Former Government Ethics Director Shaub: Donald Trump Setting Wrong Tone | Rachel Maddow

>>> WE HAVE BEEN TALKING TONIGHT ABOUT THE REALLY ASTOUNDING AND
CONSEQUENTIAL INTERVIEW "THE NEW YORK TIMES" THAT JUST PUBLISHED
WITH THE PRESIDENT. THE PRESIDENT CALLS INTO
QUESTION THE TENURE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED
STATES, AND THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES,
AND THE ACTING FBI DIRECTOR, AND THE SPECIAL COUNSEL WHO IS
INVESTIGATING HIM ON MATTERS RELATED TO RUSSIA.
THE PRESIDENT'S REMARKS TONIGHT BRING UP ALL SORTS OF QUESTIONS
ABOUT THE INDEPENDENCE OF PARTS OF THE GOVERNMENT THAT BY DESIGN
HAVE SOME LEVEL OF INDEPENDENCE SO THEY CAN FUNCTION PROPERLY
AND WITHOUT INTERFERENCE FROM THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH.
OUR NEXT GUEST IS SOMEONE WHO HAS JUST LEFT THE LEADERSHIP OF
A HIGH-PROFILE INDEPENDENT AGENCY INSIDE THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT. HE SAYS BECAUSE HE NO LONGER
BELIEVED THAT THE TOOLS HE HAD FOR CARRYING OUT HIS MISSION
WORKED. HE WAS SUPPOSED TO SAFEGUARD
ETHICS IN OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AS A NATIONAL WATCH
GUARD. TODAY IS HIS FIRST DAY OUTSIDE
OF THAT JOB. JOINING US NOW FOR THE INTERVIEW
IS WALTER SCHAB, WHO FINISHED HIS WORK YESTERDAY IN THE OFFICE
OF ETHICS. FIRST DAY OFFICIALLY -- WITH HIS
NEW JOB WHICH IS SENIOR DIRECTOR OF ETHICS AT THE CAMPAIGN LEGAL
CENTER. IT'S A REAL HONOR TO HAVE YOU
HERE. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME. >> I HAVE A LOT OF THINGS I WANT
TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT. YOU'RE HERE ON A BUSY NEWS
NIGHT. I HAVE TO ASK YOU ABOUT THE NEWS
OF THE EVENING. THE PRESIDENT IN THE INTERVIEW
IS RAISING AN ETHICS ISSUE ABOUT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.
QUOTING FROM THE PRESIDENT'S REMARKS TONIGHT TO "THE NEW YORK
TIMES," ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS SHOULD HAVE NEVER
RECUSED HIMSELF. MEANING FROM THE TRUMP-RUSSIA
INVESTIGATION. AND IF HE WAS GOING TO RECUSE
HIMSELF, HE SHOULD HAVE TOLD ME BEFORE HE TOOK THE JOB, AND I
WOULD HAVE PICKED SOMEBODY ELSE. DO YOU KNOW WHY JEFF SESSIONS
RECUSED HIMSELF AND IS THE PRESIDENT RIGHT IN RAISING THIS
AS AN ISSUE OF FAIRNESS TO THE PRESIDENT?
>> FIRST OF ALL, THANKS FOR HAVING ME HERE.
>> YEAH. >> THAT'S AN ABSOLUTELY
OUTRAGEOUS STATEMENT FOR THE PRESIDENT TO HAVE MADE.
BEFORE I ANSWER THAT QUESTION, I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR, I HAVE NO
INFORMATION ABOUT ANY INVESTIGATIONS THAT ARE OR ARE
NOT GOING ON OR THE SCOPE. WE HAVE 70 PEOPLE, 4,500
OFFICIALS WE COORDINATE THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE EXECUTIVE
BRANCH. DOJ HAS MENTIONED THAT ROD
ROSENSTEIN WAS GETTING ADVICE FROM DOJ REGARDING THIS RECUSAL.
