Return to Transcripts main page
NEW DAY SATURDAY
Sources: Deputy AG Rosenstein Discussed 25th Amendment and Secretly Recording Trump After Comey Firing in 2017; Trump Asked Advisers if he Should Fire Rosenstein; Democrats Want to Hear From Kavanaugh Accuser Before Vote; Carolinas Face Rising Rivers; Kavanaugh Accuser Ford Now Has Until 2:30 PM ET to Decide Whether She Will Publicly Testify; Trump Questions Credibility of Kavanaugh Accuser; Commerce Secretary Says Nobody Will Notice Higher Prices and Consumers Won't Notice Trade War Sting; The Dow Hits Record Highs Despite Trade War; Tornado Rips Through Ottawa Area. Aired 8-9a ET
Aired September 22, 2018 - 08:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DIANNE GALLAGHER, CNN HOST: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein floated the idea of wearing a wire to secretly record President Trump last year.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES: Just look at what is now being exposed in our Department of Justice and the FBI. There's a lingering stench and we're going to get rid of that too.
VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN HOST: Did Rod Rosenstein have a shock reaction to something we all know to be true, which is that the White House is a circus?
GALLAGHER: Jeff Sessions needs to fire Rosenstein and if he won't, Donald Trump needs to fire both of them.
TRUMP: Brett Kavanaugh, fantastic man. He was born for the U.S. Supreme Court, he was born for it and it's going to happen.
GALLAGHER: If the alleged attack was as bad as she said it was, Christine Blasey Ford would have filed charges.
SUSAN COLLINS, SENATOR, REPUBLICAN PARTY: I thought that the President's tweet was completely inappropriate and wrong.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: Good Saturday morning to you, top of the hour now, I'm Victor Blackwell.
GALLAGHER: And I'm Dianne Gallagher in today for Christi Paul, so the big question here, was it a plan to remove the President from office or was it just a sarcastic comment that was taken the wrong way? Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is denying reports that he discussed wearing a wire to record conversations with President Trump last year. BLACKWELL: CNN sources have now confirmed this story first reported by "The New York Times" that in the days after James Comey was fired as FBI Director, Rosenstein reportedly talked about recruiting cabinet members to help remove President Trump from office by invoking the 25th Amendment.
GALLAGHER: Now Rosenstein issued two, not one, but two statements denying the reports. This is the latest one, "I never pursued or authorized recording the President and any suggestion that I have ever advocated for the removal of the President is absolutely false."
BLACKWELL: Now according to "The Washington Post," President Trump asked advisers yesterday whether he should fire Rosenstein where they talked about of making any decision last night but here is what he said about the Justice Department at that rally in Missouri, last night.
TRUMP: We have great people in the Department of Justice, we have great people. These are people, I really believe you take a poll, I got to be a 95% but we had some real bad ones, you're seeing what has happened at the FBI, they're all gone.
They're all gone, they're all gone. But there's a lingering stench and we're going to get rid of that too.
GALLAGHER: President is now spending the weekend at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey and Senior White House Correspondent Boris Sanchez joining us live from nearby in Berkeley Heights, New Jersey. Boris, a lingering stench, the President hasn't really said much beyond that at least today so far, right?
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: That's right Dianne and Victor. President Trump not yet weighing in on Twitter, that's about as direct as he got, not really a subtle message but he doesn't mention Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein by name there. He also, as I noted, has not tweeted about any personnel changes at the Department of Justice.
Though previously, we had heard President Trump talk about his displeasure for the DOJ, specifically about their inability to shield certain Republicans from investigations and his unhappiness with their lack of a prosecution of some of his political enemies like Hillary Clinton, et cetera.
We should point out though that sources had previously indicated that President Trump was unhappy with his Deputy Attorney General because of the free reign that Rod Rosenstein had given Robert Mueller to pursue the Russia investigation and to investigate certain things about President Trump, namely his finances.
But the President had previously said, we're a red line in that investigation, that was all before this reporting came out that Rod Rosenstein had talked about invoking the 25th Amendment whether sarcastically or not, and about potentially wearing a wire to record the President. Now there have been calls for Rosenstein to be fired previously, now
those are ramping up, namely by number of conservatives on social media. The President's son, Donald Trump Junior, actually tweeted out that he was shocked by this. He was definitely being sarcastic because, of course, this plays into the narrative that we've heard from the President and some of his allies that there is a deep state out there that is seeking to undo the President's agenda and to remove him from office.
