Adam Schiff aims to make House Intel transcripts ‘fully available’ to Mueller

Rep. Adam Schiff said one of the first orders of business as House Intelligence Committee chairman will be to turn over congressional testimony provided to his panel to special counsel Robert Mueller.

“We hope, as one of our first acts, to make the transcript of our witnesses fully available to the special counsel for any purpose, including the bringing of perjury charges, if necessary, against any of the witnesses, but also to see the evidence that they contain and help flesh out the picture for the special counsel,” Schiff told CNN’s “State of the Union.” “We also really immediately went to work in reaching out to private institutions to lay the foundation to get records as soon as our committee is constituted.”

Schiff did not name who he thought could be at risk of being caught lying to Congress. The California Democrat’s comments come after the House Intelligence Committee voted last month to release the transcript of a 2017 closed-door meeting with Roger Stone, a former confidant of President Trump, to Mueller’s office.

Stone asserts that his testimony was honest. He shared with the Washington Examiner a letter his attorney sent to former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., last month that claims his voluntary interview before the panel in September was “forthcoming, truthful, and wholly consistent with his many detailed public statements.” Stone’s lawyer said his client had requested the sit-down be conducted in an open-door session and that the transcript be released, but both demands were denied.

Schiff also said Sunday that a half-year extension granted to a grand jury impaneled to help with Mueller’s federal Russia investigation was an indication the special counsel’s probe is “clearly not done.”

“There’s more work for the grand jury,” he said. “Now, whether that is a full six months’ more work or some portion less than that, clearly, there are other potential charges that he must be considering. There’s no purpose for a grand jury, I think, otherwise.”

Related Content