I IN MY OFFICE CALLED DOJ AND SAID, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT
INVESTIGATIONS ARE GOING ON, WE DON'T NEED TO KNOW, WE DON'T
WANT TO KNOW, BUT IF THERE'S ANY CHANCE THAT THERE'S AN
INVESTIGATION GOING ON THAT HE IS A MEMBER OF THE CLASS OF
PERSONS WHO POTENTIALLY WOULD BE INTERVIEWED IN CONNECTION WITH
THAT INVESTIGATION -- >> HE MUST RECUSE HIMSELF?
>> I NEED TO DEFEND ATTORNEY GENERAL SESSIONS HERE BECAUSE HE
DID THE RIGHT THINGS. WE TOLD DOJ IF THERE'S ANY
CHANCE THAT HE'S PART OF THE CLASS OF PERSONS BEING LOOKED AT
IN THIS INVESTIGATION, HE MUST RECUSE.
AND DOJ HAS AN EXCELLENT ETHICS OFFICE AND THEY DID THE RIGHT
THING AND TOOK PROACTIVE MEASURES TO BE SURE HE WOULDN'T
BE 1R068D. THIS IS WHAT WE DO ACROSS THEBR.
THIS IS HOW WE'RE THE PREVENTION MECHANISM.
SO WHEN I RESIGN AND WHEN I'M TELLING THE WORLD THAT WE'VE GOT
A PROBLEM WITH OUR ETHICS PROGRAM, OJE IS THE CANARY IN
THE COAL MINE WITH THIS DEPARTURE FROM ETHICAL NORMS,
AND IT STARTS WITH A LITTLE THING LIKE THE PRESIDENT NOT
DIVESTING HIS FINANCIAL INTERESTS, WHICH SETS A TONE
FROM THE TOP THAT GOES CASCADING DOWN THROUGH THE EXECUTIVE
BRANCH. AND YOU WIND UP IN A PLACE WHERE
YOU HAVE A PRESIDENT CRITICIZING A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL FOR
DOING THE RIGHT THING AND STAYING OUT OF AN INVESTIGATION
IN WHICH HE MAY OR MAY NOT BE A TARGET, BUT BECAUSE THERE'S ANY
POTENTIAL AT ALL, THEY'RE GOING TO ERR ON THE SIDE OF BEING
CAUTIOUS. NOW, AGAIN, I WANT TO BE CLEAR.
I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE SCOPE OF ANY INVESTIGATION IS, AND I'M
NOT INTERFERING WITH ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY BECAUSE I
DON'T HAVE INFORMATION TO SHARE. BUT THIS IS OGE'S ROLE.
WE TALKED ABOUT ESTABLISHING PROPHYLACTIC MEASURES TO PREVENT
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AND IT WORKED IN THIS CASE.
>> AND WHEN ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS RESPONDED TO THAT
ADVICE AND ISSUED A STATEMENT SAYING THAT HE WAS RECUSING
HIMSELF FROM MATTERS RELATED TO THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN IN
2016, WAS THAT THE APPROPRIATE SCOPE OF RECUSAL ACCORDING TO
THE ADVICE THAT OGE GAVE HIM? >> WELL, AND THERE I WANT TO BE
CAREFUL BECAUSE THEY'VE NEVER BEEN QUITE PUBLIC ABOUT THE
EXACT SCOPE OF THE RECUSAL, AND I DON'T KNOW THE SCOPE OF THE
INVESTIGATION. BUT I DO KNOW THAT HE PUBLICLY
ANNOUNCED THAT HE RECUSED, AND THAT'S THE IMPORTANT THING TO
DO. APPARENTLY THAT'S THE THING
THAT'S CONCERNING THE PRESIDENT. BUT THE VERY IDEA THATT YOU WOUD
QUESTION A DECISION TO RECUSE AND THEN IN THE SAME BREATH I
HEARD TODAY THAT HE WAS SAYING, WELL, MUELLER'S INVESTIGATION IS
FULL OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST -- YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.