One quick thing I did also want to point out though is CNN's reporting sources have indicated that the White House actually knew that this story was coming on Thursday, one day before it was published in "The New York Times" and then later confirmed by CNN and others.
So this isn't necessarily a surprise. What is starting to be a surprise is the fact that the President hasn't said anything on Twitter. As you know, Dianne and Victor, the President likes between early on weekend mornings and he has fired people via social media before, so we'll just wait, refresh and see what comes.
GALLAGHER: Always keeping our Twitter fingers ready. Boris Sanchez, thank you so much.
BLACKWELL: Joining us now to talk about this, Rachael Bade, CNN Political Analyst and Congressional reporter at Politico; Page Pate, CNN Legal Analyst and Constitutional Attorney; and Tim Naftali, CNN Presidential Historian and Former Director of the Nixon Presidential Library. Everyone, welcome back.
And Rachel, let me start with you. The President has railed against Jeff Sessions, the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein for what, a year now? Does the reporting from "The New York Times" and all the reporting since, does it makes it more likely that the President will take the next step and fire or order the firing of Rosenstein?
RACHAEL BADE, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST, CONGRESSIONAL REPORTER, POLITICO: Yes, it has definitely given Republicans and the President a lot more ammunition. Look, any other President, if these reports are true that his Deputy Attorney General talked about secretly taping him, potentially removing him against his will from office, would absolutely fire that Deputy Attorney General, no doubt about it.
And so I think that this gives Republicans something to hold up and say, we got to get rid of this guy. Look, we're already seeing people online, social media, conservatives, Trump's supporters think they want this guy to go and they had wanted him to go for a long time, but this sort of gives them that sort of concrete thing to point to in order to push him out.
The one thing that gives me pause right now is that the election is just a couple of weeks away and Democrats are saying, if he were to fire Rod Rosenstein right now that they're going to use this as an example of corruption, a reason to put Democrats in the House.
Right now, their top pitch to voters is that the White House is out of control and that there's corruption and that there needs to be a democratic check in the house, and there is a concern by top Republican, more establishment types, on the Hill that Democrats would use them against them in the election and that could be problematic.
BLACKWELL: So Page, The Washington Post report, as we said at the top that the advisers around the President convinced him not to make any decision last night. They at least appear to know what the consequences would be if the President were to take the step of firing Rosenstein.
Would those consequences be the same today as they were Friday morning, considering what we've learned from this New York Times reporting?
PAGE PATE, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Victor, I don't think so. I think now the President does have some additional cover if he wants to go ahead and move Rosenstein before the midterm elections, but I don't think that's going to happen.
It really now is not a question of if, it's a question of when and I do see him waiting until after the elections because then at that point, he's going to put his own team in place at Justice. I think Sessions is gone; I think Rosenstein is gone. The question is who is he going to put in their place because as we've heard him say, his test, if you're doing a great job in the Department of Justice is if you like him.
So if it becomes a popularity contest and he puts somebody in those positions that he can control, what happens to the Special Counsel's investigation. Robert Muller is not finished with his work yet. And so I think if the President put someone in those positions who removes Mueller or in any way obstructs that investigation, then you may see Congress finally act.
BLACKWELL: And then who could he get confirmed, that that's a lot easier to answer after the election than it would be before the election. Tim, to you, first, the discussion of the 25th Amendment that reportedly Rod Rosenstein was trying to determine who he could recruit within the cabinet to launch this effort to remove the President.
This is the second time in about three weeks, we've talked about the 25th Amendment. Please just frame for us the original use of this, the purpose of it, and how it's now put into context with the chaos some would describe in the Trump Administration. Does what we see reach the level of 25th Amendment mullets (ph).
TIM NAFTALI, CNN PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN AND FORMER DIRECTOR, THE NIXON PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY: Well, after World War I, the United States had an incapacitated President, his name was Woodrow Wilson. In large measure the U. S. government was run by Woodrow Wilson -- by the First Lady, Edith Wilson.
The 25th Amendment which came much later was a way for the U. S. government to deal with an incapacitated President and if a majority of the cabinet should by vote determine the President cannot discharge his or someday her duties, then the President can be removed.
That's there just in case the President has a stroke or has some kind of psychological attack that makes it impossible for him to serve or continue his term. That's why that's there.
But it does require majority of the cabinet and the President, if he were to find out about such deliberations could fire the cabinet in advance. So, this is really something for a President who is almost out of it, if you will.
