Return to Transcripts main page

Wolf

Trump Lawyer: He's "Very Eager" to Talk with Mueller; Steve Bannon Intel Committee Appearance Postponed, Reached Deal with Mueller; Trump Throws Wrench in GOP's Government Funding Effort; Trump Touts Economy in State Nearing Special Election. Aired 1:30-2p ET

Aired January 18, 2018 - 13:30   ET

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


[13:30:00] WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: Congressman Mike Quigley is a member of that committee. You see him live. We'll discuss with him when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: After weeks of dancing around the issue, President Trump may be ready to meet with the Special Counsel Robert Mueller to discuss the ongoing Russia investigation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TY COBB, WHITE HOUSE LAWYER: The president is very eager to sit down and explain whatever is responsive to the questions.

UNIDENTIFIED NBC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Do you have any fear of a perjury trial?

COBB: No, but I think -- I think it would be foolish to not proceed without considering that possibility.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Let's discuss with Illinois Democratic Congressman Mike Quigley. He's a member of the House Intelligence Committee.

Congressman, thank you for joining us.

REP. MIKE QUIGLEY, (D), ILLINOIS: Glad to be here. Thank you.

BLITZER: Is a perjury trap a concern in this particular matter? Is that normal to you?

[13:35:00] QUIGLEY: I think anyone testifying in sworn testimony as this would certainly be, you can't lie to the Justice Department, the FBI or Congress. That would raise concerns for the president's attorney in any case.

BLITZER: The ex-White House chief strategist, Steve Bannon, appeared before your committee yesterday. He was expected to return today, but for some reason, he didn't.

Let me first get a couple questions, including this one. Axios reported that Bannon did say he spoke to other senior White House staffers about that very controversial June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with the Russians. First of all, did Bannon say that?

QUIGLEY: What Bannon said was he had talked to other people about those events and times. Obviously, it was in the book. So apparently, he's referencing a nonexistent privilege, but he can talk to anybody but Congress about those events.

BLITZER: Is he going to be speaking? I know he's going to be answering all the questions from Robert Mueller, the special counsel. When he comes back, will he be willing to answer all of your questions?

QUIGLEY: I think he absolutely has to. Let's remember what happened this week. He refused to answer questions. And because the Republicans -- he's out of favor with the Republicans, they whipped up a subpoena real quick. He still refuses to answer those questions. I'm sure when he comes back, he'll be under subpoena again. We'll see if the majority is willing to press the case and make him answer these questions as he has to under the law under subpoena.

BLITZER: Here's something that's unusual. I'm sure it was noticed by you and your colleagues as well. The White House deputy chief of staff, Rick Dearborn, he appeared before your committee. He answered all of the committee's questions. So the White House won't let Bannon and former campaign manager, Corey Lewandowsky, do the same thing that Rick Dearborn did? How do you explain that?

QUIGLEY: The only thing you can explain here, one way to explain it, if you use your common sense, is they have more terrible things to say about what took place. The White House is more concerned about what certain people have to say. So obviously, they know him from more information that would be damaging to the White House's case.

What's frustrating here, and we just pointed it out, is there were other witnesses who have refused to answer critical questions, right, Mr. Sessions, Trump Jr, Erik Prince. All questions essential to know what exactly took place. The majority was unwilling to snap up that subpoena like they did with Mr. Bannon. As I said yesterday, apparently, only Steve Bannon can unite that committee.

BLITZER: What about Corey Lewandowsky, the former Trump campaign manager? He refused to answer your questions as well, and yet, you did not issue a subpoena to him. Why?

QUIGLEY: The only answer they gave back was the fact that he would be willing to come back and answer all questions.

Here's where it gets complicated, though. He appears on another network the day before and announces he's going to answer every question. Then he appears before our committee and says, well, I'm only prepared to answer up through the time I left the campaign. Obviously, something took place in the meantime. I think it's a fair bet to say there was a gag order directly from the White House.

