Fox News "Sunday Morning Futures" - Transcript: Interview with Representative John Ratcliffe

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BARTIROMO: Welcome back.

Back to our top story right now.

Florence has been downgraded to a tropical depression, but the danger is far from over. As we told you earlier, it continues to dump heavy rainfall on the already flooded Carolinas. The White House keeping a close eye on the unfolding situation, with all eyes on FEMA and its response.

Texas Republican Congressman John Ratcliffe sits on the House Judiciary and Homeland Security Committees. That committee oversees FEMA. He is also a member of the House Judiciary Committee and a former federal prosecutor.

Congressman, it's good to see you this morning. Thanks very much for joining us.

REP. JOHN RATCLIFFE, R-TEXAS: You bet. Good morning, Maria.

BARTIROMO: I want to get into one of our top stories. And that's the FBI and the DOJ investigation.

But, first, let me kick it off with Florence, because 12 people are dead now as a result of this storm. How has FEMA done in this event? And were there things that needed to be done that have not been done so far?

Give us your take on where we stand in terms of Hurricane Florence.

RATCLIFFE: Sure.

As the storm dissipates, it's a little bit difficult to get final grades for how FEMA has been doing. But I think they have been very smart and very strategic with respect to prepositioning and prestaging assets, everything from rescue helicopters and vehicles, rescue personnel, medical personnel, power and utility personnel, as well as supplies, six million meals, four million liters of water, hundreds of thousands of cots and blankets for those impacted.

So I think, under really difficult circumstances, FEMA has done a really great job. You mentioned casualties. And any number is too many, but when you look at a storm of this size and this magnitude, we're talking about a tiny, tiny fraction of what we typically see or expect here.

So we will wait until relief and rescue efforts turn to remediation efforts, and then we will bring FEMA in, assess the final damage and give final grades. But right now, I think they are doing a good job under really, really difficult circumstances, and hope to see that continue this week.

BARTIROMO: Our thoughts and prayers to the Carolinas.

Congressman, let me move on and ask you about the breaking news that we have had this morning.

Earlier, we heard Devin Nunes say that he is going to declassify some of the classified depositions that he's taken. That's important. Got to get your take on that.

And then we have got this. Catherine Herridge has gotten her hands on the transcript of testimony. You were interviewing Lisa Page, the former lawyer at the FBI recently, in that hearing. And we have these texts from Peter Strzok to Lisa Page back in 2017, when Peter Strzok was questioning whether or not he should move over to the special counsel Robert Mueller investigation.

And he says: "An investigation leading to impeachment? You and I both know the odds are nothing. If I thought it was likely, I would be there, no question. I hesitate in part because of my gut sense and concern there's no big there."

Explain this, Congressman.

RATCLIFFE: Well, as I told Catherine Herridge yesterday, I wish I could say more about it.

But until those transcripts become public, I can only really talk about the around the edges. But Lisa Page's testimony, I can say, is consistent with a lot of other testimony, to the point that neither she or Peter Strzok and the folks at the center of the Trump-Russia collusion investigation had any evidence of collusion with Russians nearly a year into the investigation.

So I asked her about those questions in detail. I was heartened to hear Chairman Nunes say he was going to release those transcripts from the House Intelligence Committee. I would urge Chairman Goodlatte to do the same with respect to Lisa Page and Peter Strzok and others, because the sooner those transcripts become public, the sooner the public will see that this Russian collusion narrative is at best misleading and at worst false from the onset.

BARTIROMO: So, we know that he said there's no there. They had informants trying to lure Trump campaign officials to get them into meetings.

They had a media leak strategy, apparently, all the while knowing that there was no collusion. This is just extraordinary, Congressman.

We have some more texts for you to walk through us with. Walk us through them, because here is another one from Peter Strzok to Lisa Page. After two negative articles were out, he says: "Well done."

What was this media leak strategy, sir?

RATCLIFFE: Yes, I will concede that there is such a thing as a media leak strategy, having been a national security and terrorism prosecutor.

Sometimes, you do have to deal with leaks in high-profile cases. But the texts really underscore that what Lisa Page and Peter Strzok were doing there wasn't trying to control the leaks, but to get information out that they wanted to influence this narrative.

So, it's very troubling. Again, all of this ties in. It's not just Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, Maria. What's important and significant about what Devin Nunes told you earlier is more than 70 witnesses appeared before the House Intelligence Committee. All of them were asked the same question.

What evidence do you have of Russian collusion with Donald Trump or the Trump campaign? What evidence do you have of conspiracy? What evidence do you have of coordination? And they batted 1000 in their response. These are folks like Susan Rice and Samantha Power, senior DOJ and department officials and intelligence and law enforcement officials.

And they all said, we don't have any.

