Latest / INSIGHT TODAY / WH official admitting no evidence for Trumps 2020 elex claims speaks volumes

Transcript

WH official admitting no evidence for Trumps 2020 elex claims speaks volumes · INSIGHT TODAY

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump is bringing a whole of government approach to
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: sowing doubt about the US election system and has deployed
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: federal agencies the FBI, the CIA, the Office of the
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: Director of National Intelligence, as well as the Justice Department
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: to investigate what he calls a cover up of China's
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: influence in US elections. Voting rights activist Stacy Abrams warns,
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: these officials have been handed a weapon.
• 0:25
  Speaker 2: That is part of what authoritarianism does. It uses the
• 0:29
  Speaker 2: weapons of the democratic institutions to undermine democracy, and at
• 0:34
  Speaker 2: the core of that, the core of democracy is our
• 0:37
  Speaker 2: ability to cast the ballot and determine the direction of government.
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: Joining me now, Michael Feinberg, former Assistant Special Agent in
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: charge with the FBI, and former CIA officer Mark Pollingropliss,
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: is joining us again. Both our ms now national security
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: and intelligence analysts. So, Michael, use went the overwhelming majority
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: of your FBI career combating China's intelligence service. Donald Trump
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: claimed China illegally acquired two hundred and twenty million US
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: voter files on the run up to the twenty twenty election,
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: and the US voting system is compromised. You viewed Donald
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: Trump's speech as a work of fiction, So explain why
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: you think that is and is document dump why that
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: should be ignored.
• 1:20
  Speaker 3: So it's really important to note that the intelligence community
• 1:25
  Speaker 3: gathers hundreds of thousands of data points or pieces of
• 1:30
  Speaker 3: information on any given day. They hear things from human
• 1:34
  Speaker 3: sources who are witting or unwitting spies. They intercept emails
• 1:39
  Speaker 3: and telephone calls as signals intelligence. They look at environmental variables,
• 1:44
  Speaker 3: they look at changes in geography, and when something is
• 1:48
  Speaker 3: particularly interesting in that it can give an answer to
• 1:51
  Speaker 3: a US policy question, they vet that information and they
• 1:58
  Speaker 3: corroborate it with others. They look at whether the person
• 2:03
  Speaker 3: providing it has been reliable in the past. If it's
• 2:06
  Speaker 3: human reporting, is their signals intelligence to back it up.
• 2:09
  Speaker 3: If it's signals intelligence, is their human reporting to back
• 2:13
  Speaker 3: it up? And that's sort of how the community figures
• 2:15
  Speaker 3: out what's true and what's not. But everything it collects,
• 2:21
  Speaker 3: including the stuff that turns out not to be true,
• 2:25
  Speaker 3: is still in its holdings. It still has the imperimeter
• 2:29
  Speaker 3: of being documented by the CIA or the FBI or
• 2:32
  Speaker 3: the NSA. And what I suspect we saw with this
• 2:37
  Speaker 3: document dump is that a lot of that information was
• 2:42
  Speaker 3: provided out of context, and because of this selective declassification,
• 2:50
  Speaker 3: they're not providing the public any way to know whether
• 2:53
  Speaker 3: any of it's true. And some of the documents in
• 2:56
  Speaker 3: market can probably speak better to this as well. I'll
• 3:01
  Speaker 3: be blunt. They just don't look real. There's one memorandum
• 3:05
  Speaker 3: in there that claims to be a CIA note, but
• 3:08
  Speaker 3: it's undated. It contains no source information redacted or unredacted.
• 3:14
  Speaker 3: It states conclusions, but not any sort of analysis. It
• 3:19
  Speaker 3: looks almost like something that was created in haste by
• 3:25
  Speaker 3: somebody not familiar with the process. And I can't state
• 3:29
  Speaker 3: that with certainty. I'm not making a factual allegation. I'm
• 3:32
  Speaker 3: just saying that document looks like nothing I ever saw
• 3:36
  Speaker 3: in the intelligence community.
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: So to you mark your reaction to that, Yeah, I.
• 3:42
  Speaker 4: Think Michael's got it exactly right. Look, the US intelligence community,
• 3:46
  Speaker 4: al you know, kind of sucks up a great deal
• 3:48
  Speaker 4: of information, whether it's a human source. I was a
• 3:50
  Speaker 4: case officer for CIA, I met assets, I'm at our agents.
• 3:54
  Speaker 4: Often sometimes there's a walk in, and oftentimes the information
• 3:57
  Speaker 4: is not corroborated. Sometimes it's totally false. Someone's sometimes someone's
• 4:00
  Speaker 4: lying to you. Same thing with a signals intercept just
• 4:03
  Speaker 4: because you're intercepting communications. It could be based on third
• 4:06
  Speaker 4: or fourth hand information. And so it's very easy to
