Skip to main content

tv   House Intelligence Committee News Conference  CSPAN  February 6, 2018 3:47am-4:01am EST

3:47 am
>> the house intelligence community voted to release the democratic memo which contradicts the gop allegations that the fbi of used surveillance laws. the top democrat on the committee spoke to reporters. >> good evening, the house
3:48 am
intelligence committee voted to read them i nor -- release the minority response to the minions nunes memo. this will dispel the majority of the inaccuracies in the memo. we have also asked the support of our transmittal to the white house that unlike the process that was used with the majority memo, the department of justice and fbi be consulted, that they have the opportunity to vet any information they may be concerned about in our memo in terms of sources and methods. we want to make sure that those who are in the best information to vet that do so. the justice department and fbi have had our member -- memo several days. we want to make sure any reductions that are made are fully explained to our committee by the fbi or department of justice and likewise, by the white house. we want to make sure the white house does not redact our memo
3:49 am
for political purposes and obviously, that is a deep concern. the majority found themselves in a insupportable position when they released a memo and refused to release the democrat response. i think they were compelled to take the action they did today and we think this will be useful information for the american people to see. i also want to say my colleague, asked they -- quigly chairman if he or staff had consulted with, court needed, conceptualized this memo in combination with the white house. after all, we know the chairman embarked on a similar effort to early one a campaign in the investigation and once again, mr. nunez refused to answer the questions. at the end of the hearing, he gave a very lawyerly written housese that the white
3:50 am
had not been involved in the actual drafting of the memo. it wasterms of whether correlated with the white house or they were consulted or strategized, the whole concept, he refused to answer those questions. that is a very important question for our committee. the reality is as this investigation has progressed, the investigation by individuals as more have either been in guided or pled guilty with connection to the investigation and evidence has mounted, both in terms of collusion and obstruction, there is a rising sense of panic within the white house and on the hill. as a result, we see a tactic we have often seen in criminal cases where when the facts are defendant,ng of the there is an effort to put the government on trial. that brings us to where we are --ay, where our committee
3:51 am
republicans have endeavored to but the fbi on trial, the department of justice on trial, impeach and impugn the hard work of these dedicated public servants at the fbi and department of justice. very ill serves the public and we hope they will stop, but nonetheless, the chairman has announced his intention to continue with other so-calledthis investigation into the fbi and department of justice and maybe other agencies. he has publicly described this memo as phase one, in fact it is phase two. phase one began with the midnight run and presentation to the white house of information he had gotten from the white house. we hope these phases of distraction will come to an end and once again, the committee will focus on what the russians did to interfere with our elections, what we know about the trump campaign's contacts and communication or collusion with the russians and what we
3:52 am
can do to prevent this from happening in the future. so that is where we hope our investigation will get back on track. with that, i am happy to answer any questions. -- if the president does block this -- schiff:tative chef: -- i think the republicans realize that after calling for full transparency, they were criticized for hiding the minority response. what will we do if the white house redact to protect itself or refuses to release? i think it is going to be very hard for the white house like it was hard for republicans on our committee to block release of this. i am more concerned they make a lyrical reactions, not to sources and methods -- politic al react -- reductions.
3:53 am
-- so we can segregate any political interference from the white house. reporter: [indiscernible] the department of justice has had our memo for days. we want their feedback. we want their input. they have had it for days. it is our understanding and expect patient that our memo will be going to the white house tonight so as of tonight, the five day clock is ticking. reporter: have the justice department or fbi waiting yet on certain redactions in the memo at this point? rep. schiff: at this point, they have not weighed in. we would fully expect in any rational process that the agencies that are most heavily implicated, and here it is the fbi and department of justice because they are conducting the investigation, would have the
3:54 am
paramount say in terms of what as tobe revealed, sources, as to methods, and also as to the ongoing investigation. reporter: is there evidence that nunez has court mated with the white house in any way? is there evidence or just not him it -- him not a technology? this just looks like too much of a rerun of the charade at the beginning of the investigation and that took place the day after james comey testified in our open session, counterhad an ongoing intelligence investigation. this looks too much like a rerun of that and we are all the more concerned when the chairman refuses to answer questions. [indiscernible] committee going to return to investigating the russian collusion? rep. schiff: i would hope that
3:55 am
we can get back in earnest to doing the investigation that we were given the charge to do, and that is the russian interference on our election and the issue of collusion with from campaign. there are obviously a whole host of very concerning meetings, which initially, the administration and the president denied to place and then when it was revealed they took lace, generated false statements to cover up the truth intent of those meetings. you have the national security adviser lie about his contacts with the russians and plead guilty to doing so. you had a foreign-policy advisor for the campaign also plead guilty to lying to the fbi. those indictments and convictions took place and record speed, a matter of months of the investigation. for my colleagues on the other side of the aisle or in the
3:56 am
white house to say they see no evidence of collusion, you really have to be trying to look away, trying to ignore what is obvious to make a suggestion like that. i often do the mental exercise of saying, what would be the response if it were suddenly disclosed that former national security advisor susan rice had had a secret conversations with the russians to undermine the bipartisan policy of the united states? and would plead guilty to a federal offense about that? what would be the reaction? would people say that is not rush -- evidence of russian collusion? of course they wouldn't and there are serious allegations that need investigation. it is not enough to bring people into deny the facts. one of the things that will become clear when the transcript of tonight's hearing is revealed, which we expect will be published in the next day or
3:57 am
two. we made repeated requests to the majority to subpoena documents, to test what witnesses are telling us. that is how a convict -- investigation is conducted, only to have those requests stonewalled. for the administration and the majority to say they want this investigation to go on expeditiously, they are moving very slowly when it comes to getting evidence and information. witnesses that have refused to answer questions are given a pass. we still want don jr. to come back before the committee and answer questions that produced that false statement. we want steve bannon to come back to this committee, we want corey lewandowski to come back. he didn't even claim privilege. he just said i am not prepared to answer those questions. has he been subpoenaed? no. that is inexcusable and there are countless of other examples.
3:58 am
we know don jr. was direct messaging wikileaks. we would like to subpoena twitter to get those direct messages, but the majority has so far refused. it is time for this majority to make the decision to be serious investigators, to get the information we need that can either prove or disprove these allegations. we hope that is what they will do. thank you. >> c-span's "washington journal," live with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up this morning, nebraska republican congressman don bacon discusses the house intelligence committee memo and this week's government funding deadline. then, connecticut democratic congressman and intelligence committee member jim himes on therelease of the memo and
3:59 am
latest on the investigation into russian interference in the 2016 campaign. be sure to watch c-span's at 7:00on journal, live eastern this morning. join the discussion. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit] >> here is a look at our live coverage for tuesday. the house is in at 9:00 eastern. they will work on a food labeling bill and mortgage legislation live on c-span. the senate is in a 10:00 eastern. more nominations are expected this week along with a short-term government funding bill. no votes are scheduled. live senate coverage on c-span2. c-span3, james mattis will take questions from members of the sunday on c-span's q&a, new york times staff photographer doug mills talks about the photos he took while covering president
4:00 am
trump. >> he enjoys having his photograph taken. despite his comments about fake news, i really feel he enjoys having us around because it helps drive his message. it helps drive the moods of the day. he is constantly driving the message. therefore, having us around really allows him to do that. onouncer: q&a sunday night c-span. next, the author of a new book on the u.s. senate talks about the recent partisanship in the senate. his book is "broken: can the senate save itself and the country?" he spoke to the brookings institution.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on