NBC "Meet the Press" - Transcript: Interview with Rep. Adam Schiff

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

CHUCK TODD:

And joining me now is the House's lead impeachment manager, Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff. Chairman Schiff, welcome back to Meet the Press.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF:

Thank you.

CHUCK TODD:

Let me start with getting your reaction. I know you did some reaction to the president's legal team yesterday. But do you -- what message do you believe they're trying to send to those jurors in there? And do you see their attempt at a defense being mostly about making the case against witnesses?

REP. ADAM SCHIFF:

I do. I think they're deathly afraid of what witnesses will have to say. And so their whole strategy has been deprive the public of a fair trial. They don't frame it that way, but that's in essence it. They have a very heavy burden though with that because the American people understand what a fair trial is. A fair trial requires witnesses. A fair trial does not consist of the person who is charged agreeing with the judges to deprive the prosecution from being able to make a case. So it's hard to argue, "We don't want to hear the evidence," particularly when they say, "We should hear from more direct witnesses who talked to the president, but we're not going to allow them to be called." What was so striking to me really about their case was that they basically acknowledge the scheme. They don't really contest the president's scheme. They don't say, "No, he didn't try to get foreign help in the election." They don't say that there was no evidence that he was conditioning the aid. They just try to make the case that, "You don't need a fair trial here. You can make this go away." But, look, if they're successful in depriving the country of a fair trial, there is no exoneration. There is no exoneration. Americans will recognize that the country did not get what the founders intended because they put the word try in the Constitution for a reason.

CHUCK TODD:

They -- the other part of the president's defense is to call into question the investigators, whether it's you or the intelligence community. Jay Sekulow basically said, "The president had every -- has every right to question," essentially defending the idea that the president does have suspicions about Ukraine's role in 2016, going after the intelligence community. Were you surprised that the president's counsel did that on the floor of the Senate?

REP. ADAM SCHIFF:

I was surprised. I think it was a huge mistake. Basically, what he did, and this was really following the presentation we made the day before about the threat the president poses to the country because he continues to choose to believe people like Rudy Giuliani, he continues to believe Russian propaganda over his own intelligence agencies, over his own FBI director and that makes him dangerous to our country. And what do they do? They go and double down on that same crazy conspiracy theory, that Ukraine hacked the DNC server. It's astonishing. And, you know, for -- on the first day of the president's defense to say, "The president should disbelieve his own intelligence agencies. He has every right to believe Vladimir Putin," I wouldn't want to be making that argument.

CHUCK TODD:

You were also a star of their defense as well, including, I think, an exchange you and I had about the Russian collusion issue, as well as your opening statement on the phone call. Any regrets about either of those two moments yourself?

REP. ADAM SCHIFF:

No. And, you know, I'm glad you asked the question about collusion because, again, they may be perpetuating the president's talking points, but they've got it exactly wrong. Bob Mueller did not find that there was no collusion. In fact, in the first couple pages of the report he said, "We don't address that issue. What we found is we could not prove criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt." But nonetheless, what he did find is that the president's -- the Russians offered the president dirt on his opponent and they said they would love to have it. Literally put it in writing. But the more important point, Chuck, and the relevance of the Mueller report to all this, because we're not trying the Mueller report, is that this isn't the first time that he invited foreign interference. That is the background of the current effort to get a foreign nation to help him cheat in an election. You can't say it's an accident when you repeatedly are seeking foreign help. And in this case, we proved overwhelmingly that they were leveraging hundreds of millions of dollars that Ukraine needed in military aid and a deeply sought-after Oval Office meeting to coerce Ukraine into helping him cheat.

CHUCK TODD:

The president's defense team also brought up the FISA issue sort of in general because there was a report this week that the Justice Department has now said that those renewal applications, two of them to survey Carter Page, lacked probable cause, should not have been authorized, and essentially, I think, tried to freeze any information that was collected around it. What's your reaction to the Justice Department new decision on that?

REP. ADAM SCHIFF:

Well, look, you know, for the purposes of the impeachment trial, it's a pretty remarkable argument, which is because there flaws and serious flaws in a FISA application involving a single person, Carter Page, the refore the president has every right to disbelieve the unanimous conclusion of the intelligence agencies that Russia interfered in our last election, they'll likely interfere in the next election. And therefore the president is right to investigate his political rival, Joe Biden. I don't know how one thing follows from the other. But it shows, I think, the weakness of their argument that there was some justification for the president using the power of his office to investigate his opponent. And I just don't think you can make that case persuasively to the American people.

