Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

Trump Provided Some Health Information To Dr. Oz; Clinton Sidelined By Pneumonia; Trump And Clinton Under Pressure Over Health Records; Trump Pulls Ahead Of Clinton In Nevada. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired September 14, 2016 - 13:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:00:24] WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer. It's 1:00 p.m. here in Washington, 6:00 p.m. in London, 8:00 p.m. in Damascus, Syria. Wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks very much for joining us.

We begin with breaking news. We're getting new images of Donald Trump who just wrapped up a taping of the "Dr. Oz Show," surprising the doctor and the audience by providing a one-page summary of his recent physical. His motorcade leaving the show just moments ago. The show will air tomorrow.

Both Trump and Hillary Clinton are under a lot of pressure, growing pressure, to release more health records. Clinton's health is under more scrutiny as she recovers from a bout of pneumonia her wobbly departure from a 911 ceremony on Sunday. Here, you see her leaving daughter Chelsea's apartment later that day. Clinton is expected back on the campaign trail, by the way, tomorrow.

Our Political Reporter Sara Murray is standing by. And our Chief Medical Correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta is will us as well. Sara, Trump talked about some of his medical records with Dr. Oz during this taping today. What have we learned? What are we learning about this taping and what Trump said?

SARA MURRAY, CNN POLITICAL REPORTER: Well, we're still only get a few details because while he shared this one-page summary of his physical with Dr. Oz, he has not shared it, so far, with reporters who cover him or with the general public, with voters. That's supposed to be coming out tomorrow when the show actually airs.

But he did release this summary to Dr. Oz and apparently he also expressed to the audience that he would like to lose some weight. Apparently, Dr. Oz was very impressed by the results of this physical, although we don't actually have that in front of us. And it's worth noting, Wolf, that part of the reason that there's so much pressure not just on Donald Trump but also Hillary Clinton to make more records public is because they really haven't met the standards of a number of previous nominees.

We're looking at two nominees of major parties who are much older than some nominees in the past, and we really don't have detailed medical histories on either of them in the way we have had had from some previous nominees.

BLITZER: So is this -- what he released to Dr. Oz, is that the extent of what the Trump campaign is going to release on his health or can we anticipate more details?

MURRAY: Well, that's an excellent question. I do think that for the last couple days, the Trump campaign has basically been saying that this is what they were going to put out, that this is what Donald Trump was talking about when he has previously said he would put out more details about his health.

He got this physical a week or so ago. And they were saying that these -- this is what they were going to offer, in terms of additional medical information. The campaign hasn't given any signal that they're willing to put out a lengthier medical history, like we've seen from past presidential nominees, like John McCain for instance.

BLITZER: And the physical was conducted by his longtime physician, Dr. Harold Bornstein, who's affiliated with the Lenox Hill Hospital in New York. Is he going to be made available to reporters, medical reporters specifically, for some interviews?

MURRAY: Well, that's a great question, and we have caught up with him on occasion at CNN. But he has not really been out there very publicly. And he has gotten a lot of attention over the initial doctor's note he wrote for Donald Trump, because it just looks so different from what we would expect to see from a doctor's note's. In it, he wrote that Donald Trump would be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency.

So, there is certain, sort of, showmanship not only in that doctor's letter but also in Donald Trump showing up at the "Dr. Oz show," surprising the host with results for a physical. It's no surprise, really, that you're dealing with a candidate here who is a former reality T.V. star -- Wolf.

BLITZER: All right, Sara, stand by.

Sanjay, let's talk a little bit about what we know. So, he gave Dr. Oz this one-page summery from his physical that he took last week with Dr. Bornstein. According to the press release from the show, Dr. Oz took Trump through a full review of systems. A full review of his health, including nervous systems, head and neck, hormone levels and a whole lot more. I've got the list over here, cardiovascular, health and related medications, respiratory health, gastro intestinal health, bladder and prostate health, dermatological health. You get the history of cancer. If we -- if you get all of that information, Sanjay, that would be impressive. Wouldn't it?

