CNN "The Situation Room" - Transcript: Interview With Senator Angus King

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BLITZER: All right. Everybody, stand by. There's more we need on this discuss.

But joining us right now, Senator Angus King. He's an independent who serves on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Senator, thanks so much for joining us.

How significant do you believe it is that the information we learned today from the special counsel, how significant is this information?

SEN. ANGUS KING (I), MAINE: Well, I think what's really significant is the question you asked a few minutes ago, and that is, what other information other than the Moscow project, the Moscow deal, does Michael Cohen have to offer the special counsel?

You could cover that subject in an hour. There have been 70 hours of interviews, according to published reports. So this is significant in and of itself, because it indicates a connection with Russia that, frankly, was pretty much dismissed or denied throughout the campaign.

But, also, I think the more important is, what don't we know? What is Michael Cohen testifying to, what information is he offering on a whole range of other subjects? And I think that's that's the bombshell today.

I mean, the Moscow project, I can't say too many people are surprised that this was something that they were interested in. Donald Trump had been interested in doing business in Moscow for years. And the fact that it continued into the campaign, I don't find terribly surprising.

You got to remind yourself, Wolf, this is a president with vast business interests across the world who hasn't divested himself of a dime of his businesses. He's still the owner of this business. He's turned over management to his sons, but he's the beneficial owner and still has -- whatever their ownership structure is.

So, there's no blind trust here -- or I guess you would call it a blind trust with 20/20 vision. This is -- we don't know what other businesses there are in other parts of the world or in Moscow or anywhere else.

But I think, as I said, the important part of Michael Cohen today is, what did he say other than about the Moscow project?

BLITZER: Well, do you believe, Senator, that this proves that the Russians had leverage over President Trump?

KING: Well, it certainly indicates that they had some -- that the president was interested in doing this deal. I don't know if I would escalate it to say it was leverage.

But he did have something that he wanted from Russia during the early part of 2018, and everybody knows that you don't do big deals in Moscow without the approval of the government. And the government in this case is Vladimir Putin.

So, clearly, there was an ongoing relationship and a desire to do that deal going into the middle of the presidential election, at least as far as June of 2016. So, insofar as, did the president want something for Russia during that period, I think the answer is clearly yes. He wanted to build the Trump Tower in Moscow.

BLITZER: Cohen says he misled Congress, your committee, the House Intelligence Committee as well, to protect the president. Do you think President Trump actually directed him to do that?

KING: I have no idea. I have no information or any way to evaluate that question.

I think -- I'm sure that's something the special counsel is looking into. Whether there was some kind of instruction or coordination between the White House and Michael Cohen during that period, I don't have any evidence on that and really can't speculate, Wolf.

BLITZER: The president says that Michael Cohen is lying to get a reduced prison sentence.

But he also says that if he had gone through with the Trump Tower Moscow project, there wouldn't be anything wrong with that. What's your reaction to that?

KING: Well, you know, I think the only question is, there wouldn't be anything wrong with it if he wasn't president of the United States or within a few months of running -- or he was running for president of the United States, and basically saying -- I think you played a clip that said, you know, no interests in Russia, no deals in Russia.

And then I guess that was technically true at the time of that clip. But my understanding is, earlier in the campaign, he made similar statements.

[18:20:05]

So I think, clearly, there was some interest there. The other piece that was touched upon in your clip, Wolf, is that the pardon is not off the table for Manafort.

That is dangling a pardon. I was a governor. I had the power of the pardon. And the idea of saying publicly a pardon is not off the table for somebody that might be a witness in a proceeding against me, I just -- I can't imagine doing something like that.

That is -- as I say, the term I would say is, he's dangling a pardon. He doesn't have to say, I'm going to give him a pardon. It's almost worse if he says I'm considering it, it's not off the table, because that's a signal to Manafort, hold out and you have got a good chance of getting a pardon.

BLITZER: Well, is that obstruction of justice?

KING: I'm not going to give it a legal characterization. But I would say it's very troubling.

BLITZER: Rudy Giuliani, the president's personal lawyer, says the president's answers to Mueller actually line up with Cohen's.

If that's true, Senator, why did the president call Michael Cohen a liar today?

KING: Well, I thought of exactly that same question. If they line up, then Michael Cohen wasn't lying. He lied -- I guess what they're saying is, he lied last September to the committee; therefore, he's a liar and can't be trusted in anything he's saying.

But it sounds like they're trying to have it both ways. If they're saying the president's answers which were just submitted line up with what Michael Cohen said, then it's hard to say he's not telling the truth about this whole -- the whole Moscow project.

BLITZER: Now that the special counsel has the president's written answers to the questions that he submitted, those written answers were presented to the special counsel the other day, and with the president crossing paths potentially with Putin at this weekend's G20 summit in Argentina, what do you make of the timing of all of this?

KING: Well, you know, I think it's funny that everybody is saying -- not everybody, but the president's partisan certainly are saying, let's get it over with, let's move the special counsel's work forward.

And then we have a major breakthrough in the case, and I read this afternoon that some of the president's partisans are saying, well, it's only timed to make the meeting with Putin more difficult, and the same thing happened with Helsinki.

I don't think there's anything special to read into the timing. I think the special counsel is moving at his own pace and moving forward based upon the information that they have. And he's going to continue to do so, at least if the president or the acting attorney general doesn't take steps to try to terminate or otherwise undermine the investigation.

That's why I have been one of the people around here saying, why can't we pass this bill to protect the special counsel? Mitch McConnell keeps saying, well, it's not necessary.

I'm afraid if you wait until the firing takes place, it's too late. And it's like we're going to build in fire department here, but we're not going to hire anybody for the fire department until there's a fire. I think it would be a hell of a mess if we wait until there's a firing and then Congress rushes around and tries to do something retroactively.

I don't think that should work -- that would work. That's why we need to do it now, and we should. And if everybody around here says the special counsel's investigation should go forward and be unimpeded, then let's put our money where our mouth is and pass that bill.

BLITZER: We now know that Michael Cohen wasn't honest when he came before your committee, the Senate Intelligence Committee, during his testimony. Will you have Michael Cohen back to testify again?

KING: That's a question that I'm going to defer to Richard Burr and Mark Warner, the chair and vice chair of the committee.

But I think it would be helpful if the committee could talk to him once again, given these revelations today. But that's -- I'm going to let them make that call.

BLITZER: Senator Angus King of Maine, one final question, Senator, before I let you go.

What about Donald Trump Jr.? You want him to testify before your committee?

KING: Again, I'm going to give you the same answer. I'm going to defer that to Mark Warner and Richard Burr. I think they will make the right call on that, and I have confidence.

We have been able to work very well together on a bipartisan basis. And I'm going to let them keep doing just that. I'm proud that we have been able to do what we have done so far, working in a bipartisan way. And I think that's the direction we're going to continue to go.

BLITZER: Yes, you have been able to do in the Senate, the Senate Intelligence Committee, what the House Intelligence Committee has clearly failed to do, work in that bipartisan manner.

Senator King, thanks so much for joining us.

KING: Thank you, Wolf.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source