Rachel Maddow interviews John Brennan: Read the full transcript

If you missed Rachel’s interview with former CIA Director John Brennan, we’ve published the full transcript:

RACHEL MADDOW: This interview tonight with John Brennan will be his first live TV interview since the president took this action.

Director Brennan, thank you very much for being here tonight. So, I know you have choices about where to be. Thanks for being here.

JOHN BRENNAN, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: Thanks, Rachel, for having me on.

MADDOW: So, you were CIA director from 2013 to January of 2017.

BRENNAN: Right.

MADDOW: You were President Obama’s counterterrorism and homeland security adviser. You were 25 years as a CIA officer before that. You have been through some stressful situations in your life.

How has it been the past couple days since the president singled you out for attack and punishment in this way?

BRENNAN: It’s fine. As far as I’m concerned personally, I’m fine. It’s not unexpected. He had signaled something like this would happen.

Nobody, though, got in touch with me from the White House or CIA since it was first noted that my security clearance was under review. I learned about it when somebody called me to say that Sarah Huckabee Sanders was announcing at the podium that these clearances were revoked.

Again, I was not shocked for a couple reasons. One, there’s a heads up. But, secondly, I’m not quite shocked at all the appalling things that Mr. Trump has done.

And so, I think this is an egregious act that it flies in the face of traditional practice, as well as common sense, as well as national security. I think that’s why there’s been such an outcry from many intelligence professionals. Not to support me, but to support the principle that security clearances are something that’s very, very solemn and sacred and they never, ever should be used for political purposes, either to grant friends those clearances or to revoke clearances of your critics.

MADDOW: With three decades experience at the CIA and all of your other government service, clearly, you’re familiar with clearances, with the processes around clearances, including the processes that exist inside the government for revoking them for cause. When the president first signaled that he might go after your security clearance, did you expect that the CIA would then be put through its paces in terms of the normal procedures for how these things go, that they would write a memo and evaluate whether you had behaved in any way that would justify this action? Did you expect that it would go through channels?

BRENNAN: Well, if these were formal times, I would have expected it. But these are not normal times. These are quite frankly very frightening times. So, I didn’t expect any adherence to process, any adherence to the steps and measures and regulations that exist by order. I think Mr. Trump has demonstrated time and time again that he believes that just because he has the authority to do these things, that he has, in fact, the right to do it irrespective of what is truly the appropriate thing to do.

MADDOW: And appropriate is a general word there. Congressman Elijah Cummings has suggested and other observers have suggested that even though the president has the right to sort of handle security clearances as commander in chief, there are executive orders that supposedly guide the way these things are handled.

Congressman Cummings has suggested overtly that it may be illegal what the president has done. Congressman Schiff, who’s the top Democrat on intel, has suggested the same thing.

Are you considering legal action or do you think you have a legal right to exert against the president’s actions here?

BRENNAN: Well, I think as you can imagine, a number of lawyers have reached out to say that there is a very strong case here, not so much to reclaim mine but to prevent this from happening in the future.

MADDOW: Uh-huh.

BRENNAN: And so, I am thinking about what it is that I might want to do. At this time, I’m trying to make sure that the principle is what is going to be defended and supported, and this is something that should not be repeated.

The other people on the so-called enemy’s list now, I think this is just another example of Mr. Trump trying to frighten and intimidate others. But I can tell you, having worked in the national security and intelligence community for many, many years, these are not the type of people who are bullied or intimidated by someone of the likes of Mr. Trump.

MADDOW: There is a list. They are former senior — one current, currently serving Justice Department official.

BRENNAN: Bruce Ohr (ph). Yes.

MADDOW: And there’s actually some news about him tonight that I want to get your reaction to. Just broke in the last hour or so.

But among this list, you appear to be first. The president is threatening to revoke everybody else’s security clearances. He acted against you.

Do you have a sense of why the president thinks you’re so special? Why he has, why he’s started with you. I mean — and I don’t know, I guess I don’t know if I’m asking about something personal. I guess the way that I imagine this might go is that there might be something that you know or that he knows that you know that might be making him particularly angry or particularly nervous.

BRENNAN: I don’t know what it is that is motivating Mr. Trump to focus on me at first. I met Mr. Trump only once at Trump Tower in early January 2017 when we briefed him on the intelligence community assessment on Russian interference in the election. That’s the only interaction I’ve had with him ever.

