Return to Transcripts main page


Partial Trump Travel Ban To Take Effect Tonight; Senate GOP Scrambling To Revise Bill By Tomorrow; Iraqi PM Declares End Of ISIS In Mosul. Aired 11-11:30p ET

Aired June 29, 2017 - 11:00   ET



KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. I'm Kate Bolduan. The president promises a great health care surprise, but, as we approach the July 4th recess, is it a surprise lawmakers are looking for right now? Is it a surprise that the country is looking for right now?

Plus this, the Pentagon prepares new options on North Korea as the White House loses patience over the threat of its nuclear program.

And dereliction of duty, a former U.S. ambassador hits the president over his apparent lack of interest in taking on Russia for meddling in the election as administration officials now admit they are struggling to convince the president that Russia is still a threat.

But first this, the breaking news, the president's long debated and disputed travel ban is going into effect today, nine hours and counting to implementation.

And still lots of uncertainty about exactly who will be allowed in, who is not, under these new guidelines. Remember, the terms the Supreme Court offered up that started all of this, they must show a bonafide relationship.

The new rules are focusing largely on family ties, moms and dads, yes. Grandma and grandpa, no, and there is much more to it.

CNN's Jessica Schneider is watching all of this for us. So Jessica, can you break this down for us?

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, I can, Kate. You know, the State Department is working to clarify as well. So it sent out a cable last night outlining all of the guidelines to U.S. embassies and consulates.

It lays out what the government has interpreted as those bonafide relationships in the wake of Monday's Supreme Court ruling. So here is who is allowed in. I'll break it down for you.

Parents, spouses, children, sons and daughters-in-law and siblings, but there is an extensive list, as well, as who doesn't qualify. That includes grandparents, fiances, aunts, uncles, cousins, nephews, nieces, brothers and sisters-in-law.

Now this list, it really isn't totally arbitrary since it does fall in line with how close relationships are defined in the visa application process. So for travelers, a bonafide relationship also it can be proven by connections to educational opportunities or jobs here in the U.S.

So here, Kate, if a traveler doesn't fall into any of those categories and is from one of the six majority Muslim countries, Libya, Sudan, Yemen, Somalia, Syria or Iran, they will be banned for 90 days, beginning at 8:00 tonight.

Now as for refugees from any country, if they also don't have a bonafide connection, they will be banned for 120 days. So last time, Kate, the travel ban went into effect in late January. It was chaos at the airports as we saw.

But this time, that's not really expected. Legal observers, though, and monitors, they will be dispatching to airports to see how things go tonight. But the Department of Homeland Security, they have stressed that this will not impact people who arrive in the U.S. with valid visas, legitimate travel documents.

And also Kate, those visas already approved as far back as January or just recently, those will not be revoked. So we'll see how this plays out, but people are keeping an eye out at the airport as we tick down to the travel ban finally going into effect -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: All right, Jessica, thank you so much. Lots to discuss right now. Joining me right now to discuss, CNN legal and national security analyst, Asha Rangappa. She is a former FBI special agent and currently associate dean at Yale Law School.

Also with me former U.S. attorney, Michael Moore is here and Michael Allen just in the nick of time, who worked in the National Security Council in the George W. Bush White House. You should have seen what was going on off camera. Great to have you all here. Thanks for being here.

Jessica Schneider was just walking through who is allowed in, who is not allowed in. Do the guidelines make sense to you?

MICHAEL ALLEN, MANAGING DIRECTOR, BEACON GLOBAL STRATEGIES: I think they are trying to give a rational basis to who is included and who is excluded. But just generally, the thing I'm still not over is that we have had more than 90 days since President Trump took office.

And so I get that we want to be able or they want to be able to test presidential authority under statute in the Constitution. But I'm still hung up on why the review hasn't already been done and why this issue isn't moot, already. But yes, I think they are trying to make a rational basis -- differentiation about why some can come in and why some cannot.

BOLDUAN: The timeline is a really an important one they could point out, Michael. Michael Moore, let me bring you in on this one. The concern was partial implementation as the Supreme Court kind of spelled out, was going to cause more confusion and more court challenges. Do you see that happening here?

MICHAEL MOORE, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: You know, I'm not surprised at all that they had some partial move in the case. I think there's a great respect for power of the president to have some control over immigration. I don't know that I take much from the fact we are having partial implementation.

We are going to have continued court challenges on it. They'll be people who argue whether or not there's a bonafide relationship, whether or not there's (inaudible) arrangement is a bonafide relationship to get them in.

What's interesting about it to me, you look at it, we have this large amount of scrutiny and this extreme vetting that they call it and not to get back into the countries that are included.

But if this ban was in effect, it wouldn't have stopped 9/11 because we know that a lot of them came from Saudi Arabia and they are not on the list. So you know, it's a little bit arbitrary, but at the same time, there has to be some respect I think in the Constitution and the statute for the president to have some authority when it comes to matters on immigration.

BOLDUAN: And of course, Asha, everyone is kind of waiting for when it goes into place and what happens and what happens over the next 90 days. But for the purposes of national security and homeland security, what is the difference between a son-in-law and a brother- in-law or a sibling and a grandparent? Because according to these guidelines, one is allowed in, the other is not.

ASHA RANGAPPA, CNN LEGAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, Kate, from a national security perspective, there's really not a meaningful distinction you are going to make between those categories and fundamentally, the travel ban is just a misplaced focus.

Look, as Michael pointed out, since 9/11, we have not had a terrorist attack here perpetuated by someone from a visa from any of these countries. In 2011, a House task force on terrorism determined that the biggest threat we are facing is home grown radicalization with American citizens and European citizens traveling to these countries and then coming back.

So the focus should be on those people who maybe traveling to those countries and coming back, not citizens of those countries who are coming here to attend a family wedding and certainly not people who are trying to flee a civil war in their country.

BOLDUAN: You know, another thing, if I could change gears, Michael Allen, another thing that we are picking up. Dana Bash and Sara Murray have some fascinating reporting that administration officials have kind of hit a point where they are frustrated and struggling is the way that they put it to try to convince the president, still, that Russia is still a threat when it comes to cyberattacks in our election system, if you will.

One source was asked if Trump was convening meetings on Russian hacking and meddling. The quote was, "I have seen no evidence of it," one senior administration official says. You have been inside these types of meetings. Should the president be convening these meetings? What is your take?

ALLEN: I think there have probably been some meetings only because the president is going to go to Poland on his way to the G20 Summit. I think the principle messaging there will have to be, listen Eastern Europe, we are with you, Article V, NATO and the rest.

But look, it's a politically perilous photograph if he's meeting Putin and not taking care of our Eastern European allies, but it's a substantive matter and a political matter.

If I were giving advice to the president, I would have tried to own this issue from the get go and said no one is more concerned than me about Russia. They are undermining us in Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, elsewhere around the world, and of course, Ukraine. I think there's a hang up about doing it and it does bother me.

MOORE: Kate --

BOLDUAN: Yes, Michael, I wanted to ask your take on it. Go ahead.

MOORE: Well, I think Michael maybe more optimistic than I am about it. I think there may be some meetings going on with staff members who are trying to get the president's attention on it, but I don't know that he's engaged at the level he ought to be.

And I do think he gets mighty close to question, is there some reason that he's not particularly concerned with the Russian activity? I mean, he talks more about TV hosts in tweets in the morning than he does really about the situation we are in under the -- when we talk about Russia and the ties there and meddling in the election.

So you know, I watched him make some statements on health care and kind of fumble through that. I worry that he's basically get some briefing points and not getting a good grasp on the health care bill. I'm not sure that he's paying attention as he ought to pay as commander-in-chief into the Russian meddling in the election.

BOLDUAN: Just so we get it in, the White House has pushed back. They do say that President Trump does take these cyberattacks very seriously. They say they are acting, albeit, acting more quietly than out in the public.

But as you mentioned, Michael Moore, thank you for the tee up. We will unfortunately need to talk about these tweets about TV hosts and we will get to that later. I'm going to spare this panel from having to do that. Thank you all very much. I really appreciate it.

