Former Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe is Interviewed about Trump's Attacks on Him
BERMAN: New frustration this morning from Democrats after Hope Hicks refused to answer any questions about her time in the White House. The House Judiciary chair, Jerry Nadler, says he will destroy the White House in court over their claims of immunity. The question is, when? Overnight, the president hurled fresh attacks on the Russia investigation and those who helped launch it.</s>TRUMP (via phone): What they did was unbelievable, that they could do a thing like that. And they reported to McCabe, who I think is a terrible, terrible guy. McCabe didn't do anything without Comey. McCabe was totally dominated by Comey. He did nothing. Andrew McCabe was a bad guy. But Andrew McCabe did nothing without calling Comey. He wouldn't -- there's an expression. He wouldn't go to the bathroom without getting Comey's approval.</s>BERMAN: You heard the name there from the president, Andrew McCabe. And joining us now is the fired former acting FBI director, Andrew McCabe. Thank you very much for being with us, Andy. When you hear the president say that, what's your reaction?</s>ANDREW MCCABE, FORMER ACTING FBI DIRECTOR: You know, John, I've been listening to the president say insanely stupid things for years now about me personally, about my organization, and about the investigation we undertook to find out if the president posed a threat to national security. I won't get down in the weeds with the president and exchange insults on Twitter or on TV or anywhere else. But I think the question we should be asking is why do we have a president who feels necessary to attack individuals? Individuals, private citizens, individuals who serve in our government. To attack people personally when he's scared of the truth that they have to offer. I think that's the more concerning question here. And unfortunately, it's one I can't answer for you. But I think we saw another example of that last night.</s>BERMAN: You can't answer it. What do you suspect the answer is?</s>MCCABE: As I said, I think the president is afraid. The president is clearly very concerned about the Russia investigation. He has been since its inception. He has good reason to be concerned about it. I think we've all seen now, with the release of the Mueller report, that there was substantial reason to believe that the president and those around him conducted themselves inappropriately and, in many cases, illegally. The Mueller report -- the Mueller investigation, the special counsel investigation resulted in numerous convictions of the president's associates. So very clearly not a witch hunt. And ultimately exposed, I think, 11 different categories of obstructive activity engaged in by the president himself. Not to mention the fact that it conclusively proved the meddling of the government of Russia in our democratic process and what's described as a vast and effective campaign. So, you know, I think those are all conclusions that the -- that concern the president greatly. It's unfortunate that he responds to them by attacking individuals, rather than by buttressing and supporting the system of democracy and democratic elections that we rely upon.</s>BERMAN: I'm correct, Andy. You have called for an impeachment inquiry, yes?</s>MCCABE: I think there -- I think Congress should absolutely move forward with their constitutional obligation to have this information heard. I am not a politician. I'm not a political operative. I wouldn't dare to predict how that process would affect the election or whether it would result in the president's removal. I think those are all issues that are far down the road. The only thing that's clear to me right now, John, is that Congress has an obligation under these circumstances to air out exactly what is known by the government about the president's conduct.</s>BERMAN: You say --</s>MCCABE: And they should do that by calling witnesses.</s>BERMAN: You say Congress has an obligation, and my question to you is at this moment, do you think Congress is meeting that obligation? Or put another way, if the White House goal here is to delay and drag this out -- Hope Hicks claimed some type of constitutional immunity, not executive privilege but some kind of immunity yesterday in not answering any questions. If their goal is to drag it out, if that's their game, is it a game they are winning?</s>MCCABE: Well, I don't know if I can call winners and losers. I think it's absolutely clear that the White House is trying to delay and obstruct and bind up that process. So again, ask yourself why is that? They're clearly very concerned about the public at large hearing, in a vivid and compelling way, the information that was revealed by the special counsel. So the simple fact that they're engaging in that level of delay tactics and obstruction of the -- of the Congress' work is something that should concern us even more. So turn that around, John. So let's talk about Congress. Under these circumstances, knowing what they know, confronting the sort of resistance that they're getting from the administration, if they don't act now, when would they ever? That's the question.</s>BERMAN: And again, just simply yes or no, do you think they're acting too slowly?</s>MCCABE: I think that they should be moving forward. I think they should be moving forward in a deliberate and careful fashion. They claim to be doing that. But it would be -- I think it would be good for them to make a little more progress.</s>BERMAN: All right. I want to ask you about this report that came out in "The New York Times" over the weekend that dealt with a new level of cyberwarfare against Russia. I'm not going to ask you about the facts that were in that. It said the United States is getting involved in the Russian power grid. But there was this tidbit in the article that said that members of the intelligence community kept the information about this operation from the president for two reasons. One, they were afraid he would overrule and stop the operation. Or No. 2, that he would leak the details about it. What does it say to you if there was that concern from inside the intelligence community?</s>MCCABE: Well, I won't comment on the current operation or those details that were reported in "The Times." But I will tell you from my own experience of dealing with issues very similar to that during the two previous administrations, that in my experience, those issues were dealt with at the highest levels of the National Security Council with the deputies and principles committees and with the presidents themselves. And it is really unimaginable to me that any intelligence agency would conceal relevant facts from the president, who is the ultimate decision maker. So I can't say whether or not that's happening now. But if it is, it would be a marked departure from the past.</s>BERMAN: Would you be scared in their situation that he would leak those details?</s>MCCABE: Well, I think we've seen the president speak impertinently to our foreign allies in the past. We've seen, with conversations the president had with the Russians in the Oval Office, where Israeli intelligence was allegedly exposed. So is there concern to think that the president might speak out of turn and reveal things that others would not? Absolutely, there's that concern.</s>BERMAN: All right. Andrew McCabe, the author of the new book, "The Threat." Thank you for being with us this morning.</s>MCCABE: Thanks, John.</s>BERMAN: Alisyn.</s>CAMEROTA: All right. Overnight an American drone was shot down by Iran. So we will ask a senator on the Armed Services Committee how the U.S. should respond today.