Now, I have been outspoken and I’m sure that my outspokenness and some of the things that I have said have, you know, irritated him. I wish I didn’t have to say these things. And it’s one thing to have policy differences or substantive differences with presidents and I had them in the past with previous presidents. What really gets under my skin is Mr. Trump’s lack of decency, integrity, honesty and his lack of commitment to this country’s well-being and national security.

Mr. Trump is motivated by whatever is in the best interest of Mr. Trump. That has been for many decades. I was hoping that he was going to change once he assumed the solemn responsibilities of the office of presidency.

That’s why for my first year I sometimes spoke out when he was in front of the agency’s memorial wall and spoke about the size of his inauguration crowd, but I did it very, very selectively. I gave him a year. I said, maybe he is going to adapt and change.

But it seemed like day after day, week after week, month after month, things just got worse. He did not live up to I think what Americans expect of the president of the United States, to speak with great forcefulness but to do it with integrity and honesty. Mr. Trump, time after time, I think has really just disappointed millions of Americans, which I’m trying to give voice to.

And so, I know a lot of people think a former intelligence official shouldn’t be doing this. I don’t consider what I’m doing as political at all. I never registered as a Republican or a Democrat, you know, for my entire life. But I feel such a commitment to this country’s security and its reputation.

And I’m the son of an immigrant and my father taught me and my siblings early on just how important it is that we take as very special the privilege of being born an American citizen. And, so, when I see what Mr. Trump is doing, basically trashing the reputation of his country worldwide and the way he has treated Americans, fellow Americans, how he refers to them, the divisiveness, the incitement, the fueling of hatred and polarization. This is not what this country is about.

(AUDIO GAP)

MADDOW: — over the centuries, over the generations, some of them have been terrible jerks, if you read the right history books. Some of them have been deliberatively divisive. Some of them have — had terrible ideas or treated people in their personal lives or even in political life in egregious ways.

Your criticism of President Trump is — rises above that type. Despite what you just articulated here. You’ve gone further than that. After Helsinki, you were stark and even a little bit scary in your criticism of his behavior. You said it rose to treason.

BRENNAN: I said it was says nothing short of treasonous.

MADDOW: In this current controversy, that specific comment has been singled out by a number of people as a comment that may be by you crossed the line. That was maybe in —

BRENNAN: Crossed what line? Freedom of speech?

(CROSSTALK)

MADDOW: No, I’ m not saying that you don’t have a right to say it. But do you stand by that consideration and can you explain? Can you elaborate what you mean by treasonous? It’s a very serious allegation.

BRENNAN: I know what the Russians did in interfering in the election. I have — you know, I’m 100 percent confidence in what they did.

And for Mr. Trump to stand on that stage in Helsinki, with all the world’s eyes upon him and to basically said he wouldn’t — he doesn’t understand why would the Russians interfere in the election, he’s given Mr. Putin, the Russians, a pass time after time after time, and he keeps referring to this whole investigation as a witch-hunt, as, you know, bogus, as you know — and, to me, this was an attack against the foundational principle of our great republic, which is the right of all Americans to choose their elected leaders.

And for Mr. Trump to so cavalierly so dismiss that, yes, sometimes my Irish comes out and in my tweets and I did say that it rises to and exceeds the level of high crimes and misdemeanors and nothing short of treasonous because he had the opportunity there to be able to say to the world that this is something that happened. It should never, ever happen, again. And if Russia tries at all to do it, they’re going to pay serious price for it.

I don’t expect Mr. Putin to acknowledge it. He is — you know, he’s going to deny, deny, deny. But for the president of the United States to continue to prevaricate on this issue, I think, does a great injustice and a disservice to the men and women of the intelligence law enforcement community and does a great disservice to the citizens of the United States.

And that’s why I said it was nothing short of treasonous. I didn’t mean that he committed treason. But it was a term that I used, nothing short of treasonous.

MADDOW: But you didn’t mean that he committed treason, though?

BRENNAN: I said it was nothing short of treasonous. That was the term I used, yes.

MADDOW: That’s the — if we — if we diagram the sentence, nothing short of treasonous means it’s treason.

I mean, the reason — the reason I’m bringing this out is because when you say, I know what the Russians did and when you — knowing what the Russians did, observing the president’s behavior, you go to the word “treason” suggests that you think the president may be —

BRENNAN: The president —

MADDOW: — serving a foreign country rather than our own.

