Jamie Raskin says election will be safe ‘if the federal government stays out of it’: Full interview

[0:00] Joining me now is Democratic Congressman Jamie Raskin of Maryland. [0:04] Congressman Raskin, welcome back to Meet the Press. [0:06] I'm delighted to be with you. [0:07] Thank you so much for being here in person. [0:09] Let's start with the dramatic developments out of Michigan. [0:13] You have this last-minute intraparty fighting between Abdul Al-Sayed and his challenger in the primary, Haley Stevens. [0:23] She has criticized his views on Israel. [0:27] She's upset that he hasn't disavowed an ad that he had nothing to do with that she says was anti-Semitic. [0:35] Let me ask you, could this cost Democrats the seat in Michigan? [0:39] No. [0:40] I spoke last night to Haley Stevens and I spoke to Abdul as well. [0:45] And my wonderful friend Haley Stevens wants me to represent to you and everybody else I talk to that she is voting straight down the line on the Democratic ticket. [0:54] And she's going to be celebrating with Democrats across the country when we win on Tuesday night. [0:59] And this is inside the Beltway, inside baseball, in Broglio. [1:03] And so I believe that we're going to have a landslide in Michigan for lots of candidates like Cali Barr in the 1st District, like Sean McCann. [1:18] I think Michigan's going to be in great shape. [1:20] And the Democrats have really never been more unified or more focused because everybody understands the big picture here. [1:26] Are we going to have progress under Democratic government or are we going to have continuing corruption under authoritarian chaos with Donald Trump and all of his MAGA followers? [1:37] That's the big picture here. [1:39] Haley gets it. [1:40] Abdul gets it. [1:41] And I think what we're going to see on Tuesday night is a reflection of that. [1:44] All right. [1:45] Well, we'll watch and see how that one unfolds. [1:47] Let's turn to another race I was just discussing with Senator Tim Scott. [1:50] Alaska, the developments there, the New York Times reporting that senior aides to Mary Peltola instructed a staffer to, quote, find as many people named Dan Sullivan in Alaska as you can. [2:03] And her former campaign manager told the Times that while Peltola was not directly involved, she was, quote, definitely aware. [2:11] Now, we should note that campaign manager has since retracted her statements. [2:15] The Times printed them anyway. [2:17] Peltola's campaign denies involvement. [2:20] Peltola herself denies involvement. [2:22] But even if such a tactic is legal, Congressman, do you think it crosses an ethical line? [2:29] I'm sure I would never do it. [2:30] It's stupid politics. [2:31] Nobody would do that. [2:32] Mary Peltola has said she had nothing to do with it. [2:35] But look, that's the law across America. [2:37] There are people who have the same name who are running in all 50 states. [2:41] That happens all over the place. [2:43] And nowhere is there a law which says if you have the same name as somebody who got on the ballot first, you can't get on the ballot. [2:50] Now, there might be a way of cleaning that up. [2:52] But I think Alaska has done that. [2:54] They identify the incumbent as the Republican incumbent. [2:57] It could not be clear. [2:58] Donald Trump says people don't know the word incumbent. [3:01] He should speak for himself because the vast majority of Americans obviously do. [3:05] Given how coordinated this effort was, though, Congressman, do you see it as an attempt to manipulate the voters of Alaska, manipulate this race? [3:12] I said it's ridiculous politics. [3:15] And I've never met anybody who would do that before. [3:18] But it does happen. [3:19] If you look at it, it's happened even in this election cycle in other places. [3:23] And we should stop it. [3:24] The problem is you can't stop anybody from running for office in America. [3:28] And you can't stop people from recruiting other people to run for office. [3:31] But Mary Peltola has said she had nothing to do with that. [3:34] But she is a public official filled with integrity and purpose. [3:38] And again, big picture, do we want progress with the Democrats for the common good? [3:43] Or do we want the government to be an instrument of more corruption and inside dealing with the Republicans? [3:49] That's it. [3:49] All right. [3:50] Well, let me ask you. [3:51] The Democrats are offering a way out of this corrupt authoritarianism. [3:55] Well, let me ask you, because big picture, the Justice Department is involved in a growing wave of election litigation ahead of the midterms, [4:02] including efforts to restrict certain mail-in ballots and challenge voter registration roles in multiple states. [4:10] A federal judge on Friday actually ordered the Trump administration not to threaten or intimidate state or local election officials. [4:17] How confident are you that these elections will be carried out fairly and accurately? [4:23] If the federal government stays out of it and lets the state government authorities actually run the elections the way that we always have, [4:31] we will have free and fair elections. [4:33] The problem is, as this judge found in a very important ruling, [4:37] that the Trump administration keeps trying to stick its nose into state electoral administration when it has no constitutional role there. [4:46] Only Congress could decide we're going to pass a law to allow the post office or the president to get involved in the administration of elections. [4:54] We have not passed such a law. [4:56] The president's got nothing to do with it. [4:58] So he should go off to Mar-a-Lago and let us have a Democratic election. [5:02] You know, he was talking about suspending elections, not having elections. [5:07] We had elections in the middle of the Civil War. [5:09] We had elections in the middle of World War II. [5:11] Why should we not have elections just because Donald Trump is going to get his feelings hurt when there's a landslide against him in 2026? [5:18] Very quickly, will you accept the results if Republicans win control of Congress? [5:22] Well, you know, the perfect example is 2020 and 2024. [5:25] Donald Trump tried to mount and incite a violent insurrection against the peaceful transfer of power in order to deny a presidential election. [5:34] In 2024, we accepted it. [5:37] So we accept the rule of law, and they are the ones who are constantly violating it. [5:41] This is a great opportunity for America. [5:42] We're in the fight of our lives to defend democracy and freedom, and people all across America understand that. [5:48] If Democrats take control of the House, you could become chair of the Judiciary Committee. [5:53] As you know, you've outlined an extensive agenda of investigations into the Trump administration. [5:58] President Trump has reportedly, according to the Wall Street Journal, talked about pardoning people around him. [6:03] If he follows through with sweeping preemptive pardons, would that undermine your ability to investigate the Trump administration? [6:11] How do you see that playing out? [6:12] Well, it might be an incentive towards greater lawlessness within his administration. [6:17] That's obviously what he's trying to do. [6:19] He's trying to say, go with me on my full criminal tour of the federal government, shaking down the federal government and turning every part of the executive branch into a money-making operation and a get-rich-quick scheme for him and his family. [6:34] And so he's trying to tell them, don't worry about what's going to happen to you. [6:37] First of all, those pardons apply only criminally and not civilly. [6:40] Secondly, they don't apply to state prosecutions, only to federal. [6:45] So our recommendation would be, it seems ridiculous that we have to say it, is everybody should follow the law and don't end up, certainly the lawyers should not end up where a lot of Donald Trump's lawyers, like Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, have ended up disbarred, suspended, prosecuted in different ways for participating in his corruption. [7:05] The whole country now can see what's happening, which is why they're starting to lose, Kristen, in rural areas, you know, across the country. [7:13] Let me ask you, if Democrats do in fact win black control of the House, what do you think the number is going to look like? [7:19] What are your margins going to be? [7:20] Can you give us a number? [7:21] Here's the predictions that I'm happy to make for you, two predictions. [7:25] One, that Democrats are going to score major breakthroughs in rural areas. [7:29] Take Blake Jendabean in New York's 21st District. [7:32] That was a district that Elise Stefanik was winning by 15 or 20 points. [7:36] He's now ahead in the polls and is running an amazing ground game against a terrible opponent who makes rap songs about how much he loves Donald Trump. [7:44] I mean, that's basically who he's running in. [7:46] But we're seeing this all over the country. [7:48] Callie Barr in the Upper Peninsula in Michigan, a remarkable candidate, Janelle Stelzen in the 10th District of Pennsylvania. [7:54] She came within one point last time. [7:56] Do you have a number? [7:57] In New York and Harrisburg. [7:58] I would say this. [7:59] The Republican margin today is three votes. [8:02] We will at least triple that margin. [8:05] Okay. [8:06] We will at least triple it. [8:07] There you have. [8:08] Congressman Jamie Raskin, thank you so much. [8:10] We'll see what happens on Tuesday. [8:12] Appreciate your being here.