

QUIGLEY: I think the President knows exactly how much vulnerability he has  on the financial side. I don`t think he totally understands all the money  laundering issues that he probably has. And I think he doesn`t understand  his total legal peril right now.

MATTHEWS: Do you think he understands conspiracy laws and how they work  and how he may have been supporting something and following up on things  that were illegal that made him a conspirator?

QUIGLEY: I think watching this for the last year, I think he is creating  the opportunities to be charged with obstruction step by step by act and by  deed. And it is clear he has to show the intent, but having watched him  work with our folks on the intel committee, they have teamed up at this  point in time to obstruct the investigation at every step. And I think  those are elements. Trump has and I think some of the Republicans on intel have.

MATTHEWS: Yes, they look like it. Meanwhile, when asked why the White  House hasn`t given admiral Mike Rogers authority to even counter Russian  aggression, press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders took issue with the  question. Let`s watch.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

MATTHEWS: Congressman, then I want everybody to respond down the line  here. Here you have the President`s spokesperson who is very good at her  job of defending the President. That`s what she does. But asked a very  direct question. Why hasn`t the President given orders to the NSA to try  to stop the Russian interference with our politics in this country? Why  hasn`t he given an ordered to do the job of defending the country? And she  goes back to the old default button of going after Obama more than a year  ago.

QUIGLEY: What he has really done is made us less safe and more vulnerable  by calling this a hoax. And saying it could have been some big heavy guy  in jersey. In the meantime, we are not ready. We need all new election  equipment. It is 10 to 12 years old. We couldn`t even put anti-hacking  cyberware on in.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

MATTHEWS: I know your district a little bit. Northwest Chicago. And I`m  just wondering, what about the Republicans you deal with? I know you`re  nonpartisan the way you deal with constituents. That`s how it works in the  big city and all. What do they say about the Russians?

QUIGLEY: We are just re-litigating the election. After Charlottesville, I  said you`re just re-litigating the civil war. I try to convince them.  They should have been concerned. It could have just as easily been an  attack on the Republicans.

And by the way, seven states is wrong. It`s more like 35 or 36. It`s your  voting apparatus they attacked. And as Comey said, they will be back. We  are not ready.

MATTHEWS: And what are they up to next time? We don`t know.

QUIGLEY: Well, I think they hacked into the databases already. They can  do a lot of mischief there. I think they want to hack into the voting  machines. Thirteen states don`t even have a paper record that we can audit  if they hack.

MATTHEWS: Do you think we should go to paper this fall just to be careful?

QUIGLEY: I think that we need a combination of the touch screens with  paper. That can be audited.

MATTHEWS: Julia, 69 percent, seven out of ten Americans believe the  Russians were involved in our election last time. Now there is a  difference about how much they affected the totals and all that. But they  know, most people overwhelmingly believe that Russians were screwing with  us trying to hurt our democracy.

WEHLE: Sure. And something that`s been made really clear and James Comey  said this in testimony, the Russians really tried to leave bread crumbs.  They want to show Americans that they can interfere in our elections  whether that`s through penetrating voter databases or releasing hacked  emails or launching social media campaigns.

MATTHEWS: Why? Why do that?

WEHLE: Because it seems they want us to stoke fear. So that the next time  you go to the polls and then next time you see the results of an election,  you have a little bit of doubt. And of course, it doesn`t matter which  side it`s on.

MATTHEWS: A shaky third world democracy.
Anyway, I have a question for the congressman. Remember, the intelligence  committee. Meanwhile, White House communications director Hope Hicks was  on Capitol Hill today to testify before your committee. While she answers  questions about the campaign and the presidential transition, Hicks refused  to answer any questions on anything that took place after Trump took the  presidency.

"The New York Times" is also previously reported that Hicks met with  Mueller`s investigators in December. So did you get from her?

QUIGLEY: I think it is part of a pattern with the White House working with  the intelligence committee on the Republican side to obstruct the  investigation. They did not actually assert privilege and if they did, the  scope of it would be enormous. Unprecedented. Basically who are operating  under a gag order and the Republicans have agreed to let the President do  this. They are teaming up with him. The memo was part of that, the Nunes  trip to the White House. It`s all part of a pattern where they are  actually helping the President avoid investigation.

MATTHEWS: Why? I mean, I know what partisanship is. I know what it is.  But this, this is embarrassing for Nunes and the rest of them.

QUIGLEY: This is the ball game. This is power.

MATTHEWS: Are they trying to protect him from being impeached?

QUIGLEY: I think they are trying to protect him politically and they are  trying to protect him legally. In part of that a lot of that protects hem 
politically, as well.

MATTHEWS: So what`s Nunes up for, CIA? What is he going to get out of  this? Italy? Spain? What`s he get worth all this embarrassment?

QUIGLEY: You have to ask the chairman.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source