The fact that people in the administration have been talking about it is an indication of the fact that President Trump to some who work with him appears at times to be erratic. I wanted to mention one point, Victor.
BLACKWELL: Go ahead.
NAFTALI: About this article which is quickly that it would be remarkable, if the Trump Administration fired someone on the basis of a New York Times article, given what the President has been saying all along about The New York Times.
BLACKWELL: The failing New York Times.
NAFTALI: That - so that, I can't see how they would do it on the basis of an article. What I must stress is they can't do this before the election. To do this before the election would underscore the arguments that not just Democrats, but independents have been making about the fact that Donald Trump does not wish to permit an independent Mueller investigation to go forward.
BLACKWELL: So, let me come back to you Rachael, House Judiciary announced that it's going to subpoena the notes from the former FBI Assistant Director Andrew McCabe there, his memos in which he detailed Rosenstein's comments and of course, there were the articles of impeachment that were issued or submitted against Rosenstein because of slow walking, they would say, records from the Department of Justice to Congress.
Does this reinvigorate, gives a new fire to that fight, will it get any traction with House leadership because Paul Ryan tamped it down pretty quickly in July?
BADE: That's right. So basically, Trump supporters in the House have been trying to land sort of a fatal blow on Rosenstein for a while and they have filed articles of impeachment. Paul Ryan has been trying to sort of keep them at bay and he has been able to do so, so far, but listen, they filed the articles of impeachment because Rosenstein was not turning over enough documents for one of their own FBI investigations.
This is way more egregious than that. I don't see how Paul Ryan can hold them back, in terms of pushing for this again. I will say one thing though, and that is the top conservatives on House Freedom Caucus that have been pushing for the impeachment of Rosenstein for a while, they're eerily silent right now and I wonder again, if this has something to do with the election.
I do think again, it's a question of when, not a question of if. if the President doesn't fire Rosenstein, I just don't see how they can hold this back in the House.
BLACKWELL: Tim, listen to the President last night in Missouri.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: A poll came out, they said everybody's going out in 2020 because they want to vote for you, they want to vote for the President, but they not may be coming out in 2018. Get out in 2018 because you're voting for me in 2018; you're voting for me.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: Tim, the President says, "you are voting for me." Is he right that this election is more nationalized than midterms in the past, and what does that mean for Republicans who really didn't want the President to say that, if they're going to be elected and sent back?
NAFTALI: Well, look, there is no question that President Trump believes that he is an asset to the Republican Party. I'm not sure that every Republican candidate, whether for the Senate or the House, feels that way - many do, but many do not.
I think the President is reminding people when he speaks that way, that he does not believe that there are checks and balances in the U.S. government, and that he believes that he has been elected to govern however he wishes. And that anyone who should disagree with his understanding of the constitution, I'm not talking about policy here, I'm talking about the understanding of the constitution, must be removed.
That is not the American way, that's not how this country functions and he - the President in using these terms about law enforcement, about the Department of Justice, is giving - is sending the signal that if you do not agree with Donald J. Trump's understanding of the constitution, you must leave and he's asking the American people to endorse that view of the constitution and of his powers as President.
He is making this argument and he is giving or phrasing the midterm elections with enormous significance, he's telling Americans, define the presidency, it's up to you.
BLACKWELL: All right, Tim Naftali, Rachael Bade, Page Pate, we've run out of time, thank you so much. Stay with us, of course, there's much more to discuss this hour.
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley and Senator Mazie Hirono join Jake Tapper on State of the Union, that's tomorrow on CNN at 9:00 AM Eastern, and New York Former Mayor Michael Bloomberg joins Fareed Zakaria on GPS, again that's at 10:00 am Eastern, right here on CNN. GALLAGHER: Democrats accusing Republicans of bullying the woman leveling charges of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh. So coming up, the demands that the Republicans want her to agree to before today's 2:30 deadline. Plus, a week after Hurricane Florence and the worst is not over yet for South Carolina.
CNN's Nick Valencia in Conway.
NICK VALENCIA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Dianne. This has been described to us by residents as a slow motion disaster. I'm Nick Valencia in Conway, South Carolina, coming up after the break. We'll introduce you to a community that's still dealing with the aftermath of Hurricane Florence more than a week later. You're watching CNN's New Day.
BLACKWELL: Well, South Carolina is still feeling the effect of Hurricane Florence, this morning, the town of Nichols is almost completely under water.
