WH blasts Democrats’ ‘disgraceful’ investigation Video

Transcript for WH blasts Democrats’ ‘disgraceful’ investigation

where the white house is firing back at the new congressional investigation of president trump. The house judiciary committee is looking for evidence of corruption, abuse of power and obstruction of justice. The trump administration calls the investigation disgraceful and abusive. Our senior congressional correspondent Mary Bruce covering the showdown on capitol hill. Good morning. Reporter: Good morning. In a far-reaching move house Democrats are now demanding information from 81 people and groups that they believe can shed information on the president’s campaign, his business dealings and presidency. The Democrats argue they have a duty to conduct such vast oversight but in a blistering statement the white house says this is nothing more than a shameful and pathetic political hit job. This morning, the white house is fighting back blasting Democrats and their deepening investigation into the president calling it a disgraceful and abusive investigation into tired false allegations and claiming the Democrats are not after the truth. They’re after the president. But just hours before, the president did vow to cooperate. Mr. President, are you going to cooperate with Mr. Nadler? I cooperate all the time with everybody. And you know the beautiful thing, no collusion, it’s all a hoax. Reporter: The chairman of the house judiciary committee says Democrats are just doing their job. We are talking about a situation where for two years the Republican congress did no oversight on the administration, none. They, in fact, acted as shields for the administration for whatever they wanted to do. We have to protect the rule of law and that’s what we’re doing here. He says they’re already receiving responses. His committee now requesting information from 81 people and entities close to the president including his sons, don junior and Eric and son-in-law Jared Kushner. Some of trump’s closest former aides and advisers like Steve Bannon, hope hicks and don mcgain, Brad parscale and the chief financial officer Allen weisselberg. It explores everything from the firing of former FBI director James Comey to hush money payments to stormy Daniels to contacts between the trump campaign and the Russians and whether trump and his family are profiting from the presidency. Now, Democrats on the hill are also making clear they want to get to the bottom of what really happened between those meetings, between the president and Russian president Vladimir Putin. They are demanding to speak to anyone who had any kind of insider access though those private conversations that we still don’t know anything about including those interpreters. Those are separate committees. Let’s bring in Dan Abrams for more on all this. Chairman Nadler did not use the word, they’re careful about not talking about impeachment but that’s what this investigation is, it’s a preliminary impeachment investigation. Right, they’re calling it oversight but what’s the enforcement mechanism for oversight? In the end it could be impeachment so they are looking now at whether there is evidence there to impeach. A lot of this, they’ll know they have. They’ll know a lot of what’s here. They now just want it officially on the record. A lot of these documents have been turned over. So when you talk about the three buckets, obstruction of justice and corruption, the new one, though, really is the abuse of power. That’s one that Mueller hasn’t looked into. No one else has really looked into using the presidency for personal gain. Abuse of power. The white house says this is plowing over old ground but the congress has quite distinct responsibilities from the special counsel. The congress is not trying to say there’s crime committed when you talk about oversight or impeachment. What you are saying, we think as a political matter that the president could be removed from office. Now, remember, we’ve been talking about this again and again the legal front and say, well, you know what, most people believe that Robert Mueller could not indict a sitting president. The follow-up to that, because the only enforcement mechanism against the president is impeachment. That’s what you would do so if you view it that way you kind of say, fair enough. Robert Mueller can’t seek to indict the president but then there has to be this other mechanism which is at least considered. Doesn’t mean they’ll the fight will end up in the court person by person, document over document over what has to be turned over. Now to the protest in

This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.