BRENNAN: Well, yes. I think he has crossed the line repeatedly in terms of his failure to fulfill the responsibility of the office. And to look Putin square in the eye and say, this should never, ever happen again.

MADDOW: Do you think that he is knowingly serving the interest of the Russian government instead of the U.S. government?

BRENNAN: You know, I scratch my head a lot. I’m puzzled over why Mr. Trump acts this week with such obsequiousness to Mr. Putin. I don’t — I don’t know. And I’m not going to try to pretend that I know.

But there is something that is very disconcerting, very worrisome about how an individual who occupies the Oval Office interacts with Mr. Putin.

I’m a great advocate of improving relations between Moscow and Washington, don’t get me wrong. I was a strong supporter of that during the Obama administration. And I went — I stuck my neck out a number of times particularly on Syria to say, no, we need to be able to work with the Russians to be able to bring this mass carnage to a halt.

But time after time, the Russians, you know, would feign sincerity better than anybody I’ve ever know, but I do believe we need to get this behind us. I don’t want this to, you know, roil the waters forever. But we need to have a president who is going to acknowledge this and make sure that he is able to then move on.

MADDOW: How do we get this behind us? I mean, you’re suggesting that there’s things that we do not yet know that have not yet been adjudicated or laid fairly before the American people about the president and his connection with what happened to Russia. Do we need to know that in order to move on or should we decide to move on before we know?

BRENNAN: It’s called the Mueller investigation. It’s called the duly appointed special counsel who has given the mandate to investigate what Russia did in terms of interference in our presidential election. And who might have been working in support of Russian objectives. And who might have committed a crime in that process.

And that’s why Robert Mueller is a real national treasure. He needs to be able to continue with this investigation unimpeded.

MADDOW: Mueller’s indictment about the GRU, about Russian military intelligence lays out in black and white, in great detail an alleged criminal conspiracy to illegally sway the U.S. election. It’s named conspirators, it describes what they did. There was agreement among multiple actors to pursue an aim and then they took actions in pursuit of that aim.

So, they’ve defined a criminal conspiracy existing in the world.

BRENNAN: On the part of a foreign government, which you need. A foreign government.

MADDOW: Yes.

BRENNAN: Yes, excellent (ph).

MADDOW: But because that conspiracy has been defined, what would an American have to do to be considered part of that conspiracy? All right, if you’ve got a foreign conspiracy orchestrated by a foreign government, what does it mean to have an American abetter? What does it mean for an America — I mean, we talk — the word collusion is become, you know, refrigerator poetry.

BRENNAN: Yes.

MADDOW: And it’s used by anybody for any reason and oftentimes incoherently. But what would amount in your mind, to intelligence terms, to an American being a part of that conspiracy, the one that’s been defined by Robert Mueller already?

BRENNAN: Yes, and I will leave it to the lawyers and the courts to decide whether something is criminal or not. But in my mind, it requires someone to knowingly support the efforts of a foreign government to interfere in U.S. domestic politics and especially an election.

And so, any American who was working with the Russians, or working with intermediaries who are working with the Russians, and those Americans who knowingly tried to collude, conspire and to work with them in order to advance their political objectives here in the States, I think that rises to the level of conspiracy.

Now, a lot depends on what Robert Mueller has been able to uncover. Maybe there’s none of that.

And in my op-ed in “The New York Times” when I said Mr. Trump’s claims of no collusion are hogwash, it’s because there is collusion I think in open sight now because — so many things I learned since I lost office because of what has appeared in the press. You know, the Trump Tower meeting with Don Jr. and others.

And I also when I was CIA director, I didn’t know that it was the day that Mr. Trump basically gave a public call to the Russians to find Hillary Clinton’s e-mails, matter of fact (ph), the same day that the GRU was actively looking for it. So, there is collusion in plain sight. But I don’t know whether any of that rises to the level of conspiracy and whether any of that conspiracy rises to criminal liability for that conspiracy.

MADDOW: You described in detail before Congress, an open — it’s open setting congressional testimony last spring that in the summer of 2016, you at CIA were alarmed by, said your radar went up about the number of contracts between Russian officials and U.S. persons at a time that Russia was mounting this interference campaign. When you say that your radar went up about that, did you radar go up about that just because it appeared that the Russian operation had as a component of that operation the engagement of Americans toward that end or was it specifically because of the people, the Americans, the specific U.S. citizens who those Russians were targeting? What was it that put your alarm up?

BRENNAN: Well, first, I knew that it was a very intense Russian effort to interfere in the election, number one. Number two, I am well aware and have a lot of experience in observing what the Russians will do to try to suborn American citizens, to get Americans to this to work for them. And this was a very intensive effort.

And, so, as I said in my op-ed, myself and Jim Comey and Mike Rogers are going to say (ph), we talked about the importance of making sure that our radar, our collection radar was up so that we had early indications or be able to uncover any effort on the part of the Russians to work with American citizens, the American citizens were reaching out to the Russians, as well, to see what they could get, see if they could any dirt on Hillary Clinton.

So, my radar was going because I knew the Russians were engaged in this effort and I was aware of contracts with American citizens that may have been totally innocent on the American citizens’ part and maybe they weren’t betting at all.

MADDOW: Was it clear to you that those contacts with American citizens were part of the operation? That it was part of the way that Russia was trying to accomplish its objectives?

BRENNAN: I was very concerned and aware that the Russians were trying to leverage U.S. citizens in order to achieve their objectives in the presidential election.

MADDOW: While you were in office as CIA director before you left on inauguration day, did you conclude that U.S. persons were successfully leveraged in that effort?

BRENNAN: No. No. And that’s why I said in open testimony that I was concerned about these contracts because people will go down a treasonous path, sometimes very unknowingly, and they got a very hot water and deep water and then they, in fact, cannot extricate themselves because the Russians are very clever at getting people in positions of potential kompromat, compromising positions that they then cannot sort of turn back.

So, when I left office on January 20th of 2017, I had unresolved questions in my mind if any of those U.S. persons were working in support of the Russian efforts.

MADDOW: And those were referred, those concerns about specific U.S. persons refer to the FBI.

BRENNAN: Right. We call it incidental collection in terms of CIA’s foreign intelligence collection authorities. Any time we would incidentally collect information on a U.S. person, we would hand that over to the FBI because they have the legal authority to do it. We would not pursue that type of investigative, you know, sort of leads. We would give it to the FBI.

So, we were picking things up that was of great relevance to the FBI and we wanted to make sure that they were there so they could piece it together with whatever they were collecting here domestically here. Again —

MADDOW: So, it’s an intelligence sharing operation between —

BRENNAN: Right. We put together a fusion center at CIA that brought NSA and FBI officers together with CIA to make sure that those proverbial dots would be connected.

MADDOW: Let me ask you about one other thing that happened during your tenure as CIA director and I don’t believe you’ve ever been asked about this before. Several weeks before the election in 2016, the early fall of 2016, I know, personally, that two well-respected reporters here at NBC approached you and asked you about a story that they were chasing, concerning then candidate Donald Trump and connections he might have to Russia and the Kremlin.

You were approached by these reporters. They were asking for either on the record or off the record guidance from you on that story, and they say you told them, I don’t think I can help you with that. I don’t think I can help you with this. I can’t confirm it. I don’t have that for you, I can’t help you.

So, you wouldn’t confirm any of it, you offered no help. This was September of 2016. It sounds like at that time that, you actually did know quite a lot about the Russian operation influence and potential connections to the Trump campaign. The press was coming to you with these queries. I know they at least were coming to you from (INAUDIBLE) from within this building.

What — was that of interest to you that the press seemed to be on to some of this and how did you handle that press interest?

BRENNAN: Yes. Well, I don’t think I have been asked this question on a news show. But, in fact, I informed the Senate Intelligence Committee about this in my closed testimony over the past year and a half.

Yes, it was in September. And two journalist, noteworthy members of the media asked me if I had heard about a document or a report about — that contained some salacious information related to Donald Trump.

MADDOW: Were they specifically asking about the supposed — the alleged sex tape or —

BRENNAN: They were talking about that and they used some of those descriptors. Didn’t go into great detail but they led me to believe that it was related to some things that might have happened in Moscow. I didn’t confirm or deny anything for various reasons. One is that I don’t talk to American journalists about U.S. persons ever. Number two, much less talk about a U.S. presidential candidate to journalists.

