CNN "The Situation Room" - Transcript: Interview With Connecticut Congressman Jim Himes

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BLITZER: Appreciate it.

Joining us now, Congressman Jim Himes. He's a Democrat who serves on the House Intelligence Committee.

Congressman, thanks so much for joining us.

REP. JIM HIMES (D), CONNECTICUT: Good evening, Wolf.

BLITZER: Let's go through some of these sensitive issues.

As you know, President Trump says he learned of the hush money payments now only later on, his words, later on. But they came from him, not the campaign, so they weren't necessarily campaign finance violations, he says. What do you make of that argument?

HIMES: Well, I don't know what he means by later on.

I do know that there is a tape of the president saying he knows nothing about these payments, and then, of course, now he says he does know about those payments, but later on.

But I have been around the campaign world long enough to know that his interpretation of the law -- that is to say that if I use my personal money to -- and I almost hate to reiterate this -- to buy the silence of a porn star two weeks before the election, that's not an FEC, Federal Election Commission, violation.

It is. There are disclosure requirements. Anything you do that contributes to the -- to a campaign must, at a minimum, be disclosed. And there are limits and there are all sorts of rules around it.

So, the president is just plain wrong that that is not a violation of law.

Now, this gets us into the fine points about whether the president will be indicted. I'm not a lawyer, but I doubt it very much. The remedy here is political which is particularly frustrating for somebody like me. I mean, we sort of lose the forest for the trees here. You know we're arguing about whether this particular indictment had to do with conclusion -- sorry, collusion. We're sort of forgetting the fact that what we're talking about here is alleged but credible violation of the law by the president to pay off a porn star and a playmate around an affair that he alleged to have -- I just - you know if this had been Barack Obama, who I think the most serious charge they could level at him was that he wore a khaki suit, you know, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, they would have been impeached 50 times over by now and be rotting away in the subbasement of Fort Knox. So it's just -- to somebody who plays in the political realm it's just -- it's mind-boggling.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: So if the Democrats, and you're a Democrat, become the majority in the House of Representatives following the midterm elections in November, do you think it would be appropriate to immediately begin impeachment proceedings based on what you've just learned, for example, from Michael Cohen?

HIMES: No, Wolf, I do not. And I feel very strongly about this. No forward motion should be made on impeachment until Special Counsel Mueller has had a chance to finish his work and to tell us what the truth is. Impeachment proceedings or anything else that happens outside of the completed investigation, and I put emphasis on the word completed, because a day does not go by when my constituents don't ask me whether Donald Trump is going to stop Mueller's work, fire Mueller, stop that from happening. The president needs, if he believes he's going to be cleared, that investigation to finish and certainly the American people need that to be finished. And Congress shouldn't start throwing around the concept of impeachment until we have all the facts.

BLITZER: What are the chances, Congressman, that Republicans, the majority members of your committee, the House Intelligence Committee, will bring back Michael Cohen to testify?

HIMES: I don't have to think too hard about that to tell you the chances of that happening are zero. You know, sadly, our investigation was ended by Chairman Devin Nunes. This comes after a year of Chairman Nunes using that investigation largely -- or using the resources of the committee largely to defend the president. And by the way, that's basically his words. There was that tape of him at a fund-raiser in California saying that you know we are all that stands between this president and impeachment or the Democrats going after him.

And so we're back to our regular work of oversight of the Intelligence Community. I don't think we'll take this up. We Democrats continue to try to talk to witnesses because we think that the truth must come out. Of course the Senate investigation continues. And most importantly, most importantly, of course, Bob Mueller's investigation continues. And as we have seen dramatically yesterday, far from being anything but a witch hunt, it is a very carefully done, competently executed investigation that has produced a lot of results.

BLITZER: Michael Cohen says the president knew about that Trump Tower meeting ahead of time. How credible do you think his claim is?

HIMES: Well, you know, I can only answer that question in a general sense in the way that Lanny Davis talked about it. I don't know exactly what the president knew or didn't know. That's why he should go before the special counsel for an interview. What I can tell you is what everybody knows, which is that the president is incapable of telling the truth on just about anything. And again that's not a debatable proposition. There is videotape showing him on all sides of this particular issue. And it's interesting.

Again, from the political point of view, as Lanny Davis said when you were talking to him, that doesn't seem to matter to his supporters. And I think his supporters, not just out there but in the United States Congress, really need to look themselves in the mirror and say we've got a president of the United States who is a serial liar, who apparently was covering up affairs, violating federal law, whose top people, Manafort, Gates, Flynn, Papadopoulos, his two biggest supporters in Congress, Collins, Duncan Hunter, are going to jail, or at least have been indicted.

Do I really want to hitch my wagon to that? And I understand the political realities for Republicans. It's a scary, scary thing to oppose the president of your own party, certainly going into an election. But you'd like to believe that integrity and honor require something other than political calculation.

[18:35:08] BLITZER: The president today praised Paul Manafort, his former campaign chairman who was found guilty yesterday on eight federal counts. The president saying unlike Michael Cohen he refused to break, make up stories in order to get a deal. "such respect for a brave man." those are the president's words. If the presidential goes ahead and pardons Paul Manafort, what will you do?

HIMES: Well, we'll have a long conversation that is irrelevant as to whether the president can pardon. Of course the president can pardon. The president has an unconditional right to pardon. However -- and I would say two things about it. Number one, a pardon can be part of obstruction of justice, which is a crime. So if the president pardons somebody for the purpose of stopping an investigation or interfering with an investigation that can be a crime.

Secondarily, and again, I keep saying this. The remedy to this problem at the end of the day is political. If the president were to start pardoning convicted or admitted felons, all of whom happen to be his guys, you know, what's the difference between the Oval Office and the mafia? How are Americans to think differently about the president than they would from some sort of kleptocratic mafia boss or Vladimir Putin. We have rule of law in this country. So I would expect that if the president starts pardoning those people who have admitted to committing crimes on his behalf, if he cancels the Mueller investigation, you are going to see a level of anger in this country that will have one heck of a lot of political force.

BLITZER: I'll just point out to you, I did some research. Sheriff Arpaio in Arizona, as you know a close political ally of the president, he was found guilty of criminal contempt on July 31st, 2017. The president issued a pardon of Sheriff Arpaio on August 25th, 2017, less than a month later. His sentencing had been scheduled for October of 2017 but he went ahead with the pardon. I wouldn't be surprised, and I want your reaction, honest reaction, if the president does the same thing for Paul Manafort.

HIMES: Well, again, I am not very good at climbing into the president's head and understanding what goes on in there. But I can speak with a little bit of authority on the political repercussions of such a move. Again, if the president starts pardoning people who broke the laws in his service or who were very closely attached to him and try as the president might, Paul Manafort was his campaign chairman. Rick Gates was the vice chairman of his campaign. If he starts saying that if you're associated with me and you're a criminal you're OK.

I think an awful lot of Americans are going to realize that that's not the country that we are, that's not the president that we want, that is not a precedent that we want to establish in the country. That is gangsterism. There's no other way to describe it. And I do think that that will cause a reaction that would be stunning, frankly, in its political impact.

BLITZER: Congressman Jim Himes thanks so much for joining us.

HIMES: Thank you, Wolf.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source