APPRECIATE THAT. >>> THANKS TO YOU AT HOME FOR
JOINING US FOR THIS NEXT HOUR. NOW WE KNOW HOW IT WENT.
THE SWEARING IN, THE INAUGURATION WAS ON A FRIDAY,
JANUARY 20th. WE NOW KNOW IN RETRO ASPECT THAT
THAT INAUGURATION TOOK PLACE AGAINST THE BACKDROP OF AN OPEN
AND ACTIVE FBI COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
INVESTIGATION INTO THE RUSSIAN ATTACK ON THE ELECTION THAT MADE
THAT INAUGURATION POSSIBLE. AND ON THE KEY QUESTION OF
WHETHER THE NEW PRESIDENT'S CAMPAIGN HAD BEEN IN ON THE
RUSSIAN ATTACK SOMEHOW. WE KNOW LOOKING BACK THAT IT WAS
HAPPENING IN THE BACKGROUND. THAT SWEARING IN HAPPENED ON A
FRIDAY. THE VERY YOUR NECK WEEK THOUGH,
THE WHOLE THING STARTED TO SHAKE AND RATTLE WITHIN THE FIRST WEEK
WE NOW KNOW. THE INAUGURATION IS FRIDAY.
THERE'S THE WEEKEND. THEN THE FIRST TUESDAY AFTER THE
INAUGURATION, THE NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER GOT INTERVIEWED
BY THE FBI. WHEN THE FBI DOES THAT KIND OF
INTERVIEW, THE AGENTS WHO CONDUCT THE INTERVIEW PRODUCE A
WRITTEN REPORT ABOUT IT. IT'S CALLED A 302.
SWEARING IN WAS ON FRIDAY, THEN THERE'S THE WEEK, THEN THE
FOLLOWING TUESDAY NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER GETS
INTERVIEWED BY THE FBI. THE CONSEQUENCES OF THAT
INTERVIEW ARE STILL RINGING OUT LIKE -- I MEAN, CHURCH BELLS,
AIR RAID SIRENS, DEPENDING ON YOUR MFRLT ADJUSTMENT TOWARDS
THESE THINGS. ALL THESE WEEKS AND MONTHS
LATER, WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT FBI INTERVIEW STILL RESENT RESIDENT
NATING. IT SET OFF ALARMS SO MUCH SO
THEY DIDN'T EVEN WAIT FOR THE AGENTS WHO HAD INTERVIEWED MIKE
FLYNN TO WRITE UP THEIR 302. THEY DIDN'T WAIT FOR THOSE
TOOGTS WRITE THEIR REPORT. >> DID YOU HAVE THE 302 WITH YOU
WHEN YOUEN YOU WERE IN THE WHIT HOUSE?
DID YOU SHOW IT TO WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL AND HAD YOU SEEN IT AT
THE TIME YOU WENT UP TO THE WHITE HOUSE?
>> NO. THE FBI HAD DEDUCTED INTERVIEW
ON THE 24th. WE GOT READOUT FROM THE FBI ON
THE 25th, A DETAILED READOUT SPECIFICALLY FROM THE AGENTS
THAT HAD CONDUCTED THE INTERVIEW.
BUT WE DIDN'T WANT TO WAIT FOR THE 302 BECAUSE WE FELT THAT IT
WAS IMPORTANT TO GET THIS INFORMATION TO THE WHITE HOUSE
AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. >> WE WON'T NOT WAIT FOR THE
302. WE NEEDED TO GET THIS
INFORMATION TO THE WHITE HOUSE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
THEY DIDN'T EVEN WAIT FOR THE FBI AGENTS WHO DID THE
QUESTIONING, DIDN'T WAIT FOR THEM TO WRITE IT UP.
IT IS HARD TO OVERSTATE HOW UNUSUAL IT IS THAT THE SERVING
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES WOULD PERSONALLY TAKE
OVER SOMETHING LIKE THIS, WOULD PERSONALLY HANDLE IT, BUT THAT'S
WHAT HAPPENED HERE. INAUGURATION FRIDAY, FBI
QUESTIONS THE NATIONALS ADVISER ON TUESDAY.
