Return to Transcripts main page

Don Lemon Tonight

American's Safety Now in Question Without Mattis and Troops in Syria; General Mattis Had Enough for Trump. Aired 11-12m ET

Aired December 20, 2018 - 23:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:00:00] DON LEMON, CNN HOST: This is CNN Tonight. I'm Don Lemon.

Our breaking news. That Defense Secretary James Mattis quits a day after President Trump's abrupt and controversial decision to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria.

Check out the reactions, though, from top officials. I'll start with John Brennan. He says disaster looms. The next one says "oh, shit." Deeply alarming. Almost our worst nightmare. Will endanger our nation, damage alliances and empower adversaries.

It should give pause to every American. This is chaos. It's putting America in danger. Isolationism is a weak strategy that will harm America. We're less safe. This is scary. A loss to our country's leadership.

President Trump is plunging us into chaos. This is an executive branch in crisis, a national security crisis, no way around it. I'm particularly distressed that he is resigning. This administration has abandoned those core American believes.

And the list continues. And these are the comments from Democrats and Republicans, this is a monumental night in our country.

General Mattis, one of the highest-ranking members of the Trump administration and one of the most important military leaders in the world had the courage to take a stand and tell the world exactly how he felt about the president and his administration.

He didn't do it as an anonymous op-ed in the New York Times. he didn't pretend it was for personal reasons. He was direct. In his resignation letter, Mattis wrote, in part. "While the U.S. remains the indispensable nation in the free world, we cannot protect our interest or serve that roll effectively without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies."

He goes on to write, "I believe we must be resolute and unambiguous in our approach to those countries whose strategic interests are increasingly in tension with ours. It is clear that China and Russia, for example, want to shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model gaining veto authority over other nations' economic, diplomatic, and security decisions to promote their own interests at the expense of their neighbors, America and our allies. That is why we must use all the tools of American power to promote --

to provide for the common defense."

And finally, he writes, "Because you have the right to have a secretary of defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down."

Fareed Zakaria joins me now. Every day there is something with this administration. Can you please help us explain to us how important, how critical this moment is right now?

FAREED ZAKARIA, CNN HOST: Well, first, to put in context, General Mattis' resignation, this is, I think the first that I can think of senior administration official at the level of secretary of state, secretary of defense resigning on a matter of principle since Cyrus Vance did that in the Carter administration. That doesn't happen very often.

Washington is a place where people love power. They wield power with great relish and this is really the pinnacle, as you say. Running the Pentagon is the largest organization in the world, it is the most lethal organization in the world, it's the biggest budget in the world.

What Mattis is saying very simply is enough. He had tried to find ways to constrain Trump, to influence him and I think there are two things going on here. The first is clearly the chaos of the decision-making process.

James Mattis had had these conversations with Donald Trump about troop deployments in Syria, about troop deployments in Afghanistan. He had gotten the president on board with the policy that was then articulated. We were going to stay there, we were going to actually increase some of the lethal power Trump used to boast about that.

And then all of a sudden, seemingly, totally, mercurially, idiosyncratically, impulsively, Trump reverses himself, reverses all these decisions, doesn't bother to inform most of the people involved. Certainly, it doesn't inform allies.

And I think that chaos of decision making is probably part of what just has frustrated James Mattis so much but the bigger issue is the one you raised in quoting the letter.

[23:05:01] Clearly, he feels that Trump is simply not on board with the foreign policy that every president has followed since Harry Truman. A policy that says we are going to build a more peaceful, a more stable world through a network of alliances and institutions. That means we're going to respect those alliances and institutions. We're going to stand up against our adversaries.

And Trump doesn't really believe in any of these. He thinks the allies are the problem. He wants to disrespects the allies. He wants to cozy up to the adversaries. He wants to blow up the whole model. And facing this, you know, both the substance of the deep substance of this agreement and the chaos and disrespect that the decision-making process reflects both on him and on allies. I think James Mattis just said enough.

LEMON: Is it perplexing to you that the president spun it as a retirement letter. Because if you read it, I would think so. Maybe -- it appears to be a clear repudiation of this presidency.

ZAKARIA: Well, as always with Trump he doesn't, you know, he doesn't seem to know enough. What does he mean retirement? The secretary of defense doesn't retire.

LEMON: Doesn't retire.

ZAKARIA: He's either fired or he resigns. It's not a -- it's not a military position.

