Sen. Roy Blunt: "I’d Like To Know Why He Was At The Meeting." | MTP Daily

TIMELINE MAY NOW END UP BEING CRUCIAL EVIDENCE AGAINST THE
TRUMP TEAM. JOINING ME NOW ROY BLUNT, ALSO A
MEMBER OF LEADERSHIP, SO WE WILL TALK A LITTLE HEALTH CARE.
SENATOR BLUNT, WELCOME, SIR. >> GOOD TO BE WITH YOU.
>> SO I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS TIMELINE NOW.
HOW IMPORTANT IS IT TO THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE
INVESTIGATION IN CONTEXT WITH WHAT WE KEEP LEARNING NOW?
AND I'M CURIOUS, DID YOU KNOW ABOUT THE DONALD TRUMP JR.
E-MAILS BEFORE IT CAME OUT IN PUBLIC IN THE INVESTIGATION?
>> I DID NOT. >> SO THAT HAD NOT SOMEHOW
SURFACED IN THE INTEL COMMITTEE'S INVESTIGATION?
>> IT HADN'T SURFACED IN A WAY THAT I'VE SAW IT.
AND I'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME OUT AT THE CIA, AT OTHER PLACES
LOOKING AT THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE HAD AND HAD A CHANGS TO
LOOK THROUGH CAREFULLY. YOU KNOW, MY VIEW, CHUCK, THE
WHOLE TIME HAS BEEN THAT OUR COMMITTEE SHOULD TALK TO
EVERYBODY THAT A REASONABLE PERSON WOULD THINK WE SHOULD
TALK TO. WE SHOULD LOOK AT EVERYTHING
THAT A REASONABLE PERSON WOULD THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT.
AND AT THE END OF THAT PROCESS REACH A LARGELY BIPARTISAN
CONCLUSION ON WHAT HAPPENED AND HOW IT HAPPENED AND WHEN IT
HAPPENED. AND I THINK WE'VE DONE A PRETTY
GOOD JOB OF NOT RUSHING TO CONCLUSIONS TOO QUICKLY.
BUT ALL THE PEOPLE AT THAT MEETING, FOR INSTANCE, I THINK
SHOULD BE TALKED TO. ALL OF THE -- MANAFORT --
>> HOW ABOUT THE RUSSIAN LAWYER? >> PROBABLY THE RUSSIAN LAWYER.
>> LET ME ASK YOU THIS, DOES THE SCOPE OF THE INVESTIGATION
CONTINUE TO EXPAND, THOUGH? DOES IT NOW -- THERE'S ALWAYS
BEEN SOMOME QUESTION HOW DEEP D YOU GO INTO RESEARCHING
FINANCIAL TIES BETWEEN RUSSIAN INVEST ORS AND THE TRUMP
ORGANIZATION, CONSIDERING THAT IT INCLUDES DONALD TRUMP JR. WHO
IS NOT AN OFFICIAL PART OF THE CAMPAIGN, DOES THAT MEAN THE
INTEL COMMITTEE'S INVESTIGATION NEEDS TO EXPAND ITS SCOPE A
LITTLE BIT? >> I DON'T THINK SO.
WHEN WE GET THIS MORE PRESSING ISSUE OF RUSSIAN INVOLVEMENT IN
THE ELECTIONS AND ANY INVOLVEMENT THAT OTHERS HAD WITH
THEM, IF THAT TURNED OUT TO BE THE CASE, I THINK THAT'S GOT TO
BE THE TOP PRIORITY. AFTER THAT I FRANKLY THINK WE
HAVE TO -- IT'S WITHIN OUR RESPONSIBILITY AS THE INTEL
COMMITTEE IN THE SENATE TO LOOK AT THE LEAKS, TO LOOK AT HOW
SECURE OUR OWN NATIONAL SECURITY STRUCTURE IS.
THAT'S PROBABLY WHERE WE EXPAND TO.
