DPCC Chair Cicilline: The American People Have the Right to Know the Full Truth
WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman David Cicilline, Chair of the House Democratic Policy and Communications Committee (DPCC), appeared CNN's New Day to discuss Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation. Cicilline reiterated the importance of ensuring the full report and underlying documents be made public without further delay. Below are excerpts from the interview. Click here to watch the video
"Obviously we really need to see Mr. Mueller's report to understand the context of that statement - because you could imagine, for example, that he concluded that there was insufficient evidence to meet burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but still substantial evidence to support the claim. So I hate to sort of guess because we haven't actually seen the report and supporting documents – but I think it's clear that the conclusion of the Special Counsel was that there was insufficient evidence to move forward with prosecutions which we know means a certain standard was not met – it doesn't mean, of course, that there was no evidence of collusion or conspiracy between members of the Trump Campaign and the Russians but maybe not sufficient to meet that burden. But, again, we shouldn't be forced to guess. It's important we see the actual report and the supporting materials so we can make our own judgments."
"It may well be the case – and again we're guessing because we haven't seen the report – that the Special Counsel has concluded there's insufficient evidence to charge the President or members of his campaign with conspiring with the Russians. And at the same time there is evidence that, in fact, conspiracy or collusion occurred at some level. You look at the meeting at Trump Tower that Chairman Nadler referenced. This is clear evidence that's in the public domain that members of the Trump team met with Russian operatives who committed to sharing dirt on Hillary Clinton. We know Paul Manafort shared polling data with a Russian asset. So there are facts that are in the public domain which are inconsistent with that conclusion - which is why we need to see the report to find out what the Special Counsel is talking about. But I think Chairman Nadler's points are exactly right, that those are facts which we know are true in the public domain - which are evidence of conspiracy between individual and Russian operatives. this is why seeing the contents and the context of this conclusion is really important."
"Yeah, I think that's one other option is that there was in fact conspiracy or coordination but the Special Counsel didn't believe it rise to the level of criminality. But, again, that's the urgency of seeing the report."
"It's a really impossible determination to make without actually reading the report, reading the conclusions of Mr. Mueller, reading the evidence that he gathered in connection with that. Again I think it's sort of unfair to expect anyone to sort of write it off completely. It's clearly if Mr. Barr is reporting that accurately, it seems as if they concluded there's not sufficient evidence to charge folks that may be of less interest. But we still have a responsibility to make sure we protect the integrity of our democracy and make sure we don't allow the Russians or anyone else to attack us again. So we may still have some responsibility to examine the conduct at issue here even if it doesn't rise to the level of criminality. We have a broader responsibility."
"Yeah, this is the most disturbing development in my view, of the release of this four-page document. This is the Attorney General of the United States, in my view, attempting to shape the narrative on the obstruction of justice claim because he gives a report…basically this has been an issue that's been examined by the special counsel for 22 months. He lays out the evidence of obstruction, he doesn't make a conclusion but goes out his way to say the President is not exonerated in this regard. And Mr. Barr in 48 hours turns that around and says, ‘Oh, no I've looked at. He's exonerated. He hasn't committed this offense.' Now don't forget Mr. Barr applied for this job by drafting a memo on his own – a 17/18 page memo – where he essentially says and makes the argument that the President of the United States can't be charged with obstruction of justice. So he's sort of fulfilling that commitment, apparently by quickly making this conclusion and trying to shape the debate. I think it's completely inappropriate. It clearly does underscore the importance of us seeing what Mr. Mueller concluded and why he collected evidence and put it in the report that there's obstruction of justice and yet didn't make a final conclusion of exoneration. So I think it's alarming because this was a decision that the Special Counsel was supposed to make because he's independent from the President. We don't want this determination being made by the Attorney General who is appointed by this President and some could argue was appointed specifically because of his view on the expansive power of the executive and the likelihood that the President can't ever commit obstruction of justice which we know is not true."
"Yeah, look I think we have a responsibility to make sure the truth comes out in its entirety. And to get not only the Mueller report, but all the supporting materials that, that it relied upon. The American people paid for this investigation, it's about their democracy, they have a right to know the truth and see all the evidence."