LEMON: "I very much appreciate this opportunity to serve the nation and our men and women in uniform." Nothing about administration, nothing about the president.

ZAKARIA: Well, if you remember and there was that early cabinet meeting where the cabinet with Trump forced his cabinet to go to a series of, you know, hosannas to his leadership, they were the kind of cringe worthy moment where almost like the North Korean dear leader and every cabinet member and Reince Priebus, the chief of staff, and Mike Pence talked about what a great man Trump was. James Mattis -- Jim Mattis was the only person who didn't.

He said I'm grateful for the opportunity to serve the American people and to serve our troops. You see that again here. He is not thanking Trump in some slavish personal way. He's thanking the country for the opportunity to lead the armed forces.

LEMON: Why this point, then? I mean, it wasn't the Muslim ban. It wasn't the separation of children, it wasn't -- I mean, but, so, why is this the straw?

ZAKARIA: I think as I said because probably, he felt he had had these conversations with Trump. They had agreed on a policy.

LEMON: OK.

ZAKARIA: That policy was then put in place, implemented and alliances, you know, allies were group together into making that policy work. Adversaries were put on notice. And then all of a sudden, he just upends the entire policy, you know.

I think that with every cabinet official, you're always choosing, you know, you don't win every battle. You make -- you make a recommendation; the president goes with it and sometimes doesn't.

But in this case, these are big decisions that Mattis had the president make just a year ago.

LEMON: Yes.

ZAKARIA: And they'll reversed. I think this is one of the problems, you know, people privately tell me about working in this administration, is that you don't know whether everything you've worked on will be overruled tomorrow because the president gets up and sees something on Fox.

LEMON: So reportedly, that Mattis had a pact with Rex Tillerson and Secretary Steve Mnuchin last year that they apparently agreed to leave the administration is one was forced out. Do you think that other officials will follow him, General Mattis?

ZAKARIA: I think so far, the only person who really has consistently shown backbone and dignity is Jim Mattis. The rest of them frankly have never showed it at any point. We'll see whether that proves to be true. My prediction, nobody will leave. Mattis will leave alone.

LEMON: The adult has left--

(CROSSTALK)

ZAKARIA: the adult has left. And what's distressing about it is, you know, you already have a national security council, that is apparently a third -- a third of the seats unfilled, national economic council similarly their key positions and the White House is rarely difficult to staff. These are the most powerful jobs in Washington. You're working directly for the president.

LEMON: Everybody wants that.

ZAKARIA: And nobody -- yes. Everybody wants them and, you know, nobody seems to want to work for this president but now you see why.

LEMON: Yes.

ZAKARIA: So, you have the statute of Jim Mattis. You have convinced the president on a policy and one day it's all up ended.

LEMON: Pleasure, Fareed, thank you. I appreciate it. Don't miss Fareed Zarakia GPS Sunday at 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. Eastern.

We'll be right back.

[23:10:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: So, right now there is not a permanent attorney general, defense secretary or chief of staff. The country is heading into a possible government shutdown because the president wants money for his border wall.

Stocks are having the worst December since the Great Depression. And Robert Mueller has indicted multiple members of Trump's inner circle. Is this administration melting down?

Joining me now is Nicholas Kristof, and Frank Bruni. Frank, I see your head, why are you shaking your head? Good evening, by the way.

FRANK BRUNI, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: That -- because that phrase has been in my head all day, that meltdown phrase. This feels, you said it's a monumental night just a few minutes ago, Don. It really, there is no hyperbole in that.

This, I sit here I feel so anxious and fearful and sad about the country because the way this president is behaving and all the things you just mentioned, it does feel like we're on the precipice of something very bad, if not there already.

Jim Mattis was the best of this administration. This is not an administration that is overloaded with talent. He is the pinnacle of the administration. He is someone who clearly was trying to stay in that job as long as possible and as long as he felt that he could make a positive impact on President Trump.

And he is seeming to say now this president is uneducable, he's uninfluenceable by reason, by expertise, by respect for tradition. And when you hear that it is impossible not to feel great fear about the direction of this country.

LEMON: Nick, what do you think?

[23:14:55] NICHOLAS KRISTOF, COLUMNIST, NEW YORK TIMES: So, when President Trump took office, I know there were competing theories. One was that he would learn more about the world. He would be restrained by advisors. He would grow into the position, and the other was, that he would gradually shake off the constraints and go his own way.

