Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

White House Daily Briefing; White House Responds to Questions on Yates Testimony; White House: Staff Has Met to Discuss Health Care Bill; Trump Administration Asks for $1 Billion for Border Wall. Aired 1:30-2p ET

Aired March 28, 2017 - 13:30   ET

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

SEAN SPICER, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: And every single person who has been briefed on this situation with respect to the situation with Russia -- Republican, Democrat, Obama appointee, career -- have all come to the same conclusion.

[13:30:03] At some point, April, you're going to have to take no for an answer with respect to whether or not there was collusion.

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: How do you change the perception of...

(CROSSTALK)

SPICER: We're going to keep doing everything we're doing to make sure that the president -- what the president told the American people he was going to do to fulfill those pledges and promises that he made, to bring back jobs, to grow the economy, to keep our nation safe. That's what he's been focused on since day one. We're going to keep focusing on that every single day.

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: Condi Rice did not support this president. She did not go to the convention. She (inaudible) what is on the agenda. And -- and how is their relationship? Has it healed since 2006 when he used a very negative word to describe...

(CROSSTALK)

SPICER: So, here's what I'll tell you. It's interesting that you ask those two questions back to back. On the one hand, you're saying what are we doing to improve our image; and then here he is once again meeting somebody that hasn't been a big supporter of his.

(CROSSTALK)

SPICER: Hold on. No, no, but April, hold on. You -- it seems like you're hell-bent on trying to make sure that whatever image you want to tell about this White House stays. Because at the end of the day...

(CROSSTALK) SPICER: Let me -- OK. But you know what, you're asking me a question and I'm going to answer it, which is the president -- I'm sorry -- please stop shaking your head again. But at some point, the reality is that this president continues to reach out to individuals who supported him, who didn't support him, Republicans, Democrats, to try to bring the country together and move forward on an agenda that's going to help every American.

That's it, plain and simple. So if you're asking what we're doing, I think we continue to do it, which is to bring groups together that have been supportive of him, that haven't been supportive of him, but to share a goal which is finding common ground on areas of national security, of personal security, of economic security, of job creation, of safe communities, of education, of health care -- that can unite us as a country and make the country stronger.

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: ... Russia and Tillerson...

(CROSSTALK)

SPICER: I -- I think they're -- I'm not ready to -- when we're done with that, we'll see if we can have a readout.

(CROSSTALK)

SPICER: Hold on. I understand that. We're not at Friday yet. I will have a readout when that's done. I know the pool needs to get to the vans for the signing.

Thank you. I'll back tomorrow. We're going to do five days in a row this week, ladies and gentlemen.

[13:32:29] WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: So there, once again, Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary. Another pretty contentious briefing over at the White House on several important issues, including the investigation of allegations that Russia was involved with Trump associates during the campaign. You heard some strong statements from Sean Spicer. We'll have full analysis and reaction coming up.

Joining us now, A.B. Stoddard, associate editor and columnist for RealClearPolitics; our senior Washington correspondent, Brianna Keilar; and our chief political analyst, Gloria Borger.

A lot of discussion was on this "Washington Post" report that he flatly denied, saying it's 100 percent wrong about the White House saying they did not want Sally Yates, the acting attorney general, to testify before the House Intelligence Committee. She was supposed to testify today with John Brennan, the former CIA director; the James Clapper, the former director of National Intelligence. None of them are testifying. That meeting was -- that Intelligence Committee hearing was canceled. And he says I hope she testifies, we have no problem for her testifying. "The Washington Post," 100 percent wrong.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: She's going to be testified. We just learned Senate Mark Warner that the Democratic

BLITZER: Co-chair

BORGER: -- co-chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee just said that their committee is going to have her in to testify, so we'll get her testimony one way or another.

BLITZER: Will that be an open session?

BORGER: I'm not -- I'm just getting this in right now. I'm not sure at this point. But she's going to testify one way or another

BLITZER: Before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

BORGER: -- before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

But the key point here is this: Was Sally Yates prepared to contradict certain aspects of the White House narrative about what took place between General Flynn on those phone conversations with Kislyak and perhaps others?

BLITZER: The Russian ambassador.

