Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

President Trump's Comments on Immigrant Caravan and Middle Class Tax Cut Examined; Winning Lottery Ticket Sold in South Carolina; October Surprise Rocks Florida Governor's Race. Aired 8-8:30a ET

Aired October 24, 2018 - 8:00   ET

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

[08:00:00] ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI, FORMER WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: -- lips are moving, and so all these people lie. But you should probably dial down the lying, because you don't need to. You're doing a great job for the country, so dial that down, and you will be doing a lot better.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Dial down the lies. Pretty stark, no? So what were we talking about? Among other things, the president's claim that there are unknown Middle Easterners in the group of migrants in southern Mexico. The president now tells us there's no proof of that, no proof of anything, he said. So why did he say it initially? Maybe it has something to do with his new favorite label for himself, nationalist. He likes it, and he claims he's never heard the term associated with white nationalism.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: When he said unknown, he meant himself. It was unknown to himself, actually. The president's words fueled surprise and confusion in the White House and on Capitol Hill when he promised a new tax cut before the midterms, particularly since Congress, which would have to approve it, is in recess, not in session until after the midterms. We are less than two weeks away from the election. Joining us now to talk about all this we have --

BERMAN: Marc Short, former legislative affairs, director of legislative affairs at the White House, six-ten sophomore from Virginia, also CNN senior political analyst John Avlon and Julie Hirschfeld Davis, White House reporter at "The New York Times." Marc, your former colleague, Anthony Scaramucci, your former White House staffer, just looked at the camera and said, Mr. President, dial back on the lies. Dial back on the lies. Is that advice you would also give?

MARC SHORT, FORMER WHITE HOUSE DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS: No. Look, I'm friends with Anthony, been friends for a long time. His 10 days in the White House were certainly filled with plenty of drama, and I'm not sure that's shared his perspective on this. I think that the president certainly has embellished and gotten facts wrong on occasion, but I also think the president is trying to draw a larger narrative here, John, about what the problem is at our border in saying if you want to elect Republicans who can help us secure the border, this is a picture of what's happening if we don't and what the challenges we face as a country with a border security that is out of control.

CAMEROTA: Yes. But the way you just phrased it, Marc, is quite different from how he phrased it. Hold on. He talked about criminals. He talked about Middle Easterners as though that's synonymous with terrorists somehow. And so then he admitted he has no proof of any of that. What do you call that?

SHORT: Alisyn, there is no doubt I often phrase things different than the president does. But he's very gifted at being able to turn a phrase, and he's been elected president. I haven't.

CAMEROTA: I understand that, Marc. But I'm just wondering, are you comfortable when the president makes things up to scare people?

SHORT: Alisyn, I don't think he makes things up to scare people.

CAMEROTA: Then why is he making it up?

SHORT: I think he is trying to draw attention to an issue. He uses hyperbole undoubtedly. And I'm not going to say that that is right. But I also think there is often a belief within some critics that there is a pernicious intent here that I don't think is there.

CAMEROTA: OK, but I'm just curious. Should Americans be able to trust their leaders to tell the truth?

SHORT: Absolutely.

CAMEROTA: So how do you square that circle?

SHORT: I think that we fall short. We've fallen short on several occasions. I confess to that. But I think that at the same time, I think that often there's trying to divine what the intent is here when I think the president, again, when he goes to rallies I think people look and do fact checks, and the president is often entertaining rally in part, but he's also trying to draw awareness to other issues.

CAMEROTA: I get you. This was in the Oval Office. This was in the Oval Office.

SHORT: Alisyn, I know that, too.

BERMAN: "The Apprentice" was entertaining. He's now president of the United States. I think his job is to do more than entertain.

Julie, you write something that's fascinating, which is the impact of statements like this on people like Marc Short when he worked in the White House. When the president goes out and says something like this often that has no basis in truth, there is reverse engineering, backfill to figure out how to explain it. What did you find?

JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: I don't envy those people that job because it can be very difficult. As Marc alluded to, it is different to what you're saying on a rally stage from what you are saying in the Oval Office and what you are saying on your Twitter account that has more than 50 million followers and you are the president of the United States. People look at that and expect that that's information they should be able to trust, that there is some support for the claims that the president is making, that he's not going to put something out there like that there are criminals and unknown Middle Easterners in this group of people without having data to back that up.

And so then what happens is, we all as reporters start to call people in the administration who can potentially give us whatever information underlies those claims, and they tend not to have it, and they often will refer us to other agencies or back to the White House, which usually gives us some version of, well, the president's tweets speak for themselves. But they don't speak for themselves. If they speak for themselves, they speak in a very misleading way or at least a very confusing way that it's difficult to get to the bottom of.

[08:05:00] And I think Marc makes the essential point, which is that the president is trying to stitch this broader narrative. He's not actually -- his goal is not to be taken literally here. But he is the president and the president's words have weight, and they should have weight. And so it can be pretty bewildering to try to follow the bouncing ball then and figure out what he meant. Was there any foundation to do it? Does he plan to act on it? One of the things he tweeted about was cutting off funding to Central American countries whose citizens are part of this stream of migrants that are flowing north. Does he need to do that? He said he was doing it already. The State Department has no knowledge of it.

CAMEROTA: Wouldn't that defeat the purpose, John? If your point is to keep people at home and not make the pilgrimage here to the U.S., doesn't it sort of defeat the purpose to cutoff whatever foreign aid to that home country that might help their poverty stricken conditions?

JOHN AVLON, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Only if you are thinking about consequences, Alisyn, and the responsibilities of governance beyond --

CAMEROTA: When will I learn.

AVLON: But the president clearly thinks in terms of bluster and opening bids. These are all negotiation tactics. I'm sure Marc Short would say that facts matter and words matter. But there is a little sidestep in saying not so much for this president. He's speaking to an emotional truth. That's a slippery slope from a chief executive.

What Julie's brilliant article points out is that the administration is thrown into chaos when the president makes these off the cuff statements because at the end of the day they know they don't have a plan. They aren't stats and facts. And when the vice president of the United States comes up and tries to defend the Middle Eastern comment, he's undercut by the president hours later. That's not the sign of a well-oiled machine. That is the sign of somebody who is really doing a great job of driving a narrative absent facts or the responsibilities of office.

BERMAN: I want to talk about what this means for 13 days from now, because we have these midterm elections in 13 days. And, Marc, it is interesting, because I have been speaking to Republican strategists who say to me, most people I speak to on both sides still say they believe the Democrats will take the House. There is a stench of fear among Democrats that it may not be as certain as it was a few weeks ago, but those Democrats and Republicans still think the Democrats take the House. But, Marc, Republicans were telling me, if we can keep these caravan pictures on the news for two more weeks, we have a chance.

SHORT: John, I think the reality is that the dynamics for this midterm cycle with 40 some Republican retirements, I think Americans like divided government, that that is where I think we're headed in 13 days, and more than likely the Democrats do take the House. But I think the president is helping to drive a narrative that is helping to energize the Republican base. And it started with the Kavanaugh hearings. It's continuing with the issue of immigration. But it is also a very serious issue. In 2000 when we last had a situation like this, over 98 percent of those immigrants were coming from Mexico looking for jobs --

BERMAN: Hey, Marc, I just have to do this because you brought up the word 2000 and the alarm bell went off in my head. The difference between 2000 and 2018 when we're talking about a situation like this, is in 2000 it was 1.6 million arrests at the southern border. And now we are near the historical low at about 386,000. So there is the difference. Sorry. Go on.

SHORT: There is also a difference that over more than half the individuals now coming are family units from Central America because the laws in our country say if you are other than Mexican you are required to be allowed, more or less, amnesty in the United States and to be let go with a future court date. And so there are real problem with our immigration laws that need to be address. And this is a winning issue for Republicans and Americans want that.

