that would depend on what the investigation finds. right now we have good reporting from msnbc, news articles, people making various statements. the house committee doesn t have a record. we need to build this record, collect the documents, interview witnesses under oath. we re going to show the american people what we found and then we ll make a decision based on our investigation. correct me if i m wrong, but it sounds like what you re saying in the answer is it s too soon to talk impeachment. that s correct. that s my view. we need to make sure we have all the facts, present them to the american people and then we ll have a conversation in how to proceed. you re about to send out a letter or make public a letter you have sent to the attorney general that we have exclusively first here on msnbc for you to talk about with us. you re requesting that the department of justice open an immediate investigation to determine if jared kushner is criminally liable for his false stateme
made around his financial entanglements. the days of cashing in on access to the oel office and getting a free pass on it, those are over. we saw a $500 million loan by the chinese to a trump property in indonesia the same week that the president eased sanction on a chinese company. you re going to start to see a lot more light where there was darkness in the past. you talked about the house intel russia investigation. which was closed initially by republicans. are you suggesting that will be one of the investigations that could be reopened, and you mentioned subpoenas. which specific individuals might you want to subpoena if they don t interview voluntarily? it was never closed on the democratic side. we continued to work, interview witnesses, pursue documents, and we want to know, for example, where the president s financing came from? was deutsche bank they ve been his lender. november had a long history of being in trouble before for laundering russian money.
happen at how heroic the police perform. you not only have somebody who, you know, ran toward the sound of the gunfire and gave up his life to save people, but just, you know, as someone who did this for 20 years, to watch the coverage for the last however long, what you see is that these police officers not only have to calm people down, make sure they are safe, they also have to put on their professional hat, try interview witnesses and most importantly, try identify this shooter because what you want to know as an investigator when something like this happens is this a one-off or are we going to see other types of events? do we need to worry that this guy is connected up to other people that s the thing they have to bear down on. steve: andy, what do you think of essentially the president firing jeff
number of transcripts to bob mueller s office. we have asked the out. i have seen reporting that bob mueller has those transcripts. i don t think that s accurate because they would have to be sent over from the house intelligence committee, and every time we have asked, devin nunes and the republicans have voted against that. it s for this reason, testimony like this that we re very concerned. if the democrats regain the house, will you bring stone back to testify before the committee? well, i think we ll fill in the gaps where they exist in the russia investigation, which first would be to send the transcripts to bob mueller. then show the public the transcripts and interview witnesses. also, to test their accounts using the subpoena power. and so i think first, what we want to do is test what roger stone told us by subpoenaing twitter, subpoenaing bank records, going after travel logs and communication logs. we ran a take them at their word investigation with a gang that was not
those. i think that s exactly right. and the fbi needs to be able to follow whatever leads come up and interview witnesses, not just witness designated by don mcgahn at the request of senator mcconnell. that s an inappropriate and artificial limit. that s not how these investigations proceed. and i think it s really important for the documentary evidence, photographic evidence and full interviews of witnesses not constrained by these absurd five-minute time limits we saw last week to proceed. i think if that investigation that type of investigation proceeds, then the senators will have a chance at seeing the full extent of the ways in which brett kavanaugh lied. and i think he lied extensively in the hearing last week and i think he s been lying before this hearing this last week. and that bears on his credibility. so talk about the potential lies that fits in directly with point three. pursue perjury question. how would you do that, john? i think we already have some pretty go