IN TERMS OF EXPANDING TO THINGS THAT ARE NOW UNDER THE
RESPONSIBILITY OF MR. MUELLER, I DON'T KNOW THAT THE INTEL
COMMITTEE EVER GOES THERE. BUT THINGS THAT RELATE TO RUSSIA
AND THE ELECTION AND TRYING TO PREVENT THOSE THINGS FROM
HAPPENING AGAIN. >> THAT'S YOUR SCOPE.
THAT'S THE LANE YOU WANT TO STAY?
>> THAT IS THE LANE I BELIEVE WE WERE ASKED TO BE IN AND WE
SHOULD BE IN. >> CONSIDERING WE HAVE DONALD
TRUMP JR. SAYING THOSE WORDS, TYPING THOSE WORDS, I LOVE IT
WHEN IT COMES TO THOSE E-MAILS IN THERE, WHETHER IT COMES TO
OPPOSITION RESEARCH ON CLINTON, YOU TALKED ABOUT WHAT A
REASONABLE PERSON WOULD CONSIDER, DO YOU UNDERSTAND IF A
REASONABLE PERSON SITS THERE AND SAYS HOW IS THAT NOT EVIDENCE
RIGHT THERE OF COLLUSION OR AT LEAST OF OPENNESS TO COLLUDE?
>> WELL, I THINK YOU'VE GOT TO -- I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHY HE WAS
AT THE MEETING AND WHAT HE EXPECTED TO GET FROM THE
MEETING. THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO TALK TO
HIM. I DO THINK THAT IT'S HARD TO
MEASURE THIS CAMPAIGN BY THE STANDARDS OF A SEASONED,
WELL-RUN POLITICAL OPERATION WHERE YOU'D CLEAR THESE THINGS
WITH YOUR LAWYERS. WHAT YOU HAD IN THE TRUMP
CAMPAIGN WAS A CANDIDATE WHO HAD SOMEHOW FIGURED OUT THE EXACT
COMMUNICATING SPOT TO BE WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IN 2016 AND
A CAMPAIGN AROUND HIM THAT I WAS NEVER SURE HAD THE CAPACITY TO
COLLUDE WITH THE REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE, LET ALONE
ANYBODY ELSE. SOMEBODY ASKED ME YESTERDAY
WOULD YOU HAVE GONE TO THAT MEETINMEETING IF YOU HAD BEEN HD
I SAID, YOU KNOW, IF I HAD NEVER BEEN INVOLVED IN POLITICS AND I
WAS JUST COMING TO THIS THE FIRST TIME, I DON'T KNOW IF I
WOULD HAVE GONE OR NOT, BUT OF COURSE I WOULDN'T GO TO THAT
MEETING KNOWING -- >> I HAD SOMEBODY PRESENT AN
ALTERNATIVE THEORY USING THE SAME, WHICH IS YOU HAD A
CAMPAIGN THAT COULDN'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO WORK WITH THE RNC.
YOU HAD A CAMPAIGN THAT NOBODY WANTED TO WORK WITH AT THAT
POINT IN TIME FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH.
THE ESTABLISHMENT -- >> I'M NOT SURE INTERNALLY THE
CAMPAIGN EVER KMUKD EFFECTIVELY WITH ITSELF.
>> BUT THAT MADE CAMPAIGN OPERATIVES MORE OPEN TO LOOKING
FOR HELP IN ALTERNATIVE WAYS BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T GETTING
TRADITIONAL HELP. >> OH, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT.
>> IS THAT AN EXCUSE? BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S A GROWING
SORT OF SPIN ON THIS. WELL, DONALD TRUMP JR. DIDN'T
KNOW WHAT HE WAS DOING. IS THAT AN EXCUSE?
IS THAT A LEGITIMATE EXCUSE? >> I THINK IT COULD BE A REASON,
BUT I THINK THAT'S WHY WE OUGHT TO TALK TO HIM.
WE OUGHT TO TALK TO HINL. TALK TO MR. KUSHNER, TALK TO MR.
MANAFORT, WHO HAS LESS REASON TO BE IN THAT MEETING FOR SOME
REASON OF NOT KNOWING WHAT HE'S DOING THAN THE OTHER TWO MIGHT
HAVE HAD. >> OKAY.
YOU CAN EXPLAIN AWAY THE MEETING.
HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN THE DECISION TO MISLEAD ON THE FIRST DAY OF
THE STORY ON SATURDAY, TO WRITE A STATEMENT THAT INTENTIONALLY
MISS LEADS WHAT THE MEETING WAS ABOUT?
>> I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT DECISION WAS REACHED.
AND, YOU KNOW, IT COULD HAVE BEEN -- THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT
I'VE BEEN PRETTY INVOLVED IN OVER THE YEARS, RUSSIAN
ADOPTIONS, SPO I WOULD SB SENSITIVE TO THAT AS SOMETHING
THAT SHOULD BE TALKED ABOUT AND DEFINITELY RELATED TO THE
MAGNITSKY ACT WHEN WE PASSED ARE THE RUSSIAN TRADE AGREEMENT, BUT
HOW THEY GOT THERE, I DON'T KNOW.
THAT'S ANOTHER REASON -- THESE PEOPLE NEED TO COME.
THEY NEED TO BE ASKED QUESTIONS AND SEE WHAT THAT THEIR ANSWERS
>> LET ME ASK YOU THIS. DO YOU NEED TO TALK TO THE
PRESIDENT? SHOULD HE VOLUNTARILY SPEAK TO
THE INTEL COMMITTEE? >> I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S
SOMEHOW WE SHOULD GO. YOU'D HAVE TO --
>> WHY IS THAT? >> THE CHAIRMAN AND THE RANKING
MEMBER WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO EVALUATE THAT AFTER EVERYTHING
ELSE. THAT IS WAY OUTSIDE THE NORMAL
TRADITIONS OF CONGRESSIONAL -- >> DO YOU FEEL LIKE THAT WOULD
BE THE -- IT WOULD BE AN UNUSUAL THING, BUT IF YOU'RE TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS GOING IN THERE AND WHAT DID HE KNOW,
DON'T YOU WANT TO TALK TO HIM? >> NOT UNTIL YOU KNOW WHAT
YOU'RE GOING TO ASK HIM. THAT WOULD BE THE LAST PERSON
YOU'D WANT TO TALK TO, I THINK, AND IT MIGHT BE THE LAST PERSON
YOU'D WANT TO TALK TO. BUT IT WOULD BE EVEN AT THAT
POINT UNUSUAL. THERE MAY HAVE BEEN OTHER
INSTANCES -- I THINK GERALD FORD WAS THE LAST PRESIDENT TO COME
BEFORE A CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE.
>> WHERE ARE YOU IN THE INVESTIGATION?
GIVE ME A PERCENTAGE, AN ESTIMATE.
DO YOU THINK YOU'RE 50% DONE? 25%?
WHERE ARE YOU? >>IBLE CHAIRMAN BURR AND VICE
CHAIRMAN'S GOAL TO GET DONE THIS
YEAR. BUT ALL OF THESE THINGS TO COME
UP, THE NEW LANE OF TRAFFIC WITH MUELLER.
ALL OF THIS HAS POTENTIAL TO MAKE YOU SLOW DOWN A LITTLE BIT.
WE CLEARLY NEED WITH THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT A LOT OF SORT OF
QUICK AND ABSOLUTELY TRUTHFUL GREEN LIGHT, RED LIGHT SORT OF
LANES. OKAY.
THIS IS SOMEHOW WE'RE LOOKING, WE'D RATHER YOU STAY OUT OF HERE
FOR A WHILE. >> HAS THAT NOT BEEN MADE YET?
IS THERE CONFUSION OF WHAT MUELLER --
>> IT'S IS NOT AS CLEAR AS WHAT I'D LIKE IT TO BE, BUT I THINK
EVERYBODY WANTS IT TO BE CLEARED, SO IT PROBABLY DOES GET
CLEARED UP IN THE NEAR R FUTURE >> AS A FORMER LAW ENFORCEMENT
OFFICER WHO MAKES THAT DECISION? >> I'M NOT A LAWYER AND I WASN'T
A FORMER LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER.
I WOULD THINK MUELLER MAKES THAT DECISION ALONG WITH THE
COMMITTEE. AND WHO WE TALK TO THAT HE
DESIGNATES BECOMES A REALLY IMPORTANT RELATIONSHIP IN
ALLOWING US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE WORK WE NEED TO DO.
THERE'S NO DOUBT THE RUSSIANS -- I WAS THE CHIEF ELECTION
OFFICIAL IN OUR STATE FOR EIGHT YEARS AND THERE IS NO DOUBT THE
RUSSIANS WERE INVOLVED IN THE ELECTION IN WAYS THEY SHOULDN'T
HAVE BEEN AND HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN ELECTIONS THE -- IN WAYS THEY
SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN FOR THE LAST 15 YEARS, JUST NOT AS MUCH HERE
AS IN THEIR NEIGHBORS. I THINK WE'VE LOOKED BACK AND
WONDERED WHY WE WEREN'T MORE CONCERNED AND SYMPATHETIC ABOUT
WHAT WAS HAPPENING IN ALL THOSE ELECTIONS.
>> DO YOU THINK THIS RUSSIA STUFF IS HURTING YOUR ABILITY TO
GET HEALTH CARE DONE IN THE SENATE OR IS IT NOT HAVING AN
IMPACT AT ALL? >> I DON'T KNOW THAT IT HAS AN
IMPACT ON HEALTH CARE, BUT IT CERTAINLY HAS AVERTED OUR
ABILITY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE EARLY DAYS OF THE PRESIDENCY,
JUST LIKE THE DEMOCRATS SLOWING DOWN THE CONFIRMATION PROCESS.
WE'VE BEEN SPENDING WEEKS ON NONCONTROVERSIAL NO, MA'AM
NIECE, WITH THREE PEOPLE THIS WEEK --
>> I HEAR YOU -- I HAVE NO DOUBTS THE DEMOCRATS ARE -- BUT
YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH NO, MA'AM NIECE.
THERE'S NOT FLOODING THE ZONE HERE.
>> NO, NO, NO. THEY HAVE PLENTY OF NO, MA'AM
NIECE. >> THEY ARE STILL BEHIND.
>> THEY ARE BEHIND WHERE THEY NORMALLY WOULD BE BECAUSE THEY
STARTED BEHIND AND THE CABINET GOT IN PLACE BEHIND.
THERE ARE ABOUT 200 NO, MA'AM NIECE.
23% OF THEM HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED. 69% OF THE OBAMA HAD BEEN
CONFIRMED BY THIS TIME. 90% OF THE OBAMA NOM NEES BY
VOICE VOTE. THERE ARE DOING EVERYTHING TO
SLOW DOWN THE WORK WE NEED TO DO.
>> YOU DO HAVE THE MAJORITY. AND 50% OF THIS.
YOU DON'T NEED 60 VOTES -- >> THAT ARE NORMALLY WAIVED LIKE
THE 30 HOUR RULE OF DEBATE, BUT THEN TUF 30 HOURS OF NOTHING
HAPPENING -- >> I KNOW THEY'RE DOING SOME OF
THESE THINGS. >> VOTES --
>> I GET THAT, BUT YOU STILL DON'T HAVE ENOUGH NO, MA'AM
NIECE. >> WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE
NOMINEEs WE'D NEED, BUT THAT IS NOT THE PART.
WE ARE NOT CONFIRM THE NOMINEEs WE

Sen. Roy Blunt: "I’d Like To Know Why He Was At The Meeting." | MTP Daily | MSNBC

Latest Posts