tv Rep. Adam Schiff on Kupperman No- Show CSPAN October 29, 2019 1:04am-1:14am EDT
watch c-span's unfiltered coverage anytime. >> house members are continuing their impeachment inquiry this week with more meetings behind closed doors. on monday, a top aide to former national security advisor john bolton refused to testify, citing a potential conflict between instructions he received from the white house and a congressional subpoena. house intelligence chair adam schiff spoke about the situation with reporters on capitol hill.
mr. schiff: good morning. today, dr. kupperman was scheduled to testify as part of the house impeachment inquiry for a previously scheduled deposition and he was a no-show. this is deeply regrettable. he was compelled to appear by a lawful congressional subpoena. just within the last few days, of course, the district court has ruled that the impeachment inquiry is perfectly valid. witnesses like dr. kupperman need to do their duty and show up. i want to compliment the nine other witnesses who met similar opposition from the white house who were instructed by the white house not to appear but honored their lawful obligations and came forward. did their lawful duty. we greatly appreciate the courage that they have shown. and that other witnesses will show who are scheduled to appear. the lawsuit that dr. kupperman filed in district court has no basis in law. a private citizen cannot sue the congress to try to avoid coming in when they are served with a lawful subpoena. we expect the court will make short shrift of that argument but nonetheless we move forward. dr. kupperman had testimony we believe would corroborate the allegations of miss conduct that
other witnesses have made. but we move forward and we will obviously consider as we inform dr. kupperman's counsel his failure to appear as evidence that may warrant a contempt proceeding against him. in terms of where we are, we have had a full schedule. up until this morning we got a full schedule from this point. i think we can infer from the white house opposition to dr. kupperman's testimony that they believe that his testimony would be incriminating of the president. it is also, i think, very plain additional and powerful evidence of obstruction of congress and its lawful function by the president that yet again and even after a court decision affirming the right of congress to proceed with this impeachment inquiry, the white house has obstructed the work of a co-equal branch of government.
if this witness had something to say that would be helpful to the white house, they would want him to come and testify. they plainly don't. after hearing the testimony or reviewing the written opening statement of ambassador taylor, one can easily see why the white house does not want further evidence to come before the congress. i found it remarkable i have to say that the republican members of our three committees, including ranking members on oversight committees, took a position effectively of endorsing the white house obstruction that the president in an impeachment inquiry or any oversight inquiry into misconduct can simply instruct senior people not to testify. that is deeply damaging to this institution and any congress' ability to do oversight let alone in the important context of an impeachment proceeding. nonetheless we go forward now armed with additional evidence of obstruction, as well as
additional inferences that can be drawn that this witness' testimony would further incriminate the president of the united states. and i'm happy to respond to a couple questions. mr. rhodes: the witnesses will do the same thing and wait for some guidance from the court? mr. schiff: i have more confidence in the witnesses that we have invited to appear and was subpoenaed to appear that they will perform as the nine witnesses that have gone before. they will honor their obligations and show the courage these other witnesses have shown. reporter: moving forward, does that mean you are not going -- [inaudible]
mr. schiff: it's hard to say what other senior officials will do. i'm sure they'll get like instructions from the white house. if they do and they fail to appear, they will be building a very powerful case against the president for obstruction. articles of impeachment based on obstruction. each time the white house steps in to obstruct congress from getting documents. of course we know now that there are any number of very important relevant documents the state department is withholding from congress. in time they also withhold witnesses and force them to refuse to appear or attempt to ignore lawful process, they will merely build obstruction case against the president. in terms of how we will use litigation, not use litigation, we are not willing to allow the white house to engage us in a lengthy game of rope-a-dope in the courts. we press forward.
we will not allow the white house to delay our investigation. any acts of obstruction like this, any effort to prevent the congress and therefore the american people from learning more about the president's misconduct will merely build a public case for obstruction of congress by this president. and let's keep in mind what we have learned in two short weeks thanks to the courageous testimony of many state department, defense department, and other national security officials. we have learned that a president of the united states abused his power to coerce an ally that is fending off russian occupation of its territory in order to get political dirt on an opponent. conditioned a white house
meeting and as mick mulvaney acknowledged, conditioned military support to fight off an adversary of the united states, conditioned those things on getting political help in the form of an investigation into one of his opponents. i can understand why the president doesn't want these witnesses to come forward. what i find harder to understand is why the republican members of this body in this house don't want these witnesses to come forward. where is their duty to this institution? where is their duty to the constitution? where is their respect for the rule of law? this will not be our last president. as i underscored today, they ought to understand the imperative of a congress to get information from the executive. without it, we cannot do our jobs. thank you.
>> this week, the house is expected to consider a resolution affirming the ongoing impeachment inquiry against president trump and any additional steps the house might take as part of the investigation. the house rules committee is meeting wednesday to go over the measure, setting a possible floor debate and final vote in the house as early as thursday. as always, we will have live gavel-to-gavel coverage on c-span. ♪ >> the house will be in order. c-span40 years, has provided america unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court and public policy events from washington, d.c. and around the country so you can make up your own mind. created by cable in 1979, c-span is brought to you by your loca
cable or satellite provider. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> at a police chief's conference in chicago, president trump spoke about his support for law enforcement and border security and the recent military raid in syria that led to the death of an isis leader. the president also signed an executive order to establish a new commission led by the attorney general that would study key issues facing law enforcement. ♪ >> first, let's hear a big round of applause for that playlist. it is the presidents playlist. [applause] manreat music from a great to get us excited abo