CAMEROTA: Which law is that that you are quoting? Which law is it that says that you should be let go?

SHORT: In 2008 it was a well-intentioned law that was designed to try to prevent human trafficking. And it said that if you come in as a family unit, we are going to separate the children from parents. But within 20 days if they have not been adjudicated, they have to be provided with basically a guardian or someone else in the United States. And the court process is it takes far more than 20 days. And so the numbers show that over 90 percent of those families that come in actually end up staying in the United States.

CAMEROTA: After they go through the process. They're not just moved into the interior. We have the numbers. They go through a court process.

SHORT: That's right, Alisyn, but they are not in confinement. They are put with other families, in many cases because it is years of process. These others end up getting married or for other reasons staying in the United States. And some may say that's what we want, that's the policy we want. But we should have an honest debate about that. BERMAN: So Julie, again, the debate about immigration is where

Republicans want to play, have the midterm elections, the playing field that they want for the next 13 days. Whether they succeed or not at that we will see as the days go on.

Your colleagues at "The New York Times" when we talk about the midterms, Maggie Haberman and John Martin wrote a great article about the no-go zone, where the president can and can't go and where he is and isn't campaigning in the last -- it is really interesting to see. I mean, every president in an off-year election has an issue like this. President Obama did, George W. Bush did. President Trump, to me, at least, seems to relish the campaigning more. And he's going to be out on the trail a lot the next few days, albeit in spots that are strategically selected.

[08:10:10] DAVIS: No question. And I think it is harder for his staff to tell this president that he's not wanted to or he can't go to a certain place. That falls on much less receptive ears in this White House. I think Barack Obama understood that he was persona non grata in some districts in states where Democrats were fighting for their political lives instead of George W. Bush. And Donald Trump tends to think that he is a net positive regardless.

But they are sending him out, and he wants to be out a lot. But what's so interesting about that chart you just showed on the immigration numbers is that over that period of time this president and Republicans who have followed his lead have really elevated the importance of the issue of immigration in the minds of voters. If you ask voters, basically back in the 2010s whether -- what their top line issue was, immigration wouldn't have been near the top of the list. Now if you ask at least Republican voters, it is almost always either at or near the top of the list. And that is something that the president has really stoked because he knows that it works.

And as a closing argument here in terms of the fear and the anger that it can provoke among voters that they need to turn out, the Republicans do, if they to keep the Senate, if they want to have a prayer at keeping the House, they know that it works, and so that's why they're following his lead on that.

AVLON: And so let's square the circle here. This issue works, immigration works, even if it is demonstrably less of a problem in terms of border crossings, than it was at the beginning of the century. It is because immigration and anxiety about illegal immigration and undocumented workers creates economic anxiety for people and it also creates questions about American identity, particularly for white workers who may be part of Trump's base that feel those changes are demographically and economically threatening.

So there we get to the new nationalism strategy, the president coming out as a national and really embracing that term, despite all the loaded history. Remember, this is after, of course, America first was embraced itself with all the anti-Semitic connotations and the decision by the folks who spread it under that banner to not want to intervene in the Second World Ward. So we're kind of all in here, people. And he wants this image, rather

than, for example, the family separations, which Marc just pointed out, is a logical extension of the policy being put in place, but more morally and politically complicated.

INGRAHAM: And, Marc, you know what else works for people? More money and saying you are going to lower their taxes. That's another crowd pleaser. And, so, the president said this week, oh, and I'm going to give the middle class a 10 percent tax cut. I don't know if your hair would have caught on fire.

SHORT: I don't have any left.

INGRAHAM: I think I've proven my point.

BERMAN: See what happens in the White House?

INGRAHAM: My point, you were the legislative director who then had to spring into action. That's also made up out of whole cloth. Congress didn't know anything about it. Congress is on recess. Congress would have to approve that. But the president is just putting that out there because that is like Christmas in October. And I'm just wondering, Marc, where he gets the audacity to say that. And when the president speaks, Marc, help us understand, what part should we take seriously and what part should we ignore?

