MUELLER HEARING: House Judiciary Committee Part 1

[0:00] of the criminal communication app on the date of the club tower meeting [0:04] just as we wait here for robert muller to be sworn in we already heard one protester we didn't even [0:38] get to hear any parts of the hearing but that is just moments away right here on news now everyone [0:50] the judiciary committee will come to order without objection the chair is authorized to [0:57] declare recesses of the committee at any time we welcome everyone to today's hearing on oversight [1:03] of the report on the investigation into russian interference in the 2016 presidential election [1:09] statement i will now recognize myself for a brief opening statement director muller thank you for [1:16] being here i want to say just a few words about our themes today accountability responsibility your [1:22] career for example is a model of responsibility you are a decorated marine officer you were awarded [1:28] a purple heart and the bronze star for valor in vietnam you served in senior roles at the department [1:34] of justice and in the immediate aftermath of 9 11 you served as director of the fbi two years ago [1:42] you returned to public service to lead the investigation into russian interference in the [1:47] 2016 elections you conducted that investigation with remarkable integrity for 22 months you never [1:56] commented in public about your work even when you were subjected to repeated and grossly unfair [2:02] personal attacks instead your indictments spoke for you and in astonishing detail over the course of [2:10] your investigation you obtained criminal indictments against 37 people and entities you secured the [2:17] conviction of president trump's campaign chairman his deputy campaign manager his national security advisor [2:25] and his personal lawyer among others in the paul manafort case alone you recovered as much as 42 million [2:33] dollars so that the cost of your investigation to the taxpayers approaches zero and in your report [2:41] you offer the country accountability as well in volume one you find that the russian government [2:47] attacked our 2016 elections quote in a sweeping and systematic fashion and that the attacks were [2:54] designed to benefit the trump campaign volume two walks us through 10 separate incidents of possible [3:00] obstruction of justice where in your words president trump attempted to exert undue influence over your [3:08] investigation the president's behavior included and i quote from your report quote public attacks on the [3:15] investigation non-public efforts to control it and efforts in both public and private to encourage witnesses [3:23] not to cooperate close quote among the most shocking of these incidents president trump ordered his white [3:30] house counsel to have you fired and then to deny to lie and deny that it had happened he ordered his former [3:38] campaign manager to convince the recused attorney general to step in and limit your work and he attempted to [3:45] to prevent witnesses from cooperating with your investigation although department [3:51] policy barred you from indicting the president for this conduct you made clear that he is not exonerated [3:58] any other person who acted in this way would have been charged with crimes and in this nation [4:05] not even the president is above the law which brings me to this committee's work responsibility integrity and accountability [4:14] these are the marks by which we who serve on this committee will be measured as well [4:20] director muller we have a responsibility to address the evidence that you have uncovered [4:25] you recognize as much when you said quote the constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system [4:33] to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing close quote that process begins with the work of this committee [4:41] we will follow your example director muller we will act with integrity we will follow the facts where they lead [4:49] we will consider all appropriate remedies we will make our recommendation to the house when our work concludes [4:56] we will do this work because there must be accountability for the conduct described in your report [5:03] especially as it relates to the president thank you again director muller we look forward to your testimony [5:10] it is now my pleasure to recognize the ranking member of the judiciary committee the gentleman [5:14] from georgia mr collins for his opening statement thank you mr chairman and thank you mr muller for [5:22] being here for two years leading up to the release of the muller report and in the three months since [5:27] americans were first told what to expect and then what to believe collusion we were told was in [5:32] plain sight even if the special counsel's team didn't find it when mr muller produced his report [5:38] and attorney general barr provided to every american we read no american conspired with russia to [5:42] interfere in our elections but learned the depths of russia's malice toward america we are here to [5:48] ask serious questions about mr muller's work and we will do that after an extended unhampered investigation [5:54] today marks an end to mr muller's involvement in an investigation that closed in april the burden [5:59] of proof for accusations that remain unproven is extremely high and especially in light of the [6:04] special counsel's thoroughness we are told this investigation began as an inquiry into whether [6:10] russia meddled in our 2016 election mr muller you concluded they did russians accessed democrat [6:17] servers and disseminated sensitive information by tricking campaign insiders into revealing protected [6:22] information the investigation also reviewed whether donald trump the president sought russian [6:27] assistance as a candidate to win the presidency mr muller concluded he did not his family or advisors [6:33] did not in fact the report concludes no one in the president's campaign colluded collaborated or [6:38] conspired with the russians the president watched the public narrative surrounding this investigation [6:44] assumes it certainly assumed his guilt while he knew the extent of his innocence volume two of [6:50] mr muller's report details the president's reaction to frustrating investigation where his innocence was [6:55] established early on the president's attitude toward the investigation was understandably negative [7:01] yet the president did not use his authority to close the investigation he asked his lawyer if mr [7:05] muller had conflicts that disqualified mr muller from the job but he did not shut down the investigation [7:12] the president knew he was innocent those are the facts of the muller report russia meddled in the 2016 [7:19] election the president did not conspire with the russian and nothing we hear today will change those [7:24] facts but one element of this story remains the beginnings of the fbi investigation into the president [7:30] i look forward to mr muller's testimony about what he found during his review of the origins of the [7:34] investigation in addition the inspector general continues to review how baseless gossip can be [7:39] used to launch an fbi investigation against a private citizen and eventually a president those [7:45] results will be released and we will need to learn from them to ensure government intelligence and law [7:49] enforcement powers are never again used and turned on a private citizen or a potential or political [7:55] candidate as a result of the political leanings of a handful of fbi agents the origins and conclusion of [8:01] the muller investigation of the same things what it means to be american every american has a voice in [8:05] our democracy so it must protect the sanctity of their voice by combating election interference [8:10] every american enjoys the presumption of innocence and guarantee of due process if we carry nothing [8:17] anything away today it must be that we increase our vigilance against foreign election interference [8:21] while we ensure our government officials don't weaponize their power against the constitutional rights [8:26] guaranteed to every u.s citizen finally we must agree that the opportunity cost here is too high [8:32] the months we have spent investigating from this dice fail to end the border crisis or contribute to [8:37] the growing job market instead we have gotten stuck and it's paralyzed this committee and this house [8:43] and as a side note every week i leave my family and kids the most important things to me to come to [8:50] this place because i believe this place is a place where we can actually do things and help people [8:54] six and a half years ago i came here to work on the half of the people of the ninth district in this [8:58] country and we accomplished a lot in those first six years on a bipartisan basis with many of my [9:03] friends across the aisle sitting on this dice with me today however this year because the majority's [9:09] dislike of this president and the endless hearing into a closed investigation have caused us to [9:14] accomplish nothing except talk about the problems of our country while our border is on fire in crisis [9:20] and everything else is stopped this hearing is long overdue we have had truth for months no american [9:26] conspired to throw our election what we need today is to let that truth bring us confidence [9:31] and i hope mr chairman closure with that i yield back thank you mr collins i will now introduce today's [9:38] witness robert muller served as director of the fbi from 2001 to 2013 and most recently served as [9:46] special counsel in the department of justice overseeing the investigation into russian [9:51] interference in the 2016 special election he received his ba from princeton university [9:57] an ma from new york university in my district and his jd from the university of virginia mr muller [10:03] is accompanied by his by counsel aaron zebley who served as deputy special counsel on the investigation [10:09] we welcome our distinguished witness and we thank you for participating in today's hearing [10:14] now if you would please rise i will begin by swearing you in would you raise your right hand please [10:22] my left hand do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you're about to give [10:28] is true and correct to the best of your knowledge information and belief so help you god let the [10:34] record show the witness answer the affirmative thank you and please be seated please note that your [10:41] written statement will be entered into the record in its entirety accordingly i ask that you summarize [10:46] your testimony in five minutes director muller you may begin good morning chairman nadler the uh and [10:57] ranking member collins and the members of the committee as you know in may 2017 the acting [11:05] attorney general asked me to serve as special counsel i undertook undertook that role because i [11:11] believe that it was of paramount interest to the nation to determine whether a foreign adversary [11:19] had interfered in the presidential election as the acting attorney general said at the time [11:25] the appointment was necessary in order for the american people to have full confidence confidence in [11:31] the outcome my staff and i carried out this assignment with that critical objective in mind to work [11:40] quietly thoroughly and with integrity so that the public would have full confidence in the outcome [11:49] the order appointing me as special counsel directed our office to investigate russian interference in [11:55] the 2016 presidential election this included investigating any links or coordination between the russian [12:03] government and individuals associated with the trump campaign it also included investigating efforts to [12:11] interfere with or obstruct our investigation throughout the investigation i continually stress two [12:19] things to the team that we had assembled we needed to do our work as thoroughly as possible and as [12:27] expeditiously as possible it was in the public interest for our investigation to be complete [12:34] but not to last a day longer than was necessary second the investigation needed to be conducted fairly [12:42] and with absolute integrity our team would not leak or take other actions that could compromise [12:50] the integrity of our work all decisions were made based on the facts and the law during the course of [12:59] our investigation we charged more than 30 defendants with committing federal crimes including 12 officers of the russian military [13:06] seven defendants have been convicted or pled guilty certain of the charges we brought remain pending today [13:16] and for those matters i stress that the indictments contain allegations and every defendant is presumed innocent [13:23] unless and until proven guilty in addition to the criminal charges we brought as required by justice department regulations [13:34] we submitted a confidential report to the attorney general at the conclusion of our investigation [13:40] the report set forth the results of our work and the reasons for our charging and declination decisions [13:47] the attorney general later made the report largely public as you know i made a few limited remarks [13:58] limited remarks about our report when we closed the special counsel's office in may of this year [14:04] but there are certain points that bear emphasis first our investigation found that the russian [14:10] government interfered in our election in sweeping and systematic fashion second the investigation did [14:19] not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired with the russian government in its election [14:25] interference activities we did not address collusion which is not a legal term rather we focused on whether [14:34] the evidence was sufficient to charge any member of the campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy and it was not [14:41] the investigation of the investigation and lied to investigators was of critical importance [14:51] obstruction of justice strikes at the core of the government's effort to find the truth and to hold [14:59] wrongdoers accountable finally as described in volume two of our report we investigated a series of actions [15:08] by the president towards the investigation based on justice department policy and principles of fairness [15:15] we decided we would not make a determination as to whether the president committed a crime that was [15:22] our decision then and it remains our decision today let me say a further word about my appearance today [15:32] it is unusual for a prosecutor to testify about a criminal investigation and given my role as a prosecutor [15:40] there are reasons why my testimony testimony will necessarily be limited first public testimony could [15:49] affect several ongoing matters in some of these matters court rules or judicial orders limit the [15:58] disclosure of information to protect to protect the fairness of the proceedings and consistent with [16:05] long-standing justice department policy it would be inappropriate for me to comment in any way that could [16:11] affect an ongoing matter second the justice department has asserted privileges concerning investigative [16:20] information and decisions ongoing matters within the justice department and deliberations [16:26] within our office these are justice department privileges that i will respect the department has [16:33] released the letter discussing the restrictions on my testimony i therefore will not be able to answer [16:40] questions about certain areas that i know are of public interest for example i am unable to address [16:47] questions about the initial opening of the fbi's russia investigation which occurred months before my [16:54] appointment or matters related to the so-called steel dossier these matters are subject of ongoing [17:01] review by the department any questions on these topics should therefore be directed to the fbi or the [17:08] justice department as i explained when we closed the special counsel's office in may our report contains [17:18] our findings and analysis and the reasons for the decisions we made we conducted an extensive investigation over [17:27] two years in writing the report we stated the results of our investigation with precision we scrutinized every word [17:37] and do not intend to summarize or describe the results of our work in a different way in the course of my testimony today [17:47] as i said on may 29th the report is my testimony and i will stay within that text and as i stated in may [17:57] i will not comment on the actions of the attorney general or of congress i was appointed as a prosecutor [18:05] and i intend intend to adhere to that role and to the department standards that govern it i'll be [18:12] joined today by deputy special counsel aaron zebley mr zebley has extensive experience as a federal [18:18] prosecutor and at the fbi where he served as my chief of staff mr mr zebley was responsible for [18:25] the day-to-day oversight of the investigations conducted by our office [18:33] i also want to again say thank you to the attorneys the fbi agents the analysts the professional [18:41] staff who helped us conduct this investigation in a fair and independent manner these individuals [18:48] who spent nearly two years of working on this matter were of the highest integrity let me say [18:57] one more thing over the course of my career i have seen a number of challenges to our democracy [19:05] the russian government's effort to interfere in our election is among the most serious as i said on [19:13] may 29th this deserves the attention of every american thank you mr chairman thank you we will now [19:24] proceed under the five minute rule with questions i will begin by recognizing myself for five minutes [19:30] director muller the president has repeatedly claimed that your report found there was no [19:36] obstruction and that it completely and totally exonerated him but that is not what your report [19:43] said is it correct that is not what the report said and now reading from page two of volume two of [19:48] your report that's on the screen you wrote quote if we had confidence after a thorough investigation [19:55] of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice we would so state based [20:03] on the facts and the applicable legal standards however we are unable to reach that judgment close [20:08] quote now does that say there was no obstruction no in fact you were actually unable to conclude the [20:16] president did not commit obstruction of justice is that correct well we uh at the outset determined that [20:24] that we uh when it came to the uh the president's culpability uh we needed to uh we needed we needed to go [20:35] forward only after taking into account the olc opinion that indicated that a president a sitting [20:41] president cannot be uh indicted so the report did not conclude that he did not commit obstruction of [20:48] justice is that correct that is correct and what about total exoneration did you actually totally [20:55] exonerate the president no now in fact your reports expressly states that it does not exonerate the [21:02] president it does and your investigation actually found quote multiple acts by the president that [21:09] were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations including the russian [21:15] interference and obstruction investigations is that correct correct now director muller can you explain [21:21] in plain terms what that finding means so the american people can understand it well uh [21:28] the finding indicates that uh the president uh was not uh that the president was not a sculpting [21:40] exculpated uh for the acts that uh he allegedly committed in fact you were talking about incidents [21:49] quote in which the president sought to use his official power outside of usual channels unquote [21:55] to exert undue influence over your investigations is that right that's correct now am i correct [22:00] that on page seven of volume two of your report you wrote quote the president became aware that his [22:06] own conduct was being investigated in an obstruction of justice inquiry at that point the president [22:13] engaged in a second phase of conduct involving public attacks on the investigation non-public efforts [22:19] to control it and efforts in both public and private to encourage witnesses not to cooperate with the [22:25] investigation close quote so president trump's efforts to exert undue influence over your investigation [22:32] intensified after the president became aware that he personally was being investigated i stick with [22:38] the language that you have in front of you which which comes from page seven volume two now is it correct [22:46] that if you concluded that the president committed the crime of obstruction you could not publicly state [22:52] that in your report or here today can you repeat the question sir is it correct that if you had [22:58] concluded that the president committed the crime of obstruction you could not publicly state that in [23:03] your report or here today well i would say you um i could the statement would be the that you would not [23:12] indict and you would not indict because uh under the olc opinion uh a sitting president excuse me cannot be [23:19] indicted be unconstitutional so you could not state that because of the olc opinion if that would have [23:24] been your conclusion oh we'll see opinion uh uh with some guide yes but under doj under department of [23:30] justice policy the president could be prosecuted for obstruction of justice crimes after he leaves [23:36] offices correct true thank you did any senior white house official refuse a request to be interviewed [23:42] by you and your team i don't believe so president i take let me take that back i i would have to [23:50] look at it but i'm not certain that that was the case did the president refuse a request to be [23:56] interviewed by you and your team yes yes and is it true that you tried for more than a year to secure [24:01] an interview with the president yes and is it true that you and your team advised the president's lawyer [24:07] that quote an interview with the president is vital to our investigation close yes and is it true that [24:14] you also quote stated that it is in the interest of the presidency and the public for an interview to [24:20] take place close quote yes but the president still refused to sit for an interview by you or your [24:26] team true true and did you also ask him to provide written answers to questions on the 10 possible [24:34] episodes of obstruction of justice crimes involving him yes did he provide any answers to a single [24:40] question about whether he engaged in obstruction of justice crimes i would have to check on that i'm [24:45] not certain director muller we are grateful that you are here to explain your investigation and findings [24:49] having reviewed your work i believe anyone else would engage in the conduct described in your [24:54] report would have been criminally prosecuted your work is vitally important to this committee and [24:58] the american people because no one is above the law um i'll now i'll now recognize the uh [25:07] gentleman from georgia mr collins thank you mr chairman and we're moving on no understanding just [25:13] reiterating the five minute rule mr muller i have several questions many of which that you just answered [25:17] will be kind of uh questioned here in a moment but i want to lay some foundation so we'll go through [25:21] these fairly quickly i'll i'll talk slowly i'm said that i talk fast i will talk slowly thank you [25:26] sir in your press conference you stated any testimony from your office would not go beyond [25:30] our report we chose these works carefully the work speaks for itself i would not provide information [25:34] beyond that which is already public in any appearance before congress do you stand by that statement [25:38] yes since closing special counsel's office in may of 2019 have you conducted any additional [25:44] interviews or obtained any new information in your role as special counsel and in the in the wake of [25:50] the report since the since the closing of the office in may of 2019 and the question was have you [25:55] conducted any new interviews and any new witnesses anything and you can confirm you're no longer [26:00] special counsel correct i am no longer special counsel at any time of the investigation was your [26:05] investigation curtailed or curtailed or stopped or hindered no were you or your team provided any [26:12] questions by members of congress of majority ahead of your hearing today no your report states that your [26:18] investigative team included 19 lawyers and approximately 40 fbi agents and analysts and [26:22] accountants are those numbers accurate could you repeat that please 40 fbi agents 19 lawyers [26:28] intelligence analysts and forensic accountants are those numbers accurate this was included in [26:33] your report generally yes is it also true that you issued over 200 2800 subpoenas executed nearly [26:38] 500 search warrants obtained more than 230 orders for communication records and 50 pin registers that went a little [26:44] fast for me okay in your report i'll make this very simple you did a lot of work correct yes that i [26:51] agreed a lot of subpoenas a lot of pin register subpoenas okay we'll walk this really slow we need [26:56] search warrants all right a lot of search warrants a lot of things so you're very thorough you went [27:01] in your opinion very thorough you listed this out in your report correct yes thank you is it true the [27:08] evidence gathered during your investigation given the questions that you've just answered is it true the [27:13] evidence gathered during your investigation did not establish that the president was involved [27:17] in the underlying crime related to russian election interference as stated in volume one page seven [27:23] we found uh insufficient uh evidence of uh the president's culpability uh so that would be a yes [27:33] without i'm pardon that would be a yes yes yes thank you isn't it true the evidence did not [27:38] establish that the president or those close to him were involved in the charged russian computer [27:42] hacking or active measure conspiracies or that the president otherwise had unlawful relationships [27:46] with any russian official volume two page 76 correct i leave the answer to the uh our report so yes [27:54] is that any true your investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or [27:58] coordinated with russian government in the election interference activity volume one page two volume one [28:03] page 173 thank you yes yes thank you although your report states collusion is not so specific offense [28:11] and you said that this morning or a term of art in federal criminal law conspiracy is in the [28:17] colloquial context are collusion and conspiracy essentially synonymous terms you're gonna have to [28:23] repeat that for me collusion is not a specific offense or a term of art in the federal criminal law [28:32] conspiracy is yes in the colloquial context known public context collusion collusion and conspiracy are [28:41] essentially synonymous terms correct no if no on page 180 of volume one of your report you wrote as [28:49] defined in legal dictionaries collusion is largely synonymous with conspiracy as that crime