CNN "The Situation Room" - Transcript: Interview With Connecticut Congressman Jim Himes

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BASH: For decades. Look, and they have gone in and out of favor with one another, and that certainly was the case at the beginning of the Trump campaign, that he was involved, and then he was very much told that he was not going to be involved anymore.

But like so many other people who are in the Trump orbit, the now- president tends to cut ties, but then go back and have conversations with people, and that certainly was the case, it seems to be , with Roger Stone. So one of the questions has been whether or not maybe people in and around the president didn't know about this warning that may or may not have come from WikiLeaks to Roger Stone, but maybe Stone told Donald Trump directly. BLITZER: I want to stay on this.

Jim Himes, Congressman Jim Himes, is joining us right now. He is a member of the House Intelligence Committee. He is a Democrat.

Congressman, thanks so much for joining us.

And I will read to you the lead in "The Washington Post" story. I want to get your reaction.

"Special count Robert S. Mueller III asked the House Intelligence Committee," your committee, "on Friday for an official transcript of Trump adviser Roger Stone's testimony, according to people familiar with the request, a sign that prosecutors could be moving to charge him with a crime."

Your reaction?

REP. JIM HIMES (D), CONNECTICUT: Well, Wolf, I can't confirm that one way or the other, in the interest of sort of making sure that this process remains one of confidence.

But I can tell you that, personally, you know, having listened to Roger Stone's testimony, I certainly have my concerns about whether he was truthful. And, of course, this goes back to the issue, you will remember, of him predicting essentially that John Podesta's e-mails would be released.

He said it is soon to be Podesta's time in the barrel right before, of course, his e-mails were released. And he has denied having any contacts with WikiLeaks. He has denied that he had any role there. But the more we learn, the more we -- I at least become concerned that he wasn't being honest with the committee.

BLITZER: There's a suggestion, Congressman, that Mueller probably already has an unofficial transcript of Roger Stone's testimony before your House Intelligence Committee, but now wants an official transcript. What does that say to you?

HIMES: Well, again, I am not -- I don't know if, in fact, that has -- if that has happened, but, obviously -- and I'm not quite sure where he would get an unofficial transcript.

But if that is true, and if an official transcript has been released, this, of course, would potentially form the foundation of then going back to Roger Stone and saying, you said this to Congress, and we know that not to be true.

We learned something in the last couple of weeks, Wolf, which is -- and Mueller showed this -- that lying to Congress is going to be an offense for which he will -- he will make an indictment. So, again, without confirming any of this stuff, I certainly have concerns and have had for some time that Roger Stone wasn't honest with the committee when he came and testified in front of us.

BLITZER: How could this help the special counsel investigate possible communication that he may have had directly or indirectly with WikiLeaks?

HIMES: Well, to make the obvious point, if Mueller has concerns that Roger Stone is not being honest, he knows a lot more than we know and probably that Roger Stone knows.

So, if he has evidence that Roger Stone lied to Congress -- and just in the last couple of weeks, he has brought charges to people for lying to Congress -- what that gives him is real leverage with Roger Stone to say, OK, now is the moment where you come clean. You might have said you would never testify against Donald Trump, but look at the charges we have here and think about spending the rest of your days in prison. And if you don't like that prospect, we have some questions for you.

So, if this all turns out to be true, it could be a real element of leverage for Mueller on Roger Stone.

BLITZER: Can you confirm, Congressman, that Mueller has asked your committee for an official transcript?

HIMES: I can't, Wolf. And I'm not sure that any committee member can.

As you know, Mueller's investigation has been known for its operating in secrecy, and I think I'm going to respect that and not confirm or deny either way.

BLITZER: But without confirming or denying that -- and I understand the element of confidentiality you have to maintain as a member of the House Intelligence Committee -- is there a procedure in place for the special counsel to get that kind of official transcript?

HIMES: The way it would work, Wolf -- and it probably bears watching, since we're only in town, if the rumors are to be believed about a budget deal being done by Friday -- the procedure for the release of the transcript, that would require a committee vote.

[18:10:07]

So, in other words, the committee would come together. Presumably, the Republican majority could deny a request like that to Mueller. But the committee would have to come together to vote on the release of that transcript, if Mueller, in fact, had made that request.

BLITZER: Are you going to have a vote on it tomorrow?

(LAUGHTER)

HIMES: Nice try, Wolf.

BLITZER: You can't tell us?

HIMES: Again, I don't want to get into what Mueller -- if that has happened, you will -- people will know about a meeting of the committee before too long. I don't at this point want to get out ahead of what either Bob Mueller or the committee is doing. BLITZER: Does the committee, your House Intelligence Committee, has

to -- do they have to inform Roger Stone's attorney that all of this is unfolding and they're going to make the official transcript available? Would that be the normal procedure?

HIMES: No, I don't think there's any obligation to inform anybody.

Again, this was testimony that was offered to the Congress. Because it was done in executive session, it is not a public document. Now, remember, Wolf, the other thing I would add here is that the intention of the committee was to release all of the transcripts.

