MSNBC "The Ed Show" - Transcript

Interview

MSNBC "The Ed Show" - Transcript

MSNBC "The Ed Show" Interview with Rep. Janice Schakowsky (D-IL)

Interviewer: Ed Schultz

Copyright ©2009 by Federal News Service, Inc., Ste. 500, 1000 Vermont Ave, Washington, DC 20005 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service at www.fednews.com, please email Carina Nyberg at cnyberg@fednews.com or call 1-202-216-2706.

MR. SCHULTZ: Sometimes in life it's just good to keep your mouth shut and not say anything at all. Now, for me that's tough sometimes, I know. But I think this is something that Americans can really relate to.

You know, I'm starting to believe that there's no such thing as a closed meeting behind closed doors in Washington, D.C. Now, it appears that some lawmakers just can't keep their mouths shut. Not long ago, Republican Congressman John Kline of Minnesota came out of an intelligence meeting just flat-out jacking his jaw. I mean, he went on the record with The Hill newspaper after a confidential briefing.

Now, we as citizens expect more out of our lawmakers. And when they are on an Intelligence Committee, we need to demand more. There's this thing in the military known as on a need-to-know basis. It would seem to me that that would apply to lawmakers, even if they're not on the committee. But the public should really not know what's going on in the intelligence community.

Now, I think a member who utters actually anything of any substance at all about intelligence after a meeting should be instantly taken off that committee. I'm all for the oversight. I think the oversight in intelligence would work here. But any disclosure to the public? Absolutely not. I mean, isn't that common sense?

Now we've got this political mudslinging contest on our hands. Congressman Kline from Minnesota seemed to be trying to solidify the position of the former vice president on enhanced interrogations. Well, here we go again. Here's the quote: "Based on what I heard and the documents I have seen, I came away with a very clear impression that we did gather information and did disrupt terrorist plots."

Well, why don't we just tell them everything? I mean, I think this qualifies for "Psycho Talk." Congressional members should be bound to silence. Any morsel of information is going to work against the United States security, in my opinion.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes says, quote, "Members on both sides need to watch what they say." (Laughs.) Mr. Chairman, I agree with you, but I don't think you're going far enough. The quote ought to read, "These guys need to keep their mouths shut." All these right-wingers out there who are so concerned about security in the country and protecting us, maybe they could do us a favor by just being silent and leave it to the oversight committees to get in detail when it comes to that.

Now, what has happened here is that Congressman Kline opened up the discussion on enhanced interrogations by opening his fat trap after an intel briefing.

Congressman, I think you ought to come out and explain yourself on this one. Where's the up side on that? And do you think it's appropriate?

Cheney has called on President Obama to declassify CIA information that he says will show that enhanced interrogations made us safer. I'm all for it. Let's see it. Heck, if they're going to come out of intelligence meetings and talk like that, we might as well go ahead and see the whole doggone thing. Now we've got Congressman Kline running his mouth.

You know, look at it this way. In the private sector, if you divulge company secrets or company information -- it's written in a lot of contracts across America -- you're fired. I mean, if I go across the street and have a couple of cool ones with the bad guys, you know, and I tell them what's going on at NBC, I'm probably going to be out of here. I mean, that's standard operating procedure. I think it should apply to those in the United States Congress. You run your mouth, you're out.

Joining me now is Illinois Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, chief deputy whip and member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence.

Congresswoman -- thanks for joining us tonight, Jan.

How serious is this?

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Thank you very much.

MR. SCHULTZ: You bet. How serious is this?

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Well, I chair that subcommittee that John Kline attended. And at the beginning of every committee where we have a closed hearing, a motion is made to close the hearing and a roll call is taken. There is a record of the votes to close the hearing. And everybody understands what that means, that we're dealing with classified materials and that the content of the briefing, all the facts surrounding that briefing, are not to be disclosed.

And so I think this is a very serious breach of our obligation as members of the committee. At the very least, I would say it's a violation of the rules.

MR. SCHULTZ: Shouldn't he be thrown off the committee? I mean, I just said, in the private sector, you know, it's in many contracts and business across the country, if you divulge company secrets, you're gone. Why don't they force congressional members to sign off on a pledge that there's going to be some retribution on their career if they open their mouth on sensitive information? I mean, personally, as a citizen, I don't want the terrorists knowing what we get out of anybody we have in captivity. I mean, tell me where the up side of that is. But what about the code of silence?

