Gowdy on what House Dems can expect out of a Mueller hearing


AUSTAN.>>ALWAYS A PLEASURE, MARTHA. THANKS FOR HAVING ME.>>Martha: THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE IS HOPING TO HEAR FROM SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER A WEEK FROM THIS WEDNESDAY. THE PRESIDENT TWEETING THAT THIS IS JUST A POLITICAL MOVE, HE SAYS, BY DEMOCRATS QUOTE WHY WOULD THE DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS NOW NEED ROBERT MUELLER TO TESTIFY? ARE THEY LOOKING FOR A RE-DO BECAUSE THEY HATED SEEING THE STRONG NO COLLUSION CONCLUSION HE WRITES? THERE WAS NO CRIME, EXCEPT ON THE OTHER SIDE, INCREDIBLY NOT COVERED IN THE REPORT? AND NO OBSTRUCTION HE WROTE. BOB MUELLER SHOULD NOT TESTIFY. NO REDOS FOR THE DEMS. HERE NOW TREY GOWDY FORMER HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN AND KEN STARR FORMER INDEPENDENT COUNSEL AND AUTHOR OF CONTEMPT MEMOIR CLINTON INVESTIGATION. GREAT TO HAVE BOTH OF YOU HERE TONIGHT. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. JUST ON THAT QUESTION FIRST, I GUESS, LET ME GO TO YOU FIRST, TREY GOWDY. DO YOU THINK THAT ROBERT MUELLER SHOULD TESTIFY?>>WELL, IT’S GOING TO BE HARD. HE IS NOT GOING TO HAVE A LOT TO HAVE SAY BECAUSE DOJ POLICY DOES NOT ALLOW HIM TO DISCUSS DEROGATORY INFORMATION AGAINST AN UNCHARGED PERSON. SO WHAT THE DEMOCRATS WANT IS FOR HIM TO PAINSTAKINGLY GO THROUGH ALL OF THE INFORMATION HE HAD THAT LED TO OBJECT DESTRUCTION OR THAT THEY THINK LEADS TO OBJECT DESTRUCTION AND THE CONCLUSION IS HE DIDN’T INDICT HIM. SO DOJ POLICY DOESN’T ALLOW THAT CONVERSATION. I’M NOT SURE WHAT ELSE HE CAN TALK ABOUT.>>Martha: SO YOU ARE SAYING THE UNREDACTED INFORMATION IS THE ONE THING THEY DON’T ALREADY HAVE. BECAUSE EVERYTHING ELSE IS ALREADY IN THE REPORT, CORRECT? THERE IS NOT MUCH HE COULD ADD TO THAT.>>WELL, EVEN THE UNREDACTED INFORMATION, I MEAN, SOME OF IT BY LAW HE CANNOT DISCUSS. LOTS OF IT BY LAW HE CANNOT DISCUSS. BUT EVEN WHAT IS UNREDACTED, THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE POLICY IS YOU CANNOT DISCUSS DEROGATORY INFORMATION AGAINST SOMEONE YOU DID NOT INDICT. THE DEPARTMENT DOESN’T SPEAK IN PRESS CONFERENCES AND REPORTS. THEY USE INDICTMENTS. EITHER INDICT OR SHUT UP. AND HE DIDN’T INDICT.>>Martha: I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY WOULD PROBABLY LOVE TO ASK ROBERT MUELLER, KEN STARR IS ABOUT HIS DECISION NOT TO INDICT AND WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM THE ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT CAN YOU INDICT A SITTING PRESIDENT. WHY HEARD FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BILL BARR. AND HE SAID THERE WERE SEVERAL INSTANCES WHERE SEVERAL PEOPLE WERE IN THE ROOM AND ROBERT MUELLER SAID CLEARLY ACCORDING TO BILL BARR’S TESTIMONY I’M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE OLC DECISION THE OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL DECISION. I NAUGHT AASIDE AND DECIDED WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN INDICT OR DIFFERENT OR NIFFERENT OR NOTFERENT OR NOT TRENT OR NOT TOENT OR NOT TO IT OR NOT TO INDICT. IF HE HAS A DIFFERENT STORY THAN THAT, THAT WILL BE NEWS.