Grassley says Trump's Mar-a-Lago Indictments are Serious
Grassley says Trump's Mar-a-Lago Indictments are Serious
And he wants five (or so) Republican candidates for the nomination to drop out, and more...
Senator Chuck Grassley at Pella High School in April, 2023
I interviewed Senator Chuck Grassley this afternoon, asking him about the Trump indictments, and why the party isn’t moving away from Trump when it has a great many opportunities to do so. And more.
Below is an AI-generated transcript, and below the transcript is a recording of the interview. My questions are in italics.
Let’s get right to it, you were getting some flack for not having read the Trump indictments on Mar-a-Lago, have you read those yet?
Yes. When you… when things are classified and the national security is at stake, they have to be taken very seriously. And that, I suppose now it's up to the prosecutors and the defense and the jury to determine whether or not the President did anything wrong. I have followed it in, in newspapers and on television. And I sense two things. One, very strongly that the President did something very, very serious. And then on the other hand, I don't find people saying that he didn't do something very serious. But they, they, and Iowans in particularly focus on the fact that there seems to be political bias when, let's say Hillary Clinton did similar things and didn't get prosecuted and even Comey, the FBI director said that no prosecutor would follow through with prosecution and what reasons he gave I don't remember, but those are the two points that I'm hearing. On commentaries on this or directly from constituents. In fact, yesterday, I was in three counties of northwest Iowa, and I heard some of this at two of those three town meetings.
Well, one key difference was that Hillary didn't do anything wrong. Nothing, prosecutable. And it seems that conservatives, well, not conservatives because a lot of conservatives don't necessarily, aren't necessarily Trump people, but the Trump people that tend to get behind this forget that she was found not guilty of doing any of this. It wasn't prosecutable, but Trump is prosecutable. And plus, let's just say that she was wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right. He put our national security at risk.
Well, let me ask you this and I don't really remember the exact words Comey used, but I do remember, I was at the farm that day, and I listened to the whole thing, and then hearing commentary on it, now more recently, are you sure she didn't say that it could be prosecuted, but it wouldn't be prosecuted?
All I know, and my memory has faded on that too. There was nothing, prosecutable I thought that he said or that there was enough ambiguity in it shouldn't move forward. However, even Bill Barr is saying that these are very serious charges against the president. And they're sort of, I don't know, it just seems that it was really not very bright. He had every opportunity to give those documents back. It's like they begged him to. I mean, he had to beg them to charge him because he could have just returned everything, yet. He couldn't like a hoarder or something. And that's just bizarre to me. And then showing them…documents to people that shouldn't have seen them, and serious documents that put our national security at risk. And then he did that, and we're still talking about Hillary, I think that's a distraction. It's misdirection. It's an excuse not to talk about what Trump did.
When I talked about Hillary, I'm just telling you what people back home are telling me. And in regard to papers, I think of all the papers little senator like me accumulates, I’m just glad to get them to the warehouse and then after I'm out of the United States Senate to the University of Northern Iowa. There's two reasons. One, I don't know why he would want all these documents anyway, but if you wanted them for some future use, he would have the right to get them from archives.
So you think he should have complied?
Well, I think that that's a legal analysis that I'm not sure that I want to make, but, and not being in his head or not being in the head of the FBI. Why they were acting. I think I'm… now that he has been charged. I'm willing to let the process work out. And I would have to accept the results of that process.
So how do you, how do you think this leaves the Republicans going into the next election cycle? Because you know, he's going to drag this out forever. Is it time to get behind somebody else? That actually has a better shot of winning?
I just gave an interview with another station before you, five minutes ago. And she, she told me that either the judge or the prosecutors are set on trial for August of this year. So they have the trial of August this year. It has the benefit of getting this over before we get in to the heat of the presidential race, both for the nomination and for the for the general election. I don't know whether it'll actually come off in August. But I think it'd be a good thing if we had this all behind us. And we had the election, not on Biden's age or on Trump's unpredictability. But on the issues of the campaign, like the inflation and the open border, and and what's going to happen to the 2017 tax bill in 2025. But you can name a dozen other things that are on people's minds.