IF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ARE BAD, YOU RECUSE, AND THAT'S A
GOOD THING. >> WHEN THE PRESIDENT MADE THOSE
COMMENTS ABOUT CONFLICTS OF INTEREST INVOLVING SPECIAL
COUNSEL MUELLER, HE SAID ESSENTIALLY THAT HIS OFFICE WAS
RIFE WITH CONFLICTS ACCORDING TO "THE NEW YORK TIMES'"
CHARACTERIZATION. THEN HE SAID THAT THERE ARE
CONFLICTS THAT THE PRESIDENT KNOWS ABOUT THAT HE HASN'T
PUBLICLY DISCLOSED YET, BUT HE'S GOING TO.
HE'S TALKING ABOUT MUELLER HAVING APPLIED FOR THE FBI
DIRECTOR JOB OR HAVING BEEN CONSIDERED, EXCUSE ME, FOR THE
FBI DIRECTOR JOB. IN THE PRESIDENT'S WORDS, HE WAS
UP HERE, AND HE WANTED THE JOB. AFTER HE WAS NAMED SPECIAL
COUNSEL, I SAID, WHAT THE HELL IS THIS ALL ABOUT?
TALK ABOUT CONFLICTS. BUT HE WAS INTERVIEWING FOR THE
JOB. THERE WERE MANY OTHER CONFLICTS
THAT I HAVEN'T SAID, BUT I WILL AT SOME POINT.
>> WELL, THAT SOUNDS A LOT TO ME LIKE SAYING THAT THE LAST
DIRECTOR OF THE FBI SHOULD BE CONCERNED AND HOPE THAT THERE
ARE NOT TAPES, WHICH WE LATER LEARNED THERE WERE NOT TAPES.
WHAT I CAN TELL YOU FOR SURE IS THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
AND THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION HAVE OUTSTANDING
ETHICS OFFICIALS. THEY'RE CAREER OFFICIALS WHO
KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING. THEY'VE PUT THEIR TIME IN.
THEY'RE EXPERTS, AND THEY TAKE THE TIME TO CONSULT WITH THE
OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS. SO WE KNOW A LOT ABOUT THE
CAPABILITIES OF THOSE ETHICS OFFICERS, AND I CAN TELL YOU I
AM VERY CONFIDENT IN SAYING THAT THERE ARE NOT CONFLICTS OF
INTEREST GOING UNADDRESSED BY THESE ETHICS OFFICES.
>> SO YOU'RE SAYING IN THE CASE OF ROBERT MUELLER HAVING BEEN
CONSIDERED FOR THE FBI JOB, THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WAS
FLAGGED AS A CONFLICT IN T TERM OF HIM BECOMING SPECIAL COUNSEL
IN. >> NO AND IT'S NOT A CONFLICT OF
INTEREST. >> HOW ABOUT WITH DEPUTY
ATTORNEY GENERAL ROD ROSENSTEIN? I DON'T WANT TO ASK YOU TO
LITIGATE ALL THESE THINGS HERE BUT THE PRESIDENT RAISES A
CONCERN ABOUT DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ROD ROSENSTEIN, SAYING
THAT -- HE DOESN'T SAY IT DIRECTLY, BUT THE IMPLICATION OF
WHAT HE'S SAYING IS THAT IF THE PRESIDENT IS BEING INVESTIGATED
FOR POTENTIALLY OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE, FOR FIRING JAMES COMEY
IN ORDER TO TAKE THE PRESSURE OFF HIMSELF IN THE RUSSIA
INVESTIGATION, ROD ROSENSTEIN HAVING WRITTEN A MEMO TO THE
PRESIDENT ABOUT COMEY THAT PRECIPITATED IN SOME TELLINGS --
PRECIPITATED THAT FIRING, THAT INVOLVES HIM IN THAT PROCESS TO
SUCH A DEGREE THAT ROSENSTEIN SHOULD HIMSELF BE RECUSED FROM
ANYTHING INVOLVING OVERSIGHT OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL.
