Skip to main content

Quigley on CNN: 25th Amendment Discussions Were Merited

February 18, 2019

The referenced media source is missing and needs to be re-embedded.

AVLON: Fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe speaking out, saying President Trump's own words moved top officials to open a counterintelligence investigation. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham now says he wants to question McCabe about his story. Joining us now is Mike Quigley who serves on the Intelligence and Appropriations Committees. Congressman, good to have you on "New Day." Let's start with this question about the invocation of the 25th Amendment, the conversations McCabe said occurred, and Graham's reaction. Let's listen to McCabe.

MCCABE (clip): A discussion of the 25th Amendment was simply… Rod raised the issue and discussed it with me in the context of thinking about how many other Cabinet officials might support such an effort. I didn't have much to contribute, to be perfectly honest, in that conversation. So, I listened to what he had to say; but, to be fair, it was an unbelievably stressful time. I can't even describe for you how many things must have been coursing through the Deputy Attorney General's mind at that point. It was really something he kind of threw out in a very frenzied, chaotic conversation about where we were and what we needed to do now.

AVLON: Congressman, does invoking the 25th Amendment seem remotely appropriate to you?

QUIGLEY: Let's look at the situation, and it's pretty dramatic. The Russian investigation began as a counterintelligence investigation because the intelligence community, with a great deal of certainty, unanimously came to the conclusion that the Russians attacked our democratic process to help one candidate and hurt the other. The investigation that Mr. McCabe is referencing was raising questions about whether the President of the United States was compromised. This is extraordinary. So, a theoretical discussion about what would happen, I would assume, if it was -- if it came to the conclusion that the President was compromised, is not a surprise. The fact that it's being discussed, sure, it is shocking…but what we're learning about what the President's associates and what the President has done since he took office is extraordinary, and I believe that discussion was merited.

AVLON: And do you think, then, that Senator Graham's call for a hearing on this subject is appropriate on the Senate side?

QUIGLEY: You know, what's appropriate, I guess a better way to look at it is this. It's a classic Republican response to what's taken place, right? DNI coats has said that the lights are still flashing red. The Russians are still attacking our democratic process. All along, the Republican response, besides tanking the investigation on the House side and shutting it down, has been to help the President of the United States politically and legally and to attack the Justice Department and to attack the intelligence community. So, it's no surprise at all that the Senator springs into action by, again, attacking the Justice Department and questioning them, rather than asking themselves, why would Mr. McCabe ask the question, why is the President doing this?—from day one. Why was the President acting as if he had been compromised?

AVLON: Let's go to the Democratic side of the aisle and the Chairman of your Intel Committee. Schiff spoke over the weekend and seemed to indicate a strong disposition, as he has in the past, towards the investigation. Let's take a listen.

SCHIFF (clip): You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence. Now, there's a difference between seeing evidence of collusion and being able to prove a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt, but the [sic] must have a different word for it, but, again, it will be up to Mueller to determine whether that amounts to criminal conspiracy.

AVLON: On the House Intel Side, you've been very focused on following the money. Congressman Schiff has been focused on following the money. What are the next steps in that search that you're allowed to share with us?

QUIGLEY: I think that new investigation begins with an assessment of the situation. What are the gaps? What do we still have to do? Obviously, Deutsche Bank is of great interest, given that they were fined for laundering Russian money illegally, and Deutsche Bank apparently was the only bank willing to do business with the Trump financial world. So, I think it's a methodical step-by-step analysis of where we are, what we still have to do. The fact is, I believe that, if the President was compromised, he was compromised from a financial point of view.

AVLON: You believe he was compromised from a financial point of view. That is, obviously, one of the things that's being looked into and there remains a lot of open questions. One thing there seems to be more information than we've had in the past is prosecutors saying over the weekend that they have evidence showing direct communication between Roger Stone and WikiLeaks. Was this news to you? Or, were you aware of it and can you add any more detail on what it might entail?

QUIGLEY: I think what the American public should take from all of this is that the special counsel is slowly unveiling, pulling the veil over a pattern of behavior of contacts, communication, and discussions with the Russians and Trump associates. It gets closer and closer to home. What are the two notes we learned last week that Mr. Manafort was sharing polling data with Mr. Kilimnik who -- a Russian intel figure that he'd been working with in the past, and Mr. Stone was communicating with WikiLeaks. I was one of a few that questioned Mr. Stone in front of the House Select Committee on Intelligence. I didn't believe anything he was saying, and, obviously, my assessment was borne to be accurate. So, he's communicating with WikiLeaks while Mr. Manafort is sharing polling data with a Russian intel official. This is coordination. This is communication. This is the special counsel lifting the veil on, really, what is a conspiracy.

AVLON: Alright, Congressman Mike Quigley, thank you so much for joining us on "New Day."

Issues: