MS. MITCHELL: And with us now, the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator John Warner and Senator Carl Levin. Welcome both.
Senators, you’ve just heard what Ambassador Wilson said. Senator Levin, first to you: Was the intelligence hyped?
SEN. CARL LEVIN, (D-MI): Well, there’s been some very deeply troubling evidence that the intelligence has been stretched and exaggerated, and that’s something which needs to be investigated. I’ve directed my staff on the Armed Services Committee to make a very in-depth inquiry into a number of issues, including this uranium issue. But Ambassador Wilson’s statements this morning add a great deal of additional evidence to me, because now it’s personal evidence from the ambassador that went there in February, the year before the State of the Union message, that, in fact, the documents were forged upon which that conclusion had been reached. And apparently, the State Department—if they didn’t know it, we have to find out how in heaven’s name the CIA kept that information in the bowels of the CIA, as Condoleezza Rice said.
MS. MITCHELL: Senator Warner, in fact, it was included in the national intelligence estimate. And let me show you what The Washington Post reported a few weeks ago on June 12, that: “CIA Director George Tenet, on September 24, 2002, cited the Niger evidence in a closed-door briefing to the Senate Intelligence Committee on a national intelligence estimate of Iraq’s weapons programs, sources said. Although Tenet told the panel that some questions had been raised about the evidence, he did not mention that the agency had sent an envoy to Niger and that the former ambassador had concluded that the claims were false.”
Is that your understanding as well?
SEN. JOHN WARNER, (R-VA): I’m a member of the Intelligence Committee. This is my second tour in the 25 years that I’ve been in the Senate.
MS. MITCHELL: That’s why I asked the question, sir.
SEN. WARNER: And I never comment on testimony that that committee receives. So I can neither...
MS. MITCHELL: Well...
SEN. WARNER: ...confirm nor deny.
MS. MITCHELL: I can say independently that it was in the...
SEN. WARNER: Yeah. Well...
MS. MITCHELL: ...national intelligence estimate.
SEN. WARNER: I’m not going to confirm it.
MS. MITCHELL: OK.
SEN. WARNER: I watched this man. I spoke with him before he came on the set. Much of what he said this morning was shared by him with the intelligence committees. Right now Senator Levin and I, we’re members of the committee; we have all of these documents before it and we’re making that assessment.
MS. MITCHELL: But you didn’t know this before the war?
SEN. WARNER: All I’m telling you right now is we cannot sort out this morning in one minute this situation. It is being carefully reviewed, objectively reviewed, by the Senate and the Intelligence Committee. Where I disagree with my good friend Carl Levin—we just got back from three days together in Iraq—is that I do not find the volume of evidence that he feels he sees that indicate or lay a basis that members of this administration took the intelligence, which was shared with the Congress, and began to interpret it, manipulate it or whatever to achieve a political purpose. I do not find that evidence from
the president down through the secretaries of State, Defense, CIA director, trying to manipulate that information.
MS. MITCHELL: Well, Senator, let me show you what you said to the Los Angeles Times some time ago. About a month ago to the LA Times you said: “Contending that the credibility of the Bush administration may be at risk, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee said that his panel will investigate the United States’ failure to find evidence of chemical and biological weapons in Iraq.
Sen. John Warner, stressed that he remains ‘of the opinion there has been no deception by the administration.’ However, he added, ‘the situation is becoming one where the credibility of the administration and Congress is being challenged.’ Warner said increasing concern that the intelligence on Iraq was manipulated or flawed warrants an investigation of ‘the credibility of the information provided by both the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency.’”
SEN. WARNER: Look...
MS. MITCHELL: So have you changed your mind that an investigation is no longer needed?
SEN. WARNER: No, no, no, no. Not at all. I stand by every word. I am a member of the Intelligence Committee. They are conducting an overview.
MS. MITCHELL: But not an investigation.
SEN. WARNER: Just—well, what—you know, come on. What’s—an investigation has certain meanings in the Congress when the leadership take away from the several committees their authority and repose it in an investigating committee.
MS. MITCHELL: But shouldn’t your committee, Armed Services, investigate?
SEN. WARNER: Just bear with me. Bear with me. The Intelligence Committee is conducting-of which Senator Levin and I are members—a very thorough review. All the documents have been given to the committee by Director Tenet of the CIA. My committee has had five different hearings, at which time we’ve looked into WMD. But we’re going to await the findings of the Intelligence Committee-five members of Armed Services Committee on the Intelligence Committee. Then we will determine whether
or not we have to make further oversight investigation, if you wish to call it, into other areas of evidence. So in no way is the United States Senate, at this point in time, not living up to its responsibilities to carefully and fairly look at this question.