Some highways are still closed, local roads are impassable there.
GALLAGHER: And look, the worst is still yet to come, there's more flooding, even more is expected in the coming days. CNN correspondent Nick Valencia in Conway, South Carolina.
And Nick, look, flooding there is record setting, you were there earlier this week, you are back again, what are you seeing now?
VALENCIA: Dianne, it's absolutely remarkable to see a community here more than a week after Hurricane Florence made landfall and yet, they're still dealing with the aftermath of that storm. We're in a community here in Conway, South Carolina which is about 20 miles inland from Myrtle Beach that is just absolutely flooded and it's going to continue to get worse here in the coming days.
We've already set a record as you mentioned, the Waccamaw River is inching towards 19 feet. The record last set two years ago during Hurricane Matthew was somewhere around 17.9 inches; we're well past that.
This community in fact didn't see that much water during Hurricane Matthew. It was just a little while ago that I spoke to the Emergency Management Director here in Conway and he says, "looking at all this is surreal."
LE HENDRICK, FIRE CHIEF, CONWAY: I guess just, you know, seeing our neighbors and our friends struggling and they went to sleep last night, they didn't have water and they woke up this morning and their houses are flooded.
I mean it's going to be a long few days.
VALENCIA: And they are prepared for that long few days. This area has seen four major floods in the last five years, as I mentioned, not really getting water in this area. We're seeing residents here doing their last minute, what they can to get their belongings out of their homes. Many people in this community have already evacuated though they are not in the mandatory evacuation zone.
I asked the Emergency Management Director who is also the Fire Chief, exactly why they haven't issued mandatory evacuations, they say they don't have the ability to do that, but they have highly encouraged residents to get out while they can.
Earlier this week, this is the same area that President Trump visited, seeing the aftermath of the flash flooding that took place from Hurricane Florence, that water had receded long enough for residents to come back and get their belongings. In fact, when we got here early Wednesday, that's what we saw residents doing, preparing for this type of scenario.
And the situation that we're seeing now, the river is not expected to crest until Monday, perhaps even Tuesday, some projections put it at Wednesday, they say it's going to be about five more feet before this is all said and done. And guys, all run off from the Waccamaw River, which is just a couple of miles away from here.
The - mentioned to me, I asked him, how deep it is in some areas, he says it's upwards of 8-10 feet here, we're ankle deep water. But it's just going to spread it very far, he doesn't know exactly how deep it spreads, but there's potential that this could spread main street by the weekend. Guys.
BLACKWELL: More to come there. Nick Valencia, thank you so much for your reporting. The woman accusing the President's Supreme Court nominee of sexual assault has been given until noon. Or rather this afternoon, I should say, 2:30 is the new deadline, to decide if she will testify. Coming up the demands from Senate Republicans as they are now facing some backlash over their deadlines.
GALLAGHER: This morning, Senate Republicans are demanding that the woman accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault, that she agree by this afternoon to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Christine Blasey Ford says that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her at a party when they were in high school.
Now, that's according to "The New York Times." Committee Chair Senator Chuck Grassley gave Ford until 2:30 PM today to decide if she is going to testify, or he says the vote on Kavanaugh's nomination will move forward Monday afternoon.
Now, Ford's attorney called this deadline arbitrary.
We want to bring in CNN Political Analyst and Congressional reporter for political, Rachael Bade and Tim Naftali, CNN Presidential Historian and Former Director of the Nixon library. I first want to real quick, Rachael, go up to that deadline. This is now the fourth deadline in 24 hours. There isn't anything except for political pressure that is causing them to rush through this year here, so do we think that we may see a fifth or a sixth or a seventh deadline even as they kind of work this out?
BADE: Yes, Ford's attorneys have definitely called Grassley's bluff on his deadlines, so I don't know, maybe we'll have five more extensions, who knows? Look, Republicans are racing against the political clock right now, they want to get Kavanaugh seated by October 1 which is the beginning of the Supreme Court season for next year.
They want to go out on a campaign trail and campaign to keep the Senate, so they want to get this done so they can focus on their own campaigns. And then lastly, there's a slight risk that the Senate, you know, flips and goes to Democratic hands, in which case Kavanaugh's nomination shouldn't draw out and go beyond the election.
They're going to have a big problem there if the Senate - if the Democrats take the chamber. So they want to get this done. Kavanaugh's attorney has - or, I'm sorry, Ms. Ford's attorney has obviously said, this is bullying. That she needs more time to really sort of think through the consequences of coming forward and testifying.
