POST," THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT.
>> THANK YOU. >>> WE TURN TO MICHAEL MAC FALL,
FORMER AMBASSADOR TO RUSSIA. PROBABLY THE PERFECT U.S. SOURCE
ON THIS. I WONDER IF WE COULD START WITH
THE BASICS. ON A SCALE OF ALWAYS TO NEVER,
WHERE DOES THIS PROPOSAL FIT INTO YOUR EXPERIENCE IN U.S.
DIPLOMACY WITH RUSSIA? >> NEVER.
I'VE NEVER HEARD OF ANYBODY ASKING TO COME TO OUR EMBASSY
FROM RUSSIA TO COMMUNICATE WITH PEOPLE BACK HERE IN THE UNITED
STATES, OR VICE VERSA. AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THIS REPORTING
SOUNDS VERY CREDIBLE TO ME. AND THIS TEAM FROM THE "POST"
HAS DONE A FANTASTIC JOB. THIS IS STRANGE SO SO MANY
DIFFERENT LEVELS, ARI. LET'S START WITH THE FIRST ONE.
I WAS ALSO PART OF THE OBAMA TRANSITION TEAM IN 2008, I WAS
THE RUSSIA PERSON. I THEN WENT TO THE NATIONAL
SECURITY COUNCIL. WE NEVER SPOKE TO AMBASSADOR
KISLYAK ONCE DURING THAT PERIOD. I GOT TO KNOW HIM WELL WHEN I
WORKED IN THE WHITE HOUSE, THAT WAS MY JOB.
THE VERY FACT THAT THEY WERE MEETING WITH HIM ALREADY RAISES
MY EYEBROWS, LET ALONE THE CONTENT WHICH YOU HAVE JUST BEEN
TALKING ABOUT THE LAST FEW MINUTES.
>> YOU'RE SAYING THE TIMELINE, EVEN IN A NORMAL ENVIRONMENT, OF
USING THE TRANSITION PERIOD TO SORT OF RUSH TO MEET WITH THE
RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR AND IN THIS CASE ALSO A BANKER STRIKES YOU
AS ODD? >> VERY ODD.
I WANT TO REALLY UNDERSCORE HOW EXTRAORDINARY THIS IS.
WE HAD ONE PHONE CALL BETWEEN PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA AND
PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV, A CONGRATULATORY CALL, AND THAT
WAS IT. MEDVEDEV CAME TO THE COUNTRY, A
WHOLE BUNCH OF RUSSIANS CAME FOR A G20 SUMMIT, AND WE CHOSE
DELIBERATELY NOT TO MEET WITH THEM BECAUSE OF THE PRINCIPLE OF
ONE PRESIDENT AT A TIME. >> RIGHT.
>> MOREOVER, WHAT IS THE RUSH? JANUARY 21st, YOU HAVE ALL THOSE
COMMUNICATIONS. WHAT WAS THE NECESSITY OF HAVING
THIS CONVERSATION? AND OF COURSE WHY DID IT NEED TO
BE IN THIS CONFIDENTIAL CHANNEL? OBVIOUSLY I DON'T KNOW THE
ANSWERS, BUT THOSE ARE VERY STRANGE SBKS BETWEEN THE
TRANSITION TEAM AND THE RUSSIANS.
SO STRANGE THAT AMBASSADOR KISLYAK HIMSELF FOUND IT TO BE
STRANGE, BECAUSE OF COURSE I'M SURE HE'S NEVER HEARD OF AN
AMERICAN WANTING TO COME INTO THE RUSSIAN EMBASSY TO
COMMUNICATE WITH THE KREMLIN IN MOSCOW.
>> AMBASSADOR MAC AT ALL, THIS IS NOT A MOVIE.
IF IT WERE A MOVIE IT COULD BE 1950 OR 1850 IF THE KEY
NOTIFYING PIECE OF EVIDENCE ON THIS STORY IS A LETTER THAT WAS
JUST SENT. WHAT DO YOU MAKE, GIVEN YOUR
EXPERIENCE ABOUT WHO WOULD BE IN THE POSITION TO BOTH HAVE THAT
INFORMATION THAT HAS NOW BEEN CORROBORATED ON A NUMBER OF
LEVELS AS A REPORTER JUST OUTLINED, AND THEN BASICALLY
DECIDE FOR THEIR OWN RATIONALE TO SEND THAT LETTER TO THE
"WASHINGTON POST"? >> WELL, TRANSITIONS ARE PRETTY
CHAOTIC TIMES. SO MORE PEOPLE HAVE EXPOSURE TO
THESE KINDS OF THINGS THAN NORMAL.