BORGER: We don't know. And so, there was this kind of flurry of letters, which we have here, and it was between Sally Yates's attorney and the Justice Department, and also then the White House counsel. Sally Yates' attorney is saying we're happy to testify. We have no problem with testifying. And then the Department of Justice says such communications are likely covered by the presidential communications privilege. The president owns those privileges, so you need to talk to the White House. So a letter was sent to the White House counsel at the White House, Don McGann (ph), and a reply was requested by Monday, March 27th. No reply came. So that's why Sean Spicer is saying the White House didn't do anything, no reply came. But then Sally Yates was canceled by Devin Nunes. So the next question is, why did Devin Nunes cancel Sally Yates? And did anybody tell him to do it.

[13:35:28] BLITZER: The suspicion, Brianna, is that this hearing, like last Monday's hearing, was going to be negative as far as the Trump administration is concerned.

And let's step back. Sally Yates was the acting attorney general. She was the one who notified the White House that Michael Flynn, the then-national security adviser, had misled top officials, including the vice president of the United States, about his contacts with the Russian ambassador and other Russians, and as a result of that he was eventually fired.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Let's remember, Sally Yates was, the acting A.G., who was a deputy under the Obama administration, who was a hold over until they could get Jeff Sessions in place. Donald Trump fired her after she ordered Justice Department lawyers not to enforce his travel ban. So this is not someone who at all ideologically is friendly to Donald Trump. That's just very clear. So -- (CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Let me interrupt you for a second, because once she announced, as the acting attorney general of the United States, after the president unveiled his travel ban, the first travel ban, which was eventually rejected by the federal courts, then Sean Spicer said in a formal statement, quote, "The acting attorney general, Sally Yates, has betrayed the Department of Justice by refusing to enforce a legal order designed to protect the citizens of the United States."

That shows you the relationship between the White House and the acting attorney general.

KEILAR: So if you are the White House, if you disagree with the White House, but if you put yourself in their shoes, why would you want Sally Yates to testify? She's not going to say anything that is going to be helpful. So that is -- that is taking a look at what would be happening.

But also, looking at what -- let's take a look at what Sean Spicer said. He sort of blew this off. Like, oh, the hearing wasn't notified. Actually, yes, the hearing was notified. He said this is 100 percent false. It's not. It is based on letters that you see Gloria reading here. It's not 100 percent false. It is well reported out. So just his defense of this.

And then the other thing is we've seen Manu Raju, senior congressional reporter here at CNN, asking Nunes about the cancellation of this hearing, what happened, and was this something you did at the behest of the White House. Come on, guys, is what Nunes said, and blew it off. There's no denial coming from Nunes that what's happened.

BLITZER: A.B. Stoddard, how do you see it?

A.B. STODDARD, ASSOCIATE EDITOR & COLUMNIST, REALCLEARPOLITICS: Well, where is this going? He said today, when he said that the "Post" piece was 100 percent false, he talked about what those letters meant, and that the White House technically did not evoke executive privilege and ban her from testifying. However, he didn't talk about the fact that in the "Post" there was a report that both Yates and Brennan made it clear in their testimony they would have given today that they would have contradicted accounts from the White House.

And where is this going? Somehow Sean Spicer got through another briefing without asking who cleared Nunes after his visit to the White House grounds. We've all spoken to people who worked in White Houses. You guys have been there a lot. The secured room where you review classified information is not some room that you -- we all have a key on our key chains to. It's manned. It's secured. You have an appointment there. The whole process is very formal and very structured. And, no, Nunes cannot be wandering the grounds late at night, like he kind of passed it off yesterday. So where is this leading? They're going to have Yates testify before the Senate committee, possibly Nunes will be forced to having her at the House, too. When are they going to admit Nunes was invited on the House grounds. They can't hide from this. It's a matter days until they have to --

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Let's go to Jeff Zeleny, our senior White House correspondent.

Jeff, what was your takeaway from this briefing?

JEFF ZELENY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, I think first and foremost Sean Spicer yesterday in the briefing, as we all heard, promised to follow up on some basic questions on how the House Intelligence chairman ended up here at the White House complex a week ago today, a week ago this evening, and was looking through those -- the intelligence information. Sean Spicer did not answer any of those questions. The White House has told us that they simply do not intend to say who cleared him in, who escorted him in, who started all of this here.

1So this was a bit of an abbreviated briefing because the president is going over to the EPA to sign an executive order, so the press secretary was not taking as many questions as he normally does. But they simply did not provide that follow-up information.

Back to the Yates testimony for one second, yes, the White House says we'd be happy to have her testify. That is not the feeling that we get here talking to people. She, of course, has -- her involvement in all of this, she has some information about, you know, the events leading up to the firing of Michael Flynn. She had conversations with the White House counsel's office. This is not something, as I said, the White House wants to talk about. So this is not the end it all, but the White House's aggressive push-back on that "Washington Post" report does not quite square with their true intention, Wolf. They do not want her to testify despite what Sean Spicer said from this podium, I can tell you.

[13:40:42] BLITZER: They were worried -- and this is the widespread assumption, Jeff -- that if this hearing had taken place today with these three top officials from the Obama administration, testifying about the Russia -- the Russian involvement, the cyberattacks during the presidential campaign, the leaks of confidential e-mails and all of that, that could have been another cloud, if you will, hanging over the Trump administration, as last Monday's hearing was with the FBI director and the director of the National Security Agency.

ZELENY: No question, Wolf. You do have to wonder how many of those hearings like this this administration can withstand. It was only a week ago when the FBI director said in an extraordinary testimony that the FBI is indeed investigating this. So certainly, it's in the White House's interest to limit these numbers of public hearings and things. The reality is they're likely to happen at some point if not this week --Wolf?

BLITZER: We don't know specifically what the former head of national -- director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, would have been saying at this hearing today. We don't know what John Brennan, the former CIA director, what he would have been saying. But until January 20th, they were in charge of the U.S. Intelligence community and had good information about what was going on. And in the end, they decided that is not going to happen. But now we're hearing, there will be a hearing. I wonder if you're hearing additional information, Jeff, before not the House Intelligence Committee but the Senate Intelligence Committee where there seems to be greater bipartisan cooperation between the Chairman Richard Burr and Mark Warner, the ranking Democrat.

ZELENY: Certainly, there has been much better cooperation between those two Senators. The Senate Intelligence Committee is sort of viewed as a sacred bipartisan ground, if you will. They've done many investigations. They have their differences between each side, but so far at least, as of now, the Senate investigation seems to be proceeding in a much more cordial basis here. They have given an indication that they would also like to hear this testimony from Sally Yates and others. So again, this will continue. As the House side investigation is certainly in a disarray it seems, the Senate is ongoing as well as that FBI investigation still ongoing.

So as much as this White House wants to move forward, move back to the agenda -- you heard Sean Spicer talk about health care and other things -- this Russia cloud is hanging over this White House and it seems it will continue to do so.

BLITZER: And just to button this up, on Devin Nunes, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, getting clearance to come into the White House grounds, going next door to the West Wing, and then going into one of those secure rooms, those intelligence briefing rooms, and getting access so sensitive classified information, an official at the White House or officials at the White House, that has to be authorized. That has to be approved.

ZELENY: Without question. Even if you're a member of Congress, even if you're the chairman of an Intelligence Committee, to come onto these grounds at the House, you must be invited in. You must be cleared in, escorted in regardless of who you are. I talked to several former government officials who kind of walked us through this process, and they said there are several rooms that have these security facilities. Virtually, all of the offices in the National Security Council suite has these secure facilities, so, yes, without question someone invited him in. They cleared him in. They escorted him in. Simple to take up looking who that was on a computer system, but this White House has made the decision to not say who that is. They believe their visitor logs are private and privileged. Certainly, a departure from the Obama administration, which released most logs, and they're not necessarily always in real time -- Wolf?

BLITZER: Everybody stand by.

We're going to continue our analysis of what we just heard. Lots of breaking news developments.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [13:48:30] BLITZER: Let's bring back our panel. We have A.B. Stoddard, associate editor and columnist for RealClearPolitics; our senior Washington correspondent, Brianna Keilar; and our chief political analyst, Gloria Border.

The other confusing element that came up today, Gloria, is there going to be a renewed effort after the failure of last week to get health care repeal and replace of health care once again moving a little bit and see if they can revive it?

BORGER: Well, there are conflicting messages on that, because nobody is sure how it could quite be done. I spoke with a senior White House official Sunday night who said to me, look, there are whispers about getting it back to track because they believe that now the Freedom Caucus is kind of divided to a degree and they may be more willing to work with the president because they are concerned that, for example, the pro-life movement is going to go after them because it was an opportunity to kill Planned Parenthood. So they'll try to work it that way. Could they also work with Democrats? I guess. Except there's nothing but disincentive for Democrats to work with Donald Trump. He is not popular with their base at all.

BLITZER: You heard Sean Spicer, Brianna, say they had maybe 205, 206 votes. They needed 216. He said they're working to get to the number but they don't want to work and repeal-and-replace legislation.

KEILAR: To the point of the Democrats, you have to have a willing partner. There is no incentive for Democrats to work with Donald Trump. Their base is completely against Donald Trump and would hold it against them at the ballot box, no doubt, if they were to somehow give him a win on this. But you're right, they would need to peel off some more of these votes. It's unclear if they would be able to do it.

[13:50:21] BLITZER: You think they can revive it? You think there are enough Republicans that will flip and decide to go along with the president and the speaker.

STODDARS: I spoke to a member to said, seriously, if we had put them on the fold, Jim Jordan wouldn't have folded, one of the chief Freedom Caucus, one of the biggest purists among them. But he said with the Democrats screaming and Pelosi and all of them voting "no," a couple of them would have folded. It is not clear that would have gotten them over the hurdle. They lost so many moderates in making the bill so conservative that it's still not clear. I think they are right to recommit to this. They can't get out of it. Their new plan to avoid requires Democrats.

BLITZER: The speaker and other Republican leaders came before the microphones a little while ago and offered a pretty upbeat assessment of this, compared to what they said last week when the whole thing collapsed. Listen to this.

I'll read it to you, since I don't have it up. "We are united around a common set of principles. This is the speaker. We are united around our agenda. We all want to advance the cause of freedom and limited government."

Kevin McCarthy, the majority leader, said, "We promised we will repeal and replace Obamacare. That's what we are going to do."

BORGER: They want to do it because they are confronted with a tough reality. Because they didn't repeal Obamacare, they are missing a big chunk of change they would need to use for tax reform. That's a problem for them. If it is supposed to be deficit neutral, budget neutral, then they have to find the money somewhere, and they don't have the money. So what they would be left doing on tax reform would be a small kind of tax reform as opposed to the broader kind of tax reform that they also promised. One thing does depend on another. So any are looking back at this and saying, first things first.

BLITZER: Even if they were able, Brianna, you know, even if they get something they would accept, once the legislation goes to the Senate, it is not going to get a bare majority, 51 votes, let alone 60 you might need for other aspects.

KEILAR: I was talking to Tom Delay yesterday, a very good whip in his day. He was saying they should have repealed it, and instead of worrying about the Senate, they should have done something they should just get through the House. That is a big enough lift. But certainly, they would have to consider what the Senate would do in the case of health care reform. But to the point of the unity you're seeing Republicans trying to paint, they are not unified right now. So they're trying to come out after a very stinging wasp and paint a pretty picture after a very tough week for them.

And they are also perhaps hoping that this is a lesson learned for some Republicans. We did see some step which from the Freedom Caucus. They are hoping they can say to them this is how it panned out is this time. When we are moving forward on other legislation, we need to be more unified. But it's very clear if that is something that will even come true.

BLITZER: No.

All these issues are issues that the president certainly focused on during the campaign, core issues. Another core issue, building the wall, A.B., along the border between the United States and Mexico. The Trump administration is asking for $1 billion to cover the first 62 miles of that border wall with Mexico. Experts now estimate that the whole wall would cost between $12 billion and $20 billion. This is a potentially big problem is that money is going to be made available.

STODDARD: This is a big political problem.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Especially, if Mexico is not going to pay for it.

STODDARD: Right. Republicans are on the record saying Mexico is not going to pay for it. You have Republicans trying to avoid the subject because they don't support this. You have Republicans on the record in border states saying, we are not going to take away people's land and build this wall and we don't have the money. Democrats saying they will not support a government funding bill that has to be passed by April 28th with the wall in it. They would filibuster that. You combine that bipartisan opposition, it will be a very hard push for the president to get his wall funding.

BLITZER: Mexico clearly saying, don't expect any cash from us.

BORGER: No, but $1 billion here and $1 billion there, you're talking real money. At some point, tax reform costs you money. The wall costs you money. I remember when conservative Republicans used to complain about George W. Bush because he spent too much money.

KEILAR: They felt it really cost them and they would like to go back to their fiscally conservative roots.

(CROSSTALK)

[13:55:15] BLITZER: People would like to see the national debt reduced. That was a major issue for the president as well.

In just a few minutes, we are expecting President Trump to sign a sweeping executive order that significantly changes the U.S. approach to climate change. This order is aiming to drastically reduce federal enforcement of climate regulations. That's happening in just a few minutes over at the Environmental Protection Agency here in Washington. We are going to have it for you once it begins.

That's it for me. Thanks so much for watching. I'll be back at 5:00 p.m. eastern in "The Situation Room."

NEWSROOM with Brooke Baldwin starts right after a very quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)