Visit ListenLively.com
AINSLEY: WE’RE BACK WITH A FOX
NEWS ALERT THE WEEKLY JOBLESS
CLAIMS JUST RELEASED
2.98 MILLION AMERICANS FILING
FOR UNEMPLOYMENT LAST WEEK, AS
THE ECONOMY REELS OVER THE
CORONAVIRUS, BRIAN.
BRIAN: RIGHT, THIS IS HIGHER
THAN THE ECONOMISTS PREDICTED
BUT DOWN FROM OVER 3 MILLION
CLAIMS THE PREVIOUS WEEK.
WE’RE AT 36 MILLION AMERICANS
WHO FILED FOR UNEMPLOYMENT SINCE
THE START OF THE PANDEMIC, EIGHT
WEEKS AGO, AND THEY SAY ALREADY,
100,000 SMALL BUSINESSES ARE
DOWN FOR THE COUNT.
THAT IS JUST BEFORE THEY EVEN
TRY TO REOPEN AND MAYBE REALIZE
THEY CAN’T.
LET’S BRING IN SOUTH CAROLINA
SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM, CHAIRMAN
OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE.
WE HAVE A LOT TO DISCUSS BUT
FIRST I WANT YOU TO COMMENT ON
THIS.
THEY EXPECT UNEMPLOYMENT TO GO
UP AS HIGH AS 25%, SENATOR
WHAT’S YOUR REACTION TO THIS
NUMBER?
>> WELL I THINK IT’S JUST
UNFORTUNATELY WHAT WAS REQUIRED
TO SAVE A COUPLE MILLION PEOPLE
FROM DYING.
THERE’S NO WORSE NEWS THAN I’VE
LOST MY JOB, MY BUSINESSES HAD
TO CLOSE BECAUSE OF MITIGATION,
I CAN’T GET WORK, IT’S A
TERRIBLE BLOW TO THAT FAMILY.
THE ONLY THING WORSE IS TO BE
TOLD YOUR LOVED ONE JUST DIED OF
THE CORONAVIRUS.
THIS IS THE WORLD THAT PRESIDENT
TRUMP LIVES IN.
HE HAD TO SHUT THE ECONOMY DOWN,
TO KEEP A COUPLE MILLION PEOPLE
FROM DYING.
THE ECONOMY WILL COME BACK, BUT
THOSE WHO HAVE PASSED AWAY WON’T
COME BACK AND THESE ARE THE
CHOICES WE HAVE.
AINSLEY: OKAY LET’S TALK ABOUT
THE UNMASKING BECAUSE I LIST OF
NAMES WAS MADE PUBLIC YESTERDAY,
AND LET’S PULL UP SOME OF THE
PEOPLE THAT WERE REQUESTING
UNMASKING.
YOU HAVE JOE BIDEN, JAMES COMEY,
JOHN BRENNAN, JAMES CLAPPER,
SAMANTHA POWERS SHE REQUESTED
SEVEN TIMES AND DENNIS MCDONOUGH
, WHO IS THE
CHIEF OF STAFF.
I HAVE SO MANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU
WHY WERE THERE SO MANY PEOPLE
REQUESTING THIS UNMASKING?
WHY WOULDN’T ONE PERSON REQUEST
IT AND TELL US ABOUT THE PROCESS
AND YOUR REACTION TO THIS?
>> WELL NUMBER ONE WHY ARE THEY
ASKING TO UNMASK THE INCOMING
NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR OF THE
TRUMP ADMINITRATION?
WHY DO YOU HAVE THE OUTGOING
ADMINISTRATION TRYING TO FOLLOW
CONVERSATIONS OF THE INCOMING
ADMINISTRATION?
THAT IS OUTRAGEOUS.
GENERAL FLYNN HAD EVERY RIGHT TO
BE TALKING WITH THE RUSSIANS
ABOUT POLICY DIFFERENCES THEY
HAVE WITH THE OBAMA
ADMINISTRATION.
HE COULD TALK TO ANYBODY HE
WANTED TO TALK TO ABOUT HIS NEW
JOB.
I GUARANTEE YOU THAT EVERY
INCOMING ADMINISTRATION DURING
TRANSITION REACHES OUT TO
FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS.
I DOUBT THAT MOST OUTGOING
ADMINISTRATIONS SPY ON THEM, SO
THIS IS AN OUTRAGE, IT’S AT
LEAST UNETHICAL AND WE’RE GOING
TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF IT.