BUT TO WRITE THAT LETTER, TO SEND IT THE WAY THEY DID,
OBVIOUSLY THIS PERSON THINKS THAT THE WORLD NEEDED TO KNOW.
AND THAT IS VERY CONSISTENT WITH A LOT OF THE LEAKING THAT HAS
HAPPENED SUBSEQUENTLY. NOW I WANT TO SAY I AM NOT A BIG
FAN OF LEAKERS. I THINK THAT IS -- I TOOK AN
OATH OF OFFICE NOT TO GIVE CLASSIFIED INFORMATION.
THIS OBVIOUSLY IS BEFORE. THIS IS PART OF THE TRANSITION.
BUT WHAT IT SAYS, IF YOU HAVE THIS KIND OF VERY SENSITIVE
INFORMATION AND YOU GO TO THE EXTRAORDINARY LENGTHS TO PUT IT
OUT THERE, IT MEANS THAT YOU'RE REALLY SERIOUSLY CONCERNED ABOUT
THE CONTENT OF WHAT ELSE IS GOING ON HERE.
>> I'M GLAD YOU MENTIONED THAT. I WANT TO ASK YOU THAT FINAL
QUESTION. OBVIOUSLY NEITHER OF US CAN GET
IN THE MIND OF THIS ANONYMOUS PERSON, BUT FROM YOUR
EXPERIENCE, YOU'RE SAYING YOUR INTERPRETATION IS THAT THIS IS
MORE LIKELY SOME SORT OF U.S. OFFICIAL OR SOMEONE LINKED TO
U.S. DIPLOMACY WHO LEAKED THIS BECAUSE THEY THOUGHT IT MIGHT
CONSTITUTE SOME KIND OF
MALFEASANCE? >> LIKE YOU, ARI, I DON'T WANT
TO PRETEND I KNOW WHAT MOTIVATED PEOPLE.
BUT LISTENING TO THE STORY NOW, IT SOUNDS REALLY CRAZY.
AND BY THE WAY, YOU SAID IT EARLIER.
IT COULD EASILY BE THAT THIS IS JUST A PERSON, MR. KUSHNER, THAT
IS JUST WAY OVER HIS HEAD. HE DOESN'T UNDERSTAND DIPLOMACY.
HE DOESN'T UNDERSTAND INTELLIGENCE.
HE KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT THE RUSSIANS.
AND THIS WHOLE IDEA OF A BACK CHANNEL WHEN YOU'RE ABOUT TO
MOVE INTO THE WHITE HOUSE FOR GOODNESS' SAKES, YOU DO A DIRECT
CHANNEL, YOU DON'T NEED A BACK CHANNEL.
BY THE WAY, MR. GOREKOFF IS NOT THE RIGHT CHANNEL, I KNOW HIM.
WHY MEETING WITH THE HEAD OF THE BANK -- IT JUST SUGGESTS
NAIVETE, THAT'S ONE EXPLANATION. BUT THE PERSON THAT SENT THIS
LETTER, I THINK, THOUGHT THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING MORE TO IT.
I DON'T WANT TO JUMP TO THAT CONCLUSION BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW
THAT. BUT THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS
THAT I THINK WE NOW NEED TO KNOW THE ANSWERS.
WE NEED TO KNOW FROM MR. KUSHNER HIMSELF WHY HE WAS GOING TO
THESE EXTRAORDINARY LENGTHS. >> AMBASSADOR MAC AT ALL, I KNOW
YOU TO BE A MEASURED DIPLOMAT WHO USES WORDS CAREFULLY.
BUT I UNDERSTAND YOU TO BE SPEAKING PRETTY STARKLY AT LEAST
ABOUT THE QUESTIONS RAISED HERE IN THIS STORY TONIGHT.
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US. >> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.
>> APPRECIATE IT. >>> SINCE WE HAVE COME ON THE
AIR TONIGHT, THERE IS MORE NEWS, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THAT HAS
BROKEN ABOUT JARED KUSHNER'S CONTACT WITH THE RUSSIAN
AMBASSADOR AND THE REPORTER ON THAT STORY WILL JOIN US SHORTLY.
WE'LL ALSO BE SPEAKING TONIGHT WITH A MEMBER OF THE HOUSE
INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE ABOUT ALL THIS, BE