MSNBC "The Rachel Maddow Show" - Transcript: Interview with Rep. Jerry Nadler

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

MADDOW:  Joining us now is the busiest man in Congress.  Congressman Jerry Nadler of New York is the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.  His committee today sent out to 81 different people and entities, requests for documents and information related to a number of different investigations that all touched on the executive branch.
 
Mr. Chairman, thank you for being here. 
 
REP. JERROLD NADLER (D-NY), CHAIRMAN, HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE:  Thank you. 
 
MADDOW:  So, this is a big list.
 
NADLER:  Uh-huh.
 
MADDOW:  Eighty-one people is a lot.  Have you had any response already?  I realize this is the first day. 
 
NADLER:  Yes, we have.  We`ve been having some very positive responses from a number of the 81 people today. 
 
MADDOW:  In what sense? 
 
NADLER:  They have been saying they will give us documents, some started giving us documents. 
 
MADDOW:  Do you anticipate that these letters and these requests that you sent out today will be the first step towards subpoenas to some of these people and entities if they don`t cooperate? 
 
NADLER:  Well, if they don`t cooperate, yes.  But we don`t know that they won`t cooperate.  In the initial batch of requests we sent to these 81 people, we limited the requests to material that they already submitted to other agencies, to the special prosecutor, Southern District, so that they can be -- so that they could respond quickly and there could be no question of privilege. 
 
We will follow up with some of them, maybe many of them with other document requests for documents they haven`t submitted, but to get speedy compliance to start the work quickly, the initial document request was for documents they already turned over to other people. 
 
MADDOW:  So, and when I think about that in terms of your overall remit, obviously, procedurally, that makes sense in terms of getting things fast, because of those entities and people have already given these documents over, that means that they can`t say that they have to be held secret because of privilege with the president.
 
NADLER:  That`s right. 
 
MADDOW:  But it also means that you won`t necessarily be getting anything new, that other law enforcement or investigative entities haven`t seen. 
 
NADLER:  Well, not initially.  But, remember, our job is very different from other law enforcement agencies.  The special prosecutor has a specific mandate to investigate only the possible -- only the Russian interference with the election and possible collusion by the Trump administration or anybody else with that interference with the election, and only to look at crimes. 
 
The southern district of New York also only looks at crimes.  We have to look at a much broader question.  We have to look -- our job is to protect the rule of law in this country.  That means we have to look at the three major threats to the rule of law that we have seen and that is corruption, personal enrichment and violation of the emoluments clause.  It means abuse of power in terms of various things that have been done. 
 
It means interference with elections.  It means abuse of power, attacks on the press, attacks on the judiciary, attacks on law enforcement agencies and obstruction of justice, interference with the various investigations that are going on. 
 
MADDOW:  And have you had -- in preparation for sending out all of these document requests today, did you have to go toward deconfliction process with the Justice Department or even with other committees. 
 
NADLER:  We`ve talked to the Justice Department, Southern District and special prosecutors to make sure that nothing we are doing would interfere with them.  Yes.
 
MADDOW:  OK.
 
NADLER:  And there are ongoing meetings between the staffs of the different committees and every so often the chairmen to make sure we`re not wasting time, that we`re not duplicating what we`re doing.
 
MADDOW:  Are there lines of inquiry that you would be pursuing through document requests like these or some other means that you`d like to be pursuing but you aren`t specifically because of special counsel`s waved you off or southern district waved you off? 
 
NADLER:  No, no.  Not because of the Southern District or the special counsel.  We`re not pursuing the whole question of collusion with the Russians, for example, because the Intelligence Committee is pursuing that.
 
MADDOW:  OK.  Let me ask about -- talking about obstruction of justice.  There`s been a drama that you can see a lot more of and we can only see a little bit of as a public, related to whether or not the president pressured or contacted Matt Whitaker, and Matt Whitaker was acting attorney general, essentially asking Whitaker to intervene in the Southern District of New York, asking him.  There have been reports that Whitaker was asked if a different prosecutor could be put in charge of the Cohen matter, for example. 
 