THEY HAD NO BUSINESS LISTENING
TO ANYTHING GENERAL FLYNN WAS
SAYING ABOUT TRUMP POLICY.
BRIAN: RIGHT I IMAGINE MICHAEL
FLYNN MIGHT HAVE HAD A DIFFERENT
KERR WITH ISRAEL THAN MAYBE
SUSAN RICE DID BECAUSE THEY SEEM
TO BE PUTTING HEADS WITH ISRAEL.
KEEP YOUR POWDER DRY IT’S GOING
TO BE A LOT DIFFERENT WHEN YOU
TAKE OVER, MAYBE MICHAEL FLYNN
DIDN’T REALIZE THERE’S NOTHING
WRONG WITH THAT BUT SENATOR YOU
KNOW THE LAW.
THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH
THEM UNMASKING FOR SO FOR PEOPLE
TO SAY UNMASKING MEANS UP TO
SOMETHING DIABOLICAL, YOU CAN’T
PUT THOSE TWO TOGETHER, SENATOR
GRASSLEY DIDN’T.
>> WELL SEE HERE IS WHAT I
WOULD SAY.
YOU CAN REQUEST AN UNMASKING OF
AN AMERICAN CITIZEN WHOSE ON THE
OTHER END OF A CONVERSATION
WITH A FOREIGN AGENT, BUT YOU
HAVE TO HAVE A NATIONAL SECURITY
REASON.
HERE IS THE CONCERN, THAT IF YOU
DON’T HAVE A NATIONAL SECURITY
REASON, YOU’RE BASICALLY SPYING
OR EAVESDROPPING ON A
POLITICAL OPPONENT.
THEY HATED FLYNN.
THEY WANTED HIM TO BE FIRED
BEFORE HE EVER GOT THE JOB, WAS
THIS AN EFFORT TO UNDERMINE
FLYNN OR WAS IT REALLY ABOUT
OUR NATIONAL SECURITY?
I TALKED TO FOREIGN LEADERS ALL
THE TIME ABOUT MY DIFFERENCES
WITH OBAMA FOREIGN POLICY.
WHEN PRESIDENT TRUMP WANTED TO
WITHDRAW FROM SYRIA, I GOT ON
THE PHONE AND TALKED TO ABOUT
EVERYBODY IN THE MID EAST.
IF I FIND OUT THEY’RE LISTENING
TO MY CONVERSATION AND REPORTING
BACK TO THE WHITE HOUSE, WHAT
I’M SAYING TO FOREIGN LEADERS,
THAT VIOLATES SEPARATION OF
POWERS.
THIS IS A BIG DEAL.
WHAT IS THE NATIONAL SECURITY
REASON TO UNMASK GENERAL FLYNN
IN TRANSITION?
I CAN’T THINK OF ONE BUT I DO
LEAVE GIVEN THEIR BEHAVIOR
THEY’RE LOOKING TO GET RID OF
FLYNN AND IF THEY USED OUR
INTELLIGENCE APPARATUS TO
BASICALLY ACT ON A POLITICAL
VENDETTA THAT’S CHILLING TO
EVERY AMERICAN AND BE VERY WRONG
AINSLEY: WELL LET’S GO STEVE
ALWAYS CALLS IT THE "WAY-BACK"
MACHINE AND SHOW YOU THIS
MONTAGE OF TESTIMONY FROM
COMEY, CLAPPER AND BRENNAN BACK
IN 2017.
>> YOU DIDN’T SAY ONE WAY OR
ANOTHER WHETHER THERE’S EVEN AN
INVESTIGATION UNDERWAY?
>> CORRECT.
ESPECIALLY IN A PUBLIC FORUM WE
NEVER CONFIRM OR DENY A PENDING
INVESTIGATION.
>> THE FACT IS THE CONTENT OF
THE CAUSE IS WHAT MATTERS.
>> DO YOU HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE OF
WHAT THE CONTENT OF THE CALL WAS
>> I DON’T.
>> DID EITHER OF YOU EVER
REQUEST THE UNMASKING OF MR.
TRUMP, HIS ASSOCIATES OR
ANY MEMBER OF CONGRESS?
>> YES, AND IN ONE CASE I DID.
I CAN SPECIFICALLY RECALL BUT I
CAN’T DISCUSS IT ANY FURTHER
THAN THAT.
>> DO YOU RECALL ANY U.S.
AMBASSADORS ASKING THE
NAMES BE UNMASKED?
