THEY WERE, AND WHAT THEY LED TO, IF ANYTHING.
>> JOINING ME NOW IS MICHAEL LIGHTER CHIEF OF STAFF AT THE
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE.
WELCOME BACK. >> GOOD TO BE HERE, CHUCK.
>> LET'S ADDRESS THIS ISSUE OF THE ACCUSATION OF TRYING OF THE
PRESIDENT, SUPPOSEDLY MAKING A PERSONAL PLEA TO DAN COATS AT
DNI, MIKE ROGERS AT NSA, TO DEFINITIVELY SAY THERE WAS NO
EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION. WHAT DID YOU MAKE OF DIRECTOR
COATES NOT ADDRESSING THE ISSUE AT ALL, OTHER THAN SAYING, I'M
GOING TO KEEP IT PRIVATE? >> WELL, I THINK DIRECTOR
COATES, SOMEONE WHO I HAVE A GREAT DEAL OF RESPECT FOR, DID
EXACTLY WHAT A DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE SHOULD DO.
WHICH WAS, THANKS VERY MUCH, TAKE NOTES, STAY INTERNAL, AND
MAKE SURE THAT HE IS STILL FOCUSED ON BEING THE DIRECTOR OF
NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, AND NOT ISSUING STATEMENTS WHICH
FUNDAMENTALLY ARE AT ODDS WITH WHAT THE INTELLIGENCE
COMMUNITIES HAVE THUS FAR FACTORED.
>> LET ME PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE HERE.
OBVIOUSLY THE PRESIDENT IS GETTING CHASTISED BY MANY IN THE
INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY, MANY REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS WHO
SAY, HEY, THIS IS INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOR.
HE'S GETTING CRITICIZED BECAUSE THE ASSUMPTION IS HE'S GUILTY OR
THERE'S SOME GUILTY THERE. WHAT ABOUT FROM HIS POINT OF
VIEW? IF HE BELIEVES HE'S INNOCENT, OR
HE TELLS US HE'S INNOCENT, AND IF HE BELIEVES HE'S THIS
INNOCENT, AND HE FEELS THAT IT'S A WITCH HUNT, WHY WOULDN'T HE
MAKE THOSE PHONE CALCALLS? AND WHY WOULDN'T THAT BE
APPROPRIATE? >> WE KNOW THE PRESIDENT HAS NO
PROBLEM SAYING THAT HIMSELF. >> BUT IF YOU TRULY BELIEVE
THIS, WHY WOULDN'T HE ACT THIS WAY?
>> IT'S REALLY CLEAR. AND HONESTLY, IF HE WANTS TO
CALL UP HIS DIRECTOR OF HOMELAND SECURITY OR SECRE SECRETARY OF
OR ANYONE LIKE THAT AND SAY, HEY, WE AGREE WITH THE
PRESIDENT, THAT'S JUST FINE. BUT THE LINE HAS TO BE DRAWN,
REALLY, IN TWO PLACES. THE MOST SENSITIVE ONE IS THE
LAW ENFORCEMENT PEOPLE WHO WERE DOING THE INVESTIGATION.
AND THAT IS ONE THAT CAN'T BE VIOLATED.
YOU CAN'T GO AND CALL THE INVESTIGATORS AND SAY, LET ME
TELL YOU WHAT YOU NEED TO SAY AND WHAT YOU NEED TO FIND.
WE KNOW THAT'S A PROBLEM. BUT THE SECOND ONE, A LITTLE BIT
FARTHER WAY, EQUALLY PROBLEMATIC, AND TALKING TO THE
REST OF THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY AND SAY, HEY, DO YOU
HAVE ANYTHING ELSE IN THAT INTELLIGENCE BUCKET, AND EVEN IF
YOU DON'T, REALLY, I NEED YOU TO GET OUT THERE AND TALK ABOUT WHY
I'M NOT GUILTY. AND THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY
IS GOING TO SAY, WHAT THEY SHOULD SAY, WHAT DAN COATS, I
THINK, DID SAY WAS, NO, WE'RE THE REFEREE, WE SEE THE FACTS,
WE CALL THE FACTS, WE'RE NOT POLITICAL PARTISANS TO DEFEND
YOUR PRESIDENCY. WE RESPECT YOU, WE WORK FOR YOU,
BUT THAT'S NOT OUR ROLE. >> SO IS IT -- WALK ME THROUGH.
