MSNBC "All in with Chris Hayes" - Transcript: "Rudy Giuliani butt-dials NBC reporter."
Interview
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
VELSHI: Good evening from Washington D.C., I'm Ali Velshi in for Chris Hayes. One of the ongoing arguments at the White House has been making about the impeachment inquiry is that they do not have to comply because it is not a formal impeachment inquiry. They say, the White House says, it does not count until there is a formal vote on the House floor. Well, today a federal judge blew a huge hole in that argument saying that the impeachment inquiry is legal. "Even in cases of presidential impeachment, a House Resolution has never in fact been required to begin an impeachment inquiry." And because of that, Judge Barrel Howell ruled that the Department of Justice must turn over to Congress all the grand jury material that has been redacted in the Mueller report by next Wednesday. Even more specifically, Judge Howell said, "The Department of Justice claims that existing law bars disclosure of to the Congress of Grand Jury information. DOJ is wrong." I should tell you, usually Congress does not have a right to view grand jury material. But back in 1974, in the midst of the Nixon impeachment proceedings, the court ruled that lawmakers were allowed to look at Grand Jury material so they could weigh in on impeachment. And so now, a lot of the stuff that we did not know from the Mueller report will be turned over to the Democratic-controlled House Judiciary Committee pending appeal of the ruling. The decision is a big win for Democrats who have wanted to see the full Mueller report since it came out. But it also boasts -- boost of legitimacy of their court claim related to the impeachment inquiry. Just today, the House impeachment committee subpoenaed depositions from to Office of Management and Budget officials and State Department officials after the administration blocked them from appearing. It's been three weeks since the first deposition in the impeachment inquiry. And NBC News reports that the 65 hours or so of testimony from current and former officials has painted a clear picture that President Trump was demanding a quid pro quo from the Ukrainian government, and things are not looking better for the President. Next week, current national security official -- National Security Council official Tim Morrison is expected to corroborate some of the most damning testimony that we've heard this week. And if he does appear on Thursday, Morrison will be the first person who heard President Trump's infamous call with the Ukrainian president to testify. He will also be the first current White House official to testify. Morrison's attorney tells NBC News that he plans to appear if he subpoenaed. Even more concerning for President Trump, NBC News reports attorneys for Tim Morrison's old boss, former National Security Adviser John Bolton had been in contact with the House impeachment committee officials. Remember, the New York Times reports that former National Security Council official Fiona Hill already testified that Bolton was so concerned about the rogue foreign policy being run in part by U.S. ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, and the acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, that he told her "I am not part of whatever drug deal Sondland and Mulvaney are cooking up." Publicly, President Trump removed Bolton from his position just days before the Ukraine story began to leak and criticized him in a tweet. "I disagreed strongly with many of his suggestions, as did others in the administration." This is Trump tweeting about Bolton. Now, Bolton has remained mostly silence since he was just a -- silent since he was dismissed. But he did tell the Washington Post Robert Costa, "I will have my say in due course." And it now appears that John Bolton might have his say in a sworn deposition before the House committees on the impeachment of his former boss, President Donald Trump. Joining me now is one of the Congresspeople on the Judiciary Committee which will get to see the less redacted Mueller report, Democrat Congressman -- Democratic Congressman Joe Neguse of Colorado. Congressman, good to see you again. Thank you for being with us.
REP. JOE NEGUSE (D-CO): Good to be with you, Ali.
VELSHI: Let's just understand. This has been a little while since we've had this conversation about the redactions and Congress' need to see them. What's the argument that the Judiciary Committee has made that it needs to see the redacted information, and what do you think you'll see as a result?
NEGUSE: Well, a couple of things. I think as you know, the argument was that ultimately the House was fully engaged and is engaged in an impeachment inquiry. And therefore, under Rule 6E, had every right to access these important materials, as the committee and the committee's rather now make a decision as to how to proceed. I would just say, I think you've got the historical context right at the beginning of the program, but I -- it's important for this victory not to be seen through a partisan lens. Ultimately, in my view, it's not a win for Democrats, but ultimately a win for the American people. It was a major victory for the Constitution and for the fundamental rule of law in our country for Judge Howell to ultimately conclude what we all knew to be true, which was that the House was engaged and is engaged in an impeachment inquiry and that these ludicrous process arguments made by the Republicans really are untenable. And you know, I think the fact that Judge Howell, you know, rejected these frivolous and, in many cases, spurious arguments made by the Department of Justice, to me it's a good day for democracy. So ultimately, obviously the committees are going to proceed under the path that we've chartered. It's going to be important for the judiciary committee to access these materials and we'll go from there.
VELSHI: So you mentioned 6E, Grand Jury testimony. Tell me what you -- generally speaking, because we don't have access to that as reporters, what do you expect to learn? Are there dots that you saw in the Mueller report that you believe will be connected because you get to see this otherwise redacted information?
NEGUSE: Sure, so much of this is detailed in the litigation filings that the committee submitted in the district court litigation. Ultimately, there were a number of unanswered questions, as you know, a number of gaps that we believe could be filled by the grand jury materials, the evidence that was submitted before the grand jury. There also as you know, a number of questions that have popped up as to who testified before the jury and who did not, and some recent DOJ filings that created some further mystery around that particular question. So, look, I think it is important to just contextually remember. I mean, at the end of the day, the committee has to have access to this material, is entitled to this material under the rules of both the House and ultimately precedent as was cited by Judge Howell. But right now, the focus should remain and will remain the abuse of power that the President engaged in with respect to the Ukraine scandal. As you know, that that posed --
VELSHI: Right. So I want you --
NEGUSE: That conduct -- go ahead.
VELSHI: Sorry, Congressman. Draw a line for me that in between those two, because the focus and the number of members of Congress who have said that they would vote in favor of an impeachment inquiry, which is well beyond the amount that would be -- the number that would be needed to open one is about the abuse of power generally speaking related to Ukraine. What's the link now that you and your fellow Democrats will make between that inquiry and the Mueller report?
NEGUSE: So it's a good question. The Speaker early on made clear that the six committees of jurisdiction would be proceeding under this Impeachment Inquiry under an umbrella so to speak. And so ultimately, the focus, as I said, will be and should be on the Ukraine scandal and the realities of the President's abuse of power and his betrayal of the Constitution, in my view, when he sought to have a foreign power interfere in the presidential election in 2020, and ultimately, undermining the integrity of our election. So I think that Chairman Schiff has done a masterful job at gleaning significant evidence, much of which you described in the opening of your program. The other committees are going to continue to do their work. And as you know, much of that work is tied up in litigation, some of which we're discussing tonight. So that work is going to continue. I imagine the Department of Justice will appeal this decision. I would hope that they would not but I have no illusions under this attorney general who, of course, is acting more like the President's Personal attorney than an attorney general and chief law enforcement officer. I imagine they'll proceed with an appeal. So we're going to follow the facts where they lead us and that is important work that lays ahead before the Congress.
VAUSE: I was just checking my phone to make sure that that appeal hasn't been filed yet because I think you're right, it probably will happen. But thank you, Congressman, good to see you again. Congressman. Joe Neguse.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source