BLITZER: In that book "Fire and Fury," Bannon said he suspected at the heart of this investigation, wasn't necessarily just collusion or obstruction of justice but money laundering. Did you get into that with him yesterday?

QUIGLEY: Unfortunately, a lot of those issues weren't able to be brought up because he stopped answering questions. Again, that's why he has to come forward. It's odd that it came from Mr. Bannon, but I think he's absolutely right. The problem is our committee has barely scratched the surface on the issue of money laundering. Let's put it all together. The Mueller investigation has slapped a subpoena on Deutsche Bank. Deutsche Bank was recently fined about $630 million for their role in money laundering with Russia, a $10 billion money laundering scheme that the Russians partake in. Obviously, it's a major concern. We have to understand that two of the indictments that took place so far involving Mr. Manafort and Mr. Gates involved money laundering in that same neck of the woods. So Mr. Bannon is right, and it should be a focus of our investigation, as it already is with the Mueller investigation.

BLITZER: I know there were some tensions in your committee, the House Intelligence Committee, between Democrats and Republicans. Have you resolved those or are they still very evident?

[13:40:01] QUIGLEY: It's a bad day to ask. I'd like to think that my Republican friends understand that this should be just as important to them as it is to us. Former CIA Director Mike Morrell called what the Russians did the political equivalent of 9/11. It is very easy to imagine a scenario in which the Russians would attack Republicans in a campaign, as they did Democrats this time. We also have to remember that they hacked into over 36 states' board of election. Our democratic process is at stake. It's time for a bipartisan effort to get to these answers, find a way to make sure it never happens again.

BLITZER: Congressman Quigley, thanks so much for joining us.

QUIGLEY: Thank you.

BLITZER: Up next, we'll get a view from the other side of the aisle on Steve Bannon, certain topics, meddling by the White House in Bannon's testimony, whether the Republicans have the votes in the House to stop a government shutdown. Congressman Chris Stewart, he's a member of the House Intelligence Committee as well. He will join us live from the White House right after this.

(COMMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:45:23] BLITZER: Just heard from one side of the aisle in the Russian investigation. Now I want to welcome Utah Congressman Chris Stewart. He's a Republican on the House Intelligence Committee.

Congressman, thanks very much for joining us.

REP. CHRIS STEWART, (R), UTAH: Good to be with you, Wolf. Thank you.

BLITZER: Were you disappointed when the former White House chief strategist, Steve Bannon, refused to answer some of your committee's questions yesterday? STEWART: Yes, I was disappointed and, frankly, kind of angry about

it. Look, I understand there is executive privilege. There is the expectation that a president should be able to consult with his advisers about official business and do so in private, but what Mr. Bannon claimed was far beyond that. It made many of the Democratic members angry. It made many of the Republican members angry. I think it was inappropriate. And we did what we had to do, and that was we pushed back on that and said, OK, if you won't answer these voluntarily, we'll subpoena you and bring you back and ask you under subpoena. That was the only thing we could do, but it was the right thing to do.

BLITZER: Do you believe the White House interfered and asked him not to answer those questions?

STEWART: That's a really interesting question because I honestly don't know. I chaired a hearing yesterday with Mr. Dearborn, who is an actual member of the administration now. He answered every question. He didn't hesitate. And I don't know why Mr. Bannon would take the view that he wasn't going to answer any of these questions. Other members of the administration were very, very forthcoming. I don't know, maybe Mr. Bannon took his exception to executive privilege far beyond anything anyone had intended. But you know what, at the end of the day it doesn't matter. We will compel him to testify if necessary.

BLITZER: Because Corey Lewandowski also appeared before your committee yesterday, the former campaign manager. He refused to answer questions, but you didn't subpoena him like you did with Steve Bannon. And you're absolutely right, the White House deputy chief of staff, Rick Dearborn, who appeared, he answered all the questions, didn't dodge any of them.

STEWART: Yes.

