MSNBC "All In with Chris Hayes" - Transcript: Interview with Rep. Adam Schiff

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Congressman Adam Schiff, Democrat of California is a member of the committee investigating the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol and he joins me now. Let`s start, I guess, first with the news of Jeffrey Clark, sort of a strange situation.

Jeffrey Clark is subpoenaed. Jeffrey Clark comes in for a deposition. What does he do at that first deposition that led the committee to later passing a resolution to find him in contempt?

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): Well, the first deposition of what he did was essentially refuse to answer just about any question. And he had kind of a grab bag of justifications for his refusal to testify. He claimed a variety of privileges, although he would not specify as any particular question what was privileged.

In fact, during that deposition, I asked him about a conversation that he acknowledged having with a reporter about January 6, that he had summarized in one of the letters to the committee and asked him to describe that conversation and he refused. And I said, what possible privilege could there be that would provide you could tell a reporter things but you can`t tell the committee the same thing?

So, it was you know, frankly flimsy, pretextual arguments sufficient for us to move unanimously to hold them in contempt.

HAYES: You held him in contempt unanimously on -- at the committee level. That vote has now not gone to the full Congress. It sort of hangs over him, which appeared to be inducement for him to return for another deposition which was to be, I understand, today. And now, that has been postponed due to a medical condition. What can you tell us about that?

SCHIFF: Well, look, I don`t know what the medical condition is. I haven`t discussed it with the staff. But if I did, I probably couldn`t describe it anyway.

HAYES: Sure.

SCHIFF: But this -- the committee is satisfied that it is genuine, that is there`s ample documentation this is not yet another ruse. And frankly, given his pattern of you know, spending weeks when we`re trying to get his voluntary cooperation stringing us along then being subpoenaed, then coming in and refusing to testify, and then on the eve of holding him in contempt, a new claim this time that he`s going to invoke his fifth amendment right, that was among the -- you know, all the many disparate claims that he made when he showed up for the deposition. He never suggested at that time that he believed what he said would incriminate him.

So, that`s a new defense if you will, and we don`t know yet what to make of it.

HAYES: Yes. So, he -- there was indication that he would invoke his Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. And on that note, we have another individual who appears to be set to invoke that. That would be John Eastman. John Eastman who`s a lawyer, an adviser to Donald Trump spoke at the rally on the morning January 6 and wrote the sort of infamous coup memos that laid out a kind of procedure by which the mechanics of the vote- counting that day on January 6 could be hijacked at first with Mike Pence and others to essentially bestow the presidency on Donald Trump.

The letter from his attorney says the following: Dr. Eastman hereby asserts his Fifth Amendment right not to be a witness against himself in response to your subpoena. What do you make of that?

SCHIFF: Well, he seems to be following Mr. Clark`s example. And maybe he believes that his testimony would implicate him in criminal activity. And if that`s the case, then he can assert a Fifth Amendment privilege. But we have a great many questions for him. Some of those may, you know, implicate no Fifth Amendment concern, no factual basis for that. So, we will have to see when he comes in whether there is a good faith basis to assert the fifth or whether he makes it clear, even ask the questions in which there`s no potential fifth amendment privilege that he still intends to refuse to answer questions.

So, with each of these witnesses, we will have to evaluate them when they come in. Mark Meadows, for example, has this book out now where he describes apparently conversations with the president about January 6. Well, if he did that, presumably he must have the President`s permission to discuss those communications because he`s been saying previously they`re all covered by executive privilege. If the president waved, it so he could write this in a book, he cannot assert it now as to the same matters.

HAYES: Yes, we should also note just on the -- on Eastman and Clark in the Fifth Amendment. I mean, obviously, inside a courtroom, right, juries are instructed not to draw conclusions about guilt or innocence from the absence of a -- of a defendant in the witness stand, for invocations of the Fifth Amendment as it should be.

You know that doesn`t apply to how people think about people in public life and what they`re doing. And I`ll just say, I didn`t think that John Eastman, as far as the facts I knew, do anything criminally liable. I thought what he did was wildly unethical and toxic to American democracy, but it`s something of a development for him to invoke the Fifth suggesting that he believes there might be criminal exposure.

SCHIFF: Well, it is extraordinary. And what I find even more extraordinary is you have someone in Clark who is at the senior-most levels of the Justice Department, the Department of Justice for crying out loud who is saying that I can`t answer certain questions because it may implicate me in a criminal activity.

That -- you know, I spent almost six years in the Department of Justice. That just takes my breath away.

HAYES: Congressman Adam Schiff, thank you so much your time.

SCHIFF: Thank you, Chris.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source