But, I think that her life clearly has already been turned upside down by these allegations coming out. I wouldn't be surprised if she doesn't testify and I think a lot of people want to hear from her and I'm not sure the last sort of negotiating pieces that her lawyers are asking for, if they don't get them, I'm not sure that that's going to be enough to keep her from coming forward. People really want to hear from this woman.
GALLAGHER: Well and part of it, they've said, you've mentioned the bullying there. Tim, look President Trump yesterday openly attacked Ford, saying that if the sexual assault happened, then why didn't she tell her parents or why didn't her parents report it.
For most of the day yesterday, that hash tag and if you haven't seen it, you should click on it read it, why I didn't report was trending across almost all mediums of social media. There was an Op-Ed from Ronald Reagan's daughter, Patti Davis.
Now, I just want to read two excerpts from this here, what she said, talking about the fact that maybe she didn't remember everything she said, "Your memory snaps photos of the details that will haunt you forever. It blacks out other parts that don't really matter much."
And speaking directly to those on the committee saying, that it shouldn't be that big of a deal that she wanted more time and wanted - she said, "requesting an investigation into the incident isn't a big act, unless they just want her to go away which is, by the way, one reason that women are scared to speak up."
Tim, the optics here are tough for Republicans, specifically Orrin Hatch who has been through this before with Anita Hill. Are we teeing this up for Anita Hill Part 2? NAFTALI: Well, one of the things that is so striking is the fact that you have people on the Judiciary Committee now, who were there in 1991 when Anita Hill was so shamelessly attacked, when her credibility was attacked.
You would think that since 1991, our country has moved forward but in many ways, we are seeing some of the same arguments and by the way, in this case, we're talking about sexual assault.
In 1991, it was largely a question of sexual discrimination and harassment which - these are both bad, sexual assault though is rape which should lead to - must lead, if the person is guilty, to prison.
What is, I think, really important to keep in mind is that there are people in - on that committee, on the Judiciary committee who are sending the signal that they've already made up their minds about Professor Ford and Judge Kavanaugh, and they're ready to vote for Judge Kavanaugh regardless of what Professor Ford is about to say.
This is a terrible signal to send to our country, to young women, to all women that these men and they are men and they're Republican have decided, it doesn't really matter what Professor Ford has to say and they're not willing to allow the FBI to do its work, to determine whether in fact a sexual, an issue or an incident of sexual assault occurred.
That is the optics that I'm seeing. There's politics, there's always politics, Left, Right, Republicans, Democrats, but we're talking about the question of whether Professor Ford's allegation can be investigated in time to determine whether someone who may have been guilty, he's innocent until proven guilty, but someone who is - may have been guilty of sexual assault gets a lifetime appointment to our Supreme Court.
And as Republicans, with these deadlines are sending a signal every day, listen, let's get this over with, we want to vote him in, it doesn't really matter. That's the optics that I see and they're so damaging for this country.
GALLAGHER: Tim, thank you so much and as Rachael pointed out here, they're racing against a political clock, if you will. Rachael, Tim, I appreciate you being here. And look, we've talked a lot about sexual assault this morning, these allegations and this uneasy process that so many people face if they decide to come forward.
And how do you go about reporting it? So we want to remind all of you out there, if you're watching, this has triggered something in you, there is a number you can call, it is 1-800-656-HOPE. You can get confidential support from a trained professional and there's somebody who can help talk you through the next steps and give you support.
Well, the President says there is a stench inside the Justice Department, so will he try to fix that by firing Rod Rosenstein? We'll be discussing that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BLACKWELL: The President is vowing to fix what he calls a lingering
stench inside the FBI and the Justice Department, could that mean firing the man who hired Robert Mueller for the Russia investigation?
Let's talk about that with Joseph Borelli, Republican Congressman in New York City. He's also the Former co-Chairman for the Trump campaign in New York. Last time, we had you from this site, you had a bottle of Blue behind you. I see it's not there anymore.
JOSEPH BORELLI, REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN, NEW YORK AND FORMER CO- CHAIRMAN, TRUMP CAMPAIGN: It's still there, we moved the angle a little bit.
BLACKWELL: Okay, all right, okay, all right, save me a shot, all right.
BORELLI: I will.
