CNN "Anderson Cooper 360" - Transcript: Interview with Rep. Pramila Jayapal and Rep. Gerry Connolly
Interview
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
COOPER: Well, with me tonight, Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal, a member of that committee, and Congressman Gerry Connolly who sits on the House Oversight Committee. Congresswoman, do you buy Barr's objection to having attorneys who were on the staff ask questions?
REP. PRAMILA JAYAPAL (D-WA): No.
COOPER: That that's the reason he doesn't want to come?
JAYAPAL: No, Anderson. I mean, we have -- there's lots of precedent for having attorneys question. It was clear to us that Barr did not want to come to a democratically controlled chamber where somebody wasn't controlling the gavel that he could rely on to stop difficult questions.
COOPER: Today, Senator Lindsey Graham was in charge so he was (INAUDIBLE), I think.
JAYAPAL: Correct, correct. So I think -- I mean, it's been very clear all along and we just received as you know the letter saying -- from Barr saying, we're not going to give you the unredacted report, we're not going to give you the underlying documents that you've subpoenaed us for and the reason is because we don't think you have a legitimate right to these documents, which I find really stunning. And I mean I think this letter from Mueller to Barr is -- takes us into a whole new phase of this particular story.
COOPER: Because it points to Barr not telling the truth?
JAYAPAL: It points to Barr deliberately misleading the public through his initial four-page summary, which he said today was not a summary, but we all know it was a summary, and then, again, in the news conference where he said there's no evidence. The special counsel's report says there's no evidence of this and this.
There's a number of places where there is clearly in the Mueller report it says substantial evidence that the President tried to interfere with and tried to, you know, not have McGahn testify or tried to say things that weren't true.
COOPER: So Congressman Connolly, I mean what happens now? I mean, so clearly the administration at every turn is going to fight any subpoena, is going to try to, you know, run out the clock as much as possible. What do you do?
REP. GERALD CONNOLLY (D-VA): Well, I think Congress is going to have to defend the institution, the constitutional role of Congress to provide oversight and accountability of any executive branch. To have a president defy across the board all outstanding subpoenas is unprecedented. It's never happened before. Richard Nixon didn't do that at the height of Watergate.
And so that's laying down a gauntlet and we can't let him do that. So, subpoenas can be enforced in one of two ways. It can be enforced through the judicial system. You go to court and ask them to enforce the subpoena. And if somebody defies further that order, they're now in contempt of court as well as Congress, and can be fined or even jailed. It's a criminal offense.
The other is what's called inherent contempt. We haven't used that since the 1930s. But between 1800 and 1930, for the first 130 years of the republic, Congress did use it. And that is where we enforce our own subpoenas or directives. And in this case a subpoena can be issued and if it is defied, we can direct the sergeant at arms to arrest somebody, bring them to Washington, and detain them.
COOPER: Do you -- I mean, do you actually see that -- do you see that happening? I mean that seems, well, I guess unprecedented, certainly in our time.
CONNOLLY: Well, so is the defiance.
JAYAPAL: I mean, yes.
CONNOLLY: So we cannot roll over and play dead when a president says we're not going to cooperate with the legislative branch. If we do --
COOPER: So you'd be willing to go through with that?
CONNOLLY: Well, what choice do we hive? If we do, the precedent we set for future presidents is chilling.
COOPER: So doesn't though that the strategy that the White House is employing of delaying -- this brings this up basically, you know -- I mean it could be tied up in the courts for a very long period of time.
CONNOLLY: That's right.
COOPER: Lots of appeals. It brings it up into the election. Does it hurt Democrats who are, you know, running in congressional districts, presidential candidates who are trying to speak about --
JAYAPAL: No.
COOPER: -- economic issues or health care to have all this focus and energy consumed and suddenly the Democratic Party labeled as, you know, that they're in this fight, court fight?
[20:55:08] JAYAPAL: I don't think so, because I think what we're talking about is the difference between a democracy and a dictatorship. There are checks and --
COOPER: That stark?
JAYAPAL: It's very stark. When you have a president that says, I am not going to comply with any. It's not looking at it case-by-case and saying, not this one, but yes, this one. He's saying, I am not going to comply with anything that is requested of me or subpoenaed of me or my administration on any level. And that means that there is no respect for the check and balance and the coequal branch of government, which is what we are.
COOPER: It is amazing, though, how much silence in the Republican side there.
JAYAPAL: Yes.
COOPER: I mean, if this was a Democratic president, you know, I mean, obviously Democrats would not be making these things, too.
CONNOLLY: One hesitates to remind everybody that when Eric Holder was the attorney general, they held him in contempt.
JAYAPAL: Yes, they did.
CONNOLLY: And they passed that resolution before the House. So, I mean, it's a little hard to be sympathetic with crocodile tears. But let me just say to your question, I believe it can work both ways. There is a political question. There's also a question of what is our duty as members of Congress with respect to upholding the constitution.
COOPER: Yes. Congressman Connolly, appreciate it. Congresswoman Jayapal, appreciate it as well.
JAYAPAL: Thank you.
COOPER: Thank you very much.
CONNOLLY: Thank you.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source