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, first of all, Wolf, I've never seen anything like this before. So, it's an interesting thing because it's a typically -- and I think as Dr. Oz has noted, this is typically, obviously, something that's done in a doctor's office not on a television show.

Having said that, a review of symptoms typically is just that. It's a conversation between doctor and patient asking questions. Have you had a history of heart problems? Have you had a history of cancer? All those things that you just had on the list, dermatological problems, the list goes on.

[13:05:03] It's different than an exam, than a physical exam. Now, it sounds like what Sara was just talking about was that Donald Trump had this physical exam done by his own doctor, and then provides some of those results, maybe in the form of what the exam showed, what some of the blood tests showed. And then, Dr. Oz was asking him these other questions.

It's a snapshot in time, and it's very much predicated on what the patient is telling. This -- in this case, Dr. Oz on camera. So, again, I've never seen anything like this. It's hard to know what to make of it, but it's -- it gives you a snapshot, I guess in time, this time right now, about what he's revealing, in this case Donald Trump is revealing, about his own health.

BLITZER: And when you go through a physical in a doctor's office, you can get an EKG. That can provide some information. Certainly blood work. You can, you know, learn about your -- I guess some more about what's going on with a patient out there. But you're not going to get the full review. That's what you're saying, right?

GUPTA: Right. I mean, I think that there is -- there's many things which I think are perfectly reasonable to be kept private. That's your private health information. But things that are relevant to conducting the duties of president over, you know, say the next eight years, if someone gets elected twice, are the things that very much top that list. Cognitive function, how is that tested? Heart function, overall. History of cancers on the list, are there any risk factors for that? Any risk factors for things like dementia or anything that can be incapacitating? What medications is a person on? Are those medications in any way sedating or could they impair cognitive function?

Again, not suggesting that anybody has any of that, either candidate. Nobody is saying that. But I think those are the types of questions. It doesn't mean you have to have every single medical record. Some of that probably isn't relevant and it's perfectly appropriate to be kept private. But I think if the question is, is this person fit to lead, from a health standpoint? What are the questions that should be asked at that point? What are the results, the data that, I think, the public's entitled to?

And, you know, look, I think that maybe some of that came out of this. I don't know still. We'll see when the show finally airs. But it's hard to get the complete picture that I think we're talking about here.

BLITZER: At a minimum, I assume we'll get his blood pressure, cholesterol levels, stuff like that, his height, his weight and the analysis from his Dr., Dr. Bornstein.

All right, Sanjay, stand by. Sara, stand by as well. Questions about Trump and Clinton's medical records point to a broader concern about a lack of transparency by the campaigns and the candidates. Let's discuss that and more with our Political Analyst David Gregory. He's the author of "How's Your Faith?" An important book just out in paperback right now. Also joining us, Carol Lee, White House reporter for the "Wall Street Journal." CNN Political Commentator Ryan Lizza, he's the Washington correspondent for the "New Yorker" magazine.

David, let's talk a little about what we anticipated. Earlier this morning, we weren't going to get much during the "Dr. Oz Show." We're getting something. But, clearly, if you listen to Dr. Gupta, not, for example, what John McCain did eight years ago when he let medical correspondents, including Sanjay, spend hours reviewing everything about his health record and talking to physicians.

DAVID GREGORY, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think Sanjay would agree. That was an extraordinary circumstance because he had cancer. He had melanoma. And so, he really allowed a thorough review. And so, that's something very specific to cancer which could end his life and so that made sense.

But I think there's just a basic foundation of transparency that is required here of any presidential candidate that both candidates ought to adhere to. And so, there's this kind of reality show nature, which we've come to expect of Donald Trump, in terms of these kinds of slow reveals. I think some of it is just silly. You know, there should be a thorough scrubbing of this kind of information. The public has a right to know.

It is also true of Hillary Clinton, who should be more transparent about her records and about leveling with her press corps if she gets diagnosed with something like pneumonia.

