Full Johnson: ‘There is nothing [for the special counsel] to interview me about’

[0:00] And joining me now is Republican Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin. [0:03] He's the top Republican on the Homeland Security Committee's subcommittee on investigations. [0:07] Senator Johnson, welcome back to Meet the Press. [0:11] Well, Chuck, it's been a while. [0:13] It has. [0:14] Let me start with, do you approve of Merrick Garland's decision to appoint a special counsel [0:18] to look into the Joe Biden classified documents? [0:23] Well, I guess because he assigned one to President Trump, it was pretty inevitable. [0:27] I'm not a real fan of special counsels. [0:29] I did join 32 of my colleagues in calling for one for Hunter Biden because we had a [0:34] whistleblower that said that the attorney Weiss doesn't have the resources to do the type [0:39] of investigation required. [0:41] So, but in general, I'm not a fan of special counsels. [0:44] I think the way we handle these investigations of wrongdoing, I'll call it that, in the political [0:49] realm is we just do it completely backwards. [0:52] I think Congress ought to be able to have access to all the information, do their oversight. [0:57] You know, I never held public hearings. [0:59] We just, you know, did our investigation and issued a report. [1:03] If there's evidence of wrongdoing, then we should refer that to the Justice Department. [1:07] Then the investigation should take place. [1:09] What happens nowadays is the investigation begins. [1:13] Congress never gets access to the information. [1:15] And as a result, the American public never understands the truth of these situations. [1:21] And so, again, we just do these investigations in the political realm with wrongdoing completely [1:28] backwards. [1:29] So, do you think, though, that, I mean, Congress has an oversight role. [1:35] So, shouldn't Congress do their oversight role after an investigation is over? [1:40] If doing it during the investigation, doesn't that end up either on purpose or inadvertently [1:47] interfere in the investigation? [1:48] The problem is, is Congress never gets access to the information. [1:55] And by the time we do get access to the information, if we do, it's all old news. [2:01] And the political figures aren't held accountable. [2:04] And from my standpoint, you know, I'd much rather have political figures held accountable with [2:09] the truth being exposed of what they did, what they're wrongdoing, as opposed to the criminal penalties. [2:16] Oftentimes, it's very difficult to get any kind of criminal charges or convictions, particularly [2:21] if you're a Democrat in Washington, D.C. [2:22] So, from my standpoint, the more important imperative here is for the public to understand exactly [2:30] what is happening inside government, inside the administration. [2:34] And we never find that out. [2:36] And so, that is part of the problem we have in terms of our politics today is the American [2:40] public remains in the dark, misinformation spread on all sides. [2:45] And certainly from a conservative viewpoint, one of our frustrations is the censorship of [2:50] the suppression of information primarily is coming from the left against the conservative viewpoint. [2:57] So, I guess the problem that I feel like you run into with that decision is what you're [3:02] saying is, if the Justice Department decides a crime wasn't committed, they're not going to [3:07] prosecute a crime, it sounds like you still want the information out there because you [3:11] want to politically damage the person that was investigated? [3:16] No, Chuck, because a lot of political wrongdoing does not necessarily result in a crime, but [3:23] it's still wrong. [3:24] And the public needs to understand exactly what happened. [3:28] So, you know, take a look at the political wrongdoing on the part of the FBI. [3:34] They went to Twitter and they were censoring information. [3:40] Take a look at the 51 intelligence operatives that issued a letter saying that the Hunter [3:46] Biden computer had all the earmarks of a Russian information operation. [3:51] That letter was an information operation. [3:53] What happened? [3:54] The FBI had access to Hunter Biden's computer in December 2019. [3:58] Senator Grassley and I were conducting an investigation during COVID, not the easiest thing to do. [4:03] We were smeared. [4:04] There were false intelligence products leaked to the media. [4:08] We got unsolicited briefings from the FBI designed to smear me because they leaked it later. [4:14] The FBI spent almost nine months setting up the ability to sabotage the Hunter Biden computer [4:21] should it ever surface, which it did the day after. [4:25] We were offered Hunter Biden's computer the day after Chuck Grassley and I issued our report. [4:30] But we did our due diligence. [4:32] We went to the FBI. [4:33] What do you know about this? [4:34] They never came clean with us. [4:36] Mr. McIsaac