intelligence committee back in the day. for decades now. and unprecedented doesn t even begin to describe what s happening here. that s right. and david, as we re on it, senator moynahan, barry goldwater, others had real problems with what the cia did in terms of dealing with the committee including saying that they were lied to in the committee. but nothing at this level. yeah. i mean, this is all-out war between the oversight committee and the people the spies. if i can go basic, i ll go global for one moment here. i think this is without overstating the case a constitutional crisis. the reason why is we live in an open democracy. but we allow parts of our government, the executive branch to do things in secret for national security reasons only with the provision that what they do in secrecy is monitored by another part of the government. checks and balances. and that s a legislative blanch.
the extent she would not have to turn over a single e-mail to the new jersey special legislative committee on the george washington bridge closure which she apparently ordered when she wrote the e-mail, time for some traffic problems in ft. lee. bridget kelly s lawyer used that very e-mail today to show how anything that she turns over could be self-incriminating. so i start with this proposition. i do not concede that my client sent this. everybody says, my god. this does it. this is the document. reduce the lanes. okay, so when i look at this document, i look on its face on its face does it regard the george washington bridge? nope. on its face, does it regard the reduction of three lanes to one the length of the george washington bridge? no. on its face, does it relate to activities between september 9th
fifth amendment protection against self-incrimination to the extent she would not have to turn over a single e-mail to the new jersey special legislative committee on the george washington bridge closure which she apparently ordered when she wrote the e-mail, time for some traffic problems in ft. lee. bridget kelly s lawyer used that very e-mail today to show how anything that she turns over could be self-incriminating. so i start with this proposition. i do not concede that my client sent this. everybody says, my god. this does it. this is the document. reduce the lanes. okay, so when i look at this document, i look on its face on its face does it regard the george washington bridge? nope. on its face, does it regard the reduction of three lanes to one the length of the george washington bridge?
the aclu trying to get the documents related to the committee report and the cia said we can t give them to you. the committee is the custodian of them. so if in fact the committee was the proper custodian of the documents, and i think that s the reasonable interpretation of what we know right now, then there are a lot of constitutional and criminal issues. for example, there is a statute 1505 that says any interference with an investigation is a serious criminal offense. going into committee documents, searching through them, and then deleting documents i think would be a textbook example of interfering in a congressional investigation. that s one. two, as you know in the setup piece, in february 2010 and then in may 2010, the cia admitted that it went in and actually deleted documents. but that was after they had said first that they denied deleting the documents and then they blamed it on contractors. then they blamed it on the white house.
actually happened here. lawrence, i ve been covering the cia since you worked for daniel patrick moynahan on the intelligence committee back in the day. for decades now. and unprecedented doesn t even begin to describe what s happening here. that s right. and david, as we re on it, senator moynahan, barry goldwater, others had real problems with what the cia did in terms of dealing with the committee including saying that they were lied to in the committee. but nothing at this level. yeah. i mean, this is all-out war between the oversight committee and the people the spies. if i can go basic, i ll go global for one moment here. i think this is without overstating the case a constitutional crisis. the reason why is we live in an open democracy. but we allow parts of our government, the executive branch to do things in secret for national security reasons only with the provision that what they do in secrecy is monitored by another part of the government. checks and balances. and