BLITZER: Yes. And, Carol, the campaign manager for Donald Trump, Kellyanne Conway, she said this, and I'm quoting her. "I don't know why we need such extensive medical reporting when we all have a right to privacy. So, when you hear that, when I hear that, as reporters, as journalists, we say, you know what? If you're running for president, you don't necessarily have that complete right to privacy.

CAROL LEE, WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, "WALL STREET JOURNAL": It's a completely different standard. If you're returning for president you have, you don't have a right to privacy on certain issues. There are things that, traditionally, the public has a right to know. They need to know about your health. They traditionally know about your taxes.

And what we've seen in this election cycle is an erosion of these long-time norms, on both sides. Whether it's health records or taxes or press access. And it's not clear that if it continues in this way, that you're ever going to really get that back.

BLITZER: Because if -- as you know, Ryan, if you want a right to privacy, don't run for president of the United States.

[13:10:03] RYAN LIZZA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I was literally going -- I was literally going to say that exact same thing.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: All of us, private citizens, have a right to privacy.

GREGORY: Yes.

BLITZER: But if you want to be the leader of the free world, if you will, the most important position in the world, --

LIZZA: Yes.

BLITZER: -- the American public has a right to know if you're healthy, or not healthy, your taxes, all that kind of stuff.

LIZZA: Yes. Look, if you value privacy, running for president is not the business you should be in.

GREGORY: Right.

LIZZA: Shouldn't be in the public eye at all. You shouldn't have your own reality T.V. show. So, I'm a little -- I'm a little surprised that she said that.

I think that, at the very minimum, Trump needs to match what Clinton has revealed. You know, she put out a two-page letter last year. It's not the most thorough document in the world, but it had all of the medications she's taking. It had the history of her blood clot and her concussion and seasonal allergies. And, you know, it gave us --

BLITZER: Her history of deep vein thrombosis in her legs.

LIZZA: Exactly. And it gave us a snapshot of her most recent physical from 2015 and the major issues. Trump has not done some similar. Now, we know what happened on Dr. Oz today. But, you know, from the reports so far, it sounds maybe a little bit more like a reality T.V. publicity stunt than a serious medical evaluation with lots of detailed information. We'll have to see.

GREGORY: And then, the point is you want data, right? You want to have -- you know, CNN would like this information. You can have Dr. Gupta on to say what does this tell you about risk factors and other things about history that would be relevant to whether he could serve capably at president.

LIZZA: And these are the two -- this pair is the oldest pair of presidential candidates ever.

BLITZER: He's 70 and next month she'll be 69.

LIZZA: Right? So, it's -- right. So, this isn't like, you know, a couple of spring chickens.

LEE: One of other things that --

LIZZA: It makes this much more important.

LEE: -- one of the things that's concerning is what you were talking about. You know, Clinton released these two pages last year and so Trump's just going to match that. And you get this feel that it's just this race to the bottom, where I'll do the minimum. And all the way, everyone's fighting tooth and nail to get information that is traditionally always been given to the public.

BLITZER: How much damage do you think, David, was done to her and her credibility by the delay in releasing the news that she had pneumonia?

GREGORY: Yes, I think it's a problem because I think it's much more defining than, say, the basket of deplorables comment. Because this, really, is the fundamental criticism of her that she has a penchant for secrecy, maybe deception, that she's too defensive about it. And she keeps her reinforce this time after time. I just don't there's any -- there's any reason for it. She says, look, compare me to my alternative. I don't think that's the right comparison.

Donald Trump not releasing his taxes is totally inappropriate and unacceptable. That's not the comparison. The standard should be, compare me to what is reasonable, what is precedent, what is historic. That's what she should be held to. They should both.

I really agree with what you were saying, Carol, which is, you know, for -- look, members of the press. We want ultimate access. The public should get as much access as possible because knowledge is important here.

BLITZER: And, Carol, when we get the criticism, as we do when we press for these kinds of details, we want it right away. You know, her supporters will come over and say, there are big issues out there. Why are you focusing in on simply the few hours, the delay in the release of the word, pneumonia?

