Fox News "Sunday Morning Futures" - Transcript: Rep. Ratcliffe says former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe's story has bigger holes in it than the Titanic
Interview
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
BARTIROMO: Welcome back.
Two Cabinet members were -- quote -- "ready to support" an effort to remove the president from office. That is according to former top FBI lawyer James Baker.
In a closed-door testimony to Congress last fall, Baker said he was told by senior Justice Department officials that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein spoke of the two Cabinet officials' support.
Want to bring in right now Republican Congressman John Ratcliffe from Texas. He is a member of the Homeland Security and Judiciary committees, as well as Oversight.
And, sir, it's good to see on the program this morning. Thanks so much for joining us.
REP. JOHN RATCLIFFE, R-TX: Good morning, Maria.
BARTIROMO: We want to get your take on this story.
You are a federal -- a former federal prosecutor, Congressman. And we learned some information this week on two fronts. The Senate told us that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, after two years of investigating this.
And, number two, Andrew McCabe, the former deputy director at the FBI, in an interview with "60 Minutes" tonight, said that he launched the investigation into President Trump.
Your reaction?
RATCLIFFE: Well, as to the collusion issue, the Senate just confirmed what the House and every other investigative committee has found, which is no evidence of collusion.
And, as you mentioned, Maria, the only person in Washington so far that says they has -- have evidence of collusion between Donald Trump and the Trump campaign and Russia is Adam Schiff. And, of course, he says that it is evidence that is neither direct evidence or circumstantial evidence, which are the only two types of evidence that exists in the law.
So we will wait on that.
But as to the issue of Andy McCabe, he may be a disgraced former FBI agent who's been criminally referred for lying, but he's going to make at least one truthful statement in this interview tonight.
Many of us have been saying for the last year that senior leaders at the FBI and the Department of Justice have been secretly investigating Donald Trump and trying to remove him from office. Tonight, Andy McCabe will tell you that he and other senior leaders at the Department of Justice and the FBI were secretly investigating Donald Trump and trying to remove him from office.
Now, once you get past that one truthful statement, the rest of his story, frankly, has bigger holes in it than the Titanic.
BARTIROMO: Well, I mean, look, we heard from Bruce Ohr in that other testimony a couple of weeks ago, when he did tell us that, in fact, he met with -- he met with the Fusion GPS founder as early as August of 2016.
And we did get that -- that testimony was quite illuminating in terms of what did go on.
RATCLIFFE: It did.
And we have gotten a lot of testimony that -- as you pointed out, Maria, as a former federal prosecutor, I will tell you that, as a conspiracy starts to unravel, sometimes, the co-conspirators turn on one another. And you get inconsistent testimony.
Bruce Ohr's testimony is inconsistent with his boss, Sally Yates. Andy McCabe's testimony is inconsistent with his boss, Jim Comey. Jim Comey's testimony is inconsistent with his lawyer, Jim Baker. McCabe's testimony is also inconsistent with Rod Rosenstein.
So you have all of these things that were taking place. And, again, it underscores the point that there were senior officials at the Department of Justice that were the same officials that had undermined and prejudged Hillary Clinton as innocent, prejudged Donald Trump as guilty.
And they were the ones making the decision in these investigations.
BARTIROMO: So here we are, beginning week one for the new attorney general. He is now in the job, Bill Barr.
Tell us about what you're expecting from him, because people would like to see accountability. And we should point out that Andrew McCabe is doing this interview around his book, but he has already been referred to by the inspector general for criminal charges.
RATCLIFFE: Yes, so let's go back to Andy McCabe and what you're going to hear tonight.
One of the things he's going to say is that he started this investigation when Jim Comey got fired on May the 9th because he believed that order may have come from Vladimir Putin, and that Donald Trump was acting as an agent of the Russian government in carrying out that order.
The problem for Andy McCabe is, every newspaper in America reported that, eight days later, on May 17 of 2017, Andy McCabe was one of four people to walk into the Oval Office and interview with Donald Trump to become the FBI director.
So how do you go from, I think you're an agent of the Russian government committing treason to, eight days later, I think you're an agent of the Russian government committing treason, but I would sure love a job working for you every day?
So, this is just part of the challenge that faces Bill Barr. I will tell you, it's an incredible challenge, but he has the opportunity to be perhaps the most consequential attorney general of our lifetime, because he's going to have the opportunity to try and restore the American people's confidence in a Justice Department that has been torn apart by the darkest chapters that have been written under the Comey-Lynch-McCabe era of the Justice Department and its component agencies, like the FBI.
