FOR A U.S. PRESIDENT TO MENTION AN AMERICAN CITIZEN, IN THIS
CASE, JOE BIDEN, TO A FOREIGN
LEADER.
LEADER. WE TURN TO NIKKI HALEY.
SHE SERVED AS PRESIDENT TRUMP’S
AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS
WITH US FOR HER FIRST LIVE
INTERVIEW.
INTERVIEW. SHE’S ALSO WRITTEN A NEW BOOK
CALLED "WITH ALL DUE RESPECT,"
GOOD MORNING AMBASSADOR HALEY,
GOOD TO BE WITH YOU.
WE’RE ABOUT TO HAVE PUBLIC
IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS BEGIN.
YOU MENTIONED RECENTLY IN AN
INTERVIEW YOU DON’T THINK THE
PRESIDENT’S CONTACT WITH REGARD
TO UKRAINE IS IMPEACHABLE, HAVE
YOU MADE UP YOUR MIND.
>> I HAVE MADE UP MY MIND.
IMPEACHMENT IS LITERALLY THE
WORST PUNISHMENT YOU CAN DO TO A
PUBLIC OFFICIAL AND HERE YOU’VE
GOT A SITUATION WHERE THERE WAS
NO INVESTIGATION, AND THE AID
FLOWED AS IT WAS SUPPOSED TO.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT SITUATION,
IT’S HARD TO SEE WHERE
IMPEACHMENT WOULD QUALIFY FOR
THAT.
THAT. >> CAN I STOP YOU RIGHT THERE
BECAUSE THAT, WITH ALL DUE
RESPECT TO BORROW A PHRASE, THAT
DOESN’T SEEM LIKE MUCH OF A
DEFENSE THAT HE MIGHT HAVE TRIED
TO DO THOSE THINGS BUT IT DIDN’T
WORK OUT, SO IT’S ALL OKAY.
>> I MEAN, IMPEACHMENT IS
SERIOUS.
SERIOUS. IT’S THE MOST SERIOUS THING YOU
CAN DO TO A PRESIDENT.
THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS IS WE ARE
LESS THAN A YEAR AWAY FROM THE
ELECTION.
ELECTION. INSTEAD, LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE.
LET THEM HEAR THE TESTIMONY
THAT’S FINE.
THAT’S FINE. BUT LET THEM DECIDE.
>> IF THERE IS NO QUESTION ABOUT
IT, THE PEOPLE WILL GET TO WEIGH
IN IN A YEAR, BUT LET’S TALK
ABOUT, LET’S JUST SET ASIDE THAT
ISSUE OF IMPEACHMENT.
LET’S TALK ABOUT THE CONDUCT
HERE, AND WHETHER YOU THINK IT’S
APPROPRIATE.
APPROPRIATE. LET’S THINK ONLY TO THE
UNDISPUTED FACTS.
UNDISPUTED FACTS. I HAVE THE TRANSCRIPT OF THE
CALL IN QUESTION THAT THE WHITE
HOUSE ITSELF RELEASED.
SO THIS IS NOT IN ANY
CONTROVERSY.
CONTROVERSY. LET’S TALK ABOUT THAT, AND THAT
ALONE.
ALONE. THE PRESIDENT HAS SAID THIS WAS
A PERFECT CALL.
DO YOU THINK THIS WAS A PERFECT
CALL?
CALL? >> IN HIS MIND HE THINKS IT WAS
A PERFECT CALL.
>> WHAT DO YOU THINK?
>> I THINK IT’S NEVER A GOOD
PRACTICE FOR US TO ASK A FOREIGN
COUNTRY TO INVESTIGATE AN
AMERICAN.
AMERICAN. JUST NOT A GOOD PRACTICE.
HAVING SAID THAT, THERE’S NO
INSISTENCE ON THAT CALL.
THERE ARE NO DEMANDS ON THAT
CALL.
CALL. IT IS A CONVERSATION BETWEEN TWO
PRESIDENTS THAT’S CASUAL IN
NATURE, AND YOU KNOW, IT’S JUST
HARD TO FIND ANYWHERE THAT THE
PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE WOULD HAVE
THOUGHT FUNDS WERE BEING HELD
AND THAT HE HAD TO DO THIS.
>> WELL, I MEAN, AS A BACKDROP
AND YOU AMONG ALL PEOPLE KNOW
HOW IMPORTANT THESE FUNDS ARE TO
UKRAINE.
UKRAINE. YOU WERE ONE OF THE LEADING
VOICES ON BEHALF OF UKRAINE
AGAINST RUSSIAN AGGRESSION.
THEY ALWAYS KNOW THE FUNDING OF
THEIR MILITARY IS HANGING OVER
THEIR HEADS, DO THEY NOT.
