Replies

Lou Dobbs Tonight

Aired November 5, 2003 - 18:00 ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DOBBS: My next guest is at the center of a controversy over a leaked memo from Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Senator Jay Rockefeller is the ranking Democrat on that committee and join us tonight from Washington.

Senator, good to have you with us.

SEN. JAY ROCKEFELLER (D), WEST VIRGINIA: Thank you, Lou.

DOBBS: This memo set off a firestorm, partisan politics on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Republicans outraged. Why did this happen? How did this happen?

ROCKEFELLER: First of all, it’s so minuscule in the effects of what we do here on Intelligence Committee that both Pat Roberts and I are determined to not really get into it and to bring our committee together, as it should be, as we both have been trying to keep it. And to give encouragement not only to the committee, but also to the Intelligence Committee all over the world because we’re in a dangerous time when our young men and women are, you know, overseas being shot and wounded.

DOBBS: Absolutely.

ROCKEFELLER: So, I mean, I understand your question. But I want you to understand the context in which I put it and that is that it’s a grain of sand compared to the work of the committee and the work of intelligence.

DOBBS: I would take that point. But at the same time, this grain of sand has left the chairman of the committee, Pat Roberts, Senator Roberts saying, it’s sort of like a personal slap in the face after you worked over time to come up with what we think is going to be a very good report on how to improve our capabilities at a time when your committee is trying to win the confidence and the support of the White House to provide documents.

Don’t you think this memo has undercut that effort?

ROCKEFELLER: No, I don’t. I think the memo will pass very quickly unless, you know, groups and some will, on the right, you know, push it. But, you know, there are differences, Pat, between members of the Intelligence Committee. Pat and I — I mean Lou. Pat and I have our differences.

DOBBS: Right.

ROCKEFELLER: And one of them is the scope of the investigation. But that will be worked out. He thinks that we should be looking at just the state of intelligence, pre-war, leading up to the war, and I think it should be looking at the use of intelligence by the policymakers which is, in fact, mandated on us by the charter which created us.

So, you know, that’s an argument. It’s a legitimate argument. We’ll work it out.

DOBBS: Right.

ROCKEFELLER: And we’ll stay together while we do.

DOBBS: Senator, did you order the drafting of this memo?

ROCKEFELLER: No, I didn’t.

DOBBS: Do you know who did?

ROCKEFELLER: No. I mean, it wasn’t ordered. It was simply — look, I have three people who work for me and, you know, you work in any office situation — I’m sure this happens to you — your people write you options or suggestions of something they didn’t think you did well or you did do well. And they write you a memo just to you, nobody else sees it, nobody on the committee saw it, nobody outside the committee saw it until somebody delivered it to the press and now everybody’s seen it. It’s called “a thank.” (ph) But, you know, to me it really isn’t that big.

DOBBS: It was — we have said the press here as well a leak. We should give credit to Sean Hannity at Fox, to whom it was leaked.

Do you disavow the thrust of this memo? Do you disavow...

ROCKEFELLER: I disavow nothing. I mean, you know, the thrust of the option informal draft memo, which went to nobody, the three people who wrote it and myself for whom they work, reflects frustration that I have and that other members on my side of the committee and maybe on the other side of the committee that we’re not doing a full investigation. And that is that we have to not only look at intelligence itself, was it adequate, did it lead us to where we wanted to go, why was it that all of a sudden atomic activity, nuclear activity went from sort of dormant to reconstituted? How did that happen? We have to look at that.

But then we also have to look at, how is that intelligence taken by the executive branch of government? How is it used? Was it manipulated? Was it shaped? And we need to know those things. I don’t start out with any preconceptions that it was shaped, but we need to know that.

DOBBS: Obviously, the memorandum suggests there is some prejudgment if you will, that there’s a need for an independent investigation. I have to tell you Senator, I found it amusing that Senator Corzine of New Jersey was wanting to create a new commission because he thinks there’s too much politics about politics on your committee which I thought was a wonderful way to capture the absurdity.

ROCKEFELLER: But there’s an extension on that and that is that that shows that it was an innocent memo, because I voted against the Corzine amendment to create a new committee because I think Pat Roberts and my committee should be doing that and we have jurisdiction for it.

DOBBS: It is remarkable, because obviously, no one is so naive as to think there are not politics and consideration as even as our — as the U.S. Senate weighs very significant, profound issues here. But at the same time, you and Senator Pat Roberts, who is highly regarded, as are you, there was the appearance, at least, that you two who working well together. Is this going to be disruptive to that? For example, Senator Hagel, Chuck Hagel, of Nebraska, Senator Pat Roberts, two people who have acted with obvious bipartisan interest, nonpartisan interest, do you think that this memorandum will, end that?

ROCKEFELLER: No, I don’t at all. That’s the whole point I’m trying to make. In fact, one of the — I won’t obviously give his name — but one of the Republican members of the committee who spoke critical of me this morning we talked tonight and he said, you know, Jay, I observed you over the last company of years and you have been totally bipartisan, totally helpful and totally pro-committee were.

You know he said one thing on the floor, maybe that’s what his job was, and I don’t really care. But the point was that he thinks I’m fair. And I know I’m fair. You don’t play politics with intelligence. You can play politics with other things, but you cannot do it with the intelligence and the armed forces and the security of our nation. You cannot do it. You don’t even consider doing it.

DOBBS: So, while not disavowing the memo should your Democratic staff on the select committee be taking that as a straightforward admonition?

ROCKEFELLER: No. Because they — you know, I don’t back way from anything on this, Lou, because of the fact that their job is to service me with ideas and thoughts and strategies and options. They work for me, exclusively for me, the memo is drafted exclusively for me by them and went to nobody else in the entire world until it was handed over to the gentleman that you mentioned.

And then, of course you know, it blew up. Those things happen in the Senate. We’ve all been around long enough to know that they come and they go. Pat Roberts and I will stay together. We both care profoundly about the intelligence and the security policy and safety of our troops. DOBBS: Senator Jay Rockefeller, we thank you for being with us here this evening.

ROCKEFELLER: Thank you, Lou. Thanks a lot.

DOBBS: We want to hear from you on the topic in tonight’s poll. The question is, “what is your reaction to the Democratic memo seeking to politicize the pre-war intelligence issue? Outrage, politics as usual.” Two reasonable choices. Cast your vote at cnn.com/lou. We’ll have the results for you a little later, here.

Coming up next, wasted minds: our failing schools, our special report tonight. The risks and the rewards of school vouchers, public money used for private education. Peter Viles will report and two national leading experts face off on the issue of school choice. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0311/05/ldt.00.html