Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

White House: Trump to Veto if Congress Repeals National Emergency; Interview with Bill Weld (R), Former Massachusetts Governor. Aired 7-7:30a ET

Aired February 18, 2019 - 07:00   ET

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


(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: He's got to do it on his own, and I support his decision to go that route.

[07:00:05] DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I didn't need to do this. But I'd rather do it much faster.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA), CHAIRMAN, INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: If we give away the power of the purse, there will be little check and no balance left.

ANDREW MCCABE, FORMER DEPUTY FBI DIRECTOR: I believe I was fired because I opened a case against the president of the United States.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It is alarming that there were folks at the highest levels of our government considering whether or not our president is unfit to serve.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Will you subpoena McCabe and Rosenstein?

GRAHAM: How can I not?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANNOUNCER: This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota and John Berman.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Morning, everyone. Welcome to a special holiday edition of NEW DAY. John Berman is off. John Avlon joins me.

Happy Presidents' Day.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Happy Presidents' Day to you. My favorite holiday.

CAMEROTA: Is it?

AVLON: No, I'm just kidding. But I do love presidents.

CAMEROTA: But you are going to dress up as one later in the program?

AVLON: There may be a top hat, yes.

CAMEROTA: As promised. Fantastic.

All right. A top White House official says President Trump is prepared to issue the first veto of his presidency if Congress tried to repeal his national emergency that circumvents Congress for border wall money.

Democrats are planning to introduce a resolution soon, disapproving of the emergency declaration, where it is expected to pass both chambers. If the president vetoes that resolution, will enough Republican lawmakers then go against the president to override his veto?

AVLON: President Trump already facing legal challenges, something he acknowledged would happen. California's attorney general says he's working with officials in several states to sue the White House. We're expecting to see protests across the country today in response to the president's emergency declaration.

Plus, we have the latest bombshell revelations from fired FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe's new book and why one prominent Republican wants to get McCabe before Congress to answer questions.

Let's begin with CNN's Sarah Westwood. She's traveling with the president, live in West Palm Beach, Florida -- Sarah.

SARAH WESTWOOD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, John, good morning.

And the White House is digging in and CNN preparing to defend the nation's emergency declaration as California and at least six other states prepare lawsuits and the ACLU, among other groups, is also preparing for a legal battle with the Trump administration.

But beyond these roadblocks in court, House Democrats are getting ready to pass that resolution of disapproval to try to stop the president from using his executive power in this way. That could gain some support in the Senate, where there are some Republicans who are uncomfortable with this use of executive authority.

The top Trump adviser, Stephen Miller, said yesterday that the president may be willing to veto that measure if it reaches his desk. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Will the president veto that, which would be the first veto of his presidency?

STEPHEN MILLER, TRUMP SENIOR ADVISOR: Well, obviously, the president is going to protect his national emergency declaration, Chris. And I know that we're out of time, but again, I want to make this point. There's no threat --

WALLACE: So yes, he will veto?

MILLER: He's going to protect his national emergency declaration guaranteed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WESTWOOD: Now, around the country today, there are protests against the president's use of a national emergency being planned. Those protests come amid uncertainty about where exactly the administration will be getting the roughly $6 billion in federal funds that the president is hoping to unlock with this national emergency declaration.

Acting Defense Secretary Pat Shanahan said over the weekend that he's going to start to review what programs at the Pentagon he'll cut. Keep in mind that much of this money, about half, will be coming from military construction funds, so things like family housing, schools, vital facilities on military bases, those could be on the chopping block, Alisyn and John.

CAMEROTA: Yes. That's a really important graphic that we have on the screen right now, because those are things that people fought for, they voted for. Those are things that constituents wanted, that they were expecting, and so, you know, you have to rob Peter to pay Paul, basically. Sarah, thank you very much.

Let's bring in Jeffrey Toobin, CNN chief legal analyst; Bakari Sellers, former member of South Carolina's House of Representatives; and Alice Stewart. She was the communications director for Ted Cruz.

And that's where I want to start, Alice. Because explain to us how people like your former boss, Ted Cruz, can get on board with this. You know, Senator Cruz has called it a slippery slope that he's a little concerned with, the fact that the president's doing an end run around Congress. But ultimately, will Senator Cruz get on board with the fact that he's handing over the power of the purse to the president?