is set [28:53] forth in the general federal conspiracy statute 18 usc 371 you said at your may 29th press conference [28:59] and here today you choose your words carefully are you sitting here today testifying something different [29:04] than what your report states well what i'm asking is if you can give me the citation i can look at the [29:11] citation and uh evaluate whether it is okay let me just be clarified you stated that you would stay [29:18] within the report i just stated your report back to you and you said that collusion the collusion [29:23] and conspiracy were not synonymous terms that was your answer was no that's correct in that page 180 [29:28] of volume one of your report it says as defined in legal dictionaries collusion is largely synonymous [29:35] with conspiracy as that crime is set forth in general conspiracy statute 18 usc 371. now you said you [29:41] chose your words carefully are you contradicting your report right now not when i read it so you change [29:48] your answer to yes then no the uh if you look at the language i'm reading your report sir it's a yes [29:57] no answer page 180 page 180 volume one this was from your report correct and i i i i leave it with [30:05] the uh report so the report says yes they are synonymous hopefully for finally out of your own report we [30:10] can put to bed the collusion and conspiracy one last question as we're going through did you ever look [30:16] into other countries investigated in the russians uh interference into our election where other [30:21] countries investigated or found knowledge that they had interference our election i'm not going to [30:26] discuss uh other matters uh that i yield back gentleman yields back the gentlelady from california [30:33] director muller as you've heard from the chairman we're mostly going to talk about obstruction of [30:39] justice today but the investigation of russia's attack that started your investigation is why evidence of [30:46] possible obstruction is serious to what extent did the russian government interfere [30:52] in the 2016 presidential election could you repeat that ma'am to what extent did the russian [30:58] government interfere in the 2016 presidential election well it uh particularly when it came to [31:05] uh computer crimes and the like uh the government was implicated so you wrote on in volume one that [31:11] the russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion [31:19] you also described in your report that the then trump campaign chairman paul manafort shared with a [31:25] russian operative kalimnik the campaign strategy for winning democratic votes in midwestern states [31:33] in internal polling data of the campaign isn't that correct correct they they also discussed the status [31:39] of the trump campaign and manafort strategy for winning democratic votes in midwestern states months before [31:46] that meeting manafort had caused internal data to be shared with kalimnik and the sharing continued [31:52] for some period of time after their august meeting isn't that correct accurate in fact your investigation [31:59] found that manafort briefed kalimnik on the state of the trump campaign and manafort's plan to win the [32:04] election and that briefing encompassed the campaign's messaging its internal polling data it also [32:10] include discussion of battleground states which manafort identified as michigan wisconsin pennsylvania [32:18] and minnesota isn't that correct that's correct did your investigation determine who requested the [32:23] polling data to be shared with kalimnik well i i would uh direct you to the report and adapt what we [32:30] have in the report with regard to that particular issue we don't have the redacted version that's maybe [32:35] another reason why we should get that for volume one based on your investigation how could the [32:41] russian government have used this campaign polling data to further its sweeping and systematic [32:46] interference in the 2016 presidential election that's a little bit out of uh our uh path fair enough [32:55] um did your investigation find that the russian government perceived it would benefit from one of [33:00] the candidates winning yes and which candidate would that be well it would be trim [33:10] by trump correct now the trump campaign wasn't exactly reluctant to take russian help you wrote [33:17] it expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through russian [33:23] efforts isn't that correct that's correct now was the investigation's determination uh what was the [33:31] investigation's determination regarding the frequency with which the trump campaign made contact with the [33:37] russian government well uh i would have to refer you to the report on that well we went through and we [33:44] counted 126 uh contacts between uh russians or their agents and uh trump campaign uh officials or their [33:56] associates so would that sound about right i i can't say i i understand this statistic and uh i believe it [34:04] you know i understand the statistic well mr meller i appreciate your being here and your report from [34:11] your testimony and the report i think the american people have learned several things first the russians [34:19] wanted trump to win second the russians went on a sweeping cyber influence campaign the russians hacked [34:29] the dnc and they got the democratic game plan for the election the russian campaign chairman met with [34:37] russian agents and repeatedly gave them internal data polling and messaging in the battleground states [34:46] so while the russians were buying ads and creating propaganda to influence the outcome of the election [34:53] they were armed with inside information that they had stolen through hacking from the dnc and that they [35:00] had been given by the trump campaign uh chairman mr manafort my colleagues will probe the efforts [35:07] undertaken to keep this information from becoming public but i think it's important for the american [35:14] people to understand the gravity of the underlying problem that your report uncovered and with that [35:20] mr chairman i would yield back gentlelady good morning director if you'll let me quickly summarize [35:30] your opening statement this morning you said in volume one on the issue of conspiracy the special counsel [35:35] determined that the investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or [35:40] coordinated with the russian government in its election interference activities and then in volume [35:44] two for reasons that you explain the special counsel did not make a determination on whether there was [35:49] an obstruction of justice crime committed by the president is that fair yeah yes sir all right now in [35:55] explaining the special counsel did not make what you called a traditional prosecution or declination decision [36:00] the report on the bottom of page two of volume two reads as follows the evidence we obtained about the [36:07] president's actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining [36:13] that no criminal conduct occurred accordingly while this report does not conclude that the president [36:18] committed a crime it also does not exonerate him now uh i read that correctly yes all right now your [36:25] report and today you said at all times the special counsel team operated under was guided by and followed [36:31] justice department policies and principles so which doj policy or principle sets forth a legal standard that [36:38] an investigated person is not exonerated if their innocence from criminal conduct is not conclusively [36:44] determined can you repeat the last part of that question yeah which doj policy or principle set forth [36:51] a legal standard that an investigated person is not exonerated if their innocence from criminal conduct is not [36:57] conclusively determined where does that language come from director where is the doj policy that says [37:05] that can you let me make it easier can you give me an example other than donald trump where the justice [37:14] department determined that an investigated person was not exonerated because their innocence was not [37:19] conclusively determined i i cannot but this is a unique okay well you can't time is short i've got five [37:26] minutes let's just leave it at you can't find it because i'll tell you why it doesn't exist the special [37:32] counsel's job nowhere does it say that you were to conclusively determine donald trump's innocence or [37:37] that the special counsel report should determine whether or not to exonerate him it's not in any of [37:41] the documents it's not in your appointment order it's not in the special counsel regulations it's not in [37:46] the olc opinions it's not in the justice manual and it's not in the principles of federal prosecution [37:50] nowhere do those words appear together because respectfully respectfully director it was not the [37:56] special counsel's job to conclusively determine donald trump's innocence or to exonerate him [38:01] because the bedrock principle of our justice system is a presumption of innocence it exists for [38:07] everyone everyone is entitled to it including sitting presidents and because there is a presumption of [38:14] innocence prosecutors never ever need to conclusively determine it now director the special counsel applied [38:23] this inverted burden of proof that i can't find and you said doesn't exist anywhere in the department [38:30] policies and you used it to write a report and the very first line of your report the very first line [38:37] of your report says and you as you read this morning it authorizes the special counsel to provide the [38:43] attorney general with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached [38:49] by the special counsel that's the very first word of your report right that's correct here's the [38:54] problem director the special counsel didn't do that on volume one you did on volume volume two with [39:03] respect to potential of obstruction of justice the special counsel made neither a prosecution [39:09] decision or a declination decision you made no decision you told us this morning and in your report [39:15] that you made no determination so respectfully director you didn't follow the special counsel [39:20] regulations it clearly says write a confidential report about decisions reached nowhere in here does [39:27] it say write a report about decisions that weren't reached you wrote 180 pages 180 pages about decisions [39:36] that weren't reached about potential crimes that weren't charged or decided and respectfully respectfully [39:43] by doing that you managed to violate every principle and the most sacred of traditions [39:49] about prosecutors not offering extra prosecutorial analysis about potential crimes that aren't charged so [39:57] americans need to know this as they listen to the democrats and socialists on the other side of the aisle [40:02] as they do dramatic readings from this report that volume two of this report was not authorized [40:09] under the law to be written it was written to a legal standard that does not exist at the justice department [40:16] and it was written in violation of every doj principle about extra prosecutorial commentary i agree with [40:22] the chairman this morning when he said donald trump is not above the law he's not but he damn sure [40:27] shouldn't be below the law which is where volume two of this report puts him thank you mr chairman [40:38] director muller good morning your exchange with the gentlelady from california demonstrates what is at [40:43] stake the trump campaign chair paul manafort was passing sensitive voter information and polar data to a [40:50] russian operative and there were so many other ways that russia subverted our democracy together with the [40:57] evidence in volume one i cannot think of a more serious need to investigate so now i'm going to ask you [41:03] some questions about obstruction of justice as it relates to volume two on page 12 of volume two you state [41:12] we determined that there were sufficient factual and legal basis to further investigate potential [41:19] obstruction of justice issues involving the president is that correct and do you have the citation ma'am [41:27] page 12 volume two and which portion of that page that is we determined that there was a sufficient [41:36] factual and legal basis to further investigate potential obstruction of justice issues involving the [41:42] president is that correct yes your report also describes at least 10 separate instances of [41:48] possible obstruction of justice i'm sure that were investigated by you and your team is that correct [41:53] yes in fact the table of contents serves as a very good guide of some of the acts of that obstruction [42:00] of justice that you investigated and i put it up on the screen on page 157 of volume two you describe [42:07] those acts and they range from the president's effort to curtail the special counsel's investigation the [42:13] president's further efforts to have the attorney general take over the investigation the president's [42:19] orders dom again to deny that the president tried to fire the special counsel and many others is that [42:25] correct yes i direct you now uh to uh what you wrote director muller the president's pattern of conduct [42:34] as a whole sheds light on the nature of the president's acts and the inferences that can be drawn about [42:40] his intent does that mean you have to investigate all of his conduct to ascertain true motive no and when [42:48] you talk about the president's pattern of conduct that include the 10 possible acts of obstruction [42:53] that you investigated is that correct when you talk about the president's pattern of conduct [42:58] that would include the 10 possible acts of obstruction that you investigated correct i direct you to the [43:04] report for how that is characterized thank you let me go to the screen again and for each of those [43:10] 10 potential instances of obstruction of justice you analyze three elements of the crime of obstruction [43:17] of justice an obstructive act a nexus between the act and an official proceeding and corrupt intent is [43:23] that correct yes you wrote on page 178 volume two in your report about corrupt intent actions by the [43:30] president to end a criminal investigation into his own conduct to protect against personal embarrassment [43:38] or legal liability would constitute a core example of corruptly motivated conduct is that correct yes [43:46] to the screen again even with the evidence you did find is it true as you note on page 76 of volume two [43:52] that the evidence does indicate that a thorough fbi investigation would uncover facts about the [43:58] campaign and the president personally that the president could have understood to be crimes or [44:03] that would give rise to legal personal and political concerns i rely on the language of the report [44:10] is that relevant to potential obstruction of justice is that relevant to potential obstruction of justice [44:16] yes you further elaborate on page 157 obstruction of justice can be motivated by a desire to protect [44:22] non-criminal personal interests to protect against investigations where underlying criminal liability [44:27] falls into a gray area or to avoid personal uh embarrassment is that correct yes i have on the [44:35] screen is that correct on the screen can you uh repeat the question and now that i have the uh [44:43] language on the screen is it correct uh as you further elaborate obstruction of justice can be [44:48] motivated by a direct desire to protect non-criminal personal interests to protect against investigations [44:54] where underlying criminal liability falls into a gray area or to avoid is that true and is it true that the [44:59] impact of a pardon can you read the last question the last question was i certainly got it accurate [45:07] no the last question was the language on uh the uh screen asking you if that's correct yes okay uh does [45:17] the conviction of obstruction of justice uh result potentially in a lot of years of uh a lot of years [45:23] of time in jail yes well again can you repeat the the question just to make certain that i have it [45:33] accurate uh does obstruction of justice warrant a lot of time in trial and a jail if you were convicted [45:40] yes and in time of the gentlelady has expired uh gentleman from wisconsin uh thank you very much mr [45:47] chairman uh let me begin by reading the special counsel regulations by which you were appointed it reads [45:54] quote at the conclusion of the special counsel's work he or she shall provide the attorney general with [46:01] a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declinations decisions reached by the special [46:08] counsel that correct yes okay now when a regulation uses the word shall provide does it mean that the [46:16] individual is in fact obligated to provide what's being demanded by the regulation or statute meaning you [46:22] don't have any wiggle room right i'd have to look more closely at the statute i just read it to you [46:30] okay now volume two page one your report boldly states we determined not to make a traditional [46:38] prosecutorial prosecutorial judgment is that correct i'm trying to find that citation congressman [46:52] director could you speak more directly into the microphone please yes thank you well it's volume two [46:58] page mr chairman i'm sorry yes volume two page one it said we determined not to make a traditional [47:04] prosecutorial judgment yes that's right at the beginning now since you decided under the olc opinion [47:13] that you couldn't prosecute a sitting president meaning president trump why don't we have all of this [47:20] uh investigation of president trump that the other side is talking about when you knew that you [47:26] weren't going to prosecute him well you don't know where the investigation is going to lie and the [47:32] olc opinion itself says that you can continue the investigation even though you are not going to [47:39] indict the president okay well if you're not going to indict the president then you just continue [47:45] fishing and that's you know that's my option my observation you know sure you sure you my time is [47:52] limited sure you can indict other people but you can't indict the sitting president right that's true [47:59] okay now there are 182 pages in raw evidentiary material including hundreds of references to 302 [48:09] which are interviews by the fbi for individuals who've never been cross-examined and which did not [48:15] comply with the special counsel's governing regulation to explain the prosecution or declination decisions [48:22] reached correct and where are you reading from on that i'm reading from my question [48:30] then could you repeat it okay you have 182 pages of raw evidentiary material with hundreds of [48:37] references to 302s who were never been cross-examined and which didn't comply with the governing regulation [48:44] to explain the prosecution or declaration declaration decisions reached this is one of those uh areas which [48:52] i declined to discuss okay and i would direct you to the report itself okay well i looked at 182 pages of [49:03] you know let me switch gears mr chabot and i were on this committee during the clinton impeachment now [49:09] while i recognize that the independent council statute under which kenneth starr operated is different from [49:17] the special counsel statute he in a number of occasions in his report stated that the president [49:25] clinton's actions may have risen to impeachable conduct recognizing that it is up to the house of [49:33] representatives to determine what conduct is impeachable you never use the term raising to impeachable [49:41] conduct for any of the 10 instances that the gentleman from texas uh right right did is it true that there's [49:49] nothing in volume two of the report that says that the president may have engaged in impeachable conduct [49:57] well uh we have uh studiously uh kept in the the center of our investigation the our mandate and our mandate [50:10] does not go to other ways of addressing conduct our mandate goes to uh what uh developing the report and [50:18] turning the report into the attorney general respect you know it's it seems to me [50:22] you know that there are a couple of statements that you made you know that said that this is not for [50:28] me to decide and the implication is is that this is for this committee to decide now you didn't use the [50:34] word impeachable conduct like starr did there was no statute to prevent you from using the word [50:40] impeachable conduct and i go back to what mr radcliffe said and that is is that even the president [50:47] is innocent until proven guilty all right my time is up gentlemen his time has expired the uh gentleman [50:54] from tennessee thank you mr chair first i'd just like to re re re state that mr nadler said about [51:02] your career it's a model of rectitude and i thank you sir based upon your investigation how did president [51:10] trump react to your appointment as special counsel again i uh send you the report for uh uh where that is [51:17] stated well there is a quote from page 78 of your report volume two which reads when sessions told [51:24] the president that a special counsel had been appointed the president slumped back in his chair and said [51:31] quote oh my god this is terrible this is the end of my presidency i'm effed unquote did attorney general [51:41] sessions tell you about that little talk uh i'm not right here please speak into the microphone oh surely [51:48] my my apologies um i am not certain of the the person who originally uh uh copied that quote [51:58] okay well sessions apparently said it and one of his aides had it in his notes too which i think you [52:03] had but but that's become record he wasn't pleased he probably wasn't pleased with a special counsel and [52:08] particularly you because of your outstanding reputation correct prior to your appointment the attorney [52:12] general recused himself from the investigation because of his role in the 2016 campaign is that not [52:17] correct correct correct recusal means the attorney general could not be involved in the investigation [52:23] is that correct that's the effect of recusal yes and so instead another trump appointee as you [52:29] uh know mr sessions was mr rosenstein became in charge of it is that correct yes wasn't attorney [52:35] general sessions following the rules and professional advice of the department of justice ethics folks when [52:42] he recused himself from the investigation yes and yet the president repeatedly expressed his [52:47] displeasure at sessions decision to follow those ethics rules to recuse himself from oversight of [52:52] that investigation is that not correct that's accurate based on what is written in the report [52:56] and the president's reaction uh to the recusal is noted in the report mr bannon recalled that the [53:03] president was mad as mad as bannon had ever seen him and he screamed at mcgann about how weak sessions [53:10] was do you recall that from the report that's in the report yes despite knowing that attorney general [53:15] sessions was supposed to be in was not supposed to be involved in the investigation the president [53:19] still tried to get the attorney general to unrecuse himself after you were appointed special counsel [53:25] uh is that correct yes in fact your investigation found that at some point after your appointment [53:31] quote the president called sessions at his home and asked if he would unrecuse himself is that not true [53:37] it's true now that wasn't the first time the president asked sessions to unrecuse himself [53:42] was it i know there were at least two occasions and one of them was with flynn and one of them [53:48] was when sessions and mcgann flew to mar-a-lago to meet with the president sessions recalled that [53:52] the president pulled him aside to speak alone and suggested he should do this unrecusal act correct [53:59] correct and then when michael flynn a few days after flynn entered a guilty plea for lying to federal [54:05] agents and indicated his intent to cooperate with that investigation trump asked to speak to sessions [54:11] alone again in the oval office and again asked sessions to unrecuse himself true i refer you to [54:17] the report for that page 109 volume two thank you sir do you know of any point when the president [54:22] personally expressed anger or frustrations at sessions i'd have to pass on that you called and [54:31] i think it said page 78 of volume two the president told sessions you were supposed to protect me [54:36] you were supposed to protect me or words to that effect correct and it's the attorney general supposed [54:44] to be the attorney general of the united states of america or the consigliari for the president [54:50] united states of america thank you sir in fact you wrote in your report that the president repeatedly [54:56] sought to convince sessions to unrecuse himself so sessions could supervise the quest investigation [55:01] in a way that would restrict its scope is that correct uh rely on the uh the report how could [55:07] sessions have restricted the scope of your investigation uh well i'm not going to speculate uh if he [55:14] uh quite obviously if he took over or was uh attorney general he would have greater latitude in his [55:20] actions that uh uh would uh enable him to do things that otherwise he could not on page 113 you said the [55:28] president believed that an unrecused attorney general play a protective role it could shield the [55:32] president from the ongoing investigation regardless of all that i want to thank you director muller for [55:36] your life of rectitude and service to our country it's clear from your report and the evidence that the [55:41] president wanted former attorney general sessions to violate the justice department ethics rules [55:46] by taking over your investigation and improperly interfering with it to protect himself [55:51] and his campaign your findings are so important because in america nobody is above the law [55:57] i yield back the balance of my time thank the gentleman for yielding back the gentleman from ohio [56:02] thank you uh director moeller my democratic colleagues were very disappointed in your report [56:07] they were expecting you to say something along the lines of here's uh why president trump deserves to [56:13] be impeached much as ken starr did relative to president clinton back about 20 years ago well you didn't [56:21] so their strategy had to change now they allege that there's plenty of evidence uh in your report [56:26] to impeach the president but the american people just didn't read it and this hearing today [56:32] today is their last best hope to build up some sort of groundswell across america to impeach president [56:39] trump that's what this is really all about uh today now a few questions on page uh 103 of volume two of [56:47] your report when discussing the june 2016 trump tower meeting uh you referenced quote the firm that [56:54] produced steel reporting unquote the name of that firm was fusion gps is that correct and your [57:03] on page 103 103 that's correct volume two when you talk about the the firm that produced the steel [57:12] reporting uh the name of the firm that produced that was fusion gps is that correct i'm