WEDNESDAY THOSE FBI AGENTS GO TOP BRASS OF THE NATIONAL
SECURITY DIVISION OF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT AND ULTIMATELY TO THE
SERVING ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES.
THEY GO TO THOSE TOP OFFICIALS WITH WHATEVER IT IS THAT
HAPPENED IN THAT INTERVIEW, AND THEN THE VERY NEXT MORNING, NOT
EVEN ONE WEEK INTO THE NEW ADMINISTRATION, THE ACTING
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES CALLS THE WHITE HOUSE AND
SAYS, HEY, WE GOT PROBLEM. WE CANNOT TALK ABOUT THIS ON THE
PHONE. WE NEED TO MEET ON THIS
PERSONALLY AND DIRECTLY, NOW. >> MS. YATES, WHAT DID YOU TELL
THE WHITE HOUSE ABOUT MR. FLYNN? >> I HAD TWO IN-PERSON MEETINGS
ONE PHONE CALL WITH THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL ABOUT MR. FLYNN.
THE FIRST MEETING OCCURRED ON JANUARY 26th.
I CALLED DONE McBEGAN FIRST THING THAT MORNING AND TOLD HIM
THAT I HAD A VERY SENSITIVE MATTER THIEVD DISCUSS WITH HIM,
THAT I COULDN'T TALK ABOUT IT ON THE PHONE AND I NEEDED TO COME
SEE HIM, AND HE AGREED TO MEET WITH ME LATER THAT AFTERNOON.
I TOOK A SENIOR MEMBER OF THE
NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION WHO WAS OVERSEEING THIS MATTER TO
MEET WITH ME. WE MET IN HIS OFFICE AT THE
WHITE HOUSE WHICH IS A SKIFF SO WE COULD DISCUSS CLASSIFIED
INFORMATION IN HIS OFFICE. >> AGAIN, IT IS REMARKABLE HERE
THAT THIS IS NOT EVEN ONE WEEK INTO THE NEW ADMINISTRATION.
SWEARING IN WAS A FRIDAY, THIS IS THE THURSDAY AFTER THE
INAUGURATION. THIS IS SIX DAYS INTO THE NEW
PRESIDENCY. AND THE SERVING ATTORNEY
GENERAL, THE ACT ATTORNEY GENERALLY, HAS GONE TO THE WHITE
HOUSE COUNSEL'S OFFICE WHICH HAS A SENSITIVE KPARTMENTED
INFORMATION FACILITY A SKIFF WHERE THEY CAN HANDLE CLASSIFIED
MATERIAL INSIDE THAT OFFICE. THIS IS DWODS AFTER THE FBI
QUESTIONED THE NATIONAL SECURITY ZRIERDS AND NOW IT'S THE ACTING
ATTORNEY GENERAL ALONG WITH SOMEBODY YOU COULD REASONABLY
INCLUDE IS THE OTHER SENIOR KREERD JUSTICE DEPARTMENT PERSON
THERE, THE PERSON WHO WAS THEN SERVING AS THE ACTING CHIEF.
THAT PERSON IS A CAREER JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL WHO WAS ONLY
LEAVING THAT JOB NOW. BUT IN THAT JOB, SHE HAS BEEN
OVERSEEING ALL THE TRUMP AND RUSSIA INVESTIGATIONS, SO IT'S
WE BELIEVE THE HEAD OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION AT
THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, THE ACT ATTORNEY GENERAL, THEY GO TO
THE WHITE HOUSE. UNBELIEVABLY SENIOR PEOPLE
HANDLING THIS PERSONALLY. THEY GO TO THE WHITE HOUSE, THEY
GO TO THE OFFICE THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL.
THIS IS THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL, DONE McBEGAN.
