Return to Transcripts main page

Live From...

Analysis With Julian Epstein, Jack Burkman

Aired January 13, 2004 - 14:10   ET

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

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


KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: For the moment, the documents overshadow O'Neill's comments to "60 Minutes," one of which likened President Bush to a blind man in a room full of deaf people. O'Neill says he'd take that back if he could. But it's the written stuff that could get him in real trouble.
Insights now from Jack Burkman, a lawyer and GOP consultant joining us from New York. And Julian Epstein, a Democratic strategist and consultant in Washington. Gentlemen, good to see you.

(CROSSTALK)

PHILLIPS: First reaction to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's comments. He just made them. He said he made two phone calls to Paul O'Neill, never told him to not write the book, but was surprised by what has come out of this controversy. He said he hasn't read it so he can't really confirm it. What's your take on what Rumsfeld had to say? Let's start with you, Jack.

JACK BURKMAN, ATTY., GOP CONSULTANT: I think had he it about right. He was being a gentlemen. He hasn't read the book.

The one thing have you to understand, Kyra, is that O'Neill took this job under fraudulent circumstances. A lot of what happened is the guy was a flop as treasury secretary. He couldn't get along with Democrats or Republicans in Congress. He took the job without believing in the president's tax plan. And now there is a lot of bitterness.

I'll tell you something else. You know, if he really feels passionately and wants to help the country and believes these things -- and if he does, he should say them -- why didn't he say them a year ago? Well, he didn't say them a year ago because his publisher wanted to hold the story and time it for the release of the primary season and the release of the general election and sell books.

PHILLIPS: Julian, political purpose here? Is it sour grapes against the White House, the president? Does he need money from a book deal? what's going on?

JULIAN EPSTEIN, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Who knows about all of that? There may be some sour grapes. But it really doesn't matter, particularly when there's documentary evidence that Mr. O'Neill was putting forward.

Look. I think it's very interesting that it took the White House three or four months to act on the disclosure of Valerie Plame, the CIA agent that was widely regarded as a retaliatory disclosure. Here they're acting on the disclosure by Mr. O'Neill within about a day or two.

And I think this is very politically foolish. Why is that? Because Democrats, when it gets to the general election, are going to say the following. The president's own treasury secretary said that the economic decisions were driven by a political concern to help the rich. The treasury secretary said that war was pretextual in Iraq. The president's own treasury secretary said that the president wanted to cozy up to corporate criminals like Ken Lay of Enron.

(CROSSTALK)

BURKMAN: I'll give you one more, Julian. The president's own treasury secretary broke the law and committed felonies. He misstated the law on the "Today" show. He's already setting up his excuse. He's saying, Well, the general counsel at treasury gave me that. That means it's OK.

(CROSSTALK)

PHILLIPS: Julian, if we could, let's address that because we're short on time.

EPSTEIN: Sure, we have no idea whether they were classified.

(CROSSTALK)

EPSTEIN: Classified is a process that's determined under law that has to be done at the senior levels of government. It's often a very willy-nilly procedure, therefore, it's hard to prosecute. That's one.

Secondly, some of these documents in question are already available on the Web. Third, remember it was this very White House...

(CROSSTALK)

EPSTEIN: This White House was making available this kind of information to Bob Woodward who wrote the book on the invasion in Iraq.

(CROSSTALK)

BURKMAN: ... otherwise releasing information on the Web, releasing it to a journalist, that does not declassify it. The statute is very broad. It is probably the case that we classify too much information, all of us will probably agree on that.

But if something is stamped classified, the way the case law is, it is classified. And whether the general counsel in the treasury department gave it to you, whether Bob Woodward already has it or whether CNN has it has no relevance. It is still a felony.

(CROSSTALK) EPSTEIN: But there is no evidence that this was classified. What it said on the document was "secret." Secret and classification are two different classifications.

Secondly, most of these statutes require some kind of willfulness or intent. So if it is cleared by the general counsel by the Department of Treasury, it's a very difficult, not impossible case to prosecute.

The basic point is it's very silly of the White House, I think, to keep this issue in the public debate because ultimately they'll lose the public debate about this when it's the president's own treasury secretary.

(CROSSTALK)

PHILLIPS: When it comes down to it, how many classified documents does a treasury secretary actually get his or her hands on?

BURKMAN: A good many. In fact, a lot of the asset control, the treasury secretary has access to an awful lot. It's a very sensitive position, particularly after 9/11, because all of the foreign bank accounts all of the terrorist bank accounts. There is as much classified information flowing through treasury as anywhere in the government.

What I think, Kyra, to go back to, you notice Paul O'Neill. He's already spoken to his lawyers because what he said on the "Today" show showed you the defense. He's already setting up an affirmative defense.

He said, The general counsel gave them to me. That does not change the law. I think that will be very critical in the days and months ahead.

I do agree with Julian. I wish this issue would go away. It probably won't. I think Julian and others are going to prime this guy for a prime time speech at the Democratic National Convention. That's the way it looks.

EPSTEIN: I can guarantee you the Democrats won't let this go away. But I can also guarantee you that the White House isn't stupid enough to proceed with a prosecution on something that they'll lose legally and they would lose in the court of public opinion as well.

PHILLIPS: Tell you what. Julian Epstein, Jack Burkman, we'll be all over this too. Whether it's Democrats, Republicans, the media is on it also. We'll talk more about it and follow it.

Gentlemen, great discussion. Thank you so much.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com







Aired January 13, 2004 - 14:10   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: For the moment, the documents overshadow O'Neill's comments to "60 Minutes," one of which likened President Bush to a blind man in a room full of deaf people. O'Neill says he'd take that back if he could. But it's the written stuff that could get him in real trouble.
Insights now from Jack Burkman, a lawyer and GOP consultant joining us from New York. And Julian Epstein, a Democratic strategist and consultant in Washington. Gentlemen, good to see you.

(CROSSTALK)

PHILLIPS: First reaction to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's comments. He just made them. He said he made two phone calls to Paul O'Neill, never told him to not write the book, but was surprised by what has come out of this controversy. He said he hasn't read it so he can't really confirm it. What's your take on what Rumsfeld had to say? Let's start with you, Jack.

JACK BURKMAN, ATTY., GOP CONSULTANT: I think had he it about right. He was being a gentlemen. He hasn't read the book.

The one thing have you to understand, Kyra, is that O'Neill took this job under fraudulent circumstances. A lot of what happened is the guy was a flop as treasury secretary. He couldn't get along with Democrats or Republicans in Congress. He took the job without believing in the president's tax plan. And now there is a lot of bitterness.

I'll tell you something else. You know, if he really feels passionately and wants to help the country and believes these things -- and if he does, he should say them -- why didn't he say them a year ago? Well, he didn't say them a year ago because his publisher wanted to hold the story and time it for the release of the primary season and the release of the general election and sell books.

PHILLIPS: Julian, political purpose here? Is it sour grapes against the White House, the president? Does he need money from a book deal? what's going on?

JULIAN EPSTEIN, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Who knows about all of that? There may be some sour grapes. But it really doesn't matter, particularly when there's documentary evidence that Mr. O'Neill was putting forward.

Look. I think it's very interesting that it took the White House three or four months to act on the disclosure of Valerie Plame, the CIA agent that was widely regarded as a retaliatory disclosure. Here they're acting on the disclosure by Mr. O'Neill within about a day or two.

And I think this is very politically foolish. Why is that? Because Democrats, when it gets to the general election, are going to say the following. The president's own treasury secretary said that the economic decisions were driven by a political concern to help the rich. The treasury secretary said that war was pretextual in Iraq. The president's own treasury secretary said that the president wanted to cozy up to corporate criminals like Ken Lay of Enron.

(CROSSTALK)

BURKMAN: I'll give you one more, Julian. The president's own treasury secretary broke the law and committed felonies. He misstated the law on the "Today" show. He's already setting up his excuse. He's saying, Well, the general counsel at treasury gave me that. That means it's OK.

(CROSSTALK)

PHILLIPS: Julian, if we could, let's address that because we're short on time.

EPSTEIN: Sure, we have no idea whether they were classified.

(CROSSTALK)

EPSTEIN: Classified is a process that's determined under law that has to be done at the senior levels of government. It's often a very willy-nilly procedure, therefore, it's hard to prosecute. That's one.

Secondly, some of these documents in question are already available on the Web. Third, remember it was this very White House...

(CROSSTALK)

EPSTEIN: This White House was making available this kind of information to Bob Woodward who wrote the book on the invasion in Iraq.

(CROSSTALK)

BURKMAN: ... otherwise releasing information on the Web, releasing it to a journalist, that does not declassify it. The statute is very broad. It is probably the case that we classify too much information, all of us will probably agree on that.

But if something is stamped classified, the way the case law is, it is classified. And whether the general counsel in the treasury department gave it to you, whether Bob Woodward already has it or whether CNN has it has no relevance. It is still a felony.

(CROSSTALK) EPSTEIN: But there is no evidence that this was classified. What it said on the document was "secret." Secret and classification are two different classifications.

Secondly, most of these statutes require some kind of willfulness or intent. So if it is cleared by the general counsel by the Department of Treasury, it's a very difficult, not impossible case to prosecute.

The basic point is it's very silly of the White House, I think, to keep this issue in the public debate because ultimately they'll lose the public debate about this when it's the president's own treasury secretary.

(CROSSTALK)

PHILLIPS: When it comes down to it, how many classified documents does a treasury secretary actually get his or her hands on?

BURKMAN: A good many. In fact, a lot of the asset control, the treasury secretary has access to an awful lot. It's a very sensitive position, particularly after 9/11, because all of the foreign bank accounts all of the terrorist bank accounts. There is as much classified information flowing through treasury as anywhere in the government.

What I think, Kyra, to go back to, you notice Paul O'Neill. He's already spoken to his lawyers because what he said on the "Today" show showed you the defense. He's already setting up an affirmative defense.

He said, The general counsel gave them to me. That does not change the law. I think that will be very critical in the days and months ahead.

I do agree with Julian. I wish this issue would go away. It probably won't. I think Julian and others are going to prime this guy for a prime time speech at the Democratic National Convention. That's the way it looks.

EPSTEIN: I can guarantee you the Democrats won't let this go away. But I can also guarantee you that the White House isn't stupid enough to proceed with a prosecution on something that they'll lose legally and they would lose in the court of public opinion as well.

PHILLIPS: Tell you what. Julian Epstein, Jack Burkman, we'll be all over this too. Whether it's Democrats, Republicans, the media is on it also. We'll talk more about it and follow it.

Gentlemen, great discussion. Thank you so much.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com