not familiar [57:20] with uh with uh with that i well let me just help you uh it was it's not it's not a trick question [57:26] it was fusion gps now fusion gps produced the opposition research document widened widely known as the [57:34] steel dossier and the owner of fusion gpa was uh someone named glenn simpson are you familiar with [57:42] this is outside my purview okay um glenn simpson was never mentioned in the 448 page muller report was [57:51] he well as i say it's outside my purview and it's being handled in the department by others okay well he [57:57] was not uh 448 pages the the owner of fusion gps uh that did the steel dossier that started all this [58:05] uh he's not mentioned in there let me move on uh at the same time uh fusion gps was working to collect [58:12] opposition research on donald trump uh from foreign sources on behalf of the clinton campaign and the [58:19] democratic national committee it also was representing a russian-based company prebazon which had been [58:26] sanctioned by the u.s government are you aware of that it's outside my purview okay thank you one [58:33] of the key players uh in the i'll go to something different um one of the key players in the june [58:38] 2016 trump tower meeting was natalia visonetska who you described in your report as a russian attorney who [58:47] advocated uh for the repeal of the magnitsky act uh visonetskia had been working with none other than [58:55] glenn simpson and fusion gps since at least early 2014. um are you aware of that outside my purview [59:04] thank you but uh you didn't mention that or her connections uh to glenn simpson and fusion gps uh in [59:11] in your report at all um let me move on now nbc news has reported the following quote russian lawyer [59:19] natalia visonetskia says she first received the supposedly incriminating information she brought [59:26] to trump tower describing alleged tax evasion and donation to democrats from none other than glenn [59:32] simpson the fusion gps owner um you didn't include that in the report and i assume it's a matter being [59:39] handled by others at the department of justice okay thank you um now your report spends 14 pages [59:45] discussing the june 9 2016 trump tower meeting um it would be fair to say would it not that you spent [59:54] significant resources investigating that meeting well i refer you to the uh uh the report okay and [1:00:01] and president trump wasn't at the meeting no thank you now in stark contrast to the actions of the trump [1:00:09] campaign we know that the clinton campaign did pay fusion gps to gather dirt on the trump campaign from [1:00:16] persons associated with foreign governments but your report doesn't mention a thing about fusion gps [1:00:24] in it and you didn't investigate fusion gps's connections to russia so let me just ask you this [1:00:30] can you see that from neglecting to mention glenn simpson and fusion gps's involvement with the [1:00:37] clinton campaign to focusing on a brief meeting at the trump tower that produced nothing to ignoring [1:00:43] the clinton campaign's own ties to fusion gps why some view your report as a pretty one-sided attack [1:00:52] on the president well i have uh i tell you it is still outside my purview all right and i i would [1:00:59] just note finally that uh i guess it's just by chance by coincidence that the things left out of [1:01:05] the report tended to be favorable to the president is my time's expired thank you uh director muller i'd [1:01:13] like to get us back on track here your investigation found that president trump directed white house [1:01:20] counsel don mcgan to fire you isn't that correct true and the president claimed that he wanted to fire you [1:01:29] because you had he wanted to fire you because you had supposed conflicts of interest isn't that correct [1:01:35] true now you had no conflicts of interest that required your removal isn't that a fact correct and in [1:01:42] fact don mcgan advised the president that the asserted conflicts were in his words silly and not real [1:01:50] conflicts isn't that true i've referred to the report on that episode well page 85 of volume 2 speaks to [1:01:58] that and uh also director muller doj ethics officials confirmed that you had no conflicts that would prevent [1:02:07] you from serving as special counsel isn't that correct that's correct but despite don mcgan and the [1:02:13] department of justice guidance around may 23 2017 the president quote prodded mcgan to complain to deputy [1:02:24] attorney general rosenstein about these supposed conflicts of interest correct correct and mcgan declined [1:02:33] to call rosenstein or rosenstein i'm sorry telling the president that it would look like still trying [1:02:41] to meddle in the investigation and knocking out muller would be another fact used to claim obstruction [1:02:49] of justice isn't that correct generally so yes and in other words uh director muller the white house [1:02:55] counsel told the president that if he tried to remove you that that could be another basis to [1:03:02] allege that the president was obstructing justice correct um that is generally correct yes now i'd like [1:03:09] to review what happened after the president was warned about obstructing justice on tuesday i'm sorry [1:03:18] congressman do you have a citation for the yes uh volume uh two page 81 thank you and 82 now i'd like to [1:03:29] review what happened after the president was warned about obstructing justice uh it's true [1:03:35] that on tuesday june 13 2017 the president dictated a press statement stating he had quote no intention [1:03:45] of firing you correct correct but the following day june 14 the media reported for the first time [1:03:55] that you were investigating the president for obstructing of justice correct correct and then after [1:04:02] learning for the first time that he was under investigation the very next day the president [1:04:08] quote issued a series of tweets acknowledging the existence of the obstruction investigation [1:04:14] and criticizing it isn't that correct generally so and then on saturday june 17th two days later the [1:04:22] president called don mcgan at home from camp david on a saturday to talk about you isn't that correct [1:04:31] correct what was the significant uh uh what was significant about that first weekend phone call [1:04:38] that don mcgan uh took from president uh trump i'm going to ask you to rely on what we uh wrote about [1:04:46] you wrote in your report that on uh at page 85 volume two that on saturday june 17 2017 the president [1:04:55] called mcgan at home to have the special counsel removed now did the president call don mcgan more [1:05:04] than once that day well i gave uh i think it was two calls i'm sorry about that on page 85 of your report [1:05:14] you wrote quote on the first call mcgan recalled that the president said something like quote you got to [1:05:21] do this you got to call rod correct correct correct and your investigation and report found that don mcgan [1:05:28] was perturbed uh to use your words by the president's request to call rod rosenstein to fire him isn't that [1:05:36] correct well there there was a continuous uh uh uh policy i would now it was a continuous involvement of [1:05:45] don mcgan responding to the president's entreaties and he did not want to uh put himself in the middle [1:05:53] of that he did not want to have a role in asking the attorney general to fire the special counsel [1:06:01] correct well i would again refer you to the report and the way it is characterized in the report thank [1:06:07] you at volume uh 2 page 85 it states that he didn't want to have the attorney general he didn't want to [1:06:15] have a role in trying to fire the attorney general so at this point uh i will yield back thank you mr [1:06:27] chairman uh mr muller well first let me ask a unanimous consent mr chairman to submit uh this article [1:06:36] robert muller unmasked for the record without objection now [1:06:42] mr muller who wrote the nine minute comments you read at your may 29th press conference [1:06:49] i'm not going to get into that okay so that's what i thought you didn't write it a 2013 puff [1:06:55] piece in the washingtonian about comey said basically when comey called you drop everything you were doing [1:07:01] it gave examples you're having dinner with your wife and daughter comey calls you drop everything and [1:07:07] go uh the article quoted comey as saying if a train were coming down the track and i quote at least bob [1:07:14] muller will be standing on the tracks with me yeah uh you and james comey have been good friends or [1:07:21] were good friends for a for many years correct no we were business associates we both started off in [1:07:27] the justice department about you were good friends you can work together and not be friends but you and [1:07:31] comey were friends we were friends that's my question thank you for getting to the answer now [1:07:37] before you were appointed as special counsel uh had you talked to james comey in the preceding six [1:07:44] months no uh when you were appointed as special counsel um was president uh trump's firing of comey [1:07:54] something you anticipated investigating potentially obstruction of justice okay again into that [1:07:59] uh internal deliberation to the justice department actually it goes to your credibility and maybe [1:08:05] you've been away from the courtroom for a while credibility is always relevant it's always material [1:08:09] and that goes for you too you're a witness before us let me ask you when you talked to president [1:08:14] trump the day before he appointed or you were appointed as special counsel you were talking to him [1:08:20] about fbi director position again uh did he mention the firing of james comey but not as a candidate [1:08:28] i was asked did he mention the firing of james comey in your discussion with him and i remember [1:08:36] pardon and not remember i don't believe so but i'm not going to be specific you don't remember [1:08:41] but if he did you could have been a fact witness as to the president's comments and state of mind on [1:08:48] firing james comey i suppose that's possible yeah so most prosecutors want to make sure there's no [1:08:56] appearance of impropriety uh but in your case you hired a bunch of people that did not like the [1:09:04] president let me ask you when did you first learn of peter struck's animus toward donald trump in the [1:09:11] summer of uh 2017. you didn't know before he was hired i'm sorry you didn't know before he was hired for [1:09:20] your team uh you know what peter struck hated trump okay you didn't know that before he was made part [1:09:32] of your team is that what you're saying i did not know that all right uh when did you first learn when [1:09:37] he did find out i acted uh swiftly to have him reassigned elsewhere in the well there's some [1:09:42] discussion about how swift that was but when did you learn of the ongoing affair he was having with [1:09:47] lisa page about the same time okay struck did you ever order anybody to investigate the deletion of [1:09:59] all of their texts off of their government uh phones once we found that uh peter struck was an author of [1:10:07] uh did you ever may i finish order well you're not answering my question did you order an investigation [1:10:14] in the deletion and reformatting of their government phones no there was an ig investigation ongoing [1:10:22] well listen uh regarding collusion or conspiracy you didn't find evidence of any agreement i'm quoting [1:10:29] you among the trump campaign officials and any russia linked individuals to interfere with our u.s [1:10:35] election correct correct so you also note in the report that an element of any of those obstructions [1:10:45] you referenced requires a corrupt state of mind correct corrupt intent correct right and if [1:10:52] somebody knows they did not conspire with anybody from russia to affect the election and they see the [1:11:02] big justice department with people that hate that person coming after them and then a special [1:11:10] counsel appointed who hires dozen or more people that hate that person and he knows he's innocent he's not [1:11:20] corruptly acting in order to see that justice is done what he's doing is not obstructing justice [1:11:29] he is pursuing justice and the fact that you ran it out two years means you perpetuated injustice [1:11:37] i take your time is expired the witness may answer the question i take your question the gentleman from [1:11:47] florida uh director muller i director muller i'd like to get back to your findings covering june of 2017 [1:11:54] there was a bombshell article that reported that the president of the united states was personally [1:11:59] under investigation for obstruction of justice and you said in your report on page 90 volume 2 and i quote [1:12:06] news of the obstruction investigation prompted the president to call mcgahn and seek to have the [1:12:11] special counsel removed close quote and then in your report you wrote about multiple calls from the [1:12:17] president to white house counsel don mcgahn and regarding the second call you wrote and i quote mcgahn [1:12:24] recalled that the president was more direct saying something like call rod tell rod that muller has [1:12:31] conflicts and can't be special can't be the special counsel again recall the president telling him [1:12:37] muller has to go and call me back when you do it director muller did mcgahn understand what the [1:12:45] president was ordering him to do i direct you to the what we've written in the record in terms of [1:12:51] characterizing his feelings and in the report it says quote mcgahn understood the president to be [1:12:57] saying that the special counsel had to be removed you also said on page 86 that quote mcgahn considered [1:13:04] the president's request to be an inflection point and he wanted to hit the brakes and he felt trapped [1:13:10] and mcgahn decided he had to resign mcgahn took action to prepare to resign isn't that correct [1:13:19] i'm going to direct you again to the report and in fact that very day he went to the white house and [1:13:24] quoting your report you said and quote he then drove to the office to pack his belongings and [1:13:30] submit his resignation letter close quote that is directly from the report it is and before he [1:13:37] resigned however he called the president's chief of staff reince prebuss and he called the president's [1:13:43] senior advisor steve bannon do you recall what mcgahn told them whatever uh he what was said will be [1:13:52] and will appear in the report it is it is and it says on page 87 quote prebuss recalled that mcgahn said [1:13:59] that the president asked him to do crazy expletive in other words crazy stuff the white house counsel [1:14:09] thought that the president's request was completely out of bounds he said the president asked him to do [1:14:15] something crazy it was wrong and he was prepared to resign over it now these are extraordinarily troubling [1:14:25] events but you found uh white house counsel mcgahn to be a credible witness isn't that correct correct [1:14:32] director muller the most important question i have for you today is why director muller why did the [1:14:44] president of the united states want you fired oh i can't answer that question well on on page 89 in [1:14:55] your report on volume two you said and i quote substantial evidence indicates that the president's [1:15:03] evidence that the president's attempts to remove the special counsel were linked to the special counsel's [1:15:11] oversight of investigations that involved the president's conduct and most immediately to [1:15:18] reports that the president was being investigated for potential obstruction of justice close quote [1:15:25] director muller you found evidence as you lay out in your report that the president wanted to fire you [1:15:34] because you were investigating him for obstruction of justice isn't that correct that's what it says in [1:15:40] the report yes and i go i stand behind the report director muller that shouldn't happen in america no [1:15:48] president should be able to escape investigation by abusing his power but that's what you testified to [1:15:56] in your report the president ordered you fired the white house counsel knew it was wrong the president [1:16:04] knew it was wrong in your report it says there's also evidence the president knew he should not have made [1:16:09] those calls to mcgahn but the president did it anyway [1:16:12] he did it anyway anyone else who blatantly interfered with a criminal investigation [1:16:20] like yours would be arrested and indicted on charges of obstruction of justice director muller you [1:16:29] determined that you were barred from indicting a sitting president we've already talked about that [1:16:36] today that is exactly why this committee must hold the president accountable i yield back yields back [1:16:47] the gentlelady from alabama director muller you just said um in response to two different lines of [1:16:53] questionings that you would refer as it relates to this um firing discussion that i would refer you [1:17:00] to the report in the way it was characterized in the report importantly the president never said fire [1:17:06] muller or in the investigation um and one doesn't necessitate the other and mcgahn in fact did not [1:17:14] resign he stuck around for a year and a half on march 24th attorney general bar informed the committee [1:17:19] that he had received the special counsel's report and it was not until april 18th that the attorney general [1:17:25] released the report to congress and the public when you submitted your report to the attorney general [1:17:31] did you deliver a redacted version of the report so that he would be able to release it to congress [1:17:37] and the public without delay pursuant to his announcement of his intention to do so during [1:17:42] his confirmation hearing i'm not going to engage in discussion about what happened after the [1:17:47] production of our report had the attorney general asked you to provide a redacted version of the report [1:17:53] we worked on the redacted versions together did um he ask you for a version where the grand jury [1:17:59] material was separated no i can't get into details is it your belief that an unredacted version of the [1:18:06] report um could be released to congress or the public that's not within my purview real um rule 60 [1:18:22] material why did you not take a similar action so congress could view this material uh we had a process [1:18:29] that we were uh operating on with uh the attorney general's office are you aware of any attorney [1:18:36] general going to court to receive similar permission to unredact um 16 material i'm not aware of that [1:18:42] being done the attorney general released a special counsel's report with minimal redactions to the [1:18:47] public and an even lesser redacted version to congress did you write the report with the expectation [1:18:54] that it would be released publicly no we did not have an expectation we wrote the report uh understanding [1:19:00] that it was uh demanded by the statute and would go to the attorney general for uh further further [1:19:10] review and pursuant to the special counsel regulations who is the only party that must receive [1:19:15] the charging decision resulting from the special counsel's investigation with regard to the president or [1:19:22] generally no generally attorney general at attorney general bars in confirmation hearing he made it [1:19:29] clear that he intended to release your report to the public do you remember how much of your report [1:19:33] had been written at that point do not um were there significant changes in tone or substance of the [1:19:40] report made after the announcement that the report would be made available to congress and the public [1:19:45] i can't get into that during the senate testimony of attorney general william barr senate senator kamala [1:19:51] harris asked mr barr um if he had looked at all the underlying evidence that the special counsel's [1:19:55] team had gathered he stated that he had not so i'm going to ask you did you personally review [1:20:01] all of the underlying evidence gathered in your investigation well to the extent that it came [1:20:06] through the special counsel's office yes did any single member of your team review all the [1:20:12] underlying um evidence gathered uh during the course of your as has been recited here today a [1:20:17] substantial amount of work was done whether it be search warrants or or uh my point is is there was [1:20:22] no one member of the team that looked at everything that's what i'm trying to get at okay it's fair to [1:20:27] say that in an investigation as comprehensive as yours um it's normal that different members [1:20:33] of the team would have reviewed different sets of documents um and few if anyone would have [1:20:37] reviewed all of the underlying thank you yes how many of the approximately 500 interviews conducted by the [1:20:43] special conference did you attend personally very few on march 27 2019 you wrote a letter to the attorney [1:20:51] general essentially complaining about the media coverage of your report you wrote and i quote the [1:20:56] summary letter the department sent to congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of [1:21:01] march 24 did not fully capture the context nature and substance of this office work and conclusions [1:21:07] we communicated that concern to the department on the morning of march 25th there's now public [1:21:13] confusion about critical aspects of the result of our investigation who wrote that march 27th letter [1:21:18] well i i i can't get into who wrote it uh the internal deliberation but you signed it [1:21:26] what i will say is the letter stands for itself okay why did you write a formal letter since you had [1:21:31] already called the attorney general to express those concerns i can't get into that internal deliberation [1:21:35] did you authorize the letters released to the media or was it leaked i have no knowledge on either [1:21:43] well you went nearly two years without a leak why was this letter leaked i i well i i can't get into it [1:21:51] was this letter written and leaked for the express purpose of attempting to change the narrative [1:21:56] about the conclusions of your report and was anything in attorney general barr's letter referred [1:22:00] to as principal conclusions the time of the gentlelady has expired the answer the question please [1:22:07] the question is yes you may answer the question was anything in attorney general barr's letter [1:22:12] referred to as the principal conclusions letter dated march 24th inaccurate well i am not going to get [1:22:18] into that time of the gentlelady has expired the gentlelady from california thank you mr chair director [1:22:24] muller as you know we are focusing on five obstruction episodes today i would like to ask you about the [1:22:30] second of those five obstruction episodes it is in the section of your report beginning on page 113 of [1:22:37] volume 2 entitled quote the president orders mcgahn to deny that the president tried to fire the special [1:22:44] counsel in quote on january 25th 2018 the new york times reported that quote the president had ordered [1:22:52] mcgahn to have the department of justice fire you is that correct correct and that story related to the [1:22:59] events you already testified about here today the president's calls to mccann to have you removed correct [1:23:05] correct after the news broke did the president go on tv and deny the story do not know in fact the [1:23:13] president said quote fake news folks fake news a typical new york times fake story in quote correct [1:23:21] correct but your investigation actually found substantial evidence that mccann was ordered by [1:23:27] the president to fire you correct yes did the president's personal lawyer do something the [1:23:33] following day in response to that news report i'd refer you to the coverage of this in the report [1:23:39] on page 114 quote on january 26 2018 the president's personal counsel called mcgahn's attorney and said [1:23:49] that the president wanted mcgahn to put out a statement denying that he had been asked to fire the [1:23:55] special counsel in quote did mccann do what the president asked i refer you to the report [1:24:01] communicating through his personal attorney mccann refused because he said quote that the times story [1:24:10] was accurate in reporting that the president wanted the special counsel removed isn't that right [1:24:16] i believe it is but i refer you again to the report okay so mr mccann through his personal attorney [1:24:22] told the president that he is was not going to lie is that right true did the president drop the issue [1:24:29] uh i refer to the write-up of this in the report okay next the president told the white house staff [1:24:36] secretary rob porter to try to pressure mccann to make a false denial is that correct that's correct [1:24:43] what did he actually direct porter to do and and i send you back to the report okay well on page 113 [1:24:51] it says quote the president then directed porter to tell mccann to create a record to make it clear [1:24:59] that the president never directed mccann to fire you end quote is that correct that is as it stated in [1:25:06] the report and you found quote the president said he wanted mcgahn to write a letter to the file [1:25:13] for our records correct correct and to be clear the president is asking his white house counsel [1:25:21] don mccann to create a record that mccann believed to be untrue while you were in the midst of [1:25:27] investigating the president for obstruction of justice correct uh generally correct and mr mccann was [1:25:34] an important witness in that investigation wasn't he i'd have to say yes did the president tell porter [1:25:41] to threaten mccann if he didn't create the written denial i'm referring to the uh write-up of it in the [1:25:48] report in fact didn't the president say quote and this is on page 116 if he doesn't write a letter [1:25:54] then maybe i'll have to get rid of him end quote yes did porter deliver that threat i again refer you to [1:26:03] the discussion that's found on uh page 115 115. okay but the president still didn't give up did he [1:26:12] so the president told mcgahn directly to deny that the president told him to have you fired can you tell me [1:26:20] exactly what happened i can't be on what's in the report well on page 116 it says the president met [1:26:28] him in the oval office quote the president began the oval office meeting by telling mccann that the new [1:26:36] york times story didn't look good and mccann needed to correct it is that correct correct so as it's [1:26:43] written in the report yes the president asked mccann whether he would do a correction and mccann said [1:26:51] no correct that's accurate well mr muller thank you for your investigation uncovering this very [1:26:59] disturbing evidence my friend mr richmond will have additional questions on the subject however it is [1:27:05] clear to me if anyone else had ordered a witness to create a false record and cover up acts that are [1:27:13] subject of a law enforcement investigation that person would be facing criminal charges i yield [1:27:19] back my turn the gentlelady yields back the gentleman from ohio director the fbi interviewed joseph mifsud [1:27:26] on february 10 2017. in that interview mr mifsud lied you point this out on page 193 volume 1 mifsud denied [1:27:36] mifsud also falsely stated in addition mifsud omitted three times he lied to the fbi yet you didn't charge [1:27:43] him with the crime excuse me i'm sorry did you say 193 volume 1 193 he lied three times you pointed out [1:27:50] in the report why didn't you charge him with the crime i can't get into uh internal deliberations [1:27:56] with regard to who would or would not be charged a lot of other people for making a false statement [1:28:01] let's remember this let's remember this in 2016 the fbi did something they probably haven't done before [1:28:08] they spied on two american citizens associated with a presidential campaign george papadopoulos [1:28:14] and carter page with carter page they went to the fisa court they used the now famous dossier as [1:28:20] part of the reason they were able to get the warrant and spy on carter page for a better part of a year [1:28:25] with mr papadopoulos they didn't go to the court they used human sources all kinds of from about the [1:28:33] moment papadopoulos joins the trump campaign you got all these people all around the world starting [1:28:38] to swirl around him names like halper downer mifsud thompson meeting in rome london all kinds of places [1:28:45] the fbi even sent even sent a lady posing as somebody else when by the name azra turk even [1:28:52] dispatched her to london to spy on mr papadopoulos in one of these meetings mr papadopoulos is talking [1:28:59] to a foreign diplomat and he tells the diplomat russians have dirt on clinton that diplomat then [1:29:07] contacts the fbi and the fbi opens an investigation based on that fact you point this out on page one [1:29:13] of the report july 31st 2016 they open the investigation based on that piece of information [1:29:20] diplomat tells papadopoulos russians have dirt excuse me papadopoulos tells the diplomat russians [1:29:26] have dirt on clinton diplomat tells the fbi what i'm wondering is who told papadopoulos how'd he [1:29:34] find out i can't get into the evidently yes you can because you wrote about it you gave us the answer [1:29:40] page 192 of the report you tell us who told him joseph nixon joseph nixon's the guy who told [1:29:47] papadopoulos the mysterious professor who lives in rome and london works and teaches in two different [1:29:53] universities this is the guy who told papadopoulos he's the guy who starts it all [1:29:59] and when the fbi interviews him he lies three times and yet you don't charge him with a crime [1:30:05] you charge rick gates for false statements you charge paul manafort for false statements you [1:30:09] charge michael cohen with false statements you charge michael flynn a three-star general with [1:30:14] false statements but the guy who puts the country through this whole saga starts it all for three [1:30:20] years we've lived this now he lies and you guys don't charge him and i'm curious as to why well i can't [1:30:28] get into it and uh and it's obvious i think that we can't get into charging decisions when the fbi [1:30:33] interviewed him in february fbi interviews him in february when the special counsel's office [1:30:39] interviewed mifsud did he lie to you guys too can't get into that did you interview mifsud can't get [1:30:44] into that is mifsud western intelligence or russian intelligence can't get into that a lot of things you [1:30:50] can't get into what's interesting you can charge 13 russians no one's ever heard of no one's ever seen [1:30:56] no one's ever going to hear of him no one's ever going to see him you can charge them you can charge [1:31:01] all kinds of people who are around the president with false statements but the guy who launches [1:31:06] every the guy who puts this whole story in motion you can't charge him i think that's amazing i'm not [1:31:14] certain i agree with your characterizations well i'm reading from your report mifsud told papadopoulos [1:31:20] papadopoulos tells the diplomat the diplomat tells the fbi the fbi opens the investigation july 31st 2016 [1:31:26] and here we are three years later july of 2019 the country's been put through this and the central [1:31:32] figure who launches it all lies to us and you guys don't hunt him down and interview him again [1:31:39] and you don't charge him with a crime now here's the good news here's the good news the president was [1:31:45] falsely accused of conspiracy the fbi does a 10-month investigation james comey when we deposed him a year [1:31:50] ago told us at that point they had nothing you do a 22-month investigation at the end of that 22 months [1:31:55] you find no conspiracy and what's the democrats want to do they want to keep investigating they [1:32:01] want to keep going maybe a better course of action maybe a better course of action is to figure out [1:32:07] how the false accusation started maybe it's to go back and actually figure out why joseph mifsud was [1:32:13] lying to the fbi and here's the good news here's the good news that's exactly what bill bar is doing [1:32:20] and thank goodness for that that's exactly what the attorney general and john durham are doing they're [1:32:24] going to find out why we went through this three years time and get to the bottom of the gentleman [1:32:30] is expired in a moment we will take a very brief five minute break first i ask everyone in the room [1:32:37] to please remain seated and quiet while the witness exit exits the room i i also want to announce to [1:32:44] those in the audience that you may not be guaranteed your seat if you leave the hearing room at this time [1:32:50] all right folks we have been listening now for the last 90 minutes here welcome back to news now we [1:33:03] were showing a little bit of coverage there on fox news but this is uh really have been getting intense [1:33:09] the last about 30 minutes the fireworks really uh started to go off there uh jim jordan the [1:33:15] representative from ohio wrapping up right before they went to a small five minute break and then they [1:33:21] will be right back so stay right here with us folks on uh fox 10 extra we're going to show a little bit [1:33:26] more of special fox news special coverage on this former senior trump administration official [1:33:34] and venu varghese criminal defense attorney also with us this morning thank you all for being here [1:33:39] and if i could uh i want to start actually with sarah because sarah you are the only one who actually [1:33:45] brought a copy of the muller report with you uh you have clearly read it thoroughly i want you to [1:33:49] hold it up for the camera if you don't mind real quick with all of your all of your notations that you [1:33:54] have all those posted notes yes um quick reaction to what we've seen so far well i think it's an [1:34:01] extraordinary hearing for one simple reason chairman jerry nadler of the house judiciary committee [1:34:07] either didn't read the report or he doesn't understand the law because the report is very [1:34:12] clear in volume two where we discuss obstruction of justice special counsel muller said that the [1:34:18] president was analyzed under three criteria an obstructive act a nexus to a legal proceeding [1:34:25] and criminal intent and special counsel muller repeatedly said and i quote from page seven [1:34:30] because that is the exact page that jerry nadler used he says the evidence we obtained did not [1:34:39] establish that the president was involved in an underlying crime related to russian election [1:34:45] interference hold it right there uh dr grant if you don't mind uh it's clear that robert muller is [1:34:51] not going to deviate from his report and he made that clear before he testified and his opening [1:34:57] statement so are we learning anything new are the democrats um getting anything that they can perhaps [1:35:04] potentially use later in an ongoing investigation well i think rep jim jordan just ripped some of the [1:35:10] counterintelligence lid off this investigation so we are seeing a few snippets here i thought the [1:35:16] question that came up from sense and brenner about did this rise to an impeachable offense was really [1:35:22] key and he got muller to say that really it hadn't it hadn't done that muller was weak there but he [1:35:28] didn't come in and say yes it did as with ken starr muller put the question i'd really like to hear [1:35:33] answered he said i want to make sure the american people had confidence in that election outcome please [1:35:39] someone get that question back and let's get muller to answer muller does there is there confidence in that [1:35:44] election outcome max you're a democratic strategist this is a democratic controlled [1:35:49] committee they are clearly not happy with the findings of the report they're digging for more [1:35:55] how are they doing i think what you see here is a big difference between people asking sort of [1:36:00] fact-based questions and people who are auditioning to please the president we had louie gohmert we had [1:36:05] jim jordan shouting till they were red in the face and repeating questions that they knew the special [1:36:10] counsel couldn't answer it's performative with the democrats we've had within the first 10 minutes [1:36:17] robert muller again say he did not exonerate the president on obstruction of justice and that had [1:36:23] he been able to continue investigating it there potentially would have been evidence of that well [1:36:30] the new i want you to weigh in on this as an attorney a criminal defense attorney after nearly three [1:36:37] years of investigation certainly almost two years with the robert muller investigation they didn't [1:36:43] find any criminal liability or any wrongdoing that they could prove on behalf of the president [1:36:47] so your take on that well actually that's not that's not accurate what they didn't find was that [1:36:54] there was a direct they couldn't prove a conspiracy between members of the trump campaign and the [1:36:59] russian government what they did find they did lay out was 10 acts of obstruction that would have been [1:37:05] prosecuted had he not been a sitting president i think people are have to understand one second [1:37:10] they did not establish that the trump campaign conspired with russians that's correct that is a [1:37:15] finding of the report that's correct that's volume one but on volume two they did not find enough [1:37:21] evidence of criminal construction they did not regarding russian interference or russian a conspiracy [1:37:27] with the russian campaign but what it did is remember there's two parts obviously we all know this [1:37:32] the second part relating to the obstruction of by president trump and they let out 10 acts of [1:37:38] obstruction and in this case you've they've laid it out it's up to congress to do what it's supposed [1:37:44] to do he is the word whether he uses the term impeachable offense or not he's laid out a blueprint for [1:37:51] congress now watching him today you've got to understand the kind of person muller is he is a [1:37:57] lifelong doj person he's not going to go back and forth and get into arguments when people are yelling [1:38:03] at him he's just sitting there sara you're shaking your head uh why that is a totally inaccurate [1:38:10] characterization of volume two which i have read 19 times i have also read it it is not inaccurate [1:38:15] those ten alleged acts of obstruction specifically as it relates to don mcgann the evidence that [1:38:21] that robert muller presents is that don mcgann said that he leaked to the new york times that the [1:38:26] president said that he should quote unquote fire muller there is no additional evidence and robert [1:38:34] muller specifically says in that exact same analysis where there was obstruction of justice that the [1:38:39] president told the truth when he said he did not instruct mcgann so it's very clear that the democratic [1:38:46] carty has created a narrative that is not based upon reading the full text and understanding the full [1:38:53] text of both volumes it is actually very clear of the acts laid out by the president i mean telling [1:39:00] sessions to unrecuse himself firing comey these are pretty brazen bold acts well and and you know when [1:39:08] you look at this it's up to congress this is all all of this is a show this is political right i'm a [1:39:13] i'm a legal commentator i'm a former prosecutor i'm telling you there's evidence it's a question [1:39:17] what the democrats want to do with it they have the majority they can begin impeachment hearings [1:39:21] but they're sitting back because they want to score points if there were enough evidence [1:39:25] to indict the president or to say that he could be indicted if he weren't president i think muller made [1:39:32] it clear dr grant that he he would have done that or am i wrong on that point you're right muller made [1:39:38] it 100 clear can you really look at muller this tremendous american and say that if he thought it [1:39:46] was best for america to indict the president that he would not already have done so it's clear from [1:39:52] reading the muller report that that no prosecutor wants to take forward the evidence that they turned [1:39:58] up it was way too squishy was the president upset you bet he was did he rant and rave clearly he did did [1:40:07] did this rise to real obstruction no way you guys are not listening to his actual words he cannot he [1:40:14] could not indict the president he can't even charge him because that would he could because he can't say [1:40:20] that he's guilty because that wouldn't be fair because he wouldn't have a criminal child to clear his [1:40:25] name so i don't even hear muller giving the body language guilty all right but in his own report [1:40:31] muller found that the trump campaign did not collude or conspire with russia that's what [1:40:37] the report volume one volume two didn't have a conclusion and and we heard one of the lawmakers [1:40:43] rip into that like that's not his job to come up with no conclusion you come up with a conclusion [1:40:47] he's the special counsel he's got a special investigation and and he went on for two years [1:40:50] if he had a conclusion he probably would have reached the conclusion he laid it out he laid it out [1:40:56] and he told he laid it out for congress up to congress let's democrats control the house or house [1:41:01] of uh they control the house they can do what they want they have enough whether they want to do it [1:41:06] that's a political question let's give max a little more time uh robert muller is a veteran [1:41:11] of capitol hill he's an attorney he's very familiar with these kinds of hearings he's been in plenty of [1:41:17] them he knows how to handle it he was a reluctant witness he didn't want to come here and do this [1:41:22] in fact he had to be subpoenaed to testify before these two house committees why was he so reluctant [1:41:28] to testify and why is he why did he seek out his his camp according to the the ag sought out that [1:41:34] letter making sure that he didn't deviate from the report i think you see the difference in that [1:41:38] robert muller takes his job as special prosecutor very seriously he didn't want to come out and [1:41:43] potentially misspeak or miscontextualize the information that he published we've seen him [1:41:49] repeatedly referring back to his notes it's made for a little bit of a slow hearing but at least it's [1:41:54] factually accurate and to the point on obstruction the president uh cannot legally be charged robert [1:42:03] muller made that very clear okay he could have come up with a conclusion no he's legally barred from [1:42:09] making the conclusion he says that on page 157 there is an attorney i'm not an attorney well i think [1:42:15] whether you're an attorney or not attorney you've read the report you understand what robert muller [1:42:19] is saying both in written text as well as verbally and it's very clear that he chose to not make a [1:42:26] prosecutorial decision that was his opinion it was not a requirement by the olc doj guidelines [1:42:36] i'm sorry uh jerry nadler has just re-entered the hearing room uh chairman of the house judiciary [1:42:41] committee uh well he's uh he's in discussion still so uh are you surprised jerry at um the way that [1:42:50] muller has handled these questions he doesn't seem all that familiar with the material i'm terribly [1:42:56] shocked as you noted as everybody has noted this man was director of fbi he graduated from prestigious [1:43:03] law school he fought in vietnam he was head of fbi the week before 9-11 so every time congress had a [1:43:10] hearing about the lack of follow-through on evidence muller testified he was the head of the fbi when [1:43:17] we decided the patriarch was illegal and yet look at his body language he is so uncomfortable he does [1:43:24] not want to be there and i think if i was muller i would be super frustrated we're gonna leave it there [1:43:29] and go back to the hearing all right folks coming up on round two here in just a moment they took a [1:43:49] little five minute break you're taking a live look inside the house judiciary committee as uh congressmen [1:43:56] and women getting ready and uh let's listen to fox news once again here that uh the attorney general [1:44:04] william barr is going to open his own investigation into what sparked this inquiry and questions about [1:44:13] the person who gave the original information uh to george papadopoulos that he lied and wasn't [1:44:22] prosecuted on on those lies by the muller investigation we already know that this all starts [1:44:28] against the backdrop of a huge counterintelligence effort the fbi and who knows who else are watching [1:44:35] the russians watch the trump campaign they pick up scent they come out in 2016 and say that the russians [1:44:41] have been into the dnc the rnc and 1500 other individuals believe me they're watching this [1:44:47] this is where this come from that's why muller was so uncomfortable with them of sued line of [1:44:53] questioning this is counterintell a lot of that has to go on but this is the origin bar is going to tell [1:44:58] us more about it i hope robert muller will be sworn in or resume his seat there and uh the questions [1:45:04] and statements will continue gentleman from louisiana mr richmond thank you mr chairman mr muller [1:45:15] uh congressman dutch addressed trump's request uh to mcgahn uh to fire you representative bass talked [1:45:23] about the president's request of mcgahn to deny uh the fact that the president made that request so i [1:45:30] want to pick up where they left off and i want to pick up with the president's personal lawyer in fact [1:45:38] there was evidence that the president's personal lawyer was alarmed at the prospect of the president [1:45:44] meeting with mr mcgahn to discuss mr mcgahn's refusal to deny the new york times report about the [1:45:51] president trying to fire you correct correct in fact the president's counsel was so alarmed by the [1:46:00] prospect of the president's meeting with mcgahn that he called mr mcgahn's counsel and said that mcgahn [1:46:06] could not resign no matter what happened in the oval office that day correct correct so it's accurate to [1:46:15] say that the president knew that he was asking mcgahn to deny facts that mcgahn quote had repeatedly said [1:46:22] were accurate unquote isn't that right correct your investigation also found quote by the time of the [1:46:33] oval office meeting with the president the president was aware one that mcgahn did not think the story [1:46:40] was false two did not want to issue a statement or create a written record denying facts that mcgahn believed [1:46:47] to be true the president nevertheless persisted and asked mcgahn to repudiate facts that mcgahn had [1:46:54] repeatedly said were accurate isn't that correct generally true i believe that's on page 119 thank [1:47:02] you in other words the president was trying to force mcgahn to say something that mcgahn did not believe [1:47:08] to be true that's accurate i want to uh reference you to a slide and it's on page 120 and it says [1:47:21] substantial evidence indicates that in repeatedly urging mcgahn to dispute that he was ordered to [1:47:28] have the special counsel terminated the president acted for the purpose of influencing mcgahn's account [1:47:35] in order to deflect or prevent further scrutiny of the president's conduct towards the investigation [1:47:44] can you explain what you meant there i'm just going to believe it and as it appears in the report [1:47:51] so it's fair to say the president tried to protect himself by asking staff to falsify [1:47:56] records relevant to an ongoing investigation i would say that's uh generally a summary would you [1:48:03] say that that action the president tried to hamper the investigation by asking staff to falsify records [1:48:12] relevant to your investigation i'm just going to refer you to the report if i could for [1:48:16] uh uh review of that uh that episode thank you also the president's attempt to get mcgahn to create a [1:48:24] false written record were related to mr trump's concerns about your obstruction of justice inquiry [1:48:30] correct believe that to be true in fact at that same oval office meeting did the president also [1:48:36] asked mcgahn why he had told quote why he had told special counsel's office investigators that the [1:48:43] president told him to have you removed unquote and what was the question sir if i might let me go to [1:48:51] the next one the president quote criticized mcgahn for telling your office about the june 17 2017 events [1:49:00] when he told mcgahn to have you removed correct correct in other words the president was criticizing [1:49:09] his white house counsel for telling law enforcement officials what he believed to be the truth i i again [1:49:16] go back to the text of the uh of the report well let me go a little bit further would it have been a [1:49:23] crime if mr mcgahn had lied to you about the president ordering him to fire you i don't want [1:49:29] to speculate okay is it true that you charged multiple people associated with the president for [1:49:36] lying to you during your investigation that is accurate the president also complained that his [1:49:42] staff were taking notes uh during the meeting about uh firing again is that correct uh that's what [1:49:50] the report says yeah the report but in fact it's completely appropriate for the president's staff [1:49:57] especially his councils to take notes during a meeting correct well i i rely on the the wording [1:50:03] of the report well thank you director muller for your investigation into whether the president [1:50:09] attempted to obstruct justice by ordering his white house counsel dom again to lie to protect the [1:50:13] president and then to create a false record about it it is clear that any other person who engaged in [1:50:19] such conduct would be charged with a crime we will continue our investigation we will hold the [1:50:24] president accountable because no one is above the law thank you yeah gentleman from florida director [1:50:32] moeller can you state with confidence that the steel dossier was not part of russia's disinformation [1:50:37] campaign no as i said in the uh my opening statement i that uh part of the uh building of the case [1:50:48] was predated me and by at least 10 months yeah i mean paul manafort's alleged uh crimes regarding tax [1:50:54] evasion predated you you had no problem charging them and matter of fact this steel dossier predated [1:50:59] the attorney general and he didn't have any problem answering the question when senator cornyn [1:51:03] asked the attorney general the exact question i asked you director the attorney general said [1:51:08] and i'm quoting no i can't state that with confidence and that's one of the areas i'm reviewing [1:51:13] i'm concerned about it and i don't think it's entirely speculative now if something is not [1:51:18] entirely speculative then it must have some factual basis but you identify no factual basis regarding [1:51:25] the dossier or the possibility that it was part of the russia disinformation campaign now christopher [1:51:30] steel's reporting is referenced in your report steel reported to the fbi that senior russian foreign [1:51:38] ministry figures among with other along with other russians told him that there was and i'm quoting from [1:51:44] the steel dossier extensive evidence of conspiracy between the trump campaign team and the kremlin [1:51:50] so here's my question did russians really tell that to christopher steel or did he just make it all [1:51:56] up and was he lying to the fbi let me back up a second if i could and say as i said earlier uh with regard [1:52:03] to the steel uh that that's beyond my purview no it is exactly your purview director muller and here's why [1:52:10] only one of two things is possible right either steel made this whole thing up and there were never [1:52:16] any russians telling him of this vast criminal conspiracy that you didn't find or russians lied [1:52:21] to steel now if russians were lying to steel to undermine our confidence in our duly elected president [1:52:26] that would seem to be precisely your purview because you stated in your opening that the organizing [1:52:31] principle was to fully and thoroughly investigate russia's interference but you weren't interested in [1:52:37] whether or not russians were interfering through christopher steel and if steel was lying then you [1:52:41] should have charged him with lying like you charged a variety of other people but you say nothing [1:52:45] about this in your report well sir meanwhile director you're quite loquacious on other topics you write [1:52:51] 3500 words about the june 9 meeting between the trump campaign and russian lawyer veselnitskaya you [1:52:58] write on page 103 of your report that the president's legal team suggested and i'm quoting from your report [1:53:04] that the meeting might have been a setup by individuals working with the firm that produced [1:53:10] the steel reporting so i'm going to ask you a very easy question director moeller on the week of june 9 [1:53:16] who did russian lawyer vessel nitskaya meet with more frequently the trump campaign or glenn simpson [1:53:22] who is functionally acting as an operative for the democratic national committee well what i think is [1:53:26] missing here is the fact that this is under investigation other and elsewhere in the justice department and if i [1:53:33] can finish her and if i can finish her and consequently it's not within my purview [1:53:39] department of justice and fbi should be responsive to questions on this particular issue [1:53:44] it is absurd to suggest that a operative for the democrats was meeting with this russian lawyer the [1:53:51] day before and the day after the trump tower meeting and yet that's not something you reference [1:53:55] now glenn simpson testified under oath he had dinner with veselnitskaya the day before and the day [1:54:00] after this meeting with the trump team do you have any basis as you sit here today to believe [1:54:04] that steel was lying