So what we have known and what I want the public to see from these transcripts is that our law enforcement and intelligence communities have known for a while that there isn't evidence of Russian collusion with Donald Trump or the Trump campaign. The sooner the public finds that out, the better off we will all be.

BARTIROMO: So, where does this leave the special counsel, Congressman? As a former federal prosecutor yourself, what is Robert Mueller doing? What is he going to have to do in the coming months?

RATCLIFFE: Well, part of what he's doing is still a mystery and a source of frustration to some of us in Congress, because we have only seen of order appointing Robert Mueller. We haven't seen the second scope memo that Rod Rosenstein signed in August of 2017.

And so when folks say, let Robert Mueller do his job, I'm all in favor of that, but we need to know what his job is. And so it seems incredible to me that members of Congress with oversight responsibilities at the Department of Justice, none of us have seen that scope memo.

So it's hard to comment on that with respect to Robert Mueller. I am one that has not questioned his integrity, but I have questioned his judgment at times. I think the way he has staffed his team with folks that are very clearly anti-Trump and very pro-Clinton partisans, some of whom attended her victory party, some of whom have given her money, and some of whom have made derogatory statements about Donald Trump, all call into question whatever findings he comes up with.

And what I don't want is for the American people to end up in a hung jury, where regardless of the work that he's doing, half the folks are going to conclude that it's not accurate because of who has been involved in his team. So we will have to see with respect to that.

BARTIROMO: Well, I want to see when you're going to see all of this.

Whether or not it happens before the midterm elections, you are in a fight in terms of the midterms. And we know, if the House flips, we're not going to hear another word about this.

I want to ask you about the cost of the special counsel investigation. How much is it costing taxpayers?

Let's take a short break and get into that when we come back.

We're looking ahead on "Sunday Morning Futures," speaking with Congressman John Ratcliffe. More with him coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BARTIROMO: That was House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte of Virginia with me last weekend on this program when I asked him whether the committee is going to be bringing back people like Loretta Lynch, James Comey and Sally Yates before the midterm elections.

I'm back with Republican Congressman John Ratcliffe of Texas, a member of the House Judiciary Committee.

What is the plan, Congressman, in terms of bringing back those people? You called it, when we spoke earlier, a rolling production of data, forcing you to bring people back, because, otherwise, it looks like perjury.

RATCLIFFE: Right.

So Chairman Goodlatte identified Nellie Ohr as one of the folks coming in. She's planning to come into our committee later this week. She, of course, is the wife of Bruce Ohr.

As I told you last time I was on this show, Maria, before Bruce Ohr's deposition, I was hoping to find out whether folks at the Department of Justice and the FBI were aware of certain material facts and exculpatory evidence before the first FISA application.

And I can tell you that, based on his testimony, without getting into the specifics, did nothing to ameliorate my concerns. It only exacerbated them. He identified half-a-dozen people at the FBI and at the Department of Justice that knew of his operational role, his wife's operational role, the fact that they were being paid for those roles.

So we're going to continue to bring in the Nellie Ohrs. I would like to bring in George Papadopoulos at this point. And with respect to Comey and Lynch and Yates and others, Chairman Goodlatte has tried the nice way. I think the not-so-nice way of a subpoena is going to be necessary and appropriate at this point, because...

BARTIROMO: Yes.

RATCLIFFE: ... you have alluded to this, Maria, about justice delayed can be justice denied.

And if Republicans are not in control of the House, we may never get a chance to question these folks again.

BARTIROMO: Real quick, Congressman, is it even possible that Robert Mueller will not look at -- with all of this blatant wrongdoing in our faces that we talk about every Sunday, is it even possible that Robert Mueller is not going to look at this?

And how much is this special counsel investigation costing us, where he is not looking at any of this?

RATCLIFFE: I will be honest with you, Maria. I don't think he is looking at this angle of it. I have seen no indication that he's doing that.

And I think that that's why many of us think there need to be a second special counsel dedicated to investigating the Department of Justice and the FBI. And when I say that, I mean the senior folks within the Obama administration that we have been talking about.

You know, Bob Mueller, the cost of this, obviously, we're in the millions of dollars, tens of millions of dollars. And you know what? It's all worth it if he does write the definitive narrative on Russian interference in our elections.

But that's different than Russian collusion with Trump or the Trump campaign. And what I don't want Bob Mueller to do is to fall into the same circle with Jim Comey and allow their actions to influence the outcome of an election or attempt to influence the outcome of an election.

The American people deserve to know that Donald Trump wasn't colluding with the Russians, if, in fact, that determination has been made by the special counsel.

BARTIROMO: Congressman, it's good to have you on the program this morning.

All I can say is, this upcoming midterm election seems like the most consequential midterm elections we have seen in a long time.

Thank you for joining us, sir.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source