MSNBC "All In with Chris Hayes" - Transcript: Interview with Rep. Zoe Lofgren

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Now, he might finally face some consequences for what his bodyguard did that day. The question is, will he face any for the insurrection that he also whipped up live on television? Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren represents California`s 19th Congressional District. She`s a former impeachment manager who now sits on the select committee to investigate the January 6th insurrection which tonight is being sued by the former president of the United States.

Congresswoman, welcome. Congresswoman, let me first start and just ask, was this anticipated by the committee that this kind of intervention would happen?

REP. ZOE LOFGREN (D-CA): Well it`s not a complete surprise although it`s really outside of what the statute anticipates has been mentioned. The President of the United States is not Donald Trump. It`s Joe Biden and Joe Biden has already made a determination that this material should be turned over, that if there`s a claim of executive privilege, it falls before the need of the Congress to get the information.

That`s definitive. There`s case law on it. Richard Nixon tried to make the same case that former President Trump is now and lost. I think this case is a weak one. But as you mentioned, the former President`s M.O. is to file lawsuits and to try and drag things out and to keep things hidden and to escape accountability.

[20:05:15]

HAYES: Yes, the obvious attempt to sort of delay here, because I think there`s a kind of statutory deadline where basically -- my understanding is the national archives contacted the ex-president and said we`re going to turn these over giving him notice. He then sues. He`s going to try to, I imagine, slow this down.

I mean what are you -- we`re going to talk about Bannon in a second, but what`s the strategy here to make sure that we`re not, you know, dealing with these being turned over six years from now like this deposition about a 2015 incident?

LOFGREN: Well, we will pursue this vigorously but I think the case is a weak one. And we will make our case that really this lawsuit is towards the edge of frivolous and should not be allowed to counter what the President of the United States has already decided which is that this material should be turned over and that`s what the law provides.

You know, I remember when there was -- Richard Nixon tried to keep the tapes from the public. That case rocketed up to the supreme court and was decided very promptly. There`s no need to allow this to go on forever especially since the legal basis for it is so very weak.

HAYES: Yes. There is a little question about do the judges feel some sense of, you know, pacing imperative here or did they let it languish. That`s partly going to be on them and all the way up to the Supreme Court. Three of those members of course were appointed by Donald Trump.

The arguments here to your point about frivolous, it says the legislative committee`s request fails to meet the basic requirement of fulfilling a legislative purpose. The request is not just overly broad, it requests documents including campaign polling data, what does Congress hope to learn from all this. This all does seem more political argumentation than legal.

LOFGREN: That`s right. You know, I just had a chance to read the complaint and I was not overwhelmed by its crafting, let`s put it that way. We`ll see what a court will say, but as I say, the law does not appear to be on the former president`s side. The statute is not on his side. The judgment has already been made by the real president.

And the committee needs this information and a lot more to reach conclusions about what happened and then what we need to recommend legislatively so that this never can happen again.

HAYES: So, Steve Bannon is another individual who is essentially thumbing his nose at the committee`s jurisdiction. We have -- the A.P. obtained a letter from the White House to Bannon`s lawyer basically saying a similar thing what they said in their letter to the national archivist, basically there`s no assertion here.

It says, this point we are not aware of any basis for your client`s refusal to appear for a deposition. President Biden`s determination that an assertion of privilege is not justified with respect to these subjects applies to your client`s deposition testimony and to any documents your client may possess concerning either subject. That`s deputy council Jonathan Su writing to Bannon`s lawyer.

My understanding is that your committee has issued a report recommending contempt a vote on contempt for Steve Bannon. Is that correct?

LOFGREN: That is correct. We`ll have be having a vote after votes tomorrow evening in Washington to consider whether to refer to the Department Justice criminal contempt for Mr. Bannon. His actions here are particularly outrageous. You know, if he has some claim, I can`t imagine what it is, he`s obligated to come into the -- to the committee and make that claim. Instead, he just blew us off that`s really not the procedure.

You know, there`s a lot of things that has been reported that he did plotting with people to really overthrow the constitution. We need to find out about that. That`s obviously not covered by executive privilege.

WATTERS: Yes. He didn`t even work for the White House. Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren, thank you so much for your time tonight.

LOFGREN: Thank you very much.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source