CNN "The Situation Room" - Transcript: Interview With Maine Senator Angus King
Interview
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
BLITZER: We will see what happens in that trial. Evan, thank you very much.
Joining us now, Senator Angus King. He's an independent. He serves on both the Intelligence and Armed Services Committees.
Senator, thanks so much for joining us.
SEN. ANGUS KING (I), MAINE: Sure, Wolf.
BLITZER: So all of a sudden, a pretty dramatic accusation by the president of the United States today. He says that Putin, the Russian president, is now going to be pushing and meddling in the upcoming midterm elections, but pushing for Democrats, Democrats, to win.
That's what -- we put it up on the screen, the president's tweet over there. You're on the Intelligence Committee. Have you seen any evidence that the Russians will meddle in the midterm elections to try to benefit the Democrats against the republic?
KING: Well, I don't want to say what I have seen or not seen as a member of the Intelligence Committee, but I think you can go on what Dan Coats said today, which is, he hasn't seen any such evidence.
And the evidence, the only evidence we saw was last week, when President Putin said himself, I supported Donald Trump in 2016. He answered the question affirmatively in Helsinki.
So I don't know of any evidence about it. And I don't understand why the president is saying it. Now, one of the things I have been saying for a year-and-a-half is, Putin as an opportunist, and he is going to make trouble wherever he can. I don't think that means he's going to support Democrats or Republicans or anybody else.
[18:10:02]
His job is to sow discord and undermine this country and undermine NATO and all of those kinds of things. So, the president's tweet is kind of interesting, but I don't think there's any basis for it.
BLITZER: But shouldn't the president be railing against Russian meddling in the U.S. election, midterm elections, irrespective of who Putin might be wanting to help?
KING: Of course he should. And that's the missed opportunity for the last year-and-a-half.
The problem is, the president doesn't seem to be able to separate the collusion issue between his campaign, whether there was any collusion between his campaign and the Russians, and the fact that the Russians did in fact attack our democracy.
The sad part is, by not making that distinction, he has maintained this idea it's a hoax, it's a witch-hunt, and it has paralyzed our ability to effectively respond to an ongoing challenge from Russia. That's what's really unfortunate.
BLITZER: And it's very amazing that, immediately after the summit, which was a week ago Monday in Helsinki, the president was contradicting his intelligence chiefs.
Just yesterday, he called Russia's 2016 election meddling a big hoax. Why haven't members of Congress come out more forcefully, as they did immediately after the Helsinki press conference, to defend the U.S. intelligence community?
KING: Well, I think part of the problem is, these charges come so thick and fast. It's -- you got to sort of be on alert to be responsive to them.
But I think you're going to see members of Congress responding. But today, as you showed in the intro to your program, there are four or five different things to respond to, everything from trade issues to supposed assistance to the Democrats, all of those kinds of things being confused.
BLITZER: Here's what the problem is. And it's a major problem, because the president's attacks on the Mueller-Russia investigation, calling it all a hoax, a vicious hoax, a witch-hunt, in his words, 60 percent, according to a brand-new poll, 60 percent of Republicans say they trust President Trump more than they trust U.S. intelligence agencies.
This is a Quinnipiac University poll up -- 60 percent to 27 percent among Republicans. Among Democrats, 1 percent say they trust Trump, 93 percent say they trust the U.S. intelligence community. KING: Well, and when you talk about the intelligence community,
you're talking about career professionals. You're talking about people that have been there for 20 and 30 years. They're not partisans.
And, in fact, Clapper and Brennan were both -- between the two of them, they had 80 years of experience in the intelligence community. They weren't partisans. I have no idea what party they belong to.
And when you attack that, you're really attacking facts. You're attacking data.
BLITZER: But this could clearly be a national security issue, this kind of sense among at least a majority of Republicans, according to this Quinnipiac poll, the fact that they believe Trump more than they believe the intelligence community.
If there's a real serious intelligence-related issue, that could have national security ramifications.
KING: It is a national security issue, because there are two reasons that it's impairing our ability to respond to this attack.
One is, we need presidential leadership to pull together all the aspects of the United States government to meet this. The problem is, the response is scattered all over the government, CIA, FBI, Department of Homeland Security. And we need some kind of coordinated response. And there isn't it. That's number one.
Number two, the best defense, Wolf, from talking to people in Eastern Europe that have been living with Russia meddling for decades, the best defense is for the people to understand that it's happened.
And by continuing to deny it, it's robbed us of the ability to have the American people say, oh, it's just the Russians again. And that's the best defense that we have. And that's why this is so unfortunate that the president has continued for a year-and-a-half. And we now know he was briefed on, I think January 7, something like that, before his inauguration, 2017, in detail the sources and methods that got him -- that got us this information.
BLITZER: He was fully briefed by the U.S. intelligence community two weeks before he was inaugurated.
KING: Right.
BLITZER: But he also -- earlier, I think it was August 17 of 2016, while he was the candidate, the Republican nominee, he also received a similar briefing from the U.S. intelligence community.
KING: And the problem is, as I said at the beginning, if he could distinguish the two issues and say, my campaign didn't collude, and if they did, they're going to be punished and go the full extent of the law, but what the Russians did was wrong, they attacked our democracy, and we're not going to let them do it again.
He hasn't been able to make that distinction and make that speech that I think is really necessary.
BLITZER: Has Richard Burr, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Republican, has he and other Republicans on your committee, do you believe, done enough to speak up to defend the U.S. intelligence community and to rail against what the president is accusing them of doing?
[18:15:07]
KING: I think yes.
And I think Richard Burr deserves an enormous amount of credit. He served on Donald Trump's foreign policy advisory committee during the campaign. He's a Republican, a loyal Republican.
He has specifically endorsed the findings of the intelligence community about what happened. Just today, he endorsed the FISA warrant that was issued against Carter Page, saying there wasn't any funny business with that, it was justified. And he has stepped up, I think, in a big way.
And that's one of the reasons that our committee is still functioning on a bipartisan basis, and we're going to get to the bottom of this.
BLITZER: In total contrast to the House Intelligence Committee, where Devin Nunes, the chairman, has taken a totally different stance.
KING: You said it. I didn't.
BLITZER: Well, you can say it if you want.
(LAUGHTER)
KING: Of course. No.
But Richard Burr and Mark Warner have really served the country well and I think deserve some serious credit.
BLITZER: They have bipartisan operation. I have covered intelligence for a long time in the House and the Senate. It's supposed to work together. This is national security, the intelligence community.
And it's shocking to see what's going on the House side. The Senate is just still working the way it's supposed to be.
KING: It's shocking, and it's undermining of national security.
BLITZER: Senator, thanks so much for coming in.
KING: Thank you, Wolf.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source