CNN "CNN Newsroom" - Transcript: "Interview with Rep. John Garamendi"

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: He is the National Security Council's top Ukraine expert. A member -- serving member of the military. Could he also be the witness Democrats have been hoping for? Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman just arrived on Capitol Hill. These are pictures just moments ago. His testimony gets underway any moment now. He is the first person who was actually on that now infamous July 25th call between Trump and the Ukrainian president that is the focus of the House impeachment inquiry.

Joining us now to discuss, Congressman John Garamendi. He's a Democrat from California, member of the Armed Services Committee.

Congressman, we appreciate you taking the time this morning.

REP. JOHN GARAMENDI (D-CA): Good to be with you.

SCIUTTO: For weeks now, since the whistleblower's complaint first came to light, the principal Trump complaint about it, or criticism, as well from his allies, has been that it's all based on hearsay. Now we have someone who was on that call and says he heard the same thing and expressed concerns. Does this put the hearsay argument to bed in your view?

GARAMENDI: Well, it's one more step in that process and certainly a very big and important step. Others have come forward with direct information, not so much on the phone call, but the issue surrounding it. I'm thinking of Ambassador Taylor specifically here.

And we also do not know the exact testimony given in many of the depositions, but this is a very, very important moment. This is a person that was there.

There are others that will be asked to testify. And when we do, we will have a first-person account of what actually took place. And, really, we ought to get the tape itself that's hidden in that super computer or super safe computer somewhere in the bowels of the White House.

SCIUTTO: You're right, where many of these conversations were moved to -- GARAMENDI: Exactly.

SCIUTTO: To protect them from eyes, even within the administration.

I want to quote from Vindman's opening statement here because it gives us a vision into his sworn testimony.

[09:35:04]

He says the following, and this gets to whether Ambassador Sondland, Trump appointee, U.N. ambassador, lied in his testimony. So Vindman says that Ambassador Sondland emphasized the importance that Ukraine deliver the investigation into the 2016 election, the Bidens, Burisma. I stated to Ambassador Sondland that his statements were inappropriate, that the request to investigate Biden and his son had nothing to do with national security and that such investigations were not something the NSC was going to get involved in or push. So he expressed his misgiving.

He also says that Dr. Hill, Fiona Hill --

GARAMENDI: Right.

SCIUTTO: The now former Russia expert in the NSC, then entered the room, asserted to Ambassador Sondland that his statements were inappropriate. OK, so you have those two folks who voiced their misgivings.

GARAMENDI: Correct.

SCIUTTO: Sondland testified if Ambassador Bolton, Dr. Hill or others harbored any misgivings about the propriety of what we were doing, they never shared those misgivings with me then or later.

Has this testimony now made a liar of Ambassador Sondland?

GARAMENDI: Well, it certainly raises questions, doesn't it, about the voracity of his statements. The fact of the matter is that the president's allies have been doing their very best to first stonewall, then to do character assassinations and misdirect or flat out lie. We'll see what comes of Sondland. It doesn't look good for him. And, yes, that would be something you can go to jail for if, in fact, you lied under oath.

SCIUTTO: Should he be called back to testify, to reconcile that contradictory testimony?

GARAMENDI: Well, I think he'll probably have a chance to do that, perhaps in open hearing. But the facts are coming out one by one, testimony by testimony. And the reality is that the president did try to extort a political favor from the Ukrainian president, from the Ukrainian government. All of which is clearly a -- his oath of office, national security, all of those questions have been raised and, quite probably, would be a campaign finance violation.

SCIUTTO: Let me ask you this. And I should give you credit here, note that you were one of the first Democrats, and you did so on this broadcast with my colleague Poppy Harlow, calling for a House wide vote on the impeachment inquiry. Now, after resisting for some number of weeks, Speaker Pelosi has called for just that. It's going to happen on Thursday.

I wonder why -- what changed. Have Democrats, have you been hearing from constituents, from voters that you need a House vote to legitimize the inquiry?

GARAMENDI: No, absolutely not. The inquiry is fully legitimate. Federal court said so just last week that it is the right and proper and legal thing for the House to do. So it's not a question of legitimacy, it's a question of arming ourselves to be fully prepared for what is going to be a very difficult fight.

I know that if I'm going into a football game, I want to be fully prepared for that encounter. And so, too, now that we move from the -- what amounts to a grand jury investigation, the depositions, to lay out the facts, to get the information, now we move into the public phase. And it's appropriate that at this point we lay out how that's going to be done, what the role is of the various committees and also making it very, very clear that the Republicans and the president have an opportunity to present their case in these open hearings. All of that is going to be in the resolution that would be voting on Thursday.

So, yes, it's all been proper all along. The judge said so. Pelosi was quite correct and now to take this additional step to lay it all out.

SCIUTTO: But the fact is this will put some Democratic House members, particularly in the swing districts, in some political danger here. I just wonder, in your view, did the Democratic leadership yield to Republican complaints here?

GARAMENDI: No, I don't think so. I think that it's the right thing to do. To lay it out in the public, to put a resolution on the floor that this is how things will be conducted.

With regard to those few Democrats that are uncomfortable with this vote, they can always vote present and I think legitimately say that they're not prepared, given the information at this point, to vote for this resolution.

Now, they may change their mind voting one way or another later, but right now clearly the votes are available to push this resolution forward. If nothing else, Pelosi knows how to count votes.

SCIUTTO: Just very quickly before we go, have any Republican colleagues of yours told you that they are willing to vote for this inquiry to go forward?

GARAMENDI: Well, two things here. First, are they willing to vote for it? No. Do they think that the inquiry should go forward? Yes.

SCIUTTO: OK. That's a difference.

GARAMENDI: Yes, it's a difference.

SCIUTTO: Sticking your neck out or not. We see a lot of that.

GARAMENDI: You got it.

SCIUTTO: Congressman John Garamendi, thanks very much for coming on.

GARAMENDI: Thank you, Jim. Bye-bye.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source