as i said before i'll say again it's not my purview others are investigating [1:54:10] what you so it's not your purview to look into whether or not steel's lying it's not your purview [1:54:15] to look into whether or not anti-trump russians are lying to steel and it's not your purview to look [1:54:19] at whether or not glenn simpson was meeting with the russians the day before and the day after you [1:54:23] write 3500 words about the trump campaign meeting so i'm wondering what how how these decisions are guided i [1:54:29] look at the inspector general's report i'm citing from page 404 of the inspector general's report [1:54:34] it states page stated trump's not ever going to be president right right struck replied no he's not [1:54:41] we'll stop it also in the inspector general's report there's someone identified as attorney number two [1:54:46] attorney number two this is page 419 replied hell no and then added viva la resistance attorney number [1:54:53] two in the inspector general's report and struck both worked on your team didn't they [1:54:58] pardon me yes they both worked on your team didn't they uh i know i heard struck who else [1:55:03] were you talking about attorney number two identified in the inspector general's report [1:55:06] okay and the question was did he work for you the guy who said viva la resistance [1:55:11] peter struck worked for me for a period of time yes yeah but so did the other guy that said viva [1:55:15] la resistance and here's what i'm kind of noticing director moeller when people associated with trump [1:55:19] lied you threw the book at him when christopher steele lied nothing and so it seems to be that when [1:55:25] glenn simpson met with russians nothing when the trump campaign met with russians 3 500 words and [1:55:30] maybe the reason why there are this discrepancies and what you focused on is because the team [1:55:34] i mean the gentleman has expired pledge to stop jeffries of new york is recognized the mother [1:55:42] obstruction of justice is a serious crime that strikes at the core of an investigator's effort [1:55:46] to find the truth correct correct the crime of obstruction of justice has three elements true true [1:55:52] true the first element is an obstructive act correct correct an obstructive act could include [1:55:59] taking an action that would delay or interfere with an ongoing investigation as set forth in volume [1:56:05] 2 page 87 and 88 of your report true uh i'm sorry could you again uh repeat the question an [1:56:12] obstructive act could include taking an action that would delay or interfere with an ongoing investigation [1:56:18] that's true your investigation found evidence that president trump took steps to terminate the [1:56:25] special counsel correct correct uh mr muller does ordering the termination of the head of a criminal [1:56:33] investigation constitute an obstructive act uh that would be uh uh uh i i let me refer you to the [1:56:44] report let me refer you to page 87 and 88 of volume 2 where you conclude the attempt to remove the [1:56:51] special counsel would qualify as an obstructive act if it would naturally obstruct the investigation [1:56:57] in any grand jury proceedings that might flow from the inquiry correct yes i've got that now thank you [1:57:03] thank you the second element of obstruction of justice is the presence of an obstructive act [1:57:08] in connection with an official proceeding true true does the special counsel's criminal investigation [1:57:15] and to the potential wrongdoing of donald trump constitute an official proceeding and that's uh an area [1:57:22] which i cannot get into okay president trump tweeted on june 16 2017 quote i am being investigated for [1:57:34] firing the fbi director by the man who told me to fire the fbi director witch hunt the june 16 tweet [1:57:43] just read was cited on page 89 in volume two constitutes a public acknowledgement by president trump that [1:57:51] he was under criminal investigation correct uh i i i think generally correct one day later on saturday [1:58:00] june 17th president trump called white house counsel don mcgan at home and directed him to fire [1:58:08] the special counsel true i believe to be true i think we've been i may have stated in response to [1:58:14] questions some that is correct uh president trump told don mcgan quote muller has to go close quote [1:58:22] correct correct your report found on page 89 volume two that substantial evidence indicates that by june [1:58:30] 17th the president knew his conduct was under investigation by a federal prosecutor who could [1:58:35] present any evidence of federal crimes to a grand jury true true the third element second element having [1:58:42] just been satisfied the third element of the crime of obstruction of justice is corrupt intent true [1:58:48] true corrupt intent exists if the president acted to obstruct an official proceeding for the improper [1:58:54] purpose of protecting his own interest correct um that's generally correct thank you the only thing [1:59:01] i would say is we are going through the three elements of uh of the proof of the uh uh obstruction of [1:59:09] justice uh charges when the the fact the matter is uh uh uh we got excuse me just one second well [1:59:19] thank you uh mr muller let me let me move on in the interest of time upon learning about the appointment [1:59:23] of the special counsel your investigation found that donald trump stated to the then attorney general [1:59:27] quote oh my god this is terrible this is the end of my presidency i'm effed is that correct correct [1:59:36] is it fair to say that donald trump viewed the special counsel's investigation into his conduct as [1:59:40] adverse to his own interests i think that generally is true the investigation found evidence quote that [1:59:47] the president knew that he should not have directed don mcgan to fire the special counsel correct [1:59:53] and where do you have that quote page 90 volume two there is evidence that the president knew he [1:59:59] should not have made those calls to mcgan close quote i see that yes that's accurate the investigation [2:00:05] also found substantial evidence that president trump repeatedly urged mcgan to dispute that he was [2:00:10] ordered to have the special counsel terminated correct correct the investigation found substantial [2:00:16] evidence that when the president ordered don mcgan to fire the special counsel and then lie about it [2:00:22] donald trump one committed an obstructive act two connected to an official proceeding three did so with [2:00:30] corrupt intent those are the elements of obstruction of justice this is the united states of america no one is [2:00:39] above the law no one the president must be held accountable one way or the other let me let me just [2:00:48] say i if i might i don't subscribe necessarily to your uh the way you analyze that i'm not saying [2:00:55] it's out of the ballpark but i'm not supportive of that analytical charge thank you thank you mr chairman [2:01:05] mr mull over here hi hi i want to start by thanking you for your service you joined the marines and and led a [2:01:11] rifle platoon in vietnam where you earned a bronze star purple heart and other commendations you served [2:01:17] as an assistant united states attorney leading the homicide unit here in dc u.s attorney for the [2:01:22] district of massachusetts and later northern district of california assistant attorney general for doj's [2:01:27] criminal division and the fbi director so thank you i appreciate that but having reviewed your [2:01:33] biography it puzzles me why you handled your duties in this case the way you did the report contradicts what [2:01:40] you taught young attorneys at the department of justice including to ensure that every defendant [2:01:45] is treated fairly or as justice sutherland said in the burger case a prosecutor is not the [2:01:49] representative of an ordinary party to a controversy but of a sovereignty whose interest in a criminal [2:01:55] prosecution is not that it shall win a case but that justice shall be done and that the prosecutor may [2:02:00] strike hard blows but he is not at liberty to strike foul ones by listing the ten factual situations and [2:02:06] not reaching a conclusion about the merits of the case you unfairly shifted the burden of proof to the [2:02:12] president forcing him to prove his innocence while denying him a legal form to do so and i've never [2:02:19] heard of a prosecutor declining a case and then holding a press conference to talk about the defendant [2:02:25] you noted eight times in your report that you had a legal duty under the regulations to either prosecute or [2:02:31] decline charges despite this you disregarded that duty as a former prosecutor i'm also troubled with [2:02:38] your legal analysis you discussed ten separate factual patterns involving alleged obstruction and [2:02:44] then you failed to separately apply the elements of the applicable statutes i looked at the uh the the [2:02:52] ten factual situations and i read the case law and i have to tell you just looking at the flynn matter for [2:02:57] example um the the the four statutes that you cited for uh possible obstruction 1503 1505 1512 b3 and [2:03:06] 1512 c2 um when i look at those concerning the flynn matter uh 1503 is inapplicable because it wasn't a [2:03:14] grand jury or trial jury impaneled and director comey was not an officer of the court as defined by the [2:03:20] statute six section 1505 criminalizes acts that would obstruct or impede administrative proceedings [2:03:27] and those before congress an administrative agency uh the department of justice criminal resource [2:03:32] manual states that the fbi investigation is not a pending proceeding 1512 b3 talks about uh intimidation [2:03:39] threats of force uh to tamper with a witness general flynn at the time was not a witness and and [2:03:45] certainly director comey was not a witness and 1512 c2 talks about uh tampering with the record [2:03:52] i mean as joe biden described the uh statute as being debated on the senate floor uh he called this [2:03:59] a uh statute criminalizing document shredding and uh there's nothing in the uh in your report that [2:04:05] alleges that the president uh uh destroyed any any evidence so what i have to ask you and what i i think [2:04:13] people are working around in this hearing is uh let me lay a little foundation for it the ethical [2:04:20] rules require that a prosecutor have a reasonable probability of conviction to bring a charge is [2:04:25] that correct sounds generally accurate okay and uh the regulations uh concerning your your job as [2:04:33] special counsel state that your job is to provide the attorney general with a confidential report [2:04:37] explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by your office you recommended [2:04:42] declining prosecution of president trump and anyone associated with his campaign because there [2:04:47] was insufficient evidence to convict for a charge of conspiracy with russian interference in the 2016 [2:04:53] election is that fair that's fair was there sufficient evidence to convict president trump or anyone [2:05:01] else with obstruction of justice we did not make that calculation how could you not have made the [2:05:07] calculation was regularly lc opinion the olc opinion office of legal counsel indicates that we cannot [2:05:13] indict a sitting president so one of the tools that a prosecutor would use is not there okay but let me [2:05:19] just stop you made the decision on the russian interference you you couldn't have indicted the [2:05:25] president on that and you made the decision on that but when it came to obstruction you threw a bunch [2:05:30] of stuff up against the wall to see what would stick and that is i would not agree i would not agree to [2:05:35] that uh characterization at all what we did is provide to the attorney general in the form of a confidential [2:05:41] memorandum our understanding of the case those cases that were brought those cases were declined and [2:05:48] the uh that one case where uh the president cannot be charged with a crime okay but the uh could you [2:05:58] charge the president with a crime after he left office yes you believe that he committed you could [2:06:04] charge the president united states with obstruction of justice after he left office yes ethically under the [2:06:09] the ethical standards well i'm i'm i'm not certain because i haven't looked at the ethical standards [2:06:13] but the olc opinion opinion says that the prosecutor why cannot bring a charge against the sitting [2:06:20] president nonetheless he can continue the investigation to see if there are any other uh persons who [2:06:26] might be drawn into the conspiracy time of the gentleman has expired the gentleman from rhode island [2:06:32] director director as you know we are specifically focusing on five separate obstruction episodes here today [2:06:38] i'd like to ask you about the third episode it's the section of your report entitled the president's [2:06:43] efforts to curtail the special counsel investigation beginning at page 90 and by curtail you mean limit [2:06:49] correct correct my colleagues have walked through how the president tried to have you fired through [2:06:53] the white house council and because mr mcgand refused the order the president asked others to help [2:06:58] limit your investigation is that correct correct and was corey lewandowski one such individual and again [2:07:04] can you remind me uh what car well corey lewandowski is the president's former campaign manager correct [2:07:09] correct did he have any official position in the trump administration i don't believe so your report [2:07:17] describes an incident in the oval office involving mr lewandowski on june 19 2017 at volume two page 91 [2:07:24] is that correct i'm sorry what's the citation sir page 91 of the second volume yes and a meeting in the oval [2:07:33] office between mr lewandowski and the president okay and that was just two days after the president [2:07:38] called don mcgand at home and ordered him to fire you is that correct apparently so so right after his [2:07:44] white house counsel mr mcgand refused to follow the president's order to fire you the president came [2:07:49] up with a new plan and that was to go around all of his senior advisors and government aides to have a [2:07:54] private citizen try to limit your investigation what did the president tell mr lewandowski to do [2:08:00] do you recall he told him he dictated a message to mr lewandowski for attorney general sessions and [2:08:05] asked him to write it down is that correct true and do you did you and your team see this handwritten [2:08:11] message uh i'm not gonna get into what we may or may not have uh included in our investigation the [2:08:18] message directed sessions to give and i'm quoting from your report to give a public speech saying that [2:08:23] he planned to meet with the special prosecutor to explain this is very unfair and let the special [2:08:28] prosecutor move forward with investigating election meddling for future elections that's at page 91 [2:08:33] is that correct yes i see that thank you yes it is in other words mr lewandowski a private citizen [2:08:40] was instructed by the president of the united states to deliver a message from the president [2:08:44] to the attorney general that directed him to limit your investigation correct correct and at this time [2:08:49] mr sessions was still recused from oversight of your investigation correct i'm sorry could you [2:08:55] receive attorney general was recused from oversight so the attorney general would have had to violate [2:09:00] his own department's rules in order to comply with the president's order correct well i'm not going to [2:09:05] get into uh the subsidiary details i just refer you again to page 91 92 of the report and if the [2:09:11] attorney general had followed through with the president's request mr muller it would have effectively [2:09:17] ended your investigation into the president and his campaign as you note on page 97 correct [2:09:23] could you page 97 you write and i quote taken together the president's directives indicate that [2:09:29] sessions was being instructed to tell the special counsel to end the existing investigation into [2:09:34] the president and his campaign with the special counsel being permitted to move forward with [2:09:39] investigating election meddling for future elections is that correct generally true yes sir and it's [2:09:44] an unsuccessful attempt to obstruct justice is still a crime is that correct that is correct and mr [2:09:50] Lewandowski uh tried to meet with the attorney general is that right true and he tried to meet [2:09:55] with him in his office so he would be sure certain there wasn't a public log of the visit according to [2:10:00] what we gathered for the report and the meeting never happened and the president raised the issue [2:10:05] again with mr Lewandowski and this time he said and i quote if sessions does not meet with you [2:10:10] Lewandowski should tell sessions he was fired correct correct so immediately following the meeting with the [2:10:16] president Lewandowski then asked mr dearborn to deliver the message who's the former uh chief of [2:10:23] staff to mr sessions and mr dearborn refuses to deliver it because he doesn't feel comfortable [2:10:29] isn't that correct generally correct yes so just so we're clear mr muller two days after the white [2:10:34] house counsel dom again refused to carry out the president's order to fire you the president directed [2:10:40] a private citizen to tell the attorney general of the united states who was recused at the time [2:10:44] to limit your investigation to future elections effectively ending your investigation into the [2:10:50] 2016 trump campaign is that correct i'm not going to adopt your characterization i'll say that the [2:10:56] facts is laid out in the report are accurate well mr muller in your report you in fact write at page 99 [2:11:02] 97 substantial evidence indicates that the president's effort to have sessions limit the scope of the [2:11:08] special counsel's investigation to future elections interference was intended to prevent further [2:11:14] investigative scrutiny of the president and his campaign conduct is that correct generally and so [2:11:20] mr muller you have seen the letter where a thousand former republican and democratic federal [2:11:26] prosecutors have read your report and said anyone but the president who committed those acts would [2:11:30] be charged with obstruction of justice do you agree with those former colleagues a thousand prosecutors [2:11:34] who came to that conclusion those prosecuted thank you mr chairman uh over here thanks mr mr muller uh you [2:11:47] guys your team wrote in the uh report quote on this is the top of page two volume one also on page 173 by [2:11:55] the way you said that you'd come to the conclusion that quote the investigation did not establish that [2:12:00] members of the trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the russian government and its election [2:12:03] interference activities close quote that's accurate statement right that's accurate and i'm curious when did [2:12:11] you personally come to that conclusion uh can you remind me uh uh which paragraph you're bringing to [2:12:19] top of page two on two volume one okay uh and exactly which paragraph are you looking at on the investigation [2:12:30] did not establish of course i see it yeah what was your question my question now is when did you [2:12:36] personally reach that conclusion well we were ongoing for two years uh right you were ongoing you wrote [2:12:45] it at some point during that two-year period but at some point you had to come to conclusion that uh that [2:12:51] i don't think there's a clue that there's not a conspiracy going on here there was no conspiracy [2:12:55] between this president um i'm not talking about the rest of the president's team i'm talking about [2:12:59] this president and the russians i as you understand developing a criminal case uh you get pieces of [2:13:05] information pieces of information witnesses and the like uh as you make your case right and uh when [2:13:12] you make a decision on a particular case depends on a number of factors right so i cannot say [2:13:17] specifically that we reached a decision on a particular defendant uh uh at a particular point in [2:13:24] time but it was some time well before you wrote the report fair enough i mean you wrote the report [2:13:28] dealing with a whole myriad of issues certainly sometime prior to that report is when you reached the [2:13:33] decision that okay with with regard to the president himself i don't find anything here fair enough [2:13:39] well i'm not certain i do agree with that uh you waited until the last minute when you were actually [2:13:43] writing the report okay well no but there are various uh aspects of the development of a and [2:13:49] sure and that's my point there are various aspects that are that happen but somewhere along the pike [2:13:56] you will come to a conclusion there's no there's no there there for this defendant and that right so [2:14:02] apparently i can't speak you can't you can't say when fair enough so so you know i'm not no i'm i'm [2:14:08] i'm asking the the sworn witness uh mr mr mr muller evidence suggests that on may 10 2017 at [2:14:15] approximately 7 45 a.m six days before the dag deputy attorney general appointed you special counsel [2:14:20] mr rosenstein called you and mentioned the appointment of a special counsel not not necessarily [2:14:25] that you'd be appointed but that you had a discussion of that is that is that true uh may 10 2017 [2:14:31] i uh i don't have any uh you know i don't have any knowledge of that occurring you don't have any [2:14:38] knowledge or you don't recall i don't have any knowledge evidence also suggested given that what [2:14:46] i saw you do are you questioning that uh uh well i just find it intriguing let me just tell you that [2:14:52] there's evidence that suggests that that phone call took place and that that's what was said so let's [2:14:55] move to the next question evidence suggested also on may 12 2017 five days before the dag appointed you [2:15:00] special counsel you met with mr rosenstein in person did you discuss the appointment of special [2:15:05] counsel then not necessarily that you but that there would be a special counsel i've gone into waters [2:15:10] that uh don't allow me to give you an answer to that particular question that relates to the internal [2:15:17] discussions he would have in terms of indicting an individual it has nothing to do with indictment it [2:15:22] has to do with special counsel and whether you discuss that with mr rosenstein evidence also [2:15:27] suggested on may 13th four days before you were appointed special counsel uh you met with attorney [2:15:33] former attorney general sessions and rosenstein and you spoke uh about special counsel do you [2:15:38] remember that no okay and on may 16th the day before you appointed special counsel uh you met with [2:15:46] the president and uh rod rosenstein do you remember having that meeting yes and discussion of the [2:15:52] position of the fbi director took place do you remember that yes and um did you discuss at any [2:15:59] time in that meeting uh mr comey's termination no did you discuss at any time in that meeting uh the [2:16:06] potential appointment of a special counsel not necessarily you but just in general terms i can't [2:16:11] get into the discussions on that how many times did you speak to mr rosenstein before may 17th which [2:16:16] is the day you got appointed uh regarding the appointment of special counsel how many times prior to that did [2:16:21] you did you discuss how many times is that because you don't recall or are you are you are you just [2:16:27] i i do not recall okay that thank you um how many times did you speak with mr comey about any [2:16:34] investigations pertaining to ruster prior to may 17 2017 did you have it all zero zero okay now the [2:16:42] times my time has expired so uh the gentleman has expired the gentleman from california director moeller [2:16:50] going back to the president's obstruction via corey lewandowski it was referenced that a thousand [2:16:56] former prosecutors who served under republican and democratic administrations with 12 000 years of [2:17:03] federal service wrote a letter regarding the president's conduct are you familiar with that letter [2:17:08] i've read about that letter yes and some of the individuals who signed that letter the statement of [2:17:13] former prosecutors are people you worked with is that right quite probably yes people that you respect [2:17:18] quite probably yes and in that letter they said all of this conduct trying to control and impede the [2:17:24] investigation against the president by leveraging his authority over others is similar to conduct we [2:17:30] have seen charged against other public officials and people in powerful positions are they wrong [2:17:38] they have a different case you want to sign that letter director moeller [2:17:44] they have a different case director moeller thank you for your service going all the way back to the 60s [2:17:49] when you courageously served in vietnam because i have a seat on the intelligence committee i'll have [2:17:53] questions later and because of our limited time i will ask to enter this letter into uh the record [2:17:59] under unanimous consent without a joke my colleague from california mr lu thank you director moeller for [2:18:07] your long history of service to our country including your service as a marine where you earn a bronze star [2:18:12] with a v device i'd like to now turn to the elements of obstruction of justice as applied to the [2:18:19] president's attempts to curtail your investigation the first element of obstruction of justice requires [2:18:25] an obstructive act correct correct i'd like to direct you to page 97 of volume two of your report [2:18:32] and you wrote there on page 97 quote sessions was being instructed to tell the special counsel to [2:18:39] end the existing investigation into the president and his campaign unquote that's in the report correct [2:18:45] correct that would be evidence of an obstructive act because it would naturally obstruct their [2:18:52] investigation correct uh correct let's turn now to the second element of the crime of obstruction [2:18:59] justice which requires a nexus to an official proceeding again i'm going to direct you to page 97 the same [2:19:05] page of volume two and you wrote quote by the time of the president's initial one-on-one meeting with [2:19:11] lewandowski on june 19 2017 the existence of a grand jury investigation supervised by the special counsel [2:19:17] was public knowledge that's in the report correct correct that would constitute evidence of a nexus to [2:19:25] an official proceeding because a grand jury investigation is an official proceeding correct well yes [2:19:31] okay i'd like to now turn to the final element of the crime of obstruction of justice on that same page [2:19:37] page 97 do you see where there's the intent section on that page i do see what i see all right would [2:19:44] you be willing to read the first sentence and that was starting with substantial evidence indicates that [2:19:51] the president's if you could read that first sentence would you be willing to do that i'm happy to have [2:19:54] you read it okay i will read it then you wrote quote substantial evidence indicates that the president's [2:20:02] effort to have sessions limit the scope of the special counsel's investigation to future election [2:20:06] interference was intended to prevent further investigative scrutiny of the president's and [2:20:11] his campaign's conduct unquote that's in the report correct that is in the report and i rely what's in [2:20:17] the report uh to uh uh indicate uh uh what's happening in the the paragraphs that we've been discussing [2:20:25] thank you so to recap what we've heard uh we have heard today that the president ordered former [2:20:32] white house counsel domergan to fire you the president ordered domergan to then cover that up and [2:20:37] create a false paper trail and now we've heard the president ordered corey lorandowski to tell jeff [2:20:43] sessions to limit your investigation so that he you stop investigating the president i believe a reasonable [2:20:51] person looking at these facts could conclude that all three elements of the crime of obstruction justice [2:20:58] have been met and i'd like to ask you the reason again that you did not indict donald trump is because [2:21:05] of olc opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president correct that is correct the fact [2:21:12] that their orders by the president were not carried out that is not a defense to obstruction justice [2:21:19] because the statute itself is quite broad it says that as long as you endeavor or attempt to [2:21:25] obstruct justice that would also constitute a crime i'm not okay i get into that at this juncture okay thank [2:21:32] you and uh based on the evidence that we have heard today i believe a reasonable person could [2:21:38] conclude that at least three crimes of social injustice by the president occurred we're going to [2:21:45] hear about two additional crimes that would be the witness tamperings of michael cohen and paul manafort [2:21:51] the only thing i want to add is that i'm going through the elements with you did not mean [2:21:55] or does not mean that i subscribe to uh the uh what you're trying to prove through those elements [2:22:02] the timing the gentleman has expired the gentlelady from uh arizona i'm sorry gentleman from california [2:22:09] uh thank you mr chairman uh mar over here uh thanks for joining us today uh you had three [2:22:15] discussions with rod rosenstein about your appointment as special counsel may 10th may 12th and may 13th [2:22:21] correct if you say so i have no reason to dispute that then you met with the president on the 16th [2:22:28] with rod rosenstein present and then on the 17th you were formally appointed as special counsel [2:22:34] were you meeting with the president on the 16th with knowledge that you were under consideration [2:22:39] for appointment to special counsel i did not believe i was under consideration for uh uh council [2:22:46] uh the uh i had served two terms as fbi director the answer is no and the answer is no greg jarrett [2:22:55] describes your office as the team of partisans um and as additional information is coming to light [2:23:02] there's a growing concern that political bias caused important facts to be admitted from your report [2:23:07] in order to cast the uh president unfairly in a negative light for example john dowd the president's [2:23:13] lawyer leaves a message with michael flynn's lawyer on november 17th of 2017 november 2017. the edited [2:23:20] version in your report makes it appear that he was improperly asking for confidential information and [2:23:25] that's all we know from your report except that the judge in the flynn case ordered the entire transcript [2:23:31] released in which dowd makes it crystal clear that's not what he was suggesting so my question is why did [2:23:37] you edit the transcript to hide the exculpatory part of the message well i mean i turned i would agree [2:23:43] with your characterization as we did anything to hide well you omitted you omitted it you you quoted [2:23:48] the part where he says we need some kind of heads up just for the sake of protecting all of our [2:23:51] interests if we can but you omitted the portion where he says without giving up any confidential [2:23:56] information well i'm not going to go further in terms of discussing uh well let's go on you extensively [2:24:03] discussed constantine klemnek's activities with paul manafort you describe in his quote a russian ukrainian [2:24:09] political consultant and long time employee of paul manafort assessed by the fbi to have ties to [2:24:14] russian intelligence again that's all we know from your report except we've since learned from news [2:24:19] articles that kalemnek was actually a u.s state department intelligence source yet nowhere in your [2:24:25] report is he so identified why was that fact i don't i don't necessarily credit uh what you're saying [2:24:32] occurred were you aware that kalemnek was uh a uh i'm not going to go into the department now i'm not [2:24:37] could go in the ins and outs of what we had in the court in the court in the course of our investigation [2:24:41] constantine kalemnek pardon did you interview constantine kalemnek i can't go into the discussion [2:24:47] of uh uh our investigative moves and and yet that is the the the basis of your report again the problem [2:24:58] we're having is we have to rely on your report for an accurate reflection of the evidence and we're [2:25:04] starting to find out that's that's not true for example uh you your report famously links russian [2:25:09] internet troll farms with the russian government yet at a hearing on may 28th in the concord management [2:25:15] ira prosecution that you initiated the judge excoriated both you and mr bar for producing no [2:25:21] evidence to support this claim why did you suggest russia was responsible for the troll farms when in [2:25:27] court you've been unable to produce any evidence to support it well i'm not going to get into that any [2:25:32] further than i than i already have but you have left the clear impression throughout the country [2:25:37] through your report uh that uh it was the russian government behind the troll farms and yet when [2:25:42] you're called upon to provide actual evidence in court you fail to do so well i would again uh uh [2:25:49] dispute your characterization of what occurred in that in that proceeding in in fact the judge [2:25:54] considering uh considered holding prosecutors in criminal contempt she backed off only after your [2:26:00] hastily called press conference the next day in which you retroactively made the distinction between [2:26:05] the russian government and the russia troll farms did your press conference of may 29th have anything [2:26:10] to do with the threat to hold your prosecutors in contempt the previous day for publicly misrepresenting [2:26:15] the evidence what was the question the question is did your may 29th press conference have anything to [2:26:25] do with the fact that the previous day the judge threatened to hold your prosecutors in contempt for [2:26:31] misrepresenting evidence no now the the the the fundamental problem is as i said we've got to take [2:26:40] your word your team faithfully accurately impartially and completely described all of the underlying [2:26:48] evidence in the muller report and we're finding more and more instances where this just isn't the case [2:26:54] and it's starting to look like you know having desperately tried and failed to make a legal case [2:26:59] against the president you made a political case instead you put it in a paper sack lit it on fire [2:27:04] dropped it on our porch rang the doorbell and ran i don't think you will uh uh reviewed a report that [2:27:10] is as thorough as fair as consistent as the report that we have in front of us then then why is [2:27:16] contradicting the gentleman is expired the gentleman from maryland is recognized director muller let's go to [2:27:22] a fourth episode of obstruction of justice in the form of witness tempering which is urging witnesses [2:27:28] not to cooperate with law enforcement either by persuading them or intimidating them witness [2:27:34] tempering is a felony punishable by 20 years in prison you found evidence that the president engaged in [2:27:40] efforts and i quote to encourage witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation is that right [2:27:49] that's correct do you have a citation that i'm on page seven on volume two thank you now one of [2:27:54] these witnesses was michael cohen the president's personal lawyer who ultimately pled guilty to [2:27:59] campaign violations based on secret hush money payments to uh two women the president knew and [2:28:05] also to line congress lying to congress about the hope for one billion dollar trump tower deal [2:28:11] after the fbi searched cohen's home the president called him up personally he said to check in [2:28:18] and told him to quote hang in there and stay strong is that right do you remember finding that if it's [2:28:23] in the report as as stated yes it is right yes also in the report actually are a series of calls made [2:28:29] by other friends of the president uh one reached out to say he was with the boss in mar-a-lago and the [2:28:35] president said he loves you his name is redacted another redacted friend called to say the boss loves [2:28:41] you and a third redacted friend called to say everyone knows the boss has your back do you remember [2:28:47] finding that sequence of generally yes when the news um and in fact cohen said that following the [2:28:55] receipt of these messages i'm quoting here uh page 147 volume two he believed he had the support of the [2:29:02] white house if he continued to tow the party line and he determined to stay on message and be part of the [2:29:10] team that's it page 147 do you remember generally finding that really yes well um and uh robert [2:29:18] uh costello a lawyer close to the president's legal team uh emailed cohen to say quote you are loved [2:29:25] they are in our corner sleep well tonight and you have friends in high places and that's [2:29:31] up on the screen page 147 you remember reporting that okay now when the news first broke that cohen [2:29:38] had arranged payoffs to stormy daniels uh cohen faithfully stuck to this party line he said that [2:29:45] publicly that neither the trump organization nor the trump campaign was a party to the transaction [2:29:50] and neither reimbursed him um trump's personal attorney at that point quickly uh texted cohen to say [2:29:58] quote client says thank you for what you do um mr muller who is the capital c client thanking cohen for [2:30:08] what he does i can't speak to that uh okay the assumption in the context suggests very strongly [2:30:15] it's president trump i can't speak to that okay cohen later broke and pled guilty to campaign finance [2:30:21] offenses and admitted fully they were made quote at the direction of candidate trump do you remember [2:30:27] that yes after cohen's guilty plea the president suddenly changed his tune towards mr cohen didn't [2:30:33] he i would say i rely on what's in the report well he made the suggestion that cohen family members [2:30:41] had committed crimes he targeted for example cohen's father-in-law and repeatedly suggested that [2:30:46] he was guilty of committing crimes right i generally accurate okay on page 154 you give a powerful [2:30:53] summary of these changing dynamics and you said i'm happy to have you read it but i'm happy to do [2:30:57] it if not i'm in front of me thank you would you like to read it i would can you read it out loud to [2:31:03] everybody i would be happy to have you read it out okay very very we'll read it at the same time [2:31:08] the evidence concerning this sequence of events could support an inference that the president used [2:31:13] inducements in the form of positive messages in an effort to get cohen not to cooperate and then [2:31:19] turn to attacks and intimidation to deter the provision of information or to undermine cohen's [2:31:25] credibility once cohen began cooperating i believe that's accurate okay and in my view if anyone else [2:31:32] in america engaged in these actions they would have been charged with witness tampering we must enforce [2:31:37] the principle in congress that you emphasize so well in the very last sentence of your report which is [2:31:42] that in america no person is so high as to be above the law i yield back mr chairman thank you mr chairman [2:31:51] just recently mr muller you said uh mr lou was asking you questions and mr lou's question i i quote [2:32:00] the reason you didn't indict the president is because of the olc opinion and you answered that is correct [2:32:08] but that is not what you said in the report and it's not what you told attorney general bar [2:32:14] and in fact in a joint statement that you released with doj on may 29th after your press conference [2:32:22] your offered your office issued a joint statement with the department of justice that said the attorney [2:32:28] general has previously stated that the special counsel repeatedly affirmed that he was not saying [2:32:35] that but for the olc opinion he would have found the president obstructed justice the special [2:32:41] counsel's report in his statement today made clear that the office concluded it would not reach a [2:32:47] determination one way or the other whether the president committed a crime there is no conflict [2:32:53] between these statements so mr miller do you stand by your joint statement with doj that you issued on may [2:32:59] 29th as you sit here today uh i would have to look at it more closely before i went and said uh i agree with [2:33:07] it well um so i you know my conclusion is that what you told mr lou really contradicts what you said in [2:33:17] the report and specifically what you said apparently repeatedly to attorney general bar that and then you [2:33:25] issued a joint statement on may 29th saying that the attorney general has previously stated that the [2:33:33] special counsel repeatedly affirmed that he was not saying but for the olc report that we would have [2:33:39] found the president of destructive justice so i just say there's a conflict i do have some more [2:33:44] questions mr muller there's been a lot of talk today about firing the special counsel and curtailing [2:33:50] the investigation were you ever fired mr muller from what were you ever fired a special counselor [2:33:57] mr no no no were you were you allowed to complete your investigation unencumbered yes and in fact [2:34:05] you resigned as special counsel when you closed up the office in late may 20 2019 is that correct correct [2:34:14] thank you um mr muller on april 18th the attorney general had held a press conference in conjunction [2:34:23] with the public release of your report did attorney general bar say anything inaccurate either in [2:34:30] his press conference or his march 24th letter to congress summarizing the principal conclusions of your [2:34:38] report well uh what you are not mentioning is a letter we sent on uh march 27th uh to mr bar that raised [2:34:48] some issues and that letter speaks for itself then i i don't see how you could [2:34:58] could could that could be since ag bar's letter detailed the principal conclusions of your report [2:35:06] and you have said before that that there wasn't anything inaccurate in fact you had this joint [2:35:15] statement but let me let me go on to another uh question uh mr muller rather than purely relying on [2:35:22] the evidence provided by witnesses and documents i i think you relied a lot on media i'd like to know [2:35:28] how many times you cited the washington post in your report how many times i what cited the washington [2:35:35] post in your report i do not have knowledge of that figure but i well that's it i don't have [2:35:41] knowledge of that figure i counted about 60 times how many times did you cite the new york times [2:35:46] i counted again i have no idea i counted about 75 times how many times did you cite fox news i as with [2:35:56] the other two i have no idea about 25 times i i've got to say it looks like volume two is mostly [2:36:04] regurgitated press stories honestly there's almost nothing in volume two that i couldn't already hear or [2:36:12] or no simply by having a 50 cable news subscription however your investigation costs the american [2:36:20] taxpayers 25 million dollars mr muller you cited media reports nearly 200 times in your report [2:36:28] then in a footnote a small footnote number seven page 15 of volume two of your report you wrote i quote [2:36:36] this section summarizes and cites various news stories not for the truth of the information contained in [2:36:41] the stories but rather to place candidate trump's response to those stories in context since nobody [2:36:46] but lawyers reads footnotes are you concerned that the american public took the embedded news stories [2:36:52] and i mean the gentlelady has expired the gentlelady from washington can can mr muller answer the [2:36:58] question no no we're running short on time i said the gentlelady from washington thank you director [2:37:08] muller let's turn to the fifth of the obstruction episodes in your report and that is the evidence of [2:37:13] whether president trump engaged in witness tampering with trump campaign chairman paul manafort whose [2:37:20] foreign ties were critical to your investigation into russia's interference in our elections and this [2:37:25] is starts at volume two page 123 your office got indictments against manafort and trump deputy [2:37:32] campaign manager rick gates in two different jurisdictions correct correct and your office found [2:37:39] that after a grand jury indicted them manafort told gates not to plead guilty to any charges because [2:37:45] quote he had talked to the president president's personal counsel and they were going to take care [2:37:51] of us is that correct that's accurate and according to your report one day after manafort's conviction [2:37:56] on eight felony charges quote the president said that flipping was not fair and almost ought to be [2:38:04] outlawed is that correct i'm aware of that in this context director muller what does it mean to flip [2:38:09] has somebody cooperate in a criminal investigation and how essential is that cooperation to [2:38:15] any efforts to combat crime i'm not going to go beyond that characterizing that thank you in your [2:38:21] report you concluded that president trump and his personal counsel rudy giuliani quote made repeated [2:38:27] statements suggesting that a pardon was a possibility for manafort while also making it clear that the [2:38:32] president did not want manafort to flip and cooperate with the government end quote is that correct correct [2:38:38] and as you stated earlier witness tampering can be shown where someone with an improper motive [2:38:44] encourages another person not to cooperate with law enforcement is that correct correct now on page 123 of [2:38:51] volume two you also discussed the president's motive and you say that as court proceedings move forward [2:38:57] against manafort president trump quote discussed with aids whether and in what way manafort might be [2:39:05] cooperating and whether manafort knew any information that would be harmful to the president end quote is [2:39:10] that correct and that was a quote from from page 123 volume two i have it thank you yes and when someone [2:39:18] tries to stop another person from working with law enforcement and they do it because they're worried about [2:39:22] what that person will say it seems clear from what you wrote that this is a classic definition of witness [2:39:29] tampering now mr manafort did eventually decide to cooperate with your office and he entered into a plea [2:39:35] agreement but then he broke that agreement can you describe what he did that caused you to tell the [2:39:40] court that the agreement was off i'd refer you to the court proceedings on that issue so in page on page 127 [2:39:47] of volume two you told the court that mr manafort lied about a number of matters that were material [2:39:52] to the investigation and you said that the manafort's lawyers also quote regularly briefed the [2:39:58] president's lawyers on topics discussed and the information that manafort had provided in interviews [2:40:03] with the special counsel's office does that sound right and the source of that is that's page 127 volume [2:40:09] two that's a direct report yes i support it and two days after you told the court that manafort [2:40:15] broke his plea agreement by lying repeatedly did president trump tell the press that mr manafort was quote [2:40:22] very brave because he did not flip this is page 128 of volume two if it's in the report i support it [2:40:28] as it is as it is set forth thank you director moeller in your report you make a very serious conclusion [2:40:36] about the evidence regarding the president's involvement with the manafort criminal proceedings [2:40:40] let me read to you from your report evidence concerning the president's conduct toward manafort [2:40:46] indicates that the president intended to encourage manafort to not cooperate with the government it is [2:40:53] clear that the president both publicly and privately discouraged mr manafort's cooperation or flipping [2:40:58] while also dangling the promise of a pardon if he stayed loyal and did not share what he knew about the [2:41:03] president anyone else who did these things would be prosecuted for them we must ensure that no one is [2:41:10] above the law and i thank you for being here director moeller yield back gentlemen from pennsylvania [2:41:16] thank you mr chairman mr moeller mr moeller i'm over here i'm sorry mr moeller are you familiar with [2:41:23] the now expired independent council statute it's the statute under which ken starr was appointed [2:41:30] that ken starr did what i'm sorry are you familiar with the independent council statute are you talking [2:41:36] about the one that we operating under now or a previous under which ken starr was appointed i am not that [2:41:41] familiar with that but i'd be happy to take your question well the clinton administration allowed [2:41:45] the independent council statute to expire after ken starr's investigation the final report requirement [2:41:52] was a major reason why the statute was allowed to expire even president clinton's ag janet reno expressed [2:42:00] concerns about the final report requirement and i'll quote ag reno she said on one hand the american [2:42:07] people have an interest in knowing the outcome of an investigation of their highest officials on the [2:42:13] other hand the report requirement cuts against many of the most basic traditions and practices of [2:42:19] american law enforcement under our system we presume innocence and we value privacy we believe that [2:42:27] information obtained during a criminal investigation should in most cases be made public only if there is an [2:42:34] indictment and prosecution not in a lengthy and detailed report filed after decision had has been made not [2:42:42] to prosecute the final report provides a forum for unfairly airing a target's dirty laundry and it also [2:42:49] creates yet another incentive for an independent council to over investigate in order to justify his or her [2:42:56] tenure and to avoid criticism that the independent council may have left a stone unturned again mr muller those [2:43:03] are ag reno's words didn't you do exactly what ag reno feared didn't you publish a lengthy report [2:43:10] unfairly airing the target's dirty laundry without recommending charges uh i disagree with that okay [2:43:19] did any of your witnesses have the chance to be cross-examined can i just finish my answer on that [2:43:24] quickly i operate under the current statute not the original statute so i am most familiar with the [2:43:30] current statute not the older stuff did any of the witnesses have a chance to be cross-examined did any [2:43:36] of the witnesses in our investigation yes i'm not going to answer that did you allow the people [2:43:42] mentioning your report to challenge how they were characterized i'm not going to get into uh uh okay [2:43:49] given that ag bar stated multiple times during his confirmation hearing that he would make as much of [2:43:55] your report public as possible did you write your report knowing that it would likely be shared with the [2:44:00] public no did knowing the report could and likely would be made public did that alter the contents [2:44:06] which you included i can't speak to that despite the expectations that your report would be released [2:44:12] to the public you left out significant exculpatory evidence in other words evidence favorable to the [2:44:18] president correct well i actually disagree would disagree with you i think we strove to put put into [2:44:23] the report i think my goal but exculpatory evidence as well i got into that with you where he said there [2:44:29] was evans you left out well you make a choice as to what goes into a uh isn't it mr muller isn't it [2:44:39] true that on page one of volume two you state when you're quoting the statute you had an obligation to [2:44:45] either prosecute or not prosecute well generally that is the case right although most cases are not [2:44:52] done in the context of uh the president and in this case you made a decision not to prosecute correct [2:45:00] no we made a decision not to decide whether to prosecute or not so so essentially what your [2:45:05] report did was everything that ag reno warned against i can't uh agree with that character well [2:45:12] well what you did is you compiled a nearly 450 you compiled nearly 450 pages of the very worst [2:45:19] information you gathered against the target of your investigation who happens to be the president [2:45:23] of the united states and you did this knowing that you were not going to recommend charges and that the [2:45:29] report would be made public not true mr mr muller as a former officer in the united states jag corps [2:45:36] i prosecuted nearly 100 terrorists in a baghdad courtroom i cross-examined the butcher of fallujah [2:45:42] in defense of our navy seals as a civilian i was elected a magisterial district judge in pennsylvania [2:45:47] so i'm very well versed the american legal system the drafting and the publication of some of the [2:45:54] information in this report without an indictment without prosecution frankly flies in the face of [2:46:01] american justice and i find those facts in this entire process un-american i yield the remainder [2:46:08] of my time to my colleague jim jordan uh mr uh director muller the third pfizer renewal happens [2:46:13] a month after your name special counsel what role did your office play in the third pfizer renewal [2:46:18] of carter page okay talk to that timing the gentleman has expired the gentlelady from florida [2:46:25] director muller a couple of my colleagues right here wanted to talk to you or ask you about lies so [2:46:30] let's talk about lies according to your report page nine volume one witnesses lied to your office and to [2:46:37] congress those lies