AGAIN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, WE BELIEVE THE NATIONAL SECURITY
DIVISION CHIEF AT DOJ, THEY RUSHED TO THE WHITE HOUSE
WITHOUT EVEN WAITING FOR THE FBI AGENTS TO WRITE UP THEIR REPORT
ON THEIR QUESTIONING OF MIKE FLYNN.
THEY RUSH TO THE WHITE HOUSE TO NOTIFY THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL
ABOUT WHAT THEY HAVE LEARNED ABOUT THE NATIONAL SECURITY
ADVISER MIKE FLYNN. HEADING INTO TODAY, EVERYBODY
THOUGHT THIS WAS GOING TO BE TESTIMONY THAT WOULD BE KIND OF
A LETDOWN, THAT WE ALREADY KNEW EVERYTHING SALLY YATES WAS GOING
TO SAY. BUT RIGHT OFF THE BAT, SHE GIVES
YOU THAT INCREDIBLE TIMELINE AND THAT INCREDIBLE YOU DO ABOUT HOW
THEY WENT TO THE WHITE HOUSE AND HOW FAST.
AND THEN SHE SAID THIS. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY HAS ANY
IDEA WHAT THIS MEANS EXACTLY. >> SO I TOLD THEM AGAIN THAT
THERE WERE A NUMBER OF PRESS ACCOUNTS OF STATEMENTS THAT HAD
BEEN MADE BY THE VICE PRESIDENT AND OTHER HIGH RANKING WHITE
HOUSE OFFICIALS ABOUT GENERAL FLYNN'S CONDUCT THAT WE KNEW TO
BE UNTRUE. AND WE TOLD THEM HOW WE KNEW --
HOW WE HAD THIS INFORMATION, HOW WE HAD ACQUIRED IT AND HOW WE
KNEW IT WAS UNTRUE. AND WE WALKED THE WHITE HOUSE
COUNSEL WHO ALSO HAD AN ASSOCIATE THERE WITH HIM THROUGH
GENERAL FLYNN'S UNDERLYING CONDUCT.
THE CONTENTS OF WHICH I OBVIOUSLY CANNOT GO THROUGH WITH
YOU TODAY BECAUSE IT'S CLASSIFIED, BUT WE TOOK HIM
THROUGH UNDERLYING CONDUCT, AND THEN WE TALKED WILL YOU THE
VARIOUS PRESS ACCOUNTS AND HOW IT HAD BEEN FALSELY REPORTED.
>> WE WALKED HIM THROUGH GENERAL FLYNN'S UNDERLYING CONDUCT ARE,
WHAT GENERAL FLYNN HAD DONE. I CANNOT GO THROUGH THAT WITH
YOU TODAY BECAUSE IT'S CLASSIFIED.
WE WALKED HIM THROUGH GENERAL FLYNN'S UNDERLYING CONDUCT.
WHAT UNDERLYING CONDUCT? WHAT WE HAD KNOWN BEFORE TODAY,
WHAT AT LEAST HAD BEEN REPORTED BEFORE TODAY IS SALLY YATES
BECAME AWARE THAT MIKE FLYNN WAS NOT TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT HIS
CONTACTS WITH RUSSIAN OFFICIALS. TODAY SHE SAID ASIDE FROM HIM
NOT TELLING THE TRUTH, HIS UNDERLYING CONDUCT ITSELF WAS
PROBLEMATIC. WHAT UNDERLYING CONDUCT?
