Return to Transcripts main page
New Day
Trump Backs Saudi Explanation for Khashoggi Murder; Trump Slams Warren After She Releases DNA Results to Rebut Him. Aired 6- 6:30a ET
Aired October 16, 2018 - 06:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Maybe these could have been rogue killers. Who knows?
[05:59:20] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't think rogue actors is a good enough explanation.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They intend to concede Khashoggi was killed during an interrogation gone wrong.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You don't get the benefit of the doubt when you take two weeks to develop your cover story.
TRUMP: I've got more Indian blood in me than Pocahontas, and I have none.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The problem with the DNA test is that it proves nothing of relevance.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She's put to rest his nickname for her.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANNOUNCER: This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota and John Berman.
JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Welcome to our viewers in the United States and all around the world. This is NEW DAY. It's Tuesday, October 16, 6 a.m. here in New York, and we do begin with breaking news.
Just moments ago the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, met with Saudi Arabia's king amid international outrage, intrigue and now obfuscation.
Sources now tell CNN that the Saudi regime is prepared to admit that "Washington Post" journalist Jamal Khashoggi was killed while being interrogated. Their best explanation is something along the lines of torture gone wrong.
What's more, this story directly contradicts what they've said over the past two weeks. The Saudis initially claimed Khashoggi walked out of their consulate in Istanbul unharmed. So why does this matter? Well, a U.S.-based journalist was apparently
murdered by an ally of the United States. That ally has changing stories about why and how. And the president of the United States is willing to believe and promote these explanations.
President Trump emerged from a 20-minute phone call with King Salman yesterday, parroting the Saudi's spin that rogue killers might be responsible.
ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: And we are three weeks before the midterm elections, and the 2020 presidential campaign is already in politicians' sights.
President Trump has raised more than $100 million for his reelection campaign, and he's already tangling with one potential rival, Senator Elizabeth Warren.
The president falsely claims he did not pledge to pay $1 million to Senator Warren to her favorite charity if she took a DNA test to prove her Native American heritage, but he did make that promise at a rally in July. We'll play it for you.
Let's begin our coverage with CNN's Sam Kiley, live in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, with all of the breaking news.
What are the latest developments, Sam?
SAM KILEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The developments are actually coming out of Istanbul immediately, which is that diplomatic sources tell CNN that the Turks are now going to extend their search into the consul's residence not very far from the consulate itself, where a number of vehicles that are associated with that group of Saudis that arrived on two private jets went at the same time as Mr. Khashoggi was inside the consulate, and then moved in vehicles to the residence.
So there's a very significant development there. The Saudis are at least not blocking the next stage of the Turkish investigation, which President Erdogan of Turkey has just said would also involve a search for the use of what he calls toxic materials.
And this all comes just moments after Mr. Pompeo had finished his meeting with the Saudi king. It was a brief meeting lasting something around 15 minutes, so clearly not a very in-depth discussion. But he is scheduled to meet for a much more long period with the crown prince of this country both later on today and at a dinner hosted by Mohammad bin Salman, the crown prince, later today.
And this is all coming as CNN sources are saying -- telling us that the Saudis are expected to come up with what might be the most convenient truth, if you like, that they have been able to cobble together about what happened inside the consulate, that was more than hinted out by none other than Donald Trump following his statement -- following his phone call with King Salman.
This is what the U.S. president more or less let slip, if not paved the way for the Saudi narrative. This is what he said, Alisyn.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: The king firmly denied any knowledge of it. He didn't really know, maybe -- I don't want to get into his mind, but it sounded to me like maybe these could have been rogue killers. Who knows?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KILEY: Now, "rogue killers" is an idea that would mean that the Saudi crown prince and the king himself can claim that they didn't know anything about this operation, that it was off the books; it was a rendition that went ahead and went wrong.
Whether that is acceptable, either to the family that's called for an international investigation or indeed to Saudis' allies, remains to be seen. But I think it's clear that the U.S. and Saudi Arabia somehow want to put this behind them and move on to the more important strategic relationship -- John, Alisyn.
BERMAN: Sam Kiley in Riyadh for us. Sam, it's great to have you there on the ground. Keep us posted as the secretary continues his meetings there.
Want to bring in former CIA and NSA director, General Michael Hayden. General Hayden is a CNN national security analyst.
General, I want to take this in pieces here. The secretary of state is on the ground. He's about to meet with the Saudi crown prince. What should Mike Pompeo be doing in Saudi Arabia this evening?
