♪ ♪
>>> BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT, ♪ ♪
>>> BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT, WE NOW KNOW THE PRESIDENT NEEDS
TO BE IMPEACHED, AND I’M
GRATEFUL THAT NANCY PELOSI HAS
DECIDED TO MOVE FORWARD, THAT IT
LOOKS LIKE THE MAJORITY OF SOME
OF HER HOBBES AND SOME OF THE
REPUBLICANS ARE CONSIDERING THIS
AS WELL.
AS WELL. IN OTHER WORDS, THEY’LL PLACE
THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY
BEFORE THEIR POLITICAL FUTURE,
BEFORE THEIR PROSPECTS IN THE
NEXT ELECTION.
NEXT ELECTION. THAT’S THE WAY, IF WE’RE GOING
TO MAKE IT, THIS COUNTRY HAS TO
WORK.
WORK. I’M CAUTIOUSLY OPTIMISTIC ABOUT
THE PATH WE ARE ON NOW.
>>> THAT CONVERSATION HAPPENED
JUST A FEW BLOCKS AWAY FROM
WHERE I’M SITTING.
DISCUSSING IMPEACHMENT ON THE
STAGE.
STAGE. MEANWHILE, PRESIDENT TRUMP IS
PUSHING BACK AGAINST ACCUSATIONS
OF CLOSED DOOR
EVENT IN NEW YORK.
THE PRESIDENT WAS CAUGHT ON
CAMERA AT THAT EVENT DECLARING
WAR ON DEMOCRATS AND SUGGESTING
THE WHISTLEBLOWER’S SOURCES
COMMITTED TREASON.
COMMITTED TREASON. TAKE A LISTEN TO WHAT THE
PRESIDENT HAD TO SAY.
>> WE ARE IN A WAR.
THESE PEOPLE ARE SICK.
THEY’RE SICK.
THEY’RE SICK. AND NOBODY IS -- I WANT TO KNOW
WHO IS THE PERSON THAT GAVE THE
WHISTLE-BLOWER -- WHO IS THE
PERSON THAT GAVE THE
WHISTLE-BLOWER THE INFORMATION
BECAUSE THAT’S CLOSE TO A SPY.
DO YOU KNOW WHAT WE USED TO DO
IN THE OLD DAYS WHEN WE WERE
SMART, RIGHT, WITH SPIES AND
TREASONOUS, RIGHT?
TREASONOUS, RIGHT? WE USED TO HANDLE IT A LITTLE
DIFFERENTLY THAN WE DO NOW.
>> A WHOLLY DIFFERENT SPEECH
THAN MANY PEOPLE IN THAT
AUDIENCE EXPECTED.
AUDIENCE EXPECTED. WITH ME NOW IS JEH JOHNSON IN
AUSTIN.
AUSTIN. WE HAVEN’T SPOKEN TODAY ABOUT
WHAT ALL OF THIS MEANS ABOUT THE
SANCTITY OF WHISTLE-BLOWER
COMPLAINTS AND HOW WHAT’S
HAPPENED HERE CHANGES THAT.
WHEN YOU HEAR THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES TALK ABOUT
WHAT USED TO BE DONE IN THE OLD
DAYS TO TRAITORS, HOW DO WE MOVE
ON TO HERE ABOUT THE SANCTITY OF
THE WHISTLE-BLOWER’S COMPLAINTS.
>> DAVID, THANKS FOR HAVING ME
HERE IN AUSTIN.
IN A FREE AND OPEN SOCIETY, IN A
DEMOCRACY, WHISTLE-BLOWER
DEMOCRACY, WHISTLE-BLOWER PROTECTIONS ARE FUNDAMENTAL.
THEY’RE FUNDAMENTAL TO CHECKS
AND BALANCES, SEPARATION OF
POWERS.
