CNN "The Situation Room" - Transcript: "Interview with Rep. Peter Welch"

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BLITZER: Very significant developments, indeed.

Sara Murray, thank you very much for that report.

Joining us now, Democratic Congressman Peter Welch. He's on the House Intelligence Committee that's been fighting with the administration to obtain that whistle-blower complaint.

Congressman, thanks so much for joining us.

CNN has confirmed that President Trump pressured his Ukrainian counterpart to investigate Joe Biden's son in that July phone call. And according to "The Wall Street Journal," the president made this request about eight times. What's your reaction?

REP. PETER WELCH (D-VT): Well, first of all, as a member of the Intelligence Committee, I can't confirm it.

We heard nothing about that in our interview with the inspector general. But, second, I know what you have reported, and it's shocking, because, essentially, you have the president, whose principal responsibility in relationship to foreign leaders is to protect the national security of the United States, injecting his own personal campaign into those discussions.

And that is yet another example of trying to bring foreign interference into a decision that should be made solely by American citizens.

BLITZER: You heard yesterday, as you point out, from the intelligence community's inspector general, but he's been barred from sharing any details from the whistle-blower complaint, barred by his boss, the director of -- the acting director of national intelligence, who's relying on a Justice Department memorandum.

If the complaint is actually what "The Wall Street Journal" is now reporting, does the administration's rationale for withholding the complaint from your committee, the Intelligence Committee, hold up?

WELCH: No, it doesn't at all.

I mean, this law is very, very clear. If a whistle-blower comes forward, they have to follow a careful statutory procedure. Otherwise, they're in jeopardy, because what they're presenting is information that may have classified content.

They present that, as they did, to the inspector general. The inspector general has two weeks to review it, where, in order to forward it, he has to make a finding that it's urgent and it is a matter -- and it's credible.

And our inspector general made that finding, sends it to the director of national intelligence, who then has a ministerial responsibility within seven days to refer that to the Intelligence Committee for our review.

And we're talking about classified information. We're talking about secrets, and we're talking about protecting whistle-blowers who can actually present evidence that allows us to do oversight.

And that process was short-circuited. We don't know why exactly, but, obviously, it was someone who had more authority than the director of national intelligence.

This is the first time it's happened, to our knowledge.

BLITZER: Do you think there's an actual audio recording of this phone conversation that the president had with the president of Ukraine, or at least the transcript out there?

WELCH: I would think so.

I think that's standard operating procedure when you're having presidential discussions with foreign leaders.

BLITZER: I suspect you're right.

So the question then becomes, is that audiotape something your committee, the Intelligence Committee, will try to get ahold of?

WELCH: Well, that's something, frankly, that I think all of Congress would want to see.

I mean, we have got two issues here. One is the content of this report. And, again, as I'm emphasizing, that we in the Intelligence Committee don't have knowledge of this, so we can't confirm it or deny it.

But it's a very serious allegation that the president, in a conversation with a foreign leader, was essentially injecting his own personal political fortunes into the mix. No place for that whatsoever.

If Donald Trump and his campaign wants to go after Joe Biden and his son, he can do that. What he can't do is, as president, leverage a situation where there's $250 million in aid to Ukraine that Congress has approved as a quid pro quo for getting something on -- that will help his campaign.

But what's really at stake for us in the intelligence community, and I think Republicans and Democrats, is the integrity of the whistle- blower system. With intelligence, if a whistle-blower is going come forward, they have to be very careful, because if they present information without authorization, then they're subject to prosecution and losing their job.

And, by definition, with classified information, it's got to be done according to the law. And we set this up to protect whistle-blowers. And now, as a result of what the director of national intelligence did, not refer that information to us, we don't know. We're in the dark about this.

So the report from "The Wall Street Journal" very important on the content, but the whistle-blower protection system is absolutely vital, whether it's a Republican or a Democratic president.

BLITZER: Do you want to see the Intelligence Committee chairman, Adam Schiff, pursue this battle in court?

[18:15:03]

WELCH: Yes, I do.

I want to get -- I want to stand for the integrity of the whistle- blower system. And, frankly, this is a question that should concern all of us in Congress. I mean, what is happening now -- and it's a real dire situation for our country -- is the separation of powers, the equal branches of government, is under assault.

The president has a tendency, in this case and in others, to just do whatever he wants. And whether you're a Republican or Democrat, you have got to stand up for that constitutional principle of co-equal branches of government.

I mean, when you have a president who does an end-around, it appears, on this statute, or where he diverts funds that were appropriated for a day care center to a military base and uses them to construct a wall on the southern border, that should be a concern to anyone who wants to preserve our constitutional order.

BLITZER: But if this goes to court, that would certainly give the administration the opportunity to drag this out in a lengthy legal battle, right?

WELCH: Well, that's true. And this is, I think, a matter of great concern to us, but also, I think, to the American people, because the M.O. of the Trump administration is to stall, delay, go to court, refuse to provide documents, to be in denial mode, not present witnesses.

And I think that's a challenge to our constitutional order. I think it's very dire, and it's unique with this administration. Wolf, there's always been tension between the legislative branch and the executive. The legislative branch wants information because it has a duty of oversight.

Sometimes, it gets political. But the bottom line is, in the past, by and large, it's been worked out. The Trump administration is on strike. The Article 1 powers of Congress don't exist, as far as the Trump administration is concerned.

BLITZER: Would you encourage the whistle-blower, the intelligence official, to come directly before your committee?

WELCH: Well, I would be hesitant to do that. I would like it, but keep in mind, this whistle-blower followed the rules. And the rules give that person some protection against retaliation.

Also, there's real apprehension, I think, among any whistle-blower, potential whistle-blower in the intelligence community, if they come forward without the benefit of the protections of the statute, that they will be making an unauthorized disclosure and therefore be subject to prosecution and firing from their job.

So that's the tragedy here. We need a strong whistle-blower statute to allow people to bring forward information that would be of concern to the committee, Republicans and Democrats.

BLITZER: What can you do to protect the whistle-blower from potential retaliation? Because you're absolutely right. This whistle-blower acted according to the regular legal channels.

WELCH: That's right.

No, the whistle-blower acted according to the rules. And, by the way, the inspector general acted according to the rules. This is a career person, had private practice, but then a Justice Department prosecutor, appointed by the Trump administration, and is scrupulously following the letter of the law in the carrying out of his duties.

And, by the way, that's a humbling experience to see a civil servant who, at great jeopardy, personal jeopardy, and clearly no personal political interest, doing his job. And the whistle-blower is in the same category.

But the bottom line here is that we have got to enforce the whistle- blower statute. And I'm really hopeful that my Republican colleagues are going to share with us concern about the upholding of our whistle- blower system.

BLITZER: Congressman Peter Welch, thanks so much for joining us.

WELCH: Thank you.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source