Colorado’s Morning News, Ken Buck, December 11, 2019
Station: KOA, 850 am
Show: Colorado’s Morning News
Guests: Buck, Ken
Date: December 11, 2019
Topics: Impeachment, House Judiciary Committee, Joe Neguese, Abuse of Power, Obstruction of Congress, Floor Vote, No GOP Witnesses, Exert Executive Privelege, Supreme Court, Nixon, Removed from Office, Fast and Furious Gun Scandal, Benghazi, President Obama, Ukraine, Election Meddling, Russia, Russians, Ted Cruz, Politico Article, Op-ed, Foreign Minister of Ukraine, Hilary Clinton, Bidens, Conspiracy Theory, Right Wing Nut Jobs, FBI, Intelligence Agency, Ukrainian President.
HOST MARTY LENZ [00:00:00] House Democrats have two articles of impeachment — abuse of power, obstruction of Congress. Tonight, the House Judiciary Committee will likely vote on those articles tomorrow [sic], and that will set up a potential House floor vote next week.
HOST APRIL ZESBAUGH [00:00:11] Two Coloradans are on the House Judiciary Committee: one, Democrat Joe Neguese; and the other, Republican Ken Buck. Right now, we’re talking live with Representative Buck. Thanks again for coming on. Good morning.
U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM COLORADO’S FOURTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT AND CHAIMAN OF THE COLORADO GOP, KEN BUCK [00:00:22] Thank you, April. It’s great to be with you.
ZESBAUGH [00:00:24] Do you feel like — and I would ask Joe Neguese if he were on with us, I would ask him this question. Do you feel like you went into this process with an open mind, waiting to be swayed one way or the other?
BUCK [00:00:35] No, I think I went into it believing that an individual is innocent until there is a threshold met that proves guilt. And in this case, I don’t believe that threshold has been met.
LENZ [00:00:49] Congressman, I know the president said he will not offer witnesses. I know he’s exerted executive privilege, but you realize there is no executive privilege in impeachment hearings. In fact, the Supreme Court [ruled with an] 8-0 vote, when it came to Nixon. So how is he able to exert that, or at least complain that there’s bias against him in the process?
BUCK [00:01:05] He has asserted executive privilege as to conversations that he has had with high ranking executive officials, and there is an executive privilege as it applies to those conversations. The appropriate — and this was done several months ago before there was an announcement of any type of impeachment inquiry. So the proper process is for the Democrats — and frankly, many Republicans would join the Democrats in this effort — to go to court and to challenge the broad assertion of executive privilege by this president. I think what the courts would end up doing is instructing the president and his team that they have executive privilege has to certain things and not as to others. If the president refused to turn over those witnesses or documents that the court determined were not appropriate for executive privilege — or did not fall under executive privilege — then I think he would be subject to a charge of obstruction of Congress. But this is not — that is not what happened in this situation. The Democrats have not gone to court for that finding.
ZESBAUGH [00:02:21] I think, Congressman, that the hope from Democrats is [that] even if the president is not removed from office after all of this, that the process — the testimony from people like Gordon Sandlin — that’s going to ding up the president enough that he won’t get reelected in 2020. That’s a valid concern for the GOP, isn’t it?
BUCK [00:02:38] Sure, it’s a valid concern. I think that anytime a president in this office, the opposition party — especially if they have control of one or both houses of Congress — is going to do what we call oversight hearings. And in so far as those oversight hearings elicit damaging information, it will be used against the president in a reelection. The Fast and Furious gun scandal occurred with President Obama. Benghazi occurred with President Obama. Those are all things that are part of our constitutional process and absolutely appropriate. What’s not appropriate is to try to remove a president, a duly elected president from office eleven months before the next election.
LENZ [00:03:23] Congressman, respectfully, is it appropriate to carry conspiracy theories? I mean, you’re countering what FBI director Chris Wray and his department has said when it comes to Ukraine and election meddling. I think you’ve been very fair and reasonable in many of these things. But but that’s a bridge too far, because you know that’s not the case but you, Ted Cruz, other officials keep conflating and muddying the waters with Ukraine and Russia when it comes to election meddling.
BUCK [00:03:45] And I got to tell you, I absolutely disagree with you. There is a Politico article dated January 11th, 2017–.
LENZ [00:03:50] It’s an op-ed. It’s an op-ed, though. This is not a pri — it’s an op-ed in a paper. That’s — it’s like saying.l “I drive, so I’m a driver in NASCAR or Indy 500.” That’s– that’s kind of the level you’re meddling there.
BUCK [00:04:02] No! The Politico article — and other articles, frankly — have outlined statements by the foreign minister of the Ukraine and other issues. We’re not — no one is suggesting that Russia didn’t interfere. They absolutely interfered. But the Ukraine also took a very strong position in favor of Hillary Clinton and opposed to Donald Trump. Many of their senior officials — and all the president was asking — well, one of the things the president was asking for in his conversation was for the president of the Ukraine to do an investigation as to the 2016 election. That’s a legitimate request. When they start talking about the Bidens, it gets off track. But that request is not a conspiracy theory. And I just disagree with my Democrat friends on this. And I will have a chance tomorrow to offer an amendment and we will have that discussion.
ZESBAUGH [00:04:53] Oh! Tell us about your memo. What is it going to say?
BUCK [00:04:57] My amendment is going to strike some language in the articles — or move to strike some language in the articles of impeachment that refer to the Ukraine interference in the election as discredited, debunked — whatever the term is that they use in the articles of impeachment. I’m going to move to strike that. I think it’s a sentence out of that because it just isn’t — there are–. It’s not just a group of right wing nuts that are saying, “Oh, the Ukraine interfered!” There are a lot of people who believe that the Ukraine took steps.
LENZ [00:05:31] Well, believing is one thing. But when your own intel — when the FBI — says otherwise, that’s problematic, because then you are politicizing in many ways what what our intel does for the country. We may not see eye to eye on this, but the facts being are what they are, it’s just — it’s concerning for me that to some degree in the reasonable of this that we can’t agree on on a similar set of facts, even when our own intelligence agency says Ukraine did not meddle.
BUCK [00:05:54] And I again, I disagree with you on that. And I — you know what? You have prompted me; I am going to write an op-ed on this, frankly, because –.
LENZ [00:06:03] Ha! [facetiously] You’re meddling, Congressman, but–.
BUCK [00:06:03] I am not meddling. I am–.
ZESBAUGH [00:06:03] [laughing] He’s joking.
BUCK [00:06:07] I think it is important to point out that the president’s request to the Ukrainian — that President Trump’s request to the Ukrainian president at the beginning of that phone conversation was a legitimate request.
ZESBAUGH [00:06:22] Congressman, we will run at that. We’ll talk soon again. Thanks for the time. I know you’ve got a big meeting tonight and a vote tomorrow. So thank you much.
BUCK [00:06:30] Thank you very much.