BLACKWELL: So let's get to the story of the day. I first want you to listen to two people that we know had the President's ear, Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST, FOX NEWS: The President tonight should seriously consider whether Rod Rosenstein should remain on the job. We just cannot have this plotting at the highest levels of the Justice Department against the Chief Executive of this Executive branch.
SEAN HANNITY, HOST, FOX NEWS: I have a message for the President tonight. Under zero circumstances should the President fire anybody. They are hoping and praying that the President does just that, they're hoping he gets mad, that he gets sick and tired of it and that they can turn this politically into their equivalent of a Friday night massacre.
The President needs to know it is all a set up.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: So conflicting advice from his advisers and friends there at Fox News, what do you think, should the President fire Rod Rosenstein?
BORELLI: Yes, I mean, I tend to agree with one of the guests you had on earlier that it probably is more a question of when than if Rod Rosenstein becomes one of the latest firings of the Trump Administration.
I do think Sean Hannity's right that the timing of it is a little bit suspicious, in the sense that firing him at the wrong time could have some more significant political ramifications.
But that said, look, this is a President who under this constitution has unilateral executive power. We don't have a multiple executive branch, the framers could have done that, they didn't do that. Instead we give the entire power of the executive branch to one person
and if that one person believes that people under him are working to undermine or actively not support the policies he seeks to enact, then I think he does have a right to fire Rod Rosenstein when he does choose.
BLACKWELL: You know several guests have said that this makes it easier potentially for the President to do it without - and not completely, but in some ways avoiding the question of obstruction of justice.
We'll see if it even gets to that point, if the President decides to fire Rosenstein. You know, one thing we have not talked about is that this report from The New York Times came out just a few hours after the President tweeted his reversal in releasing and declassifying those documents related to the Russia investigation.
Do you expect or should this reporting lead the President to reconsider that reversal?
BORELLI: No, no, no and I agree with a lot of friends of mine in the House of Representatives who believe that these documents should be transparently broadcast to the American people unredacted, so we can figure out why this Russia investigation began.
Again, this has been almost two years going into this Mueller investigation and not one credible bit of evidence that Trump colluded with Russia has since been broadcast to the American people.
More questions have been asked about how, why and when this investigation started. So, I certainly side with the President on that; I certainly side with a lot of member of Congress who feel the same way.
And it does kind of raise some suspicion, when you have people like run Rod Rosenstein, but more of his ilk within the Department of Justice, who are seeking to the block this unredacted document from going out.
BLACKWELL: So there are lots of questions there about, you're saying that there's no evidence of collusion there, this investigation is not over and there would be some who would point to the Trump Tower meeting in 2016 to rebut what you just said there.
But I've got one more thing to get to, I just wanted to point out.
BLACKWELL: There's obviously some conflict, there will be some people who disagree with what you said there. I want to play for you what House Secretary Ben Carson said at the Values Voter Summit.
This is about -- this is Blasey Ford who's accusing Judge Kavanaugh of sexual assault back when they were in high school. Listen to what he attributes this accusation to.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BEN CARSON, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT SECRETARY: If you really
understand the big picture of what's going on, then what's going on with Judge Kavanaugh will make perfectly good sense to you because you see there have been people in this country for a very long time, go all the way back to the Fabians who have wanted to fundamentally change this country.
And in order to do that, there are three things that they must control - the educational system, the media and the courts. Okay, the first two they have.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: Secretary Carson there, suggesting that her accusation is part of a century-long plot to change this country by socialists. What is he talking about and do you agree?
BORELLI: Well, it's certainly a more cerebral and perhaps odd way to talk about, I think, what the Democrats are trying to do and they're trying to prevent Judge Kavanaugh's nomination.
No, I have no obvious knowledge of whether the assault happened to Dr. Ford. I certainly hope it didn't. But that said, all the evidence that has come out since this allegation has become public tends to make people believe that this is not - did not occur as Dr. Ford -
BLACKWELL: You know how you get evidence, you have an investigation, right?
BORELLI: Well, but also we do have some evidence. I mean, she pointed to certain people that she claimed were there when this happened and they said that this in fact didn't happen that way. I mean you have -
BLACKWELL: Haven't said that under oath.
BORELLI: - about five or six women on CNN, last week and they unanimously said that they didn't believe it. So, I don't want to be the one to pass judgment whether it happened or not, but it certainly seems that a lot of people don't buy the story as she's saying it and are seeing this as more of a delay tactic by Democrats in the nomination.
