'Are You Implying That The Transcript Was Doctored?': Guy Reschenthaler Clashes With Jamie Raskin

I yield back CH thanks the gentleman gem yields back chair recognize the gentleman from Pennsylvania for questions thanks Mr chairman I appreciate it you know I think that there's only one question that we have to deal with here and that's that's one question only can the executive branch ignore a a subpoena that's not only lawful but valid that's the one question we're here to decide everything else is just a complete distraction uh chairman comr would you like to talk about that I mean look we are the Congressional overseers of the executive branch we have checks and balances in our system that's the way it was set up and uh we have requested this these uh audio recordings uh the reason uh that we stumbled upon President Biden's mishandling of classified documents throughout the uh the the Biden influence pedal investigation was there were there were emails on the laptop that we now know was 100% legitimate because that was the major piece of evidence in the in the court case that Mr McGovern cited a dozen times it seemed like in the last 30 minutes there were emails on there that looked like they could be potentially be classified documents and and the the thing that the investigation has revealed is with the tens of millions of dollars that the bidens have taken in from our adversaries around the world there was never a business purpose you know they say the media will say or the Democrats say well in Hunter Biden and Jim Biden Joe Biden's business dealings what business was it they were in because we haven't ever found a legitimate business uh the business according to at least two people who testified under oath and that would be balinsky and and Jason glanis was they were s and three count Deon arer three former Biden associate said the business was selling the Biden brand that is called influence pedaling were the classified documents were any of the classified documents used in the Biden influence pedaling scheme that's the question the oversight committee has with respect to the classified documents and look I think it's trans this is about transparency uh again and I I can't say this enough it's not just the House Republicans requesting these documents the Associated Press CNN ABC CBS NBC Bloomberg The Washington Post their people their people want it too the American people want it poll after poll shows the American people want transparency so if there's nothing wrong with the tapes then just disclose them Mr well hold on Mr R I'm not you know you know me I'm not going to leave you hanging like that if you want go ahead well but I just wanted to be certain that this constitutes the Chairman's endorsement for uh every petition by The Washington Post in ABC and CBS and CNN to get information for example they were asking for all the information that Donald Trump was suppressing for several years and wouldn't give to Congress do you agree it should be released because the media wanted it what was the question Mr as oh well I'll write it out for you Mr Nadler I I just want to point out that the uh contrary to what uh distinguished chairman said the uh House of Republicans didn't quote stumble on Biden documents President Biden's personal uh um Council found a documents the Penn Biden Center and voluntarily uh then reported them to the FBI this cooperation was one reason that special counsel her declined to indict Biden and I would contrast this with President Trump who has hidden and you know who who refused to uh to turn over documents who necessitated the court to order a search warrant and who apparently hid documents uh from the AG uh executing the search warrant and that's why um um um the pre the the special counsel in the one case president Trump has asked the grand jury and got a grand jury to indict him and in the other case uh with President Biden uh Mr her declined to uh ask a grand jury to indict and said there was no crime I I mean I get what you're saying Mr nler I would just counter with the fact that the decision not to prosecute President Biden was because of the demeanor that was seen on the tape and the Dem there was an assessment that is not true if you read the report there are many reasons cited for not uh uh uh um for the decision not to indict and I mentioned a few of them a moment ago there are many reasons cited in it I think it's was a 231 or 261 page report um and that's why I called the comment about the president's cognitive ability gratuitous because that was not uh any one of the major reasons given in the report for declining to indict it's it's my understanding that one of the major reasons was that and it was in the report is that President Biden would present to a jury as I believe the quote was a well-meaning um yeah I I forget the exact basally that he doesn't know recommend you read the report and see all the other reasons why the why they declined to indict in particular the cooperation um the cooperation that I just mentioned that it was the President Biden's personal Council who found the documents and volunt at at the Penn Biden Center and voluntarily uh uh reported them to the FBI okay I but again it was the demeanor and how he would present to a jury that he'd be sympathetic that people think he doesn't have control uh mental acuity enough and the fact that let me say this well we got I don't want to get into we cannot talk over each other gentlemen will suspend clerk cannot keep up with us when we cross talk so let's one at a time okay let me say this that quote has been used and may have been put there for all I know to question the president's cognitive ability I don't know why he put that in but the fact is there going to be two debates and the public will be able to judge the president's cognitive ability and for that matter the former president's cognitive abilities there's no point debating it here okay okay I'm trying I'm not trying to bring this into a larger debate but we're totally focused here if we're talking about the privilege issue and whether or not they have a privilege uh they've I believe they have waved that by providing the transcript number one number two when the report now you you can say it's not controlling or not but the report does talk about his demeanor it would be nice to see the tape from so we could assess the demeanor ourselves and again I would say the privilege has been waved because you handed over the Executive Branch not you spec specifically but the executive branch has handed over the transcript I mean that's just my read of the situation Mr R before I Mr com chairman comr is trying to talk too so I will give you time I promise Mr chair or chairman I just wanted to to say this again I mentioned in my opening statement our timeline doesn't match up with the White House's Narrative of their timeline of the discovery of the document and one of the things the White House is obstructing is our ability to interview several of the White House employees about the specific of when those class mishandled classified documents were discovered I just want to point that out yeah thanks Mr chairman um Mr Rasin then we'll go to m Hagman Mr thank you Mr R it's really more a question for you because I you you you make an interesting point you assert that the whatever privilege the president had and obviously that was something that was expansively invoked by Donald Trump but you're saying if he had an executive privilege it was waved when he turned over the written transcript but does that argument depend on the written transcript being uh a faithful transcription of the oral statements if so it would seem to defeat the point I mean let's say if they're really different then he's asserting executive privilege presumably for the 0.001% of it that hasn't been turned over yet right I so I get what you're saying but I would say that if the transcript is different that's all the more reason to get the audio or the the audio visual uh of it so we can see if the transcript meets the audio visual but the fact if you are you implying that it was the transcript was doctored no but that's the paranoid Theory that's been floated today by some people but no I I think that's ridiculous um in other words I think those two arguments cut against each other the idea that the privilege has been waved depends on the idea that the written transcript is actually a faithful record of what was spoken and I haven't seen any evidence certainly that there's any difference um in the two so um you know I I just I think we are really splitting hears here I mean it's kind of an amazing thing that we would think about holding the Attorney General of the United States in cont in contempt for not giving the audio version when we have all these people walking around who've never given any testimony at all in answer to subpoenas and it doesn't seem to trouble you know at least your side of the aisle no I get I get your argument but I mean again if you already handed over the transcript itself I would still argue that you've already waved the privilege of then holding on to the audio visual of the transcript I mean that's just my understanding I understand you're saying we're splitting hairs here but miss hagaman uh yes a couple of things to conflate the outcome of the two cases between huter Biden and president

Channel: Forbes Breaking News

Views: 492,319

Keywords:

Id: 3Hrc_RjhGqg

Length: 9min 49sec (589 seconds)

Published: Tue Jun 11 2024