• 4:09
  Speaker 4: selectively take documents and kind of build a case like this.
• 4:12
  Speaker 4: And look, you know, one of the things that has
• 4:14
  Speaker 4: to be said very clearly is the president of the
• 4:16
  Speaker 4: United States is the number one consumer for the intelligence community.
• 4:20
  Speaker 4: You have to be very careful on what you brief them.
• 4:22
  Speaker 4: You don't brief him or her on uncorroborated information. Ever,
• 4:26
  Speaker 4: you have finished an analysis, which would be a piece that
• 4:29
  Speaker 4: actually contained you know, all sorts of both you know,
• 4:33
  Speaker 4: operational human intelligence pieces and signals intelligence, and then the
• 4:36
  Speaker 4: analyst would provide their kind of their ultimate conclusion on this.
• 4:41
  Speaker 4: And so you know, that's what's most important. What was
• 4:43
  Speaker 4: the intelligence community the analyst providing to the White House
• 4:47
  Speaker 4: and to others in the cabinet, not this raw information.
• 4:50
  Speaker 4: And so it's very easy to cherry pick this. And
• 4:52
  Speaker 4: I think, as Michael said, it's exactly what happened.
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: Let's hear what John Soloman, a former journalist and election
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: denier and member of Trump's election task force, told my
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: colleague Von Hilliard right after Trump's speech. Take a listen
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: to this. Oh that is so unfortunate. I was just
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: told we don't have it. Let me just give you
• 5:17
  Speaker 1: a little bit of the four one one on this.
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: Von Hilliard asks, the twenty twenty election was in fact
• 5:23
  Speaker 1: the results as we the Merian people have seen it,
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: and he says, I'm still researching. Let me say this
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: is the first and Vaughn says to him, but there's
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: no intelligence. Oh guess what they have it It's much
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: bet if you hear it from Vaughn. Take a listen, everybody,
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: do you acknowledge that there were no votes changed in
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: twenty twenty.
• 5:40
  Speaker 2: I've all I can acknowledge is what the intelligen show
• 5:42
  Speaker 2: is right. I only know the intelligence communee has zero.
• 5:44
  Speaker 4: Evidence that someone has flipped, that a foreign power flip
• 5:48
  Speaker 4: they vote in twenty twenty, twenty two or twenty four.
• 5:50
  Speaker 3: So my twenty twenty election was in fact the results
• 5:53
  Speaker 3: as we of the American bodyle researching. So let me
• 5:57
  Speaker 3: have this is the first one.
• 5:57
  Speaker 4: There's no intelligence. There is no intelligence at the election.
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: Michael jumpsund Election frag Guy says he's still searching for
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: proof and the documents don't back up the president's claims,
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: and yet is there something still somewhat nefarious about the
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: administration's election security performance over the past day or so?
• 6:25
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I just if we could go back for one second,
• 6:28
  Speaker 3: because I missed the part when you were reciting John
• 6:31
  Speaker 3: Solomon's resume where you mentioned his intelligence community experience that
• 6:36
  Speaker 3: gives him the credibility to administ to evaluate raw and
• 6:40
  Speaker 3: finished intelligence and products. But yeah, yeah, I mean, this
• 6:45
  Speaker 3: is not somebody who has the slightest bit of familiarity
• 6:48
  Speaker 3: with the world into which he is now entering. And
• 6:52
  Speaker 3: it's legitimate for the American people to ask, why is
• 6:57
  Speaker 3: a political journalist who has never, to my knowledge, published
• 7:02
  Speaker 3: a word critical of Trump, and who has been edged
• 7:09
  Speaker 3: out of a number of publications because of conspiratorial musings
• 7:16
  Speaker 3: somebody that the White House should be listening to. But
• 7:22
  Speaker 3: even if we take that into account, the very fact
• 7:25
  Speaker 3: that someone with that background and temperament is admitting to
• 7:30
  Speaker 3: a reporter that there's no evidence that the election was
• 7:36
  Speaker 3: somehow mishandled or thwarted or interfered with speaks volumes. I'll
• 7:43
  Speaker 3: be honest, I don't understand why anybody would take any
• 7:49
  Speaker 3: of the pronouncements that the nation heard Thursday night with
• 7:53
  Speaker 3: the slightest ounce of seriousness.
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: I'm going to leave it there for this conversation guy,
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: and also apologies, but we have had the breven. We
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: had to make it a little briefer than we anticipated,
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: just because of the breaking news out of Iran and
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: the death of those two US soldiers. But thank you
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: so much. It's always good to see both of you.
• 8:11
  Speaker 1: Thank you