materially impaired the investigation of russia interference according [2:46:43] to your report other than the individuals who pled guilty to crimes based on their [2:46:48] lying to you and your team did other witnesses lie to you i think and they're probably a spectrum of [2:46:54] witnesses uh in terms of uh those who uh are not telling the full truth and those are outright liars [2:47:02] thank you very much outright liars it is fair to say then that there were limits on what evidence [2:47:08] was available to your investigation of both russia election interference and obstruction of justice [2:47:13] that's true and it's usually the case and that lies by trump campaign officials and administration [2:47:19] officials impeded your investigation i would generally agree with that thank you so much director muller [2:47:28] you will be hearing more from me in the next hearing so i yield the balance of my time to mr korea [2:47:34] thank you mr muller first of all let me welcome you thank you for your service to our country you're a [2:47:43] hero vietnam war vet wounded war vet we won't forget to service to our country thank you sir i may begin [2:47:50] because of time limits we have gone in depth on only five possible episodes of obstruction there's [2:47:56] there's so much more and i want to focus on another section of obstruction which is the president's [2:48:02] conduct concerning michael flynn the president's national security advisor in early 27 the white [2:48:09] house council and the president were informed that mr flynn had lied to government authorities about [2:48:16] his communications with the russian ambassador during the trump campaign and transition is this [2:48:23] correct correct if a hostile nation knows that a u.s official has lied publicly that can that can be [2:48:31] used to blackmail that government official correct i'm not going to speak to that i don't disagree [2:48:36] with it necessarily but uh i'm not going to speak to any more to that issue thank you very much sir [2:48:41] uh flynn resigned on february 13 2016 and the very next day when the president was having lunch with [2:48:50] new jersey governor chris christie did the president say open quotes now that we fired flynn the russia [2:48:58] thing is over close quote is that correct correct and is it true that christie responded by saying open [2:49:06] quotes no way and this russia thing is far from over close quote that's the way we have it in the report [2:49:13] thank you and after president met with christie later that some that same day the president arranged [2:49:22] to meet with an fbi director james comey alone in the oval office correct correct particularly if uh [2:49:31] you have the citation to the uh page 3940 volume two thank you very much and according to comey the [2:49:39] president told him i hope open quote i hope you can see your way to clear to letting this thing go to [2:49:47] letting flynn go he's a good guy and i hope he can let it go close quote page 40 volume two accurate [2:49:57] what did comey understand the president to be asking i'm i'm not going to get into what was in uh [2:50:02] mr comey's mind comey understood this to be a direction because of the president's position [2:50:08] and the circumstances of the one-to-one meeting page 40 volume two well i understand uh it's in the [2:50:15] report and i've supported uh as being in the as being in the report thank you sir even though the pub [2:50:22] the president publicly denied telling comey to drop the investigation you found open quote substantial [2:50:29] evidence corroborating comey's account over the president's is this correct correct the president [2:50:37] fired comey on may 9th is that correct sir i believe that's the accurate date that's page 77 volume two [2:50:46] you found substantial evidence that the catalyst for the president's firing of comey was comey's open [2:50:53] quote unwillingness to publicly state that the president was not personally under investigation [2:51:00] i'm not going to delve more into the details of what happened if it's in the report then i'm [2:51:04] supportive because it's already been reviewed and appropriately appears in the report and that's [2:51:09] page 75 volume thank you thank you and in fact the very next day the president told the russian foreign [2:51:17] minister open quote i just fired the head of the fbi he was crazy a real nut job i faced great pressure [2:51:25] because of russia that's taken off i'm not under investigation close quote is that correct and that's [2:51:33] what was written written in the report yes time of the gentleman is expired um thank you sir gentleman [2:51:39] from virginia thank you mr chairman mr cohn mr muller we've heard a lot about what you're not going [2:51:46] to talk about today so let's talk about something that you should be able to talk about the law itself [2:51:51] the underlying obstruction statute and your creative legal analysis of the statutes in volume two [2:51:57] particularly an interpretation of 18 usc 1512 c section 1512 c is an obstruction of justice statute [2:52:05] created as part of auditing and financial regulations for public companies and as you write on page 164 [2:52:12] of volume two this provision was added as a floor amendment in the senate and explained as closing a [2:52:17] certain loophole with respect to document shredding and to read the statute whoever corruptly alters [2:52:23] destroys mutilates or conceals a record document or other object or attempts to do so with the [2:52:27] intent to impair the object's integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding [2:52:33] or otherwise obstructs influences or impedes any official proceeding or attempts to do so [2:52:38] shall be fine under the statute or in prison not more than 20 years or both your analysis and [2:52:42] application of the statute proposes to give clause c2 a much broader interpretation than commonly used [2:52:48] first your analysis proposes to read clause c2 in isolation reading it as a freestanding all [2:52:53] encompassing provision prohibiting any act influencing a proceeding if done with an improper motive and [2:52:59] second your analysis of the statute to apply this week being pro proposes to apply the sweeping prohibition [2:53:05] to lawful acts taken by public officials exercising their discretionary powers if those acts influence [2:53:11] a proceeding so mr mollard ask you in analyzing the obstruction you state that you recognize that the [2:53:21] department of justice and the courts have not definitively resolved these issues correct correct [2:53:26] you'd agree that not everyone in the justice department agreed with your legal theory of the [2:53:30] obstruction of justice statutes correct i'm not going to uh be involved in the discussion on on [2:53:36] that at this juncture in fact the attorney general himself disagrees with your interpretation of [2:53:40] the law correct i leave that to the attorney general to identify and you would agree that prosecutors [2:53:45] sometimes incorrectly apply the law correct i would have to agree with that one and members of your [2:53:51] legal team in fact have had convictions overturned because they were based on an incorrect legal [2:53:55] theory correct i don't know to what you advert we've all well in time in the trenches trying [2:54:00] cases have not won every one of those cases well let me ask you about one in particular one of your top [2:54:04] prosecutors andrew weissman obtained a conviction against auditing firm arthur anderson lower court [2:54:09] which was subsequently overturned in a unanimous supreme court decision that rejected the legal [2:54:14] theory advanced by weissman correct well i'm not going to get into that delving into let me read from [2:54:19] that maybe i just finish i just finished my answer to say that i'm not going to be get involved in [2:54:24] discussion on that i will refer you to that citation that you gave me at the outset for the lengthy [2:54:31] discussion on just what you're talking about and to the extent that i have anything to say about it [2:54:36] it is what we've already put into the uh report on that i am reading from your report uh when discussing [2:54:42] this section i'll read from the decision of the supreme court unanimously reversing mr weissman uh when he [2:54:48] said indeed it's it's striking how little culpability the instructions required for example the jury was [2:54:53] told that even if petitioner honestly and sincerely believed his conduct was lawful the jury could [2:54:57] convict the instructions also diluted the meaning of corruptly such that it covered innocent conduct [2:55:02] well let me let me just say let me move on i have limited time your report takes the broadest [2:55:07] possible reading of this provision and applying it to the president's official acts and i'm concerned [2:55:11] about the implications of your theory for over criminalizing conduct by public officials and private [2:55:15] citizens alike so to emphasize how broad your theory of liability is i want to ask you about a few [2:55:20] examples on october 11 2015 during the fbi investigation into hillary clinton's use of a [2:55:25] private email server president obama said i don't think it posed a national security problem and he [2:55:30] later said i can tell you that this is not a situation in which america's national security was [2:55:34] endangered assuming for a moment that his comments did influence the investigation couldn't president [2:55:39] obama be charged under your interpretation with obstruction of justice well again i'd refer you to [2:55:45] uh uh the report but let me say with andrew weissman who's one of the more talented attorneys that we [2:55:50] have and uh have on board i will take that over a period of time he has run a number of uh units [2:55:57] i have very limited time in august 2015 a very senior doj official called fbi deputy director andrew mccabe [2:56:04] expressing concern the fbi agents were still openly pursuing the clinton foundation probe the doj official [2:56:09] was apparently very pissed off quote unquote mccabe questioned this official asking are you [2:56:15] telling me i need to shut down a validly predicated investigation to which the official replied of [2:56:19] course not this seems to be a clear example of somebody within the executive branch attempting to [2:56:24] influence an sbi this investigation so under your theory uh couldn't that person be charged with [2:56:30] obstruction as long as a prosecutor could come up with a potentially corrupt corrupt motive i i refer [2:56:35] you to our lengthy dissertation on exactly those issues that appears in the at the end of the report [2:56:41] mr muller i'd argue that it says above the supreme court equal justice under law the gentleman has [2:56:46] expired not stretch our intent was our intent was to conclude this hearing in three hours given the [2:56:52] break that would bring us to approximately 11 40. with director muller's indulgence we will be asking [2:56:57] our remaining democratic members to voluntarily limit their time below the five minutes so that we can [2:57:02] complete our work as close to that time frame as possible and i recognize the uh gentlelady from [2:57:07] pennsylvania thank you director muller um i want to ask you some questions about the president's [2:57:13] statements regarding advanced knowledge of the wiki leaks dumps so the president refused to sit down [2:57:20] with your investigators for an in-person interview correct correct so the only answers we have to [2:57:26] questions from the president are contained in appendix c to your report correct okay so looking at appendix c [2:57:33] on page five you asked the president over a dozen questions about whether he had knowledge that [2:57:39] wiki leaks possessed or might possess the emails that were stolen by the russians i apologize sure can [2:57:46] you start it again okay sure so we're looking at appendix c right um and appendix c page five you [2:57:54] asked the president about a dozen questions about whether he had knowledge that wiki leaks possessed [2:58:01] the stolen emails that might be released in a way helpful to his campaign or harmful to the clinton [2:58:07] campaign is that correct you asked those questions okay in february of this year mr uh trump's personal [2:58:14] attorney michael cohen testified to congress under oath that quote mr trump knew from roger stone in [2:58:21] advance about the wiki leaks drop of emails end quote that's a matter of public record isn't it [2:58:26] well are you referring to the report or some other public record this was testimony before congress [2:58:32] by mr cohen do you know if he told you i'm not familiar with it explicitly familiar with uh what he [2:58:38] testified to before congress okay let's look in an event described on page 18 of volume two of your [2:58:46] report now according and we're going to put it up in a slide i think according to deputy campaign [2:58:52] manager rick gates in the summer of 2016 he and candidate trump were on the way to an airport shortly [2:59:01] after wiki leaks released its first set of stolen emails and gates told your investigators that candidate [2:59:08] trump was on a phone call and when the call ended trump told gates that more releases of damaging [2:59:15] information would be coming end quote do you recall that from the report uh if it's in the report i [2:59:21] support it okay and that's on page 18 of volume two now on page 77 of volume two your report also [2:59:28] stated quote in addition some witnesses said that trump privately sought information about future wiki leak [2:59:36] releases end quote is that correct correct now in appendix c where the president did answer some [2:59:43] written questions he said quote i do not recall discussing wiki leaks with him nor do i recall being [2:59:49] aware of mr stone having discussed wiki leaks with individuals associated with my campaign end quote [2:59:55] is that correct i if it's from the report it is correct okay so is it fair to say the president [3:00:01] denied ever discussing wiki leaks with mr stone and denied being aware um that anyone associated with [3:00:07] his campaign discussed wiki leaks with stone i'm sorry could you repeat that one is it fair then that the [3:00:13] president denied uh knowledge of himself or anyone else discussing wiki leaks dumps with mr stone yes [3:00:19] okay um and with that i would yield back thank you ma'am thank you mr chair uh mr muller over here [3:00:30] mr muller did you indeed interview for the fbi director job one day before you were appointed a [3:00:35] special counsel my understanding i was not applying for the job i was asked to give my input on what it [3:00:45] would take to do the job which uh triggered the uh interview you're talking about so you don't [3:00:50] recall on may 16 2017 that you interviewed with the president regarding the fbi director job i [3:00:55] interviewed with the president and uh regarding the fbi director was about the job and not about me [3:01:00] applying for the job so so your your statement here today is that you didn't interview to apply [3:01:06] for the fbi director job that's correct so it did you tell the vice president that the fbi director [3:01:13] position would be the one job that you would come back to for don't recall that one you don't recall [3:01:18] that no okay uh given your 22 months of investigation tens of million dollars spent and millions of [3:01:24] documents reviewed did you obtain any evidence at all that any american voter changed their vote as a [3:01:30] result of russia's election interference i'm not going to speak to that you can't speak to that after [3:01:35] 22 months of investigation there's not any evidence in that document before us that that any voter [3:01:40] changed their vote because of their interference and i'm asking you based on all the documents that [3:01:44] you reviewed that was outside our purview russian meddling was outside your purview but the impact [3:01:50] of that meddling was undertaken by other uh agencies okay you stated in your opening statement that you [3:01:56] would not get into the details of the steel dossier however multiple times in volume two on page 23 27 [3:02:03] and 28 you mentioned the unverified allegations how long did it take you to to reach the conclusion [3:02:09] that it was unverified i'm not going to speak to that it's in it's actually in your report [3:02:14] multiple times that it's unverified and you're telling me that you're not willing to tell us how [3:02:18] you came to the conclusion that it was unverified true when did you become aware that the unverified [3:02:24] steel dossier was included in the fisa application to spy on carter page i'm i'm sorry what was he uh [3:02:31] what was the question when did you become aware that the unverified steel dossier was intended was [3:02:37] included in the fisa applications spy on carter page uh i'm not going to speak to that uh your team [3:02:44] interviewed christopher steel is that correct not going to get into that you can't tell this committee [3:02:50] as to whether or not you interviewed christopher steel in a 22-month investigation with 18 lawyers [3:02:55] as i said at the outset that is one of those uh one of the uh investigations that is uh is being [3:03:01] handled by others in the department of justice yeah but you're here testifying about this investigation [3:03:06] today and i am asking you directly did any members of your team or did you interview christopher [3:03:11] steel in the course of your investigation and i am not going to answer that question sir you had two [3:03:15] years to investigate not once did you consider worthy to investigate how an unverified document [3:03:21] that was paid for by a political opponent was used to obtain a warrant to spy on the opposition [3:03:26] political campaign did you do any investigation and that was i did not accept your characterization [3:03:30] what occurred what would you what would be your character so you can't speak any more to it but [3:03:35] you're not going to agree with my characterization is that correct yes the fisa application makes [3:03:45] reference to source one who was christopher steel the author of the steel dossier the fisa application [3:03:50] says nothing sources one's reason for conducting the research into candidate one's ties to russia [3:03:55] based on sources one previous reporting history with fbi whereby source one provided reliable [3:04:00] information the fbi the fbi believes source one's reporting here and to be credible do you believe [3:04:05] the fbi's representation that source one's reporting was credible to be accurate i'm not going to answer [3:04:10] that so you're not going to respond to any of the questions regarding christopher steel [3:04:15] or your interviews with them well as i said at the outset this morning that was one of the [3:04:21] investigations that i could not speak to well i don't understand how if you interviewed an individual [3:04:26] on the purview of this investigation that you're testifying to us today that you've closed that [3:04:30] investigation how that's not within your purview to tell us about that investigation and who you [3:04:34] interviewed i have nothing to add okay well the i can guarantee that the american people want to know and i'm [3:04:41] and i'm very hopeful and glad that ag bar is looking into this and the inspector general is [3:04:45] looking into this because you're unwilling to answer the questions of the american people as it relates [3:04:50] to the very basis of this investigation into the president and the very basis of this individual who [3:04:55] you did interview you're just refusing to answer those questions uh can can't the president fire the fbi [3:05:02] director at any time without reason under article one of the constitution yes article two yes that's [3:05:08] correct can't he also fire you as special counsel at any time without any reason i believe that to be [3:05:13] the case under article two hold on just a second uh you said without any reason i i know that special [3:05:20] counsel can be fired but i'm not certain it extends to for whatever reason uh is given well and you've [3:05:26] testified that you weren't fired you were able to complete your investigation in full is that correct [3:05:30] i'm not going to add to what i've stated before my time is expired gentlemen's time has expired the [3:05:37] gentlelady from pennsylvania from texas thank you mr chairman and thank you mr muller for being with us [3:05:46] this afternoon close to the afternoon now director director muller and i would like to ask you [3:05:51] about the president's answers relating to roger stone roger stone was indicted for multiple federal [3:05:58] crimes and indictment alleges that mr stone discussed future wikileaks email releases with the trump [3:06:05] campaign understanding there's a gag order on the stone case i will keep my questions restricted to [3:06:12] publicly available information uh mr stone's indictment i would just say at the outside i i don't mean to [3:06:19] disrupt you but uh i'm not i i would like some demarcation of that which is applicable to this [3:06:28] but also in such a way that it does not hinder uh the other prosecution is taking place in dc i understand [3:06:34] that i'm only going to be talking about the questions that you asked uh in writing to the [3:06:39] president thank you ma'am that relate to mr stone mr stone's indictment states among other things [3:06:45] the following quote stone was contacted by senior trump officials to inquire about future releases [3:06:51] of organization one organization one being wikileaks the indictment continues quote stone thereafter [3:06:59] told the trump campaign about potential future releases of damaging material by wikileaks so in [3:07:05] short the indictment alleges that stone was asked by the trump campaign to get information about more [3:07:14] wikileaks releases and that stone in fact did tell the trump campaign about potential future releases [3:07:22] correct yes ma'am but uh i i see you're quoting from the indictment even though the indictment is a [3:07:28] public document i feel uncomfortable discussing anything having to do with the stone uh prosecution [3:07:34] right the uh indictment is is of record and i pulled we pulled it off of the uh straight from it [3:07:40] well well turning back to the president's answers to your questions then on this very subject the [3:07:45] president tonight ever discussing future week wikileaks releases with stone and tonight knowing whether [3:07:51] anyone else on his campaign had those discussions with stone if you had learned that other witnesses put [3:07:58] us putting aside the president if other witnesses had lied to your investigators in response to pacific's [3:08:05] questions whether he whether in writing or in an interview could they be charged with false statement [3:08:11] crimes well i'm i'm not going to speculate i think you're asking for me to speculate uh given a a set of [3:08:19] circumstances well let's put it more specific what if i had made a false statement to an investigator on [3:08:25] your team could i go to jail for up to five years yes yes although there's it's congress so [3:08:34] well that's the point though isn't it that that no one is above the law that's true not you not the [3:08:39] congress and certainly not the president uh and i think it's just troubling to have to hear some of [3:08:45] these things uh and that's why the american people deserve to learn the full facts of the misconduct [3:08:51] uh described in your report for which any other person would have been charged with crimes so [3:08:56] thank you for being here and again this the point has been underscored many times but i'll [3:09:02] repeat it no one is above the law thank you thank you ma'am the time the uh gentleman the uh [3:09:08] gentleman from north dakota is recognized mr muller how many people did you fire how many people [3:09:12] on your staff to fire during the course of the investigation how many people did you fire i'm not [3:09:19] okay uh uh discuss that you fired attorney according to uh uh inspector general's report [3:09:25] attorney number two was let go and we know peter strock was let go correct yes and there may have [3:09:29] been other persons on other issues that have been uh either transferred or fired peter strock testified [3:09:35] before this committee on july 12 2018 that he was fired because you were concerned about preserving [3:09:40] the appearance of independence do you agree with this testimony i'll say that again if you could he said he [3:09:46] was fired at least partially because you were you were worried about a um concerned about preserving [3:09:51] the appearance of independence with the special counsel's investigation do you agree with that [3:09:55] statement and the statement was by whom peter strock at this hearing and i am not familiar with that [3:10:02] did you fire him because you were worried about the appearance of independence of the of the [3:10:06] investigation no he was transferred as a result of instances indwelling uh texts do you agree that [3:10:14] do you agree that your office did not only have an obligation to operate with independence but to [3:10:19] operate with the appearance of independence as well absolutely we strove to do that over the two [3:10:22] years andrew weissman part of that was making certain that andrew weissman's one of your top [3:10:27] attorneys yes did weissman have a role in selecting other members of your team he had some role but not [3:10:33] a major role andrew weissman attended hillary clinton's election night party did you know that [3:10:37] before or after he came onto the team don't know when i found that out on january 30 2017 weissman wrote [3:10:43] an email to deputy attorney general yates stating i am so proud and in awe regarding [3:10:49] her disobeying a direct order from the president did weissman disclose that email to you before [3:10:54] he joined the team yeah i'm not going to talk about that is that not a conflict of interest [3:10:59] i'm not going to talk about that are you aware that miss jeannie rey represented hillary clinton [3:11:04] in litigation regarding personal emails originating originating from clinton's time as secretary of [3:11:08] state yes did you know that before she came on that no aaron zeldley the guy sitting next to you [3:11:15] represented justin cooper a clinton aide who destroyed one of clinton's mobile devices and [3:11:20] you must be aware by now that six of your lawyers donated twelve thousand dollars directly to hillary [3:11:25] clinton i'm not even talking about the 49 000 they donated to other democrats just the donations to [3:11:31] the opponent who was the target of your investigation can i speak for a second to the hiring practices [3:11:36] sure uh we strove to hire those individuals that could do the job uh i've been okay i've been in this [3:11:43] business for almost 25 years and in those 25 years i have not had occasion once to ask somebody [3:11:50] about their political affiliation it is not done what i care about is the capability of the individual [3:11:55] to do the job and do the job quickly and seriously and with integrity but that's what i'm saying mr [3:12:01] muller