CNN "The Situation Room" - Transcript: Interview with Rep. Denny Heck

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BLITZER: Kaitlan Collins at the White House, thank you.

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

Congressman, thanks so much for joining us.

After this hearing with Hope Hicks -- it just ended a little while ago -- the House Judiciary Committee chairman, Jerry Nadler, is vowing to destroy the White House argument for immunity in court.

Do you think he will prevail?

REP. DENNY HECK (D-WA): So, I found the assertion of absolute or blanket immunity to be curious in a bunch of regards.

First of all, it's not terribly original. It's been tried before, and didn't work. More about that in a second. And, secondly, it's completely predictable, because the president has done everything he can to withhold information. This is the least transparent administration in modern history.

[18:10:04]

But this was tried before, Wolf. And I think it was 2008, a U.S. district court ruled that there is no such thing as absolute or blanket immunity just because you work for the president.

This is not going to work in the long run. They can run -- they can hide, but they can't -- they can run, but they can't hide. And the truth of the matter is that when you live in a free, open, democratic society, like we do, with a vibrant press, even though he campaigns against it on a daily basis, the truth will out.

And it will in this case as well.

BLITZER: Nadler, you just heard him say as he was emerging from this meeting, he did say they did get some very good information from Hope Hicks. Is that a sign that the current Democratic strategy is working?

HECK: Well, there's no question that it's working, when you consider what's happened over the last few weeks, two court cases with respect to being able to subpoena the accounting records.

We won. In fact, the judge not only ruled in favor of the effort to produce those documents, but did so with a very strongly worded ruling. And then, secondly, with respect to the court decision on gaining access to Deutsche Bank and Capital One records as well.

And, in addition to that, we had, of course, Hope Hicks on a limited, very qualified basis come forward. We had Donald Trump Jr. come forward. And that which hasn't received too much attention is that there have been successful negotiations for the partial production of documents of interest to the House Intelligence Committee and the Judiciary Committee as well.

So, we are making progress across all fronts. I wish it were faster, and we're going to stay at it and we're going to keep our shoulder to the wheel here.

BLITZER: Your committee, the Intelligence Committee, will hear testimony from Felix Sater, this Friday.

Sater, as we noted, he's a Russian-American businessman who worked on that Trump Tower Moscow project during the 2016 presidential election. What exactly do you hope to learn from him?

HECK: So, let me be real clear, Wolf.

I will neither confirm nor deny that Mr. Sater is coming before the House Intelligence Committee this Friday. I will confirm with you that we continue to have people in, some on a voluntary basis, some which must be subpoenaed, some which must be negotiated to agreement, but we will continue to interview people that we think are relevant.

And much of this will, in fact, take place behind closed doors, because our part, our focus on this investigation has to do with counterintelligence. And, of course, that's sensitive and classified matter -- material often, and we don't want to compromise other people or procedures.

BLITZER: Speaking of counterintelligence, your committee has started reviewing counterintelligence documents from the Mueller report, going beyond the official Mueller report.

Has that material, Congressman, shed light on the president's business interests with people like Felix Sater, with other Russians, other foreign countries, for example?

HECK: So, again, I'm not going to elaborate as to the specifics of the material that we have received in a classified setting, as you might imagine, Wolf.

But I will tell you that I guess, if I had a disappointment with the Mueller report in terms of its content, it would be that he never did explore potential financial conflicts of interest. And I think that's relevant, especially as it relates to an awful lot of the activity and the communications that we knew took place between 17 Trump campaign operatives or staff people and people on behalf of the Russian government or actual Russian government representatives.

So, we need to know and understand if there is a predicate for this behavior that helps explain it.

BLITZER: Your committee subpoena for Trump documents from Deutsche Bank, from Capital One, I understand it's now in the courts.

Has your committee subpoenaed other banks, in addition to those two banks, to try and get more information on any other foreign business dealings?

HECK: I'm sorry, sir. Again, I can neither confirm nor deny that, because it is of a sensitive nature that has to do with the discussions that are under way.

But you might well imagine that we're going to subpoena all of that which we think is directly relevant and for which we have good reason to believe we might learn something from it, as a matter of fact.

The answer to the spirit of your question is yes, but I will not answer the question in the specific because of obvious classified sensitivities.

And, by the way, the subpoenas of Deutsche Bank and Capital One, that was a joint effort on behalf of both the Intelligence Committee, trying to get the counterintelligence track record or paper trail, as it were, and the Financial Services Committee, which has jurisdiction in this area, and on which I also happen to sit.

BLITZER: Congressman Denny Heck, you're a busy guy. Thanks so much for joining us.

HECK: Thank you, sir.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source