Fox News "Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace" - Transcript: Interview with Rep. Jerry Nadler

Interview

WALLACE: On Wednesday, former Special Counsel Robert Mueller faces five hours of questioning before two House Committees on his investigation of Russian interference in the 2020 campaign and possible obstruction of justice by President Trump. Some Democrats are counting on the testimony to convince Americans the House should impeach the president or at least to damage his chances for reelection. Joining us now exclusively from New York, Jerry Nadler. Mr. Chairman, Robert Mueller has made it clear he doesn't want to testify and he's not going to go beyond what he wrote in his report. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERT MUELLER, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: We chose those words carefully and the work speaks for itself. And the report is my testimony. I would not provide information beyond that which is already public in any appearance before Congress.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: So, why are you putting Mueller and the country through this?

NADLER: Well, we want the American people to hear directly from Special Counsel Mueller what his investigation found. The president and the attorney general and others have spent the last few months systematically lying to the American people about what the investigation found, they've said that it found no collusion, that it found no obstruction, that it exonerated a president. All three of those statements are absolute lies. It found a great deal of collusion, it found a great deal of -- of obstruction of justice by the president and it found -- and it pointedly refused to exonerate the president.

We think it's very important for the American people to hear directly what the facts are because this is a president who has violated the law six ways from Sunday. If anyone else had been accused of what the report finds the president had done, they would have been indicted. It's important that -- that we not have a lawless administration and a lawless president, it's important that the people see where we're at and what we're doing, what we're dealing with.

WALLACE: I want to -- I want to follow up with what you just said, that he's violated the law six ways from Sunday, if he weren't the president he'd be indicted. You've read the 448 page report. Do you believe the president is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, the marker for impeachment by the House?

NADLER: I think there is very substantial -- well, the report presents very substantial evidence that the president is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors and we have to present -- or let Mueller present those facts to the American people and then see where we go from there, because the administration must be held accountable and no president can be -- can be above the law.

WALLACE: Your committee, though, has said -- your committee staff has said that you expect that Mueller could be fairly uncooperative, could give yes- or-no answers, could refer -- when you ask a question about an incident, refer you to a specific page in -- in the report, look at page 224 in volume two. I understand that you're trying to educate the people -- people have said see the movie, not read the book, but what if this whole thing ends up being a dud?

NADLER: Well, we hope it won't end up being a dud and we're going to ask specific questions about look at page 344 paragraph two, please read it, does that describe obstruction of justice and did you -- did you find that the president did that, for example.

WALLACE: Meanwhile, Republicans say that they're going to use their time - - and they get equal time, five minutes along with each of your members -- to ask about what they call the corrupt cabal, and that's the idea that there was FBI misconduct in launching and then conducting the investigation of the president. Isn't there a real chance, since what you're asking about is stuff that's already in the report and they're going to ask about stuff that isn't in the report, that the Republicans could end up getting more out of this hearing than Democrats do?

NADLER: Well I doubt it, because the fact is that those charges have been investigated by the inspector general and have been found to be baseless. They will do whatever they can --

WALLACE: Well, wait, wait, wait. I mean, forgive me, sir, but they -- he -- they had -- the inspector general hasn't investigated or at least hasn't come out with his report on the conduct of the Trump investigation.

NADLER: Well, the inspector general came out with -- most of what they're talking about is the -- is the Hillary investigation and the beginning of the Trump investigation. And we have -- it's been very clear that the Trump investigation was not predicated on the so-called dossier that they're talking about. There was nothing wrong with the -- with the FISA application. All the things they're talking about have gone through. The inspector general found that there was nothing wrong with the other half of what they're talking about, which is the Hillary investigation. He's finishing it.

If they want to debate, or discuss, I should say, this irrelevancy, let them waste the time. But the -- the -- what's before the American people now is the conduct of this president and what Mueller found about the conduct of this president and where we go from here.

