CONGRESSMAN AND MEMBER OF THE
HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE,
ADAM KINZINGER.
LELAND: THANKS FOR BEING WITH
US, WE APPRECIATE IT.
DO YOU THINK GIVEN HOW MUCH THE
ADMINISTRATION WAS WILLING TO
SORT OF TURN AWAY FROM ITS
THREATS AGAINST VENEZUELA, THAT
THE IRANIANS ARE TAKING US
SERIOUSLY WHEN IT COMES TO
THREATS ISSUED BY THE
ADMINISTRATION SO FAR THIS WEEK?
>> WELL, I CERTAINLY THINK THEY
SHOULD TAKE IT SERIOUSLY.
I DO THINK, YOU KNOW, VENEZUELA
WAS UNFORTUNATE.
I THINK WE HAD A REAL
OPPORTUNITY THERE, AND IT'S NOT
NECESSARILY OVER.
AND WHEN IT COMES TO IRAN, I
MEAN, LOOK, THIS IS A WEAK
COUNTRY THAT BECAUSE OF THE
REIMPLEMENTATION OF SANCTIONS
AND THE PULLING OUT OF THE IRAN
NUCLEAR DEAL IS NOW LASHING OUT.
STRONG, CONFIDENT COUNTRIES
DON'T ATTACH MINES TO INNOCENT
SHIPS, AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE
DOING --
LELAND: YEAH, BUT --
>> SO I THINK THEY OUGHT TO --
LELAND: -- ISN'T THE REASON
THEY'RE LASHING OUT BECAUSE THEY
FEEL LIKE THEY CAN TEST THIS
ADMINISTRATION IN A WAY,
PERHAPS, BECAUSE IT WAS
PRESIDENT TRUMP WHO TWEETED OUT
ABOUT CUBAN MERCENARIES INSIDE
VENEZUELA BETTER GET OUT, OR
THERE WAS GOING TO BE AN
EMBARGO.
THE I CUBAN MERCENARIES ARE
STILL THERE, AND THERE'S NO
EMBARGO.
>> I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHY, BUT
I CERTAINLY THINK THAT'S A RISK.
I THINK IF YOU'RE GOING TO TALK
TOUGH, YOU HAVE TO BE WILLING TO
BACK THAT UP WITH ACTION IF
THAT'S THE CASE, IF THAT'S
WHAT'S CALLED FOR.
WITH IRAN, WE'VE SEEN THEY TAKE
THIS RIGHT UP TO WHERE THEY
THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE A
MILITARY RESPONSE, AND I THINK
THAT'S WHY THE SECRETARY OF
STATE AND THE PRESIDENT BEING
VERY CLEAR THAT ISN'T OFF THE
TABLE.
BUT THE KEY IS IF THESE KINDS OF
ATTACKS CONTINUE, THERE NEEDS TO
BE A MILITARY RESPONSE.
THAT MEANS TAKING OUT THEIR
ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO DO ATTACKS
LIKE THIS IN THE FUTURE AND
INFLICTING REAL HARM ON THEIR,
BASICALLY, ABILITY TO DENY
SHIPPING.
LELAND: SO WITH IN THIS, DOES IA
LELAND: SO WITH IN THIS, DOES IN
NEED TO BE TAUGHT A LESSON NOW,
OR ARE THE TOUGH WORDS ENOUGH?
>> LOOK, IF I WAS, IF I WAS
MAKING THE DECISION, I THINK
WE'VE REACHED THAT LINE.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S WRONG FOR
THE PRESIDENT TO NOT DO IT YET,
BUT I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE
CLEAR, AND HOPEFULLY IT IS CLEAR
TO IRAN, THAT BASICALLY THIS IS
IT.
THIS IS ABOUT THE EXTENT OF WHAT
WE'LL ACCEPT.
THIS IS THE SIXTH TANKER THEY'VE
DAMAGED, PLUS THE FACT THAT A
QUARTER OF AMERICAN TROOPS
KILLED IN IRAQ WERE KILLED BY
IRAN, AND THERE'S A POINT AT
WHICH WE'VE HAD ENOUGH.
THE KEY WE HAVE TO PUSH BACK
AGAINST IS FOLKS THAT SAY ANY
MILITARY RESPONSE MEANS IT'S
GOING TO BE A FULL INVASION OF
IRAN.
THAT'S THE KIND OF STUFF OBAMA
USED TO DO WHEN HE DIDN'T DO
ANYTHING.
THE REALITY IS THERE'S A LOT OF
STUFF IN BETWEEN THAT WOULD
INFLICT THE KIND OF PUNISHMENT
WE NEED TO.