>> I DON’T, I DON’T KNOW.
MAYBE IT’S RINGING A VAGUE BELL
BUT I’M NOT, I COULD NOT ANSWER
WITH ANY CONFIDENCE.
AINSLEY: SO SAMANTHA POWERS WAS
ALSO ASKED ABOUT IT AND THIS IS
WHAT SHE SAID.
ANY TIME A U.S. PERSON OR
ENTITIES NAME CAME TO ME
DISCLOSED OR ANNOTATED OR
WHERE I REQUESTED IT, AND IT
CAME BACK, I NEVER DISCUSSED IT
WITH ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE HUMAN
RACE.
I HAVE NO RECOLLECTION OF MAKING
A REQUEST RELATED TO GENERAL
FLYNN.
I HAVE NEVER LEAKED CLASSIFIED
INFORMATION.
I HAVE NEVER LEAKED NAMES THAT
HAVE COME BACK TO ME IN THIS
HIGHLY COMPARTMENTED
PROCESS.
I HAVE IN FACT NEVER LEAKED EVEN
UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION.
WHAT DO YOU THINK WHEN YOU HEAR
THOSE SOUND BITES FROM 2017 AND
YOU HEAR WHAT SHE SAID?
>> WELL SOMEBODY LEAKED TO THE
WASHINGTON POST THE CONVERSATION
BETWEEN GENERAL FLYNN AND THE
RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR DURING
TRANSITION.
SHE SAYS IT WASN’T HER BUT EVEN
MORE CHILLING, TREY GOWDY ASKED
SAMANTHA POWERS HE SHOWED HER A
CART WHERE SHE MADE OVER 200
UNMASKING REQUESTS AND HER
ANSWER IS I DIDN’T MAKE NEARLY
THAT MANY.
I DIDN’T MAKE THAT MANY
UNMASKING REQUESTS SO HERE IS
THE QUESTION.
IF SHE DIDN’T MAKE THOSE
REQUESTS, WHO DID UNDER
HER NAME?
THIS STINKS TO HIGH HEAVEN AND
AGAIN YOU HAVE TO HAVE A
NATIONAL SECURITY REASON TO UN
MASK AN AMERICAN CITIZEN WHOSE
INVOLVED IN A CONVERSATION WITH
A FOREIGN ENTITY.
IT CAN’T BE FOR POLITICAL
CURIOSITY OR FOR POLITICAL
REVENGE.
THIS STINKS TO HIGH HEAVEN AND
WHAT THEY’RE ABOUT TO DO TO
GENERAL FLYNN IN FEDERAL COURT
IS THE MOST DISTURBING THING
I’VE SEEN AS A LAWYER IN DECADES
I’LL BE GLAD TO TELL YOU WHY.
BRIAN: YEAH, IN A SECOND FIRST
I WANT TO GO BACK TO 2017 WHEN
YOU HAD A CHANCE TO ASK JAMES
CLAPPER AND SALLY YATES ABOUT
THESE UNMASKING ISSUES, LET’S
WATCH.
>> DID ANYBODY EVER MAKE A
REQUEST TO UNMASK THE
CONVERSATION BETWEEN THE
RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR AND MR.
FLYNN?
>> AGAIN, SENATOR, I CAN’T
ANSWER A QUESTION LIKE THAT.
>> I DON’T.
>> IS THERE A WAY TO FIND THAT
OUT?
>> WELL IN ANOTHER SETTING.
IT COULD BE DISCUSSED.
>> BUT THERE IS A RECORD
SOMEWHERE OF WHO WOULD MAKE A
REQUEST TO UNMASK THE
CONVERSATION WITH GENERAL
FLYNN AND THE RUSSIAN?
IF ONE WAS MADE THERE BE A
RECORD OF IT?
>> I CAN’T SPEAK TO THIS
SPECIFIC CASE BUT I CAN
GENERALLY COMMENT THAT IN THE
CASE OF 702 REQUESTS, YES.
BRIAN: SO WHAT IS HE NOT SAYING
AND WHAT IS HE SAYING IN THAT
NOW THAT YOU KNOW?
>> WELL THIS IS A VERY
IMPORTANT EXCHANGE BECAUSE I
READ IN THE WASHINGTON POST THAT
ON JANUARY 12, DAVID IGNACIOUS
WROTE ABOUT A
CONVERSATION BETWEEN GENERAL
FLYNN AND FORMER RUSSIAN
AMBASSADOR IN DECEMBER.