And it was later that year when, in December, was the first time I had ever put eyes on the so-called Steele dossier that I recalled the conversation I had with those two members of the media. And said, oh, this must be what they’re talking about because they said this was widely circulating among the media and the press, this document, this report and these rumors and whatever else. And I basically told them, I can’t help you with that and I’m not going to engage.

But it was subsequent to that that I connected the dots then and said they must have been talking about what ultimately referred to as the Steele dossier. I didn’t see that dossier until December. There are a lot of people out there, including members of Congress, who claimed I told Senate majority leader, minority leader at the time, Harry Reid, about it in August or September. That is, you know, that is false.

I did not have eyes or information on that —

Recommended

Latest

John Brennan rips ‘insecure’ Trump and ‘supplicant’ Jim Jordan after DOJ referral

Allison Detzel

News

DOJ preparing subpoenas in investigation into John Brennan

Ken Dilanian

MADDOW: Until after the election

BRENNAN: Until after the election. That’s right.

MADDOW: Before it was published in January, but after the election in November.

BRENNAN: Right. It became a hot topic of debate within CIA, NSA and FBI and DNI about whether or not to take that dossier into account when the intelligence community assessment was done. We decided no because there’s no way we could substantiate it. It wasn’t in an intelligent document. So, it was appended to it but not taken into account at all as the intelligence community assessment was done and was completed.

MADDOW: The president has made a specific, on the record allegation against you on that specific topic. There’s also a little bit of breaking news about the security clearance fallout after the president revoked your security clearance this week.

Please, stick with us. Former CIA Director John Brennan is my guest. We’ll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC HOST: Joining us, once again, for his first sit down interview since President Trump revoked his security clearance in an unprecedented move this week is former CIA Director John Brennan.

Director Brennan, thank you, again, for being here.

JOHN BRENNAN, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: Sure.

MADDOW: I want to ask you about this breaking news we had tonight from “Washington Post.” you can see the headline here White House drafts more clearance cancellations demanded by Trump. I will just read you the lead.

The White House has drafted documents revoking security clearances of current and former officials whom President Trump has demanded be punished for criticizing him or for playing a role in the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election, according to senior administration officials. Trump wants to sign, quote, most, if not all of them, said one senior White House official who indicated that communication aides including Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Bill Shine, the new deputy chief of staff, they have discussed the optimum times to release them as a distraction during unfavorable news cycles.

Here’s the part about you. The senior White House official acknowledged that the step taken this week against John Brennan had been prepared in late July when Sanders first said Trump was considering it. But the decision to take that step was made this week to divert attention from nonstop coverage of a critical book released by fired Trump aide Omarosa Manigault Newman. Consideration is being given to holding other prepared documents in reserve for similar opportunities in the future.

Do you have any reaction to learning that that, according to a White House official, is why the president took this action against you this week?

BRENNAN: No, other than this is just another demonstration of his irresponsibility in terms of holding that office. Just because he has these authorities, and he does — he can revoke, you know, and he has revoked my clearances and others, and just the way he can give pardons out. But — and I’m not a lawyer, but I know there is a question about whether or not there is corrupt intent terms of doing this.

And so, I think this is a thing that lawyers and courts and others are going to be looking at in terms of whether Mr. Trump is going to be doing any of this to obstruct justice or try to silence critics, whatever. But the fact that he’s using a security clearance of a former CIA director as a pawn in his public relations strategy, I think, is just so reflective of somebody who, quite frankly, don’t want to use this term maybe, but he’s drunk on power. He really is. And I think he’s abusing the powers of that office.

I think right now this country is in a crisis in terms of what Mr. Trump has done and is liable to do. And so, are the Republicans on the Hill who have given him a pass, are they going to wait for a disaster to happen before they actually find their back bones and spines to speak up against somebody who clearly, clearly is not carrying out his responsibilities with any sense of purpose and common sense from the stand point of a national security?

MADDOW: When you raised that kind of prospect, what kind are you envisaging?

BRENNAN: I don’t know. I mean, look, we’re just tossing around these things right now. What happens if he wants to do something on the foreign front in terms of some type of military adventure? You know, the wag-the-dog scenario as a way to distract attention, as things get increasingly tough for him and the waters get choppier, how desperate is he going to become? What else is he going to do in order to distract attention?

And so, I really am quite surprised and very disappointed in many of the Republican members of Congress. A lot of them who I know well and respect, but for whatever reason, they are turning a blind eye and making excuses for someone who doesn’t deserve to be given this type of leash with the authorities of the office of the presidency.

MADDOW: The authority that he is exerting here is, again, an untested one because the president — no president has ever been known to use a security clearance like a weapon this way, the revocation of a security clearance this way. One of the other things that’s discussed in the breaking news from “The Washington Post” tonight is that there’s particular concern expressed even within the White House about the president’s statement today that he intends very quickly to strip the clearance of a current Justice Department official Bruce Ohr.

Some people have suggested that depending on Mr. Ohr’s actual job is at the Justice Department right now, stripping his security clearance might actually effectively be a way of firing him, if he needs a security clearance to do his job.

BRENNAN: Absolutely. It would be.

MADDOW: Is the president exercising a new authority here to essentially fire people, disable people from being able to do their jobs, even if he’s constitutionally unable to fire that official?

BRENNAN: I think he’s out of control. He is, has the steering wheel of the American vehicle in his hands. And he’s veering wildly right now. He’s trying to preserve and protect himself.

And, so, what more demonstration do you want some when things get really, really bad? I’m glad that if his revoking my security clearance is going to wake some people up. Look at all the people who have come and spoken out. You know, the icons of a national security intelligence community over the past several decades saying enough is enough.

And so, when are the members of Congress and the Republican Party going to say enough is enough?

This country is more important than Mr. Trump. This country is more important than party affiliation. I’m waiting for it. I’m hoping for it and I truly hope that it’s going to happen sooner rather than later.

MADDOW: Because the president has overtly today raised this prospect of going after this current Justice Department official, his security clearance, raised a question for me as to whether he might do that to the attorney general, who he has criticized in unsparing terms, this week calling him not a real attorney general or to the deputy attorney general who oversees the Mueller investigation or to FBI Director Chris Wray.

BRENNAN: Or Bob Mueller or the team of investigators there.

MADDOW: Yes.

BRENNAN: Yes.

MADDOW: That was raised publicly by former DNI James Clapper this week. I wondered what you thought about that.

BRENNAN: Well, I think it just demonstrates that anything is possible with Mr. Trump in the Oval Office. That he has the authorities. And he can yank the security clearances of basically anybody he wants. I think it is subject to challenge.

But if he decides to yank the challenges tomorrow or the investigators working on this special counsel’s effort, they’re not going to be — have access to classified information they need to do their jobs.

So, again, how desperate is he going to get? And do the Republicans really want to have to clean up after a disaster or do they want to stop this before it becomes disastrous? It’s their choice. And if things become disastrous, it’s going to be on their shoulders, on their conscience.

MADDOW: You have said that since you left the CIA, you have returned to the agency several times, specifically to review materials in order to prepare yourself for congressional testimony for questioning by congressional staffers. Will the loss of your clearances affect your ability to do that?

BRENNAN: I’ve returned to the CIA twice to talk about — well, in support of my congressional testimony. I had to go back and read the files, just to make sure I was able to respond to their questions.

One other time, a CIA senior official asked me to come in to talk about things and that was with using my security clearances, so I could talk freely about things. Another time, Director Pompeo when he was there, every year, the director of CIA usually invites back former directors to give them updates on what’s happening in the CIA, as well as some substantive briefings.

I have never gone into CIA to ask for any type of briefing. I’ve never gone in there to access any type of computer. So, again, I’ll be fine. But — and I don’t want to get anybody in CIA in trouble, you know, in terms of their reaching out to me.

I think there has been a chilling effect on the part of what Mr. Trump is doing and his characterization of me that, I think, CIA officers are pretty reluctant to be found out that they, you know, consulted me about a matter.

MADDOW: With now every — nearly every living director and former director of the CIA speaking out in support of you today —

BRENNAN: In support of the principle of security clearances not being political tools.

MADDOW: And also in support of you personally. Personal praise and support for you there, too. Even among former officials who say they don’t always agree with your criticism of the president. They support you and reject any allegation that you’ve mishandled your security clearance in any way, with 60 former CIA officials joining their own letter today and joining, this is becoming a larger issue, not a smaller one in terms of the public debate on this matter.

Speaking of the public debate on this matter, can I chain you to the desk for one more second?

BRENNAN: Sure.

MADDOW: All right. We’ll be back with former CIA Director John Brennan. Thank you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MADDOW: Joining us, once again, for his first sit down interview since President Trump took the unprecedented step of revoking his security clearance is former CIA Director John Brennan.

