During MSNBC’s 11 a.m. ET hour on Thursday, anchor Ali Velshi tried to turn legitimate questions raised by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes into whether there was “inappropriate” surveillance of Donald Trump’s presidential transition team by the Obama administration into a scandal that may require the Republican Congressman to resign from office.
Just prior to an interview with Democratic House Intelligence Committee member Mike Quigley, Velshi pushed left-wing talking points: “Democratic colleagues are questioning his [Nunes’s] objectivity because of his unusual move to brief the President yesterday about information that he says bothered him in intelligence reports....Some Democrats are calling for Nunes to step aside.”
Moments later, he urged Quigley to call for the ouster of Nunes: “Okay, so let me ask this a couple ways. Do you think Devin Nunes should step down? Do you think the House Intelligence Committee can work in a bipartisan fashion, and do you think this investigation should now move to either a select committee or an independent investigator?”
Quigley seized the chance provided to him by Velshi to condemn his colleague:
Can the committee work in a bipartisan fashion? It always has before this. Particularly Chairman Nunes, prior to the Trump White House, was particularly fair in terms of how he ran the committee. What's taken place since then is disturbing and frustrating beyond comprehension. That has to end....I'm hoping that this is a horrible bump in the road and we can continue this investigation...
However, to the disappointment of Velshi, the Democrat notably stopped short of calling for Nunes to resign.
Earlier on NBC’s Today, co-host Matt Lauer asked Senator John McCain if Nunes “so damaged the credibility of the Intelligence Committee that they should just shut down that investigation?”
Here are excerpts of the March 23 interview:
11:25 AM ET
ALI VELSHI: Fallout today from two huge bombshells dropped by House Intelligence Committee leaders. The chairman, Devin Nunes, apologized this morning to the Intel Committee, but wouldn't say for what. Democratic colleagues are questioning his objectivity because of his unusual move to brief the President yesterday about information that he says bothered him in intelligence reports.
REP. DEVIN NUNES [(R-CA) CHAIR, INTELLIGENCE CMTE.] It was a judgment call on my part, and that's – at the end of the day, you know, sometimes you make the right decision, sometimes you make the wrong one.
VELSHI: It's worth noting that the chairman of the House Intel Committee and the ranking member, a Democrat, are both supposed to have access to the same intel information, much higher than what most Americans can get. He didn't tell Adam Schiff, the ranking member. He went to the White House instead. Some Democrats are calling for Nunes to step aside. And we heard the strongest accusation yet from ranking member Adam Schiff about the ongoing investigation over possible collusion between Trump campaign team members and Russian operatives in the 2016 election.
(...)
VELSHI: Joining me now is Congressman Mike Quigley, he’s a Democrat from Illinois who sits on the House Intelligence Committee. Congressman, I just want – I think it’s useful for our viewers to understand that they may not like some of you in Congress, they may not think you’re all that effective, but Intelligence Committee – the chairman and the ranking member – have clearance that is very close to that of the President of the United States. They get real intelligence information.
(...)
VELSHI: And you have certain responsibilities with that information. One of them is secrecy. And I guess you get trained on this, and you're told what you can and cannot say, and the other is methodology, what you do when you get intelligence information. That's where this comes into question, what the Chairman did when he got information that may or may not have been salient to things that you're investigating.
REP. MIKE QUIGLEY [(D-IL) INTELLIGENCE CMTE.]: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, my first concern was that this wasn't shared with the committee as a whole. Typically we get briefed by the intelligence community two, three times a week. That's what happens. We all get briefed at the same time. We're allowed to ask as many questions as we want and we use it – we synthesize that information to understand policy as a whole.
What didn't take place was that wasn't shared and unfortunately the Chairman chose to go to the White House, which is particularly concerning given director Comey just this week announcing that there is an investigation into the Russian probe taking place with the very same White House that we're talking about. So if this is going to be a detached, bipartisan, credible investigation, you simply don't go to those who are the subject of the investigation and tell them something like this.
VELSHI: Yeah, I'm not on any intelligence committee, I sort of figured that out just from watching TV shows on spies and things like that.
(...)
VELSHI: Okay, so let me ask this a couple ways. Do you think Devin Nunes should step down? Do you think the House Intelligence Committee can work in a bipartisan fashion, and do you think this investigation should now move to either a select committee or an independent investigator?
QUIGLEY: Let me start with the last one first. I think that different committees have different strengths. As we’ve discussed, the fact that the Intel Committee works in a top secret fashion, we're able to review materials that otherwise would not be available. Can the committee work in a bipartisan fashion? It always has before this. Particularly Chairman Nunes, prior to the Trump White House, was particularly fair in terms of how he ran the committee. What's taken place since then is disturbing and frustrating beyond comprehension. That has to end.
So I think the discussion today was one of saying, “Look, we have to reboot. We have to follow the facts wherever they are, the American public has a right to know wherever they lead us.” What took place in the last few days simply can't happen again. But do I think the committee can work in a bipartisan fashion? It always has. I'm hoping that this is a horrible bump in the road and we can continue this investigation beginning with the next hearing next Tuesday.
VELSHI: Congressman, good to talk to you. Thank you for joining us. Congressman Mike Quigley of Illinois.
QUIGLEY: Thank you.
