Schiff on the whistle-blowing allegation: the indictment "could be the only cure" to the equal of the "evil" committed by Trump | Video

JAKE TAPPER, CNN: Mr. President Schiff, do you want to respond to what you have just heard from the chairman? He explained that Biden had done wrong and that there was no counterpart in this conversation.

REPRESENTATIVE. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): Well, if that's the case, why does not the president just publish the transcript of that call?

And I do not know if the whistleblower's complaint is about this allegation, but if that's the case, and even if it's not the case, why does not the president just say that it's not? must the whistleblower's complaint be released?

Obviously, he fears that the public will see one or the other of these things. And we are determined to ensure that the public protects the nation, that if the President of the United States repairs a foreign leader, he retains at the same time the vital military assistance that Ukraine needs to defend Russia, and trying to defile her political opponent during a second campaign yet, the country must know it.

[09:20:03]

And we must take defensive measures.

TAP: Well, I said this to Secretary Mnuchin just two minutes ago, why not just publish this to fix the problem?

And he said, because it would be a horrible precedent, because world leaders should be able to talk to President Trump without these conversations being shared.

Your answer to that?

SCHIFF: Well, not if these conversations involve potential corruption or a crime or leverage used for a political advantage contrary to the interests of our nation.

And that's what's at stake here. That would be, in my opinion, the most profound violation of the presidential oath, certainly during the presidency, which speaks volumes, but perhaps during any presidency.

No privilege covers corruption. There is no privilege to participate in sneaky discussions. And, again, I do not know if this is the subject of the whistleblower complaint. But if that is the case, it must be exposed.

And we know that the Inspector General has found this complaint urgent. We also know that the Inspector General found that this did not result in a policy disagreement. It is one thing if you are talking about a presidential communication involving a policy problem.

This is not a valid complaint of denunciation. But, said the Inspector General, this is not what is involved. We are talking about serious or flagrant abuse, irregularity, potential violation of the law.

And no privilege protects that. And the reason I think that, if these two problems are, in fact, a problem, if there is a connection between this complaint and this problem, you have not only this unlawful behavior of the President of the United States, but also: the added element of a concealment.

TAPPER: If the president actually pushed the Ukrainian president to investigate eight times Hunter Biden and Joe Biden, as reported by the "Wall Street Journal", is it an impenetrable crime, in your opinion ?

SCHIFF: Well, Jake, you know I was very reluctant to go down the drain, because I think the founders are considering, in a country that holds elections every four years, that this is an extraordinary remedy , an appeal of last resort, no first resort.

But if the president essentially refuses military aid, at the same time as he tries to convince a foreign leader to do something illegal, that is to say to dirty his opponent during a presidential campaign, he may be the only recourse possible. co-equal to the evil that this conduct represents.

On Thursday, the director of national intelligence will explain why he is the first director to never have been the subject of a complaint. And we will make sure that we receive this complaint, this whistleblower is protected.

And we will make sure to determine if the president is engaged in this kind of inappropriate behavior. But it may be that we are forced to go ahead with this extraordinary remedy. If the president at the same time refuses vital military assistance, he tries to take advantage of this possibility to obtain unacceptable help in his political campaign.

TAP: Well, that's certainly the farthest case I've heard regarding the possible need for indictment.

But for some Democrats, as you know, that is not enough. The candidate, Senator Elizabeth Warren, a candidate for 2020, tweeted on Friday that she had not yet deposed President Trump – "Congress is complicit in Trump's latest attempt to solicit foreign interference in help in US elections. "

And Ocasio-Cortez, a congressman, said something similar on Twitter this morning: the real scandal is that Democrats let this happen.

How do you answer?

SCHIFF: Well, I would just like to say this. We have no chance to persuade the Senate, the Republican senators, to participate in a trial for impeachment. They showed their willingness to carry the President's baggage, no matter how dirty it was.

But I want to make sure, before embarking on this path, that we can persuade the public that it was the right thing to do. And to persuade the public that removal is the right thing to do, you have to make sure the country understands it is a last resort.

Now, some of the people you mentioned are committed to indictment from the very beginning. I do not think it helps to explain to the public that we did that reluctantly.

But the president is pushing us in this direction. And if, in particular, after asking for help abroad and having it hosted in the last presidential campaign as a candidate, he now remakes the same thing but now using the power of the presidency, he could then force us down that road.

I've talked to several of my colleagues over the past week, and this seems to be of a different nature. And we could very well have crossed the Rubicon here.

TAP: Listen to the president's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, in an interview with my colleague Chris Cuomo.

(START THE VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS CUOMO, ANIMATOR CNN: So you asked Ukraine to examine Joe Biden?

RUDY GIULIANI, PROSECUTOR TO PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: Of course, I did it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: So there is Giuliani, the president 's lawyer, who says that he asked Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden.

Your committee, even before this whistleblower complaint was made, was already investigating whether this request from the White House, through Rudy Giuliani or otherwise, was based on the maintenance of military aid, worth $ 250 million, which we should report last week. has been freed.

[09:25:12]

Have you found evidence of a counterpart?

SCHIFF: Listen, it's not necessary for us to find proof of a counterpart.

The fact that Ukraine understands that the military aid is suspended and the fact that Ukraine understands, like the president, that the president, if these allegations are correct, asks him in the first place to unearth his opponent, it's all you need. You do not need an explicit counterpart to betray your country. And

that would be if the president were engaged in this conduct.

We now know that Rudy Giuliani was engaged in this conduct. But that's one thing when it's done by the court jester. It's another one when it's done by the man who would be king.

So we will have to get to the bottom of things. We will have to fight to make sure we can reveal what happened during this call, which happened in other conversations between the administration and the administration. Ukraine, where they wrongly used the power of this office to dirty his opponent. .

TAPPER: The Ukrainian Foreign Minister said in an interview that he knew the contents of the July 25 phone call and that, according to him, President Trump had not put pressure on Zelensky for that he's investigating Biden. He said that there was no pressure.

What is your answer to that?

SCHIFF: My answer is, look, Ukraine is in a very difficult position here.

They were very eager to organize a summit with the president. They know how much they depend on American help in the war. They have a long and ferocious war with Russia in Ukraine, in a country that Russia still occupies.

And they know that although the decision to release this military aid has been made, the decision to discontinue it can be made at any time, and this president is nothing but vindictive.

I do not envy the position of the Ukrainian President. What worries me is the actions of the American president. And I do not think we can count on a country so faithful to the good graces of Donald Trump to be at the height of the situation on this point.

TAP: You said this week that you will get the content of the whistleblower complaint – a quote – "live it well" and that you will use all possible tools, including lawsuits, including potentially reconsidering funding when the Director of National Intelligence comes to Congress for a new authorization.

Not to withhold funds from the intelligence community would jeopardize the security of the nation?

SCHIFF: It depends on the funds we hold.

In this case, you have the Office of the Director of National Intelligence Services that withholds this complaint, in violation of the clear letter of the law. This law says that he will forward the complaint. He is the first to refuse to do so.

And this office makes requests for funding that do not go directly to national security that we can retain.

Look, it's a brutal remedy and I'm very reluctant to use. At the same time, the Inspector General said that it was not only serious, but not only credible, but urgent.

Now we can not afford to play rope in the court for weeks or even months. We need an answer. If there is a fire that burns, it must be extinguished. And that is why we will have to examine each solution.

And if these two issues are, in fact, a question and relate to deplorable conduct, a violation of the oath of the President and a concealment of this whistleblower complaint, then we will have to consider indictment, as well, a remedy here.