CNN "State of the Union" - Transcript: Interview with Rep. Adam Schiff

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

TAPPER: Here in Washington, the attorney general is expected to release the Mueller report as soon as this week. And President Trump still seems to be feeling the pressure, it seems, saying in a series of tweets Saturday -- quote -- "The Democrats, no matter what we give them, will never be satisfied."

And it is true the Democrats in Congress are not satisfied. House Democrats are launching two battles this week that could theoretically go all the way to the Supreme Court, authorizing a subpoena to receive the full Mueller report with no redactions and formally requesting to see six years' worth of President Trump's tax returns.

Joining me now, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Democrat Congressman Adam Schiff of California.

Mr. Chairman, thanks for joining us.

You just heard what President Trump said yesterday about your party, the Democrats, at the Republican Jewish Coalition Convention in Las Vegas.

You're one of the highest-ranking Jewish members of Congress. What's your response?

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D), CALIFORNIA: Well, I hate to even dignify those remarks.

But, look, it's not the Democratic Party that believes that there are good people on both sides of a Nazi rally. There's just one party and one party leader who believes that, and that's Donald Trump.

If there's anything that is likely to cement the relationship between the Democratic Party and the Jewish community, it's the presidency of Donald Trump. The lack of character and values that are certainly inconsistent with Jewish values, I think, are only consolidating support in the Jewish community.

And I think the president needs to look inward when it comes to the rise of anti-Semitism in the country and his own actions and his own words and how that may fuel some of the rise and hate that we see, not just in the form of anti-Semitism, but the rise in active hate of all kinds.

TAPPER: But, Congressman, are you concerned at all about some of the rhetoric that has been expressed by Democratic members of Congress and their support for the BDS movement to boycott Israel? Does this not concern you at all?

SCHIFF: I certainly don't support the BDS movement. And, yes, there are isolated comments by members of our caucus that I have strongly condemned as being anti-Semitic.

But it's one thing when you have a few members who make comments, and it's another when the president of the United States makes comments like he did in Charlottesville or about Charlottesville. There's quite a difference.

I'm very proud of our leadership and its condemnation of anti- Semitism. We will continue to speak out. We will continue to take action to try to combat this scourge.

But I don't think the president is helping by trying to divide us this way.

TAPPER: Let's turn to the Mueller report.

You have made clear that Congress should get the Mueller report with no redactions. Tell me where you stand on the issue of what kinds of reactions, if any, you think are acceptable in the public version of the Mueller report?

SCHIFF: Well, look, if there are classified portions of the report, if there's the classified annex, for example, that may need to be close-hold, depending on whether that reveals sources and methods.

There may even be some parts of that, though, that can be declassified in the public interest. And, in fact, if you look at the Mueller indictments, those two dealing with the Russians, that went into very granular detail. That would have been previously classified information about what the budget was for that social media farm, about private e-mails between members of that social media farm and their family.

[09:05:08]

All of that information at one point was classified, but the decision must have been made the public interest outweighs that. And I think a similar analysis should be undertaken here.

TAPPER: You have been clear in your -- you have been criticized a great deal for saying that you still see -- quote -- "evidence of collusion," even though, according to Attorney General Barr, the Mueller report says -- quote -- "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities" -- unquote. So, are you saying that Mueller got it wrong?

SCHIFF: No.

And what I have said on your show and others, Jake, for over a year now is that, yes, there's ample evidence of collusion in plain sight. But that is not the same thing as proof a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt, and that I would defer to Bob Mueller's judgment. And I do.

But I think what we're talking about here is the difference between conduct that rises to the level of criminality and conduct that is deeply unethical, unpatriotic and corrupt that may not be criminal.

And I think you saw from Mr. Mulvaney on your show last week, and, indeed, we see from Mr. Nunes and Mr. McCarthy, an attitude that ethics don't matter. If there's no crime, there's no foul.

And I think, if we get to that point in this country, then we're in a very desperate situation.

TAPPER: Well, let's talk about this, because you say you think what the Trump campaign members did was immoral, unethical and corrupt, even if it was not enough for criminal charges.

Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, did tell me on the show last week that ethical judgments are ultimately not your job. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICK MULVANEY, ACTING WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: That's not the job of the House Intelligence Committee. It's not the job of the House Judiciary Committee. It's not the job of the House Oversight Committee.