Also joining me right now, Democratic congressman from New York, Joe Crowley. Congressman, thanks for being here. Really appreciate it.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE CROWLEY (D), NEW YORK: Thank you, Kate. Great to be with you. BOLDUAN: I want to get your take, if I could go back to the travel ban. You've been an outspoken critic of the president's travel ban. Part of it is going into place tonight. What do you think of these updated guidelines?

CROWLEY: I think, you know, it's a reflection of the more than 400 individuals who haven't been placed yet I think throughout our government. There's a real lack of cohesiveness within our government right now. People checking what is going out.

You know, the fact that a step siblings would be acceptable, but grandparents aren't is just mind boggling, I think to most Americans. But really it gets to the point I think that what the president really set out to do was a political objective, and not necessarily a policy objective.

As your other guests have said, what about the home grown terrorists in places like Great Britain or France? You know, we are right about countries apparently understand who haven't sent a terrorist here to the United States. So, I really think this is a political policy, not one well thought out. It was really toward the president's base support.

BOLDUAN: Let's wait and see exactly what happens when it goes into place and also of course then when the Supreme Court takes up the case later this year. Let's talk about health care if we could. President Trump teased something of a reveal yesterday. Listen to this.


PRESIDENT TRUMP: Health care is working along very well. We could have a big surprise with a great health care package. So, now they are healthy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What do you mean by a great surprise?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: It could be a great, great surprise. It's going to be great.


BOLDUAN: What kind of surprise do you think this could be?

CROWLEY: I haven't a clue. But the one thing I can say to you it's no surprise the health care bill is anything but mean, as the president described the House bill. The Senate bill is no better. It's actually worse. It's more of a hoax.

So whatever that surprise might be, it's all about again a political objective. That is to get something apparently done where regardless of the policy and what the effect it will have on the American people and the public.

I think that's what's so sad about what's going on right now. It's not about people, it's about politics and getting a bill passed for the sake of getting something passed. It's not the way we should operate.

BOLDUAN: But unfortunately on Capitol Hill, there's always a little bit of politics no matter what's going on. Let me ask you this, Congressman. The Senate Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer, is saying very publicly basically we want to make a deal. Let's get to the table and let's all work together.

But privately, our folks are told that no Democrat is going to go to the table until this GOP effort crashes and burns, essentially. Is that the right way to try to fix the solution? Is that the right way to not let politics get in this?

CROWLEY: Well, Kate, I think it's important to note that Democrats have not been invited to the table. It would be one thing if that were the objective and Democrats were resistant to it. But we've never been invited to the table and I think --

BOLDUAN: If you walked in Mitch McConnell's office right now and said I have concrete ideas we'd like to add to your draft, do you think he would kick you out of his office?

CROWLEY: I don't think he is interested at all in any concrete ideas. I don't think he's interested right now working bipartisan. If he can get a bill, finding that sweet spot, and I know that he's talking to Senator Portman about upping the opioid money to somewhere around $45 million more.

That somehow will buy his vote into this. I think that's an important issue, but to buy a vote into a poisonous bill overall, you know, it's really meaningless in many respects.

So all of this an effort to get a majority of votes in the Senate without really working in a bipartisan way. It's not the way American people want us to address this issue.

BOLDUAN: But in the spirit of bipartisanship, I mean, there are a lot of members in your own conference who want to go the other direction, they want a single payer system. With that in mind, would they settle for just a bipartisan fix to Obamacare?

CROWLEY: I think that many of us, including myself, who think we are moving towards Medicare for all or single payer system at some point. We have already said that what --

BOLDUAN: You are not going to get a bipartisan fix in the end, that's the point, right?

CROWLEY: What we do think we can get is an amend -- we can mend the Affordable Care Act, not end the Affordable Care Act. Their simple goal is to undermine and to do away with the Affordable Care Act entirely. That's the political objective.

Their answer to that does not meet the needs of the American people. You will be taking away health care from 22 million Americans over the next 10 years if the Senate bill passes.

Fifteen million Americans will lose their health insurance next year if this bill passes. So that's the real impact of this political hoax that is going on here in Washington.

BOLDUAN: At the beginning of this week, Chuck Schumer put the chances of the Senate bill -- the Senate passing a health care bill at 50/50. Where do you think the chances stand today?

CROWLEY: Look, I have been around here long enough to know that the odds have to be with the majority. I think McConnell will try to do everything he can to get something out before the August break. I think that's unfortunate. I hoped that they would come to the sense to see that this bill could not muster the support of the Senate.

And if it did, the Freedom Caucus said they would reject what the Senate has put forward so far. They would come to their senses and actually work with Democrats to mend the Affordable Care Act. There are things we can do together to help make the Affordable Care Act a better act.

BOLDUAN: Is it truly intellectually honest, though, Congressman, to say, why aren't they inviting us to the table. When it came down to an Obamacare happens, Republicans weren't going to help Democrats do it and Democrats pushed it through on their own. That was not bipartisan effort, either.

CROWLEY: There wasn't an effort to being bipartisanship. In fact, we had one Republican, Joseph Cow (ph) in the House in the first passage of the House bill voted for the bill. I'm not saying that's overwhelmingly bipartisan.

But what I would suggest we did make attempts to try to bring them into work on these issues and that's the same way you saw, you know, they made changes -- the Medicare Part D, there wasn't much bipartisanship, although there was some Democrats actually supported that legislation.

So we recognize, in order to have something stand with the American people, it needs to be done in a bipartisan way. They had made a commitment. Mitch McConnell have said we will make this a one term president.

You know, it's evident for the next six years of the president's term they wouldn't work with him at all. We had the majority both of the House and Senate to get something passed and the hope that at some point we can work in a bipartisan way, and they rejected that.

BOLDUAN: And now the table is turned and they have the majority in the House and Senate. There's a little bit of exactly what happened to them happening to you now. We will see, though, what that means for the country's health care.

I'm saying, if we are all being honest, there are politics at play. What was done then is definitely being done now. I'm not making a judgment call on anyone being more (inaudible) to the other. I'm just saying --

CROWLEY: I do think, though, there is -- we were not resistant to Republican ideas. In fact, much of what we incorporated came from the Heritage Foundation. So we actually used --

BOLDUAN: But this isn't a repeal. Like this isn't a repeal. Conservatives are not signing on because it's not a full repeal. So when Democrats say they guarantee people are going to die because of this health care plan or will come to the table if you guys take repeal off the table, this isn't a repeal.

CROWLEY: Well, the reality is, though, that 15 million Americans lose next year lose their health insurance, I can't say with certainty, but I am (inaudible) that some people may very well die because they don't have access to health care.

Certainly over the next decade, as more people begin to lose their health care, what are the consequences of that? So, it's not hyperbole. What we are talking about is actual people's lives and the effect of this legislation, what it will have?

We know people will lose their health insurance, what does it mean? So I think once your listeners and viewers will ask themselves the same question, some will die because of that.

And so unless we come up with a solution not only to repeal the Affordable Care Act but replace it with something that works for the American people, which they are not talking about right now. It is into a political issue, and not a policy issue.

BOLDUAN: Let's see where this ends up. We've got 24 hours to see if the draft comes out and much more time to debate it. Congressman, always appreciate you coming on, thank you.

CROWLEY: Thank you, Kate.

Also following some breaking news right now, Iraq's prime minister is declaring a major victory today over ISIS in a key city that has been under their control for years. We are going to be live in Iraq for a major, potentially major update there.

Also coming up, the president under fire from both sides of the aisle right now after unleashing a vicious attack on a female news anchor. We'll discuss. That's up, coming up.

Plus soon, House Speaker Paul Ryan, is going to be speaking live from Capitol Hill, talking about battle over immigration. Immigration votes that are coming up in the House today.

He's also going to face questions on health care and, no doubt, his least favorite topic, Donald Trump's tweets. He will face new questions over the inflammatory tweets from Donald Trump on a totally unrelated topic. That's coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BOLDUAN: Breaking news right now, the Iraqi prime minister declaring the end of ISIS control in Mosul after a key mosque in the embattled city was just recaptured. The prime minister tweeting this, "We are seeing the end of the state, deliberation of Mosul proves that and we will not relent. Our brave forces will bring victory."

The mosque is especially significant as it's the very place from where ISIS leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi declared the caliphate in 2014.

Let's get over there now. CNN senior international correspondent, Nick Paton Walsh has been traveling with the very units that were battling ISIS on the frontlines in Mosul and just returned to Irbil, Iraq. Nick, what do you know? What does this mean?