Yes, well, that the trial has been set, is new to me. I hadn't heard that this morning. Yeah, we'll see whether he decides that he wants to proceed. But he's known to drag this stuff out. It seems like I'm just going to be honest with you. It seems that you guys, Republicans should have cut their losses a long time ago. You've had lots of opportunities to cut your losses on Trump and then to get behind other candidates that are that might actually be interested in in different issues, I've seen DeSantis I've seen Haley. Scott, it seems that they're wanting to talk about issues, not all that I agree with. I think there's more things to talk about than woke like DeSantis does, but I mean, Haley's foreign policy speech was really good…
interrruption
Your questions seem to imply that all we think about in the Senate is Trump, and I don't think about Trump very much until you asked me about it or other people in town here asked me about it. But I got issues to deal with and everything you're asking me it doesn't make much difference what I say because he's a candidate. He's announced his candidacy, eight or nine other people and it will be up to the voters. If it's time for another Trump nomination or time for somebody else. And that's a way that the Governor and I and Ernst and the four congresspeople and maybe some other leading Republicans like her state chairman, etc. are taking the position that we aren't going to say any, anything that would keep people from coming to Iowa to campaign. We want all these candidates in Iowa, including Trump to come to Iowa and campaign. And we don't want to discourage anybody from campaigning. And that's, that's a smart way for us to handle it if we want Iowa to stay first in the nation caucus.
I understand that. But there's also a time to say as you have to let justice take its course. But other representatives, including the governor, the minute the indictments came out before she had any information about them. She was defending Trump and saying that it was I don't know if she has the exact word witch hunt. But Republicans all over the country in leadership positions did the same thing. Undermining to me our judicial system, why don't why aren't they saying let's just let it play out. And then it seems to me to put you in a stronger position going into the next election.
Well, I can only speak for myself, but I think I made it very clear that if we, if we took a position that DeSantis did something wrong on the abortion vote or the abortion bill in Florida or Trump did something this way or that way. It's like you're taking the stand for or against those candidates. That's the way people interpret everything so we're trying to take a position of neutrality for the Iowa caucuses.
But it's not a position of neutrality regarding a former president committing felonies and … or allegedly committing well felonies and I would think that if DeSantis had or Haley or anybody that people would say let's let the chips fall where they may it's not about an abortion position. It's about the rule of law.
Am I not saying the same thing? You just said let the chips fall where they may when I said let the judicial process serve out and I don't want to say anything that discourages anybody coming to Iowa to campaign.
Yeah, I think you are saying the same thing. This is the surprise to me is others aren't doing that same thing. And I think that my position my thoughts are that you shouldn't move from on from Trump a long time ago and there was lots of opportunities, but still some of the leadership including Governor Reynolds isn't willing to do that is and I'm guessing is because 30% more or less of the Republican base. Won't believe anything anybody says but him.
Well, I don't.. when you say you agree with the position I've taken as opposed to the governor's decision. I want to make it very clear that I haven't taken a position on Trump being…(unclear) saying or shouldn't be a candidate for president because I can't keep anybody from being a candidate for president. If I could, I wouldn't keep, if I could I keep about five of the people that are running from running, so that we would have narrowed this thing down and make sure that that we're discussing issues instead of whether people are getting ready to run for 2028 because it's a foregone conclusion, which it isn’t, that Trump's is going to be our nominee, et cetera, et cetera. You just kind of I do my job as a senator and let the political process work out. And then you use the term leader of the party. He may be the leader in the polls for the next nomination. But I've said since January 20, that we don't have a leader in the Republican Party. We got 50 different leaders because we got 50 different political parties (leaders?), and we won't know who our leader is, until the nomination next year.
Yes, we're looking at 2016 again, where so many other people in the race are going to split the vote and that and that, is that a concern? Well, it is a concern. You just shared that. It seemed it seems that, as you say there are people looking down the road or campaigning to be vice president. Or looking at 2028.
Or 2028
Yeah. And I know you're not going to say who should drop out…
We live in America. How are you going to stop ten people that want the Republican nomination from running? You can’t.
Check out my Substack focusing on my walks every morning at the Cedar Bluffs Recreation Area, called Cedar Creek Nature Notes. Also, I’ve started a small PR consulting group called “Better PR,” with an associated Substack newsletter. I know many subscribers here are in the corporate world, in education, and in nonprofit companies and might value it.
I’ll help companies and nonprofits with PR but won’t work with political campaigns because I still want to write about them.
Please sample the talents of my fellow collaborative members. If you can afford to be a paid subscriber, that would be great. If not, the vast majority of content is free. And here is a link to the Iowa Podcasters’ Collaborative. My Iowa Revolution podcast with award-winning broadcaster Spencer Dirks can be found here.
Check out these other columnists at the Iowa Writers’ Collaborative:
Mr. Grassley said he can’t get into Trump’s head as to whether Trump should have complied. That is a disingenuous way of saying that he isn’t sure Trump should have complied with a legal request. It really doesn’t require “legal analysis” on the part of our Senator.
Further, he deflects when saying that constituents are mentioning Hillary.
All extremely disappointing when Governor and two Senators cover for a total scofflaw.
Good interview, Bob. A good interviewer doesn't let a vuage answer go, but rather keeps pushing until the interviewee fully answers the question.