CHUCK TODD:

Where are you on witness reciprocity?

REP. ADAM SCHIFF:

Look, I think the president has the right to call relevant witnesses, just as we do, in his defense. He doesn't have the right to call irrelevant witnesses or witnesses who aren't fact witnesses.

CHUCK TODD:

Well, if the Senate says he does, why not then -- I mean, that's the way the trial rules work. I mean, I understand where you come from, but if the Senate says he can, then he can.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF

Well, the Senate can make whatever decision the Senate can make. And the American people can judge that decision. But if we're talking about a fair trial, if the Senators are going to give content to their oath to be impartial administrators of justice, they can't say, "Well, we're going to allow the president to trade witnesses that don't shed any light on the facts, but would allow him to, once again, try to smear his opponent. We're going to make that the pound of flesh. We're going to make that the cost of calling relevant witnesses.'

CHUCK TODD:

If they're irrelevant, what are you afraid of? Won't that be exposed?

REP. ADAM SCHIFF:

Well, it's not a question of what I'm afraid of. I'm not afraid of anything. The question is: Should the trial be used as a vehicle to smear his opponent? Is that the purpose of a Senate trial? Or is it to get to the truth? Because if it's to get to the truth, Hunter Biden can't tell us anything about the withholding of the military funding. Hunter Biden can't tell us why the president wouldn't let the president of Ukraine into the Oval Office. Hunter Biden can't tell us anything about that. And so, you know, it's a false choice to say, "Well, if the House gets to call the witnesses, doesn't the president?" Yes, we both get to call witnesses. We both get to call relevant o nes. And one other point on this, Chuck, which is important. We have a very capable justice sitting right behind me who can make decisions about the materiality of witnesses. We trust the Supreme Court justice, the chief justice, to make those decisions. And one final thing, if you will.

CHUCK TODD:

Okay.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF:

The president's team is pushing out the argument, "We don't have time to call witnesses. We'd really love to have these people testify. We just don't have time to do it. It would be too inconvenient." That's a dodge. We have a justice who can make decisions if there's any legitimate claim of privilege. It can go to the justice --

CHUCK TODD:

Their argument is that it interferes in the presidential election, that we start to creep too close to it and that basically, "At what point should voters have this decision versus the Senate?"

REP. ADAM SCHIFF:

Well, it's a broader argument than that. Their argument is, "You cannot impeach a president in his first term because it will either overturn the will of the voters who elected him or prevent him from being on the ballot the next time." Now, the remedy of impeachment, if it's to being a meaningful remedy, means that you can remove a president from office and if a president commits serious misconduct in his first term, he doesn't get a pass. The danger to the country is particularly acute when the conduct involves threatening the integrity of the next election because that's normally the remedy. But if he is allowed to cheat in that election, it's not a proper remedy.

CHUCK TODD:

What do you make of the criticism that some Republican senators, who you might want to see vote for witnesses, didn't like your "head on a pike" comment? Murkowski, Collins, and Ernst. All three Republican senators who are -- might be open to witnesses thought you got too personal.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF:

Well, I don't think it was personal to refer to the CBS story. What may be personal though, and I think I have to be very candid about this, is I made the argument that it's going to require moral courage to stand up to this president. And this is a wrathful and vindictive president. I don't think there's any doubt about it. And if you think there is, look at the president's tweets about me today, saying that I should pay a price.

CHUCK TODD:

Do you take that as a threat?

REPRESENTATIVE ADAM SCHIFF:

I think it's intended to be. But, look, it is going to be very difficult for some of these senators to stand up to this president. It really is. There's just no question about it. And, and I want to acknowledge that. And I don't want to acknowledge it in a way that is offensive to them, but I do want to speak candidly about it. And if this weren't an issue, there wouldn't be an issue about calling witnesses. If we can't even get the senators to agree to call witnesses in a trial, it shows you just how difficult that moral courage is.

CHUCK TODD:

Well, we're going to try to have that conversation in a second. Chairman Adam Schiff, thanks for coming on, sharing your --

REP. ADAM SCHIFF:

Thanks.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source