And I think clearly, the second core has taken effect. I'm, you know, at the end of the day, I think that domestically he is constrained by institutions, by Congress, by laws and the area where he has, the president has the greatest economy of course is international appearance. I think that's why as Frank says, the resignation of Secretary Mattis is deeply alarming.

But, you know, I would also say that if you look back at the course of the last two years, I think that while there is plenty of reason to be alarmed by the way President Trump is going, we should also remember that American institutions have been gravely tested and I think they've -- those institutions have actually stood up remarkably well.

You look at the courts. You look at law. You look at the intelligence community. You look at the professional civil service. You look at the military. You look at the journalism, and, you know, we've -- all these institutions have their flaws. We've all made mistakes but the institutions have to reasonably reassuring degree manage to uphold some pretty crucial American values.

LEMON: Don't you think after this, there is going to be some rejiggering in all of those places to prevent the possibility of teething off a precipice again?

KRISTOF: So, I think--

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: Because they've held up.

KRISTOF: They have. LEMON: So far.

KRISTOF: They have and I think that -- I think that it's going to be -- that Republicans are already clearly divided. I think that it may be easier for these institutions to withstand the rogue president when he is constrained by Bob Mueller, when more Republicans are speaking against him when there is only two years to go.

LEMON: Did you want to add anything to that, Frank, before I ask you another question?

BRUNI: Well, I want to say the following, which is, I think Nick is mostly right about the last couple of years in terms of institutions standing up and they shouldn't have to do battle with the president the way they do.

But the last, you know, month, the last month since the midterms concerns me in particular. The midterms were no two ways to look at it that they were repudiation of Donald Trump. And I think even in all of his narcissism he had to see that. But what did he do after that repudiation? Did he take a look at his shortcomings and some of his worst traits and try to mitigate them? No.

He seems to be doubling and tripling down on all of the things about him that earned him that repudiation. I mean, there is something so deliberately rash and defiant about this decision with Syria about what he may be poised to do in terms of Afghanistan.

And I'm just very alarmed by a leader, it's generous to use that term for him who seems never to self-examine and say hey, how could I be better? But seems to just act like a defiant child and say you don't like these things about me I'm going to show you more of them.

LEMON: That's the reason I said to Nick, I said they've stood up so far. I mean, we shall see. But Frank, considering what you just said, how petty is it the president -- of the president that he announced on Twitter that Mattis was, quote, "retiring" knowing that that was a lie that Mattis was resigning in protest?

BRUNI: Well, it's incredibly petty and it goes, it's of a peace with tweeting that Rex Tillerson is dumb as a rock or stone or whatever it was. He's at peace of tweeting that Omarosa looks like a dog.

I mean, this is the way our president amazingly behaves. This one though is so silly because within hours, we knew that that tweet was meaningless. We had this letter that Mattis wrote which is soulful and heartfelt in which, you know, has a very subdued tone, which is one of the things that gives it such impact and authority.

But if you read that letter, it's very clear he's resigning in protest, he's very clearly rebuking the president. And so, Trump's tweet, in retrospect just looks like the silly wishful thinking of a child that he could make his spin, you know, win the day.

LEMON: Yes. Nick, General Mattis, this was back in 2014, he was asked whether there was a situation in which he would resign over bad orders, right, from civilian leaders. This was his answer, I'll put it up here.

He said, "Had I ever been asked to do something unethical, immoral, or a felony study, of course, you'd owe it to yourself, you'd owe it to your troops."

And then he went on to argue for the (Inaudible) chain of command saying that, "I always expected to be heard as I rose in prank -- in rank, excuse me, as I rose in rank. But under our system of government if you really believe in it, if you trust in it, if you have faith in it, you don't expect to be obeyed as a general. Words like you serve at the pleasure of the president, you can't say.

[23:20:01] Those words only count when I agree and the president agrees with me. Loyalty really counts when there is a hundred reasons not to be loyal."

Pretty significant tonight, right?

KRISTOF: It is. I think Mattis has been quite conflicted. He's talked to people around him about this, about his desire to protect American interests and American policies at the same time that he, you know, is also concerned about his own honor, his own history.

And I think that what pushed him over the edge was not just Syria and it was not just Afghanistan but it was also this larger issue of American alliances of the architecture that has kept the world safe for the last 75 years and that the U.S. strong interest in preserving that he feels President Trump is now undermining and at some point, he does not want to be part of that.

LEMON: Frank, I remember that you wrote a column about Secretary Mattis just last month after he compared troop deployment at the border to President Woodrow Wilson's 1916 deployment to counter Mexican revolutionary General Francisco Pancho Villa, remember that column that you wrote?

And you said, "Defense Secretary Jim Mattis who recently evoked that specter was supposed to be -- was supposed to speak to better language. He was known to be a saner sort, not just the proverbial adult in the room but the conscious amid the corruption and the barricade against disaster. I like to think that millions of American parents instructed their children to expand their bedtime prayers, watch over mommy, protect daddy, and don't let anything bad happen to General Mattis."

What does it mean to our country now that the conscious amid the corruption and barricade against disaster is now gone?

BRUNI: It means that we're left with even less talent in this administration. It means that the number of people around Donald Trump who have respect for traditions who, as Nick was just talking about, have respect for alliances, who have a much more kind of grounded responsible approach to the world.

The number of people who fit that description, fewer and fewer in this administration. And this administration can't find a new chief of staff. It just can't attract top talent and that's because, you know, you mentioned pettiness before. It's because of the way Donald Trump behaves and treats people.

He has joked that he only gets the best. He has no access to the best because the best doesn't want to have anything to do with a culture this chaotic and this ungrounded.

LEMON: Yes. Nick, I want to get your reaction. But I just wonder if you think that what Trump sending troops to the border, remember.

KRISTOF: Yes.

LEMON: If that played into his decision and send troops to the border yet he's withdrawing troops from Syria if he said one is a stunt, one is real and he just said I wonder if that played into his decision.

KRISTOF: I mean, I think -- I think that was all, you know, profoundly embarrassing for the professional military. But, you know, but so much of this has been and I think at some point, you know, let me give you an example of the difference that Mattis makes.

So, a year ago, I think if we had had -- I think Mattis may well have helped avoid some kind of conflict in the Korean peninsula. There was tremendous pressure from the White House on the Pentagon to consider strikes on North Korea to consider very provocative actions sending farmers close to North Korea, this kind of thing and Mattis strongly resisted that.

You look at Mike Pompeo, I think that if were Pompeo being insulted on these issues, I don't think he would push back in the same way. I think he's much more, very smart. Knows the world but much more of a yes man and that's the case, I think, where, you know, because Mattis was there, he profoundly protected Koreans, Americans, and the entire world.

LEMON: Thank you, gentlemen. I appreciate it.

Up next, reaction to Secretary Mattis' powerful resignation from the incoming chair of the House foreign affairs committee.

[23:25:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Defense Secretary Mattis in his resignation letter make making a bold statement to the nation and the world about President Trump's military policies, especially his controversial decision to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria.

Now I want to bring in New York Congressman Eliot Engel, the incoming chair of the House foreign affairs committee. Congressman, good evening. Thank you so much for joining us.

REP. ELIOT ENGEL, (D) NEW YORK: Thank you. My pleasure.

LEMON: And especially this -- yes. This is l especially busy evening. Listen, what first went through your mind when you heard about this resignation. Because the reactions from your colleagues and other officials they've been pretty stunning.

ENGEL: My first reaction was, oh, my, God, the only grown up in the room is now just left and that's really what happened. It's really a pity and you can see by his resignation letter that he's been agonizing for quite some time now but the pull out of Syria is the straw that broke the camel's back.

LEMON: Yes. You can see that he put some effort and energy and thought into writing that resignation letter.

Congressman, sources are telling CNN that Mattis tried and failed to change the president's mind over withdrawing troops from Syria. How would you characterize the president's understanding of the region and what's at strike there?

ENGEL: Well, I don't know how much he could understand it if he keeps switching his game plan. You know, it's sort of like, whoever speaks with him last or what I call by a fly by the seat of your pants diplomacy.

I mean, this is just a horrific thing, not because we want to keep American troops there in perpetuity, that's not what we want, but we know that as American lives and lives of our allies are being save. The policy so far has worked. And now we live and ISIS has not been defeated. They will surely have a resurgence again.

[23:29:59] We let Turkey, Erdogan push us into leaving because he said he's going to go after the Kurds and we're in the way. The Kurds have been our loyal and faithful allies through these many years and this is the thanks they get and it really increases the worry for countries like Israel, which could see Iran and the Syrian leadership get together with Russia beyond the border of Israel. That's something we have to worry about as well.

So I just don't know, you know, what it is between President Trump and Putin, why the moves he makes seem to benefit countries like Russia, but it's very disconcerting. And, you know, again, it's not that we want to have a presence there forever, but you don't pull out unless it's wise to do so, and clearly every bit of analytical thinking says it is going to cause a worse blood bath and then if we have to get back in, it will be even more impossible for us then.

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: Let me talk about something else. Several defense officials are telling CNN that the president also wants to draw down troops in Afghanistan. What do you think of that?

ENGEL: Well, I think it would be the same mistake. It's ironic they criticized President Obama when he drew down troops in Afghanistan and you remember we had to go back in and it was much more difficult. That will be the same thing I predict unfortunately in Syria now. You think that he would have learned, but apparently nothing was learned.

LEMON: Can we just talk about where we are right now? And I just want to get your opinion, because if you look at just what happened just now, just this week, the Dow is down almost 500 points today. The government is about to shut down. He's pulling out of Syria. There is a new attorney general that he's asking for, a new chief of staff that he's seeking as well, a new interior secretary that he's seeking, and Mattis is out. What in the world is going on? Is this a rude awakening for many of the Trump supporters and Republicans in this country?

ENGEL: I don't know. It's not a rude awakening for me unfortunately and most of the people in my district who didn't vote for Trump. It's just scary because whether you like someone or not, you want to feel that there is sort of firmness at the helm. And with President Trump going back and forth and changing his mind, you almost feel like no one is driving.

You know, we are sitting back with those cars that have no driver and you don't know if you're going to crash or not. It's very, very frightening. And as you mentioned, we're seeing it in the stock market now and we're going to see a lot more. And a lot of good people are not going to want to come to the administration because if you're not being listened to, if you're being disregarded, why should you want to come?

LEMON: Congressman Engel, thank you for your time.

ENGEL: Thank you. My pleasure.

LEMON: There could be some major consequences of Mattis' resignation. We're going to talk about possible security risks we all should be worried about right after this.

[23:35:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Sources say Defense Secretary Mattis could not see eye-to-eye with the president over his abrupt decision to pull U.S. troops out of Syria. But the differences in opinion went beyond that.

Here to discuss, Lieutenant General Mark Hertling, and CNN national security analyst Sam Vinograd. Thank you so much for joining us, both of you. Sam, we are going to start with you. This is by far the boldest resignation letter we have heard from a Trump administration official. What is your reaction?

SAMANTHA VINOGRAD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: My reaction is that this is truly unprecedented. The letter obviously laid out a series of differences that the secretary of defense had with the president on the issues that are the most core to U.S. national security. The secretary of defense focused, for example, on this issue of alliances.

I want to pose an operational question. If the secretary of defense is saying that we can't currently rely on our allies, who are we going to call when the next ISIS is born and we need to call our coalition partners together to try to protect American national security? No one is going to be there to work with us because we destroyed these relationships.

And Don, I also want to point out that the secretary said that he had differences of opinion with the president on Russia and China. As secretary of defense, he's charged with protecting us from those actors in land, air, sea, space and even cyber. So at this point, it is unclear to me what he thinks the president is doing well from the national security perspective.

LEMON: Interesting. General Hertling, simply, are we less safe with Mattis gone?

MARK HERTLING, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: We are, Don. And I think it has to do with a couple things. First of all, having attended a lot of security forums both here in the United States and overseas since I've been retired, I've noticed that Secretary Mattis had been a calming influence. He had been the individual who would come behind various presidential decisions and really put the calm on our allies.

Well, the president said this, but what he really meant, and here, let me say it a different way, and I'll use the example of NATO. Secretary Mattis was phenomenal in terms of calming the NATO, general officers and ministers of defenses, after the president had gone through on several occasions and really swept through and caused all sorts of terror, the elephants in the parade if you will. So without him being that individual overseas, it is going to be much more difficult.

[23:40:00] I heard in your last segment, your guests were talking about Secretary Mattis also as the calming influence in the PCs, the policy committees in the White House. He was the one that we'll never know until history is written contributed some significant advice and led up to the president and was the individual in the room who really made different things happen when the president was going off the rail.

So when you're talking about the potential for a calming influence, both with our allies and partners and with members of the president's staff, Secretary Mattis really stood head and shoulders above the rest of the cabinet.