I would certainly hope that, in engaging and doing that, the first order of business for Bill Barr would be to address the byproduct of those senior leaders at the FBI and the Department of Justice that were trying to undermine the American election of 2016.
And that byproduct is the Mueller investigation.
BARTIROMO: Right.
RATCLIFFE: If Bill Barr's first action, Maria, is not to bring in Bob Mueller and say, the American public has been consumed with this for two years, and this idea of collusion between Donald Trump and the Russians.
After two years, either you have evidence of it or you don't. And if you do, let's see it. And if you don't, let's make that clear to the American people, so all of this can end, and we can move forward with what the Department of Justice should be doing.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
But, in the meantime, you have got people like Adam Schiff saying they're not going to slow down, they're going to expand the investigations into President Trump right now.
Congressman, stay with us. I want to ask you about that, but I also want to ask you why you voted against the bipartisan border security deal.
We will talk about that right after this short break. Stay with us.
More John Ratcliffe next up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back.
We are back with Texas Congressman John Ratcliffe.
And, Congressman, we just ended our last block talking about what will be on Bill Barr's plate. Do you think we will see accountability? And what about Adam Schiff and the Democrats vowing to pursue investigating every corner of President Trump's life?
RATCLIFFE: Well, I certainly hope there's accountability.
Bill Barr pledged that there would be during his confirmation hearing. He said he was troubled by a lot of the developments that have now become public. And he promised Senator Graham and others at his confirmation hearing that he would get to the bottom of that. And we intend to hold him accountable to that standard.
As to Adam Schiff, again, it remains to be seen whether or not Adam has this secret collusion evidence that he hasn't been able to produce up to this point.
But what we do know Adam Schiff does have is a conflict of interest under a standard that he created. Remember, he said that Devin Nunes needed to recuse himself because of a perceived bias with regard to the Russia investigation.
Now we learn that Adam Schiff met with Glenn Simpson, the same Glenn Simpson that got a million dollars to commission the phony, fake Russian Steele dossier document, the same Adam Schiff that is now believed to have lied to the committee that Adam Schiff chairs, the House Select Intelligence Committee, that I'm on.
BARTIROMO: Right.
RATCLIFFE: So, under Adam Schiff's own standard, Mr. Simpson needs to come forward, but Adam Schiff can't be the one presiding over that.
BARTIROMO: Congressman, let me -- let me switch gears and ask you about this budget deal.
You voted against this border funding deal.
RATCLIFFE: I did.
BARTIROMO: Why?
RATCLIFFE: Because the president, as commander in chief, said he needed $5.7 billion to fulfill his primary role, securing the sovereignty and integrity of our territorial borders to provide for the common defense, the one thing that we have a federal government for.
Congress gave him a quarter of that, $1.4 billion, woefully short of what's needed. So I certainly wasn't going to support that. And
I am going to support the president again meeting his constitutional obligations.
BARTIROMO: Right.
RATCLIFFE: Again, the Constitution says it in the preamble. And, as you pointed out, Maria, the National Emergency Act, created by Congress, also gives him that authority. And he's testing it.
Listen, if the Supreme Court says that that's improper, Donald Trump will abide by that. But I appreciate the fact that he's being relentless with respect to his desire to secure the sovereignty and integrity of our territorial borders.
BARTIROMO: Yes, relentless, to the extent that people are saying it's not lawful. You just heard what Congressman Van Drew said.
Walk us through this money, this $3 billion that is available to him, and your reaction to some of your colleagues saying it's the wrong move, constitutionally speaking, to declare a national emergency to use this money.
RATCLIFFE: Well, as you have pointed out already, Maria, the National Emergency Act was created by Congress.
It has been used, I think, 58 times. So we see it quite frequently. And, in this case, what the president is trying to use is military construction money. That, by definition, means the military is using it for national security purposes.
So, when the president says, I want to use it for national security purposes for the purpose of constructing a wall, it seems entirely appropriate and would be on solid legal footing with regard to that.
So I hope the -- the president continues on this course. I think -- again, I think he is on solid legal footing. But beyond the legal determination here, there's a political calculation as well.
And I think it's the right one. The American people are waiting to see whether or not this is the first president, Republican or Democrat, to address a crisis at the border that has resulted in immigration troubles in this country...
BARTIROMO: Right.
RATCLIFFE: ... from illegal immigrants, from drug trafficking, human trafficking, you know, an opioid epidemic.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
RATCLIFFE: And he's trying to address that.
And many of us believe that this is maybe the most important thing that he can accomplish over the next two years. And I'm going to support him in that regard.
BARTIROMO: Congressman, it's good to see this morning. Thanks so much.
RATCLIFFE: You bet, Maria. Thanks.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source