CNN "The Situation Room" - Transcript: Interview With Senator Mark Warner

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BLITZER: Because the stakes are pretty significant in this particular case.

Manu Raju, thank you very much.

Manu is going to be back in a little while. He's done some serious investigation of the president's spy claim, how it originated. We are going to have the report. That's coming up as well.

But, right now, joining us, Democratic Senator Mark Warner. He's the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Senator, thanks so much for joining us.

SEN. MARK WARNER (D), VIRGINIA: Thank you, Wolf.

BLITZER: All right, quickly, if you can, what can you tell us about what Manu just reported on this former staffer of your committee?

WARNER: This is an ongoing legal proceeding. It's now in the hands of the Department of Justice. And I will have nothing to add today.

BLITZER: Is it a -- what, can you give us, without getting into specifics, just the nature of the investigation?

WARNER: Wolf, Wolf, I -- I just -- this is a legal proceeding that is being carried out, and I have got no comment today. No further comment today.

BLITZER: All right. I will let you go on this. But can you just tell us if it involves the overall Russia

investigation?

WARNER: Wolf, you can ask it a half-dozen different ways. I got nothing else for you on this matter today.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Obviously a very sensitive issue. We totally understand.

We now have heard the chairman of your committee, Senator Richard Burr -- and I know you work very closely with him -- the House speaker, Paul Ryan, Senator Lindsey Graham, among other Republicans, rejecting the president's claim that the FBI planted a spy in his presidential campaign.

[18:10:01]

Why won't these Republicans say this directly, though, to the president?

WARNER: Wolf, that's a great question.

I mean, the truth is, we all came out. We all heard the same pieces of information. The FBI acted totally appropriately.

And what is outrageous, though, and, frankly, should have gotten more attention was that the White House and at least one of the allies were trying to force the director of the FBI, the head of the direction of national intelligence, and the deputy attorney general to disclose classified information about an individual in a partisan-only setting, bypassing the way the process has been set up.

If there's top-secret classified information that needs to be relayed, it's relayed bipartisan to the so-called Gang of Eight. Unfortunately, this White House was trying to completely bypass, run a fast one by the Gang of Eight and force the head of the FBI to reveal classified information on an individual's name.

Luckily, the heads of our intelligence community and FBI stood true to their oath of office and did not reveal information. And I think everyone, other than perhaps the White House, agrees that there was no there there.

BLITZER: Can you tell us who this ally that the president, the White House had who wanted to do this?

WARNER: There's been speculation on that. I will just leave it at what I have said. It was the White House and one of their allies.

But, other than that, everybody else heard the same message. And I give a great deal of credit to my not only Democratic, but Republican colleagues as well who have been willing to push back on the president's latest fantasy.

BLITZER: I assume you're talking about Devin Nunes, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. Can you tell us if that's the case?

WARNER: I'm going to leave it where I stated.

BLITZER: All right.

You have also written to the FBI director and the deputy attorney general for confirmation that none of the information that the so- called Gang of Eight received at that highly classified briefing about the FBI confidential source made its way into the hands of the president's legal team. Have you received a response?

WARNER: We have not received a response.

As a matter of fact, again, one of the things that was so inappropriate about this attempted end-run around the Gang of Eight and trying to share and force classified information to a partisan- only meeting was that the president's -- not only his chief of staff, but his lawyer, his lawyer who is involved with his potential collusion activities, was trying to show up at this Gang of Eight meeting.

Completely inappropriate and, frankly, a little bit embarrassing.

BLITZER: The Justice Department's inspector general report is expected in the coming days to fault James Comey, the fired FBI director, his handling of the Clinton e-mail investigation. Do you accept that James Comey violated protocol?

WARNER: Wolf, I would like to actually see the inspector general's report before I comment on it.

I know pieces have been leaking out. As I have tried throughout this whole investigation, I would like that reserve judgment until I look at the whole report. There was clearly a lot of controversy about how Mr. Comey handled the Clinton tapes, the Clinton e-mails. But let's hear what the I.G. has to say first.

BLITZER: Earlier today, the president tweeted this.

I will read it to you: "When will people start saying thank you, Mr. President, for firing James Comey?"

If the inspector general's report is really very tough on Comey in a bunch of areas involving the Hillary Clinton e-mail investigation, will you agree with the president that he was right to fire him?

WARNER: Listen, I will look at the inspector general's report, but what we know from the president's own lips on national TV was the reason he fired Jim Comey was to try to get rid of the Russia investigation or get rid of the whole Russia thing.