ALICE STEWART, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: What we're going to see, in my expectation, Alisyn, is many Republicans here in Washington will get on board with this, because this president ran and won on building a wall and securing the border; and many of them also included that in part of what they ran and won on. So this is an important issue.

Now with many things that this president has done, I agree 100 percent with the policy of it, but the pathway he has used to get there is something that I do have some concern with.

CAMEROTA: But meaning what? You agree with the emergency declaration or you don't?

STEWART: I agree with his commitment to securing the border and keeping America safe. And building a wall is something that he has wanted to do from the very beginning, and he has been committed to that.

[07:05:03] Look, I agree that declaring an emergency is going to cause some concerns down the road. We're certainly looking at the potential for facing legal challenges. But this is something that he was committed to doing and is following through on. The concern with doing this is the precedent that this sets. What is

to stop a future Democrat president from declaring national emergency on an issue that they think is important --

CAMEROTA: Right.

STEWART: -- whether it is climate change, whether it is gun control, whether it is abolishing ICE? So that is the concern.

However, the president does have the authority to do so. I think it will ultimately be decided in court, but legally, he has the authority do so; and Congress gave him that back during the National Emergencies Act.

AVLON: But, Jeff, you know, one the problems, of course, is that the president's undercut his own argument. Knowing this legal challenge would come after floating this for weeks. Let's take a listen to how he created the problem for himself potentially.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I could do the wall over a longer period of time. I didn't need to do this. But I'd rather do it much faster.

WALLACE: "I didn't need to do this." How does that justify a national emergency?

MILLER: What the president was saying is, is that like past presidents, he could choose to ignore this crisis, choose to ignore this emergency, as others have. But that's not what he's going to do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: That's, of course, not exactly what he said. And the problem is that, while emergency is not defined in this statute, the dictionary definition of emergency certainly doesn't fit this; and this weekend he's at Mar-a-Lago at the omelet bar. Also not exactly communicating urgency.

CAMEROTA: Nothing says rapid and fast like an omelet bar.

AVLON: Yes. So --

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: They cook fast.

AVLON: Presumably for the president. But nonetheless, did the president create a problem for himself where he was already going to face a serious challenge, legally?

TOOBIN: He did. He did create a problem for himself. But I don't know if it's an insurmountable problem. I mean, remember, courts are very cognizant of their own institutional limitations. They know that they don't have the the resources to do the kind of investigation that the executive branch has.

And there will certainly be some judges -- I don't know how many. And you know, this is a novel legal question. But there will certainly be some judges who say, "Look, it is the executive branch's decision how to define an emergency." They will certainly come with arguments that say this is an emergency. And some judges will say, "We just are not going to second guess the executive branch in this area." Whether that's five Supreme Court justices, I don't know. My guess is it probably is. I think we are now in a moment, a conservative moment in our courts, where there is a lot of deference to the executive branch.

So I think, you know, it's -- this is not a slam dunk for either side, this legal case. But if I had to guess, I would say the president is ultimately going to win.

CAMEROTA: Bakari, I was so struck by Stephen Miller's timeline that he gave this weekend. So he said that he was asked when he thinks that this wall, the barrier, will be built.

Now, remember, it was supposed to be 55 miles in the bipartisan deal, but now it's 230, I guess. And he said September of 2020. September of 2020 for a national emergency. They can't build a barrier before 19 months from now? Because September of 2020 seems like people might be busy thinking about who they're going to vote for; and it might be convenient to unveil the wall then. It seemed like a political timeline.

BAKARI SELLERS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, it is. And I think that Jeffrey actually has an amazing point, because I don't think this is much -- as much of a constitutional issue for this White House as it is a political issue.

I do think we're in a conservative moment, and I do think there will be a lot of deference to the executive branch in this matter. But the fact is, the president created for himself a political problem.

The first is not only is he trying to fulfill a campaign promise, but he's trying to fulfill a campaign promise and pull the wool over the people's eyes, because he said he was going to build a wall that Mexico was going to pay for. We all know that this is now going to come out of the pockets of American citizens.

But even more importantly, the second point is we know that this is going to come out of the pockets of our military men and women, because we see where this money is going to come from.

The real emergency or crisis that we have is on our military bases, where they have a shortage of housing. And this money or these monies were going to go towards building that housing.

The larger question that they have to answer politically is, if you have a House and Senate majority for two years, how is it an emergency now, but it was not an emergency then? I think that's one of the largest and most looming questions they have.

I don't think they have a legal question. I think the courts will side with this White House, unfortunately. I think they have a real big political problem that they're trying to solve, and I don't think the American public is going to forget who's supposed to pay for this wall. Because, to be honest, those of us, the five of us sitting on this show aren't supposed to be paying for this wall. I thought Mexico was paying for it.

AVLON: Alice, Bakari just said it's that possible, quite possible that the courts may decide in the president's favor. Jeffrey concurs. So as a conservative, if there is this precedent, and Republicans long resisted executive overreach; and now you have a precedent of emergency powers being able to fund priorities by a Democratic [SIC] president. When that is brought to bear by a Democratic president, will you and your fellow conservatives support the precedent, or will you fight it as political overreach?

STEWART: Well -- well, John, based on our CNN poll, look at the numbers.

AVLON: Let's do that.

STEWART: Republicans -- Republicans, more than 60 percent of Republicans say they support the president's emergency declaration. More than 70 -- around 74 percent of conservative Republicans support this idea of emergency declaration. So clearly, he has the support of Republicans, and certainly, what he has posted a lot of his emphasis on is the more conservative Republicans. That is what will help him continue to fight what he's doing.

AVLON: Sure.

STEWART: And let me just say to Bakari's point, when we -- yes, ideally, we were to build this wall and Mexico would have paid for it. When that didn't happen, the dynamics of how to achieve this certainly changed.

But even with Republicans in control of the House and Senate, we still needed Democratic support. And when we put DACA on the table and we put protections for TPS recipients on the table and we also put humanitarian aid on the table; and Democrats still -- were still in the point of saying no, that right there shows that Democrats are not willing to secure the border.

AVLON: Well --

STEWART: And that is something that all Americans can agree on. So it's time for everyone to come together. And since we did not get Democrat support on issues that they have wanted --

AVLON: Two points just for clarity on that. First of all, the president offered, basically, a three-year reprieve for DREAMEers and DACA recipients, not what the Democrats were asking for, which was a path to citizenship. But I want to --

SELLERS: He also took it away.

AVLON: -- bear into those numbers a little bit -- a little bit. Of course.

I want to bear into those numbers a little bit more closely. So you see the partisan divide on this issue. Yes, Republicans falling in line behind the president. Independents, much lower support for the emergency declaration. Democrats, not surprisingly, very little. That would indicate that this is about politics, not principle.

And if that's the standard we're going to use, can we expect conservatives to sing a very different tune about executive power when a Democratic president tries to pull an emergency order?

STEWART: Well --

AVLON: Will you -- will you be fighting a Democratic president who tries to do a similar thing?

STEWART: There's always going to be a situation where -- when President Obama used his executive powers and using his pen and a phone, specifically with regard to DACA, there were a lot of Republicans, myself included, that had some concern with his end run around Congress.

But at the end of the day, he was president of the United States. He had the authority to make that decision, and at the end of the day, he chose do so; and I supported that decision as president.

I think when we all look back on this, we can recognize the fact the president does have the authority to do so; and he is the president of the United States. He campaigned and won on this issue, and as much as it's painful to say, Democrats have to accept that.

TOOBIN: Can I just ask? I mean, you know, we're talking about the procedure here and what's -- I mean, how many people want this wall at all? I mean, that's the thing that is so interesting to me.

AVLON: We've got polling on that.

TOOBIN: Is that the president has bet his presidency on a project that is, again, popular with his base but not with much of anyone else.

And, I mean, look, as I often point out, I was wrong about 2016. I'll probably be wrong about 2020. But I don't get why this is such a winning issue for him.

CAMEROTA: It goes further than that, in fact. It's that --

SELLERS: But the -- because --

CAMEROTA: Hold on, Bakari, because I want you to comment on this. The things that he's promising, the wall can do are also really questionable.