BLACKWELL: You can certainly put the people under oath instead of having their attorneys saying that statements, but you would agree or rather you would disagree with the Secretary that this is part of some century-long socialist plot to change the country?
BORELLI: Well, I don't know if there's any plot. I'm sure, if it is, they're being very secret about it. You know Republicans have been -
BLACKWELL: No, just wait a minute, wait a minute, I just got - are you not taking a side on the socialist plot line from the Secretary?
BORELLI: No, I mean, I don't know if there are socialists plotting to undermine the government. I mean, I don't think there are, perhaps there are. But more importantly - BLACKWELL: Okay, Joseph, we got to cut it there. I appreciate the interview but you don't know if this is part of some socialist plot, that's where we got to cut it. Joseph Borelli, thanks so much for being with us.
BORELLI: Take care, Victor.
BLACKWELL: You too. Dianne?
GALLAGHER: All right. So there's a trade war going on between the U.S. and China but you might not know it by looking at the recurring highs on Wall Street. So, we're going to discuss why that is and why the Commerce Secretary thinks that consumers aren't going to notice that trade war at all.
GALLAGHER: Wall Street seems to be just shrugging off the President's trade war with China. The Dow hit back-to-back record highs, Thursday and Friday, and look at that, that is best week in two months. Corporations don't really seem worried either.
The Corporate tax cut is helping them make a lot of money, but what about the average person, what about the average consumer? You means most of you out there watching.
This ongoing trade war will eventually cost Americans more money but Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross says, "They're not going to notice."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WILBUR ROSS, COMMERCE SECRETARY: If you have a 10% tariff on another $200 billion, that's $20 billion a year, that's a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of 1% total inflation in the U.S.
Because it's spread over thousands and thousands of products, nobody's going to actually noticed it at the end of the day.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GALLAGHER: Really? All right, well, joining me now to discuss is Financial Analyst and Managing Director of Cornell Capital, Ann Berry. Ann, look, first off how is this possible?
Even if it's just a little bit of money on a few products here and there, that adds up depending on the cost of it and what people need to buy.
ANN BERRY, FINANCIAL ANALYST AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, CORNELL CAPITAL: Absolutely, but it really is a little bit supporting on the lower numbers. The analysis that's being run suggests that the impact of inflation is probably 0.03% at the 10% tariff range.
(inaudible) from January to 25%, so maybe that goes to 0.05%. I think the question is whether this is going to be subsumed in the fact that the broader economy is really continuing to be very strong, unemployment - jobless claims are down at levels that are the lowest since 1969.
Consumer confidence is an all-time high. So whether these other economic variables will continue to mark the impact in inflation, I think, still remains to be seen.
GALLAGHER: So but when you say, mask it, I mean, is it just too soon then for Americans to kind of feel the effect? Because eventually, they're going to have to buy products and those prices are going to go up, even if other things seem great.
BERRY: The piece of this that'll be interesting and I think, the jury is still out on this, is how will supply chains change and evolve to try to accommodate the fact that these prices are going up and you try to find alternative sources.
So for example, if tariff is going up on components coming in from China, are United States manufacturers able to either find domestic sources or there are some other nations that you don't actually see as much of a cost increase come through, and I think there isn't yet real visibility on the numbers around that.
GALLAGHER: Ann Berry, thank you so much for your expertise.
BLACKWELL: The final episodes of Parts Unknown hosted by our late colleague, Anthony Bourdain start tomorrow night at 9:00 PM, here's a preview.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Who gets to tell the stories. This is a question asked often. The answer in this case, for better or for worse, is I do. At least this time out.
First time in this continent, yes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's unbelievable.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (Inaudible) I also wanted to do it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (Inaudible) New York.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: New York in your mind is where the rider's life was?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (Inaudible).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Anthony Bourdain, Parts Unknown, the final episodes, starts tomorrow at 9:00 PM on CNN.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BLACKWELL: Well, it took just minutes for a tornado in Canada to rip roofs off homes and cars flying. One storm victim caught it all on his cell phone video, watch. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GALLAGHER: That was in the town of Gatineau that's near Ottawa. The man who took that video says that he did get the warning, but just minutes later that tornado was right in front of him.
BLACKWELL: The Ottawa man says, emergency personnel are going door to door now to check on people. Almost 150,000 people are without power this morning. So of course, we're thinking of the people there in Gatineau.
All right, we got more news for you straight ahead.
GALLAGHER: Smercornish is next and we'll see you again in just one hour.