MS. MITCHELL: Senator, let me just button this up by showing you what The New Republic said about your decision not to immediately open an Armed Services Committee investigation. Said, “Senator John Warner, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, initially called for public hearings but recanted after Cheney visited a GOP senators’ lunch on June 4. Cheney, according to Capitol Hill staffers, told his fellow Republicans to block any investigation, and it looks likely they will comply. Under pressure from Democrats, Roberts, the new Intelligence Committee chairman, has finally agreed to a closed-door hearing but not to a public or private investigation.”
Was there political pressure from the White House to back off?
SEN. WARNER: I was in that room. I’ve known Dick Cheney for 30 years. In no way has he in this time or at other times tried to dictate to the Congress, a separate and co-equal branch of government, what they should or should not do. And I assure you that the Intelligence Committee and indeed my committee are looking at this. Let me tell you, this week Don Rumsfeld is coming before the Senate Armed Services Committee with Franks. We’re going to have open and closed session.
MS. MITCHELL: General Tommy Franks the...
SEN. WARNER: That’s correct. The question will be asked to him on the very issues raised.
MS. MITCHELL: Well, let me ask Senator Levin...
SEN. WARNER: So that’s an open discussion before the Armed Services Committee. It will take place this week.
MS. MITCHELL: Well, Senator Levin, if that’s adequate, why is the minority on the Armed Services Committee desiring its own investigation?
SEN. LEVIN: It’s not adequate at all. I have urged Senator Warner to carry through with that investigation which he said would happen. He has made the decision, which he has the right to make as chairman, not to do it at this time. But I also have the right as the ranking minority or Democratic member of the Armed Services Committee to direct my staff to pursue that inquiry, and t hat’s exactly what we’ve done. And we will keep Senator Warner informed at all times of the direction of the inquiry, who we’re going to be talking to, which witnesses will be making statements to us, all the information which we’re seeking, which the CIA may not have given us.
I can’t just rely on the CIA anymore to give us the information which they say they have. We’ve got to have a probing inquiry on a number of committees. One committee is now finally doing it. Our committee in my judgment should, but in the absence of that inquiry at this time by the Armed Services Committee, and as to how our operations of the Defense Department were affected by the intelligence because if in fact intelligence was exaggerated, or shaped in any way to fit policy decisions of the administration, that has a direct effect on the security operations of our men and women in the armed forces.
MS. MITCHELL: Well...
SEN. LEVIN: We’re going to look into it the best we can and keep Senator Warner informed.
By the way, there’s one other little aspect to this and that is that the Defense Department itself said that there were shipments sought of uranium from Africa. They said that in December of 2002. So it wasn’t just the president saying it in the State of the Union message in January of this year, but the Defense Department had said nine months after this report from Joe Wilson, said in a printed document that was published all over the country that there were uranium shipments from Africa and that that was a basis for proceeding against Saddam Hussein.
MS. MITCHELL: Well, Senator, you’ve said you want to conduct this investigation, but there was a report in The Hill newspaper this week that you’re being starved for resources to conduct it by the Republican leadership. and I’m also wondering how are you going to get witnesses? Do you expect the White House to cooperate? Will you get CIA witnesses? How will you conduct this hearing?
SEN. WARNER: Andrea...
SEN. LEVIN: We’re going to be interviewing witnesses of the CIA, the Defense Department, the Defense Intelligence Agency. We’re going to keep Senator Warner informed. He and I keep in very close touch on this even though we have a procedural disagreement. And I’ve agreed to keep him informed. As a matter of fact, Senator Warner may from time to time join me in this inquiry. He has written me a letter to that effect. We would welcome that at any point because we’ve to make this as bipartisan as possible. The credibility of intelligence is so important. We cannot exaggerate it. If it’s
been exaggerated, that endangers the security of this nation and will jeopardize our actions in the future.
Are we going to act against Iran, for instance, based on a CIA assessment that there is a connection between al-Qaeda and Iran. If we find out there was exaggeration of the al-Qaeda/Iraq connection, it’s going to undermine confidence in the intelligence that we have, the intelligence assessments in this country and it seems to me that is so critical that it requires a bipartisan investigation or inquiry or review. I don’t care what the name is, providing it be thorough and providing it be bipartisan.
MS. MITCHELL: Senator Warner?
SEN. WARNER: Andrea, let’s step back. We, the United States, enjoy I think the finest collection of intelligence. It’s largely done by a magnificent group of civil servants all over the world. So let us not as a nation lose confidence in our system. And Carl well knows, he’s got his allocation of funding. We sat down together. He decided he wanted to do this on his own initiative. And this is fine.
MS. MITCHELL: Well, Senator, let’s...
SEN. WARNER: All I’m saying is let the Intel Committee finish its working going through mounds of documents and then our committee will re-examine the extent to which we have to go further.
MS. MITCHELL: Let’s look at the current situation. Do you think...
SEN. WARNER: Sure.