I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF VIEWERS WHO PROBABLY SIT THERE AND ARE
MORE CYNICAL THAN MOST OF US IN WASHINGTON AND SAY, PLEASE,
PRESIDENTS ARE ALWAYS LOOKING FIND INTELLIGENCE TO BACK UP
THEIR BELIEFS. GEORGE W. BUSH DID IT WITH IRAQ.
BARACK OBAMA DID IT WITH IRAN, TRYING TO CALM DOWN THE IRAN
WORRIES. HOW PREVALENT IS IT?
WALK ME THROUGH THIS PROCESS. >> THAT SKEPTICISM IS REASONABLE
TO HAVE. I CAN ONLY TELL YOU FROM MY
EXPERIENCE, FIRST FOR PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH AND THEN
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA, THERE ARE POLICIES, WE KNEW THEY HAD
POLICIES AND THEY WANTED TO PURSUE THINGS, BUT FOR BOTH OF
THOSE PRESIDENTS, WHEN WE SHOWED UP AND SAID, MR. PRESIDENT,
THESE ARE THE FACTS WE SEE, THIS IS OUR ASSESSMENT OF THE
SITUATION, HERE YOU GO, I NEVER HAD A PRESIDENT, I NEVER HAD
ANYONE ON THEIR STAFFTAFF SAY, KNOW, MIKE, WE DON'T THINK THOSE
ARE THE FACTS. YOU CAN DISAGREE WITH THE
ASSESSMENT -- >> WHAT ABOUT, HEY, MIKE, CAN'T
YOU KEEP FINDING INTELLIGENCE THAT BACKS THIS UP?
>> THEY CAN TELL US TO GO BACK AND LOOK AND LOOK AND LOOK, AND
WE WOULD DO THAT. BUT THE IDEA OF SHAPING THOSE
FACTS ONCE WE CALLED THEM AND SAID, THIS IS WHAT WE --
>> THERE'S A LINE BETWEEN "KEEP LOOKING" VERSUS SHAPING.
>> ONCE WE SAID WHAT IT WAS, THEY DIDN'T PUSH BACK.
AND EVEN ON IRAQ, I WORKED ON THE COMMISSION THAT INVESTIGATED
THE WMD IN IRAQ, THAT WAS A BIPARTISAN COMMISSION AND
ULTIMATELY IT FOUND, NO, THE PRESIDENT DIDN'T TRY TO SHAPE
THE INTELLIGENCE -- >> IT REALLY WAS BAD
INTELLIGENCE. >> IT WAS JUST BAD!
AND IT SUPPORTED A POLITICAL OUTCOME, BUT IN MY EXPERIENCE,
THE IDEA OF A PRESIDENT OR NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
CALLING AND SAYING, THERE OUGHT TO BE DIFFERENT FACTS, WE OUGHT
TO KNOW THOSE FACTS, DIDN'T SEE IT.
>> IF YOU WERE A POLITICAL ACTOR IN THIS TOWN, POLITICAL ANALYST
IN THIS TOWN, AND THEY SAY TO YOU HEY, MIKE LIGHTER, THIS
LOOKS LIKE THE INTEL COMMUNITY AND INDEED DONALD TRUMP ARE AT
WAR, WHAT WOULD YOU SAY? >> I SAID, IT MAY NOT BE A WAR,
BUT THERE'S A SERIES OF SKIRMISHES.
THERE'S A LEVEL OF TENSIONS BETWEEN THESE TWO PARTS TO HAVE
THE GOVERNMENT, OUR GOVERNMENT AND THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY
THAT IS THERE TO SUPPORT THEM, AND THE LAW ENFORCEMENT, WHICH
IS REALLY PROBLEMATIC AND BAD FOR THE COUNTRY, WHICH IS ONE OF
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét