Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Intelligence Probe

Aired February 09, 2004 - 07:09   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.


BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: The president is also criticized for allowing too much time for a new commission to investigate U.S. intelligence failures regarding the war. Some Democrats say the commission should report before the November election, not in March of next year, 2005, as it is right now on the schedule.
Joe Wilson, a former U.S. charge d'affaires in Iraq, is with us from our Washington bureau, back here on AMERICAN MORNING.

Nice to see you again. Good morning to you.

JOE WILSON, FORMER U.S. CHARGE D'AFFAIRES IN IRAQ: Hi, Bill. How are you this morning?

HEMMER: I'm doing fine. Thank you.

You've gone on record saying you will campaign actively against this White House to get George Bush out of power. What did you make of the interview yesterday with Tim Russert on NBC?

WILSON: Well, I'm not sure it broke a lot of new ground. I think those who believed in the president's rationale for going to war have been comforted, and those who didn't believe are reassured that the war was wrong in the first place.

HEMMER: So, you don't believe the ball was moved at all yesterday, is that right?

WILSON: Well, you know, unless the president hits a home run, I think it doesn't advantage him whatsoever what happened yesterday.

I must say I find it absolutely stunning that now the rationale for going to war was capacity. In other words, Saddam Hussein had a few scientists, as John Bolton (ph) said earlier in London, on his payroll. And, therefore, that's the reason for going to war. It's not imminent threat. It's not grave and gathering danger. It's capacity -- a few scientists on the payroll.

HEMMER: Are you suggesting there's a shift in the rationale then?

WILSON: Oh, indeed. I think -- it's not that I'm suggesting it. I think if you go and take a look at it, first it was the urgent threat to our national security posed by weapons in his hands and the possibility he might hand them off to non-state actors. And now, it is that Saddam was a bad man, Saddam was a mad man reason for doing it.

The quadrennial review, which is how we structure our military doctrine and resources and troops, doesn't have the mad man or bad man scenario as one of the rationales for using our military.

HEMMER: Let's look at the presidential commission that was announced late on Friday afternoon. And we can put the seven names up on the screen. Some may be familiar, some not. There is some criticism suggesting that only one person here has any intelligence background.

What do you make of the commission and how it's set up right now in terms of a deadline, March 2005? Is that acceptable? The White House saying essentially it wants to remove the element of politics away from the conclusions that these men and women may reach.

WILSON: Well, I don't think you are going to remove the politics out of this until such time as we really have a good sense of what the intelligence was that the administration based its decision to go to war on. And if this commission is going to look only at the constituted intelligence agencies and not look at the information that entered the decision-making matrix laterally, then we're not going to get any sort of answer that yields, I think, the truth.

HEMMER: On a personal matter, your wife, a CIA analyst, has been in the news and the headlines for the past year. You have said it has essentially ruined your life. Tell us how that's the case.

WILSON: Oh, I've never said that. It didn't ruin our lives at all. She's not an analyst. She's an operative. She works for the DDO with the CIA. She continues to go to work every day.

On the contrary, it hasn't ruined our lives. It's made life difficult for those who may have leaked it and clearly for those who are having to investigate it. But, you know, this is a great country we live in, and the public square is open to everybody. And these sorts of vindictive actions on the part of a hostile administration are simply unacceptable, and the American people know that.

HEMMER: Do you expect indictments from that case?

WILSON: I know what I've read, which was on the wires last week, but I don't expect anything until such time as I hear it from the Justice Department or from the special prosecutor.

HEMMER: So...

WILSON: But I would make one other point on that, and that is irrespective of their indictments -- and you hear a number of pundits talk about, well, it may not have been illegal because the people who did this may not have known what she was -- notwithstanding that, it is a breach of national security.

There is somebody sitting, according to "The Washington Post," close to the president of the United States, who is prepared to defend his political agenda by violating the national security of my country. Irrespective of whether it is ultimately determined to have been a criminal act, it is a violation of national security.

HEMMER: Joe Wilson, thanks for being with us today.

WILSON: Good to be with you, Bill.