And I think that firing was completely inappropriate if he was trying to stop an ongoing investigation of his or people affiliated with him activities in terms of potentially being involved with Russia and their interference in the 2016 elections. BLITZER: Yes, we're told this inspector general's report -- Michael

Horowitz is highly respected, the inspector general over at the Justice Department -- he's prepared some 500 pages, going through all of what Comey and others did in that Hillary Clinton investigation.

It's going to be very tough, we're told, on Comey. Does it weaken Comey's standing, though, as a potential witness in the Mueller investigation?

WARNER: You know, Wolf, fair question.

I think there was, obviously, a lot of consternation about Comey's reopening of the Hillary Clinton e-mail so close to the election, and then closing it back up literally three or four days before the election.

I'm not going to -- I want to see the inspector general's report before I make that -- any comment. People -- your characterization or others. Nobody has seen the actual report.

[18:15:08]

But what we know is that this president fired Jim Comey, told the Russians that he fired him because he thought he was a -- involved with the Russian thing, went on national TV and said he fired Jim Comey because of the Russia thing.

And that was because there was an investigation into Russian interference in the election, also any collusion with the Trump campaign. The firing, I still think, was terribly inappropriate.

And let's face it, that was what birthed, in many ways, the Mueller investigation. If you look at the president's actions, if you look at his constant haranguing of Mueller, if you look at his unhappiness with the fact that the attorney general recused himself, if you look at him trying to force out these false stories about spy gate or whatever he wants to call it, these are not the actions of somebody who says he's got nothing to hide.

So, this is going to continue to play out. Our bipartisan investigation will continue to play out. The Mueller investigation will continue to play out. I want it to be done as soon as it can be. But we have got to have all the facts.

BLITZER: I assume you agree, though, that Comey was wrong in revealing all the information from the FBI investigation, whether in July or only a few days before the election.

Usually, the FBI makes recommendations, but it's up to the Justice Department, the attorney general, the deputy attorney general, or a U.S. prosecutor or U.S. attorney to announce whether or not charges are filed.

Will Comey's behavior undermine the entire Mueller investigation as a result?

WARNER: First of all, I do think it's appropriate. It's traditional

that the FBI doesn't comment when they simply -- particularly when they don't proceed on a case.

But let's -- we're going to get this inspector general's report in appropriate due time. I think some people have said, you know, tomorrow or early next week. Let's look at that, and then I will be happy to comment.

But the Mueller investigation, which was started because -- it wasn't started by Jim Comey. It was started by the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, who drew a conclusion that there needed to be an investigation to carry on an investigation that, obviously, the president had tried to stop by firing Jim Comey into Russian involvement in the 2016 election.

And I'm glad that investigation has gone on, because what we know now, a year-and-a-half later, is that the Russians massively intervened. They did it to help Trump and hurt Clinton. Trump intelligence officials have confirmed that. We as -- our committee has confirmed that. They touched 21 states' electoral systems. And we're still not fully secure for the elections come this fall.

They used social media in ways that were unprecedented. And we still need to get our arms around that and put some guardrails going forward. And we know that so far out of the Mueller investigation, there's been 15 indictments, including the indictment of the president's campaign manager, and four guilty pleas.

So, there's been a lot of production already from the Mueller team. And, obviously, if there's already guilty pleas, that was necessary to take place.

BLITZER: All right, I want to talk to you about ZTE, the Chinese telecom company.

But I just will point out Comey himself testified before Congress that he launched the investigation in July of 2016, when they got some suspicions of some Russian activities going on involving the Trump campaign.

Let's talk about ZTE for a moment. As you know, there's a deal been reached between the U.S. government and the Chinese that the Chinese will pay $1 billion, $400 million, in escrow, allow U.S. experts to oversee what is going on.

And as a result, ZTE is going to be back in business. Is this a good deal?

WARNER: Wolf, this is a horrible deal for our country's national security.

And don't take my word. Take the word of Trump's CIA director. Take the word of Trump's director of national intelligence. Take of the word of the fact that the Pentagon, which has in effect banned ZTE equipment. Take the word of all the folks that say this is compromised equipment. My And Background was in the wireless industry, in the telecommunications business. When those experts say don't, buy this equipment, I would follow that advice.

And, candidly, I was pleased when the president first put these strict requirements on ZTE and said we were going to stop purchasing this kind of equipment. What concerned me was, he immediately buckled once the Chinese pushed back.

And I understand he's trying to start or engage in a trade war with China. Use other items other than national security concerns like this equipment vendor that is penetrating many of our networks now as a trading chip.

The idea that a billion-dollar fine and putting some compliance officers into this company just doesn't cut the mustard.

BLITZER: Senator Warner, thanks so much for joining us.

WARNER: Thank you, Wolf.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source