>> THE FIRST THING WE DID WAS TO EXPLAIN TO MR. McBEGAN THAT THE
UNDERLYING CONDUCT THAT GENERAL FLYNN HAD ENGAGED IN HUSBAND
PROBLEMATIC IN AND OF ITSELF. >> ON JANUARY 24th YOU JUST
TESTIFIED NAFGS ADVISOR FLYNN WAS INTERVIEWED BY THE FBI ABOUT
HIS UNDERLYING CONDUCT AND THAT THAT UNDERLYING CONDUCT WAS
PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE IT LED TO THE COLLUSION THE VICE PRESIDENT
WAS RELYING ON FALSEHOODS. WHAT WAS THAT UNDERLYING CONDUCT
AND ARE YOU CONVINCED THAT THE FORMER NATIONAL SECURITIES
ADVISER WAS TRUTHFUL IN HIS TESTIMONY TO THE FBI ON JANUARY
24th? >> AGAIN I HATE TO FRUSTRATE YOU
AGAIN, BUT I THINK I'M GOING TO HAVE TO BECAUSE MY KNOWLEDGE OF
HIS UNDERLYING CONDUCT IS BASED ON CLASSIFIED INFORMATION, AND
SO I CAN'T REVEAL WHAT THAT UNDERLYING CONDUCT IS.
IT'S WHY I HAD TO DO SORT OF AN ARTIFICIAL DESCRIPTION OF EVENTS
WITHOUT REVEALING THAT CONDUCT. >> MY KNOWLEDGE OF HIS
UNDERLYING CONDUCT IS BASED OBJECT CLASSIFIED INFORMATION SO
I CANNOT REVEAL WHAT THAT UNDERLYING CONDUCT IS.
BUT APPARENTLY SHE TOLD THE WHITE HOUSE THAT UNDERLYING
CONDUCT WAS PROBLEMATIC IN AND OF ITSELF, IN ADDITION TO THE
FACT THAT HE WAS LYING ABOUT IT. WHAT WAS THE UNDERLYING CONDUCT?
WHEN THE NARNLS ADVISER WAS FIRED 24 DAYS INTO THE NEW
ADMINISTRATION, AFTER WHAT WE KNOW WAS AN SIMPLICITY WARNING
FROM THE OUTGOING PRESIDENT THAT MIKE FLYNN SHOULD NOT BE HIRED,
THAT THERE WERE SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT HIM.
AFTER HE WAS HIRED ANYWAY, THE WHITE HOUSE LINE WAS THAT HE HAD
TO BE FIRED BECAUSE HE LIED TO OTHER PEOPLE AT THE WHITE HOUSE,
PARTICULARLY THE VICE PRESIDENT ABOUT HIS CONTACTS WITH THE
RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT. WELL, NOW WE KNOW FROM THE ACT
ATTORNEY GENERAL AT THE TIME THAT IN ADDITION TO MIKE FLYNN
LYING ABOUT H HIS CONTACT WITH E RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT, THERE WAS
ALSO SOMETHING PROBLEMATIC ABOUT HIS UBDS LYING CONDUCT AND IT'S
SOMETHING THAT CANNOT BE DISCUSSED IN AN UNCLASSIFIED
SETTING. WHAT DID HE DO?
THE OTHER PROBLEM WITH THE WHITE HOUSE LINE ON MIKE FLYNN THAT
HAS NEVER MADE SENSE IS THE TIMING.
IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHETHER THE WHITE HOUSE HAS ANYTHING TO HIDE
HERE, WHETHER THEY'RE COVERING ANYTHING UP HERE, THEN YOU HAVE
TO ASK WHETHER THEIR EXPLANATION FOR FIRING MIKE FLYNN MAKES ANY
SENSE. AND PART OF IT THAT MAKES NO
SENSE IS WHY AFTER THIS EXTRAORDINARY IN-PERSON WARNING
FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HERSELF, AFTER THIS
EXTRAORDINARY WARNING THEY SAY WE CANNOT DISCUSS THIS ON THE
PHONE. I'M COMING TOT WHITE HOUSE
TODAY. GET THE SKIFF READY.
AFTER THAT REMARKABLE WARNING WHY IS IT THE WHITE HOUSE DIDN'T
DO ANYTHING ABOUT FLYNN FOR WEEKS?
>> DO YOU BELIEVE THE ADMINISTRATION TOOK YOUR
WARNINGS SERIOUSLY WHEN YOU MADE THIS EXTRAORDINARY EFFORT TO GO
TO THE WHITE HOUSE AND IN PERSON BRIEF THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL ON
THE 26th AND 27th? DO YOU THINK THEY TOOK
APPROPRIATE STEPS WITH REGARDS TO GENERAL FLYNN AS THE NATIONAL
SECURITY ADVISORY GIVEN HE REMAINED A FREQUENT PARTICIPANT
IN VERY HIGH-LEVEL NATIONAL SECURITY MATTERS FOR TWO WEEKS?
>> WELL, CERTAINLY IN THE CONTINUOUS OF THE MEETINGS MR.
McBEGAN CERTAINLY DEMONSTRATED THAT HE UNDERSTOOD THIS WAS
SERIOUS. SO HE DID SEEM TO BE TAKING IT
SERIOUSLY. I DON'T HAVE ANY WAY OF KNOWING
WHAT IF ANYTHING THEY DID. IF NOTHING WAS DONE, THEN
CERTAINLY THAT WOULD BE CONCERNING.
>> SO YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER THEY TOOK ANY STEPS TO RESTRICT
HIS ACCESS TO CLASSIFIED INFORMATION TO INVESTIGATE HIM
FURTHER? >> AGAIN, I WAS GONE AFTER THE
30th. I WOULDN'T KNOW IF ANY STEPS HAS
BEEN COMMUNICATED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BUT I WAS
NOT AWARE OF ANY, NO. >> HAD YOU NOT BEEN FIRED, WOULD
YOU HAVE RECOMMENDED TO THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL THAT THEY
BEGIN FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS INTO THE NATIONAL SECURITY
ADVISER OR THAT THEY RESTRICT HIS ACCESS TO SENSITIVE AND
CLASSIFIED INFORMATION? >> IT'S A BIT OF A HYPOTHETICAL.
IF I WERE TURNED IMPRESSION NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE, THEN,
YES, I WOULD HAVE RAISED IT AGAIN AT THE WHITE HOUSE.
>> HAD I STILL BEEN WILL AND HAD THEY DONE NOTHING TO ACT ON THIS
I GAVE THEM, I WOULD HAVE RAISED
IT. HAD I STILL BEEN THERE, YEAH, I
WOULD HAVE RAISED IT AGAIN. LUCKILY, THEY GOT RID OF HER.
THE PRESIDENT FIRED SALLY YATES THE MONDAY AFTER SHE HAD HER TWO
MEETINGS ABOUT FLYNN. FBI INTERVIEWS FLYNN ON TUESDAY.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE POW WOWS ABOUT IT ON WEDNESDAY.
ON THURSDAY, THERE'S THAT MEETING AT THE WHITE HOUSE.
ON FRIDAY A FOLLOW-UP MEETING AT THE HOUSE.
FOLLOWING MONDAY, THEY CANNED HER.
SO WHEN THE WHITE HOUSE DID NOTHING IN RESPONSE TO SALLY
YATES' WARNING, SHE WAS OUT OF GOVERNMENT BY THEN.
WHILE MIKE FLYNN STAYED ON AS NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER AS IF
NOTHING HAPPENED. THAT GOT AL FRANKEN OF MINNESOTA
SLIGHTLY WORKED UP TODAY. >> AND WE HAVE McGAN, DOESN'T
UNDERSTAND WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS?
AND THEN WE HAVE SPICER THE PRESS SECRETARY SAYING THE
PRESIDENT WAS TOLD ABOUT THIS. THE PRESIDENT WAS TOLD ABOUT
THIS IN LATE JANUARY ACCORDING TO THE PRESS SECRETARY.
SO NOW HE'S GOT A GUY WHO HAS BEEN THE FORMER PRESIDENT SAID
DON'T HIRE THIS GUY. HE'S CLEARLY COMPROMISED.