POWERS. AS PAINFUL AND AS DISCONCERTING
AS IT CAN BE, IF YOU ARE IN THE
EXECUTIVE BRANCH AND YOU HAVE A
WHISTLE-BLOWER, IT’S FUNDAMENTAL
THAT IN A SITUATION WHERE A
SEASONED FEDERAL OFFICIAL FEELS
THAT HE OR SHE HAS NO PLACE TO
GO, BUT THE OTHER BRANCH OF
GOVERNMENT, THAT THERE BE LEGAL
PROTECTIONS IN PLACE FOR THAT
KIND OF PERSON.
I’VE DEALT WITH THE
WHISTLE-BLOWER LAW AND THERE ARE
TIMES WHEN IT’S UNPLEASANT, IT’S
A SET BACK, JUST LIKE HAVING AN
INSPECTOR GENERAL, YOU KNOW, AN
INDEPENDENT INSPECTOR GENERAL IN
YOUR DEPARTMENT, BUT IN THE END
IT IS A HEALTHY COMPONENT OF A
DEMOCRATIC FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
THE PRESIDENT’S REMARKS ARE,
FRANKLY, NOT HELPFUL.
I’VE BEEN SAYING NOW FOR SOME
TIME THAT LEADERS, THOSE WHO
COMMAND A MICROPHONE, THOSE WHO
ASPIRE TO BE OUR LEADERS HAVE A
RESPONSIBILITY TO ENGAGE IN
CIVIL DIALOGUE, LOWER THE
TEMPERATURE IN SOME OF THE
POLITICAL RHETORIC WE’RE SEEING
RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WORDS HAVE
CONSEQUENCES.
CONSEQUENCES. PEOPLE DO LISTEN TO THEIR
LEADERS AND SO I DON’T -- I
DON’T BELIEVE THE COMMENTS WERE
HELPFUL.
HELPFUL. >> CAN WE HAVE A CONVERSATION
ABOUT WHAT WE LEARNED OVER THESE
COUPLE WEEKS, WHAT WE LEARNED IN
THE "WASHINGTON POST" ABOUT THIS
MEETING THAT THE PRESIDENT TOOK
IN THE OVAL OFFICE.
WHAT THE POST IS REPORTING THIS
MORNING IS THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP
SAID CASUALLY HE DOESN’T THINK
THAT THERE WAS ELECTION
INTERFERENCE IN 2016 AND
FUNDAMENTALLY IT DOESN’T MATTER
BECAUSE IT’S SOMETHING THAT WE
THE UNITED STATES HAS DONE IN
THE PAST.
THE PAST. >> YES.
>> YES. >> YOUR REACTION TO THAT, AGAIN,
AS THIS IS THE MARQUIS THING
THAT IS DRIVING ALL OF THIS.
>> DAVID, WHEN IT COMES TO
CYBERSECURITY THERE CAN BE NO
COMPLETE LINE OF DEFENSE AND
WHEN IT COMES TO BAD CYBER
BEHAVIOR BY NATION STATES WE
HAVE TO PUT IN PLACE SUFFICIENT
DETERRENTS TO MAKE THE BEHAVIOR
COST PROHIBITIVE.
COST PROHIBITIVE. NATION STATES WHETHER COMMUNIST
REGIMES
REGIMES REGIMES, DICTATORSHIPS,
REGIMES, DICTATORSHIPS, MONARCHIES ALL TEND TO FOCUS IN
A BASIC WAY IN THAT THEY WILL
RESPOND TO SUFFICIENT DETERRENTS
IF YOU MAKE THE BEHAVIOR
CROSS-PROHIBITIVE.
CROSS-PROHIBITIVE. THAT COMMENT, IF TRUE, GOES IN
THE OTHER DIRECTION AND IT
SIGNALS TO THE RUSSIAN
GOVERNMENT, HEY, IF YOU DO THIS
AGAIN IT WON’T BE A BIG DEAL FOR
ME, THE PRESIDENT, WHICH
UNDERMINES, BY THE WAY, HIS OWN
ADMINISTRATION.