LELAND: ALL RIGHT, YOU SAID IT
IS TIME TO TEACH THEM A LESSON,
WHAT WOULD BE THE PROPORTIONAL
RESPONSE?
>> I THINK WE NEED TO BE A
LITTLE ABOVE PROPORTIONAL.
IRANIANS UNDERSTAND THAT THE
COST WILL CERTAINLY EXCEED ANY
BENEFITS THEY GAIN, THAT'LL
INCLUDE TAKING OUT SOME OF THEIR
NAVY INFRASTRUCTURE, THEIR
ABILITY TO MINE THIS AREA AND
ALSO MAYBE SURFACE TO AIR
MISSILE SITES BECAUSE WE KNEW
ONE WAS SHOT AT OUR DRONE.
LELAND: RIGHT.
SO YOU'D BE WILLING TO DO THAT,
YOU'D START KINETIC ACTION
AGAINST THE IRANIANS NOW.
>> YEAH.
I THINK WE'RE AT THAT POINT, BUT
AT THE SAME TIME I DON'T THINK
IT'S WRONG TO NOT DO IT AT THIS
POINT.
BUT I THINK WE'RE REALLY CLOSE
TO THAT.
LELAND: GOT IT.
YOU HAD COME OUT WITH SOME
PRETTY HARSH WORDS WHEN THE
PRESIDENT SAID IN THAT ABC
INTERVIEW EARLIER THIS WEEK THAT
HE WASN'T SURE IF HE WAS GOING
TO CALL THE FBI IF OFFERED
POLITICAL DIRT ON A CAMPAIGN
OPPONENT.
THIS IS WHAT A FELLOW MEMBER OF
CONGRESS, ALEXANDRIA
OCASIO-CORTEZ, HAD TO SAY ABOUT
THAT AND IMPEACHMENT THIS
MORNING.
TAKE A LISTEN.
>> EVERY DAY THAT PASSES THE
PRESSURE TO IMPEACH GROWS, AND I
THINK THAT IT'S JUSTIFIABLE.
I THINK THE EVIDENCE CONTINUES
TO COME IN, AND I BELIEVE THAT
WITH THE PRESIDENT NOW SAYING
THAT HE IS WILLING TO BREAK THE
LAW TO WIN RE-ELECTION, THAT
GOES, THAT TRANSCENDS
PARTISANSHIP, IT TRANSSENDS
PARTY LINES, AND THIS IS NOW
ABOUT THE RULE OF LAW IN THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
LELAND: WHEN THE PRESIDENT SAYS
THINGS LIKE HE DID TO GEORGE
STEPHANOPOULOS, WHETHER HE
WALKED IT BACK OR NOT, DOES IT
MAKE IT HARDER FOR REPUBLICANS
IN CONGRESS LIKE YOURSELF TO
DEFEND HIM?
>> NO, I DON'T THINK SO, BECAUSE
I DON'T THINK WHAT HE SAID WAS
IMPEACHABLE.
HE SHOULD HAVE MADE IT CLEAR
THAT HE WOULDN'T TAKE THIS
INFORMATION, AND HE HAS TRIED TO
WALK THAT BACK.
WHEN IT COMES TO THESE ISSUES,
WE HAVE TO IN A BIPARTISAN WAY
SAY WE'LL NEVER TAKE --
LELAND: RIGHT.
BUT SIMPLY TALKING IN THAT WAY
TO WHERE NOW REPUBLICANS SUCH AS
YOURSELF HAVE TO REBUKE HIM OR
FEEL THE NEED TO REBUKE HIM,
DOESN'T THAT MAKE IT HARDER,
DOESN'T THAT MUDDY THE WATERS A
LITTLE BIT FOR CONGRESS?
>> YEAH, MAYBE FOR SOME PEOPLE,
NOT FOR ME.
I THINK IMPEACHABLE OFFENSES
REACH A VERY HIGH THRESHOLD, NOT
THIS.
I JUST THINK IT NEEDS TO BE
CLEAR TO PRESIDENT -- AND I
DON'T THINK HE WAS INVITING
FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN THE
ELECTION, BUT I THINK JUST
MAKING IT CLEAR THAT YOU
WOULDN'T ACCEPT THAT IS REALLY
IMPORTANT AT THIS POINT.
I VERY RARELY AGREE WITH AOC.
LELAND: ALL RIGHT.
WELL, WE'LL HAVE YOU BACK THE
NEXT TIME YOU ALL DISAGREE.