MARTHA.

>> Martha: THANK YOU.

WE ARE NOW, FORMER ACTING

ATTORNEY GENERAL MATT WHITAKER.

GOOD TO SEE HER TONIGHT, WHAT

YOU MAKE OF THIS?

>> THANK YOU.

I THINK THIS IS A CLEAR EXAMPLE

OF SOMEONE THAT'S PART OF THE

DEEP STATE, MAY BE PART OF THE

DEEP STATE IN THE INTELLIGENCE

COMMUNITY, TAKING ADVANTAGE OF

THIS WHISTLE-BLOWER PROCEDURE,

WHICH IS CLEARLY, AS TORRES

REPORTED, OUTSIDE OF THE

INTENTION OF THIS, AND THEN

TRYING TO CREATE THIS FIRESTORM

AND I THINK IT IS COMPLETELY

OVERBLOWN AS IT WAS SUGGESTED.

>> Martha: HOW DO YOU KNOW

THOUGH?

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IS?

WHAT WE DO KNOW IS THE

WHISTLE-BLOWER BROUGHT IT TO THE

IG AND THE IG ALSO FELT THAT IT

WAS WORTH WRITING UP AND SENDING

OUT A REPORT ON, SO THE IG

DIDN'T LOOK AT HIM AND SAY THIS

IS RIDICULOUS, WE'RE NOT GOING

TO DO THIS.

THAT'S TWO PEOPLE.

>> I ALSO KNOW THAT THE GENERAL

COUNSEL FROM DNI AND THE ACTING

DNI DIRECTOR LOOKED AT THIS AND

SAW IT EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS FOR.

CONGRESS OVERREACTS AND

ADAM SCHIFF IS GOING TO FIND ANY

CAMERA TO GET IN FRONT OF THEM

COMPLAIN ABOUT BUT THE BOTTOM

LINE IS THE PRESIDENT HAS BROAD

DISCRETION IN THE AREAS TO

NEGOTIATE WITH WORLD LEADERS AND

HAVE A FEELING THAT WE DO HEAR

THE WHOLE STORY, IT WILL BE A

BIG NOTHING BURGER.

>> Martha: AND MY GUESS IS

THAT WE WILL.

ESPECIALLY IF THEY DO TURN IT

OVER TO CONGRESS, I THINK THAT'S

PROBABLY ONE OF THE HESITATIONS,

BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THEN

ANOTHER CONVERSATION FOR THE

PRESIDENT A FOREIGN LEADER WILL

BECOME PART OF THE PUBLIC DOMAI

DOMAIN.

FORMER CIA -- GO AHEAD.

>> AND IT ALSO IS AN EXAMPLE OF

THIS PERSON WHO CLEARLY

DISAGREED WITH WHATEVER THE

POSITION THE PRESIDENT DID TAKE

IN THIS CONVERSATION WANTED TO

GET THAT OUT THERE.

THEIR TAKE WAS DIFFERENT AND I

DISAGREED WITH THE PRESIDENT

WHATEVER HE SAID, THEY TRY TO

GET THAT OUT AND GET INTO

"THE WASHINGTON POST," GET IT TO

CONGRESS DOING EXACTLY WHAT THEY

INTEND TO DO.

>> Martha: I THOUGHT IT WAS

INTERESTING THAT FORMER CIA

ANALYST AND CNN COUNTERTERRORISM

ANALYST WHO IS NOT A BIG FAN OF

THE PRESIDENT, HE WAS OUTRAGED

BY THIS.

LET'S WATCH WHAT HE HAD TO SAY.

>> I'M ABOUT READY TO BLOW A

GASKET.

THAT IS EXTREMELY UNUSUAL.

WHAT THE HECK IS OVER THE LINE?

THE PRESIDENT CAN SAY WHAT HE

WANTS TO PUTIN.

HE CAN SAY WHAT HE WANTS TO

KIM JONG UN.

THE PRESIDENT CAN SAY WHAT HE

WANTS.

IT'S NOT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF

THE INTEL GUYS TO GO POLICE THE

PRESIDENT AND GO SNITCH ON HIM

TO THE CONGRESS.

RIDICULOUS.

>> Martha: I THINK THAT'S VERY

INTERESTING AND IT RAISES THE

QUESTION, WHAT WOULD RISE TO THE

LEVEL OF WHAT THIS INDIVIDUAL

HAS CHOSEN TO DO?

>> I THINK THE ONLY THING WE

KNOW IS THIS INDIVIDUAL,

ESPECIALLY IF THEY ARE THE

SOURCE FOR

"THE WASHINGTON POST," MAY HAVE

VIOLATED THE LAW IN PROVIDING

INTELLIGENCE AND CLASSIFIED

INFORMATION TO THE PRESS VIA

LEAK OUTSIDE OF THE BOUNDS OF

THE WAY THE SYSTEM IS SET UP TO

BE SO I AGREE WITH -- ONE OF THE

RARE SITUATIONS I AGREE WITH

HIM, I THINK THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS

CONDUCT IN THE PRESIDENT IS

ENTITLED TO NEGOTIATE ON BEHALF

OF THE UNITED STATES, IT'S A

CONSTITUTIONAL POWER AND I JUST

CAN'T IMAGINE A SITUATION WHERE

WHATEVER HE SAID TO ONE OF THESE

INDIVIDUALS COULD BE SAID AS

MAKING A PROMISE OR A COMMITMENT

THAT STEPS OVER THE LINE BECAUSE

THE PRESIDENT 'HIS POWERS ARE SO

BROAD.

>> Martha: I ALSO THINK THE

ADDITIONAL DETAILS THAT CAME UP

THIS AFTERNOON, IT WASN'T JUST A

PROMISE OR ONE THING, BUT IT WAS

ACTUALLY A LOT OF THINGS.

IN SOME WAYS COULD

POTENTIALLY -- IT MIGHT JUST BE

AN INDICATION OF OVERALL

DISGRUNTLED WITH THE WAY THE

PRESIDENT WAS DEALING WITH.

SO WE WILL SEE.

WHAT ABOUT THE CRITICISM OF THE

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE?

BECAUSE SOME ARE SAYING THAT

THEY SORT OF STEPPED IN BETWEEN

HERE TO PREVENT WHAT DEMOCRATS

AS THE CORRECT PROCEDURE, WHICH

WOULD BE TO RELEASE THE REPORT

TO THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE TO

HAVE THEM HAVE A LOOK AT IT BUT

THE DOJ STANDING IN THE WAY OF

THAT.

>> THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND

ESPECIALLY THE OFFICE OF LEGAL

COUNSEL, WHO IS THE LAWYER OF

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH AND SOME OF

THE SMARTEST PEOPLE THAT I KNOW

AND HAVE WORKED WITH MANY OF

THEM UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL.

THEY ARE THE ONES THAT GET TO

DECIDE THESE ISSUES REGARDING

WHAT THE LAW IS AND WHAT YOU CAN

AND CAN'T DO AND I WOULD STAND

BEHIND REALLY ANYTHING THEY SAY

BECAUSE STEVE ENGEL AND HIS

GROUP ARE JUST THE SMARTEST

LAWYERS AND THE GOVERNMENT.

>> Martha: ALSO JUST AS A LAST

MENTION, THE INSPECTOR GENERAL'S

JOB IS TO SORT OF OVERSEE THE

DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE UNDER THEM

IN THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES, SO

IT DOES SEEM THAT IT'S

POTENTIALLY A VALID ARGUMENT

THAT THE PRESIDENT IS OUTSIDE OF

THAT CIRCLE AND THEY DON'T HAVE

JURISDICTION OVER THAT.

>> THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT, SO THE

INSPECTOR GENERAL, THIS PROCESS

IS RESERVED FOR ESSENTIALLY

THEIR --

>> Martha: EMPLOYEES.

>> EMPLOYEES ON WHAT THEY HAVE

AUTHORITY OVER AND THE PRESIDENT

IS NOT INSIDE OF THE SCOPE AND

SHOULD NOT BE PART OF THIS

PROCEDURE TO TELL CONGRESS.

>> Martha: WE WILL SEE WHERE

IT GOES AND WHAT WAS SO

EGREGIOUS THAT THEY -- WE WILL