CNN "The Situation Room" - Transcript: Interview with Rep. Jim Himes

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BLITZER: I'm about to speak with Congressman Jim Himes, who has made this dramatic announcement today. How much pressure is there right now for formal impeachment proceedings to begin? SERFATY: Well, there certainly are growing vocal calls, Wolf, and

increasing numbers among Democrats calling for a formal impeachment inquiry to be opened up.

And it was a significant statement by Congressman Himes today. He acknowledged in his statement -- notably, he says, the politics of impeachment are messy and uncertain, and it might in the short run actually serve the president's political interests.

But Himes also pointing out in the statement that -- you know, noting that the president has refused to comply with oversight, subpoenas, refused to have people come up here on Capitol Hill and testify. And he says, in his own words, the president has shown no contempt -- shown a contempt for the truth, and he says now, because of all this, it is the time to move forward.

And he does join that growing number, now 79 House Democrats, calling for an inquiry to be opened up. Notably, they are still in the minority. And perhaps more significantly, these numbers have not moved Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi an inch in her position, her very stated public position that they should just stay the course, focus on investigations and oversight -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Sunlen Serfaty up on Capitol Hill, thanks very much.

Joining me now to talk about his new position on impeachment, the House Intelligence Committee member Jim Himes.

Congressman, thanks so much for joining us.

REP. JIM HIMES (D-CT): Good evening, Wolf.

BLITZER: All right, so in the statement you released today, you laid out a long list of reasons for impeaching the president, beginning formal impeachment procedures.

Was there a specific tipping point that pushed you over the edge?

HIMES: There probably was, Wolf. It was a sort of a straw that broke the camel's back type situation.

You know the long list of the president's refusing to send people to testify to the Congress, refusing the production of documents, claiming executive privilege over and over and over again, even for things that didn't happen during his presidency.

Probably, to answer your question, what finally pushed me over the edge, amongst other things, was the week two weeks ago when the president said absolutely not to a subpoena which was looking for answers to the question of why the administration has chosen to put a citizenship question on the census, something that we know is designed to tamp down the counting of people of immigrant heritage.

And that had nothing to do with Russia. It had nothing to do with the possible challenge to his credibility as president. It was just an in-your-face no to a body, the Congress, that the president cannot say no to.

[18:10:03]

That was also, of course, the week when the inspector general came out with the remarkable and unprecedented report about Kellyanne Conway's breaking of the of the Hatch Act by doing political things on the taxpayer dime. And the president said, I don't care.

It was probably that week that I realized that this president has no interest in the law or in abiding by the Constitution, and that it was time for Congress, as a co-equal branch, to stand up and say, that will not fly.

BLITZER: You note in your statement that impeachment actually might wind up serving the president's political interests.

Do you think this could seriously endanger Democrats' chances of taking the White House in 2020?

HIMES: Well, I must say, if I thought it was going to seriously endanger their chances, I might not have done what I did today. And, of course, that's an unknowable question.

It does worry me, and it has -- that has probably been one of the considerations that has kept me on the sidelines until now.

But here's what I think, Wolf, and here's why I decided to do what I did today. I believe that, when you speak with clarity and conviction, and when you speak with moral authority and say, this is wrong, and we won't stand for it, when you remind Republicans that there will come a day when there will be a Democratic president, and they won't want that Democratic president saying absolutely not to every request of Congress, when you show the American people, as an inquiry, an impeachment inquiry, would do, the facts in a fair and open way.

In other words, there will be supporters of the president on one side, prosecutors of the president on the other. That, I suspect, is appealing to the American people. I'm a believer that the American people are fundamentally good.

And when they look at a president who writes hush money checks to porn stars with whom he may have had an affair in the Oval Office of the White House, the more those stories get out there in a fair format, in a fair forum, it's not clear to me that that would be a political problem going forward.

But, fundamentally here, what we have, Wolf, is not so much a political question as it is, are we going to stand up against a president who is interested in essentially rewriting the relationship between the Congress and the presidency?

BLITZER: And when you say he wrote the checks in the Oval Office for the hush money payments, I want you to be specific on that.

HIMES: Well, this, of course, came out a couple of months ago in the Michael Cohen situation, where Michael Cohen actually produced the checks that the president wrote to him to reimburse Michael Cohen for paying Stormy Daniels hush money.

Again, it's a pretty sordid thing. It doesn't get me quite as excited as when the president decides he wants to act like a dictator vis-a- vis the Congress. But that's just something that, I promise you, if a Democratic president had done it, my Republican colleagues would be absolutely howling for impeachment.

So -- and, again, that's just one example of the president's ongoing lawless behavior, behavior that most Americans don't subscribe to.

BLITZER: You insist you're trying not -- you're not trying to pressure the speaker, Nancy Pelosi, into opening up a formal impeachment inquiry, but that's ultimately up also to the House Judiciary Committee, not the speaker.

Should the Judiciary Committee Chairman, Jerry Nadler, open an impeachment inquiry without Speaker Pelosi's blessing?

HIMES: Well, I would urge against that.