>> THEY ALSO KNOW THAT PRESIDENT
TRUMP HAS BEEN VERY STRONG FOR
UKRAINE BY GIVING ANTI-TANK
MISSILES, GOING AGAINST RUSSIA,
HOLDING THE SANCTIONS.
>> THE AID WAS ON HOLD AT THAT
MOMENT.
MOMENT. THE AID DID GO ON HOLD.
IT EVENTUALLY WAS RELEASED.
>> YOU CAN HAVE THOSE
HYPOTHETICALS.
HYPOTHETICALS. IT WAS RELEASED.
THAT’S A FACT.
>> THE AID WAS HELD UP.
THAT IS NOT A HYPOTHETICAL.
>> WAS THE AID RELEASED, IT WAS.
>> OKAY.
>> OKAY. YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS WHEN
WE TALK ABOUT THE CALL, AND YOU
SAID, YOU KNOW, I THINK I WON’T
PUT WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH, YOU
SAID IT’S NOT ADVISABLE TO HAVE
SOMEONE ASKING, A PRESIDENT
ASKING FOR A POLITICAL FAVOR
LIKE THAT, ASKING FOR AN
INVESTIGATION INTO AN AMERICAN
CITIZEN.
CITIZEN. YOU KNOW, I WENT BACK ACTUALLY
LOOKED AT YOUR RESIGNATION
LETTER, AND YOU SAID THROUGH IT
ALL, WE WERE ALWAYS PLACING
AMERICA FIRST.
AMERICA FIRST. HOW IS IT ASKING A FOREIGN
COUNTRY TO INVESTIGATE YOUR
POLITICAL RIVAL PUTTING AMERICA
FIRST.
FIRST. WHOSE INTEREST IS THAT IN, IS IT
IN AMERICA’S INTEREST OR THE
PRESIDENT’S PERSONAL INTEREST.
>> UKRAINE HAS ALWAYS BEEN AN
ISSUE WITH CORRUPTION.
WE ALWAYS KNEW THERE WAS
CORRUPTION.
CORRUPTION. >> BUT THE CORRUPTION MENTIONED
BY THE PRESIDENT HERE HAS TO DO
WITH JOE BIDEN AND THE DNC
SERVER.
SERVER. THOSE ARE THE TWO VERY SPECIFIC
SERVERS.
SERVERS. >> AMERICANS SHOULD WANT TO KNOW
THE ANSWER OF DID BIDEN PRESSURE
THE PROSECUTOR TO, YOU KNOW, TO
DO WHAT HE DID, AND I THINK
THERE’S A REAL QUESTION THERE.
YOU CAN QUESTION THE PRESIDENT
BUT YOU ALSO HAVE TO QUESTION
WHAT BIDEN DID.
>> THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS THERE,
BUT LET ME ASK YOU THIS -- LET’S
DO A WEIGHING OF INTEREST.
AS BETWEEN AMERICA’S INTEREST
AND MAKING SURE UKRAINE IS ABLE
TO BATTLE THE AGGRESSION OF
RUSSIA, OUR ADVERSARY AS YOU
WELL KNOW, AND WHETHER THERE’S A
U.S. INTEREST IN LOOKING INTO
JOE BIDEN’S SON IN THE DNC
SERVER, WHICH IS THE GREATER
INTEREST.
INTEREST. >> YOU CAN’T PUT IT INTO THAT
AND MAKE SURE THAT’S EQUAL.
YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE FACT IS
WE SHOULD ASK WAS BIDEN’S
POSITION ABUSED.
POSITION ABUSED. THE SAME WAY YOU’RE LOOKING AT
THE PRESIDENT, YOU HAVE TO LOOK
AT BIDEN, AND NOT ONLY THAT,
SAVANNAH, PRESIDENT TRUMP WAS SO
STRONG ON UKRAINE, HE HAD
STRONGER POLICY ON UKRAINE THAN
PRESIDENT OBAMA DID.
SO THIS WAS A STRONG
RELATIONSHIP.
RELATIONSHIP. THE UKRAINIAN AMBASSADOR WAS ONE
OF MY CLOSEST ALLIES ON THE
SECURITY COUNCIL.
SECURITY COUNCIL. >> LET’S TALK ABOUT ANOTHER
EXPLOSIVE STORY THAT YOU HAVE IN
YOUR BOOK WHERE YOU TALK ABOUT
HOW THEN CHIEF OF STAFF JOHN
KELLY AND REX TILLERSON, THEN
THE SECRETARY OF STATE CAME TO
YOU AT ONE POINT AND PULLED YOU
ASIDE AND SAID THEY WERE TRYING
TO QUOTE SAVE THE COUNTRY AND
ACTIVELY WORKING TO RESIST THE
PRESIDENT.