And, importantly, members of Congress, even if they are the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, don't get to substitute their judgment for the voters.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: What's your response, sir?

SCHIFF: Well, that is certainly the president's attitude: It's not the job of Congress to do oversight, period. And, indeed, under the GOP Congress, they did no oversight.

But it's our responsibility to root out fraud, corruption, waste, abuse, whether it rises to the level of criminality or not. If Mr. Mulvaney's standard is, Congress cannot look into anything unless there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt of crime, then Congress would be able to do little or no oversight.

That's simply not how Congress should act or ever has acted. We need to do our legitimate oversight. We need to ferret out any kind of malfeasance or abuse, whether that rises to something that the Justice Department can prosecute or not.

TAPPER: How do you respond to the suggestion made by every Republican on your committee -- they have called for you to step down -- that you going out there before this report came out and saying that there's evidence of collusion, and then Mueller comes out and says, we don't find any evidence conspiracy or even coordination, that -- that what you're saying and what you said is irresponsible, because you're kind of muddying the waters?

There is a standard that Mueller has. And then you have a different standard. And maybe people got confused, and maybe Democrats got their hopes up.

SCHIFF: Look, I think there is a different standard here between the Republicans and the Democrats.

The Republicans seem to think that, as long as you can't prove it's a crime, then all is fair love and war, that it's all OK, what the Trump administration, the Trump campaign does.

I don't feel that way. I don't think most Americans feel that way. And, Jake, what I have been saying all along is that the evidence that I'm concerned about is in plain sight. And I have used those words probably 100 times.

If the fact that the president called on the Russians to hack Hillary's e-mails, if the fact that Don Jr. said he would love to get the Russians' help -- all of this is in plain sight -- if the Republicans think that's perfectly fine because it doesn't amount to the crime of conspiracy, then we are going to part company.

And I'm not going to stop making the point that we should hold our president, our campaigns, our elected officials to a higher standard than mere criminality.

TAPPER: And you have no regrets of anything you have said in the last couple years?

SCHIFF: I don't regret calling out this president for what I consider deeply unethical and improper conduct, not a bit.

And I think the moment that we start to think that -- that we should back away from exposing this kind of malfeasance and corruption is a dangerous point.

Now, Jake, you have asked the question many times, is there a risk of doing too much oversight? There is a risk when you have an immoral president, a president lacking in basic character who violates the norms of office. There is an even greater risk of doing too little oversight.

So I make no apologies for that. And I'm going to continue holding this administration accountable.

TAPPER: I don't think that's exactly how I phrased that question, but I take your point. I do want to ask you, sir. Your fellow Democratic chairman Richard

Neal formerly requested President Trump's tax returns from the IRS this week, writing that his committee is considering legislation about how the IRS audits a president.

[09:10:03]

President Trump's lawyers fired back, saying Democrats are just playing politics. They write -- quote -- "If Chairman Neal genuinely wants to review how the IRS audits presidents, why is he seeking tax returns and return information covering the four years before President Trump took office?" -- unquote.

Why do Democrats need President Trump's tax returns from four years before he took office?

SCHIFF: Well, first, the president marveled that Chairman Neal wasn't seeking 10 years and was only seeking six years.

I will leave it to Chairman Neal to explain what year period he chose. But I think it goes to the gravamen of this problem. And that is that the president appoints the head of the IRS or the lawyer for the IRS.

The IRS is supposed to conduct an examination of the president's returns. This is a president who has resisted any oversight or inquiry into his affairs. And so I think the chairman of Ways and Means has every right to determine, is the IRS following its own policy and protocols?

But I will also say this, Jake. There is no legal ground for them here. The statute says, the IRS shall provide these returns to the Congress upon request.

When the Republicans asked similarly for returns when they were running that committee, including the returns of the Obama for America organization, he gave no explanation for why he sought those returns or how many returns he was seeking or what organizations. He just asked, and the IRS says, you can have them because we shall provide them.

And I think that's how it's going to end up here too.

TAPPER: All right, Democratic Congressman and Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Adam Schiff of California, thanks for your time, sir. Appreciate it.

SCHIFF: Thanks, Jake.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source