Again, as I said in my statement today, the things that I say are the things that I say because of what I believe to be right and because of what my constituents hopefully want me to do.

The speaker of the House, she sits on a slightly higher peak than I do. She sees a little bit more than I do. She needs to think about and probably understands better than I do the way people feel elsewhere, other than in Connecticut.

And so that's why I'm deferential to her. And I say, look, here's where I am. Here's what my constituents want me to do.

But, Wolf, one of the things, to get to your question, that we cannot do as Democrats going into 2020 is that we cannot get involved in the classic Democratic circular firing squad. We have got to have the robust debate. We have got to state our opinions with strength and conviction.

But, at the end of the day, we need to remember that we're part of the team, and we need to subsume our individual beliefs and passions into an effort to make sure that we win in 2020.

Wolf, I do not believe, despite what I said today, that there is anything that this president could do or any fact that would out that would cause the president to convict -- sorry -- that would cause the Senate to convict the president.

If you agree with me on that, you know that the only way the president will face true accountability, in terms of getting him out of office, will be in the November 2020 election. We need to act like a team and make sure that we put our best foot forward in that regard.

BLITZER: Because, as you know, there are some -- plenty of vulnerable Democrats in the House of Representatives who won in 2018 in districts that potentially the president had carried in 2016, for example.

Do you believe the impeachment procedure that you now support potentially could put your majority in jeopardy? Clearly, that's what Nancy Pelosi fears.

HIMES: Yes, I personally do not believe that.

[18:15:00]

We have already seen a number of our younger members who actually come from districts where they defeated Republicans come out in support of an impeachment inquiry. And that's an important distinction. An impeachment inquiry, that's what I called for.

I'm thinking of Tom Malinowski of New Jersey, of Katie Porter in California, of Sean Casten of Illinois. All three of those members defeated Republicans. And so it looks like the politics of this, while unclear -- and the fact that they're unclear gives me pause and has probably kept me on the sideline partly, until now -- the fact that many of our brand-new members who won in Republican districts are coming out in support of an impeachment inquiry suggests that the politics of this may be evolving somewhat.

BLITZER: As you know, you're splitting with the chairman of your committee, the Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff. He's reluctant to do what you're doing right now, propose formal procedures on impeachment begin.

Are you trying to change his mind?

HIMES: Again, I'm going to be deferential to people who are in different positions than I am.

And the chairman, Adam Schiff, of the Intelligence Committee, he sees more than I do. He coordinates more with the leadership. So my objective here is not to pressure them, not to say that you're doing the wrong thing.

My objection here is just to speak with conviction and clarity about what I believe. And I find that, on moral issues -- and this is a moral issue. It's a moral issue about how we treat people, about whether we attack the free press, about whether we belittle people because of their religion, and, most importantly, about whether we stand up for our prerogatives as a Congress.

I believe, personally, that we should speak as loudly and as clearly and with as much conviction as we can. But the chairman and the leadership, they see other things that I don't see.

So, again, in the service of making sure that the Democratic majority in the House is -- gets the benefit of all sorts of different points of view, but, at the end of the day, we're an effective, mission- oriented team, I'm not going to try to put pressure on any of them.

BLITZER: Do you agree with the House Judiciary Committee chairman, Jerry Nadler, and the House Intelligence Committee chairman, Adam Schiff, that it may now be time to go ahead and subpoena Robert Mueller to come before Congress and testify publicly?

HIMES: I do. I do.

I think we are grinding through this process, not just with Robert Mueller, who doesn't want to come to Congress, because I think he doesn't want to sort of get caught up in the political whirlwind, but we're, of course, in that situation with any number of other witnesses and any number of other people who have been subpoenaed.

And I give Nancy Pelosi a lot of credit. She's shown a lot of patience. She has won in court over and over again. I imagine that we will continue to win in court.

But, yes, look, at some point, these processes have to come to an end. And if Bob Mueller won't come voluntarily, I do think it's important that we subpoena him.

BLITZER: Because, as you know, the public polls nationwide show the American public not ready to go ahead with impeachment right now, don't favor impeachment right now.

Do you think a public hearing with Mueller, for example, with others, might change public attitudes?

HIMES: I think it might. I think it might.

I suspect the number of people out there who have read all nearly 500 pages of the Mueller report, I can probably count them on two hands and two feet.

So, just having Bob Mueller -- and I think this is what he would do in his testimony -- just having Bob Mueller summarize his conclusions in the report, I think, would educate the American public.

Look -- and that's the point of an impeachment inquiry too. I have already acknowledged that an impeachment inquiry is not going to lead to the removal of this president. But what it will do is, it will, in a fair environment, because, again, you will have supporters and prosecutors of the president arguing in public, the American people will be educated about the behavior of this president.

Look, and then they should make their own conclusions. Once the information is out there, the American people, I have -- I have utter faith in them. And so this is largely an exercise in making sure they have got the facts, that they understand the facts from both perspectives, so that they can make an informed decision in 2020.

BLITZER: Congressman Jim Himes, as usual, thanks so much for joining us.

HIMES: Thank you Wolf.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source