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Well, you know, certainly I think there needs to be accountability. I don't exactly know if sanctions ought to be given or what they ought to be. That's going to be a discussion, I think, that we'll have.

But let me just say one other thing. I'm not going to talk about the content, but I would say -- recommend that before people shoot their mouths off to the press, that they ought to wait for the hearing to be completed to make sure that, before they draw any conclusions -- still they shouldn't talk about it -- they ought to wait and hear everything that is talked about at that hearing.

MR. SCHULTZ: All right, now, let me get this --

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: In this case, Mr. Kline left early --

MR. SCHULTZ: Okay, I want to get this straight. Are you saying that Congressman Kline left the meeting early and then went out and did an interview?

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: That's exactly what I'm saying. And he was joined by the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Hoekstra, who wasn't in the meeting at all, and seemed to have some things to say about what was talked about in the meeting. And it is really quite remarkable and irresponsible.

MR. SCHULTZ: So why should our intelligence agents and our agencies come on over to Capitol Hill and have a big information party and then have it out on the front pages and on all the talking channels the next day, or almost instantly? I mean, I view this as a breach of security. Now, I know we've got this big fight over who knew what, when, and everything else. But it would seem to me that this would be a high priority fighting terrorism that nothing gets out.

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Absolutely. You know, look, we can have a debate about classification and what shouldn't be. But clearly the congressman knew that we were dealing with classified documents and classified briefing and that it was a closed hearing. I believe he was there when we voted to close the hearing. But in any case, he knew the circumstances, did not stay for the entire hearing, left, and then went ahead and talked to the press, clearly about the content, as he saw it, of the hearing.

MR. SCHULTZ: Well, we did ask --

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: No, this is really --

MR. SCHULTZ: We asked Congressman Kline of Minnesota to come on the program tonight and explain his side of the story and why he did it. He declined. Maybe he's too busy. But that invitation is open again on Monday and any day next week. I would really like to know where the Congress is when it comes to a code of silence. There really should be almost a military code here. I mean, if we've got information that's floating around to intelligence communities and all of a sudden there's competition in the media to make sure we find out what's going on, I just have a real problem with that.

Now, this is Mr. Boehner --

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: There's no -- oh, go ahead.

MR. SCHULTZ: Go ahead. No, go ahead. We've got a satellite delay, but go ahead.

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Well, I was going to say, there's no question that this was politically motivated. They're trying to, you know, create a certain impression out in the public. And it had nothing to do with thinking about national security or the rules of -- the code of silence, as you put it.

MR. SCHULTZ: Okay. This is Mr. Boehner talking about the speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi.

HOUSE MINORITY LEADER JOHN BOEHNER (R-OH): (From videotape.) She's made this outrageous claim. She's undermined our intelligence officials, I think had a chilling effect on their ability to do their job, which is to keep America safe, and believes that it's just all going to go away. Well, just trust me. It's not going to go away.

MR. SCHULTZ: Yeah, it's a chilling effect when a Democrat does it, but it's not a chilling effect and it really doesn't mean anything if a Republican comes out and does it. I mean, I'm sorry I'm jaded about that, but that sure as heck seems what's being played out here.

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Well, the incredible hypocrisy of that as well, because the ranking member, Representative Hoekstra, has been infuriated himself by the lying that went on to the Congress about something very close to his heart, and that's a 2001 shoot-down of a plane in Peru where the CIA was involved in that. And the Congress was lied to.

MR. SCHULTZ: Sure.

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: We share that across the aisle in a bipartisan way, that how can that be that for eight years the Congress had been lied to? He's mad about it. So he knows all too well that there certainly are times when we're not told the full story or even told a lie.

MR. SCHULTZ: Well, it's a sad day when they're playing politics with intelligence and playing with people's lives like that.

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Right.

MR. SCHULTZ: Congresswoman, we all know that Senator Burris is pretty much on shaky ground in Illinois. Are you going to run for the United States Senate? Are you going to challenge that seat? Are you going to go for it?

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Well, I'm still checking all the boxes, but I am going to make an announcement one way or another on Monday. So we're huddling as a family this weekend to make a final decision. You'll hear about it soon.

MR. SCHULTZ: Okay. So that means you will do that on "The Ed Show," right? I'm all about it. We'll be here at 6:00 Monday. (Laughs.)

Congresswoman --

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: (Laughs.) Happy to do it.

MR. SCHULTZ: -- you're a charger. We'll see you on Monday. Thanks so much.

REP. SCHAKOWSKY: Thank you.

END.

Source