HEMMER: All right.

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 February 9, 2004 - 07:09   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: The president is also criticized for allowing too much time for a new commission to investigate U.S. intelligence failures regarding the war. Some Democrats say the commission should report before the November election, not in March of next year, 2005, as it is right now on the schedule.
Joe Wilson, a former U.S. charge d'affaires in Iraq, is with us from our Washington bureau, back here on AMERICAN MORNING.

Nice to see you again. Good morning to you.

JOE WILSON, FORMER U.S. CHARGE D'AFFAIRES IN IRAQ: Hi, Bill. How are you this morning?

HEMMER: I'm doing fine. Thank you.

You've gone on record saying you will campaign actively against this White House to get George Bush out of power. What did you make of the interview yesterday with Tim Russert on NBC?

WILSON: Well, I'm not sure it broke a lot of new ground. I think those who believed in the president's rationale for going to war have been comforted, and those who didn't believe are reassured that the war was wrong in the first place.

HEMMER: So, you don't believe the ball was moved at all yesterday, is that right?

WILSON: Well, you know, unless the president hits a home run, I think it doesn't advantage him whatsoever what happened yesterday.

I must say I find it absolutely stunning that now the rationale for going to war was capacity. In other words, Saddam Hussein had a few scientists, as John Bolton (ph) said earlier in London, on his payroll. And, therefore, that's the reason for going to war. It's not imminent threat. It's not grave and gathering danger. It's capacity -- a few scientists on the payroll.

HEMMER: Are you suggesting there's a shift in the rationale then?

WILSON: Oh, indeed. I think -- it's not that I'm suggesting it. I think if you go and take a look at it, first it was the urgent threat to our national security posed by weapons in his hands and the possibility he might hand them off to non-state actors. And now, it is that Saddam was a bad man, Saddam was a mad man reason for doing it.

The quadrennial review, which is how we structure our military doctrine and resources and troops, doesn't have the mad man or bad man scenario as one of the rationales for using our military.

HEMMER: Let's look at the presidential commission that was announced late on Friday afternoon. And we can put the seven names up on the screen. Some may be familiar, some not. There is some criticism suggesting that only one person here has any intelligence background.

What do you make of the commission and how it's set up right now in terms of a deadline, March 2005? Is that acceptable? The White House saying essentially it wants to remove the element of politics away from the conclusions that these men and women may reach.

WILSON: Well, I don't think you are going to remove the politics out of this until such time as we really have a good sense of what the intelligence was that the administration based its decision to go to war on. And if this commission is going to look only at the constituted intelligence agencies and not look at the information that entered the decision-making matrix laterally, then we're not going to get any sort of answer that yields, I think, the truth.

HEMMER: On a personal matter, your wife, a CIA analyst, has been in the news and the headlines for the past year. You have said it has essentially ruined your life. Tell us how that's the case.

WILSON: Oh, I've never said that. It didn't ruin our lives at all. She's not an analyst. She's an operative. She works for the DDO with the CIA. She continues to go to work every day.

On the contrary, it hasn't ruined our lives. It's made life difficult for those who may have leaked it and clearly for those who are having to investigate it. But, you know, this is a great country we live in, and the public square is open to everybody. And these sorts of vindictive actions on the part of a hostile administration are simply unacceptable, and the American people know that.

HEMMER: Do you expect indictments from that case?

WILSON: I know what I've read, which was on the wires last week, but I don't expect anything until such time as I hear it from the Justice Department or from the special prosecutor.

HEMMER: So...

WILSON: But I would make one other point on that, and that is irrespective of their indictments -- and you hear a number of pundits talk about, well, it may not have been illegal because the people who did this may not have known what she was -- notwithstanding that, it is a breach of national security.

There is somebody sitting, according to "The Washington Post," close to the president of the United States, who is prepared to defend his political agenda by violating the national security of my country. Irrespective of whether it is ultimately determined to have been a criminal act, it is a violation of national security.

HEMMER: Joe Wilson, thanks for being with us today.

WILSON: Good to be with you, Bill.

HEMMER: All right.

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