WALLACE: Some Democrats, including perhaps you, hope that this hearing will breathe new life into the possibility of impeaching the president. And here's what the president has to say about that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: How many bites of the apple do you get? We've gone through 500 witnesses 2,500 subpoenas. I've let them interview my lawyers, I've let them -- because I had nothing to do with Russia. Now that's come out. There was no collusion.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: And here's what a Wall Street Journal poll from earlier this month found. Twenty-one percent say there's enough evidence for Congress to begin impeachment hearings, 27 percent say Congress should continue investigating, but 50 percent say there should be no hearings and that Mr. Trump should finish his term as president. Chairman, hasn't the country largely moved on from the Trump investigation?

NADLER: No, the country has not moved on. I mean, they've -- the -- the president and the attorney general have lied to the American people about what was in the Mueller report, about the fact that -- you just heard the president saying they found no collusion. That was not true. That it found no obstruction, that is not true. And they've had months about lying to the American people, people don't read a 448 page report. I believe that when people hear what was in the Mueller report, then we'll be able -- we'll be in a position to begin holding the president accountable and to make this less of a lawless administration.

And the fact of the matter is that the president has also been lawless in telling all witnesses not to obey Congressional subpoenas, not to testify at all, and that is beyond the pale of the Constitution.

WALLACE: Well let me pick up on that, because regardless of what Mueller says, you have said that you intend to continue this investigation and one of the things that you very much want to do is to talk to former White House Counsel Don McGahn, who was involved in a number of these key incidents when, according to the Mueller report, the president told him to get the -- the special counsel's investigation ended. The White House has refused to make him available and you've suggested you're going to go to court after the Mueller hearing. How soon do you plan to take that before a judge?

NADLER: Within a couple of days. That -- if the House counsel weren't so busy enforcing subpoenas -- other subpoenas, we would've done that before. The fact is that we have never seen a situation where the president, the White House stonewalls Congress on subpoenas. That was article three of the Nixon impeachment, that they stonewalled subpoenas. Here the president said outright, out loud that he's stonewalling all subpoenas, which they are doing, and that's an invasion of the separation of powers and it's a -- and a core function of the -- of the duty of Congress to hold the administration accountable to the American people.

WALLACE: You are also ask Hope Hicks, who was a former top White House advisor and is now an executive vice president of Fox Corporation, you're asking her to come back before your committee to clarify earlier comments she made in testimony before your committee about her knowledge of the hush payments to Stormy Daniels. Her lawyer came out with a statement after you requested her to come back. He issued this statement. "Ms. Hicks stands by her truthful testimony that she first became aware of this issue in early November 2016 as the result of press inquiries. Does that satisfy you, Mr. Chairman?

NADLER: No, that does not, because that would seem to go against the evidence that -- that was released by the court in the -- in -- in -- in the Michael Cohen -- in -- in the -- I think it was the Michael Cohen case the other day. So we've asked her to clarify how her testimony was truthful given what the court -- the court filings reveal. But again, the key here is that all people owe the public their evidence, all witnesses all witnesses owe the public their evidence and it is our duty to make sure that people like McGahn testify, for example, because as the Mueller report showed, the president asked him to fire the special counsel so as to stop the investigation into the president.

He asked him to deny publicly they've done so. Both of those, if true, are criminal acts by the president.

WALLACE: But I just want to pick up on one last thing with regard to Hope Hicks. This information came out when the judge ordered it released after the prosecutor in New York indicated that the case -- the hush money case is closed and they're not going to bring charges against anyone else. So isn't that kind of a dry hole? Because according to reports, the prosecutor, in effect, found that there was not sufficient evidence to show that President Trump actually knowingly, intentionally violated campaign finance laws.

NADLER: Well first of all, there was no -- I don't think that was (ph) the latter finding. He could not consider indicting the president because it is the policy of the Justice Department pursuant to the office of legal counsel memo (ph) that a sitting president may not be indicted no matter what, no matter what the evidence. Now, the finding, you know, in that case -- Michael Cohen was sent to prison for these -- campaign finance violation, done at the behest of Donald Trump, in the interest of Donald Trump.

And the indictment said that Cohen did it at the request and direction of Individual 1, who has now been identified as President Trump.

So, from a legal point of view, he is subject to indictment for that after the election. The fact that they have closed the case doesn't mean that they found him not guilty in any way.

WALLACE: Chairman Nadler, thank you. Thanks for joining us.

And we will, of course, be watching your hearing on Wednesday.

NADLER: It should be interesting.

Source