And the only reason they haven't all been released is because they're going through a process of declassification, showing the transcripts to the intelligence community to make sure that there isn't classified information.

But one way or the other, that information, those transcripts are going to be public very soon, either because these stories are true or because that process is done and all of the transcripts will be released.

BLITZER: And, as we have been reporting, Congressman -- I will read the second sentence in this "Washington Post" story -- "It is the first time Mueller has formally asked the committee to turn over material the panel has gathered in its investigation of Russian interference of the 2016 campaign," according to the people.

But that was a surprise to me, that only now, that Mueller and his special counsel team, they're beginning to ask your committee, presumably other committees, for official transcripts.

HIMES: Yes. Yes. There has been almost no communication, and I don't think that's an accident, between the special counsel, Robert Mueller, and certainly on the House side. I can't speak for the Senate.

But, remember, the House Intelligence Committee investigation was badly damaged from the start, when the chairman of the committee, Devin Nunes, used the committee as a platform to defend the president.

You may recall that the House Intelligence Committee's report said that the intelligence community was wrong that the Russian interference was designed to help Donald Trump. That, of course, was the finding of the intelligence community, but the House majority report denied that.

Well, now, there are two Senate reports out that say, in fact, the Russians were trying to help Donald Trump. And so that is just yet another example of why the House Intelligence Committee's investigation was pretty badly hindered from the start, and I think Bob Mueller deliberately kept his distance.

BLITZER: I want to move on to some other issues.

I will just read another sentence from the article: "Securing an official transcript from the committee would be a necessary step before pursuing an indictment that Stone allegedly lied to lawmakers, legal experts said."

Let's move on to something else that's emerging right now, very sensitive information. Just a year before he won the presidential election, President Trump signed off on this plan to build a Trump Tower in Moscow.

Is that something the American people should have known about during the campaign?

HIMES: Well, I mean, I think there's two things that are important about that, Wolf.

Number one, the president very clearly lied about this, and you can go back and run the tape. He said, I have no deals, I have no prospects of deals, I have no nothing.

In fact, he had a signed letter of intent. And, of course, just, was it yesterday that his lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, said, well, there was a letter of intent, but it wasn't signed?

Well, lo and behold, it turns out to have been signed by Donald Trump. So, once again -- and this seems like a daily occurrence -- we are finding that the president and the president's people cannot be honest on the subject of Russia.

And, of course, that raises the question that has been with us for a year-and-a-half from now, which is, why can't you be honest about the interactions of the campaign and the president with Russia? There are people going to jail because of that dishonesty. That doesn't happen because you make a mistake. That happens because you have something to hide.

BLITZER: If there was never a deal, as Rudy Giuliani initially suggested, why was all of this kept so secret during the campaign?

HIMES: Well, exactly. Why was it kept secret? Why did the president lie about it? Why did Paul Manafort lie about it? Why did everybody lie about -- Michael Cohen lie about it? That is the question.

Again, most people only lie if they have something to hide, particularly if that lie is going to put you at risk of spending significant time behind bars.

So, this is why it is so important for this investigation to be allowed to run its course. There are too many people lying too often about this very narrow question of, what was the contact, what was the deal, what happened with Russia?

At the end of the day, we need to know why so many people were willing to risk going to jail and, in fact, are going to jail because they lied about the campaign and the president's contacts and deals with Russia.

[18:15:02] BLITZER: And we have a copy, thanks to our Chris Cuomo, of the actual document, the proposed deal.

And it is described on page one, "Proposed development of a first- class, luxury, mixed-use to be known as Trump Moscow, or such other name as mutually agreed upon by the parties, and located in Moscow city." It was called the project.

The president, then the candidate, signed it October 28, 2015, the same day, by the way, that there was presidential, a Republican presidential debate in Boulder, Colorado that CNBC was hosting, and months after he declared his intention to seek the Republican presidential nomination.

Just give me your bottom line on all of this.

HIMES: Well, again, what -- the headline here is that you had Russia working very hard both to create uncertainty, divisiveness within the body politic of United States of America, and working very hard to elect a president of the United States, Donald Trump.

Why? Why did they do that? They did that because they knew it would be divisive, but they may also have done it -- and here is why the investigation must be allowed to run its course -- because, for example, Paul Manafort changed the Republican platform at the Republican Convention, because, apparently, there were business deals involved, and who knows what else, because Michael Flynn in his conversation, for which he may go to prison, with Ambassador Kislyak, suggested that there would be a rethink of the relationship with Russia.

So, anyway, all of those lies are designed to hide those things and probably to hide things that Mueller has not yet told us are out there. And we are talking about the fundamental credibility of the president of the United States here and whether the president of the United States is, in fact, being blackmailed or being -- or whether something is being held over his head in a way that might not be in the interests of the American people.

BLITZER: We will watch you and your colleagues on the Intelligence Committee to see what is going on tomorrow.

Congressman, thank you so much for joining us. Always appreciate your spending some time here in THE SITUATION ROOM. Thanks very much.

HIMES: Thank you, Wolf.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source