Thank you, again, Director Brennan.

BRENNAN: Thanks, Rachel.

MADDOW: In your op-ed this week of “The New York Times”, you said one of the questions that remains to be answered now is how many members of Trump Incorporated attempted to defraud the government by laundering and concealing the movement of money into their pockets. What does Trump Incorporated mean there? It seems like you’re making an organized crime reference.

BRENNAN: Yes. Well, it’s sort of the orbit of individuals that are associated in one way or another with Mr. Trump. Rick Gates has already admitted to doing this. Paul Manafort is now — his trial is now to the jury, who is being charged with those types of extensive criminal activities.

So, the use of, you know, financial transactions is a way to move money surreptitiously. You know, I don’t know who else that is associated with Mr. Trump, but you’re talking about the former campaign manager and a former deputy campaign manager. I think — you know, Mr. Trump over the years, I think has, you know, associated himself with some individuals of some, you know, questionable business practices.

So, all I’m saying is that as a result of the investigation that Mr. Mueller is doing, those financial transactions are a critically part — important part of the investigative process.

MADDOW: Is there a money element to the Russia operation to influence the election? There are some banking and money moving allusions, seemingly not on a large scale in the Mueller indictment in terms of how the Russia operation unfolded. As far as you know and as far as you can tell us, is there a financial component to that that may be helpful either in an investigative way or in terms of understanding the scale of the crime?

BRENNAN: Well, I know that the Russians have used financial transactions in previous efforts overseas to try to influence the outcome of election and I talked about this with Jim Comey quite a bit, to make sure that our radar and antenna were up in terms of what types of monies might be moving as part of this Russian effort, to suborn U.S. persons. Maybe they were not at all, in fact, connected with the campaign.

But, you know, the term “follow the money” is very, very important one, whether or not you’re pursuing organized crime or you’re pursuing some type of counterintelligence operation. And so, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the special counsel has uncovered a number of those or some financial transactions that do speak to Russia’s efforts.

MADDOW: I have one last very specific thing to ask you. You were — you were CIA director through the election and through the transition. Your last day ended at noonon inauguration day.

There have been published reports that some of the same elements of the Russian influence from the campaign were actually employed for a new purpose during the transition, once Trump had been elected and was serving as president-elect, was standing up to the new administration. There have been published reports that during the transition, Russian efforts were redirected to try to sway the selection of some of the president-elect’s cabinets, specifically, basically, the Russian boots were repurposed to start trying to block ball Mitt Romney as a potential secretary of state and to cheer lead for the eventual choice Rex Tillerson.

You were CIA director at the time those things allegedly were happening. Can you comment on that at all?

BRENNAN: Russian efforts to influence American politics in the aftermath of the inauguration on January 20th of 2017 did not stop with election day in November. They continued throughout the course of those months between election day, inauguration day, in order to do whatever they could to ensure that whatever happened in American politics in 2017, 2018 and beyond was going to be as favorable to them as possible.

MADDOW: Director Brennan, I just want to underscore one point that you made in our initial segment which is that you said you are considering potential — the possibility of legal action in terms of your security clearance revocation?

BRENNAN: It would be with the eye towards preventing this type of abuse by Donald Trump in the future, not to reclaim mine. Although this is the first time in 38 years I haven’t had a security clearance. I am very concerned about the future generation, the current generation of intelligence officers.

It was a privilege every day of my life to be a part of this community that kept this country, this wonderful country strong and safe, and I don’t want to ever allow a politician or someone in the Oval Office to just so cavalierly toss around national security and security clearances. So, I will fight on behalf of those who still have their clearances.

MADDOW: Director Brennan, I have disagreed with you publicly and privately on a number of serious policies —

BRENNAN: And look forward to talking about those issues in the future.

MADDOW: I look forward to talking about this, too. But I want to tell you, for all my disagreements with you on a number of different policy matters, I have profound and earnest respect for your service. So, thanks.

BRENNAN: Thank you. Thanks, Rachel.

MADDOW: Director John Brennan of the CIA, 25 years CIA officer and four years as CIA director, stripped this week of his security clearance by the president.

Something unprecedented happens almost every day. You would think that would be a blessing in the news business, sometimes it feels like a curse.

We’ll be right back.