CNN "State of the Union" - Transcript: Interview With Virginia Senator Mark Warner

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: And here with me is Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia.

Let me just start with this issue of guns and this epidemic or mass -- a lot of incidents of shootings, mass shootings.

Is there any legislation you can think of, based on what we know about the Santa Fe, Texas, incident, that could have prevented the tragedy?

[09:10:02]

SEN. MARK WARNER (D), VIRGINIA: Well, first, obviously, condolences to the folks in Santa Fe, although, as has been stated, I think tragedy after tragedy, people want to hear more than thoughts and prayers from politicians.

that could have prevented the tragedy?

[09:10:02]

WARNER: Well, first, obviously, condolences to the folks in Santa Fe, although, as has been stated, I think tragedy after tragedy, people want to hear more than thoughts and prayers from politicians.

I don't think there's a single piece of legislation, but there's a series of actions. Are there things we can do that would improve safety of our security -- of our schools? Should there be more mental health counseling for troubled teens? A number of the incidents that -- are caused by young men time and again. Absolutely. Making sure people are safer with their own firearms? Absolutely. But one of the things from the previous interview, the notion that you

can go through this list of items, and not talk about reasonable gun control, reasonable at least background checks -- might not have affected this tragedy, but potentially others -- the fact that we should -- and this was not a case where there was an assault-style weapon, but the fact that we are the only industrial weapon in the world that allows these military-style assault weapons to populate throughout our whole society.

I think anyone that says you can address this issue without also dealing with reasonable and logical restraints on gun ownership -- and I say that as somebody who was -- when I was governor, I was supported by the NRA.

But tragedy after tragedy after tragedy, I would hope elected officials would allow their thinking to evolve on this issue.

TAPPER: Well, let me ask you a question, because, obviously, the current Congress is a place where the kind of gun legislation you are talking about goes to die.

Even the ban on bump stocks couldn't get through Congress or isn't going through Congress or doing it in a regulatory way, the Trump administration.

But I am old enough to remember when Democrats controlled the House and the Senate and the White House, and this -- these shootings did not just start in the Trump administration. They have been going on for decades.

Why didn't Democrats do anything about gun violence then?

WARNER: I think this epidemic seems to have gotten much worse in the last 10 years.

There's plenty of things that we could have pointed back in the '80s and '90s, when the Democrats controlled, that perhaps, in retrospect, should have -- more should have been done.

But the fact is, Jake, it is now 2018. We have these tragedies, it feels like, once a quarter. There's a few days of mourning, with the exception of what happened after Parkland, where there seemed to be a moment.

And my hope and my appeal to everyone is, let's do an all of the above. But, please, for those folks that I work with in the Congress, take a moment and let your position evolve. I mean, there are ways that we can put reasonable restraints without dramatically interfering with people's Second Amendment rights.

TAPPER: All right, Senator, stay right there. We have a lot more to talk to you about.

We are going to take a quick break, but when we come back, we're going to talk about a lot having to do with the Russia investigation, including a new report detailing another meeting that Donald Trump Jr. held at Trump Tower before the 2016 election. Who was at that meeting?

That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:16:58]

TAPPER: Welcome back to STATE OF THE UNION. I'm Jake Tapper.

One year into special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation, there is new reporting suggesting that another country may have tried to influence the U.S. presidential election.

"The New York Times" is reporting that, three months before the election, Donald Trump Jr. met with an emissary for two Gulf nations offering to help his father's campaign. It included a proposal for a social media manipulation campaign.

And just a few minutes ago, President Trump seemed to respond to that story on Twitter, writing in part -- quote -- "The world's most expensive witch-hunt has found nothing on Russia and me, so now they are looking at the rest of the world."

I'm back with Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the vice chairman of the Intelligence Committee.

Senator, I want to get your reaction to this report.

Were you aware of this other meeting Donald Trump Jr. had with some representatives of Gulf state nations? And is there any evidence that any of them actually followed through and did anything to help the Trump campaign?

WARNER: I'm not going to comment about where we stand in terms of certain witnesses in our investigation.

But if the "Times" story is true, we now have at least a second and maybe a third nation that was trying to lean in to this campaign. And I don't understand what the president doesn't get about the law that says, if you have a foreign nation interfere in an American election, that is illegal.

TAPPER: But did it take place, is the question?

WARNER: Well, again, I think the "Times" story, we will see what follows after that.

What we do know took place, though, is that Russia, a foreign adversarial nation, massively interfered in our elections, both in terms of leaking information to -- on a selective basis, scanning 21 of our states' electoral systems, using social media in ways that were basically unprecedented.

And they were doing it to not only sow disarray, but to help Trump and hurt Clinton.

TAPPER: But the...

WARNER: And that -- and that point was reconfirmed this week on a bipartisan basis by the...

TAPPER: By your committee.

WARNER: ... Senate Intelligence Committee.

TAPPER: So -- but the big question is, did they do so with the assistance or participation of any American, especially and including people who were in the Trump campaign's orbit?

And do you have an answer to that question? Because that's collusion. That's the collusion question.

WARNER: And that -- that is -- that is clearly the end point question that we're going to have to deal with.

(CROSSTALK)

TAPPER: But have you seen any evidence of that?

WARNER: But what we do know -- and we have seen evidence.

As a matter of fact, the leaked -- the leaking of the transcripts from Donald Trump Jr., putting out by the Judiciary Committee, shows clearly that the Trump campaign welcomed dirt on Hillary Clinton.

TAPPER: Sure.

WARNER: Now, did the president know about that meeting or not? I don't know. I would like to get the answer to that.

TAPPER: Yes.

WARNER: I would also like to find out if there was this other pattern -- if the "Times" story is accurate and there is this pattern that other countries were offering, and, clearly, the Trump campaign was receptive to these kinds of offers, how that is not the beginnings of evidence of stuff that needs to be investigated.

And remember where we are at, at this point. We are a year in, 14 indictments, including the indictment of the president's campaign manager, five guilty pleas, and, as we have seen on reports, a lot of questions that still need to be answered.

[09:20:02]

TAPPER: Many questions, but just to put a point on this -- and then I want to move on to another question about the same subject -- still, as far as the public knows, no evidence of anybody in the Trump team accepting the offers of help, no and, as we have seen on reports, a lot of questions that still need to

be answered.

[09:20:02]

TAPPER: Many questions, but just to put a point on this -- and then I want to move on to another question about the same subject -- still, as far as the public knows, no evidence of anybody in the Trump team accepting the offers of help, no evidence of actual conspiracy that we know of yet, that we in the public know of yet?

And you are not willing to comment on whether or not you have seen evidence of that conspiracy?

WARNER: What we're going to do in our investigation, collusion will be the last issue. We have dealt with election security.

We've reconfirmed the findings of the intelligence community assessment. We are going to deal with the social media issues. And, yes, we have to get to the conclusion...

TAPPER: OK.

WARNER: ... just as well as, obviously, the Mueller investigation has to be able to continue.

And this is the point, Jake, that just amazes me, the president and his allies constantly trying to undermine these investigations.

TAPPER: Well, but let's...

WARNER: If the president has got nothing to hide, let these investigations finish.

TAPPER: Well, I want to talk about that, because one of the points that you have been trying to make is, they're trying to undermine it by revealing the identity of somebody who was a confidential informant for the FBI.

Reports in "The Times" suggest that this FBI informant met with two Trump aides during the campaign.

The president tweeted -- quote -- "Reports are there was indeed at least FBI representative implanted for political purposes into my campaign for president. It took place early on and long before the phony Russia hoax became a hot fake news story. If true, all-time biggest political scandal."

Do you -- was this individual, this informant, was he or she implanted into the Trump campaign?

WARNER: I do not -- I have not seen any evidence of that kind of truth of the claim the president has made.

As a matter of fact, his attorney Mr. Giuliani, I understand, backed off some of that. But let's go to the heart of what the president and his allies -- some

of his allies in the House are starting to do.

TAPPER: Devin Nunes and others, yes.

WARNER: What his allies are trying to do.

The first thing you learn when you get involved with the intelligence community is, you have to protect sources and methods. People's lives depend upon it.

As a matter of fact, Mr. Trump's own FBI director this week, Christopher Wray, said, when officials or elected officials go out and start exposing classified information, exposing informants that work with our government, America is less safe.

That is illegal if you reveal this kind of information.

TAPPER: You think, if Devin Nunes reveals the name of this informant, he will be breaking the law?

WARNER: I think that if any individual, elected official or otherwise, knowingly reveals a classified piece of information about an FBI source, you are breaking the law and should be fully prosecuted.

TAPPER: Have you seen any evidence that this individual was implanted into, because that's -- this is what the conservatives are saying, the Trump supporters are saying, including people like Devin Nunes.

The idea is that the FBI put somebody in there to trump up this whole investigation.

WARNER: I would find that extraordinarily hard to believe.

TAPPER: And you have seen no evidence of it?

WARNER: I would find that extraordinarily hard to believe.

What we do know is, there was constant outreach from the Russians, not just to Trump Jr., Papadopoulos, potentially others, and there was a lot of willingness.

Now, was there -- was there this willingness to actually connect the dots? That's where the investigation, Mueller investigation, our investigation will continue to look at.

But what we do know is...

TAPPER: What role did the informant play in launching the investigation?

Was the informant -- what we have been told is that Papadopoulos' meeting with the Australian diplomat in which he said that somebody with ties to the Kremlin told him about the Hillary e-mails, that that was the linchpin for the investigation. But I don't know what the timeline is in terms of this informant. And

I don't know what role he played in the launch of Operation Crossfire Hurricane.

WARNER: I believe there was a whole series of information that our government received, or at least law enforcement received, that made them start this investigation. And...

TAPPER: Including the informant?

WARNER: I'm not going to get into the particulars. That is not appropriate. That would be doing exactly what I said is inappropriate to do.

TAPPER: OK.

WARNER: But what we do know is that the conclusion that was reached by both the Obama intelligence officials and the Trump intelligence officials that said they are -- the Russians were trying to influence to help Trump and hurt Clinton, that has all been reconfirmed.

TAPPER: So, lastly, I know you have been very concerned about President Trump talking about wanting to help China with this telecom giant ZTE get access to the United States.

What exactly is your concern?

WARNER: Well, first of all, the president claims he is out for American jobs.

One area I thought I might agree with him on is taking a stronger stand against China, and particularly calling out a company like ZTE that his intelligence officials have said poses a national security threat.

Once he took an action positively, then he immediately backs off and says he is suddenly concerned about Chinese jobs instead?

To me, that is outrageous. And we owe a responsibility, not just with ZTE, but with other Chinese companies that are penetrating our systems, for the intelligence community to be more forthcoming to the American public to make sure that we -- that we, in effect, inform the public and inform businesses.

And the fact that the president stepped away from that claim, and is just using this as a bargaining chip, that is not in the best interests of our national security.

[09:25:03]

TAPPER: Are you going to try to stop it legislatively?

WARNER: I think that we need to take every tool we can to make sure that, whether it's ZTE or other firms that are, in effect, stealing our intellectual property, penetrating our systems, that we take appropriate action. TAPPER: Senator Mark Warner, Democrat of Virginia, thank you so much,

sir.

WARNER: Thank you.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source