LEE: Well -- and these things matter. And to go to what you were saying about her, the perception of her being really adhering to secrecy and not disclosing things. And, you know, on Donald Trump side, you see that polls are showing that voters actually do care about releasing your tax returns. And so, I think what's going to matter is whether the candidates pay at the polls for the approach that they have taken. And that is not clear that they will.

BLITZER: The polls -- Ryan, the polls that are coming --

LIZZA: Overwhelming, right?

BLITZER: -- the polls that are coming out right now, show Donald Trump really catching up pretty dramatically.

LIZZA: Right.

GREGORY: Yes.

BLITZER: There's a new Bloomberg poll that just came out in Ohio, the key battleground state of Ohio. Look at this, Trump is at 44 percent; Clinton 39 percent. A five-point lead. And then, you get into Gary Johnson, the libertarian candidate, and Jill Stein. But this is in Ohio. And then, there's a Monmouth University poll in Nevada right now. Trump is winning there, 44 percent to 42 percent. These are numbers that --

LIZZA: Yes.

BLITZER: -- clearly are disturbing to the Clinton campaign.

LIZZA: Yes. Look, these battlegrounds like Iowa, Nevada and Ohio, which demographically are a little better for Trump, have tightened quite a bit. The overall national picture has tightened from about a high of a nine-point average lead for Clinton down to a three to four- point lead right now, depending on which polling average you're looking at. That's got to be concerning, right? He's doing something right over this last month.

Now, maybe it's just the traditional post-convention bounce dissipating and this race is settling into a slim, but comfortable, lead for Hillary. But she -- they need to be a little bit worried by the -- not just the national polls now but now these very important swing states.

BLITZER: Because, David, you and I -- you know, we've all covered -- national polls are important. They are very interesting.

GREGORY: Right.

BLITZER: But the key battleground states, you know, Ohio, Florida, some of these other key battlegrounds states, whether Virginia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania. Some of these -- that's where this battle is going to be won and lost.

GREGORY: Particularly, if you look at, you know, his bread and butter, male voters or voters -- white voters without a college degree. He's really -- he has a huge advantage over Hillary Clinton among those voters who are going to be in states like Ohio. That rust belt is really where he's going to make his gains if he's going to do it, and I think it's also political malpractice on her part. She has lost some of that advantage. When he's gotten a bit more disciplined on the trail, she has made some mistakes and has some self-inflicted wounds and now we see this tightening. You can't deny it. And a lot of Democrats are very worried, saying how did this get so close, and they're pointing to their candidate and her team.

BLITZER: It's a very close tightening. Final thoughts?

CAROL LEE, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: Well, I think that for you -- in terms of the map, they believe that Pennsylvania is necessarily the firewall, that Trump can pick up a bunch of other states but that she really has a hold in Pennsylvania and that's why you've seen Bill Clinton there. You'll see Joe Biden there. You saw the President there.

BLITZER: We saw the President of the United States there.

LEE: Right.

GREGORY: Yes.

BLITZER: Of all places, which should be a relatively easy lock for the Democratic candidate but they consider it problematic right now.

All right. Guys, thanks very, very much.

Coming up, Donald trump and the charity that bears his name, it's now under investigation in one state. We're going to tell you the latest.

Plus, an international pariah and a national disgrace. Colin Powell's private thoughts about Donald trump made public after hackers published his e-mail. We're going to get reaction from Trump's senior adviser, the former CIA Director under President Bill Clinton, James Woolsey. He's here with my live. We'll discuss that and a whole lot more.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:20:09] BLITZER: House Democrats are now calling for a Federal investigation into the Donald Trump charitable foundation and a political donation made to the campaign of the Florida Attorney General.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, (D) FLORIDA: When there is a whiff of the potential for bribery to have occurred, and there is way more than a whiff here, there is a stink rotting in the Attorney General's Office in Florida, and the only way that we're going to be able to snuff it out and make sure that that stench goes away is if the Department of Justice launches an investigation and gets to the bottom.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: That same donation by the way is being investigated by New York's Attorney General, an investigation the Trump campaign says is nothing more than another left wing hit job designed to distract from crooked Hillary Clinton's disastrous week.

