60 Ex-CIA Members Condemn Trump's Clearance Decision; Trump Looks At Stripping Moore Security Clearances Soon
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There's no silence. If anything, I'm giving a bigger voice. Many people don't even know who he is. And now, he has a bigger voice, and that's OK. I say it, I say it again, that whole situation is a rigged witch hunt.</s>UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: My daddy is a hero. He helps me --</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Somebody has her, just please bring her back. I just want them back. I just -- I just want them to come back.</s>UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Husband, Chris Watts, was taken into custody and was transported to jail.</s>ANNOUNCER: This is NEW DAY WEEKEND with Victor Blackwell and Christi Paul.</s>VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN ANCHOR: Good to be with you this Saturday. And the feud over security clearances is escalating. Ex-CIA Director John Brennan is firing back at President Trump after the president threatened yesterday to strip a DOJ official's clearance very quickly.</s>JOHN BRENNAN, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: He's drunk on power. He really is. And I think he's abusing the powers of that office. I think right now this country is in a crisis in terms of what Mr. Trump has done and is liable to do.</s>CHRISTI PAUL, CNN ANCHOR: So, the White House isn't backing down. The Washington Post now reporting the documents needed to strip additional security clearances from these top officials tied to the Russia probe, and they're ready for the president to sign. CNN White House Reporter, Sarah Westwood, is in New Jersey where the president is staying this weekend. Sarah, we understand that there are 60 former CIA officials who are now standing in solidarity with Brennan, is that right?</s>SARAH WESTWOOD, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: That's right, Christi. President Trump is facing a growing backlash to his decision to target former FBI Director, John Brennan. Former senior intelligence officials are speaking to call this move unprecedented while the White House struggles to explain the reasoning behind the decision. Trump has linked it to the Russia investigation. And while the White House has claimed that Brennan lost his security clearance because he abused it, aides have so far not produced any evidence to suggest this is anything other than political retribution. Now, 60 ex-CIA officials joined forces this week to condemn the president's move, saying in a statement: "All of us believe, it is critical to protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure. But we believe equally strongly that former government officials have the right to express their unclassified views on what they see as critical national security issues without fear of being punished for doing so. The country will be weakened if there is a political Litmus test applied before seasoned experts are allowed to share their views." Now, crucially many of these former intelligence officials are not saying that they agree with how Brennan has gone about criticizing the president, but they're saying they all agree on Brennan's right to do so.</s>PAUL: So --</s>BLACKWELL: Sarah, what are we learning about the other security clearances that could be revoked? Is there a timeline here? Very quickly, seems vague, pretty relative.</s>WESTWOOD: Well, Victor, President Trump is weighing removing the security clearances of the at least nine officials who are either connected in some way to the Russia investigation or who have spoken out against this president. Those names include former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper; former FBI Director James Comey; recently fired Deputy Andrew McCabe; and one current DOJ official is on that list, that's DOJ employee Bruce Ohr, whose ties to the opposition research firm hired by the Clinton campaign have recently drawn scrutiny particularly from Trump and Congressional Republicans. Senator Mark Warner, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee is threatening to take action against the president if he follows through on his plan to revoke additional security clearances. Warner wrote on Twitter, "I will be introducing an amendment next week to block the president from punishing and intimidating his critics. They arbitrarily revoke -- security clearances. Stay tuned." Now, this comes as the Washington Post is reporting that Trump has already drawn up the papers to remove those security clearances and aides are weighing when to do so, potentially waiting to execute on those decisions when an opportune time comes along, Victor and Christi.</s>BLACKWELL: All right. Sarah Westwood for us there in New Jersey. Thank you.</s>PAUL: So, Errol Lewis, CNN Political Commentator and Political Anchor for Spectrum News with us; as well as Brent Budowsky, Opinion Columnist for The Hill and former Democratic Aide. Gentlemen, thank you and good morning to both of you.</s>ERROL LEWIS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Good morning.</s>BRENT BUDOWSKY, OPINION COLUMNIST, THE HILL: Good morning.</s>PAUL: Good morning. So, Errol, I wanted to start with you. Is this essentially, this list that we're seeing this morning an enemies' list of people who have done the president wrong in his mind? Because I don't know the validity of polling these -- what the validity would be of polling these security clearances.</s>LEWIS: An enemies' list is one way to put it, another way to put it would be an attempt to intimidate and influence and obstruct the ongoing probe into possible links between the Russians and the Trump campaign in 2016. I see this -- look, just as a short history lesson, people should recognize that some of the articles of impeachment against Richard Nixon included exactly this kind of activity, interfering with the Justice Department, interfering with the FBI, interfering with the special counsel and the probe into what went on during the Watergate era. Donald Trump is arguably writing his own articles of impeachment, one tweet at a time by drawing up these bogus, politically motivated severances of security clearances and openly stating that it's because he wants to counterattack the Russian investigation.</s>PAUL: So, Brent, we know that Senator Mark Warner has tweeted this -- he said, "I will be introducing an amendment next week to block the president from punishing and intimidating his critics by arbitrarily revoking security clearances. Stay tuned." Now, the president is within his rights to do what he's doing. But how effective could an amendment be like this?