SHORT: Alisyn, I think the president raising taxes is trying in essence to remind Americans that it was the Republican Party that delivered the tax relief they have on a strictly partisan vote without one Democrat crossing over. It's his way to go back to remind them.

CAMEROTA: Got it. So it is a hollow promise?

SHORT: I don't think it is something that's going to happen obviously right now, and I don't think it's honestly something that's going to happen in the next Congress either. I think that our best efforts at tax reform have already happened.

CAMEROTA: Yes. So it is not true?

SHORT: Does it mean that he doesn't want to push for that? Does it mean he doesn't want to work with Kevin Brady? Of course he does.

CAMEROTA: I want to win the mega millions, but I didn't.

SHORT: He also thinks that it is the right policy that should be pushed for Republicans. I'm trying to be honest with you as well about what I think the political landscape is, but that doesn't mean that you should campaign on to say hey, guys, if you elect us we can do this, too.

CAMEROTA: Generally a promise is something that you can keep, that you intend to keep.

BERMAN: It is interesting. I think the issue there is he was claiming as if it had been discussed, as if it has been a plan in the works, when there's really no evidence of that. Now he can say he wants it. We'll see how he plays it. John Avlon, Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Marc Short, thank you very much for being with us.

We do have breaking news.

CAMEROTA: Let me hear it.

BERMAN: One winning ticket sold somewhere in South Carolina. The mega millions jackpot of more than $1.5 billion. CNN's Dianne Gallagher live in South Carolina with the latest. What have you learned?

DIANNE GALLAGHER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: John, yes. Still waiting to find out exactly where in South Carolina. I'll tell you the person with that winning ticket, that $1.537 billion ticket, probably still trying to pick their jaw up off the floor and hopefully contact an attorney. So, look, that's $1.537 billion. After Uncle Sam and the state of South Carolina takes their cut, you are looking at probably somewhere between $400 million $500 million range to take home.

[08:15:00] That's not too shabby.

What's even better? The fact that they won it in South Carolina means that we may likely never know who the winner of the second largest jackpot in history is and that's because South Carolina is one of six states that allows these winners to remain anonymous. Also, officials may not know for quite some time because they have 180 days to come forward to claim their prize.

So, they could wait roughly six months to decide when they want to make their move after their get their affairs in order preparing for this. This is a life-changing event. The good news for all of us is, if you want to win the lottery, hey, guys, there is a $620 million Powerball jackpot tonight, so we have another chance out there, right?

CAMEROTA: Fantastic, because I never learn when it comes to the lottery.

Thank you very much, Dianne.

All right. Just 13 days from Election Day and an October surprise rocks or at least comes up in the governor's race. We'll tell you all about it, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:20:20] CAMEROTA: All right. If you are counting, we're just 13 days away from the midterm election. And an October surprise popped up in the race for Florida governor.

Democratic nominee Andrew Gillum is defending against claims that he improperly accepted a ticket to see "Hamilton" in 2016. As you may know, those are priceless, basically. Gillum saw the show with his brother, a close friend named Adam Corey, and unbeknownst to him, an undercover FBI agent posing as an Atlanta businessman named Mike Miller. Gillum says his brother gave him the ticket, which is legal. But

newly released text messages show that his friend Corey told him Mike Miller, the undercover agent, and the crew had tickets. Gillum responded, quote, awesome news.

Gillum's campaign says Gillum's brother was part of the crew cited in that text.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDREW GILLUM (D), FLORIDA GOVERNOR NOMINEE: I always knew that if we were able to connect in New York we would go and see "Hamilton". When I got to the theater, my brother handed me the ticket. The idea that I accepted a gift never came to me.