You know, he promised that he was going to tackle the opioid crisis. Opioid overdoses have gone up under President Trump.

He's now claiming in that press conference that the wall will solve the drugs, the heroin, and fentanyl and opioids coming into this country. Really? What's going to happen when you seal off those 230 miles and somehow, miraculously, we still have an opioid crisis in this country?

SELLERS: Well, I mean, the word of the day should be "hypocrisy." I mean, I understand Alice's point. She wasn't quite accurate on the TPS and DACA, because the president actually took those away and then tried to give it back in negotiations.

But hypocrisy is the word of the day. I mean, when you look at Lindsey Graham and how he contorts himself as the chairman of Judiciary and how he stood in front of a camera and stated that the presidential overreach when you talk about DACA and how you should not use your -- your emergency powers to do such things as this, and it was a slippery slope and it was unconstitutional, but to now stand back and allow this to happen.

In January of 2021, if there is, and we hope there to be a Democratic president, and on day one, they declare a national emergency on gun violence in this country, which is running rampant; on day one, if they declare a national emergency on climate change, which is -- which is destroying this earth that we've inherited, then I think Republicans are going to all out have a hissy fit.

And the problem that we're -- the problem that we're seeing is that no one right now is having any conviction. There's not one Republican. There's not one Republican who stands on the side of the Constitution. That's the biggest problem.

[07:15:10] CAMEROTA: All right. Bakari, Jeffrey, Alice, thank you very much for all of your varied perspectives on this.

STEWART: Thanks, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: OK. He's the first Republican to say that he wants to challenge President Trump in 2020. Up next, we talk to former Massachusetts governor William Weld on if he thinks he has a chance and why now.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAM WELD (R), FORMER GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS: I have established an exploratory committee to pursue the possibility of my running for the presidency of the United States. As a Republican we cannot sit passively as our precious democracy slips quietly into darkness.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: All right. That is former Massachusetts governor Bill Weld, announcing an exploratory committee to challenge President Trump for the Republican nomination in 2020.

In his speech, Governor Weld said Republicans in exhibit -- in Washington exhibit all the symptoms of Stockholm syndrome, and he is doing his part "to stand up to the school yard bully," end quote. Joining us now is former governor Bill Weld. Good morning, Governor.

WELD: Thank you, Alisyn, good to be with you.

CAMEROTA: So what was it for you? What was the straw that you broke the camel's back that made you think now is time to jump into this?

WELD: I think now's the time, because the New Hampshire primary is one year away. Time's a-wasting. If one's going to make a serious effort to have the actual issues discussed, as opposed to a bunch of political palaver and slogans and in-fighting in Washington, now's the time to do it.

CAMEROTA: But was there something that President Trump did that made you think, "Yes, I'm going to get in"? I mean, when you say that he's too unstable to carry out the duties of higher office, what was it? How so?

WELD: You know, one moment does stick in my mind, and that's the time when the president shooed all the U.S. press out of the Oval Office and brought in Ambassador Kislyak from Russia and Sergey Lavrov from Russia to have his summit meeting with them, with nobody present except TASS, which is the Russian state press organ. That showed contempt for the American people, if anything I've ever seen does.

CAMEROTA: He shared classified information during that.

WELD: Yes. No, it just gets worse and worse. And the president does not exhibit curiosity about history or even world events.

It troubles me that he -- you know, abroad he seeks out the company of people who are dictators and despots, people like Vladimir Putin, like President Kim of North Korea. He said of President Kim, "Oh, what a -- what a great strong kid. He iced his uncle. He even iced his own brother." I mean, this is mob talk, which I had some familiarity from my days in the Justice Department.

CAMEROTA: And so was that the moment? When you saw what he did in the Oval Office with sharing classified information, was that the moment you thought, "I think I'm going to primary -- I'm going to try to launch a primary attack on him"?

WELD: There was not one moment. I do think the president has shown a tendency to associate with autocrats. I think his domestic instincts are in the same direction.

I recall him saying on television, "Wouldn't it be great if we didn't have to have elections." I'm sure he will say that was a joke. I'm not so sure it was a joke.

I mean, the response to my announcement of an exploratory committee has been for everybody to close ranks among the state Republican parties and say, "No, we can't have a primary." And the truth is that, if the president had his first choice, he wouldn't have a primary; and he wouldn't have an election.

CAMEROTA: So when you say that some of your fellow Republicans have Stockholm syndrome, who are you referring to?

WELD: The general reception in Congress is pretty quiet to some of the president's outrageous conduct and behavior. And by that, I mean they identify with their captor. That's what Stockholm syndrome means. So they identify with him as the emblem of the Republican Party.

You couldn't have a much worse emblem, if in my view. So it's just everybody going quiet. There's a hush over the Republican Party in Washington, D.C., and they're content to let the president take the lead and be the spear point. And he's going in all the wrong directions, in my view.

This whole thing about the wall is a political symbol for him. All the experts will tell you what we really need down there near the border is more drones, more people. And I realize the president campaigned on it, but it doesn't make it any more attractive an issue.

It goes right back to the nativism of the Know-Nothing Party in the 1850s, which was half of the Whig Party. The other half become the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln. And I'm trying to get us back in the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln rather than the Know-Nothing, anti-Catholic zealots of the 1850s.

CAMEROTA: I just don't know if that's where the Republican Party is right now. Here's the latest poll by CNN. This is in terms of whether people support the national emergency for a border wall. This is among conservative Republicans, which of course, is the president's base. Seventy-two percent say yes; 21 percent say no.

And so when you say that, you know, Republicans are sort of in the sway of the president, I mean, aren't they in the sway of his base and they don't want to alienate them?

WELD: Well, there is a very conservative group, probably not -- not my base for sure. There are 20 primaries where independents and unenrolled voters can come in and vote in the Republican primary. Those will have my attention.

But beyond that, in states like New Hampshire, people like to sit down and talk with the candidates and see them up close and personal. And, you know, I think when you have conversations with people, when they break out of this duopoly: "Everybody's got to be a Republican or a Democrat, and I'm going to be a Republican, because we have to kill the Democrats" or the other way around; if people think for themselves and break out of that sort of -- that stranglehold of the two parties, as they present, then I think there is a good chance that people can be reflective and think there's another way to do things than to waste all this time in Washington.

CAMEROTA: Well, last time around, I mean, you ran as part of a third- party ticket. What do you think of Howard Schultz's run as an independent?

WELD: I think people are giving Howard Schultz a bad rap, and they say, "Oh, he's going to -- he's going to hurt the Democrats, because all his votes will come from the Democrats." I don't think so. Howard Schultz is a business guy. I think his votes would come from Trump.

The libertarian vote last time, when I was on the ticket with former Republican governor Gary Johnson, our votes came 3 to 1 out of Trump, not from Mrs. Clinton. And the Democrats howled that we cost them the election.

But think about it. A libertarian vote is going to be a change vote or a protest vote. Those were not going to Mrs. Clinton last time.

CAMEROTA: So why don't you run as an independent?

WELD: I thought about the Libertarian Party again, but I decided I really wanted to go mano-a-mano with Mr. Trump. There's so many things he's doing that I think are undermining our Democratic institutions; and I think he's leading the country, in the most fundamental way, in the wrong direction. And that clearest shot is in the Republican primary.

CAMEROTA: And so one of your strategies, as you just said, is to go -- is to focus on the states where Democrats can vote in the Republican primary?

WELD: No, no, no. Democrats can't ever take a Republican ballot. It's unenrolled and independent voters who can come in the. And that always helped me when I was running. The independents came in and voted for me six to one, because they saw me as kind of a centrist, maybe center right, but somebody who would work across the aisle to try to get things done. That's what's not happening in Washington, D.C., right now.

CAMEROTA: Well, Governor Bill Weld, thank you for explaining all of this to us. Obviously, we will be watching very closely your next moves.

WELD: Thanks, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: All right. A programming note. Democratic presidential candidate Senator Amy Klobuchar will take part in a CNN town hall with Don Lemon tonight at 10 p.m. only an CNN. This is in New Hampshire.

AVLON: Up next, his story got attention from Hollywood to presidential candidates. Now there are serious questions about whether "Empire" actor Jussie Smollett was attacked or if it was all a hoax. The latest twist in the case next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)