</s>BUDOWSKY: Well, Christi, I hope it is passed. I think it would be effective it they'd do it, and it's valuable to raise the issue. And I want to thank CNN for inviting me on this morning to tell our audience that late yesterday, I suggested at a high level and in the right place that all of the retired CIA directors, who spoke out against this, ask for a private meeting with President Trump in the White House as a group standing together, to look him in the eye and tell him he should restore John Brennan's security clearance, he should stop acting like a rogue president, and violating the first amendment and being what Admiral McRaven said recently was someone who was acting in a McCarthy-ite way. It is amazing that Russia is attacking America, and the CIA directors who are defending America are now on an enemies list by the president of the United States. That is unacceptable, that is unconscionable. And I think if the former CIA directors ask for this meeting, I think the president who recently met with Vladimir Putin, the Russian dictator attacking us in a secret meeting with no Americans except the translator of the president, would have to agree to meet them. And if not, the American people would know that he refused to meet them. And I think the whole country deserves to stand with, as I do, all of these intelligence leaders. These are great patriots. And a meeting with the president eye to eye, face to face, in the White House with all of those former CIA directors and intelligence leaders would make a clear and powerful statement to the president and the world that we can't have a rogue president who acts in a way that continues to help Russia attack our country.</s>PAUL: Errol, you know, we are hearing from somebody that we don't usually hear from when it comes to criticizing presidents. But Jimmy Carter is talking this morning in the Washington Post he said of President Trump: "I think he's a disaster -- in human rights and take care of people, and treating people." What do you make of the fact that we are hearing from Jimmy Carter at this point?</s>LEWIS: Well, there are sort of two brands that one associates with former President Carter. One is speaking the truth, you know. That was his slogan: "I'll never lie to you." And secondly, human rights. He's dedicated most of his life in the post-presidency to furthering and advancing democracy and human rights which have been notably absent from the Trump foreign policy. So that, you've got human rights abuses all over the place that this White House just doesn't talk about. You know, there are hunger strikes, there are people in prison, there are gross violations of human rights, and even assassinations, all of which have gone on in recent times in Russia. You didn't hear the president talk about it once. And from what we can tell about his private, secret meeting with Vladimir Putin, none of it was even raised. So, these are important issues. Jimmy Carter has been an architect of making clear that it's not a source of weakness, and it's not charity, but it's a source of American strength to really fight vigorously for democracy and human rights. So, it's exactly what you would expect him to say.</s>PAUL: You know, it's -- one of the things that was perplexing this week is this news, Brent, about Rand Paul going to Moscow and our reporting on it last night from Manu Raju was not just that but that Paul wants to encourage all U.S. lawmakers to go to Russia and Russia lawmakers to come to the U.S. What would the strategy be there? I mean, how likely are the lawmakers, all lawmakers to do this?</s>BUDOWSKY: Oh, I think Rand Paul is operating a little above his intellectual pay grade with an idea like this. And I think -- I agree with what Errol said and what President Carter did. I fully agree with what Patti Davis, President Reagan's daughter, told Don Lemon that President Reagan is going to be appalled and outraged by this. I wrote a column praising President George W. Bush who I never supported, for giving too profound sweeping speeches warning about the dangers of Trump. And I think all the presidents might even consider a joint statement supporting all the CIA directors, as a group. All of them. This is dangerous in the extreme. It's not something that should happen in America. It's something that should happen with a Russian dictator. We are at critically dangerous moment in American history right now, and this has to be ended now. And we have to get the CIA directors in the White House to discuss it with the president. The former president should be applauded for speaking out as well. I agree with all of them and praise them all for what they're doing.</s>PAUL: OK. It is notable, however, that President Trump still has the support of his base. So, not everybody obviously coming to this from the same perspective as it has been for quite some sometime here obviously. Errol Lewis, Brent Budowsky, appreciate you both being here. Thank you.</s>BUDOWSKY: Thank you.</s>LEWIS: Thank you.</s>BLACKWELL: The breaking news, Kofi Annan, former U.N. Secretary General and Nobel Peace Prize Winner has died. He was 80-years-old, a diplomat from Ghana. He served in the U.N.'s top post from 2007 to 2006 and worked tirelessly for human rights.</s>PAUL: The current secretary general released this statement: "'Kofi Anna was guiding force for good." It was profound sadness that I learned of his passing. In many ways, Kofi Annan was the United Nations. His legacy will remain a true inspiration for all of us." Joining us now, CNN's Richard Roth, he covered Annan for years. Richard, what does this mean to you? You did cover him for years. I've heard you talk about Kofi Annan for so so long. What is your take this morning? What is resonating with you?</s>RICHARD ROTH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, you're not supposed to say this as a news journalist, but I'm kind of in semi shock. Though, oddly I was thinking at him yesterday morning -- his book stares at me in my office and the CNN complex is moving, and I was thinking of where I'm taking that book. Look, Kofi Annan was the heart of the U.N. for ten years, and before that as director of peacekeeping. And as his family noted in a statement, the words you hear expressed about Kofi Annan: Often compassion, empathy, you don't often hear that about at times these faceless U.N. diplomats the world has been opinion of despite the heroic work done by humanitarian and rescue aid workers. So, according to the statement issued this morning by the Kofi Annan foundation and his family, this is what they had to say following the passing at age of 80 of Mr. Annan: "Kofi Annan was a global statesman," they say, "and a deeply committed internationalist who fought throughout his life for a fairer and more peaceful world. During his distinguished career and leadership of the United Nations, he was an ardent champion of peace, sustainable development, human rights, and the rule of law." He was involved in many global crises at that time, in those ten years. Sometimes with success, and others he was able to escape condemnation. A lot of it by the force of his personality, Christi and Victor.</s>PAUL: Yes, I remember him just being a very measured, strong presence, I think. Richard Roth, we appreciate that. Thank you. All right. Well, it is the weekend. Some people might have a chance to be doing a little deliberation in their head. We're talking about the jury in Paul Manafort's fraud trial. They need more time to reach a verdict. His freedom and Robert Mueller's credibility are on the line. And apparently, the judge's safety is as well, as the jury will reconvene on Monday. We'll have more on all of that.</s>BLACKWELL: Plus, the fallout from the death of a Maryland football player. The steps taken by officials last night and a new report that claims inaction by the university president.