Fox News "Sunday with Chris Wallace" - Transcript Interview with Jack Reed

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Joining us now from Rhode Island, Democratic Senator Jack Reed, a former Army Ranger and the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee.

Senator, welcome back to FOX NEWS SUNDAY.

SEN. JACK REED (D-RI): Thanks, Mike.

EMANUEL: Classified briefings at the end of this week about the possibility of Russian bounties on U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Reports are the administration is not planning to take any action in response. How concerned are you and what would you do to advise them to, you know, take action?

REED: Well, I'm very concerned. And this is based upon just the public reports. If there's credible evidence that Russia is trying to entice Afghanis to kill American servicemen, that is a serious issue. Involvement of Russia in Afghanistan with the purpose of trying to kill individuals, American soldiers, is something that can't be accepted. It should have gone to the president. He should have been aware of it. In fact, there's some indication that it was in his presidential decision brief in the early part of the year, but he did not read it or did not pay attention to it. But that's the type of information that has to be seized by the president, because he's at the intersection of all the different roads of intelligence that come together. And, also, he's the one that's talking to Putin. He's had five or six conversations with Putin. And if this is an issue at all, even if it's one you just want to warn him away from not even thinking about, that discussion might have been very useful.

EMANUEL: Republicans like your college Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa say leading Democrats, quote, had access to that same sort of information months ago, so what's the big deal?

Is this a failure across our government, sir?

REED: I -- it's not a failure across the government. The way the information is structured in terms of the presentation is first the president, as you would expect, every day gets a daily briefing, which is the most sensitive information that the intelligence community can come together. One of the things we've heard about President Trump is that he seldom reads them every day, maybe once a day, maybe once every three or four days, so there's, I think, a gap that has to be filled.

And then there's another level of information, highly classified information, that goes to the big eight. Those are the -- the ranking Democrats. But the rank and file Democrats and rank and file Republicans don't typically get access to these kinds of very, very highly sensitive reports.

EMANUEL: President Trump is threatening to veto the bipartisan National Defense Authorization Act over renaming military installations that bear confederate names. As a former Army Ranger who served it Fort Benning and Fort Bragg, what about this name issue?

REED: I think we've finally come to grips with our history and we've come to grips with it in the appropriate way. This was a bipartisan initiative. It came out of the Armed Services Committee on a bipartisan basis. It wasn't a Republican initiative or Democratic initiative. It was supported by the committee by and large with very few exceptions. And it's coming to the floor of the Senate as a bipartisan initiative.

And I think what it recognizes is that these individuals defied their country, abandoned their uniform, and fought against the United States of America. And to later on, and in many cases it was 50 or 60 years later, to name a post after these individuals does not represent what I think should be consistent with our, you know, honoring of American military heroes.

The -- the factor, I think, that is important today is when you look at a post in the United States military, it is composed of men and women, it's composed of Americans of all different races. It cannot be named, I think, for someone who basically pledged his service to a system that was based on slavery. That has to be changed. And it will. It's a three-year process. At the end of those three years, with local import, with military import, with historic input, we will have a name, I think, that is much more fitting for the institution and for the history of the country.

EMANUEL: As the ranking Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, what's the big picture impact if the president vetoes the defense authorization?

REED: It would be reckless. He would be abandoning the -- the welfare of the troops, their pay raises, their quality living, the -- the housing improvements we've made, the platforms that they need, the -- the -- literally the ammunition that they'll need. All of it for not an issue that I think is comparable and indeed an issue which is being advanced on a bipartisan basis.

This is not an example of the -- the -- the president responding to the cries of the entire country and -- and helping save us from ourselves. I mean when you have situations where the -- the assembly in the state of Mississippi chooses to recommend the elimination of the confederate battle flag, that show something about where the country is headed. And the president does not want to go and lead the country. He wants to pull them back. And that's wrong.

EMANUEL: The Supreme Court's about to wrap its term. As always, there is speculation about possible retirements. What would be the impact of one or possibly even two retirements in this political season?

REED: Well, first of all, I think a -- a justice that would retire for such a transparently political reason would have to think twice, I would hope. Second, it would be the height of hypocrisy if Mitch McConnell tried to drive a nomination through within a few months when he refused to allow Merrick Garland's nomination to come up for over a year when President Obama made the appointment.

So I think what's -- and I think the court, because it should represent -- regard its reputation as paramount, I think they would be not particularly wise if they chose to do that and nor would Senator McConnell be, I think, appropriate in trying to ram through a nomination at this point.

EMANUEL: Does President Trump have the right to fill one or more Supreme Court seats, particularly if they are conservative justices in this election year?

REED: Again, I think it looks on precedent where you have a situation where President Obama certainly had the same constitutional right as President Trump and yet the -- Leader McConnell said, no, I'm not going to let you get your nominee up. So in terms of rights and responsibilities, they're the same. But I think what we have to recognize is, you know, what's fair, what's most deserving of the American people? I don't think they want to see a slapdash nomination of a Supreme Court justice in a few weeks. And I -- again, I think the court themselves, these justices, are extraordinarily eminent personalities. They've dedicated themselves to the law. And their last act to be something of looking like a political expedience is something I don't think that would be favorably viewed by history or by -- by their colleagues.

EMANUEL: What can your side do to stop the president if he wants to go forward other than perhaps taking it to the American people, and what does that do to the already heated 2020 race?

REED: Again, there are the constitutional provisions that if a seat is vacant on the court, the president has the right to do that. The Senate considers it. That's all there. Those are the mechanics.

The reality, the substance is, this is close to an election. The American people want to go ahead and make decisions about their future, including the -- the future of their courts. And I think they should be allowed to do that.

This is about letting America speak, not letting people who are conveniently located in the process to exercise their will. Let -- this is about the Americans speaking.

EMANUEL: Senator Reed, how are you feeling about the Senate races this fall? Do you see perhaps Democrats taking back the majority in the Senate and perhaps you becoming the chairman of the Armed Services Committee?

REED: Well, I feel very good. I think we have extraordinary candidates and I think they are working very hard. And I think one of the problems that my colleagues in the Republican side, and particularly the president, is that we see a situation where the Covid virus is not being effectively dealt with. It's causing huge economic problems. So you have a combination of a pandemic and economic disarray that is affecting every American. And I think, again, people want to see common sense solutions.

And what we have seen from the White House has not been the kind of consistent, thoughtful use of the powers the president has. The powers initially to use the Defense Production Act to buy protective equipment so that all of our health care workers would be protected without excessive cost and without excessive delay. We haven't yet seen an aggressive testing program so that we can test throughout the United States so people feel confident that they know they don't have it, nor does anyone else they're likely to see.

We've got a whole issue that we have to do in terms of making sure we can go back to school in the fall. I know you're talking to the expert from Harvard Medical School. That's going to be a real, serious challenge. We have to, right now, provide more resources, I believe, for our local schools and local states so that we can get children back to school. And if you don't have kids back in school, you don't have workers back in the workplace because who is going to take care of their children? None of this is being dealt with on a comprehensive, coordinated way. And that has been the situation since the very beginning.

EMANUEL: All right.

REED: The president has tried to ignore the problem. The president dismissed it. The president went out for his Fourth of July speech, who I think there's one phrase about Covid, when, in fact, Covid is probably -- and the economy are probably the two greatest issues.

EMANUEL: Senator Reed, thank you. Thanks for your time.

REED: Thanks, Mike.

EMANUEL: Always good to speak with you. See you soon back on The Hill.

REED: Likewise. Thank you.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source