HE'S LIED TO THE VICE PRESIDENT, AND HE KEEPS HIM ON, AND HE LETS
HIM BUT "B" IN ALL THESE CLASSIFIED -- LET'S HIM TALK
WITH PUTIN. PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
AND THE NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISORY SIT IN THE OVAL OFFICE
AND DISCUSS THIS WITH PUTIN. >> WE HAD KNOWN BEFORE TODAY
THAT WHATEVER HAPPENED WITH MIKE FLYNN, THE WHITE HOUSE HAS BEEN
TELLING A STORY ABOUT HIM THAT DOES NOT ADD UP OR MAKE SENSE.
FOR EXAMPLE, JUST AS ONE PART OF THIS, VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE,
HE WAS THE HEAD OF THE TRANSITION WHEN THE TRANSITION
WAS NOTIFIED MULTIPLE TIMES, INCLUDING IN PERSON TWICE BY
FLYNN'S LAWYERS, AND IN WRITING BY CONGRESS THAT MIKE FLYNN HAD
TAKEN FOREIGN PAYMENTS. FOREIGN PAYMENTS WERE ALSO THE
SUBJECT OF MULTIPLE PRESS REPORTS.
NBC NEWS REPORTS THAT THE TRUMP TRANSITION HAD DIRECT KNOWLEDGE
OF MIKE FLYNN'S PAYMENTS FROM FOREIGN SOURCES, BUT
NEVERTHELESS, VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE, HEAD OF THE
TRANSITION, HE PRO-CLAIMS HE WAS PERFECTLY IGNORANT OF THAT FACT
UNTIL WEEKS AFTER MIKE FLYNN WAS FIRED.
>> LET ME SAY HEARING THAT STORY TODAY WAS THE FIRST I HEARD OF
IT. >> THAT IS NOT CREDIBLE.
WHETHER OR NOT YOU CARE ABOUT WHAT THE VICE PRESIDENT NEW
ABOUT MIKE FLYNN, WHETHERTHER Y CARE ABOUT THAT SUBJECT ITSELF
OR NOT, THE BIGGER QUESTION IS WHY ARE THEY TELLING THIS LIE
ABOUT IT? WHY ARE THEY LIELG ABOUT THIS
STUFF? THEY ARE TELLING STORIES ABOUT
MIKE FLYNN THAT MAKE NO SENSE A GIVEN WE NOW KNOW ABOUT THE
FACTS. AND THAT WAS A PROBLEM FOR THEM
BEFORE TODAY, IT BECAME A MUCH BIGGER PROBLEM FOR THEM AFTER
TODAY. BEFORE TODAY, WE KNEW THEY HAD
INEXPLICABLY WAITED 18 DAYS AFTER BEING WARNED ABOUT MIKE
FLYNN BEFORE THEY FIRED HIM. TODAY THAT DELAY BECAME ALL THE
MORE INEXPLICABLE AND EVEN A BIT SCARY WHEN WE FRERND SALLY YATES
WHAT THE QUALITY OF HER WARNING WAS ABOUT MIKE FLYNN.
>> WE WERE CONCERNED THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAS BEEN MISLED
ABOUT THE UNDERLYING CONDUCT AND WHAT GENERAL FLYNN HAD DONE.
AND ADDITIONALLY THAT WE WEREN'T THE ONLY ONES THAT KNEW ALL OF
THIS THAT THE RUSSIANS ALSO KNEW ABOUT WHAT HE HAD DONE AND THE
RUSSIANS ALSO KNEW THAT GENERAL FLYNN HAD MISLED THE VICE
PRESIDENT AND OTHERS. BECAUSE IN MEDIA ACCOUNTS IT WAS
CLEAR FROM THE VICE PRESIDENT AND OTHERS THAT THEY WERE
REPEATING WHAT GENERAL FLYNN TOLD THEM AND THIS WAS A PROBLEM
BECAUSE NOT ONLY DID WE BELIEVE THAT THE RUSSIANS KNEW THIS, BUT
THAT THEY LIKELY HAD PROOF OF THIS INFORMATION.
