The next is a transcript of an interview with Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff of California that aired Sunday, July 24, 2022, on "Face the Nation."
MARGARET BRENNAN: Becoming a member of us now could be a member of that panel, Congressman Adam Schiff of California, who can be the chair of the Home Intelligence Committee. Good to have you ever right here with us.
REP. ADAM SCHIFF: Thanks.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Earlier than I'm going additional on January 6, I do wish to rapidly simply button up what Dr. Jha addressed in regard to that letter you wrote this week in regard to monkeypox. You mentioned the federal response falls brief by way of provide and timeliness, concerning a vaccine. The present provide accounts for less than three and a half million residents. Some shipments usually are not even anticipated to reach till 2023. Why do you assume the federal response is failing when Dr. Jha says it is contained and below management?
REP. SCHIFF: I do not know why there aren't extra vaccines out there. I am listening to from well being care suppliers in my district that there are folks lining as much as get vaccinated and so they do not have the vaccines for them, and that may be a actual downside. As I believe you indicated, we actually do not know the longer term course of this virus. However what we do now, early on, simply as was the case with the pandemic, will decide simply how dangerous this will get. And so I wish to gentle a fireplace below the administration and get them to make it possible for we up manufacturing, that we up distribution and that individuals which might be prepared and keen and capable of get vaccinated have the flexibility to guard themselves.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We'll proceed monitoring that on this program. However, let me get again to January 6. Once you had been final on this program, you mentioned you believed that it will be extra harmful for the Justice Division to determine towards prosecuting the previous president than it will be to go forward with a prosecution. This is how Lawyer Normal Merrick Garland responded when my colleague Jeff Pegues requested him about potential prosecution.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ATTORNEY GENERAL MERRICK GARLAND: Look, no individual is above the legislation on this nation. Nothing stops us-
JEFF PEGUES: Even a former president?
ATTORNEY GENERAL GARLAND: No- I do not know the way to- possibly say that once more. No individual is above the legislation on this nation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MARGARET BRENNAN: What do you make of these remarks?
REP. SCHIFF: Nicely, the Lawyer Normal is dedicated to following the proof to wherever it could lead and it has led to Donald Trump. And so I believe the president must be investigated. Whether or not they'll finally conclude they've proved past cheap doubt to- to cost him and to convict him, that's- that may or not it's as much as the division however when now we have demonstrated it, simply within the final couple of hearings is that when all else failed, when all these different strains of effort to overturn the election failed, he made the choice to carry a mob to the Capitol. When he discovered they had been armed, his response was, 'then take the magnetometers down.' He needed to march with that mob, that armed and harmful mob to the Capitol when he was refused and delivered to the protection of the cafeteria or the eating room of the White Home, he would not raise a finger as he watched on TV. Law enforcement officials being overwhelmed and gouged and sprayed with chemical substances in essentially the most supreme dereliction of responsibility ever, but additionally, these a number of strains of effort, I believe, invoke varied legal legal guidelines and his conduct must be the topic of investigation.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Nicely, we'll see if the Justice Division begins one. On the issues that the committee has specified by this congressional discussion board, we nonetheless have not seen a direct hyperlink substantiated between the White Home officers and the militias just like the Proud Boys and the Oathkeepers who had been a part of the violence that day. Are you continue to making an attempt to substantiate that?
REP. SCHIFF: That continues to be an ongoing a part of our investigation. We have now definitely proven some hyperlinks between the president, the important thing advisors like Roger Stone and Mike Flynn, and parts of those white nationalist teams, however that element of our investigation continues. And, as is the case extra broadly, witnesses proceed to come back ahead. We'll be presenting new data within the fall. However, , as we proceed to ask about further proof, I believe we actually want to consider what we have demonstrated already, in regards to the President's data that the election wasn't stolen, and his response and his intent, and to me that's most graphically demonstrated, when he informed prime Justice Division officers principally to say- simply say the election was stolen or simply say it was corrupt and that he would care for the remainder. These sort of items of testimony; they're instantly on the President's data and intent. And this will get again to your earlier query in regards to the Justice Division. Hope they're watching; I hope they're watching rigorously, and I hope they perceive the implications of what we're presenting.
MARGARET BRENNAN: In the case of implications, your colleague Liz Cheney was on two different networks this morning, and she or he mentioned that you just all are discussing a possible subpoena for Ginni Thomas, who's married to Supreme Court docket Justice Clarence Thomas. Are there strains that should not be crossed right here relating to the Supreme Court docket? As a result of one of many objections to the premise of a subpoena right here is that it- it units a harmful precedent by placing the partner of a justice on this political discussion board.
REP. SCHIFF: There are strains that should not be crossed, however these strains contain sitting Supreme Court docket justices, not presiding or- or showing or taking motion in instances wherein their partner could also be implicated. And on this case, for Clarence Thomas to concern a call, in a case of dissent, in a case the place Congress is making an attempt to get paperwork, and people paperwork may contain his personal spouse, that is the road that is been crossed. And I believe, for Congress to be trying into these points, trying into battle of curiosity points. However right here, trying into points whether or not it entails the spouse of a Supreme Court docket justice or anybody else, if they've data or position in an effort to overturn an election. Sure, they are not excluded from examination.
MARGARET BRENNAN: It sounds such as you're saying you prefer that subpoena?
REP. SCHIFF: Nicely, I- if she has related data or investigation, we hope she is available in voluntarily. But when she would not, then we should always give that a critical consideration. And, sure, I believe people who we determined have necessary sufficient data must be subpoenaed.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Congressman Cheney additionally mentioned the Committee expects to listen to once more from Tony Ornato, that lead Secret Service agent, and that each he and one other have employed non-public legal protection counsel. What does that recommend to you?
REP. SCHIFF: Nicely, , I believe in the event that they're hiring legal protection counsel, then they most likely have a priority about their potential legal legal responsibility. We wish to hear from these witnesses. Some we wish to hear from once more. We wish to put them below oath in the event that they weren't beforehand below oath, in order that we are able to perceive precisely what was taking place on January 5 and January 6. And now we have profound issues about what is going on on on the Secret Service. We at the moment are, for the primary time, getting paperwork that we had requested lengthy, way back. There's one concern about why they weren't offered earlier, however they're additionally displaying us some new issues. And- and moreover, we wish to receive these textual content messages if there's any strategy to retrieve them. However both means, we wish to get solutions as to why these had been destroyed.
MARGARET BRENNAN: All proper. We are going to proceed to observe what the committee does once you reconvene within the fall. Thanks very a lot, Congressman.