BLITZER: You heard what Congressman Quigley said, that the White House may have feared that Steve Bannon may have had more damaging information than Corey Lewandowski, may have had more damaging information, that's why they didn't want them to answer questions, whereas Dearborn did not have damaging information. Is that a legitimate concern?

STEWART: It's a concern. I can understand why some people would take that view and want to pursue it for those reasons. I have to tell you, just being very honest, I don't think that's likely. I think that we would have some indication of what that damaging information might be, and we simply don't.

I think it's a couple things. Mr. Lewandowski didn't claim privilege. He said, I'm not prepared to answer that right now. I didn't think that was within the scope of the questions, so let me come back to you. But he didn't ever say, I won't answer those questions. Now, Mr. Bannon did. I think he did so inappropriately. But, you know, no one has accused Mr. Bannon of being involved with this. He wasn't involved with any of the Trump Tower meetings. He wasn't involved with the dossier. He wasn't involved with any of the court onus of this investigation. I think it's very unlikely he has information that we haven't already had access to.

BLITZER: Did you ask him about that Trump Tower meeting?

STEWART: Yes. He was asked about that. Now, I got to be fair, too, I wasn't there for the entire eight hours. I was actually flying in to D.C. during the first part of the meeting, so there are some things you may ask me that I'm just going to have to say, I don't know, I wasn't there. But I do know he was asked about that.

BLITZER: The White House, obviously, is insisting they have not interfered, they have not exerted executive privilege, but they, apparently, did tell these guys, or at least Steve Bannon, there are certain things we don't want you to talk about. But he's going to come back. He was going to come back today, Steve Bannon, but now he's going to come back at a later date. Do you know when?

STEWART: Yes, we don't yet, but we'll be persistent on that. It's not going to be months down the road. We'll bring him back quickly. Again, we were hoping today, maybe not today or tomorrow, but certainly within the next few weeks.

BLITZER: While I have you, Congressman, let me get your thoughts on a possible government shutdown. The White House chief of staff, John Kelly, said the president stance on the border wall with Mexico during the campaign was uninformed. He also said the president's position has evolved on the wall on other matters, but today the president tweeted that his position hasn't evolved at all. How do you explain this disagreement between the White House chief of staff and the president of the United States?

STEWART: Oh, my gosh, I would be maybe the last person in the world that could explain that disagreement. You would have to ask them.

Let me just say, speaking broadly once again. Many of us feel like we should secure our southern border, including the negotiator of the country, protect our sovereignty. But it doesn't have to be, the fact is, shouldn't be a physical wall. There is no reason for it. It would be too expensive. There would be environmental concerns. Having been to Israel, as I'm sure have been, they have a great model there where they use a number of things, detectors, some military presence, in some cases, a wall. I think that's what many of us are looking for and hoping to achieve when we talk about a southern wall.

But I couldn't explain, really, what the president means or why he may disagree with some of his staff. Again, I just wasn't privy to some of those conversations.

[13:50:29] BLITZER: Congressman Stewart, thanks so much for joining us.

STEWART: Thank you, sir.

BLITZER: It's been one year since President Trump and his predecessor appeared together at the inauguration. They haven't spoken since. What's the reason? Plus, the president speaking soon in Pennsylvania to sell taxes, push

the economy, trying to save Republicans an open House seat. He won the state in 2016. The questions now is this, will his support help or hurt the Republican candidate?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:55:20] BLITZER: Next hour, the president will arrive in western Pennsylvania. He tweeted earlier today that he's there to back the Republican candidate in a special house race. Although, despite that tweet, the White House just announced this as an official event U.S. taxpayers will be paying for it, not his political campaign or the Republican national committee.

The outcome of this race could be a key bellwether for the November midterm elections.

Let's go to CNN's Jason Carroll. He's on the scene for us.

What's at stake, Jason?

JASON CARROLL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, so much is at stake here, you know, when it comes to the 18th district, when it comes to the 18th district.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CARROLL (voice-over): Saccone, often referred to in these parts as Trump 2.0.

