Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Senate to Vote on Dueling Bills to End Shutdown; Cohen Postpones Testimony Citing 'Threats Against His Family'; Interview with Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ). Aired 7-7:30a ET

Aired January 24, 2019 - 07:00   ET

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


JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: I look forward to giving a great State of the Union address in the near future.

[07:00:05] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: CNN has learned the White House was caught off-guard when Speaker Pelosi called the president's bluff. Sources tell us the president is increasingly mystified that his tactics have not turned the tables on Democrats.

So today the Senate takes up two dueling measures that could end the shutdown, though neither is expected to pass. Eight hundred thousand federal workers will miss another paycheck tomorrow as the longest shut-down in history hits day 34.

So joining us now to discuss all of this, we have Jeffrey Toobin, our CNN chief legal analyst; Dana Bash, CNN chief political correspondent; and Frank Bruni, "New York Times" op-ed columnist. Guys, great to have you all here in studio.

Dana, I was so struck by the president's tweet. This tone is so different. We know that sometimes he has a ghostwriter for some tweets. Maybe this is one of them. The tone was so respectful, it was, dare I say, presidential. I mean, I just want to read a little portion of it again, because this is what --

BERMAN: You didn't think I did it justice?

CAMEROTA: Well, I feel that it bears repeating.

BERMAN: OK.

CAMEROTA: I feel it is so important it bears repeating.

BERMAN: I gave it a lot of emotion.

CAMEROTA: Well, that was well done. I mean, very well done. But what he says about Nancy Pelosi, this is her prerogative, OK? That's her prerogative to disinvite him, and then he says, "I'm not looking for an alternative venue, because there's no venue that can compete with the history and tradition." In other words, he's talking about the hallowed halls of the House chamber. He's not calling Nancy a derogatory nickname.

DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: No. CAMEROTA: What's going on here?

BASH: You know, boy, you're asking me to read into his mind, and I'm -- and I'm obviously trying to do more, which is get source reporting on what happened, which we don't know exactly yet.

But going into last night, we were told a couple things. No. 1, that as you said, he was caught off-guard by Pelosi calling his bluff. And No. 2, he was -- he was planning a potential alternative site. They were actively looking. The advance teams in the White House were out there looking to see what are the things he could do. And he might still do that but just not call it State of the Union, by the way.

And No. 3, he's being urged by his conservative flank to say, "Forget about these guys. Just find the money. Do it by executive action," maybe not emergency -- an emergency declaration, but another executive action, and start to put money in the pot for the wall and open the shutdown. I mean, open the government and the shutdown.

So it could be a combination of all of those things, but I completely agree with you. This is something that looks like part of a strategy, not part of a gut reaction.

TOOBIN: Well, but wait. We all have read enough Donald Trump tweets to know the difference between the ones he writes and the ones the staff writes.

BASH: That's what I mean.

TOOBIN: But that was a stat --

BASH: That's what I mean is that usually, when it's his gut reaction, you know he wrote it. This -- this looks something, to your point, that the staff wrote, which is to what end? That's the question.

TOOBIN: But to know what Trump really thinks, I think we have to wait --

CAMEROTA: Until he wakes up.

TOOBIN: -- until he starts talking and he starts tweeting.

CAMEROTA: We -- we agree. We're monitoring this this morning to see if he doesn't like the reaction to this. But still, don't you think it's striking the tone of this tweet?

TOOBIN: A little bit. But, I mean, what I'd like to hear is a tweet in his voice in the conciliatory way. That would make a difference. This, I think, I'm just -- I'll --

CAMEROTA: You're reserving judgment.

TOOBIN: Reserving judgment.

BERMAN: I've got to say, the tone to me isn't the biggest change. What the biggest change is, is the actual substance. And the position. Because they were searching for alternative sites. They were threatening to walk up there and bang on the walls of that House and give the speech in the Senate or something.

FRANK BRUNI, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: But John, I think what happened overnight, and there's some words in that tweet that you read beautifully, and then you read even more beautifully.

CAMEROTA: Thank you. Well done.

BRUNI: But that phrase about there is no other -- there's no venue as whatever, I think that's the key thing here. I think they were talking, as Dana said, about alternative venues.

And I think someone had the wisdom and maturity to realize that, if the president is giving something he's calling the State of the Union from anywhere but the House chamber, he looks like a president in exile. He looks diminished. Whatever sort of stagecraft they bring to it, you can't get away from the fact that he is the first president who, by disinvitation, is not giving his State of the Union by that fact in the House chamber. And that makes him look small. And I think he and his people realized that.

