CNN "The Situation Room" - Transcript: "Interview with Rep. Denny Heck"
Interview
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
BLITZER: Yes, the U.S. has branded Hezbollah a terrorist organization for many, many years.
Shimon Prokupecz, I know you're working your sources. We will get more information. Thank you for.
Joining us now, Democratic Congressman Denny Heck. He is a member of the House Intelligence Committee. That was briefed on the secret whistleblower complaint earlier in the day.
Congressman, thanks so much for joining us.
And I know you heard directly from the intelligence community's inspector general, all behind closed doors. We know that he described this complaint as a sequence of events.
And I know you can't discuss classified information, but what can you tell us about what you learned?
REP. DENNY HECK (D-WA): Well, first of all, he didn't address us or in any way inform us as to the substance of that complaint. He didn't, and he shouldn't have, because it would have been a violation of his oath of office.
But here's what we learned, more importantly. America is less safe tonight if this precedent is allowed to stand.
Let's back up, Wolf, and take a little bit of a historical context here. The Intelligence Community Whistleblower Act was enacted in '98, updated in 2010. And it was adopted for one purpose. And that was to provide whistleblowers who had credible evidence of serious abuses or violations protection if they were to come forward. That's its purpose, to provide them with that protection.
And as a matter of just common sense, what the acting ODNI has ruled obviously violates common sense, because if the subject of a complaint is allowed to quash it, then the whistleblower is not going to receive any protection.
So that makes it less likely that whistleblowers are going to come forward, and then, therefore, we're all safe.
But, even more perversely, this could create, unfortunately, an incentive for somebody who has evidence of wrongdoing to make that known to the public. If they don't think they can be protected through the internal channels, in accordance with the law, then they may, a la Edward Snowden, just go public with it, and thusly may compromise methods and procedures.
So we're less safe on several levels if this precedent has been allowed to stand.
BLITZER: In this four-page, single-spaced letter, the inspector general of the intelligence community, Michael Atkinson, strongly rejects the White House and the Justice Department rationale for refusing to hand over this complaint to Congress.
So what does that tell you?
HECK: That it was a mini act of a profile in courage, frankly, that Inspector General Atkinson would be willing to reduce the writing that he was at impasse with the acting ODNI and set forth why it is that he thought the ODNI's decision, which, in our opinion, clearly violates unambiguous black letter of the law.
The role of the ODNI is that of a clerk, ministerial. Their obligation under the law is to advance that complaint to Congress and to the Intelligence Committees.
And, as a matter of fact, Wolf, every director of national intelligence has done that, even when it did not meet the threshold of being credible evidence of an urgent concern.
And, of course, that's what the inspector general, Atkinson, deemed in this case, that it was credible and that it was urgent, which means that it was a serious violation.
BLITZER: And Michael Atkinson, the inspector general, he's a Trump administration appointee.
[18:15:00]
Do you believe, Congressman that the Trump administration is now breaking the law?
HECK: Sure, but you could have invited me on your program any number of times over the last two years and 10 months, and I probably could have cited a recent example of that.
BLITZER: So what are you going to do about it?
HECK: So, we will be having, as you know, the ODNI into the Intelligence Committee next week, as will the Senate Intelligence Committee.
We will see if that is an opportunity for him to change his mind or change his heart or move the chains down the field, as it were. Short of that, we are seeking remedies. I would say we would litigate this, but the truth of the matter is, because it has been deemed urgent by the inspector general, I think we will be seeking an urgent legal remedy, which would be a little bit more accelerated than that from which we normally pursue in the courts.
BLITZER: Can you share with us some thoughts on -- you spent, obviously behind closed doors, quite a bit of time with the inspector general today.
Tell us about his demeanor. Was he angry? Was he frustrated? What can you tell us about the way he was responding to your questions?
HECK: He was a professional, Wolf.
BLITZER: And was he angry?
HECK: He was a professional who was putting the interests of his country and the rule of law first and foremost in his very considerable responsibilities in his job.
BLITZER: "The Washington Post" is reporting that the complaints stemmed from a so-called promise President Trump made in a phone call with a foreign leader. How concerning is that to you?
HECK: So, I'm not going to speculate as all -- at all as to what the substance of this may have been or who it may have involved.
Obviously, there are a couple of print press reports as to who that might have been. And that's important, and, hopefully, that we will learn that and learn that soon.
But again, I want to tell you, Wolf, if I think it's secondary, to the willful violation of the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Act, which keeps us all safe by protecting whistleblowers and discouraging any consideration of releasing information to the public, if it has not yet -- or if it has not first gone through appropriate channels.
BLITZER: How worried are you that this whistleblower will face retaliation now as a result of this uproar that has developed?
HECK: Well, in effect, he already has faced retaliation, hasn't he?
Because the complaint that he filed, in accordance with the law, and with the full understanding of what the law was, was quashed, or at least it's been quashed thus far. And so, yes, of course I'm concerned for him or her, whomever it may be, just as I am concerned about the content of it.
But I'm concerned about, again, the underlying law. This law needs to be safeguarded. This law needs to be upheld, frankly, so that we can all be safer.
BLITZER: Yes, the inspector general, by the way, Michael Atkinson, suggested to the committee today that it's a him, not a her.
Obviously, we have no idea who this person is.
(CROSSTALK)
BLITZER: But he clearly was talking -- he was clearly talking about he.
(CROSSTALK)
HECK: It may have been a deflection, Wolf.
BLITZER: Well, you never know. All right. I will take his word for it. Michael Atkinson sounds like a very respectable kind of guy.
Hey, Congressman, thanks so much for joining us.
HECK: You're welcome, sir.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source