ended up getting frustrated and offered that to Rudy Giuliani's computer and then, [4:41] or to his attorney and then to the New York Post. [4:45] But again, nine months of the FBI setting up the process of sabotaging Hunter Biden's computer, [4:51] which we now know is authentic. [4:53] Our investigation was accurate, but we were smeared. [4:58] All that information was censored and suppressed. [5:00] And the FBI, in their actions, impacted the election to a far greater extent anything that [5:05] Russia or China ever could have hoped to accomplish. [5:08] These are facts. [5:09] And that's all I'm interested in is I'm interested in the truth. [5:12] And I think the American public deserves the truth. [5:14] And again, these investigations, they cover up the truth. [5:18] Senator, do you have a crime that you think Hunter Biden committed? [5:21] Because I've yet to see anybody explain it is not a crime to make money off your last name. [5:30] So, Chuck, you ought to read the Marco Polo report, where they detail all kinds of potential crimes. [5:36] You know, Senator Grassley- [5:37] Oh, let me just stop you there. [5:38] Potential. [5:39] This is- [5:39] About, about, about, about- [5:41] Potential is innuendo. [5:43] About 30,000, about $30,000. [5:45] That's why you do investigation. [5:45] I mean, Chuck, Chuck, Chuck, is it a crime to be soliciting and purchasing prostitution [5:52] in potentially European sex trafficking operations? [5:55] Is that a crime? [5:56] Because Chuck Grassley and I laid out about $30,000 paid by Hunter Biden to those types of individuals. [6:03] Over December 2018, 2019, about $30,000. [6:08] This is about the same time that President Biden offered to pay about $100,000 of Hunter Biden's bills. [6:14] I mean, again, that's, that's just some information. [6:16] I don't know exactly- [6:17] Here's what I don't get. [6:18] All right, Senator- [6:18] It doesn't, it doesn't really look on the, it sounds sleazy as you know what. [6:22] I'll take your, I'll take your word that you're ethically bothered by Hunter Biden. [6:26] I'm curious, though. [6:27] You seem to have a pattern. [6:28] Are you not? [6:29] I seem to have a pattern. [6:30] I'm a journalist. [6:31] I have to deal in facts. [6:32] Are you not? [6:32] I deal in facts. [6:33] It says, Senator, my question to you is, I'm always worried, I have skepticism of both parties. [6:38] I sit here with skepticism of a lot of people's work. [6:40] And I'm curious, are you, were you at all concerned? [6:45] Your Senate Democrats want to investigate Jared Kushner's loan from the Qatari government [6:50] when he was working in the government negotiating many things in the Middle East. [6:56] Are you not as concerned about, are you not concerned about that? [6:59] And I say that because it seems to me if you're concerned about what Hunter Biden did, you should [7:03] be equally outraged about what Jared Kushner did. [7:07] I'm, I'm concerned about getting the truth. [7:09] I don't target individuals, target individuals. [7:12] You don't? [7:12] You're targeting Hunter Biden multiple times on this show, Senator. [7:16] You're targeting an individual. [7:18] Chuck, my concern, my, you know, Chuck, you know, part of the problem, and this is pretty [7:23] obvious, anybody watching this is, you don't invite me on to interview me. [7:26] You invite me on to argue with me. [7:29] You know, I'm just trying to lay out the facts that certainly Senator Grass and I uncovered. [7:34] They were suppressed. [7:35] They were censored. [7:36] They interfered in the 2020 election. [7:38] Conservatives understand that. [7:40] Unfortunately, liberals in the media don't. [7:42] And that's part of the things that, part of the reasons our politics are inflamed is we [7:46] do not have an unbiased media. [7:49] We don't. [7:50] It's unfortunate. [7:50] I'm all for a free press. [7:52] It needs to be more unbiased. [7:54] There's misinformation on both sides, but the censorship and suppression primarily occurs [7:59] from the left. [8:00] It's frustrating. [8:01] Look, you can go back on your partisan cable cocoon and talk about media bias all you want. [8:05] I understand it's part of your identity. [8:07] Let me move to what happened in Brazil. [8:10] And I want to play something that former Vice President Mike Pence said about what happened [8:14] in Brazil. [8:15] It is evident that what happens in the United States has repercussions around the world. [8:24] I have no doubt that that tragic day in January of 2021 in this country played some role in [8:30] sowing the seeds of what's taking place in Brazil. [8:32] Do you agree with Mike Pence? [8:36] I don't know. [8:37] Did the 570 riots during the summer of 2020 play some part? [8:41] I have no idea what the connection is. [8:45] But again, Chuck, this interview is just example A of what Front Street's conservative [8:51] about the media. [8:52] You don't see any connection here at all? [8:56] Chuck, Brazil is Brazil. [9:00] There are issues in terms of election fairness in every election. [9:05] So I can't really comment on Brazil. [9:08] And this is just, again, I'm not making any connection. [9:12] I'm curious when it comes to that brief moment where you were handed the potential of alternative [9:19] electors and you say it was a brief moment. [9:21] I wasn't. [9:22] Are you being... [9:23] I wasn't. [9:24] I wasn't. [9:24] I wasn't. [9:25] That's false. [9:26] I was never handed... [9:27] That's not... [9:28] I know you weren't handed it. [9:29] You're incorrect. [9:29] They were asking to hand it to you and you were obviously contemplating it. [9:34] Obviously your staffer was dealing with it. [9:36] No, no, no, Chuck, I never was. [9:39] I was contacted by the attorney of the president of the United States. [9:42] He had something he wanted to deliver to the vice president. [9:45] Could I arrange it? [9:46] So I contacted my chief of staff who worked in the White House, see if he could do it. [9:51] I had no idea what they wanted to contact, what they wanted to hand to the president [9:55] or the vice president. [9:56] Within an hour, we found out the vice president wasn't accepting anything. [10:00] End of story. [10:01] Nothing was delivered. [10:01] I had no idea what I was being contacted to deliver and we never delivered it. [10:06] Have you been interviewed... [10:07] There's no story there. [10:07] There never was a story there. [10:08] And everything I've always said about that has proven to be true, even though the media lied [10:13] about it. [10:13] Have you been interviewed by the FBI or the special counsel's office investigating the [10:19] alternative electors? [10:20] No, there is nothing to interview me about. [10:24] I played no role in it whatsoever. [10:26] Do you know why Congressman Kelly thought you were going to be the best person to hand [10:30] these slate of electors to? [10:33] I have no idea. [10:34] But remember, Congressman Kelly denied initially that his office was involved in trying to get [10:39] that information to the vice president. [10:42] I told the truth about that. [10:43] He lied about it. [10:45] And I was smeared for about a week and a half. [10:47] And by the way, it's never been corrected. [10:49] You believe the congressman lied to you or lied about your role? [10:53] He lied about his non-role. [10:58] His office did play a role in this. [11:00] That's what I suspected. [11:02] Again, this was such a non-event for me. [11:03] I had a hard time. [11:04] We had to go back and really scour our records to find out what happened. [11:08] And Chuck, you started this questioning falsely. [11:11] You falsely accused me of getting those. [11:14] And I never took possession. [11:16] I never had them. [11:18] OK? [11:18] So again, this has been a complete smear job against me. [11:23] The January 6th committee did not do their due diligence like Chuck Grassley and I did [11:28] during our... [11:28] You dabbled in so much of this. [11:30] Do you understand why somebody might have thought you were willing to go along with [11:35] this scheme? [11:35] I did not dabble in very much of this. [11:40] It's just false. [11:41] I held a hearing in December 2020 examining the irregularities of the 2020 election. [11:49] What you ought to do is go back and read my opening statement, and that pretty well lays [11:53] out exactly what I thought about the 2020 election. [11:56] But the news media never does that. [11:58] They smear me. [11:59] They lie about me. [12:00] They make these things up. [12:02] And then that becomes the narrative. [12:04] It's a false narrative. [12:05] Most of the things I... [12:07] Everything I've said that I'm aware of has panned out to be true. [12:11] The things I'm accused of providing misinformation have been true time and time again. [12:17] I'm happy to come on in a longer format, and we can go over this point by point. [12:21] Well, as I've always said, look, remote interviews... [12:23] Every lie told about me. [12:25] Remote interviews are never easy when there's a back and forth. [12:28] And that, I think that is a fact for a lot of folks. [12:31] So have me in studio. [12:31] I'm happy to do it. [12:31] We would love to have you in studio. [12:32] Always want you here. [12:33] Last question. [12:34] Donald Trump's been a candidate for office for a couple of months. [12:37] You have not endorsed him. [12:38] Do you plan on it? [12:41] I don't endorse candidates. [12:42] I let the voters decide that. [12:44] I don't make endorsements. [12:45] You're not going to endorse anybody in the presidential race? [12:49] I don't make endorsements. [12:50] All right. [12:51] Senator Ron Johnson, I look forward to our face-to-face at some point. [12:55] Thanks for coming on and sharing your perspective with us. [12:58] So do I. [12:59] Thanks for watching our YouTube channel. [13:03] Follow today's top stories and breaking news by downloading the NBC News app.