GENERAL MICHAEL HAYDEN, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, Wolf, first of all, let me offer some sympathy for the secretary of state. He must feel like the Harvey Keitel character in "Pulp Fiction," Mr. Wolf. He's the guy who has to fix things. He was given that task with regard to North Korea following Singapore, and now he's cleaning up in Riyadh.
[06:05:00] Look, frankly, I think the secretary has to be tough in private. You saw him smiling with the king, with the foreign minister, Abdel al-Jubeir. That's fine.
But in private, he has got to impose the reality on the kingdom's leadership that this is an incredibly serious issue and that the president nor the secretary of state are going to be able to preserve the important Saudi/American relationship in its present form without a great deal of effort on the part of the Saudis to make this right following what it was they did in Istanbul.
BERMAN: If the secretary of state is the Wolf, it's going to take more than a blanket to clean up this mess in the back seat of this car.
General Hayden, they call this -- the Saudis are apparently going to call this a rogue interrogation gone wrong. Take the rogue part out of it for just a minute. Is it plausible to you that this could have been an interrogation? Can interrogations go wrong like this?
HAYDEN: It is. In fact, we talked about a week ago, and I suggested a likely scenario was that they wanted to capture, pressure, coerce the individual, and something went wrong. It wasn't done in a professional way. He resisted, he died, something happened.
So that part, plausible, but as I suggested last night, John, you don't get the benefit of the doubt if you take two weeks to come up with your cover story. And so I do think we're going to need a little bit more evidence with regard to something going wrong before we just accept that whole cloth. And your suggestion about it being rogue, that is far less plausible, as you point out.
BERMAN: So that's a completely separate issue, isn't it, because it could be an interrogation gone wrong. Whether it's a rogue interrogation gone wrong is a completely different notion. Do you believe that an interrogation like this with the type of personnel they allegedly had there -- doctors, autopsy specialists -- do you believe that that would happen. Those folks would be there if some high-placed Saudi officials, perhaps even the crown prince didn't know about it?
HAYDEN: Yes, so first of all, I'll accept what King Salman said at face value, he didn't know. And I, frankly, wouldn't expect him to know, given the dynamics of how the kingdom is governed right now, but it is very hard for me to believe that the crown prince, Mohammad bin Salman, who is a very controlling personality, would not have known this was going on.
Or put it another way, John, that I don't think anyone would have attempted this, had they not had the strong belief that the crown prince had their back.
I mean, just look at the cover story. "We are going to conduct a rendition in the capital of Turkey." That's a high-risk operation in and of itself. That's their departure point. That's the best they can come up with that that activity went -- went bad. I just don't think that happens without the crown prince being at least aware of the fact of the operation.
BERMAN: Their best story is torture gone wrong. Rogue interrogation gone wrong, General.
So that gets me to my third question. Is that exculpatory? If it did go down the way they suggested, does this mean that the Saudi crown prince and the administration there is -- you know, is clean?
HAYDEN: Well, look, as your man in Riyadh suggested, both the kingdom and the Trump administration want to get this behind us as quickly as possible with as little damage to the Saudi-American relationship as possible.
I actually think that's an unjust position because of what happened, but I also think it's an ineffective position, John, with regard to the long-term Saudi/American relationship. I've suggested recently that -- well, look, if I'm talking to
President Trump, I would simply make the point, the crown prince, a 33-year-old man in Saudi Arabia, had so little respect for you and for the United States that he actually thought he could do this, even if it hadn't gone wrong, and get away with it without any unacceptable repercussions.
That's a horrible thing for the United States to suggest to other people around the world, that -- that we really don't care about these sorts of things. And so I think the president, for his own interest, for the interest of his administration, should take a much tougher line than we're seeing from him publicly.
BERMAN: Much tougher line, I mean, he's often accused of being his own press secretary. He's being the press secretary for the Saudi regime. He's going out there and parroting the version of the story he got from King Salman. What does the rest of the world make of that?
HAYDEN: Yes. So you know, if you look upon this in context, John, if you look at the body of work of Mohammad bin Salman, this is pretty consistent with some things, other things that he's done over the past year or so. And let me be very harsh right now with regard to this administration, John.
[06:20:07] The president has personally put his energy into bettering relationships with three heads of state around the world: Putin, Kim and Mohammad bin Salman, who is effectively the head of state in Saudi Arabia.
And one thing those three individuals have in common is that their governments have been involved in murders of their citizens abroad in the last two years.