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Kate, let's start with the mosque itself. The mosque where the only major public appearance of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the ISIS leader occurred. Is it in the hands of Iraqi troops? Well, no.

Frankly, we were there just three hours ago and they were still fighting incredibly fiercely to complete the operation they started this morning, which was to encircle that particular mosque.

Now we've also heard from the Pentagon just recently, in which they confirmed the mosque had in fact been liberated. I have to say I'm very confused because military commanders on the ground were clear they haven't taken it.

This is a political statement obviously from Baghdad, from the Iraqi prime minister. They are very keen to show progress in this fight. You could possibly argue that the Iraqi military spokesperson that pointed out because the mosque is being blown up and it's full of booby-traps, nobody is really going into it.

But because nobody really controls it and nobody has really encircled it, then technically it falls automatically back into the hands of the Iraqi government.

But the broader statement of the mosque having been liberated and back in the hands of the Iraqi government doesn't tally with what we have been seeing for the last two days. The fight there is still ongoing.

But let's put that aside. What does it mean for Iraq more generally? That's the broader question.

BOLDUAN: Absolutely. Nick, I really appreciate it. We are going to come back to you and continue to follow this breaking news. Thank you so much. Nick Paton Walsh in Iraq for us. Really appreciate it.

We are going to turn back home really quick. We are following breaking news on Capitol Hill. The clock is ticking for Senate Republicans ahead of a new deadline that they set, sort of.

Scrambling to make changes and come up with a new compromise health care deal all before they head out of town for the July 4th recess next week. Does Mitch McConnell have any surprises up his sleeve? Is that what President Trump was hinting at yesterday?

CNN's Phil Mattingly is following it all on Capitol Hill right now. So Phil, what direction are things moving at the moment? Why are folks starting to talk about bipartisanship? Is that wishful thinking still?

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, in a word, yes, (inaudible) wishful thinking in bipartisanship. Look, to just address that straight forward, Republicans would need to completely drop their current effort and take repeal completely off the table for Democrats to even consider to start working with them.

And when you talk to Republican leadership, for them to consider dropping that altogether and then bringing it on a bipartisan effort to move forward on perhaps an Obamacare fix bill is kind of an (inaudible) at least to this point in time, maybe sometime in the future or if this falls apart.

But I think it's worth pointing out, this hasn't all fallen apart yet, sure. Earlier this week was a clear declaration of that, but they are still working to try to get to a final compromise.

We are already being told they are adding money for opioid rehabilitation. This is a big issue for Senator Rob Portman. Senator Shelly Moore Capito on the other side.

For conservatives, they are adding flexibility to health savings accounts, allowing people to use that money to help pay for premiums. That's an important thing for conservatives. Neither of these things are the silver bullet.

And it's very clear that moderates particularly Medicaid expansion state senators want more. It's very clear, very clear conservatives want more particularly on the regulatory side.

But what we are seeing here is movement. As Senator McConnell kind of gently tries to thread this needle here over the course of the next 48 hours. As for what's happening right now, Kate, one-on-one meetings continuing to happen between the majority leader and members to try and get a sense for what it might take, what they could possibly get to move people towards the idea that 50 could come over and say yes.

They are not there yet. Those meetings continue. I can tell you, as long as meetings are continuing and the possibility of passing something stands out there, the possibility of bipartisanship absolutely does not.

BOLDUAN: Yes. It's not Pollyanna. It's not the Pollyanna view of the world, but it's the realistic view of the world. Until it falls apart, they are not all come to the table. That seems very obvious. Great to see you, Phil.

MATTINGLY: Thanks, Kate. BOLDUAN: Coming up for us, all eyes remain on Capitol Hill. We will be hearing from House Speaker Paul Ryan very soon. He will be holding a news conference shortly and we will bring that to you live.

Many questions about health care today. They have a big immigration vote also coming up later today. Now, he also will face questions of once again, inflammatory tweets coming from President Trump himself. We'll bring that to you, next.

Also, this -- the president coming under fire from both sides of the aisle after he unleashes this vicious attack on a female news anchor. That's coming up.