CNN Wolf Blitzer Reports - Transcript

CNN

SHOW: CNN WOLF BLITZER REPORTS 17:00

July 21, 2004 Wednesday

Transcript # 072100CN.V67

HEADLINE: Interview with Romanian Prime Minister; A look at up Coming Democratic Convention in Boston

GUESTS: Edward Flynn, Adrian Nastase, Saxby Chambliss, Ron Wyden

BYLINE: Wolf Blitzer, Matthew Chance, Dana Bash, Jamie McIntyre, Bob Franken, Kimberly Osias

HIGHLIGHT:
An interview with Romanian Prime Minister Adrian Nastase. A look at the up coming Democratic Convention in Boston
Joining us now from Capitol Hill, two key members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Georgia Republican Saxby Chambliss and the Oregon Democrat Ron Wyden.

Senator Chambliss, let me begin with you.

Your colleague, Senator Smith, just said Sandy Berger has been charged with certain things. As far as I can tell, he hasn't been charged with anything yet, has he?

SEN. SAXBY CHAMBLISS ®, GEORGIA: Well, I think Gordon was probably using that term a little loosely, but certainly it's been indicated and I think he's even admitted, Wolf, that he did, under whatever circumstances, remove classified documents from the Archives building.

And I don't know that there's any crime that was committed or one that's been-he's been charged with. But certainly it is a very, very serious national security offense.

BLITZER: Well, what is your worst fear, Senator Chambliss, that what, what happened? Because these were copies-these were copies of top secret documents. The originals, of course, remain in the National Archives.

CHAMBLISS: Well, I understand that he went back two times after the original time he was there and apparently took the same document, for whatever reason. I don't know what his intent was. Nobody knows that but Sandy Berger, who I have great respect for and have admired. He's been a good public servant, did a good job I thought as national security adviser.

But he was the top national security adviser in the United States. He knows how sensitive classified documents are. And for him to remove certain documents that he knew to be classified, return some of them and then say, well, the dog ate the rest of them or something else happened to the rest of them is really inexcusable. Now, whether that constitutes a crime or not, that's what the investigation is all about right now. It all to be flushed out. And then we can decide whether he ought to be charged. But certainly it's a very serious breach of national security.

BLITZER: Senator Wyden, his attorney, Lanny Breuer, was on my program 24 hours ago and he acknowledges that notes that should have been reviewed by the staff of the National Archives before he took those notes out, he took them deliberately, knowing he was violating national security regulations, the Archive regulations.

But he says the classified documents that he took out were inadvertent. They got tied up in some other papers in his briefcase and it was simply sloppiness, an innocent mistake. Do you accept that?

SEN. RON WYDEN (D), OREGON: Mr. Berger has already made it clear that what he did was a mistake. There's an independent inquiry. And, at this point, allegations are swirling around Washington, D.C., about Mr. Berger like they're confetti in the wind.

Let's let the independent inquiry go forward. To me, the bottom line is, the 9/11 Commission has indicated that they were able to get all the information they needed. So it's hard to see how any of this is going to discredit the work of the 9/11 Commission. What I want to do is get serious about bipartisan efforts to improve intelligence. That's what I'm going to be working on and not something that may end up being a distraction.

BLITZER: Well, when you say a distraction, what is your suspicion? So many of your Democratic colleagues are accusing the Republicans, the Justice Department, or at least Republicans in the Justice Department or elsewhere in the administration, of deliberately timing the leak of this to embarrass John Kerry because Sandy Berger is a former adviser to him or embarrass the Democrats on the eve of their own convention and deflect attention from the 9/11 report that's coming out tomorrow. What's your concern?

WYDEN: Nobody is oblivious to the fact that we are moving into the fall of an even-numbered year and everything is going to be seen through a political filter.

But I come back to the bottom line. The 9/11 Commission has indicated they were able to get everything they need. That's a bipartisan commission. They've made it clear now they were able to do their work. So it's hard to see how any of this, and particularly some of these far-fetched ideas, are going to discredit their work. We ought to be bipartisan. Senator Lott and I introduced a significant bill last week, for example, to deal with the fact that the CIA would have kept 50 percent of the report that our committee came out with last week.

They would have blacked out 50 percent of it. Those are the kinds of things we need to change. We ought to do it in a bipartisan way.

BLITZER: Senator Chambliss, I assume you've been briefed on this matter to a certain degree. The documents that Sandy Berger himself says were lost, that he discarded them, how high was that classification? And worst-case scenario, if it got into the wrong hands, how much damage, if any, significant damage would there really be to U.S. national security?

CHAMBLISS: Actually, Wolf, I have not been briefed on this. I don't know what the document was. It's now been reported that it relates to the 1999 millennium incident. And if that's the case, if it details how we were able to figure out the gentleman that was crossing the border, the terrorist that was crossing the border with intentions of blowing up LAX and reveal sources and methods, it could be very damaging.

That's why it's so sensitive. That's why it's classified and that's why you don't release it. Now, that's not being partisan. That's being factual. And I think Ron and I can agree that, if there were sensitive sources of materials, information in there, and they were taken out by Sandy Berger, that's not sloppiness. There's more to it than that.

And it's not being political. I don't care whether he's a Republican or Democrat. If you take classified documents, you take classified documents, and you know better than to do that.

(CROSSTALK)

WYDEN: The only thing I would add is that there is nothing in Sandy Berger's history that he would compromise this country's security. Certainly, you can differ with his political views. And I have over the years. But there's nothing in his history that he would sacrifice the well-being and the national security of our country for politics.

CHAMBLISS: And with that, I would agree. Sandy was a good public servant and did a good job. That's why this is so odd and so bizarre. I really wish he'd come forward and tell the truth about it and let's put it to rest.

But that just simply hadn't been done. And I have no idea whether the Kerry campaign was in any way involved. I certainly don't think that Senator Kerry would be involved in anything like this. So let's make that clear, too. But he was his national security adviser.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Senator Chambliss, why do you think he's not telling the truth? His lawyer told us yesterday he's been fully cooperating with the Justice Department investigators. He's more than happy to go and do whatever they basically want. Why do you suspect he's not telling the truth?

CHAMBLISS: Well, it is-undoubtedly, there is a criminal investigation ongoing. And I'm sure there's some hesitancy on their part to come forward.

But that would be the easiest way to put this to rest in a hurry. If they would just come forward and say, look, this is what happened, I was wrong and here's what I did, you know, we could move ahead and the criminal investigation could proceed or it would be dropped or whatever. But to this point, they haven't done that, for whatever reason.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: All right, Senator Wyden, we only have 10 seconds, Senator Wyden, so go ahead. I'll give you the last word.

WYDEN: The 9/11 Commission indicated we missed a lot of signals. Some of those were missed on the Bush watch. Some of them were missed on the Clinton watch. Let's work in a bipartisan way to deal with that and not something that may end up being a significant distraction.

BLITZER: All right, Senator Wyden, unfortunately, we have to leave it there, Senator Chambliss. Thanks to both of you for joining us, both members of the Senate Intelligence Committee.