this isn't just about you being able to voucher your team this is about knowing that the [3:12:04] day you accepted this role you had to be aware no matter what this report concluded half of the [3:12:09] country was going to be scheduled skeptical of your team's findings and that's why we have recusal [3:12:14] laws that define bias and perceive bias for this very reason 28 united states code 528 specifically [3:12:21] lists not just political conflict of interest but the appearance of political contracts conflict of [3:12:26] interest it's just simply not enough that you vouch for your team the interested doses demand that [3:12:31] no perceived bias exists i can't imagine a single prosecutor or judge that i have ever appeared in [3:12:36] front of would be comfortable with these circumstances where over half of the prosecutorial team had a [3:12:41] direct relationship to the opponent of the person being investigated let me one of the fact that i [3:12:46] put on the table and that is we hired 19 lawyers over the period of time of those 19 lawyers 14 of them [3:12:53] were transferred from elsewhere in the department of justice only five came from outside and half of them [3:12:58] had a direct relationship political or personal with the opponent of the person you were [3:13:03] investigating and that's my point i wonder if not a single word in this entire report was changed but [3:13:08] rather the only difference was we switched hillary clinton and president trump if peter strock had [3:13:13] texted those terrible things about hillary clinton instead of president trump if a team of lawyers worked [3:13:19] for donated thousands of dollars to and went to trims trump's parties instead of clinton's i don't think [3:13:25] we'd be here trying to prop up an obstruction allegation my colleagues would have spent the last four [3:13:31] months accusing your team of being bought and paid for by the trump campaign and we couldn't trust a [3:13:35] single word of this report they would still be accusing the president of conspiracy with russia [3:13:41] and they would be accusing your team of aiding and embedding in that with that conspiracy and [3:13:45] with that i yield back gentleman yields back the gentleman from colorado director muller thank you [3:13:51] for your service to our country i'd like to talk to you about one of the other incidents of obstruction [3:13:55] and that's the evidence in your report showing the president directing his son and his communications [3:13:59] director to issue a false public statement in june of 2017 about a meeting between his campaign and [3:14:05] russian individuals at trump tower in june of 2016. according to your report mr trump jr was the only [3:14:12] trump associate who participated in that meeting and who declined to be voluntarily interviewed by your [3:14:18] office is that correct yes did mr trump jr or his counsel ever communicate to your office any intent [3:14:25] to invoke his fifth amendment right against self-incrimination i'm not going to answer that [3:14:30] you did pose written questions to the president about his knowledge of the trump tower meeting [3:14:35] you included also asked him about whether or not he had directed a false press statement the [3:14:39] president did not answer at all that question correct i don't have it in front of me i take your word [3:14:46] i can represent to you that appendix c specifically c13 states as much according to page 100 of volume two [3:14:54] of your report your investigation found that hope hicks the president's communications director in june of [3:14:59] 2017 was shown emails that set up the trump tower meeting and she told your office that she was [3:15:05] quote shocked by the emails because they looked quote really bad true do you have the citation sure it's [3:15:12] page 100 of volume two while you're flipping to that page director moeller i will also tell you that [3:15:20] according to page 99 of volume two those emails in question stated according to your report that the [3:15:26] crown prosecutor of russia had offered to provide the trump campaign with some official documents and [3:15:31] information that would incriminate hillary and her dealings with russia as part of russia and its [3:15:35] government support for mr trump trump jr responded if it's what you say i love it and he kushner and [3:15:43] manafort met with the russian attorneys and several other russian individuals at trump tower on june 9th [3:15:49] 2016 end quote correct generally accurate isn't it true that miss hicks told your office [3:15:56] that she went multiple times to the president to quote urge him that they should be fully transparent [3:16:02] about the june 9th meeting end quote but the president each time said no correct accurate and the reason [3:16:11] was because of those emails which the president quote believed would not leak correct well i'm not [3:16:17] certain how it's characterized but generally correct did the president direct miss hicks to say quote [3:16:24] only that trump jr took a brief meeting and it was about russian adoption end quote because trump [3:16:29] jr's statement to the new york times quote said too much according to one page 102 of volume two [3:16:36] okay correct let me hit one let me just check one thing yes and according to miss hicks the president [3:16:48] still directed her to say the meeting was only about russian adoption correct yes despite knowing that [3:16:55] to be untrue thank you director muller i yield back the balance of my own time mr muller you've been [3:17:03] asked over here on the on the far right sir uh you've been asked a lot of questions here today to be frank [3:17:09] you performed as most of us expected you've stuck closely to your report and you have declined to [3:17:13] answer many of our questions on both sides as the closer for the republican side i know you're glad to [3:17:18] get to the close i want to summarize the highlights of what we have heard and what we know you spent two [3:17:24] years and nearly 30 million taxpayer dollars and unlimited resources to prepare a nearly 450 page [3:17:30] report which you describe today as very thorough millions of americans today maintain genuine concerns [3:17:36] about your work in large part because of the infamous and widely publicized bias of your investigating [3:17:42] team members which we now know included 14 democrats and zero republicans campaign finance reports [3:17:48] later showed that team excuse me it's my time that team of democrat investigators you hired donated more [3:17:53] than sixty thousand dollars to the hillary clinton campaign and other democratic candidates your team [3:17:58] also included peter struck and lisa page which have been discussed today and they had the lurid text [3:18:03] messages that confirmed they openly mocked and hated donald trump and his supporters and they vowed to [3:18:09] take him out mr ratcliffe asked you earlier this morning quote can you give me an example other than [3:18:15] donald trump where the justice department determined that an investigated person was not exonerated [3:18:20] because their innocence was not conclusively determined unquote you answered i cannot sir that is [3:18:26] unprecedented the president believed from the very beginning that you and your special counsel team [3:18:31] had serious conflicts this is stated in the report and acknowledged by everybody and yet president trump [3:18:36] cooperated fully with the investigation he knew he had done nothing wrong and he encouraged all [3:18:41] witnesses to cooperate with the investigation and produced more than 1.4 million pages of information [3:18:47] and allowed over 40 witnesses who were directly affiliated with the white house or his campaign [3:18:52] your report acknowledges on page 61 volume two that a volume of evidence exists of the president [3:18:57] telling many people privately quote the president was concerned about the impact of the russian [3:19:02] investigation on his ability to govern and to address important foreign relations issues and even [3:19:07] matters of national security and on page 174 volume two your report also acknowledges that the supreme [3:19:13] court has held quote the president's removal powers are at their zenith with respect to principal officers [3:19:19] that is officers who must be appointed by the president and who report to him directly the president's [3:19:24] exclusive and illimitable power of removal of those principal officers furthers the president's ability [3:19:29] to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed unquote and that would even include the attorney general [3:19:34] look in spite of all of that nothing ever happened to stop or impede your special counsel's investigation [3:19:40] nobody was fired by the president nothing was curtailed and the investigation continued [3:19:44] unencumbered for 22 long months as you finally concluded in volume one the evidence quote did [3:19:50] not establish that the president was involved in an underlying crime related to russian election [3:19:55] interference unquote and the evidence quote did not establish that the president or those close to him [3:20:01] were involved in any russian conspiracies or had an unlawful relationship with any russian official unquote [3:20:07] over those 22 long months that your investigation dragged along the president became increasingly [3:20:11] frustrated as many of the american people did with its effects on our country and his ability to govern [3:20:16] he vented about this to his lawyer and his close associates and he even shared his frustrations as we all [3:20:21] know on twitter but while the president's social media accounts might have influenced some in the media [3:20:26] or the opinion of some of the american people none of those audiences were targets or witnesses in your [3:20:31] investigation the president never affected anybody's testimony he never demanded to end the [3:20:36] investigation or demanded that you be terminated and he never misled congress the doj or the special [3:20:41] counsel those sir are undisputed facts there will be a lot of discussion i predict today and great [3:20:47] frustration throughout the country about the fact that you wouldn't answer any questions here about [3:20:50] the origins of this whole charade which was the infamous christopher steele dossier now proven to be [3:20:55] totally bogus even though it is listed and specifically referenced in your report but as our hearing is [3:21:00] concluding we apparently will get no comment on that from you mr muller there's one primary reason [3:21:06] why you were called here today and by the by the democrat majority of our committee our colleagues [3:21:10] on the other side of the owl just want political cover they desperately wanted you today to tell [3:21:14] them they should impeach the president but the one thing you have said very clearly today is that [3:21:19] your report is complete and thorough and you completely agree with and stand by its recommendations [3:21:24] and all of its content is that right true mr muller one last important question your report does not [3:21:31] recommend impeachment does it i'm not going to talk about uh recommendations it does not conclude that [3:21:38] impeachment would be appropriate here i'm not going to talk about that uh that issue that's one of [3:21:46] the many things you wouldn't talk about today but i think we can all draw our own conclusions i do thank [3:21:49] you for your service to the country and i'm glad this charade will come to an end soon and we can get [3:21:53] back to the important business of this committee with its broad jurisdiction of so many important issues [3:21:57] for the country with that i yield back gentleman yields back i want to announce that our intent was [3:22:03] to conclude this hearing at around 11 45 all of the republican members have now asked their questions but [3:22:09] we have a few remaining democratic members they would be limiting their questions so with director moe's [3:22:14] indulgence we expect to finish within 15 minutes the gentlelady from georgia is recognized thank you mr [3:22:19] chairman and thank you director muller your investigations of the russian attack on our democracy and [3:22:25] of obstruction of justice justice were extraordinarily productive in under two years you charged at [3:22:31] least 37 people or entities with crimes you convicted seven individuals five of whom were top trump [3:22:37] campaigner white house aids charges remain pending against more than two dozen russian persons or [3:22:44] entities and against others now let me start with those five trump campaigner administration aids that [3:22:49] you convicted would you agree with me that they are paul manafort president trump's campaign [3:22:55] manager rick gates president trump's deputy campaign manager michael flynn president trump's former [3:23:01] national security advisor michael cohen the president's personal attorney george papadopoulos [3:23:07] president trump's former campaign foreign policy advisor correct correct and the sixth trump [3:23:13] associate will face will face trial later this year correct and that person would be roger stone [3:23:19] correct correct thank you i'm not certain what you said by stone but he is uh in another [3:23:25] court system as i indicated before exactly he's still under investigation correct thank you and there [3:23:32] are many other charges as well correct correct so sir i just want to thank you so much in my limited [3:23:38] time today for your team the work that you did in your dedication in less than two years your team was [3:23:44] able to uncover an incredible amount of information related to russia's attack on our elections and to [3:23:51] obstruction of justice and there's still more that we have to learn despite facing unfair attacks by the [3:23:58] president and even here today your work has been substantive and fair the work has laid the critical [3:24:07] foundation for our investigation and for that i thank you i thank you and with that i yield back the [3:24:14] balance of my time ladies back the gentleman from arizona thank you director muller i'm disappointed that [3:24:20] some have questioned your motives throughout this process and i want to take a moment to remind the [3:24:26] american people of who you are and your exemplary service to our country you are a marine you served [3:24:33] in vietnam and earned a bronze star and a purple heart correct correct which president appointed you to [3:24:40] become the united states attorney for massachusetts which senator which president oh which president i think [3:24:49] that was president bush um according to my notes it was president ronald reagan had the honor to [3:24:55] do so under who's my mistake under whose administration did you serve as the assistant attorney general in [3:25:02] charge of the doj's criminal division or which president yep that would be george bush one that is [3:25:11] correct president george hw bush after that you took a job at a prestigious law firm and after only a couple [3:25:18] years you did something extraordinary you left that lucrative position to re-enter public service [3:25:24] prosecuting homicides here in washington dc is that correct correct when you were named director of [3:25:30] the fbi which president first appointed you bush and the senate confirmed you with a vote of 98 to zero [3:25:38] correct surprising and you were sworn in as director just one week before the september 11th attacks [3:25:47] through help to protect this nation against another attack you did such an outstanding job that when your [3:25:52] 10-year term expired the senate unanimously voted to extend your term for another two years correct [3:25:59] true when you were asked in 2017 to take the job as special counsel the president had just fired fbi [3:26:07] director james comey the justice department and the fbi were in turmoil you must have known there [3:26:13] would be an extraordinary challenge why did you accept i'm not gonna get into that's a little bit off [3:26:19] track it was a challenge period [3:26:24] some people have attacked the political motivations of your team even suggested your investigation [3:26:29] was a witch hunt when you considered people to join your team did you ever even once ask about their [3:26:35] political affiliation never once in your entire career as a law enforcement official have you ever [3:26:41] made a hiring decision based upon a person's political affiliation no i'm not surprised if i might just [3:26:49] interject the capabilities that we have shown in the report that's been discussed here today as a result [3:26:56] of a team of agents and lawyers who were absolutely exemplary and were hired because of the value they [3:27:03] could contribute to getting the job done and getting it done expeditiously sir you're a patriot and clear [3:27:08] to me in reading your report and listening to your testimony today you acted fairly with restraint there [3:27:13] were circumstances where you could have filed charges against other people mentioned the report [3:27:17] but you declined not every prosecutor does that certainly in a one-on-a witch hunt the attacks [3:27:21] made against you and your team intensified because your report is damning and i believe you did [3:27:27] uncover substantial evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors let me also say something else that [3:27:31] you were right about the only remedy for this situation is for congress to take action i yield back [3:27:38] gentleman yields back the gentlelady from pennsylvania morning director mother muller madeline dean ah got [3:27:49] you sorry thank you uh i wanted to ask you about public confusion connected with attorney general [3:27:56] barr's release of your report i will be quoting your march 27th letter sir in that letter and at [3:28:05] several other times did you convey to the attorney general that the quote introductions and executive [3:28:10] summaries of our two-volume report accurately summarize this office's work and conclusions end [3:28:16] quote and i have to uh say that the letter itself uh speaks for itself and those were your words in that [3:28:23] letter continuing with your letter you wrote to the attorney general that quote the summary letter letter [3:28:29] that the department sent to congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of march 24th did not [3:28:36] fully capture the context nature and substance of this office's work and conclusions end quote is [3:28:42] that correct again i rely on the uh letter itself for uh its terms thank you what was it about the [3:28:50] reports context nature substance that the attorney general's letter did not capture i think we [3:28:55] captured that in the uh march 27th uh responsive letter and this is from the 27th letter what were some of [3:29:03] the specifics that uh you thought i uh directed the letter itself okay uh you finished that letter by [3:29:11] saying there is now public confusion about critical aspects as a result of our investigation could you [3:29:17] tell us specifically some of the public confusion you identified not generally again i go back to the [3:29:22] letter and letter speaks for itself and could attorney general barr have avoided public confusion if he had [3:29:28] released your summaries and executive uh introduction and summaries i don't feel comfortable speculating [3:29:33] on that shifting to may 30th the attorney general in an interview with cbs news said that you could have [3:29:40] reached quote you could have reached a decision as to whether it was criminal activity end quote on the [3:29:47] part of the president did the attorney general or his staff ever tell you that he thought you should make [3:29:52] a decision on whether the president engaged in criminal activity i'm not going to speak to uh [3:29:58] what the uh attorney general was thinking or saying if the attorney general had directed you or ordered [3:30:05] you to make a decision on whether the president engaged in criminal activity would you have so done [3:30:12] i can't answer that question in the vacuum director muller again i thank you for being here i agree with [3:30:19] your march 27th letter there was public confusion and the president took full advantage of that confusion [3:30:25] by falsely claiming your report found no obstruction let us be clear your report did not exonerate the [3:30:31] president instead it provided substantial evidence of obstruction of justice leaving congress to do its [3:30:37] duty we shall shall not shrink from that duty i yield back the gentlelady yields back mr chairman [3:30:43] mr chairman i have a point of inquiry over on your left gentleman will state his point of inquiry was the [3:30:49] point of this hearing to get mr muller to recommend impeachment that is not a fair point of inquiry [3:30:54] the uh gentlelady from florida is recognized mr chairman director muller to your point the [3:31:00] gentlelady from florida is recognized for coming here you're a patriot i want to refer you now to [3:31:06] volume two page 158 you wrote that quote the president's efforts to influence the investigation [3:31:15] were mostly unsuccessful but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the president declined to [3:31:22] carry out orders or exceed to his request is that right that is accurate and that is what we found [3:31:29] and you're basically referring to senior advisors who disobeyed the president's orders like white house [3:31:35] counsel don mcgan former trump campaign manager corey lewandowski is that right well we have not [3:31:41] specified uh the person's veteran well in in page 158 white house counsel don mcgan quote did not tell [3:31:50] the acting attorney general that the special counsel must be removed but was instead prepared to resign [3:31:56] over the president's orders you also explained that an attempt to obstruct justice does not have [3:32:01] to succeed to be a crime right true simply attempting to obstruct justice can be a crime correct yes [3:32:11] so even though the president's aids refused to carry out his orders to interfere with your investigation [3:32:18] that is not a defense to obstruction of justice by this president is it i'm not going to speculate [3:32:25] so to reiterate simply trying to obstruct justice can be a crime correct yes and you say that the [3:32:32] president's efforts to influence the investigation were quote mostly unsuccessful and that's because [3:32:40] not all of his efforts were unsuccessful right are you reading into what i uh what we've written in the [3:32:47] report um i was going to ask you if you could just tell me which ones you had in mind as successful [3:32:54] when you wrote that sentence i'm i i'm going to pass on that yeah um director moeller today we've talked a [3:33:01] lot about the separate acts by this president but you also wrote in your report that quote the overall [3:33:08] pattern of the president's conduct towards the investigations can shed light on the nature of the [3:33:15] president's acts and the inferences can be drawn about his intent correct accurate recitation from [3:33:22] the from the report right and and on page 158 again i think it's important for everyone to note that [3:33:31] the president's conduct had a significant change when he realized that it was the investigations were [3:33:38] um conducted to investigate his obstruction acts so in other words when the american people are deciding [3:33:47] whether the president committed obstruction of justice they need to look at all of the president's [3:33:53] conduct and overall pattern of behavior is that correct i don't disagree thank you dr moeller director [3:34:01] also i'll designate that too um i have certainly made up my mind about whether we what we have reviewed [3:34:09] today meets the elements of obstruction including whether there was corrupt intent and what is clear [3:34:15] is that anyone else including some members of congress would have been charged with crimes for these acts [3:34:23] we would not have allowed this behavior from any of the previous 44 presidents we should not allow it now [3:34:31] or for the future to protect our democracy and yes we will continue to investigate because as you [3:34:38] clearly said at the end of your report no one is above the law i yield back my time the gentlelady yields [3:34:46] back the gentlelady from texas director muller you wrote in your report that you quote determined not to [3:34:54] make a traditional prosecutorial judgment end quote was that in part because of an opinion by the [3:35:00] department of justice office of legal counsel that a sitting president can't be charged with a crime [3:35:06] yes director muller at your may 29 2019 press conference you explained that quote the opinion says [3:35:16] that the constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a [3:35:23] sitting president of wrongdoing end quote that process other than the criminal justice system [3:35:29] for accusing a president of wrongdoing is that impeachment i'm not going to comment on that [3:35:37] in your report you also wrote that you did not want to quote potentially preempt constitutional [3:35:44] processes for addressing presidential misconduct end quote for the non-lawyers in the room what did [3:35:51] you mean by quote potentially preempt constitutional processes i'm not going to try to explain that [3:35:58] that actually is coming from page one of volume two in the footnote is the the reference to this [3:36:07] what are those constitutional processes i think i heard you mention at least one impeachment correct i'm [3:36:17] not going to comment okay that is one of the constitutional processes listed in the report [3:36:24] in the footnote in volume two your report documents the many ways the president sought to interfere with [3:36:30] your investigation and you state in your report on page 10 volume two that with a interfering with [3:36:39] a congressional inquiry or investigation with corrupt intent can also constitute obstructed obstruction of [3:36:46] justice true well the president has told us that he intends to fight all the subpoenas his continued efforts to [3:36:56] interfere with investigations of his potential misconduct certainly reinforce the importance of the process [3:37:02] the constitution requires to quote formally accuse the sitting president of wrongdoing as you cited in [3:37:09] the report and in this and this hearing has been very helpful to this committee as it exercises its [3:37:15] constitutional duty to determine whether to recommend articles of impeachment against the president [3:37:22] i agree with you director muller that we all have a vital role in holding this president accountable for [3:37:28] his actions more than that i believe we in congress have a duty to demand accountability and safeguard one of [3:37:35] our nation's highest principles that no one is above the law from everything that i have heard you say here [3:37:43] today it's clear that anyone else would have been prosecuted based on the evidence available in your report [3:37:51] it now falls on us to hold president trump accountable thank you for being here chairman i yield back [3:37:58] mr. chairman general lady yields back mr. chairman general lady yields back mr. chairman general lady yields back