STATE REP. RICK SACCONE, (R), PENNSYLVANIA & U.S. HOUSE CANDIDATE: I think it's an honor. People will respect that.

CARROLL: Saccone is a five-time representative in the Pennsylvania House and staunch Trump supporter.

UNIDENTIFIED RADIO HOST: Would you be more likely to support the Republican Saccone or the Democrat for Congress?

(CHEERING)

CARROLL: Saccone faces Democratic challenger, Conor Lamb, in a special election in the 18th district, the seat vacated by Tim Murphy, an anti-abortion GOP congressman, who resigned after it was revealed he allegedly asked a woman he was having an affair with to have an abortion.

The 18th spreads across four counties and includes industrial towns and suburban communities. It's primarily white and working class.

SACCONE: I don't know if you realize this, Jason, but you're in Trump country. This is -- Trump won this area by 20 points. And I think maybe today he may be even more popular than he was when he was elected.

CARROLL: A loss in so-called Trump country could have national repercussions.

(APPLAUSE)

CARROLL: Saccone's opponent, Conor Lamb, is a 33-year-old retired Marine and former U.S. attorney.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Will you support Conor Lamb for Congress in the special election being held on March 13th?

CARROLL: His supporters say Lamb is not your typical Democrat. They say he's more moderate and not afraid to take on his own party. He raised eyebrows when he said he would not support Nancy Pelosi as Democratic leader.

CONOR LAMB, (D), PENNSYLVANIA CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: I think Congress, as a whole, has failed to achieve the results people want. It's not a personal thing but when that happens it's time for new leadership.

CARROLL: Is that enough to fwan points in a district that has not elected a Democrat since 2000, despite having an edge in party registration?

Paul Bergens is one of those Democrats here who switched parties and is now behind Saccone.

PAUL BERGENS, PENNSYLVANIA RESIDENT: People don't want another obstructionist Democrat in Washington. That would be Conor Lamb.

CARROLL: Across the district, at a hardware store, more voters standing behind Saccone.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think we need a supporter of Trump and Rick Saccone is a supporter of him.

CARROLL (on camera): Democrats hope that the president's popularity has waned here, and that, in turn, could help them with white working- class voters they need in order to pull out a win here. Still, Democrats say they have an uphill battle.

And who is this guy? Young-looking you, yes?

(voice-over): Lifelong Democrat Michael Flynn says Saccone's support for Trump has turned off some voters.

MICHAEL FLYNN, PENNSYLVANIA RESIDENT: From what I've seen in the past year of Donald Trump and having Mr. Saccone say he's more Trump than Trump, that settled my -- that made my decision there.

CARROLL: That settled it?

FLYNN: That was it. I would hope it would be a backlash against what we've seen from Trump, but I don't know.

CARROLL: Voters head to the polls here March 13th.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CARROLL: Little audio glitch there at the top, Wolf. Let me just say this is a race that's very, very important to the Republican Party. They've already seen defeats in places like Alabama and Virginia. They don't want to see a repeat of that here. That's why you've got Donald Trump, who tweeted out earlier this morning, saying that Rick Saccone is a great guy. After that, you had the press secretary basically weighing in, saying this is not a political event, that this is an official event. But if you believe that, I've got a bridge I need to sell you -- Wolf?

BLITZER: Jason Carroll reporting for us from western Pennsylvania.

That's it for me. I'll be back 5:00 p.m. eastern in "THE SITUATION ROOM."

For our international viewers, "AMANPOUR" is next.

For our viewers in the North America, "NEWSROOM" with Brooke Baldwin starts right now.

[13:59:58] BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: Wolf, thank you.

Hi, everyone. I'm Brooke Baldwin. You're watching CNN.

The finger pointing is at a fever pitch as the government is set to shut down, you see the clock right there, 34 hours and counting. We're going to dive in to what's being done to avoid that in just a second.

But first, here's what would happen if there's no deal --