Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Trump Intends To Sign Border Deal To Avoid Shutdown; Dem Aide: Text Not Finished Yet On Deal To Avoid Govt. Shutdown; Schultz Says He Will Not Run For President If It Looks Like His Candidacy Will Help Trump; Senate Intel Chair Slams Michael Cohen For Missing Testimony. Aired 10-10:30a ET

Aired February 13, 2019 - 10:00   ET

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

[10:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR, NEWSROOM: All right. Top of the hour. Good morning everyone. I'm Poppy Harlow live this morning in Houston, Texas.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: And, I'm Jim Sciutto here in New York.

He will sign it, but he doesn't have to like it. Sources telling CNN that the President does intend to back the bipartisan border deal, just days before another possible shutdown. All this, despite the fact that it gives him just a fraction of the billions he wants for his wall.

And Poppy, of course, the White House telling us just in the last hour that the president's still examining the deal.

HARLOW: Yes, yes. That was a really important interview you just did with Mercedes Schlapp, ahead of -- strategic communications there. A lot of news made, and look, the White House is saying, the president has not looked at the final layout here of what the legislation would be, but wall funding is not where we know he wanted it to be. And that raises a lot of questions this morning including, how then will the president get that money?

Sarah Westwood joins us from the White House with more. There was this tweet Sarah from the president yesterday about $23 billion dollars. What's going on?

SARAH WESTWOOD, CNN REPORTER: That's right Poppy. That is what the overall funding level for DHS will be, but the White House at this hour not confirming whether President Trump is going to back that deal although sources do tell CNN that the president intends to sign it despite expressing frustration with that final product.

Trump said yesterday, he was not happy with that deal. It contains less than half of what he requested for border wall funding. He only gets 55 miles of new wall. He wanted a couple hundred. The administration did not get the increase in funding for detention beds that they wanted, and ultimately the president is being forced to back a deal that's very similar to a Senate package that he rejected last year that preceded that historically long shutdown, but White House officials say they're waiting to see the text of this Bill. They want to see what language is in the legislation before the president commits to signing it

White House press secretary, Sarah Sanders, said this morning though that the president not fully satisfied by what he already knows about the Bill. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SARAH SANDERS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: We want to see what the final piece of legislation looks like. It's hard to say definitively whether or not the president is going to sign it until we know everything that's in it. The president isn't fully happy, as he said yesterday, with everything that's in the legislation, but there are some positive pieces of it. But, one way or the other, and one thing you can be sure of is, at the end of the day, the president is going to build the wall.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WESTWOOD: Now, Trump is still considering executive action to supplement this Bill to get closer to that $5.7 billion that he wanted for wall funding. Some of those executive actions could include declaring a national emergency to try to tap into things like disaster relief funds. Some of them might not require him to declare a national emergency. For example, if he was going to go after Treasury Forfeiture Funds.

Now, we will see the president today at noon for the first time when he meets with the President of Colombia. Then later in the afternoon, he'll be addressing a conference of sheriffs. So Poppy and Jim, there will be a couple of opportunities to get some questions into President Trump about what he thinks about this deal.

HARLOW: OK. Sarah Westwood at the White House. Thanks so much -- Jim.

SCIUTTO: To Capitol Hill now where the finishing touches, as we've been talking about on the deal still being written. Phil Mattingly is there. But, Phil at this point, don't we really know all of the basics in this Bill here. So, when the White House says, well they're waiting for the fine print -- I mean we know the big picture. Don't we?

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes. You know, the top-line numbers, and I think we know kind of the key elements that both parties were skirmishing over, or really fighting hand, tooth, and nail over for the better part of the last couple of weeks and months.

But, I do think it's important to note that this is a very large package. This is seven Funding Bills. The Department of Homeland Security Bill in itself contains about $23 billion in border security funding. So, the details here, the legislative wheels if you will, they do actually matter, and they will matter to the White House. They matter to rank-and-file lawmakers here, as you noted.

Right now, I'm told staff is still drafting that legislation. In total, probably will end up being more than a thousand pages, and that's the first step that needs to finish before the House or Senate can vote, before the president can actually put pen to paper, and sign it.

The hope, according to those staffers is they try and work through the final kind of skirmishes they're having over particular issues is, to post that legislation later this afternoon. Our understanding right now, or my understanding right now, according to talking to staff is, both the House and the Senate plan to move quickly once the legislation is finalized.

It might be as soon as tonight. I'm told that's pressingly unlikely, but the house will go first, likely tomorrow. The Senate will follow in quick suit afterwards.

[10:05:00]

MATTINGLY: And, I think what's been most interesting, as Jim you know, we know, the top-line details of this has been not just how people are trying to digest everything. But also, how Republicans, in particular Senate Republicans, have been trying to sell this proposal making clear both publicly and privately, I'm told, to the president that there are elements of the Bill beyond just that one top-line border funding number that are important, that are necessary, and that they believe are wins.

The kind of top-line viewpoint here is, everybody just wants to get this over with, and move on to their agenda. They hope, at least in talking to Republicans over the course of the last hours, the president will go along with them on that -- Jim.

Phil Mattingly, thanks very much. In the popular word, the phrase they keep using, it's down payment. That this is a down payment, sort of --

HARLOW: Right.

SCIUTTO: -- you know, indicating that there will be other money that they'll pass down the road. Hard to see how that is --

HARLOW: Yes.

SCIUTTO: -- but still that's the spin, they're going with it.

HARLOW: Yes. It's true. Certainly depends on who you ask about that. Let's discuss it all. Ron Brownstein is with us. Senior editor for "The Atlantic", and of course, Mark Preston is back, our senior political analyst, who I don't think you've slept, Mark, in -- We both got about three hours sleep last night. Thank you for being here my friend. OK. So, let's just check through the numbers here. The president wanted -- well first Mexico was going to pay for it. Then the president wanted $5.7 billion for the wall. Then in December, he turned on the deal that would have given him $1.6 billion. Now, this is $1.375 billion.

MARK PRESTON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: You know, oftentimes when you're in a negotiation, the longer you hold out, the better the deal is going to get. However, what President Trump didn't realize is, that when Democrats took back the House of Representatives that deal was going to get worse, and this is what he is going to be handed now

At this point politically, he can't shut the government down again. Republicans in Congress are telling him that he absolutely can't do it. The government is now back in operation. If you look at polling, he's doing better in the poll.

But basically, what we're going to see President Trump do is, he'll sign this bill, and then he's going to try to do something to try to get that money elsewhere, and that's where the next fights going to be.

SCIUTTO: Ron Brownstein, getting money elsewhere. That apparently is the plan. And, you have a lot of pots that are being talked about, Disaster Relief, DOD Funding, Department of Defense Funding for expanding, or improving military bases here.

You know, I think oftentimes when this administration does things that haven't been done in the past, that we're like, ah just another thing. But, is that significant for a president who can't get money from Congress, as the Constitution requires, goes and finds slush funds elsewhere in the government.

RON BROWNSTEIN, THE ATLANTIC, SENIOR EDITOR: Yes. Sure. I'm, you know, and by the way, first of all, it is worth noting that it's not only though, you know, the $1.6 or so billion from December.

We're talking about one year ago this month, all but three Senate Democrats voted for a deal that would have given him $25 billion for the wall in return for legal status for the DREAMers. But, he abandoned that deal, and caused it to fail, because it did not include the largest reduction in legal immigration since the 1920s, which he was also demanding despite, what he said in his State of the Union about, wanting the highest levels of legal integration ever. In fact, he was looking for the biggest cut in essentially almost a century.

So, that's kind of important to remember. That he -- that was his moment to get the funding. But yes, I think, you know, for the President to kind of look for ways to go, or if you cannot convince Congress to give you the money -- by the way you cannot convince the public that this is, you know, the necessary expenditure, given that he's never had more than 45 percent support for the wall in polling, and it's lately been more, back down to around 40 percent.

And, you find a way around that. I do not think that is going to sit very well with the public. You know, we've seen two-to-one opposition of the idea of a national emergency. I'm not sure it'll be much better for these other options that he's exploring. Maybe a little better, but not much.

HARLOW: Yes. So, Mark, we heard Sean Hannity last night on "Fox News Book Club", you know, someone the president listens a lot too. Before we knew that the president would sign this agreement, or might according to the White House. That he can do it. That's OK, but he has to declare a national emergency.

Here's what the conservative "Wall Street Journal" Editorial Board writes this morning about those right-wing pundits, and the influence on the president.

TEXT: "But these are the same critics who have coaxed Mr. Trump to crash into one immigration dead end after another. They seem to think Mr. Trump's duty is to fail repeatedly in the service of the politically impossible. The next time they give good advice will be the first time."

PRESTON: OK. So, let me respond to that in a way if I was a Sean Hannity supporter.

HARLOW: Oh boy.

PRESTON: Establishment Republicanism right there. That's what you're seeing right there. You're not hearing from Republicans who want change, and they're looking Donald Trump for change.

But, the reality is, that's the pragmatic Republican right there speaking on that editorial page -- Poppy -- saying the reality is, that you are driving the president down a road where he cannot find success.

The "Wall Street Journal" is a conservative editorial page. We know that. They want him to succeed. They want him to succeed economically. When they see issues like this though, they're going to call them out, and that's exactly what we see.

HARLOW: All right.

SCIUTTO: (CROSSTALK)

HARLOW: (INAUDIBLE) the House intends to vote tomorrow -- we're just hearing -- Jim -- sorry, the House intends to vote tommorrow night on all of this, on the spending deal.

SCIUTTO: Well, there you go, moving forward, regardless of that the president endorsing it in public yet. They're going to move forward. No appetite clearly for a shutdown.

[10:10:00]

SCIUTTO: Ron Brownstein, another issue I spoke to Mercedes Schlapp in the last last hour, and I asked her about the administration, the president, the vice president, demanding that Ilhan Omar, a Congresswoman step down for comments, anti-Semitic comments. And I asked about whether they feel the same should have happened with Steve King. Have a listen to the answer here.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

MERCEDES SCLAPP, WHITE HOUSE DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS: I have to say that Congresswoman Omar's comments are horrific. You know, the president was critical of Steve King.

SCIUTTO: Fair enough, but then, why not hold Steve King to the same standard. I mean he's repeated Nazi comments. We treated them. He has talked about white nationalism.

SCLAPP: But we were tough enough on Steve King. The mere --

(END VIDEO TAPE)

SCIUTTO: I mean, there essential answer was, that they were tough enough on Steve King. Did you see that? We certainly didn't see that. They have not asked for his resignation as they have for Omar.

BROWNSTEIN: Well, no. And, look, and even talking about Steve King, I think is aiming too low. When you're talking about this president, who I think has more overtly appeal to racial resentment than any national public figure since George Wallace in the 1960s.

I mean, you know, the issue is not only what the president is saying about the congressman, but what other Republicans are saying. Who, have been silent, when the president has used, for example, the re- tweeting of the anti-Semitic imagery around Hillary Clinton, or Kevin McCarthy talking about, you know, global -- you know talking about the billionaires who are trying to buy the election, who are all Jewish.

Or, the closing ad of the Trump campaign, and it talked about globalists with pictures of Lloyd Blankfein, and you know, and George Soros. I mean, the idea that there is -- that, you know, there is certainly a debate, a legitimate debate, about what has been said. And, kind of, you know, whether it, whether in fact it, you know, it does traffic in anti-Semitic tropes.

But, for Republicans who have been silent, while the president has reoriented their party into a party of essentially what -- identity politics for whites uneasy about a changing America. I mean, it's very grating, I think, for many to hear them come forward now with all of this outrage.

Where was that in Charlottesville, and where was that, and these other examples that I talked about?

SCIUTTO: Yes. Yes, and it's a fair point. Ron Brownstein, Mark Preston, thanks to both of you.

As always, spoiler alert. Former Starbucks CEO, Howard Schultz, mulling an Independent 2020 run. But, what does that mean for the Democratic pick challenging the president? Poppy asked him about that. You'll see what he had to say.

Plus a public clash over collusion between the two leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee. We'll discuss that disagreement.

HARLOW: And also, ahead for us, this hour, a battle over the name of the Dixie school district in California. Many saying, look this is a shameful reminder of the Confederacy and slavery. Well, what did the school board decide in their hearing last night? we'll bring you a live update

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARLOW: All right. Welcome back. I'm Poppy Harlow, along with Jim Sciutto. I'm live in Houston, Texas this morning, because this is where I moderated the Town Hall with potential presidential candidate, Howard Schultz, last night. And, asked a slew of Democrats about a potential independent run by Schultz. You will hear one word a lot, and that word is spoiler.

At the Town Hall, I asked him all about that. Here it is.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HARLOW: To that point you have said, and you just repeated it, that you promise that you will not be a spoiler.

HOWARD SCHULTZ, STARBUCKS EX-CEO: Yes.

HARLOW: That you will not run.

SCHULTZ: Yes.

HARLOW: That you will not continue running, if it would mean a second term for President Trump.

SCHULTZ: OK.

HARLOW: If you run Mr. Schultz --

SCHULTZ: Yes.

HARLOW: -- and if you look at the polls in the fall of 2020, and it looks like you are going to be a spoiler, like you will get president Trump re-elected. Will you drop out of the race?

SCHULTZ: OK. A very important question. So, let's clarify this right now, right here, on national TV, on CNN. First off, the issue of being a spoiler. How can you spoil a system that is already broken? It's just not working. So it's not the right word.

Now, what I said publicly, and I want to repeat, if the math doesn't tally up when I get to the next three or four months, and I take my message out to the American people, and I continue to talk this way about how concerned I am about the country, and how much I think we can do so much better under a different process.

If the numbers don't add up, I will not run for president, because I will not do anything whatsoever to re-elect Donald Trump.

HARLOW: But --

SCHULTZ: No one wants to see him fired more than me.

HARLOW: Mr. Schultz, the fall of 2020 is what I was asking about.

SCHULTZ: Yes.

HARLOW: If you do run, and the numbers don't add up your way, and it looks like it would mean a second term for the president, would you commit to dropping out?

SCHULTZ: What I've just said is, I am not going to run for president if it looks in any way, shape, or form --

HARLOW: But, you know, look at 2016.

SCHULTZ: Yes.

HARLOW: Things changed.

SCHULTZ: Yes. Well, they do change, but at this point, right now, I'm asking a different question, and that is, it's a lot less about me than giving the American people a voice that they don't have. And, what better expression of our democracy than giving the American people a better choice.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HARLOW: All right. So, as you'll see there, we don't know. If he does run, and if the polls are not in his favor, will he drop out? He didn't answer that, but he is seriously considering a bid, and this is something that is freaking out a lot of Democrats.

Let's discuss with CNN political commentator, former Democratic nominee for governor of Florida, Andrew Gillum. Andrew Gillum, thank you for being with me this morning.

ANDREW GILLUM, FORMER NOMINEE FOR GOVERNOR, (D)-FLORIDA: Of course Poppy, and really nice job last night, especially with the follow-ups.

HARLOW: Oh, thank you. The amazing team behind the scenes that you don't see, and around me this morning, they are the miracle workers, they make it all happen. You know that, my friend.

GILLUM: I know it well.

HARLOW: So, let me ask you about Schultz.

[10:20:00] HARLOW: Yes, let me ask you about Schultz. Spoiler -- are you in the camp with the most other Democrats who do not want to see him run, and say all he would be as a spoiler, or do you think the system is broken, and you welcome an independent candidate?

GILLUM: Well, there are shortcomings to the system. There's no doubt about it, What I was hoping to hear last night through the town hall meeting would have been a vision from Mr. Schultz around where he wants to take the country.

What his ideas might be to make sure that people get access to health care, and wages that they can live on, and a response to the dangers that our environment faces due to global climate change. Instead, I heard a lot of complaining. I heard a lot of shredding of the ideas that have been put out there by others, but not a lot of thinking about what he himself would like to do, if he were afforded the opportunity to be President of the United States.

Poppy, it's clear that he wants a platform by which to speak from, and maybe to lead from. I just don't believe that that office is President of the United State.

HARLOW: So, there are some things we did not get specifics on. And, you know, for example, a tax rate. We did get some specifics on health care in terms of the cost of pharmaceuticals, the cost of drugs, and in terms of, you know, the idea that it has been talked about by this administration of selling insurance across state lines. But, I hear you on some of those areas, specifics.

GILLUM: But those are status quo. I mean, we think we can agree that most of that is status quo.

HARLOW: On the Green New Deal, right? We talked about that.

GILLUM: Yes.

HARLOW: We had a lot of audience questions about that, and I asked him about that. And here's what he said, "When I see politicians throwing things out that I know is not realistic that's not being honest with the American people."

He said, "Let's not just throw things against the wall, because it's a good slogan, or we get a press release. Let's be truthful."

Do you see his point here? Do you agree with it at all? That his argument is that, much of the Green New Deal he doesn't think is realistic or affordable for this country.

GILLUM: Well, I come from a state where in South Florida, we had water flooding streets in Miami Beach due to high tide. No rainfall, a natural occurrence. None of us can be confused about the existential threat that climate change presents for our country, for a state like mine, for all of us.

It's called the Green New Deal, because like the first new deal, it is a big, audacious goal. It is a large vision. It is an attempt to re- establish America's authority on this issue, and quite frankly, a plan, a pathway to build a green economy. An economy that creates jobs, and saves the environment at the same time.

Now, obviously the devil will be in the details, but that's what we expect.

HARLOW: Right.

GILLUM: I think that's what the American people expect from their leaders, is someone who's going to cast a big vision.

HARLOW: Before you go, I'd like you to weigh in on this. Of course, Senator Cory Booker has jumped in the 2020 race. And, he said something that caught a lot of attention yesterday, and that was about a potential running mate, potentially being a woman. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. CORY BOOKER, (D)-NEW JERSEY: I think that you will rarely see a Democratic ticket anymore without gender diversity, race diversity. I think it's something that we should have. So, I'm not going to box myself in, but should I become it, you know, I'll be looking to women first.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: Do you think a winning Democratic ticket in 2020, Mayor Gilliam, has to include gender diversity, has to include at least one woman on it.

GILLUM: Well, we've sort of jumped a little bit of head here. We've got a pretty vigorous primary to make our way through, of which there are more women right now running in that primary than there are men. So, the question might be asked potentially of a female nominee for president, what she might think about, by way of a vice president.

But, there's no doubt about it and I agree with Senator Booker that the days of a ticket that does not represent the rich diversity of this country, certainly on the Democratic side, is not feasible. So, I'm actually looking forward to a really robust primary that I think will produce the next President of the United States.

HARLOW: Quick yes or no. Do you want to be on a ticket?

GILLUM: No, I'm here with you. What do you mean?

HARLOW: OK. OK, but that's for now. Thank you. It's nice to have you on. We'll talk to you soon.

GILLUM: You as well. Take care.

SCIUTTO: Yes. And Poppy sometimes politicians will change answers to those questions as you know, but a great one.

HARLOW: Really. SCIUTTO: We'll be watching. Lawmakers on the hill are fed up after

the former Trump lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen postponed his testimony on the Hill for a third time Is this simply the art of the dodge? I'll be asking a member of the House Intelligence Committee next.

[10:25:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: This morning, no love for Michael Cohen from a top Republican on Capitol Hill. Senate Intelligence Committee Chair, Richard Byrd, telling reporters that any goodwill he had is now gone. This, after the president's former fixer postponed his testimony for a third time. Joining me now is Republican Congressman, Chris Stewart. He sits on the House Intelligence Committee. Congressman thank you for taking the time this morning.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:30:00]