MSBNC "The Ed Show" - Transcript
Interview
Interviewer: Ed Schultz
Joining me now is Congresswoman Jan Schakowksy. She's a member of the House Intelligence Committee and chair of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. They're going through votes right now. She joins us on the phone.
Congresswoman, thanks so much for joining us tonight.
I know you're busy, but we've got to clarify this. Are you on the same page-or should I say is Silvestre Reyes on the same page with you when it comes to this investigation possibly taking place?
REP. JAN SCHAKOWSKY (D), ILLINOIS: We're meeting tomorrow morning at 9:30 to discuss the investigation. Let me say that, as far as I'm concerned, the investigation has begun already. There's been a request for documents, for collecting information, and I think that there's no question that the committee feels that this should go forward.
Exactly, you know, what the nature is, we're going to start talking about tomorrow. But I have to say that I completely agree with you.
And the other thing is, not informing Congress, there's no excuse for that. And they're making the assumption that if Congress were informed, that we would not have endorsed a program.
But let's remember, after 9/11, everyone was on the same page. The whole world was on the same page. But to cut Congress out and deny us the oversight capacity we have, you know what? The committee might have even had a good idea. That is possible, that we might have actually been able to contribute to this.
SCHULTZ: OK. So the committee's on the same page. You're telling us unofficially this investigation is under way, you're collecting documents.
That's right.
SCHULTZ: All right. And I also had another member of the House Intelligence Committee tell me that earlier today, Adam Smith.
SCHAKOWSKY: Yes.
SCHULTZ: OK. So, the Republican narrative here is that this is all cover for Nancy Pelosi, and that there really is a "gotcha" kind of attitude amongst the Democrats that, oh, we're going to prove to them that they were really breaking the law and we're going to prove that Nancy Pelosi was right all along.
Is there some kind of "gotcha" going on here?
SCHAKOWSKY: You know, if you take Nancy Pelosi out of this, which is the proper thing to do, because this has nothing to do with her, then what are we supposed to say it's all right for the vice president to not inform the Congress, to order that the Congress not be informed, that any time the executive branch decides that they don't want to tell us what's going on? No, the law is pretty clear, as far as I'm concerned, and we at least ought to explore whether or not there have been any laws that have been broken.
SCHULTZ: What do you make of Pete Hoekstra's comment this morning, you know, playing the card that, gosh, we're going after the bad guys, the people have got to realize what this is all about? Are you going to get him on board with this investigation?
SCHAKOWSKY: Well, the assumption is that the Congress-the Democrats on the Intelligence Committee aren't for getting the bad guys, that we want them threatening Americans. I mean, he knows better than that. He absolutely knows better than that.
And so I think what Pete Hoekstra is trying to do is make it a political issue, a diversionary political issue, bring Nancy Pelosi into this when she has nothing to do with it, to take the heat off the last administration that was so irresponsible in the way it acted.
SCHULTZ: OK. Congresswoman, I know you've got to go vote, but I think the plot thickens now that we know that George Tenet canceled the program. That means that he knew that Congress wasn't briefed.
SCHAKOWSKY: That's right. Well, actually, I say that's right. I learned that from you, so I have yet to know that for sure.
SCHULTZ: All right.
Congresswoman, thanks for your time.
SCHAKOWSKY: Thanks. OK.
Source