Fox News "Sunday Morning Futures" - Transcript: Interview with Rep. John Ratcliffe
Interview
REP. JOHN RATCLIFFE, R-TX: Good morning, Maria.
BARTIROMO: So, let me see.
Robert Mueller -- you just heard that sound bite from William Barr. Robert Mueller said that he had a team of approximately 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants. The special counsel issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, 230 orders for communication records, issued almost 50 orders authorizing the use of pen registers, interviewed approximately 500 witnesses, and was given almost $40 million to complete the task.
Should he have come up with the determination or a judgment on obstruction?
RATCLIFFE: Yes, Maria, I actually disagree with the Attorney General Barr when he says that Bob Mueller could have reached a decision.
Bob Mueller should have reached a decision. Maria, there isn't anyone in the country, Republican or Democrat, who expected Bob Mueller, after everything you just related, two years of this, to come back and tell us that he wasn't able to reach a decision or a conclusion, especially when he was able to reach a decision on the most important aspect, whether or not anyone committed any crime by colluding with Russia.
Bob Mueller put a stake in the heart of this collusion conspiracy narrative as it related to Donald Trump. He did exactly what a prosecutor is supposed to do. It's -- that's what's so surprising and puzzling about why he then went on for 200 more pages in his report and did exactly what a prosecutor isn't supposed to do, which is talk about potential crimes, potential conduct of someone that he has no intention of charging with anything.
It doesn't make any sense. And to your point about that advisory OLC opinion that Bob Mueller used as the basis, I wish I could tell you that I agreed with his analysis. The idea and the explanation that he gave, that that OLC opinion stands for the proposition that you can investigate a sitting president, but not reach a decision or a conclusion about whether criminal activity occurred, is just absurd.
I wish I could tell you that it conjures up James Madison, but all I can think about is Billy Madison, the part of the movie where they say everyone in the room is now dumber for having listened to that explanation, because it makes no sense at all.
BARTIROMO: Well, if there was no crime, there was no crime. I mean, it's not -- you're either pregnant or you're not pregnant.
And to just leave some crumbs around for Bob Mueller's friends in the media, as well as in the Democratic Party, well, it's actually stoking exactly what he intended, I guess. And that's impeachment conversation once again.
RATCLIFFE: Yes, it's -- again, it's this idea that what Bob Mueller was supposed to do was investigate and then make a referral to Congress.
It doesn't work that way, Maria. Members of Congress make criminal referrals to the Department of Justice because they have the ability to convene grand juries, issue subpoenas, conduct interviews, and make a determination whether or not conduct rose to criminal activity.
It doesn't work the other way around. The Justice Department doesn't make referrals to Congress to decide on whether or not something criminal has happened.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
RATCLIFFE: So I think that idea is just equally ridiculous.
BARTIROMO: Yes, and it's exactly what Bill Barr said, actually. The A.G. said, we're not an adjunct to Congress. The Department of Justice is not an adjunct to Congress.
Let me go back to a letter that you have been talking about very much that has to do with the intelligence assessment that then candidate Trump was given back in August of 2016. We have got the letter here to Charles Grassley, the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary then, back in October of 2017.
Let's talk about this letter and why this letter is important, because we are looking at the letter from Gregory Brower. He's the assistant director of the Office of Congressional Affairs.
RATCLIFFE: Yes, Maria, that letter documents some really important and extraordinary events that were happening in August of 2016.
Let me remind your viewers exactly what happened during that time frame. It was on July 31 of 2016 that the FBI opened this counterintelligence investigation that related to the Trump campaign, Operation Crossfire Hurricane. It was opened by FBI agent Peter Strzok.
So it's interesting that, 18 days later, on August 17 of 2016, that the FBI and CIA conducting a counterintelligence briefing for the purpose of protecting and warning Donald Trump would put in charge of coordinating that briefing Peter Strzok, the same agent who was already investigating the Trump campaign, the same agent who eight days before that defensive briefing to protect and warn Donald Trump sent a text message saying he was going to stop him, and who two days before that defensive briefing sent a text message saying, we need an insurance policy against a Trump presidency.
So little wonder that on that date of August 17, 2016, Donald Trump wasn't warned about Russian interference in his campaign. He wasn't briefed about the Steele dossier. He wasn't briefed about Carter Page.
And Jim Comey came out this week, Maria, and said, well, we wouldn't have wanted to tip off anyone about that. The problem with that, Maria, is at the same time they weren't warning and protecting Donald Trump, they were warning his political adversaries.
On August 25, CIA Director -- August 25, 2016, CIA Director John Brennan picked up the phone and called Democratic Minority Leader Harry Reid and briefed him on Russian interference into the Trump campaign, about the Steele dossier and about Carter Page.
BARTIROMO: Right.
RATCLIFFE: So this is why Bill Barr is saying, this stuff doesn't add up about the origins of this investigation set and why he is getting...
BARTIROMO: Yes. So...
RATCLIFFE: Why he says it doesn't jibe and we need to get to the bottom of it.
BARTIROMO: So here we are, in August of '16. The president is candidate Trump. He's supposed to get this intel briefing. They tell him, oh, you have to be careful about China. You have to be careful about Russia. But they don't tell him, in fact, they are investigating him. They are investigating his campaign.
And it's Peter Strzok who launched the investigation, who's also giving the intel briefing.
Look, the president declassified some important documents last week . You wanted him to declassify this. Tell us what this means. And are we going to see accountability here? You mentioned John Brennan. I'm talking about John Brennan, Peter Strzok, Jim Comey. Will we see -- I mean, what will we see, prosecutions, indictments, what?
Where's this going?
RATCLIFFE: Well, think about the irony of what we just talked about, Maria.
The only reason Democrats are be able to talk about obstruction of justice as a possible basis for impeachment is because the people responsible for starting the obstruction investigation, Jim Comey, Peter Strzok, Andy McCabe, didn't do their damn job and warn Donald Trump.
Had they warned Donald Trump, there wouldn't have been a Bob Mueller. We wouldn't be having a discussion about obstruction. So these documents that go to the origin that many of us, like Trey Gowdy and Devin Nunes and myself, have been asking to be declassified, the president did give that declassification authority to Bill Barr.
One theory that I have as to why we have not yet seen those is because Bill Barr instead named a second special counsel, John Durham. And if I were a special prosecutor looking into these things, those documents and what I know they establish are things that I would want to use before a grand jury to determine whether or not indictments should be issued, whether not anyone's conduct as it related to the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation or the obstruction investigation...
BARTIROMO: Right.
RATCLIFFE: ... warrant criminal charges.
BARTIROMO: Well, we will see about that. Maybe that's why we haven't seen it. We will be watching.
Congressman, it's good to see you, as always. Thanks so much.
RATCLIFFE: You bet. Thanks, Maria
Source