You have suggested in letters that have been made public that your committee has evidence that the president did in fact ask Whitaker to lean on SDNY. 
 
Can you talk to us about that at all? 
 
NADLER:  I can`t get into the specifics, but we have some reason to believe that that is the case and that`s why we`ve -- it`s one of the reasons we`ve asked Whitaker to come back to our committee, which we`ll be doing shortly. 
 
MADDOW:  Shortly? 
 
NADLER:  I forget the date, but in the next couple weeks. 
 
MADDOW:  You have a specific date with him? 
 
NADLER:  I think so. 
 
MADDOW:  Is it important he unexpectedly left the Justice Department?  The DOJ --
 
(CROSSTALK)
 
NADLER:  I don`t know.  I just heard that for the first time on your show.  I don`t know what the impact of that is, or whether it has an impact. 
 
MADDOW:  Does it have an effect on whether or not you can get him to come back? 
 
NADLER:  No, it does not.  He`s subject -- first of all, he`s agreed to come back.  And second of all, he`s subject to subpoena like anybody else. 
 
MADDOW:  Uh-huh.
 
If the president did ask him why can`t the recused U.S. attorney that I picked for that job be in charge, why are these Cohen prosecutions going ahead -- if the president was asking questions about that out of frustration, is that necessarily improper, especially given --
 
NADLER:  It would depend if it was pure -- pure curiosity, it was intended as such and it was understood as such, why can`t -- why does this have to happen?  Well, Mr. President, it`s improper.  Oh, OK.  Then that wouldn`t be a terrible thing. 
 
If it was an open invitation or a coded communication, really issue change the prosecutor, you should lean on them.  That would be improper.  That would be abuse of power, maybe obstruction of justice, too. 
 
MADDOW:  Is that what you have you have -- you have evidence of that kind of communication? 
 
NADLER:  That`s what we`re looking into. 
 
MADDOW:  When we read through all of these document requests today, we were sort of looking for themes in terms of what various lines of inquiry you`re pursuing, my general feeling about this is that you know what you`re looking for.  That there are maybe as many as 20 different things that you`re looking into in terms of different ex -- different occurrences you want explained, different relationships that you want exposed.  But my sense is that you know what you`re driving at. 
 
NADLER:  We know about a lot of what we`re driving at.  It`s not to say that as more evidence comes to light, that we find out more of the other subjects won`t reveal themselves. 
 
MADDOW:  Uh-huh.  Can you tell us a little bit about the manpower or the firepower that you have on your staff?  I mean, this is a lot of material. 
 
NADLER:  We have -- yes, this is a lot of material.  We have our normal staff, plus as has been reported, we`ve hired two very good attorneys on a contract basis on the committee for this investigation, Berry Berke and Norm Eisen.  Beyond that, it`s our regular staff. 
 
MADDOW:  Are you worried --  
 
NADLER:  We`re also working on everything else like immigration and gun control and you name it. 
 
MADDOW:  Have you bitten off more than you can chew here?  I imagine this is going to be a voluminous amount of stuff you`re about to get back. 
 
NADLER:  I don`t think so.  I think we`ll be able to prioritize and know what we`re looking for. 
 
And, remember, we are talking about a situation where for two years, the Republican Congress did no oversight than administration, none.  They, in fact, acted as shields for administration for whatever they wanted to do.  They tried to sabotage the Mueller investigation, for example. 
 
But we must have -- the Constitution contemplates a situation which Congress has a check on the executive and -- on the president and vice versa.  You must have that check and we have to protect the rule of law and that means we have to investigate and hold hearings and layout for the American people if the administration is involved in abuses of power or obstruction of justice and certainly violation of the Emoluments Clause and personal enrichment. 
 
We have to know about that.  We have to lay that out.  People have to know about it and we have then to see what we can do about it.  There has to be a check in the executive.  We have to protect the rule of law, and that`s what we`re doing here. 
 
MADDOW:  Mr. Chairman, Jerry Nadler, head of the Judiciary Committee in the House -- please keep us apprised.  I know it takes a lot out of your schedule to be here tonight.  Thank you, sir.
 
NADLER:  Thank you. 

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source