On Wednesday, the Morning Joe crew erupted over the revelation that notes from Hillary Clinton’s interviews with the FBI are being given to a congressional committee for review. According to guest Adam Schiff, a Democratic Congressman from California who serves on the House Intelligence Committee, this “opens a Pandora’s box of requests from Congress.” Bloomberg Politics Editor, Mark Halperin, believes this is one of the “most horrible precedents” he’s seen in a long time.

Co-host Joe Scarborough reminded viewers that many Democrats are “rightly skeptical” that the information will remain secure, and Rep. Adam Schiff affirmed those fears.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF: Well I think, unfortunately, that's exactly right and the history of documents like this has been leaked almost immediately upon receipt by congress and I would be very surprised if that was different here and the broader concern, frankly, is what this will mean to the department of justice investigations and people's willingness to cooperate in the future. I also have to say that it opens a Pandora's box of requests from congress now…You could list probably easily a dozen or dozens of closed cases that congress would have a legitimate interest if this is now the precedent. And that concerns me greatly because I think it will deter people from cooperating in the Department of Justice investigations if they know they’re going to become public and part of political fodder.

Rep. Schiff went on to suggest that this will “deter” people from cooperating with DOJ investigations if they are at risk of becoming “public and part of political fodder.” It was equally difficult for Mark Halperin to find any ascertainable benefit from the notes being reviewed by congress. Halperin even pleaded with the congressman: Why did the FBI do this?

MARK HALPERIN: Congressman I totally agree with you I think this is one of the most horrible precedents I’ve seen in a long time. I don't understand why the FBI agreed to send the material over. Not just terms of deterring cooperation, but people's privacy, people's rights to not have accusations if they’ve not been indicted. Why did the FBI do this? REP. ADAM SCHIFF: … But to go further than that and release investigative files and witness interviews and other documents, that seems to me unjustified and unwise. And I think it's a decision and a precedent the Justice Department will rue that it has set. Because I don't see a limiting principle here. And so whenever you have a party in the majority in congress now and someone from the other party under investigation and that investigation is ultimately declined, they're going to demand the same kind of access that we saw here.

It is very clear that liberals shudder at the thought of transparency when one of their own is in the spotlight. Ought not Democrats be celebrating that these notes will clear Clinton’s name? Perhaps they aren’t as confident as they pretend to be.

View Full Transcript Here: