Complete exchange between Sen. Kamala Harris and Attorney General William Barr (C-SPAN)

Thank You mr. chairman attorney general bar has the president or anyone at the White House ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone I wouldn't I wouldn't yes or no I will repeat it has the president or anyone at the White House ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone yes or no please sir the president or anybody else seems you would remember something like that and be able to tell us yeah but I'm trying to grapple with the word suggest I mean there have been discussions of matters out there that they have not asked me to open a investigation but perhaps they've suggested I don't know I wouldn't say suggest hinted I don't know inferred you don't know okay in your March 24th summer you wrote that quote after reviewing the special counsels final report will say that no I'm asking a question in your March 24th summary you wrote that quote after reviewing the special counsels final report Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence is not sufficient to establish that the president committed an obstruction of justice offense now the special counsels investigation produced a great deal of evidence I've led to believe it included witnesses notes and emails witnesses congressional testimony witness's interviews which were summarized in the FBI 302 forms former FBI director Comey's memos and the president's public statements my question is in reaching your conclusion did you personally review all of the underlying evidence no we took an accepted did we accepted mr. Rosen sign no we accepted the statements in the report as the factual record we did not go underneath it to see whether or not they were accurate we accepted it is accurate and made our say you are accepted the report as the evidence yes you did not question or look at the underlying evidence that supports conclusions in the report no did mr. Rosen Stein review the evidence that underlines and supports the conclusions and the report to your knowledge not to my knowledge we accepted the statements and the report anywhere accumulation of the evidence is true did anyone in your executive office review the evidence supporting the report no no yet you represented to the American public that the evidence was not quote sufficient to support an obstruction of justice the evidence presented in the report this is not over this is not a mysterious process in the Department of Justice we have Prospero's and declination memos every day coming up and we don't go and look at the underlying evidence we serve would you support the characterization of the evidence as true as the Attorney General of the United States you run the United States Department of Justice if in any US Attorney's Office around the country the head of that office when being asked to make a critical decision about in this case the person who holds the highest office in a land and whether or not that person committed a crime would you accept them recommending a charging decision to you if they'd had not reviewed the evidence well that's a question for Bob Muller he's the US attorney he's the one who presents the report but it was you who made the charging decision sir you made the decision not to charge the president in the process and in the declination memo you said it was your baby what did you mean by that it was my baby to look to let to decide whether or not to disclose it to the public and whose decision was it who had the power to make the decision about whether or not the evidence was sufficient project make a determination of whether there had been an obstruction of justice prosecution memos go up to the supervisor in this case it was the you know the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General who decide on the final decision and that is based on the memo as presented by the US Attorney's Office I think you've not looked as we just move on I think a lot of may be clear sir that you've not looked at the evidence and we can move on will you agree to consult career DOJ ethics officials about whether your refusal from the 14 investigations that have been discussed by my colleagues is necessary I don't see any basis for it I already consulted with them and you have consulted with them about the 14 other investigations about the Muller case have you consulted with the career DOJ ethics officials about the appropriateness of you being involved or recusing yourself one of the 14 other investigations that have conflict of interest clear conflict I think the American public has seen quite well that you are biased in the situation and you've not been objective and that would arguably be the conflict you know I haven't been the only decision-maker here now let's take the Deputy Attorney General rod Rosen Stein who was approved by this Senate 94 to 6 with specific discussion on the floor that he would be responsible for supervising the Russian investing I'm glad you brought up that that's a great Aires experience and we had a number of senior prosecutors in the department involved in this process both career and non-career yes I have another question and I'm glad you brought that subject up because I have a question about that earlier today in response to Senator Graham you said quote that you consulted with Rosen Stein constantly unquote with respect to the special counsels investigation report but Deputy Attorney General Rosen Stein is also a key witness in the firing of FBI director Comey did you consult with D I'm not finished did you consult with DOJ ethics officials before you enlisted rod Rosenstein to participate in a charging decision for an investigation the subject of which he is also a witness my understanding was that he had been cleared already to participate in it but so you had consulted with them and they cleared it no I think they cleared it when he's when he took over the investigation did you can I understanding I am you don't know whether he's been cleared of a conflict of interest he would be participating if there was a conflict of interest so you're saying that it did not need to be reviewed by the career ethics officials in your office I believe I believe it was well I believe it was reviewed and I and what would also point out this seems to be a bit of a flip flop because when the president supporters were that you're not answering the question directly did the ethics officials in your office in the Department of Justice review the appropriateness of Rodd Rosenstein being a part of making a charging decision on an investigation which he is also a witness in yeah Mike so as I said my understanding was he had been cleared and he had been cleared before I arrived in making a decision on the Moller report yes and and the findings of whether or not the case would be charged on obstruction of justice it made clear that he was he was the acting Attorney General on the mulher investigation had he been cleared he had I am by your side I am informed I am informed that before I arrived he had been cleared by the ethics officials of what serving as acting Attorney General on the Muller case how about making a charging decision on obstruction of justice what aligning offenses which include him as a witness that's what the acting Attorney General's job is to be a witness and to make the decision about being prosecute no but to make charging decisions I have nothing else my time is right now thank you Sarah

Channel: C-SPAN

Views: 1,540,408

Rating: 4.149303 out of 5

Keywords: Kamala Harris, Senate, Attorney General, William Barr, C-SPAN, CSPAN, Mueller Report

Id: bHd_UlebyoM

Length: 8min 13sec (493 seconds)

Published: Wed May 01 2019

Reddit Comments

[u/LeeDoverwood]

Imagine being married to this woman and having an argument over who washed the dishes last.