>>YES, IN FACT, I THINK HE WILL NOT SAY THAT BECAUSE HE HAD HIS OPPORTUNITY, THAT VERY ELABORATE REPORT, 446 PAGES, SO, HE HAS GOT TO STICK WITH THE REPORT. HE CAN’T HAVE A LATTER DAY INSPIRATION. AND SO IN TERMS OF THE PRESIDENT, THE PRESIDENT HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DIRECT ROBERT MUELLER THROUGH BILL BARR NOT TO TESTIFY. BUT I DOUBT THAT THAT’S GOING TO HAPPEN. I DON’T THINK THAT THE PRESIDENT IS GOING TO CROSS HIS OWN ATTORNEY GENERAL OHIO THINK HAS BEEN DOING A GREAT JOB UNDER THIS UNREMITTING CRITICISM. BUT, IN TERMS OF BOB MUELLER, HE HAS GOT TO STAY WITH WHAT HE HAS WRITTEN. THOSE 446 PAGES, THE REDACTIONS, I HAVE BEEN THROUGH THESE NOT THE REDACTIONS BUT I HAVE SEEN WHERE THE REDACTIONS ARE. 10% OF BOOK ONE, WHICH IS THE REAL BOOK THAT’S ON RUSSIAN COLLUSION THERE WAS NO COLLUSION. THERE WERE CONTACTS, NOT COLLUSION. LET’S FACE IT THE NAME OF THE GAME NOW IS DO WE IMPEACH. THIS IS THE WHOWRPTION IS ALL HOL HOUSE OFREPRESENTATIVES IS ALL ABOUT. BOOK TWO.>>Martha: PUT UP A QUOTE FROM “THE WASHINGTON POST PIECE ON WHAT NANCY PELOSI TOLD DEMOCRATS ON THAT BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. SHE SAID TRUMP HAD ENGAGED IN TYPE OF BEHAVIOR THAT PROMPTED THE MOVE TO IMPEACH NIXON IN 1974. THIS PERSON HAS NOT ONLY IGNORED SUBPOENAS, HE HAS SAID THAT HE IS NOT GOING TO HONOR OUR SUBPOENAS. WHAT MORE DO WOULD WHAT MORE DO WEULD WHAT MORE DO WE WD WHAT MORE DO WE WANT? SHE HAS SOUNDED AT TIMES LIKE SHE IS AGAINST IMPEACHMENT. LIKE AT TIMES THERE IS NO CHOICE, TREY GOWDY. BUT, CLEARLY, THIS IS THE POLITICAL DECISION THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO WRAP THEIR ARMS AROUND.>>YEAH. THE REASON I’M SMILING, MARTHA, THE DEMOCRATS AND THE D.C. MEDIA NEVER MET A SUBPOENA FOR THE FIRST SIX YEARS I WAS IN CONGRESS THEY COULD EMBRACE. THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION ROUTINELY IGNORED REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION SO, GOD KNOWS THAT CAN’T BE AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE. I DIDN’T THINK ROD ROSENSTEIN SHOULD BE IMPEACHED I DIDN’T THINK JOHN KOSKINEN SHOULD BE IMPEACHED. IT IS THE POLITICAL DEATH PENALTY. YOU NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL WHEN YOU USE OR HOW YOU AUTHORIZE THE USE OF WHAT IS TANTAMOUNT TO THE POLITICAL DEATH PENALTY. THEY ARE NOT GOING TO SUCCEED. THE JURY IS NOT GOING TO GO R. GO RAH LONG. THIS IS ABOUT FUNDRAISING AND PLAY INDICATING YOUR BASE.>>Martha: IN TERMS OF WHAT YOU SAID EARLIER KEN STARR YOU SAID BOB MUELLER DESERVES THE SHARPEST CRITICISM FOR SANDBAGGING BILL BARR. WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT.>>TERRIBLE. HIS LETTER LEAKED ON THE VERY EVE OF BILL BARR’S TESTIMONY WAS ESSENTIALLY, I BELIEVE, AN UNFAIR WHINY COMPLAINT WHEN HE WASN’T SAYING THAT THE LETTER, THE MARCH 24TH LETTER FROM BILL BARR SUMMARIZED THE CONCLUSIONS WHICH HE WAS OBLIGED TO DO. THAT WASN’T A DISCRETIONARY CALL HE WAS OBLIGED TO DO EXACTLY WHAT HE DID. AND THEN HERE COMES BOB MUELLER WITH THIS LETTER WHICH IS THEN LEAKED. THAT IS TO ME THE UNFORGIVABLE SIN. HE, BOB MUELLER, BADLY INJURED THIS ATTORNEY GENERAL AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DIDN’T DESERVE THAT BUT, OF COURSE, THAT CREATED ITS OWN HUGE FIRESTORM INCLUDING SUGGESTIONS THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WAS TOTALLY MISCHARACTERIZING THE REPORT AND SO FORTH. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT MARCH 24 LETTER, I THINK BILL BARR WAS HONESTLY

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *