Return to Transcripts main page

ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT

Judge: Manafort "Intentionally" Lied To FBI, Mueller, Grand Jury Concerning His Interactions With Russian Associate; Judge: Paul Manafort "Intentionally" Lied To Special Counsel; Mueller No Longer Needs To Support A Reduced Sentence; Judge: Manafort "Intentionally" Lied To FBI, Mueller, Grand Jury; Bernie Sanders Proposes Raising Taxes On People Making More Than $250,000; Joins Other Dems With Plans To Raise Taxes On The Rich; Sanders Proposes Raising Taxes In Order To Expand Social Security. Aired: 7-8p ET

Aired February 13, 2019 - 19:00   ET

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


WOLF BLITZER, ANCHOR, CNN: Very interesting. Good work, Dana. I appreciate it.

DANA BASH, CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Thanks, Wolf.

BLITZER: Very much. I'm Wolf Blitzer in the Situation Room. Follow me on Twitter and Instagram @WOLFBLITZER. Tweet the show @CNNSITROOM. Erin Burnett OutFront starts right now.

ERIN BURNETT, ANCHOR, CNN: OutFront next, breaking news a judge just ruling that Paul Manafort intentionally lied to the FBI, Robert Mueller and the Grand Jury, including lying about his interactions with the Russian-linked operative. What does this mean for Manafort?

Plus, President Trump looking for a landmine in the latest border deal, his word and some Republicans seem eager to give him an out, turn it down, shut it down, another shutdown?

Plus, Roger Stone speaking out more than ever now selling stones and shirts, gag order? Let's go OutFront.

Good evening. I'm Erin Burnett. OutFront tonight, the breaking news in Robert Mueller's Russia investigation. This is happening just moments ago, so let me tell you what we know. A judge ruling moments ago, here is the ruling right now, the Trump campaign chairman, Paul Manafort intentionally lied repeatedly to the FBI, the Special Counsel, and the Grand Jury. Even after his plea deal, agreeing to cooperate and then lying again, violation of the deal.

Now, they say in here that this includes lies about this interactions with longtime Russian operative, Konstantin Kilimnik, an operative spy in casual word, but an operative who's alleged to have ties to Russian intelligence. That's the allegation they have, the judge writing and that because of the finding the Special Counsel is no longer obligated under the plea deal to support a reduction in Manafort's sentence. Obviously, that is where then you get a lot of big questions about what President Trump will do.

Shimon Prokupecz is OutFront live in Washington. So Shimon, this news is literally just breaking, I hope you've had time to go through this as quickly as possible. What else did the judge say?

SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER, CNN: The key here, Erin, to think about is that the judge here agreeing with the Mueller team, with the Special Counsel that Paul Manafort lied repeatedly. And the thing that the judge makes a point about is that she said that he lied about facts that are material to the investigation, significant.

She's pointing out how he intentionally lied to the FBI, to the Office of the Special Counsel and then even when he appeared before the Grand Jury. And then like you said one of the big things that we've been discussing in all of this is this Russian operative, the man that the FBI has said was working on behalf of the Russian government, Konstantin Kilimnik. And it is one of the things that the judge points out that he specifically lied about.

She says that the Special Counsel's office established a preponderance of evidence that the defendant, Paul Manafort, intentionally made multiple false statements to the Grand Jury concerning matters that were material to the investigation, his interactions and communications with Kilimnik. This was something that the Special Counsel made a big deal out of at the hearing. They said that his interactions with Kilimnik, Manafort's interactions with Kilimnik goes to the heart of the Special Counsel's investigation.

What we don't know is why did Paul Manafort lied, why did he lie after agreeing to cooperate with the Special Counsel's office. Obviously, his attorneys say he didn't lie. The judge disagreeing with him and now it's going to be about his sentencing. Does this in any way affect his sentence. The judge in her filing here, in her decision, does not say that. She said she's going to wait to see more information before making a decision.

And then we'll see, look, either way Paul Manafort is facing a substantial amount of jail time, how this affects everything in the end, who knows? But he could potentially now spend the rest of his life in jail.

BURNETT: Obviously. I mean, so you're talking 10 plus years or something, right?

PROKUPECZ: Yes, it's a lot.

BURNETT: A lot. All right, thank you very much Shimon. As I've said - we're just starting to go through this, but if you think about the significance of that we're going to going to recommend a reduction of sentence, so now you're talking about 10 plus years just on the back of the hand there, if possible, that could be a life sentence.

OutFront now, former Assistant Secretary for the Department of Homeland Security Under President Obama, that's Juliette Kayyem, former Nixon White House Counsel John Dean and White House Correspondent for American Urban Radio Networks, April Ryan.

So John let me start with you. The judge is ruling that the former Trump campaign chairman and we say that again and again, this was not - this was the chairman intentionally lied repeatedly after agreeing to cooperate with Mueller, lied to the FBI, to the Grand Jury and to Bob Mueller establishing that in several areas including communications with this alleged Russian operative. Why would he do that after agreeing to cooperate and what's the significance of the fact that the judge has now ruled that he in fact did?

JOHN DEAN, FORMER NIXON WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL: Well, there appears to be two reasons that he might do it. One is that he thinks he can get a pardon by going light on some of the facts and trying to twist them and not fully cooperating and sending signals all over - one of the lies that was not established by a preponderance of evidence was the last one that he had misstated his communication with the administration.

[19:05:09]

So I don't know what that means in the bigger picture. But the second reason he might be lying and I think is more dominant is fear for his life and in his own family's well-being that he's been playing with Russian heavy weights who do not like to have anybody go in and testify against them or to reveal their secrets and that's why he's taking this course.

BURNETT: That's a pretty significant thing to say. I mean, Juliette, let me ask you because there were five areas that the Special Counsel said that Manafort lied about. The judge is saying that - she's going to say for sure that he lied on three. I mentioned one of them, the interactions with this alleged Russian operative. The others payments to a trump PAC law firm payment back-and-forth and also information material to another DOJ investigation. We don't know exactly what that is or do we?

JULIETTE KAYYEM, FORMER ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY UNDER PRESIDENT OBAMA: No.

BURNETT: We don't so that could obviously - yes, it could be very significant. We just don't know.

KAYYEM: No, we don't. That's exactly. It could be any number of these investigations that are going on around the family, because DOJ would also include the U.S. Attorney's Office, so it might be something going on in New York.

BURNETT: Okay. So then that could include Southern District?

KAYYEM: That could include Southern District. I mean, I think the biggies. So I mean if you believe that the judge would have set this up in chronological order, the big one is intentionally lying. This is what the judge found out. It wasn't a lie, it was an intentional lie about this interactions with Konstantin and then the second most important is discussions with him about the Ukraine policy.

So those two areas are, I think, where the judge is focusing on and as we know from reporting today from the Washington Post, it's this meeting that occurred between Gates, Manafort is number two, Konstantin and Manafort in a greatly named Havana cigar club bar, exclusive bar, its membership-only in the 666 building that was owned by the Kushners which has become the focal point and that's the question of whether polling data was actually shared.

So the judge is calling a lie a lie which is essentially something really bad happened in that meeting and Manafort continues to lie about it even though he was given this sweetheart deal.

BURNETT: And I do want to remind everybody that the platform at the Republican National Convention, the Republican platform on that whole issue Russia-Ukraine was changed, so there was a very specific policy change that obviously could have come from this.

April, Paul Manafort now could go to jail for the rest of his life which means it's possible, in fact it's probable that his way out of that is a pardon from this President. That's his way out. Is that going to happen?

APRIL RYAN, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, AMERICAN URBAN RADIO NETWORKS: Yes. Well, the way I understand it it's not off the table. The President smiles favorably upon you if you're in trouble and you do not get him in trouble. It sounds so elementary but it is the case.

This President has not ruled it out but he actually has been talking to people from what I understand a very close circle and he's listening. And the way that he gets information about Manafort is through, from what I'm hearing from sources, is through those who are mutual friends. And we'll find out how this all plays out.

So we'll see how this plays. I mean there are things that you see on the face of it, but there are things also that's behind the scenes that have been going on from what sources are saying.

BURNETT: So John Dean what do you think the significance could be here? Obviously, you have this whole issue with Konstantin Kilimnik and you raised the issue of perhaps Manafort lying in part because of fear for his life, for his family's life, but also lying about information material to another DOJ investigation which again it seems we don't yet know what that is. That also could be significant given what is going on in terms of investigations possibly into money and the Trump family.

DEAN: Well, one of my reactions is that this is only one case where he has pled guilty. He might get a little bit of reduction of sentence for that, but he's also facing a case in Virginia with a whole different judge and a whole different set of sentencing issues for very serious financial crimes. So that's going to make it much more difficult to pardon this man where you have two very different kinds of cases and it'll be clear that the President is playing games to let this man off at this point once he's sentenced in both courts.

BURNETT: But Juliette if they can't pardon him, does Manafort then finally flip? Are they going to get what they need from him now? They know he lied which means they've obviously proven by other means whether it's texts, emails, documentation right that it was a lie.

[19:10:07] Is there more that he has to give that would help them at this point?

KAYYEM: It's hard to tell because he's such an unreliable witness at this stage. I mean if you're the prosecutor in any of these cases, you're not going to want to rely on Manafort at this stage. He was given as I've said the sweetheart deal and he lied under it, and I lied throughout it, and I think this goes to John Dean's point which is this is Manafort's - Manafort has no values. His only value is to protect himself.

So it's not like he's going to find some savior in truth at this stage. And so I just think that it's worth - we're looking at all of the pieces of what they found and lie about them, what they didn't find and like lie about it, what is not in question at this stage is that the campaign chairman of the Trump campaign which has already been warned by the FBI at this stage that the Russians are trying to infiltrate the campaigns as well as the election meets secretly at a secret club with his number two with someone with ties to Russian intelligence and hands him polling data.

Now, people are going to parse whether that data was important or not important, just take a step back. Like two plus two equals four like this is the reality of what this campaign was doing and no stage did they ever feel any responsibility to stop this Russian madness. In fact they were willing to smoke cigars with these guys and that's just what sometimes lost in the details of did he lie or did he not lie about one of these points.

BURNETT: I think you just put it very aptly. I mean when you take a step back and lay it out like that, it's very clear. April, of course, then that all does beg the question of what Juliette just laid out. The question is did the President know and what's the standard for judging whether he knew or was actively encouraging this happening.

RYAN: What's the standard if we're going to find out what the White House rolls out, but the bottom line is the question, that's right, what did he remember, what did he understand it to be. And they play these word games a lot and we know in fact that there were people within that inner circle that had been working in the campaign to get information, this opposition research or what have you to work to get information from us, we know that.

But the bottom line is when these cigar meetings happened and these meetings in Trump Tower happened, who was there, what did they say, what was actually on the table and the question is did it actually go to the highest person in this whole scheme of things which is the President. And the question is, is there factual, tangible paper trails that you can actually connect the President to. That's the issue. That's the issue.

BURNETT: Right. In fact, I guess it brings me back - we're going to get to Roger Stone later this hour, but back to that one line in that Roger Stone filing, who directed the senior campaign official to tell Roger Stone to go and get the dirt. Who was that person that was more senior than a senior campaign official, perhaps it could be what this all comes down to as well. And thank you all so very much.

Next, Bernie Sanders, the latest Democrat to say higher taxes on the rich is the answer. Good politics or a gift to Trump for 2020? Plus freshman Congresswoman Ilhan Omar fighting back against President Trump, but refusing to take questions.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MANU RAJU, SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT, CNN: ... the President trafficked ...

ILHAN OMAR, UNITED STATES CONGRESSWOMAN: Are you serious? What is wrong with you? No.

RAJU: A question about your tweet. You had a tweet.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: And the President says he doesn't want another shutdown, but is he looking for an excuse to do just that?

[19:15:00]

Tonight, Senator Bernie Sanders with a tax hike proposal. One that would raise taxes on people making more than $250,000 a year. He's got a bill and the 2020 Democrats are all jumping on the bandwagon including Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand and Jeff Merkley. It's all part of a growing chorus of Democrats who want the wealthy to pay more.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BERNIE SANDERS, UNITED STATES SENATOR: We're going to do that by having the wealthiest people in this country finally start paying their fair share of taxes.

ELIZABETH WARREN, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Those loopholes and giveaways to the people at the top and an ultra millionaire's tax to make sure that rich people start doing their part for the country that made them rich.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, DEMOCRAT, NEW YORK: Once you get to like the tippy tops on your $10 millionth sometimes you see tax rates as high as 60% or 70%.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: OutFront now Robert Reich, former U.S. Labor Secretary under President Clinton and Stephen Moore Informal White House Advisor. Steve, Bernie Sanders wants to raise Social Security taxes and investment taxes, 6.5% there, 6.5% there, this is just the latest proposal from a Democrat.

STEPHEN MOORE, INFORMAL WHITE HOUSE ADVISOR: It sure is and you're exactly right, Erin, that almost every Democratic Presidential candidate is coming up with some new plan to raise taxes even higher around the one who came before them. Look, I hate it. I think we should have a flat tax in this country where every penny pays the same rate, get rid of all the loopholes and deductions.

But what I really hate is this kind of hate the rich mentality that somehow the rich are sinister people. I mean I like Bill Gates, I like Warren Buffett, I like LeBron James, I like even Tom Brady. I like people who are successful in this country. By the way, one other quick thing, the top 1%, Robert Reich you know these statistics. The top 1% already pay about 40% of the income tax. They pay more than the bottom 90%. The rich already do pay their fair share, Robert.

BURNETT: Robert?

ROBERT REICH, FORMER U.S. LABOR SECRETARY UNDER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON: Well, first of all, Steve Moore nobody hates the rich. Just because you're saying to the rich, "We expect more from you in terms of paying the national bill."

BURNETT: Well, no, that's not what they're saying, Robert. They're saying fair like what is fair? It's a great word but what does it mean?

REICH: Erin, I think it means paying the same, a kind of share that is corresponding to the pain that as actually being attributed. For most of our history since the Second World War certainly the first three decades after the Second World War, the rich paid about 70%. That was the highest marginal tax rate and nobody complained that that was unfair, everybody understand that that was fair.

MOORE: Because they were unfair.

BURNETT: Okay but you know as well as I know there were so many loopholes that that was not the effective rate.

REICH: That's right.

BURNETT: Now, you've gotten ...

(CROSSTALK)

REICH: But even with all of the deductions, even with all of the tax credits, the rich at the top are paying ...

BURNETT: They still pay more, okay.

REICH: ... more than 50%. Now, Steve Moore is saying that that's not fair or that that's bad or somebody hates the rich. No, more and more of the nation's income is now concentrated at the very top.

[19:20:07]

Most Americans have had no increase if you adjust for inflation in their income in four years, why shouldn't the rich pay more when more and more is concentrated at the top?

BURNETT: Steve? MOORE: Well, Robert, I mean this is exactly the opposite of the

strategy that we used when we put the tax plan together for Donald Trump which is the lower taxes on people. By the way this top 1%, you know these numbers, 60% of them own, operate or invest in small businesses. So if you take the money from these businesses, how are you going to get more jobs?

Our whole idea was let's provide tax benefits to businesses so they can hire more workers and pay more wages. And by the way that's what the data showing what's happening.

REICH: Steve Moore, that is ...

(CROSSTALK)

It doesn't work. Trickle-down this has never worked.

MOORE: But it is working. It's working now.

REICH: And by the way going back to your point, Steve Moore, about the top 1% paying 40% of income taxes, that does not take account of all of the Social Security taxes which have increased as a proportion of federal revenues. It doesn't take account of state and local property taxes, sales taxes. If you look at all of the taxes actually the rich are not paying anywhere close to their fair share. The rich are - and they own about 40% of all of the assets of ...

(CROSSTALK)

BURNETT: Well, they just lose the deductions on those, so that should help. I mean, in terms of a financial hole that would help contributions.

MOORE: Well, look, I want a system where are trying to make poor people rich, not rich people poor. I want a system that allows everyone to succeed. Look, I don't think Americans generally if their ship comes in and they make it successful in America, Robert, I don't think they want 50% or 60% or 70% of their money to go ...

(Crosstalk)

BURNETT: So Steve one of the issues is that people there's less income mobility, so ...

REICH: Steve Moore, where are we going to get - excuse me, where are we going to get the money, where are we going to get the money for education, for job training, for infrastructure ...

MOORE: I've got an idea.

REICH: .... for all of the investments that we need in order to help people actually - everybody not just the rich, everybody knew better, we're not going to make ...

(CROSSTALK) BURNETT: Steve, one the issues that was income mobility has gone

down, to Bob's point, income mobility has gone down over the past decades. It's harder to get from a lower level to a higher level than it used to be. And that may be part of the reason --

MOORE: Not in the last couple of years, we're seeing a lot of people see increases in their income and that's a good thing. I mean we've only had this policy for two years.

BURNETT: Hold on. Hold on. Let me just make the point.

MOORE: Okay, yes.

BURNETT: When you look at the latest CNN poll of Democrats because we're talking about Democrats proposing these, 69% of voters, Democratic voters support a new tax on people with assets over $50 million. That's Elizabeth Warren's idea.

MOORE: Yes.

BURNETT: Are taxes on the rich like the wall for the Democratic base? I mean if a Democrat wins, you're getting taxes, that is what it means.

MOORE: No, I think that it --

REICH: Erin, it's not just Democrats, 45% to 50% of Republicans are saying we should also raise taxes on the rich.

MOORE: Yes. But I think the Democratic Party has been the party of greed and envy that they basically think the way we can solve all our problems is to take money from rich people.

REICH: Oh, Steve. Steve, the Republicans are just ...

(CROSSTALK)

MOORE: And look if we're going to have these public investments that you want, Robert, everybody should pay for it. Why should only 1% pay such a huge percentage of the tax burden.

REICH: As I've said if you look at the total tax burden, the total tax burden, the rich are paying a very, very small percentage relative to everybody else. And by the way, if you look at Bernie Sanders' proposals with regard to Social Security, the last time I looked, once you hit $129,900, you don't pay $1 more in Social Security taxes, why should there be that cap, it's not the Medicare. You don't have that for Medicare.

MOORE: Yes, because that was the system that was setup - I'll answer that question, Robert. That was the system that was set up by President Roosevelt back in the 1930s when they [went tup] the system. It was basically ...

REICH: No that cap is not there, I'm sorry.

(CROSSTALK)

MOORE: People would pay ...

(CROSSTALK)

REICH: I'm sorry, you're wrong. That cap was not there and ...

(CROSSTALK)

MOORE: I mean the first tax is up to $6,000 of income. Now, we tax it up to $120,000. People are paying essentially premiums in to pay for their own Social Security benefits.

REICH: Steve Moore, you tell me why Medicare - why your entire income is subject to Medicare taxes and not Social Security taxes, why not subject both to put to both taxes, if you want a strong Social Security system and you want a strong Medicare system.

MOORE: Because right now, Robert, the average person who makes over $125,000 is only going to get about $0.50 back from every dollar that they paid into the system. So the rich are already getting a terrible deal out of Social Security. That's the answer.

BURNETT: All right, I'm going to leave it there. We'll leave it there. Thank you. Because there's a lot of problems with Social Security and this plan that's been put out there would only fund it for another 50 years. The problem is much bigger it would seem in taxation regardless of the tax discussion.

MOORE: Thank you, I agree with that.

BURNETT: Thank you both. And next Congresswoman Ilhan Omar doing anything but staying quiet after an uproar over her anti-semitic tweets lashing out at the President, the media, and a diplomat. Plus, we're just two days away from another government shutdown and President Trump is still refusing to say whether he'll accept the latest border deal or shut it all down again.

[19:25:00]

Tonight, fighting back. Congresswoman Ilhan Omar under attack for anti-semitic tweets not saying quiet. Omar who accuses Trump of trafficked in hate, her words, his entire life is now publicly clashing with the President's new envoy to Venezuela. Manu Raju is OutFront.

RAJU: President Donald Trump has called on her to resign after remarks many viewed as anti-semitic. And on Twitter she's accused of President of racism, but on Capitol Hill freshman Congresswoman Ilhan Omar is in no mood to talk about any of it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: The President said that you should resign and the Vice President said she should be held accountable for your views, can you respond to that? OMAR: No, thank you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Then asked about this Wednesday tweet where she said to Trump, "You have trafficked in hate your whole life against Jews, Muslims, Indigenous, immigrants, black people and more. I learned from people impacted by my words. When will you?"

Omar took strong exception.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: This morning you said the President trafficked ...

OMAR: Are you serious? What is wrong with you? No.

RAJU: A question about your tweet. You had a tweet saying the President trafficked in hate.

OMAR: Yes, I tweeted. There's a response you can run that and have a nice day.

RAJU: Why can't you explain more what you meant to say?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: The Somali refugee who joined Michigan's Rashida Tlaib as the first Muslim women to ever serve in the House. Omar has long criticized the Israeli government but has said she respects the Jewish people. And her allies argue she's been unfairly singled out. Yet after tweeting Sunday the GOP criticism over Israel views are, "All about the Benjamins," she was roundly condemned even by her own leadership and later apologized saying she understands a painful history of anti-semitic tropes.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you regret your comments, Congresswoman?

OMAR: I'm pretty sure that was stated in my statement.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[19:30:00]

RAJU: GOP leaders were not satisfied, demanding lose committee spots even though they have been mostly silent about Trump's inflammatory racial rhetoric.

Still, Trump went even further.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think she should resign from Congress.

RAJU: The chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee who has been critical of Omar's words would not say whether she should have been removed from his panel.

REP. ELIOT ENGEL (D-NY), CHAIRMAN, FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: I'm not commenting on anything.

RAJU: On a hearing today on Venezuela, Omar engaged in a contentious engage with Trump special envoy, Elliott Abrams, who wanted a chance to respond to her criticism.

REP. ILHAN OMAR (D), MINNESOTA: I fail to understand why members of this committee or the American people should find any testimony that you give today to be truthful.

ELLIOTT ABRAMS, SPECIAL ENVOY: If I can respond to that.

OMAR: It wasn't a question. That was not a question. I reserve the right to my time.

ABRAMS: It is not right.

OMAR: That was not a question.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RAJU: Erin, I had a chance to ask the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi if she agrees with Republicans in that Omar should have been removed from committee assignments, she said, no, and she said the Republicans do not have clean hands on any of this. She cites chants at President Trump's where they said Jew S.A., and where were they when Steve King made a series of racial comments, until last year they decided to pull him from his committee assignment. Why didn't they do that sooner? Erin?

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Thank you, Manu.

OUTFRONT, Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut. He sits on the Foreign Relations Committee.

And I appreciate your time, Senator. Congresswoman Omar is firing back at the president today, you know, she's pointing out, he's made anti-Semitic and racist comments in the past. But the question is, do two wrongs make a right?

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT), FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE: Of course, they don't. And Representative Omar and the president and those that surround him need to understand that trading in these kind of anti- Semitic tropes does great damage to our country and is greatly offensive to those that are supporters of the U.S.-Israel relationship and Jews here in the United States and across the world.

But it's true, I mean, the president and his allies who have been, you know, going after any Democrat linked to George Soros, claiming that he's trying to buy the influence of members of Congress or treading on dangerous ground as well. So hopefully everyone can be a little bit more attuned to the words they use in this place and we can talk a little bit more substance. BURNETT: So, I want to play an exchange from the House Foreign

Affairs Committee on the House side of things, but obviously, you know, a hearing important to you. Congresswoman Omar refusing to give Trump's Venezuelan envoy, Elliot Abrams, a chance to respond to his criticism. I want to play this clip for you, Senator.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OMAR: In 1991 you pleaded guilty to two counts of withholding information from Congress regarding your involvement in the Iran Contra affair for which you were later pardoned by President George H.W. Bush. I fail to understand why members of this committee or the American people should find any testimony that you give today to be truthful.

ABRAMS: If I can respond to that.

OMAR: It wasn't a question. That was not a question. That was -- I reserve the right to my time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: Senator, is that how these things are supposed to go? Is that appropriate questioning?

MURPHY: That's the first time I heard that. I'd have to listen to the fuller context before I pass judgment. Obviously lots of these hearings become fairly heated.

Listen, what I think we all, you know, have to understand is that the United States needs to tread very carefully when it comes to trying to promote regime change in South America and Central America. We don't have a good history there, and there's a bad taste left over from decades of perceived American imperialism.

And so I have actually written that the Trump administration needs to understand that by sending Elliot Abrams to Venezuela who does have a history that is not looked kindly upon by many in that region, that it may send a message that is unintended. So I don't know anything more than what you played about that exchange. I just know that there's a tricky business afoot in Venezuela right now, as we are trying to oust a dictator without, it seems, a real concrete plan on how to get that done.

BURNETT: You, Senator, you're talking about South America, you have taken a big stand on what's going on with Saudi Arabia, and it's been five days since the White House refused to meet a deadline, right, and to tell you all whether the White House what happened, whether the Saudi Arabia crown prince is personally responsible for the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

[19:35:14] Obviously, the CIA and U.S. intelligence community has concluded that the crown prince personally directed that murder.

Here's Representative McCaul, a top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs, today. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MICHAEL MCCAUL (R-TX), RANKING MEMBER, FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: The response that I received was completely inadequate. It was about half a page and it was not in compliance with law.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW: Is there anything you can do, Senator, to force a response from the White House which clearly is trying to stone wall?

MURPHY: Listen, the president knows that Mohammed bin Salman is responsible for the killing of Jamal Khashoggi, and he doesn't want to certify to that.

Now, we don't know the reason for that. Obviously the most disturbing reason would be that the Trump family has business interests, present business interests in Saudi Arabia that we don't know about. That's one of the reasons why we would like to see the president's tax returns.

But we don't have to wait for his certification to take action. We have to a piece of legislation in the Senate, a bipartisan piece of legislation, the Yemen Accountability Act, which would set sanctions against those that ordered the Khashoggi murder and reset our relationship with Saudi Arabia because the murder is not the only bad thing they're doing, the Yemen civil war at the top of that list.

So, you know, we can't got over there and hold his hand while he writes the certification to us, but we can take our own action.

BURNETT: Before we go, I want to ask you about the breaking news, and that, of course, is Paul Manafort, the judge ruling that he intentionally lied to the FBI, to the special counsel, to the grand jury. This obviously was President Trump's campaign chairman.

How big of a threat could this be for the president? The judge is ruling he intentionally lied after agreeing to cooperate.

MURPHY: Right. I guess the question is, why was he lying? What was he trying to protect, and were there others that were cooperating with the government that were lying as well?

And that's why many of us are really eager to see a report from the special investigator. I have been amongst those who have said that while I don't want Mueller to shut down his investigation, he's locking people up and should continue to lock bad guys up. At some point, he's got to show Congress his cards and this new finding that Manafort was lying intentionally to him, raises more questions about what they were all trying to hide.

So, I'd like to see some report from the special investigator as soon as possible. So we can take action on it if it's necessary.

BURNETT: All right. Senator Murphy, thank you so much. I appreciate your time. MURPHY: Thanks, Erin.

BURNETT: And next, another government shut down could be just two days away. Why won't the president commit to signing a deal? It's a done deal at least with Democrats and Republicans.

And Trump's long time associate Roger Stone flaunting a judge's gag order threat going on TV, headline speaking events, selling his book, selling, quote/unquote, stones. What's going on?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:41:47] BURNETT: Tonight, looking for a land mine, the White House digging through the details of the bipartisan spending bill, looking for what could be an excuse for President Trump to turn down the deal that gives him far less than what he wanted for his wall.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Well, we haven't gotten it get. We'll be getting it. We'll be looking for land mines because you could have that, you know? It's been known to happen before to people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: The biggest land mine when it comes to this compromise happens to be the president himself because obviously he blew up the last deal at the last minute, there had be been a deal, bipartisan. That deal would have given more money for his wall than he's getting now. Now, the president's allies, making him cover to slam the deal, to knock it down.

Mark Meadows, staunch Trump ally, of course, says the House Freedom Caucus wants a one week continuing resolution so they can try to get a better deal which is sort of outrageous because the government closed down for 34 days, and then we have this, you know, a few weeks to do a deal, and now, one week is going to make a difference. Give me a break.

OK. OUTFRONT now, Democratic Congressman Tim Ryan, member of the House Appropriations Committee.

And I appreciate your time, Congressman.

So, the president's biggest allies in Congress, the Freedom Caucus, I mentioned Mark Meadows there. They want another week. What's another week going to do?

REP. TIM RYAN (D-OH), APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Probably not a whole lot. I mean, I think we're in the same position and as the country's watching this, it's, you know, Democrats and Republicans in Congress making a deal. Obviously, people who have different philosophies on how to govern, coming together for some agreement, and then the president waiting to see what the extreme right wing talk radio circuit, Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, and others have to say about it, and then he follows their lead. So I get a little bit worried about that.

But one week's not going to make much of a difference because those basic structures are all still going to be in place.

BURNETT: Speaking of structures, all of this is about a structure. I mean, President Trump said today that no matter what's in this bill, and I guess the more operative thing would be what is not in this bill which is explicit wall funding, not very much of it, $1.3 billion. He says, OK, so what, I'm going to build my wall, a wall his own administration by the way said would cost $25 billion for an explicit wall.

Here's what he said today, though, Congressman.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We're building as we speak in the most desperately needed areas and it's a big wall. It's a strong wall. It's a wall that people aren't going through very easy, going to have to be in extremely good shape to get over this one. They would be able to climb Mount Everest a lot easier, I think.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: OK. Mount Everest, let's talk about where he is serious though, here, he's trying to say I'm getting my wall, I'm getting my wall, I'm getting my wall. Obviously, the deal here does not give him the money for the wall. Is he serious, he's still going to get the big whole thing, the full wall?

RYAN: Well, at first and foremost, you know, you can't have a wall from sea to shining sea because you have the Rio Grande River. You have areas that don't necessarily need a wall. You have a lot of farmers and ranchers in the southern parts of the southern states right on the border who really don't want the federal government coming in and eminent domaining their property.

[19:45:01] And I think there are Republican senators and members of Congress who represent those areas are not for the wall for that very reason.

So, he's not going to get a wall from sea to shining sea. Many of us are saying, look, if the experts are saying we need a barrier in this part or that part, you know, fine, let's do it. The reality of it is 90 percent of the drugs are coming in through the legal ports of entry and that's where we need investment.

Most people who are here are undocumented have overstayed their visas, 50 to 75 percent of the people that are here like that. So what are we doing where the real issues are: fentanyl, which is getting laced into heroin in places like Ohio where people are dying all the time, that's coming in through the United States Postal Service and this guy is caught up on a border wall that he's obsessed with, and you hear him talk about it.

I mean, it just -- for most people, it's like, yes, we need border security, but it's not 1,500, you know? We like planes too, but we don't want to ride in the ones that Orville Wright was putting together.

BURNETT: And then, of course, there's Mount Everest come in.

Congressman, before we go, I want to ask you about something else. It's a big field, 2020 race for the White House. You have said you're considering a run, jumping into that field. When are you going to decide?

RYAN: I don't feel any pressure for any time line at this point, but I am seriously considering it. The country is divided. We can't get anything done because of these huge divisions that we have, and people in communities like the ones I represent, Erin, are suffering because of this division.

You can't win the future divided. You know, a divided country is a weak country, and I'm concerned about that. I don't feel any pressure to make any particular announcement anytime soon, but it is something I'm really worried about.

I mean, the debate you had a few minutes ago about the economy where you have 400 people in the country who have more wealth than the bottom 150 million. You know, workers want cut in on the deal here, and they haven't been for 30 years. So, it's something I'm considering.

BURNETT: All right. I'm sure Robert Reich wishes he had that statistic that just shared. Pretty powerful.

Thank you very much, Congressman. I appreciate it.

RYAN: Thank you.

BURNETT: And next, Roger Stone facing a gag order, but he won't stop talking.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROGER STONE, FORMER ADVISER TO DONALD TRUMP: My name is Roger Stone. Perhaps you've heard of me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: That was today.

Plus, former First Lady Michelle Obama reveals what her mom really thinks of her success.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:51:23] BURNETT: Tonight, Roger Stone defiant in the face of a gag order threat by a federal judge. Stone is not being quiet. On TV holding a speaking event today, selling t-shirts, even marketing stones, rocks.

Sara Murray is OUTFRONT.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

STONE: My name is Roger Stone. Perhaps you've heard of me.

SARA MURRAY, CNN POLITICS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It's rule number 81 in Stone's rules. Admit nothing, deny everything, launch counterattack. And that's exactly what Roger Stone is doing.

STONE: Twenty-nine armed FBI agents, 17 vehicles, all unnecessary expenditure paid for by the taxpayers for the theater of it, to create a public image of me as guilty before I get an opportunity to prove I'm innocent.

MURRAY: In the face of a warning from a federal judge that she may put a gag order on his case, stone has been delivering speeches, doing interviews and signing books. Stone, President Trump's long time political adviser was arrested in a predawn raid.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We love you, roger.

MURRAY: He pleaded not guilty last month to seven charges of obstruction, making false statements, and witness tampering. After Judge Amy Berman Jackson announced she was considering a gag order to ensure an untainted jury pool, stone's lawyers pushed back in a filing suggesting, not that many Americans are paying attention to him, writing on Instagram, Kim Kardashian has 126 million followers. Roger Stone's Instagram following amounts to 39,000 subscribers.

Stone, meanwhile, passed his time criticizing Judge Jackson, claiming he can't get a fair trial in D.C. and peddling conspiracy theories. In one Instagram post, Stone wrote, I will continue to defend myself unless an Obama-appointed judge decides to suspend my First Amendment rights. In another post, he claimed fair trial in D.C.? Impossible.

STONE: I feel pretty good. I mean, you know, I spend my time raising money.

MURRAY: Stone and his wife launched a fun raising blitz for Stone's legal defense. He is hawking t-shirts and signed roger stones. She blasted out a fund-raising e-mail Tuesday seeking donations and claiming the FBI used police state tactics and engaged in a brutal assault on a U.S. citizen by arresting her husband in a predawn raid.

Stone's very public protests may be a dubious legal strategy. Today, he dodged a question about whether he's openly angling for a presidential pardon.

STONE: I did not have a discussion about a pardon with anybody including the president nor have my lawyers.

MURRAY: And patted himself on the back for his self-restraint.

STONE: The judge is considering a gag order. I have avoided talking about the case itself other than the indictment is de-contextualized.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MURRAY: Now, the government does want a gag order on Roger Stone. And what makes this case even more bizarre is the judge has weighed in and said Jerome Corsi, the conspiracy theorist who is now a witness or perhaps even another target of this investigation is allowed to weigh in on the gag order. He wants to see Roger Stone getting a gag order, Erin.

BURNETT: Hmm, interesting. An interesting the comment isn't that it's untrue, it's decontextualized. Sort of an interesting comment in and of itself.

All right. Thank you very much, Sara.

BURNETT: And next, Michelle Obama getting a reality check from her mother.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:58:17] BURNETT: Here's Jeanne.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JEANNE MOOS, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: You know how everyone's always making fun of mom texts?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What do you think a unicorn sounds like?

MOOS: From the mom who can't stop sending animojists to --

JIMMY FALLON, LATE NIGHT TV HOST: I once got a text, you're amazing auto texted to you're adopted.

MOOS: Or even former first ladies can't resist. While on her book tour, Michelle Obama fondly recounted how her mom reacted to seeing her daughter's surprise appearance on the Grammys. On Instagram, Mrs. Obama described it as when your mom doesn't think you're a real celebrity.

MICHELLE OBAMA, FORMER FIRST LADY: Marianne Robinson says, I guess you were a hit at the Grammys.

MOOS: To which Michelle says, did you watch it?

OBAMA: I saw it because Gracie, her sister, called me. Did you meet any real stars?

I say, I told you I was going to be on it. Mom said, no, you didn't. I would have remembered that even though I don't remember much.

MOOS: The former first lady responds with laughing emojis.

OBAMA: I thought I told you, and I am a real star, by the way.

To which my mom says, yes.

I have to tell her, mom, do you realize I am Michelle Obama?

MOOS: And Marianne Robinson, the former first lady's 81-year-old mom, is every mom.

But you know what's even sweeter than getting a text from your mom, when she's sitting next to you being interviewed and Gayle King asks --

GAYLE KING, TV HOST: What's the best thing about Michelle Obama that makes you proudest?

MARIANNE ROBINSON, MICHELLE OBAMA'S MOM: When I grow up, I would like to be like Michelle Obama.

(MUSIC)

MOOS: Jeanne Moos, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BURNETT: And Anderson starts now.