Our Senior Investigative Correspondent Drew Griffin is joining us now from New York. So what exactly are they looking for, Drew?

DREW GRIFFIN, CNN SENIOR INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT: This stems back to August of 2013, Wolf, when Donald trump wanted to give Pam Bondi, the Attorney General of Florida, a $25,000 donation to her political PAC, that PAC called "And Justice for All." You need to remember that.

What happened, according to trump's side, is that Donald trump directed his staff to make the donation. The staff erred in saying that the donation was a charitable foundation because there is a charitable foundation called "And Justice for All" that's not related with Pam Bondi. So they took money from a Trump foundation account and sent a $25,000 check that by rule is not allowed. The IRS does not allow you to take charitable contributions and use them for political circumstances. So when Donald trump learned about this in a news report, I think it was back in march, he self-reported to the IRS. He rewrote a $25,000 personal check and sent it to the pact that we're talking about in Florida and he paid a penalty, a 10 percent penalty of $2,500 to the IRS.

Now, since then, the New York's attorney general has been writing letters back and forth to the Trump foundation and the Trump organization trying to get clarity on this. This all looked like a settled matter according to the documents I read back in June, but it has resurfaced again now.

BLITZER: What about the allegations related to the timing of the Attorney General's decision?

GRIFFIN: Well, this -- the Attorney General's decision in Florida, wolf, or the Attorney --

BLITZER: The Attorney General's decision in Florida not to investigate Trump University?

GRIFFIN: Yes. And this relates to what you just said on with the House Democrats. Now, this is a separate issue. This is whether or not Pam Bondi, in 2013, soliciting a donation from Donald trump decided to drop any kind of investigation against Trump University. Her office at the time -- her staff at the time, I should be clear, was looking into a complaint that was made in the state of Florida about Trump University, and those staffers were trying to decide if they joined the New York Attorney General's lawsuit against Trump University or not.

It was decided based on reviewing the case that the one case that they had in Florida complaining about this could easily be resolved if that person in Florida or anyone else in Florida would just join the New York Attorney's lawsuit. The problem is all of this happened at the exact same time that this donation was made, which is why the House Democrats are asking for the Department of Justice, I guess, to see if Pam Bondi is basically selling favors down in Florida.

BLITZER: All right. Drew Griffin reporting for us. Thank you very much.

A national disgrace, that's how former Secretary of State Colin Powell described Donald Trump in a hacked e-mail. He also called the Republican presidential candidate, and I'm quoting him now, an international pariah. In response to the hack of political aide -- a Powell aide, I should say, would only say that the content of the hacked e-mail is accurate.

Here with me is the newest member of the Donald trump campaign, the former CIA director James Woolsey. He's now a senior adviser to the Trump campaign. Ambassador Woolsey, thanks for joining us.

JAMES WOOLSEY, SENIOR ADVISERS TO THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN: Good to be with you.

BLITZER: You were the CIA director under Bill Clinton in the '90s. Why have you decided now to go ahead and support Donald trump?

WOOLSEY: I have worked for four administrations, had Presidential appointments, and two Republican and two Democratic. Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Clinton and Carter. And I don't make decisions about whether to help a President based on his political party.

I think, generally, as a citizen, when a presidential candidate asks for advice, one ought to be of -- and it's something I know something about and what I focus on here is national security issues, one should be prepared to advise the potential President.

[13:25:06] BLITZER: And you hope that will be Donald trump. You heard what Colin Powell wrote in that e-mail about Donald trump, the former Secretary of State, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. You know Colin Powell well. That was a very dire assessment of Donald trump.