AND THAT CREATED COMPROMISED SITUATION, A SITUATION WHERE THE
NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER ESSENTIALLY COULD BE BLACK
MAILED BY THE RUSSIANS. WE BELIEVED THAT GENERAL FLYNN
WAS COMPROMISED WITH RESPECT TO THE RUSSIANS.
TO STATE OBVIOUS, YOU DON'T WANT YOUR NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER
COMPROMISED WITH THE ZBLUGSZ WHAT DID YOU THINK WOULD HAVE IF
HE WERE, AND HOW DO YOU BELIEVE HE WOULD HAVE BEEN COMPROMISED?
>> WE HAD TWO KRNGSZ COMPROMISE WAS CERTAINLY THE NUMBER ONE
CONCERN. THE RUSSIANS CAN USE COMPROMISED
MATERIAL, INFORMATION, IN A VARIETY OF WAYS.
SOMETIMES OVERTLY, AND SOMETIMES SUBTLY.
AND AGAIN, OUR CONCERN WAS THAT YOU HAVE A VERY SENSITIVE
POSITION LIKE THE NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER, AND YOU DON'T
WANT THAT PERSON TO BE IN A POSITION WHERE, AGAIN, RUSSIANS
HAVE LEVERAGE OVER HIM. YOU DON'T WANT THE NATIONAL
SECURITY ADVISER TO BE IN A POSITION WHERE THE RUSSIANS HAVE
LEVERAGE OVER HIM. NOW, IN TERMS OF WHAT IMPACT
THAT MAY HAVE HAD OR CAUSED, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT, BUT WE KNEW
THAT THAT WAS NOT A GOOD SITUATION, WHICH IS WHY WE
WANTED TO LET THE WHITE HOUSE KNOW ABOUT IT.
>> WE WANTED TO LET THE WHITE HOUSE KNOW ABOUT IT.
ASSUMING THEY WOULD DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
AND THEN THEY DID NOTHING WITH THAT INFORMATION.
THEY LET HIM STAY ON IN HIS JOB AS NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER
AFTER THIS EXTRAORDINARY WARNING ABOUT THE KIND OF LEVERAGE THAT
RUSSIA HAD OVER HIM, LEVERAGE THEY COULD CONCEIVABLY USE TO
CONTROL HIM. WHO IS THE TOP SECURITY ADVISER
TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES -- THEY HELD ONTO HIM.
MOST REPUBLICAN SENATORS ON THIS COMMITTEE TODAY WERE MOSTLY
CONCERNED ABOUT FACT THAT THIS EVER ENDED UP IN THE PRESS.
IT'S A REMARKABLE THING IN ITS OWN RIGHT.
BUT DESPITE THOSE GUYS, WE KNOW A LOT MORE ABOUT THIS
INVESTIGATION, SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE STILL UNEXPLAINED
BEHAVIOR OF THIS WHITE HOUSE WHEN IT CAME TO THIS RED-HOT
ISSUE OF THEIR SECRET CONTACTS WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT.
AND THAT IS BAD NEWS. THAT IS VERY, VERY BAD NEWS FOR
THIS WHITE HOUSE. AND AS SOON AS THIS HEARING
ENDED TODAY, THE WHITE HOUSE FLOATED THE NEWS THAT THEY ARE
CONSIDERING BASICALLY REDECLARING WAR IN AFGHANISTAN,
TARGET THE WAR THERE ALL OVER AGAIN IN ITS 16th YEAR, WHICH
HAD THE PRACTICAL EFFECT OF SHOVING THE HEADLINES ON THIS
HEARING TODAY DOWN TOWARD THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE, AT LEAST AT
THE "WASHINGTON POST." AND THAT IS A CYNICAL AS I HAVE
FELT ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE IN POLITICS IN MANY, MANY YEARS.
IT HAS BEEN 108 DAYS OF THIS PRESIDENCY SO FAR, THAT'S IT,
AND ALREADY WE ARE AT THIS LEVEL OF COVERU