CNN "The Situation Room" - Transcript: Interview With Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BLITZER: Yes, 34 percent approval, that's pretty awful.

All right, thanks very much, Abby Phillip, at the White House.

Let's talk about all the breaking news.

Senator Richard Blumenthal is joining us. He's a Democratic who serves on the Judiciary and Armed Services Committee.

Senator, thanks very much for coming in.

So, you heard Michael Cohen accusing the president and his lawyer Rudy Giuliani of threatening his family. Is he referring to their public statements? Or do you know of any other threats?

SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D), CONNECTICUT: I know of no other real threats. There are lots of rumors and reports.

But, remember, these words of intimidation come from the president of the United States with a vast Twitter following. So it's not only his formal position. It's also his, in effect, inciting potential danger to his -- Michael Cohen's father-in-law and to his wife.

BLITZER: Does what the president is saying, what Rudy Giuliani is saying, from your perspective -- and you're a former attorney general in your home state of Connecticut -- does it amount to witness intimidation?

BLUMENTHAL: As a federal prosecutor, I have actually done cases involving organized crime, some of them potentially involving these kinds of threats.

Clearly, there's a violation here of 18 United States Code 1512, which stops and protects against intimidation of witnesses. He would be prosecutable, but for his being president. And I believe that a sitting president can be indicted.

One of the reasons for it is to stop ongoing criminal activity.

BLITZER: What about Rudy Giuliani? He's not a sitting president.

BLUMENTHAL: Well, I think that that kind of statement by him, which is -- has to be examined very closely, could be indictable.

BLITZER: Should Mueller, Robert Mueller and his team investigate?

BLUMENTHAL: Very definitely.

Robert Mueller should include in his investigation already of obstruction of justice these statements by Rudy Giuliani and the president and possible agreement between them.

And my view about Rudy Giuliani is that kind of statement should be investigated for additional facts. I'm not saying that he can be indicted today, but it has to be included in Robert Mueller's ongoing investigation of obstruction, because these kinds of tactics smack of what the mob does, clearly, what is very, very, really outrageous for anybody who has any experience in law enforcement, as Rudy Giuliani does, or any position in law enforcement, as the president does, as the head of our justice system.

BLITZER: Because I checked the other day, rechecked the other day, what Mueller is authorized to do, as the special counsel.

[18:15:00]

He can investigate, of course, any links and/or coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign. Also, he can investigate -- quote -- "perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence and intimidation of witnesses."

So he could -- if he wants to go down that road, he certainly has the authority from the deputy attorney general, who was then the acting attorney general, Rod Rosenstein.

BLUMENTHAL: Even before these statements of intimidation and threat, there was a credible case of obstruction of justice against the president of the United States.

There was evidence of it in actions that he's taken, like the false statements about the Trump Tower meeting, the firing of Jim Comey, his statement to the Russian ambassador and foreign minister that he fired Comey because he wanted to stop the investigation. One more piece of the mosaic.

BLITZER: Do you think the House Oversight Committee chairman, Elijah Cummings, should go ahead and subpoena Cohen right now?

And you are on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Do you think you should guys subpoena Cohen, specifically before he begins his three- year prison sentence in early March?

BLUMENTHAL: I wrote to the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Graham of South Carolina, that we should really force Michael Cohen to come back as a witness, if necessary by subpoena.

We should invite him back. But the House Intelligence Committee very definitely should subpoena him, if he won't come voluntarily. Witnesses come from prison all the time. They are dressed in suits and ties, not in orange jumpsuits. And they testify before courts and juries and before congressional committees.

And that's what should happen with Michael Cohen, in public. The American public deserves to hear Michael Cohen's testimony.

BLITZER: You heard the president say that Cohen, in the president's words, doesn't want to tell the truth. Do you believe this was a way, what has unfolded, for Cohen to get out of testifying in open session before the Oversight Committee in the House?

BLUMENTHAL: I think Michael Cohen has a very understandable and legitimate fear for his family.

If the president of the United States threatens in the way that he has, anybody would have that kind of fear. And Michael Cohen has nothing left to lose by telling the truth. In fact, he has everything to lose if he fails to tell the truth.

And I think he legitimately fears for the safety of his family.

BLITZER: Two top Republicans on the Oversight Committee yesterday said they were told that Cohen would not answer questions on any current investigations, investigations still under way.

So, they say this is all a Democratic effort to showboat. How significant would his testimony at this point really be, if there are restrictions as to what he can say and what he can't say?

BLUMENTHAL: They are going to have to, in effect, deconflict his testimony with the special counsel, so that there is no compromise or undermining of the ongoing investigation.

But it may just be a matter of timing as to when Michael Cohen can testify in public before the Senate Judiciary Committee, where I think we should bring him back, or bring him for first time, and before the Intelligence Committee and any other committee.

BLITZER: You are trying to reopen a Senate bill that's going to go after the Trump administration's efforts to ease sanctions on Russian companies tied to Oleg Deripaska, this Russian oligarch.

Explain -- who is also being investigated by Mueller. Explain your reasoning, why you want to redo it, because it failed? You didn't get enough votes the other day.

BLUMENTHAL: There is more evidence which has never been revealed before to the Congress about how Oleg Deripaska, who is one of Putin's financial henchmen, may have benefited from this agreement to lift sanctions on his companies.

Remember, the sanctions had the purpose of, in effect, punishing him and his companies and others for Russians meddling in our elections and other malign acts around the globe. And some of the information that has recently been revealed was not given to us when we first voted to block that lifting of sanctions.

We should have an opportunity to vote again. That's why I have asked that we again consider blocking lifting those sanctions. They should be in place, those sanctions, not only on him personally, but on his companies. That's where his financial interest is.

BLITZER: Thanks so much for joining us.

BLUMENTHAL: Thank you.

BLITZER: Senator Blumenthal of Connecticut.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source