I never frankly feared for people coming into MySpace because I never assumed people to have negative or ill intentions towards me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: All right. Let's discuss this and so much more with CNN political commentator Ana Navarro, and CNN contributor and "New York Times" op-ed columnist Frank Bruni.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Ana is Florida royalty. I will note that Ana is Florida royalty.

CAMEROTA: Oh, I call her Queen Navarro.

BERMAN: OK.

CAMEROTA: OK. So because of that, we defer to royalty. Ana, how big of a problem is this?

ANA NAVARRO, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: You know, I was thinking about it last night, and I talked to myself, OK, so we elected Rick Scott governor, and he was involved, he was the CEO of a company that was involved in Medicare fraud that resulted in $1.7 billion in fraud.

We elected Marco Rubio senator, and his lifelong best friend at that moment was involved in an investigation and Marco was accused of a sweetheart mortgage deal that he had gotten from a donor. So, I think in Florida we have a high tolerance for this kind of stuff. And, you know, the "Hamilton" tickets kind of pale in comparison.

I do think Andrew Gillum's explanations are a little convoluted. Even though, if you have ever been to "Hamilton", if you've ever been to -- impossible to get into Broadway play, look, I've got to tell you, I was at Springsteen a few weeks ago. A friend of mine got me access to the tickets, and then I paid for the tickets.

I went to "Hamilton". A friend of mine got me access to the tickets and then I paid for the tickets and I went to "Hamilton". I don't know what Andrew's story is. This seems like a fairly small thing and he needs to get his story straight and he needs to get it out quick.

BERMAN: The FBI is on line B for you, Ana, right now on those tickets.

Frank, it is interesting. It is something that Alisyn has brought up repeatedly.

NAVARRO: I wish I knew that FBI agent. He seems to have good connections.

BERMAN: Exactly. Could he get me to see the dead?

Frank, in a way, is one of the by-products of the Trump era that maybe, and we don't really know yet, that voters will become inoculated to certain types of scandals. Obviously, Roy Moore is one thing.

CAMEROTA: But Scott Pruitt is another.

BERMAN: Scott Pruitt is another.

CAMEROTA: And that lasted for a long time.

FRANK BRUNI, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: I think Trump has worsened the situation, but I think, in all fairness, this predates Donald Trump.

And, you know, Ana said correctly that Floridians have a high tolerance for this sort of thing, I don't think it's confined to Florida. I think most American voters assume that politicians are not totally clean.

I mean, they assume they hang out with some people whom they take favors from and that sort of thing. And in the context of that, honestly, I don't think a single "Hamilton" ticket is going to ruin Andrew Gillum's campaign. I also think this new information does not resolve and solve everything.

I mean, he's correct. That text is ambiguous. You can say that does not prove the ticket is from the FBI agent or from the guy trying to buy influence. The reference to the crew gives Andrew Gillum enough wiggle room to say what he's saying.

I think a lot of lot of this is just voice to voters because as I said, I don't think they expect politicians, sadly, to be completely above board and completely clean, and the "Hamilton" is not --

CAMEROTA: But I also want to just a line in the sand here. Is this the moment where we decide that everything we heard about the claims of corruption on Donald Trump's side, the violations of the emoluments clause, taking Saudi money, the Trump family tax scheme that "The New York Times" laid out in exhaustive, detail, has that upped our tolerance so that when we hear about one "Hamilton" ticket, it is such small potatoes, or are only Democrats held to a standard of no corruption anymore?

[08:25:05] NAVARRO: You know, frankly, only Democrats are stupid enough to apologize for it and try to make excuses and justify it and explain it, instead of shrugging our shoulders and saying, so what? And the Trump thing is particularly relevant in this case, I think, in

this race because Ron DeSantis owes his primary win, he owes his, you know, being the nominee, the Republican nominee strictly to Donald Trump. He embraced Donald Trump. He modeled himself after Donald Trump.

He was just asked in that debate by Jake Tapper on Sunday if Donald Trump was a good role model for his children and somehow he started answering about Israel. So I do think that Andrew Gillum, who's got a debate tonight should throw Donald Trump in Ron DeSantis' face and say, look, you are coming after me when you are a mini me of a president whose campaign is under investigation, who has led to five indictments or guilty pleas, who is violating the emoluments clause constantly, and you guys are obstructing all these investigations.

So, you know, in the same way that Ron DeSantis answered with Israel when he got answered about Donald Trump and moral fitness, I think Andrew Gillum should answer with Trump when he gets asked about "Hamilton". Either that or break into song.

BERMAN: We should note, the debate is tonight. They have a lot of fodder for that debate tonight.

Frank, I want to change subjects, if I can, I'm an avid reader.

NAVARRO: They were very good debating, both of them, I thought.

BERMAN: It was absolutely riveting, and I'm expecting tonight to be just as entertaining, except Jake won't be moderating.

Frank, avid reader of your column. You're very scared. You've been very frightened or at least you are noting how scary all of a sudden things sound.

BRUNI: I mean, I just -- we have seen ugly campaigns before. We have seen people try to sow fear, but I feel like what Donald Trump and many Republicans who are modeling themselves after him are doing goes a little bit beyond that. I mean, they are talking -- leave Trump out of it.

Look at the ads that Republicans are running. They are calling Democrats sympathetic to terrorists. They are calling them traitors. I mean, there is a distance being traveled from the truth here and deep into the gutter that I think goes beyond what we have seen in previous campaigns.

BERMAN: What does it tell you?

BRUNI: Well, I think -- I mean, this is -- you ask about the Trump effect and you ask if our standards are changing or people are feeling encouraged, discouraged in different ways. I think when you have someone in the Oval Office who feels no tether timer whatsoever to the truth and who has committed to a strategy of making you afraid that unless he's there to protect, your country is going to ruin, I think it just kind of pulls out the stops. And people I interviewed in that column say the same thing. They say

if you are a politician, especially in the Republican Party, and you are watching Donald Trump, you feel like he's told all these whoppers and I'm not sure I see him pay a price for it, maybe that's the strategy. Maybe that's the way to go.

And so, this is absolutely I think a lowering of our standards and our standards weren't that high to begin with.

CAMEROTA: Ana, we just had Marc Short on who was in the White House working for Donald Trump who was basically just saying, you know, the president is just trying to make a larger point when he says that he has no proof of the outlandish, scary claims that he's made. You know, he's just trying to talk about immigration.

I mean, what they're willing to excuse. The president admitted, I thought it was remarkable, that he had no proof of his claims that there were scary elements in the caravan. He rarely admits that, but he did admit it.

And so, now, we as voters and viewers have to figure out what do we do with that admission?

NAVARRO: Well, frankly, I think you're better off just assuming everything that comes out of his mouth is a lie and then picking and choosing what is a -- what is a truth.

And, you know, the really kind of obnoxious part about what Donald Trump says and does in addition to the fact that he's cheapened the bully pulpit of the presidency is that he throws all these people that work around him and enable him under the bus. I mean, you know, now, Donald Trump is saying, yeah, I have no proof. There is no evidence.

But, you know what? We just saw the vice president the day before say there is absolutely no doubt that there are people of Middle Eastern decent in that caravan. So all the people around him that are there to parrot him, to justify him, to explain him, to bolster him, to enable him, they end up looking like fools and with eggs on their face because Donald Trump can change on a dime, but they're left carrying the lie on their back.

BERMAN: There are people pointing to this event that happened on an airplane as a moment you can see the president had cultural impact. I'm not sure whether that's fair or not. But what happened was a Florida man was accused of roping a passenger on a Southwest Airlines flight. Told an FBI agent after the arrest that, quote, the president of the United States says it's okay to grab women by their private parts.

That's according to the criminal complaint there. Frank, you know, we talk, again, you know, the president uses coarse language, or kids using coarse language, et cetera, et cetera. Is there a tie here?