BERMAN: Can there be one other possibility for why they backed down? Because they thought they were losing this battle. And the poll number suggests that, overall, it is not going the way that the White House wants to go. CNN collects all the approval ratings and does a poll of polls; and president is at 37 percent approval. Thirty-seven percent approval, 57 percent disapproval. That is a staggering number.

BASH: It is. And that is a big reason why Democrats are feeling very empowered to stick to -- to their guns on this.

Having said that, the thing that we really need to watch is what happens after we have this pair of Senate votes today? Because from my experience on the Hill covering a few of these things, maybe not to this extent, but a few of them, you have the show votes you call them, because you know that they're not going pass to reopen the government. You know, the Republicans have theirs, a proposal. Democrats have theirs. They fail, and then you roll up your sleeves, and you get things done.

And some in the Democratic leadership -- Bennie Thompson and Jim Clyburn -- who I know you're going to have on-- have talked about the potential for Democrats offering something, a package with more money. Maybe not for the wall, but more money for other things that the president likes. That could begin to break the impasse.

CAMEROTA: I think that that's a good point. Because back to tone, maybe this -- there is a cooling. Maybe there's a cooling. Maybe there -- maybe Democrats will be more in the mood to offer something conciliatory towards the president because of all of this. I mean, I don't know. You're laughing at me.

BRUNI: I'm laughing --

CAMEROTA: At my Pollyannaish take on all this?

BRUNI: I'm stepping back and I'm laughing at the fact that we wonder why voters hate Washington. They're going to take two votes today that they know will fail. But it's not legislation a solution.

CAMEROTA: Not a chance.

BRUNI: The legislation is laxative, right? That's exactly what it is. And we wonder why voters, like, kind of turn their -- just roll their eyes at him and throw up their hands.

TOOBIN: Voters -- voters? How about if you're out of -- I mean, you're a TSA employee and not -- and not getting paid. And you see, you know, this back and forth over the State of the Union. and you see all this posturing. And you think what good is this to me?

I mean, there -- you know, we're all talking about potential movement here. There's been no real movement. And we're now over a month.

CAMEROTA: I mean sort of.

TOOBIN: A month.

CAMEROTA: The president has backed off a cement wall. Democrats are coughing up more money. These are glacial movements, I will grant you. And certainly, for the 800,000 workers, it's not happening soon enough. They're going to miss another paycheck tomorrow. But, maybe something's happening.

TOOBIN: Well, no. I mean, you know, we have to cover the news, and the news is there is this tiny movement.

But, you know, for supposedly the world's greatest democracy, to have much of its government closed for over a month and, you know, we're deciding whether Donald Trump gives a speech in the Capitol or in the Michigan state capital, which is apparently under consideration, I mean, it is pretty bizarre.

BERMAN: And these government workers are now screaming. I mean, they are begging to be heard about the fact that they're not getting paid. They are begging to be heard about what the impact is on the security of the country. We heard from the FBI Agents Association yesterday saying investigations are not going on.

CAMEROTA: Terrorism investigations, investigations into MS-13, investigations into interdicting heroin, all of the stated reasons --

BASH: Yes.

CAMEROTA: -- for why we would need a border wall are being hurt by this.

BASH: They canceled a whole border security conference aimed at getting information from people who do this around the world, led by the State Department, because they didn't have the money do it.

BERMAN: And the FAA, air-traffic controllers are saying, "We cannot calculate the level of risk at play."

I fly sometimes. I find that a little bit frightening.

CAMEROTA: I do, too. Particularly that warning from the FAA, all the equipment that's not being kept up.

BRUNI: No, I've gotten e-mails from readers, saying that they're canceling flights; they're not flying. And that's just one piece of an economic ripple effect here.

I mean, this is a real threat to the economy. And I think that is, in short order, going to get Trump's attention. Because I'm not sure how much he cares about the 800,000 workers. I wish I could say he was losing sleep over that. He will lose sleep if his beloved economy that is the thing he crows about most tanks any further.

BERMAN: I will say, and Kevin asked, from the White House economic team, and told Poppy Harlow yesterday there could be zero percent growth. Zero percent growth.

BASH: That was huge. That struck me also, and it probably struck him, because if he's saying that to us publicly, you can imagine what he's saying privately. Or maybe he said it publicly so that he reached the president, because he watches television.

CAMEROTA: So let's talk about Michael Cohen. So yesterday, Michael Cohen announced that he would not be voluntarily testifying in front of Congress as he was scheduled to do on February 7.

Certainly, reporters were looking forward to that. Certainly, Democrats were looking forward to that, because there were many unanswered questions that have come to light since admitting that he lied to Congress.

But now he says that he's not going to do it, because he says the president and Rudy Giuliani have been threatening him. And there's a whole litany of things that the president and Rudy Giuliani have said on air about "You really should be looking at his father-in-law. Maybe you should look at his wife," all of that stuff. Is that officially witness tampering?

TOOBIN: It's awfully close if it's not an actual crime.

You know, what makes it, in a way, worse than most witness tampering cases that are brought is that, when a witness is threatened in normal circumstances, you can -- you can get that person in the witness protection program. You can get that person protection.

Here, the person making the threat is the person in charge of the witness protection program and the Justice Department and the FBI. I mean, it does seem to me classic witness tampering. And, you know, we'll see what Mueller does with it in his report.

And it worked. It succeeded in getting his testimony stopped, for at least a short-term. Now, he may be subpoenaed. He may testify again. But, you know, again, we are in a realm where the norms of presidential behavior are so transformed. The idea that a president would be making dark utterances, with no evidence, about the family members of someone who is testifying against him is just beyond anything we've ever seen before.

BERMAN: Let's play it so people see it. There's no ambiguity in what's going on here.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: His father-in-law, I thought, was the guy that was the primary focus. Did he keep -- make a deal to keep his wife out of trouble?

(via phone): He should give information, maybe, on his father-in-law, because that's the one that people want to look at.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: So it's OK to go after the father-in-law?

RUDY GIULIANI, LAWYER FOR DONALD TRUMP: Now -- of course it is. If the father-in-law if a criminal. He may have ties to something called organized crime.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: So, Dana, what's our reporting here? Is Michael Cohen scared for his family? Is Michael Cohen scared about being questioned under oath? What's Michael Cohen scared of?

BASH: Well, apparently both, a combination of those things. We were on Anderson Cooper last night, and Gerry Connolly, who's a member of the Oversight Committee, a Democrat, said that their understanding inside the committee was that it's -- it's security, it's physical safety for himself, for his family. But it's also concerned about the threats to his family legally and to his in-law in particular.

I actually -- I totally agree with everything you said. It's unbelievable that we're talking about the president of the United States and his lawyer, who Rudy Giuliani went a lot further with Jake on Sunday in threatening Michael Cohen.

Having said that, the fact that Cohen decided to pull out and shine a light on that which, because of so much news and there's so much noise, you know, there wasn't, maybe, as much focus on those threats. Now there's a focus on those threats, which I think is really noteworthy.

CAMEROTA: And now Democrats have to decide if they're going to subpoena Michael Cohen. So are they going to subpoena him if they believe what he's saying and put his family further at risk, because they want the information? And so that's -- it sounds like some, like, Adam Schiff are moving towards doing that.

BRUNI: I don't think they will subpoena him if they really think it puts him at risk.

But I mean, we can't say enough what you two have just said so well, which is look at how the president of the United States is behaving here. He's issuing not-so-veiled threats through Twitter to this person; and it's interesting that Rudy Giuliani uses the phrase "organized crime," because that's what comes to mind when you read our president's tweets, when you hear him saying what about his father-in- law?

It's like some "Godfather" movie where the person says, "I hope your family's sleeping safely tonight." This is the president doing this, and we sometimes lose track of just how crazy his behavior is, because it's daily.

BERMAN: Well, it literally is like a "Godfather" movie. I won't play it again, but it's like in "Godfather 2" when they brought Frankie Pentangeli's brother to the Senate hearing to scare Frankie away from testifying.

Rudy Giuliani has seen that movie, and I think that's the playbook going here.

BRUNI: Your recall of it is so specific.

BERMAN: I know. Ali Hedges, who sits back there. My producer brought up a point this morning that, if something like this had leaked, if there had been a blind quote somewhere or an e-mail somewhere saying, "Hey, the president and his lawyer are threatening Michael Cohen," it would be a giant frontpage story.

BASH: It's so --

BERMAN: But it's now playing out in public.

BASH: In plain sight. In plain sight. It's so transparent. There's absolutely nothing secretive of it.

And I -- that's why -- kind of what I meant when I said by pulling out of the hearing he really is making it a front-page story in a way that, by pulling out of the hearing, he really is making it a frontpage story in a way that, surprisingly, given the fact that it was in plain sight, wasn't.

CAMEROTA: Dana, Jeffrey, Frank, thank you very much.

BERMAN: And Frankie Pentangeli.

So what will it take to end this shutdown? A Democratic member of Congress who has met with the president joins us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:17:39] BERMAN: A group of 30 Democrats sent a letter yesterday to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, calling on her to give the president a vote on his border security funding requests if he reopens the government.

Joining me now is Democratic Congressman Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey. He signed that letter to the speaker. He is also the cochair to the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus and did meet with President Trump last week at the White House.

Congressman, very quickly on the State of the Union, the president says he will not give it Tuesday, not in the House, not anywhere. Is there a winner here in the battle between the president and the speaker on that matter?

REP. JOSH GOTTHEIMER (D), NEW JERSEY: Well, I think there's a clear recognition that we've got to get the government back open before you give a speech on the State of the Union.

And if he would actually have to give a speech on the state of the union now, we'd hear that actually, because of this shutdown, the state of the union is hurting.

But we know from yesterday, I think the president's head of his economic advisers, said that if this shutdown continues, we're going to have zero economic growth this quarter. Right? So it's affecting our economy. It's affecting jobs. It's affecting safety.

So I think we all should be focusing on how do we get this government back -- get our government back open, and then we can talk about other issues facing the country.

BERMAN: So you signed this letter that I have right here. Thirty Democrats to Nancy Pelosi, saying promise the president that, if we reopen government, you'll get a vote on border security.

Isn't that basically a proposal, the same type of proposal that Lindsey Graham floated that the president himself said he would not accept?

GOTTHEIMER: I think it's actually -- I think it's similar to what Lindsey said, but it's actually what we've been saying over here, which is open the government first, right? Because you can't negotiate about anything while the government's closed while it's affecting our safety, and security, and our economy.

Then after we reopen the government, let's get together at the table and talk about border security which, obviously, is essential, but also immigration reform and what we can do to fix our immigration situation, right?

But you've got to come to the table. We've got to get the government open. And what I've been saying now for weeks and so many of us have been saying, is we've got to actually talk to each other.

But you can't talk while the government's shut down, because there's no way you're going to have a productive conversation; and it's not how our government should operate.

BERMAN: So again, I think the gist of that letter is something the president has already rejected. He says he will not reopen government without promise for actual money for a border wall.

As you know -- as you know well, the bar moves every single day, right? So it's hard to actually know what's -- what would be accepted from the administration on this.

I'm hoping what ultimately is accepted is we're going to reopen the government. And then let's have this serious conversation about how to make sure our borders are tough and secure, right, to keep out terrorists and gang members and all the things we need to do to make sure our borders are secure but also actually address immigration reform.

BERMAN: You're being generous by saying the position changes every day. Sometimes it changes multiple times in one day.

GOTTHEIMER: Yes good.

BERMAN: But my question to you is would you promise the president some border barrier funding if he reopened the government, not just a vote on it? Would you promise him, "You know what? I will vote for new barrier funding if you reopen government?

GOTTHEIMER: Well, I think there are a lot of options on the table for what tough borders are, and there's a lot of technology and the -- what the -- we've met with a lot of experts, what they believe is actually what's needed to keep our borders tough.

So I'm also not going to say what I'd agree to until we actually have that conversation, because let's make -- let's see what it looks like. And I think it's got to include all options and include an -- and address all options and include immigration fixes. Right?

So what my position is, is let's actually come to the table. That's why I went to the White House last week to talk, because I think the only way that you get a way forward is talking. In life, and in business.

BERMAN: But you're not willing to promise any new barrier funding if the president agrees to reopen the government?

GOTTHEIMER: What I'm willing to commit to is to have the actual debate and conversation that we're supposed to have as lawmakers about what the right security is, to make sure we spend every nickel smartly for the American people, and to make sure it does its job.

And again, I think experts, we have a lot of experts who have met with us, who told us this is actually what will keep our borders tough and secure. And, to me, that should be the answer.

BERMAN: What's the Democratic plan for border security?

GOTTHEIMER: Well, we've -- a lot of us have been meeting, and there's a lot -- just last year, we passed, actually, a plan that we tried to get to the House floor but our caucus got behind that said, we need to have tough borders. We need to address immigration reform. We need to make sure that our DREAMers are able to stay here and have a path forward.

To me, they're -- and we've been having lots of conversations about what that would look like and will look like once we get the government reopened. You know, there's no actual one magic bullet. I think the whole answer here is, we've got to find what's going to work for both sides.

And as you know, I think you know you have to have that bipartisan consideration, but you can't do it in these circumstances.

BERMAN: Let me look at the reverse of what we've been talking about. You won't commit to voting for new money for a border barrier. Will you promise now to some progressives who never wanted it that you would never vote for new money for a border barrier?

GOTTHEIMER: I would say that I will -- it would -- that's a lot of "nots" there.

BERMAN: I know.

GOTTHEIMER: I'm sorry. I'll tell you what I'm for.

BERMAN: Have you closed the door on new money for a border barrier?

GOTTHEIMER: I will not close the door to more resources for tougher border security. Right? And again, I think there's a lot of options on the table of what that can mean.

BERMAN: I hear you. If you are dancing around, you are dancing around the barrier.

GOTTHEIMER: Well, because I'm not -- well, because I don't believe you should negotiate any of this on television. I think you talk about this sitting with experts, with people who tell you here's actually what we need.

Here is -- so, you know, I met with experts to talk about a force, more drones and more sensors, cost-effective ways to do it. If there are places where we need other -- other options, other physical options that, if the experts come back and say that, obviously, we'll consider that.

But the point is, every option has to be on the table, but you don't negotiate when the government's shutdown. And you don't do this deal when the government's shut down. You reopen it, and then you have that conversation.

And you see that a lot of my colleagues are saying the same thing. Let's sit down and talk. And I say that to all leaders, like, please come to the table so we can actually move forward here.

BERMAN: Two final questions. One, do you think Nancy Pelosi is willing to sit down and talk? Has she talked as much as you would like?

GOTTHEIMER: She's -- I've talked to her about it. She's certainly willing to come to the table.

BERMAN: OK. Second question, Michael Cohen has said he does not want to come to testify before Congress on February 7 at this point, because he fears for his family.

Now, this is not your committee. It's not your immediate business. But you are in the House. Do you feel that the Democrats on the Oversight Committee or other committees should issue a subpoena to compel him to testify?

GOTTHEIMER: I think we have an oversight responsibility, and we have to make sure that people actually show up. So if the committee subpoenas him, he should show up. And obviously, we want to make sure that we get the answers that we need to understand what's going on here, and there's a lot of questions.

BERMAN: Congressman Josh Gottheimer of the state of New Jersey, thanks so much for being with us.

GOTTHEIMER: Good to see you. The great state of New Jersey.

BERMAN: I just say New Jersey. I just say New Jersey. The amazing thing is Alisyn let me weasel into a discussion with anyone from New Jersey, because she demands a complete monopoly.

CAMEROTA: I mean, generally, yes, but you know, we have a Jersey -- you're sort of an honorary Jersey guy.

BERMAN: I don't want that. I don't want that honor.

GOTTHEIMER: You do want that. It's a great thing.

CAMEROTA: He does want it. He doesn't know he wants it.

BERMAN: Thank you, Congressman.

GOTTHEIMER: Good to see you.

CAMEROTA: You, too.

Who is the person who may be the biggest winner of the Trump presidency? It's not who you might expect, John Berman. John "Jersey" Berman.

BERMAN: What?

CAMEROTA: The author of a new profile on the biggest winner talks about us next.

BERMAN: Talk about unwanted accolades.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:28:46] CAMEROTA: "Mitch McConnell Got Everything He Wanted, But At What Cost?" That is the title of a new in-depth profile of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell that will come out in "The New York Times" magazine this weekend. It is based on hours of interviews with Mitch McConnell, and it contains new details about the leader's relationship with President Trump.

Joining us now to discuss it is the writer of the piece, Charles Homan. He's the politics editor for "New York Times Magazine."

Charlie, great to have you here. Is it fair to say, since Mitch McConnell got everything he's ever wanted, that he is actually the biggest winner of the Trump presidency thus far?

CHARLIE HOMAN, POLITICS EDITOR, "NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE": I think you could make that case. I mean, it's a little bit complicated, as we see now, obviously, with the shutdown, which has put him in a very different position than he was in a few months ago.

But if you look at sort of what he wanted to do under a Republican president, I think he's been able to do most of that under Trump.

CAMEROTA: Speaking of the shutdown, you know, there were a couple of weeks there where people thought that Mitch McConnell was in the witness protection program; and they couldn't find him. What was he doing?

HOMAN: I spoke to him during that period. He was, I think, basically trying to remain kind of out of the limelight as much he's could, because he understood there was no real percentage in him, you know, putting his face on these negotiations. He didn't see a way out of them, necessarily. You know, between the president and the ground that he had staked out, and Speaker Nancy.

And I think he thought that basically, you know, the less seen of him, probably the better for him. Obviously, he's reached a point where that's not really tenable anymore.