LEMON: Sam, I want to put up something you tweeted earlier. That was about you being in the White House when Mattis and President Obama disagreed on Iran policy. Talk to me about the difference.

VINOGRAD: Well, Don, it's so interesting listening to General Hertling point out that General Mattis was a calming influence in this principle committee meetings because when I was at the White House, General Mattis was known -- it's no secret, as "Mad Dog Mattis" because he was so forceful about the options that he wanted the president to consider when it came to Iran.

And General Mattis and President Obama had strong disagreements about the tools that the U.S. government should use to counter Iranian influence in central command where General Mattis was in charge with.

The difference was, though, Don, while they agreed on the tactics -- they disagreed on the tactics, excuse me, they agreed on the end game, and that's why General Mattis didn't quit when President Obama didn't agree with the recommendation that he made. He followed his orders. He followed the president's recommendation. But when you think about that principal committee needing now and you think about the national security council meeting, think about what it means for security. We have a lame-duck cabinet to begin with. The president doesn't actually listen to his national security team. We now literally have a placeholder secretary of defense. He is out the door by the end of February if the president lets him into this situation room at this point.

We have a national security advisor who missing in action and lets Stephen Miller give a foreign policy briefing to Wolf Blitzer, our colleague, earlier today. And who is left to actually represent policy interests and to disagree with the president, have the discussion and then protect American national security?

LEMON: That's a good question. Who is left, general?

HERTLING: First, if I can, Don, to comment on what Sam just said, it's an interesting dynamic. I knew General Mattis before as well. He was my senior trainer before I took a division in Iraq. And I would say he was nothing short of a less than calming influence. He had the ability to chew ass with the best of them and was quite dynamic.

But what is interesting is the requirements for strategic leadership is to address your superiors, the people who are your bosses, in different ways depending on their style. So where he may have been forceful with President Obama who was somewhat calm and sometimes didn't make the quickest of decisions and he had to be forceful with President Trump, he was probably probably, I didn't see him, but I would suggest he was very calming in his attempt to influence and talk him off the rails.

But to get to your question who is left? You know, we've lost some key figures in national security. We've lost some key figures within the cabinet. Secretary Mattis' resignation and his departure is much different. And I want to make this point, too, Don, that military officers throughout their career discuss resignations in their different schools and the work college and staff college because there is always the requirement to serve your civilian masters.

So, in reading Secretary Mattis' letter today, it was not your typical resignation letter. He has thought long and hard about this, and I'm sure it pained him to deliver that message. But it's one of these kind of things that it doesn't happen often in the military. In fact, I was searching today. There has only been a few instances of senior military officials or defense department officials resigning because of differences with their boss over the decades.

But Secretary Mattis doing this today is significant and it better send a clear message to others in the cabinet to keep the president straight. I'm not sure who the replacement is going to be for him but it should be someone with a strong backbone and not an ideologue like Stephen Miller.

LEMON: General Hertling, Sam Vinograd, thank you very much. I appreciate your time.

VINOGRAD: Thanks.

LEMON: We'll be right back.

[23:45:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: There are new questions tonight if the Justice Department may move to curb the Russia investigation. We are learning that the acting attorney general, Matthew Whitaker, is rejecting the advice of Justice Department ethics officials that he recused himself from the Mueller investigation.

A source tells CNN that Whitaker never sought a formal recommendation which is all the more unusual since back in November, the DOJ said, acting AG Matt Whitaker is fully committed to following all appropriate processes and procedures at the Department of Justice, including consulting with senior ethics officials on his oversight responsibilities and matters that may warrant refusal.

But ethics officials were concerned by comments Whitaker made on TV about the Mueller investigation. Comments like this which he made on this show back in June of 2017.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MATTHEW WHITAKER, ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL: I think think what's happening is we're conflicting sort of the lawyers and the prosecutors and the FBI and what they do with politics, and that gets really dangerous. And what we hear is Jim Comey believes the president asked him to stop the investigation of Mike Flynn but that hasn't happened, it didn't happen.

[23:50:00] It continues to go on as we sit here today. So, whether or not what Jim Comey believed he heard, it also matters what the intent of the president was. And he had all the power in the constitution to actually tell him to stop, and he didn't.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Officials noted that his TV commentary would give the impression that Whitaker could not be an impartial overseer of the investigation. Whitaker is not expected to be briefed on the Mueller investigation. And remember, he is the acting attorney general.