THEY WERE TALKING APPARENTLY
ABOUT A DIFFERENT ATTITUDE
TOWARDS SANCTIONS.
OBAMA IMPOSED SOME SANCTIONS ON
RUSSIA AS IT WAS GOING OUT THE
DOOR THEY WERE PRETTY LIGHT
TO BE HONEST WITH YOU FOR
INTERFERING IN OUR ELECTION
AND I THINK THE LINE OF ATTACK
WAS THAT FLYNN WAS GOING TO TELL
THE RUSSIANS WE’RE GOING TO HAVE
A NEW START HERE, DON’T
RETALIATE.
HE HAD EVERY RIGHT TO TALK TO
THE RUSSIANS ABOUT THE TRUMP
VIEW OF HOW TO ENGAGE THE
RUSSIANS.
THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION HAD NO
RIGHT TO UNMASK THAT
CONVERSATION BECAUSE THERE’S NO
LEGITIMATE NATIONAL SECURITY
PURPOSE HERE.
THE LOGAN ACT DOES NOT APPLY TO
ME AS A SENATOR.
IF I WANT TO CALL SOME FOREIGN
GOVERNMENT AND REGISTER MY
DISAPPROVAL WITH THE
ADMINISTRATIONS FOREIGN
POLICY I’M NOT COMMITTING A
CRIME.
I’M NOT UNDERCUTTING FOREIGN
POLICY OF THE ADMINISTRATION.
I’M ABLE TO SPEAK FOR MYSELF AS
THE UNITED STATES SENATOR.
SO, THE INCOMING ADMINISTRATION
HAS TO BE ABLE TO CONDUCT
BUSINESS WITHOUT BEING SPIED ON
BY THE OUTGOING ADMINISTRATION.
AINSLEY: YOU’RE RIGHT.
REAL QUICKLY, WE WANTED TO ASK
YOU ABOUT JUDGE SULLIVAN.
WHAT’S YOUR RESPONSE TO WHAT
HE’S DOING?
>> I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT
WHAT I SEE HERE.
THIS JUDGE GLEASON IS BEING
APPOINTED FOR THE COURT.
HERE IS THE THEORY OF THE CASE.
THEY’RE GOING TO ARGUE
APPARENTLY THAT WHEN JUDGE, WHEN
GENERAL FLYNN PLEAD GUILTY, AND
CHANGED HIS PLEA, THEY’RE GOING
TO HOLD HIM IN INDIANA CONTEMPT
OF CORD BECAUSE WHEN HE PLEAD
GUILTY NOW HE’S SAYING HE WANTS
TO WITHDRAW HIS PLEA.
HE MUST HAVE LIED TO THE COURT.
HERE IS THE ONE THING WE CAN
NEVER TOLERATE.
IF THE GOVERNMENT IS WITHHOLDING
EVIDENCE IN YOUR CASE THAT’S EXC
ULPATORY, THE COURT
NEEDS TO ALLOW YOU TO CHANGE
YOUR PLEA BASED ON ADVICE OF NEW
COUNSEL SO TO DENY GENERAL FLYNN
THE ABILITY TO CHANGE HIS PLEA
BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT WITHHELD
EVIDENCE IS REWARDING
BAD BEHAVIOR BY THE GOVERNMENT
AND TO PUNISH HIM FOR FOLLOWING
ADVICE OF A NEW LAWYER, THIS
HAPPENS IN AMERICA ALL THE
TIME.
SOME KID IS CHARGED WITH ROBBING
A STORE OR STEALING A CAR AND
THEY FIND OUT THE COPS WERE A
LITTLE BIT SHADY, THEY ALLOW THE
KID TO WITHDRAW HIS PLEA AND
GET A FAIR SHAKE HERE, SO I HOPE
AND PRAY THAT THEY’RE NOT GOING
DOWN THE ROAD OF TRYING TO
PUNISH GENERAL FLYNN FOR
CHANGING THAT PLEA BECAUSE
THE GOVERNMENT WITHHELD EVIDENCE
IN THIS CASE.
THAT BE SO WRONG.
BRIAN: IT BE , BUT I THINK
THAT’S IF YOU LOOK AT THIS OTHER
JUDGE IT LOOKS LIKE THE ROAD
THEY’RE HEADING.
SENATOR GRAHAM WE’LL TALK TO YOU
AGAIN.
>> THEY NEED TO PROVE BEYOND
BELIEF IF THAT HAPPENED.
THANK YOU.