HOW DO YOU VIEW THAT? >> THAT DOES NOT MEET THE
DEFINITION OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN THE EXECUTIVE
BRANCH. NOTHING THAT YOU'VE SAID IS A
REASON WHY ROSENSTEIN SHOULD HAVE TO RECUSE FROM THE WORK OF
HIS JOB. NOW, THAT SAID, AS A CAREER
GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL, FOR MANY YEARS, I HAVE GRAVE CONCERNS
ABOUT THE IDEA THAT SOMEBODY WOULD WRITE A MEMORANDUM
DESIGNED TO LOOK LIKE THIS IS MAKING AN OUT OF THE BLUE
RECOMMENDATION TO FIRE SOMEONE WHEN THE PRESIDENT TURNS AROUND
AND SAYS THE DECISION WAS ALREADY MADE.
I CANNOT IMAGINE WHAT WAS GOING THROUGH THE HEAD OF THE LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICER WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IS TO DISPLAY A
HIGH LEVEL OF CANDOR AND BE DIRECT.
THAT KIND OF IMPRESSION THAT WRITING THAT MEMORANDUM CREATES
IS VERY CONCERNING TO ME AS A CAREER GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL.
THAT'S NOT T THE WAY PEOPLE BEHAVE, BUT IT IS NOT AN ETHICS
VIOLATION IN THE SENSE THAT THERE ARE ANY SPECIFIC RULES
SAYING IF YOU'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN TAKING A DECISION TO FIRE
SOMEONE, YOU SHOULD NOT BE INVOLVED IN OVERSEEING THEIR
REPLACEMENT. THERE'S JUST NOTHING IN PLACE
THAT WOULD SUGGEST THAT'S INAPPROPRIATE.
>> DO YOU FEEL TOTALLY CONFIDENT IN YOUR DECISION TO LEAVE OFFICE
BEFORE YOU'D HAVE TO AT THE END OF YOUR TERM?
YOU KNOW THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP WILL APPOINT YOUR SUCCESSOR.
>> I DON'T KNOW IF HE WILL. IF HE WERE TO NOMINATE SOMEBODY,
I THINK HE MIGHT HAVE A LOT OF QUESTIONS RAISED DURING THAT
NOMINATION HEARING, THE CONFIRMATION HEARING ABOUT HIS
OWN CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE IF
HE LEAVES SOMEONE ACTING IN THAT POSITION OR WHETHER HE NOMINATES
SOMEBODY. I WILL SAY ONE THING THAT I
THINK PEOPLE SHOULD BE WATCHING OUT FOR.
UNDER THE VACANCIES REFORM ACT THERE'S A MECHANISM FOR
IDENTIFYING WHO IS GOING TO TAKE OVER.
THAT WAS DESIGNATED MONTHS BEFORE THE ELECTION, THAT'S OUR
CHIEF OF STAFF. IN THEORY, CAREER OFFICIALS
SHOULD BE INTERCHANGEABLE. THEY'RE HONEST, NON-PARTISAN
INDIVIDUALS. IF THE WHITE HOUSE REACHES DOWN
AND PLUCKS SOMEBODY ELSE OUT OF THE OFFICE TO PUT THEM IN THE
ACTING ROLE RATHER THAN THE PERSON IT SHOULD DEFAULT TO,
EVERYONE SHOULD BE ASKING WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT.
WHAT ADVANTAGE DO THEY THINK THEY'RE GOING TO GAIN?
DO THEY THINK THEY WILL FIND AN INDIVIDUAL THAT WILL GIVE THEM A
BETTER DEAL THAN MS. FINLANDSON WHO IS TOUGH AS NAILS AND AS
EXPERIENCED AS THEY COME. >> WALTER SHAUB, THANK YOU.
HOW SOON CAN YOU COME BACK? VERY SOON?
>> SURE. >> GOOD.
NOW SENIOR DIRECTOR OF ETHICS AT THE

Former Government Ethics Director Shaub: Donald Trump Setting Wrong Tone | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC

Latest Posts