PRESIDENT. CAN YOU TELL US WHAT HAPPENED IN
THAT MOMENT?
THAT MOMENT? >> YEAH, WE WERE HAVING A
MEETING WITHIN THE OVAL OFFICE,
REX AND I DISAGREED ON AN ISSUE.
I PLAY IT ALL OUT IN THE BOOK,
BUT BASICALLY WE WENT TO JOHN
KELLY’S OFFICE, AND IT WAS A
LONG TWO-HOUR MEETING WHERE THEY
BASICALLY SAID THAT THEY WERE
NOT TRYING TO UNDERMINE THE
PRESIDENT.
PRESIDENT. THEY WERE TRYING TO SAVE THE
COUNTRY.
COUNTRY. BUT THIS WAS THE ISSUE IS THIS
WASN’T THAT THEY THOUGHT THERE
WAS A ROGUE PRESIDENT IN THE
WHITE HOUSE.
WHITE HOUSE. THIS WAS THE FACT THAT THEY
DISAGREED WITH HIM ON POLICY.
THEY DIDN’T THINK WE NEEDED TO
MOVE THE EMBASSY FROM TEL AVIV
TO JERUSALEM.
TO JERUSALEM. >> YOU SAY IN THE BOOK, THESE
WERE DANGEROUS PEOPLE.
YOU WRITE THAT IN THE BOOK.
>> I MEAN, I WAS A GOVERNOR.
AND IF PEOPLE IN MY CABINET
TRIED TO UNDERMINE ME, IT’S VERY
DANGEROUS.
DANGEROUS. >> DID YOU SAY THAT RIGHT THEN
AND THERE TO THEM, HEY, GUYS,
THIS IS WAY OUT OF LINE.
>> THEY TOTALLY KNEW THAT I WAS
NOT GOING TO BE WITH THEM.
>> DID YOU SAY THAT?
>> IT WAS VERY AWARE.
>> AND DID YOU TELL THE
PRESIDENT AFTERWARDS, HEY --
>> I TOLD THEM, IF THIS IS WHAT
THE PRESIDENT WANTED AND
ESPECIALLY WE WERE TALKING ABOUT
THE ISSUE OF PALESTINIAN AID
THAT WE THEEDNEEDED TO DO THAT.
>> DID YOU SAY TO THE PRESIDENT,
HEY, YOU GOT TWO GUYS WORKING
AGAINST YOU.
AGAINST YOU. >> THE PRESIDENT WAS AWARE, YES.
>> YOU TOLD HIM?
>> YES.
>> YES. >> I LOOK AT WHAT YOU HAVE SAID
ABOUT TILLERSON AND KELLY, YOU
SAID THEY’RE DANGEROUS PEOPLE.
YOU SAID THEY WERE PURSUING A
POLICY AGENDA, THAT THEY WEREN’T
REALLY TRYING TO SAVE THE
COUNTRY.
COUNTRY. I THINK ABOUT GENERAL JOHN
KELLY, HE SPENT MORE THAN FOUR
DECADES IN UNIFORM, HE LOST HIS
SON IN BATTLE.
YOU WRITE IT VERY DRAMATICALLY,
WHAT IS IT, AT STAKE IS THE U.S.
CONSTITUTION.
CONSTITUTION. NO DISAGREEMENT WITH THE
PRESIDENT NO MATTER HOW
HEARTFELT JUSTIFIES UNDERMINING
THE CONSTITUTION.
THE CONSTITUTION. JOHN KELLY LOST HIS OWN SON IN
BATTLE.
BATTLE. HE KNOWS WHAT IT IS TO TAKE AN
OATH TO THE CONSTITUTION.
DID HE DESERVE A BETTER OR MORE
GENEROUS ASSESSMENT FROM YOU?
>> FIRST OF ALL, I DIDN’T CALL
THEM DANGEROUS PEOPLE.
WHAT I SAID IS WHAT THEY WERE
TRYING TO DO IS DANGEROUS.
I HAVE ALWAYS REFERRED TO JOHN
KELLY AS A PATRIOT.
I AM A MILITARY WIFE.
U RESPECT HIM AND HIS FAMILY FOR
WHAT THEY WENT THROUGH BUT TO
UNDERMINE A PRESIDENT BECAUSE
YOU THINK YOU KNOW BETTER THAN
HIM IS WRONG.
IT’S WRONG WHETHER IT’S A
REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT AND A
DEMOCRAT PRESIDENT AND AT THAT
POINT, IF YOU DISAGREED WITH
GETTING OUT OF THE IRAN DEAL, IF
YOU DISAGREED WITH MOVING OUR
EMBASSY OR GETTING OUT OF THE
PARIS CLIMATE AGREEMENT, GO TELL
THE PRESIDENT AND IF YOU STILL
DON’T LIKE IT, QUIT.