WOOLSEY: Well, I think he also called Hillary Clinton dumb in one of the e-mails. There are -- a lot of people say a lot of things and write a lot of things in e-mails that are somewhat intemperate. And the difference, of course, between, you know, between a diamond and an e-mail? An e-mail is forever. Once you write an e-mail, you're likely to have it turn up in circumstances and in ways that are very surprising to you.

BLITZER: He called him an international pariah. Those are very strong words, but I'm sure you respect General Colin Powell?

WOOLSEY: Oh, sure. But there are lots of -- lots of able people use intemperate words from time to time.

BLITZER: Let's talk about Russia right now. It's obviously right in the middle of all this campaigning. Do you believe the Russians are, in fact, hacking these various institutions in order to score political points?

WOOLSEY: I think there's a very good chance the Russians are hacking institutions, and the one I'm really worried about is that they would be hacking our voting machines in early November.

BLITZER: Is that possible, do you think?

WOOLSEY: I think it is. We have about a quarter of the American voting machines, or a quarter of the states, have voting machines that are touch screen only and produce no paper, so there's almost no way to do a recount. About three quarters have paper backups, so you could do a recount. But if you remember the mess in Florida in 2000, we could be headed toward another mess if the Russians do get into our voting machines.

BLITZER: Well, clearly, a lot of U.S. officials believe they hacked the Democratic National Committee. They're hacking General Powell's e-mails. That's the allegations out there. You don't trust the Russians at all, do you?

WOOLSEY: No.

BLITZER: Why does your candidate say such nice things about Putin?

WOOLSEY: Well, you can work closely with people that you don't trust. We were close allies for three years and eight months in World War II, with a man who, at that time, was history's greatest murderer, Josef Stalin. And Roosevelt hugged him and called him Uncle Joe and we needed him. And we defeated the NAZIs and then we went on to a great rivalry for 45 years in the Cold War between us.

Things like that happen in international affairs. And I think, you know, if it's a tactic to make progress in relations with Russia, maybe trump has something in mind. I don't know.

BLITZER: So do you think the praise that he's giving Putin of being a great leader, all that kind of stuff? Does he really believe that?

WOOLSEY: I think there are circumstances in which one can and like Uncle Joe Stalin when one can say things --

BLITZER: But it makes you uncomfortable to hear him glowing about Putin?

WOOLSEY: Well, I haven't had a chance to talk to him about this particular issue, and I don't know do the degree to which he's thinking of a tactic or what. I think in diplomacy in international affairs and things like this, it's much more important what you do than what nuance you put on describing somebody. There are all sorts of possibilities.

BLITZER: Now, your decision to go ahead and become an adviser to Donald trump, was that based on stuff he said or direct conversations you had with the -- did you meet with him? Did you talk to him about the most sensitive national security issues facing the country right now?

WOOLSEY: I met with him last Friday. It's the first time I met him.

BLITZER: First time and only time?

WOOLSEY: First and only time I met him.

BLITZER: Yes, but is it just the two of you, one on one?

WOOLSEY: Well, no, there were a few other people, but there was mainly a him and me. And it was a good discussion. And I am glad to try to help out a potential president, and I have done that a number of times in my life and career. There are really important issues that need to be dealt with. I think we have to do a much better job than we are now at protecting our infrastructure, and the grid is very, very vulnerable. We've got some a national security questions, of first order.

BLITZER: Because that could be hacked too. WOOLSEY: Absolutely. Hacks --

BLITZER: And we appear to be hacked by whom?

WOOLSEY: Russians, the al-Qaeda and ISIS and the Middle East that have that hacking capability.

BLITZER: You think that even ISIS have that hacking capability?

WOOLSEY: The best one probably is the Russians, the Chinese to some extent. But I think there are lots of vulnerabilities to our electorate grid, and we've got to deal with those. We also, I think, have an opportunity to work together with China on some ways to move away from reliance on oil, and to move toward renewable fuels and -- so I think particularly waste to transportation fuels and do that in a way that doesn't require China to, in its own eyes, to push through its weight around in the South China Sea to protect its line of communication.

[13:30:11] BLITZER: One final question before I let you go.