President Trump has nominated William Barr to that post. Barr's opinion on the Mueller investigation is now a little bit clearer, thanks to the release of an unsolicited memo he wrote to the Justice Department arguing that an obstruction of justice investigation into the president was not legally justifiable.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein downplayed the importance of the memo to reporters.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROD ROSENSTEIN, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES: He shared his personal opinion with the department. Lots of people offer opinions to the Department of Justice, but they don't influence our own decision making. We have very experienced lawyers, and obviously our decisions are informed by our knowledge of the actual facts of the case which Mr. Barr didn't have.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: But according to The Wall Street Journal, Barr also shared the memo with the lawyer representing the White House in the Mueller investigation. Now you have to ask, was Barr who was last in public service when he served under President George H.W. Bush as his attorney general, was he pitching himself for the job with this memo? Matthew Axelrod is here. Matthew, good evening.

MATTHEW AXELROD, FORMER JUSTICE DEPARTMENT SENIOR OFFICIAL UNDER OBAMA ADMINISTRATION: Good evening.

LEMON: Do you think he is pitching himself?

AXELROD: I don't know if he is pitching himself but I do think today was an extraordinary day at the Department of Justice as you outlined the two people handpicked by the president to oversee the Department of Justice, both acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker and then the nominee to be attorney general Bill Barr, had serious ethics questions swirling around them today and that's not normal.

LEMON: Do you think the president is trying to constraint the Mueller investigation by putting his critics in charge of the Justice Department?

AXELROD: Look, I think especially with Matt Whitaker, it's hard to come to a different conclusion, right? So, what you have is for the first time in DOJ's history, you have someone who came in to be acting attorney general who did not come from a Senate-confirmed post.

The first time in history happening at the same time that the person in that position oversees an investigation into the president. Then you have as you noted a commitment by DOJ that person would follow the normal process and consult with the DOJ ethics officials. And today we learned that he did consult with the DOJ ethics officials. He just ignored their recommendation and advice that he should recuse himself.

And so he remains in charge of the investigation of the president. That's really troubling and disturbing. It does, I think, raise the question of whether he was selected and put there in order to specifically oversee the Mueller probe with a thumb on the scale, and that is completely contrary to how the Department of Justice is supposed to and traditionally has done business, which is based on the facts and the law and free from politics. LEMON: Are you worried that he will now try to interfere?

AXELROD: So, I am hopeful that he would not. The letter that was sent by the department to Congress this evening, which laid out the status of the recusal process and the ultimate result, committed that he would not, that he would do things the right way with integrity.

But look, the whole reason that these ethics rules exist is not just that things be done on the level in the right way so that the public can have confidence that things are being done on the level and in the right way, and that the appearance matters. And that was the basis on which the senior career folks at DOJ recommended that he recuse himself was on the appearance.

And because he's ignored that advice, whether it's done on the level or not, unfortunately there is going to be a perception that something is off, and that's why it's so destructive to the reputation and to the integrity of the process.

LEMON: Matthew Axelrod, let's now turn to the memo written by Barr about the Mueller investigation. This is what Senator Mark Warner told our Manu Raju.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MARK WARNER (D), VIRGINIA: I think it's more than a little bizarre that a private attorney, Mr. Barr, would write this kind of memo and then in effect give it, my understanding, to officials in the White House almost as an attempt to solicit this position to say hey, Mr. Trump, don't worry, I'll have your back on the Mueller investigation.

[23:55:05] To me, this makes this individual disqualified for the position.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So how unusual is it to send a memo like the one Bill Barr sent?

AXELROD: Incredibly unusual. So in my time at the Department of Justice, I worked there for over 12 years and was in senior leadership position for over four, it didn't happen a single time. In other words, we never received an unsolicited detailed legal memo about a pending criminal investigation.

LEMON: Is it disqualifying?

AXELROD: Look, that will be something that the senators will have to consider during his confirmation hearing, but it's certainly going to be a problem for him and something he's got to be asked a lot of questions about. And look, the process is a problem as we've been discussing, the process of him sending this unsolicited memo to the the department and to the president's lawyer in the White House counsel's office, but also the substance of the memo is concerning.

It takes quite an extreme view about the president's authority and inability of the special counsel to investigate him for obstruction of justice for certain acts.

LEMON: Matthew Axelrod, thank you for your time.

AXELROD: Thank you.

LEMON: Thanks for watching. Our coverage continues. [24:00:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)