BERMAN: Let me ask you --
HAYDEN: And that's a pattern of behavior that's going to impose a cost on America globally for a long time.
BERMAN: And we talked about this yesterday as being the Trump doctrine, because when he talks about Vladimir Putin poisoning and assassinating; when he talks about the possibility of Jamal Khashoggi being killed in Turkey, one of the things that the president points out, he says, "Yes, maybe it happened, but it didn't happen here."
BERMAN: So the Trump doctrine appears to be as long as it doesn't happen here, it's OK. Does that have repercussions?
HAYDEN: Look, of course it has repercussions. And it certainly has repercussions with regard to our moral standing in the world, but, John, you know, the president talks about making America great again.
One of the aspects of American greatness has been that by and large -- and we've had our own unforced errors, I get it. But by and large, a large chunk of our greatness comes out of our instinct to be good; and we seem to be undercutting that with elements of our policy now. BERMAN: General Michael Hayden, great to have you here with us, your
expertise is always valued.
HAYDEN: Thank you, John.
BERMAN: Coming up in just minutes, Senator Marco Rubio will be here to talk about this and other things. I've got to say we have a big show today. It's like a veritable book club. Right?
CAMEROTA: I know. I know you've read all of them.
BERMAN: Doris Kearns Goodwin is going to come to talk about her book.
CAMEROTA: I can't wait to talk to her.
BERMAN: We've got Ben Sasse, Senator Sasse. Going to talk about his book, "Them."
CAMEROTA: What's the other book you've got?
BERMAN: Alisyn Camerota here to talk about "Amanda Wakes Up."
CAMEROTA: So great. Now --
BERMAN: Now available in paperback.
CAMEROTA: In paperback.
BERMAN: Now available in paperback.
CAMEROTA: My gosh, you're good. And I am still sending you the 10 percent.
BERMAN: That's fantastic.
CAMEROTA: Fantastic.
President Trump slams Senator Elizabeth Warren after she releases a DNA test on her Native American ancestry. What does this reveal about a possible 2020 showdown? We discuss it all next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[06:15:58] CAMEROTA: President Trump apparently not impressed by Elizabeth Warren's DNA test --
BERMAN: Who could see that coming?
CAMEROTA: -- showing that the senator does have Native American ancestry. The president had promised to pay $1 million to Warren's favorite charity if she could prove that connection.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you owe her an apology? What about the money that you -- DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I don't her. She owes the country an apology. What's her percentage? One-1,000th.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What about the money that you told her you would --
TRUMP: You mean if she got the nomination in a debate where I was going to have her tested? I'll only do it if I can test her personally. OK? That will not be something I enjoy doing, either.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: Let's discuss that, if possible, with CNN's senior political analyst John Avlon; national political correspondent for "The New York Times," Alex Burns; and Washington bureau chief for "The Daily Beast," Jackie Kucinich.
Alex and Jackie are also political -- CNN political analysts.
BERMAN: I haven't heard that last part. I mean, like, President Trump offering to play doctor or something?
JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: It's creepy.
CAMEROTA: Draw her body fluids.
Moving on. Here is what President Trump had said, just to remind people, when he did make that vow to pay a million dollars.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Let's say I'm debating Pocahontas, right? I promise you I'll do this, I will take -- you know those little kits they sell on television for $2. And we will say, I will give you a million dollars to your favorite charity, paid for by Trump, if you take the test and it shows you're an Indian, you know?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: OK. So maybe he did mean it was just during the debate. He's just won me over. He's just convinced me.
AVLON: He just did.
CAMEROTA: Actually, he did.
AVLON: He did convince you on the actual extraction part, too? No. Look, spoiler alert, he lied. There is no million dollars going to Elizabeth Warren.
CAMEROTA: This is all fun and games, so ha, ha, ha.
AVLON: Yes.
CAMEROTA: But the point is, I think, that she -- the point is that he was always suggesting that she somehow had exploited it for employment purposes. And "The Boston Globe" did an investigation and talked to all sorts of bosses and colleagues and found out that was not true. But is all of this a preview for what voters will be treated to during 2020?
AVLON: This is a classic example of a sort of a culture was issue that the president likes to inflame, because it actually plays really well not just with his base. Democrats have a tendency to keep digging.
But I also don't think we want to bend too far over to the side to say, hey, you know, the president has got a point. He's not speaking literally truth, but, you know, there's truth in there somewhere, people. People. The president offered a million dollars for -- if there was a connection. There is a connection. The issue is not going away, because he doesn't want it to.
BERMAN: I actually think the point is something different, which is the point that Elizabeth Warren is making, which is that she wants this fight. The fight is the point. This ridiculous back and forth over the million dollars --
CAMEROTA: And she wants it because she wants relevance now?
BERMAN: Jackie, why does she want it?
JACKIE KUCINICH, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: I think it has to do with relevance. I don't really know a lot of Democrats that want to have this conversation right now about Elizabeth's heritage, what, three weeks before the midterm elections and about her politics.
There are a lot of Democrats that are in some pretty contentious races that don't want to be talking about Elizabeth Warren being the top of their ticket right now. That is going to be problematic for people if they're asked about it. And again, in some of these more contentious races.
BERMAN: But Elizabeth Warren thinks it's good for her, Alex. Elizabeth Warren thinks being picked on and arguing with the president one-on-one over something as dumb as a million-dollar bet, even that is good for her.
ALEX BURNS, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, look, I think that this whole sort of network of issues is pretty uncomfortable for her. But what she does think is good for her, both in the short term and the long-term in a presidential campaign, is showing Democrats that she can take this kind of heat, right?
That the taunts about administering the test to her himself, that kind of, you know, insinuating, obviously, outside the bounds of normal politics, rhetoric from the president, is what the Democratic nominee is going to be subjected to, whether it's Elizabeth Warren or somebody else.
So a big part of the road to that nomination, a big part of showing the Democratic base that you actually are ready to run for president, yes, is getting into it with Trump and showing that you're still standing at the end of it, yes.
[06:20:12] KUCINICH: But does it backfire? Does it end up -- her punching back end up punching herself in the face? And that's going to be the --
CAMEROTA: But how would it do that?
KUCINICH: Because it's not going away. This isn't going away. I mean, the -- you go to a Trump rally, and you still hear, "Lock her up." When there's something that -- and it's already -- the damage is kind of done in a way. When you --
BURNS: Isn't it true -- isn't it true of kind of -- if a candidate is going to be disqualified by the president being, like, brutally negative to them, and that's going to happen, right --
KUCINICH: No, it's true, but I think how he does it. And he's making her a caricature.
AVLON: Yes, and the main point I think that Jackie was making is exactly right, is this is not a conversation that national Democrats want. They don't want the prospect of Elizabeth Warren/Donald Trump 2020 overshadowing all the candidates running in states, many of them red states --
KUCINICH: Right.
AVLON: -- where Elizabeth Warren, you know, the idea of her being at the top of the ticket doesn't help the Democrats.
KUCINICH: Right.
CAMEROTA: President Trump has amassed more than a million dollars --
BERMAN: A hundred million.
CAMEROTA: Thank you. A $100 million?
AVLON: One million dollars.
CAMEROTA: Maybe he can afford that million dollars to charity.
KUCINICH: Right.
CAMEROTA: A hundred million dollars in his war chest for 2020. The significance, Alex?
BURNS: Well, it shows, as many things this cycle have, that the alliance between the president and Republican donors, who used to feel uncomfortable about him, is as strong as it has ever been.
When you see not just his own personal campaign account but also the main super PAC supporting Republicans in the House and Senate raising the kind of astonishing sums of money that they are bringing in, a lot of that is not in spite of Trump. A lot of that at this point is because of Trump. Sheldon and Miriam Adelson are not cutting a $50 million check in
spite of President Trump. They love what he's done for the party; and that's a huge change from where we were two years ago.
KUCINICH: And I don't even think we have the totals from what happened during the Kavanaugh fight. I think those totals for both sides are going to be fascinating to see how much was kicked in during that particular battle, because you really saw particularly Republicans really unite behind the president, really unite behind his nominee and Republican candidates.
AVLON: That's right. And also, it should be said, 98 percent of this is small-dollar donations. That does speak to it's not just big donors rallying behind the president.
I will also say, as a point of comparison, in the third quarter he raised, I believe, $18 million. That's about half of what Beto O'Rourke raised in Texas. So I mean, you know, these are relative measures.
BERMAN: The really interesting thing here is that President Trump did spend some of his own money to get elected president the first time. He's going to spend exactly zero -- zero cents in this next one, which has got to make him happy. Right? He hates spending money on anything.
BURNS: Well, and to John and Jackie's point about sort of Elizabeth Warren stepping in, in the middle of a midterm campaign, which I think is dead on. Democrats don't want to be having that conversation right now.
You know, if you're talking about somebody cannibalizing small-donor money that could be going to other candidates in the midterm elections --
AVLON: Yes.
BURNS: -- that's probably something that's happening on the Republican side.
CAMEROTA: All right. Let's talk about the issue of family separation at the border. It worked so well the first time, the administration is considering a redo of it, granted in a different incarnation.
So there are still, to this day, as far as we know, as far as our reporting, is 245 children who are still separated from their parents for months who may never see their parents again; either whose parents can't be traced, for whatever -- you know, the tracking system was abhorrent. And so -- so, anyway, there's still 245. We need to keep remembering that.
Now the president is apparently considering doing it again. Here is what he told Leslie Stahl on "60 Minutes."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TRUMP: When you allow the parents to stay together, OK, when you
allow that, then what happens is people are going to pour into our country.
LESLIE STAHL, "60 MINUTES": So are you going to go back to that?
TRUMP: Well, we're looking at a lot of things.
STAHL: Can I just ask this simple question, yes or no?
TRUMP: Go ahead.
STAHL: Are you willing to reinstitute that policy? You said, "We're looking at everything." Yes or no?
TRUMP: I will -- no. You can't say "yes" or "no." What I can say is this: there are consequences from coming into a country, namely our country, illegally.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: He wasn't being transparent.
BERMAN: He could say yes or no.
AVLON: He basically did.
CAMEROTA: There is a proposal. There is an actual proposal. That Stephen Miller has already proposed, and they're already talking about --
AVLON: Yes. And he is tripling down on what has been the administration's somewhat understated reason for this, which is it's supposed to be punitive. It is supposed to de-incentivize. Jeff sessions said it early on, Kirstjen Nielsen, the president. So they're just -- that is -- this is actually a positive good. The separation is a feature not a bug in terms of deterring people to cross.
In terms of those 245, just think about this. That's 13 kindergarten classrooms of kids that are still in detention. And if the administration sees that as a victory, that is a very different vision of America than many folks have.
KUCINICH: And the ACLU has had to help with this. Let's -- let's be real here. The administration couldn't even find some of these children's parents. They had to bring in the ACLU to help them with this. They haven't been able to handle the first time this happened.
[06:25:06] The second round is going to be -- I can't imagine it will be any better. And also you have these moments -- I don't know if you guys do, as well -- where I end up screaming at the television. That was one of them. Because one of the things the president doesn't mention is that many of these people were seeking asylum. That is not illegal.
AVLON: Correct.
BERMAN: Can I also say that I think the timing of this is fascinating, Alex? Is that the president is willing to muse about something that was so controversial and such a problem for him politically over the summer. He's three weeks before the election, and now all of a sudden, he and his allies think that somehow family separations might not be so toxic?
BURNS: Well, there is this faction in the White House and the House of Representatives that is just trying so hard to make the final weeks of the election a big referendum on hardline immigration policy.
They had a hard time breaking through with that message in a big way. It's not been the defining issue of the midterm elections. And so there is this sense -- and you see it with hardliners as a sort of regular feature of American politics now, that they feel like, "If we're more outrageous, if we do something that's more offensive or controversial, maybe that will create a referendum" --
CAMEROTA: But I just want to be clear. This one is less outrageous than the first one. What they're considering now, which is called the binary choice, would give parents the choice to say whether or not the kids remain with them in detention behind bars --
KUCINICH: -- act Flores --
CAMEROTA: -- which is against the court -- 1997 law. But they would give parents the decision about whether they want their kids to stay with them after the 20 days or whether they want their kids to go to foster care. So it's a little more humane than just ripping a nursing baby from a mother's breast.
BURNS: Well, but I'm just talking as a political matter. It's reopening a fight that they had gotten over a couple months ago or maybe gotten over a couple months ago, and doing it in a way that undermined everything you said previously about how this was not the goal of your policy. It was kind of an accident; your hand was forced.
BERMAN: We've now seen the paper. We know it was a goal of their policy, because the documents have said as much.
AVLON: Family values, people.
CAMEROTA: Thank you all very much.
OK. The midterms are three weeks away, so we want to check back in with our group of independent voters, most of whom supported Donald Trump in 2016. How do they feel now?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: How do you feel today?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We've got a very crazy man driving the train, and he's going to kill this country. (END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: OK. The pulse of the people ahead.
BERMAN: But first Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is in Saudi Arabia at this moment. He's about to meet with the Saudi crown prince over the missing and presumed murdered "Washington Post" journalist. So what will the president do if the Saudis admit that they killed him? Senator Marco Rubio joins us next live.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