ADMINISTRATION. HIS OWN ADMINISTRATION’S EFFORT
AT IMPOSING ADDITIONAL SANCTIONS
ON THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT FOR
THEIR BEHAVIOR IN 2016.
>> YOU HELD AN AGENCY THAT
NEEDED THE FREE FLOW OF
INFORMATION, YES, WITHIN THE
POOL OF PEOPLE WHO SHOULD HAVE
IT, BUT PEOPLE NEEDED ACCESS TO
IT.
IT. AS YOU READ WHAT WAS ALLEGED IN
THAT WHISTLE-BLOWER COMPLAINT
ABOUT HOW A READOUT OF A PHONE
CALL WAS COMPARTMENTALIZED AND
IN A PLACE WHERE IT SHOULDN’T
HAVE BEEN.
HAVE BEEN. HOW DO YOU REACT TO THAT?
FOR WHATEVER REASON THAT WAS
DONE AND IS BEING INVESTIGATED.
HOW DO YOU REACT TO THE WAY THAT
HAS PLAYED OUT?
>> YOU CAN SPIN THAT A NUMBER OF
WAYS.
WAYS. ONE WAY IT COULD BE SPUN AND
MIGHT WELL BE DONE IS SOMEBODY
REALIZED THAT THE DOCUMENT
CONTAINED SOMETHING VERY
CONTROVERSIAL, THEY WERE WORRIED
IT WAS GOING TO LEAK AND SO THEY
PLACED IT IN A FILE THAT HAD --
WHERE FEWER PEOPLE WOULD HAVE
ACCESS TO IT.
SO THAT’S, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT IT
BEING MOTIVATED BY SOME SORT OF
POLITICAL COVER.
POLITICAL COVER. THAT’S ONE INTERPRETATION OF
EVENTS.
EVENTS. >> YEAH.
>> YEAH. >> BUT IT IS ALSO THE CASE THAT
IT’S FUNDAMENTAL TO
CLASSIFICATIONS LAW WHEN YOU
CLASSIFY SOMETHING OR WHEN YOU
WITHHOLD SOMETHING FROM FOIA,
REQUESTS UNDER THE FREEDOM OF
INFORMATION ACT, THAT IT NOT BE
DONE SO TO AVOID POLITICAL
EMBARRASSMENT.
EMBARRASSMENT. THAT’S SET FORTH IN THE LAW.
>> LET ME ASK YOU ABOUT WHAT’S
HAPPENED YOUR WEEK AND YOUR
REACTION TO IT.
YOU ARE SOMEBODY WHO SPENT A LOT
OF TIME IN WASHINGTON AT THE
DEFENSE DEPARTMENT, THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,
YOU KNOW THE WAY THE CITY WORKS.
WHAT THE HOUSE SPEAKER DID WAS A
GRAVE AND IMPORTANT STEP THAT
SHE TOOK.
SHE TOOK. YOUR REACTION TO IT.
DO YOU THINK FUNDAMENTALLY IT’S
A GOOD THING THAT SHE HAS
AUTHORIZED OR BEGUN THIS FORMAL
IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY.
IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY. >> DAVID, MY REACTION IS THIS, I
THINK THE HOUSE DEMOCRATS HAD NO
CHOICE AND ESPECIALLY SINCE THE
MUELLER REPORT THE PRESIDENT HAS
BASICALLY THUMBED HIS NOSE AT
CONGRESS BY REFUSING TO ACCEPT
THEIR SUBPOENAS, REFUSING TO
ACCEPT CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT,
THIS EXPANSIVE ASSERTION OF
EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE AND THIS
LATEST REVELATION COMES ON THE
HEELS OF THAT TO THE POINT WHERE
THEY HAD NO CHOICE.
THEY FELT LIKE THEY HAD NO
CHOICE.
CHOICE. I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT FOR THE
AMERICAN PUBLIC TO REMEMBER
HOWEVER THIS TURNS OUT IN THE
SENATE, AND IT REQUIRES A