>> YOU MENTIONED A COUPLE OF
TIMES IN YOUR BOOK, YOU YOURSELF
DID CONFRONT THE PRESIDENT OVER
A COUPLE OF MATTERS.
YOU MENTIONED IN PARTICULAR, HIS
NEWS CONFERENCE WITH VLADIMIR
PUTIN AND HELSINKI IN WHICH WE
SEEMED TO SIDE WITH PUTIN OVER
OUR OWN INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES.
YOU SAY YOU CALLED THE
PRESIDENT, YOU SAID I TOLD HIM
YOU MADE IT SOUND LIKE WE ARE
BEHOLDEN TO RUSSIA AND THE
PRESIDENT WAS SURPRISED, NO ONE
AROUND HIM CHARACTERIZED THE
PRESS CONFERENCE IN THAT WAY.
I WAS ALWAYS HONEST WITH THE
PRESIDENT EVEN WHEN OTHERS
WEREN’T.
WEREN’T. REALLY, YOU WERE THE ONLY
PERSON, I MEAN, THAT NEWS
CONFERENCE WAS GLOBALLY
CONDEMNED BECAUSE OF THAT
MOMENT, BUT YOU WERE THE ONLY
PERSON IN THE ADMINISTRATION WHO
SAID, HEY, THAT DIDN’T LOOK SO
GREAT.
GREAT. >> THAT’S WHAT HE TOLD ME.
I MEAN, WHEN I SAID I WANTED TO
MEET WITH HIM, AND I GO THROUGH
THAT IN THE BOOK, WHEN I SAID I
WANTED TO MEET WITH HIM, AND I
SAID, LOOK, THIS SOUNDED SOFT,
AND HE SAID, REALLY, JOHN KELLY
WAS IN THE ROOM WITH ME WHEN I
HAD THIS MEETING, AND HE LOOKED
AT JOHN, AND HE SAID ALL OF YOU
GUYS SAID I DID GREAT.
>> THIS IS THE SAME JOHN KELLY
WHO YOU SAY IS ACTIVELY WORKING
TO UNDERMINE HIM BECAUSE HE’S A
DANGER TO THE COUNTRY.
EXPLAIN THAT.
EXPLAIN THAT. >> YOU ASK HIM THOSE QUESTIONS
BECAUSE I HAD OPENLY SAID I KNOW
HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT RUSSIA.
HE HAS BEEN STRONGER ON RUSSIA
THAN ANY PREVIOUS PRESIDENT, AND
YOU CAN LOOK AT NUMEROUS RESULTS
OF THAT.
OF THAT. BUT THE ISSUE WAS THAT ON THAT
TOPIC, NO ONE HAD SAID ANYTHING
TO HIM.
TO HIM. AND I THOUGHT IT WAS HUGELY
IMPORTANT, AND YOU’LL SEE LATER
HE COMES OUT AND HE COMES OUT
MUCH STRONGER ON RUSSIA, AND THE
POINT IS, WHEN I HAD MY CABINET,
WHAT I ASKED MY CABINET WAS BE
CREATIVE, HELP SERVE THE PEOPLE,
AND TELL ME IF YOU SEE SOMETHING
WRONG.
WRONG. I DID FOR HIM WHAT I WANTED MY
CABINET TO DO FOR ME.
>> I AM WAY OVER TIME, BUT LET
ME JUST QUICKLY BECAUSE IT’S
BEEN OUT THERE AND YOU WORKED IN
THIS ADMINISTRATION, DID YOU
EVER HAVE ANY DOUBT ABOUT THE
FITNESS OF THIS PRESIDENT?
>> I NEVER DID.
>> ANY DOUBT ABOUT HIS MENTAL
ACUITY.
ACUITY. >> I NEVER DID.
>> ANY QUESTION ABOUT HIS
TRUTHFULNESS, HIS ABILITY TO
TELL THE TRUTH?
>> SAVANNAH, I TALKED TO HIM
MULTIPLE TIMES AND WHEN I HAD
ISSUES HE ALWAYS HEARD ME OUT.
I NEVER HAD ANY CONCERNS ON
WHETHER HE COULD HANDLE THE JOB,
EVER.
EVER. >> AND WHAT ABOUT HIS
TRUTHFULNESS, DID YOU THINK HE
WAS A TRUTHFUL PERSON.
>> YES, IN EVERY INSTANCE THAT I
DEALT WITH HIM, HE WAS TRUTHFUL,
HE LISTENED AND HE WAS GREAT TO
WORK.
WORK. >> AMBASSADOR HALEY, THANK YOU