Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Interview with Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ); Interview with Rep. Chris Stewart (R-UT); Trump-Kim Bromance. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired February 26, 2019 - 08:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:30:22] JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: President Trump is set to arrive in Vietnam in less than one hour. So what can we expect in his meeting with North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-un? Some key Senate Democrats have laid out their expectations in a letter to the administration.

Joining us now is Democratic Senator Bob Menendez. He is the ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Senator, thank you so much for being with us this morning.

You know, you told CNN yesterday that we don't need what you call a made for TV moment between President Trump and Kim Jong-un. What would that be exactly?

SEN. ROBERT MENENDEZ (D), NEW JERSEY: Well, that would be very much similar to what the first summit was where President Trump walked away with virtually nothing towards the goal of a denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. Kim Jong-un walked away with the beginnings of international recognition. And there was a lot of pomp and circumstance. But even the communique that was, you know, put forth from that meeting was insignificant, the most insignificant communique of any administration that has ever had any types of efforts with North Korea.

So what we need is a verifiable denuclearization of the Korean peninsula, which means the elimination of the nuclear weapons, the ballistic missiles and the infrastructure that supports them. That's the goal.

And the president walked away from the last summit without even a definition, an agreed upon definition of what denuclearization of the Korean peninsula was all about. That should have been a minimum. And so I'm concerned that the president is headed to another summit without the appropriate preparation and I'm concerned that he continues to give Kim Jong-un international acceptance at a time that our efforts for maximum pressure need to be -- continue to be pursued so that we can ultimately achieve our goal.

BERMAN: So the cessation of missile testing or nuclear testing, which the president says that's good, that's not enough for you?

MENENDEZ: Well, it's a bit of a showmanship, right, because Kim Jong- un has already done all the testing that he needs in order to know that his weaponry has been perfected. And so the ending of testing, and even the -- you know, the demolition of some of the sites that they -- that they did is because they didn't need it anymore. So it was inconsequential at the end of the day. That's -- that's a TV moment when they exploded those tunnels.

BERMAN: So --

MENENDEZ: But that isn't ultimately making any real progress towards denuclearization.

BERMAN: What I'm getting from you and mostly other Democrats I'm speaking to is the implication that you're worried the president's going to give something up here. What are you afraid he will give up?

MENENDEZ: Well, I'm afraid that what we'll end up with is a North Korea nuclear state that has now positioned itself in international recognition on the way to lifting sanctions and receive very little in terms of ending verifiably North Korea's nuclear program. And I am afraid that the president goes there, for example, and declares a peace with North Korea without getting anything in return. So I'm really worried that the president, for a victory -- what he'll describe as a victory -- will leave us far short from what we need as security for the Korean peninsula, for our allies in the region, like Japan, for our own interests in terms of our national security.

BERMAN: Let me ask you, since we're on the subject of foreign affairs and people you consider to be dictators, Nicholas Maduro, the leader in Venezuela, gave an interview to Tom Llamas of ABC News, he gave an interview to Jorge Ramos of Univision, and then seized all the equipment and detained them for a while. But the Llamas interview at ABC got out. I want to play a little bit of it for you.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NICOLAS MADURO, VENEZUELAN PRESIDENT (through translator): The United States wants Venezuela's oil, and they're willing to go to war for that oil. Everything that the United States government has done has been condemned. They're trying to fabricate a crisis to justify political escalation and a military intervention in Venezuela to bring a war to South America.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Do you think -- you -- you've been very critical of the Maduro regime. Do you think the Trump administration is trying to create the pretext for military intervention?

MENENDEZ: I do not. And I certainly don't support that.

But what I do support and where I would say that the president is at correctly is in recognizing Juan Guaido as a legitimate interim president of Venezuela under the Venezuelan constitution.

[08:35:00] I listened to that interview. And only in Maduro's parallel alternate universe does he think that we want oil when we are now the largest producer of oil in the world.

And, secondly that -- that, internationally, our actions have been condemned. No, over 50 countries, including most of the European Union, have recognized Juan Guaido and said that Maduro is an illegitimate president. The Lima Group, within our own hemisphere, has said the same thing. It's Maduro who's oppressing his people. It's Maduro in one of the -- what should be one of the wealthiest countries in the western hemisphere is keeping his people hungry and without medical supplies. And he showed who he is by not allowing the international aid to peacefully cross into Venezuela in order to help the Venezuelan people.

BERMAN: You know, it's interesting, discussing Maduro last night in a CNN town hall with Democratic Presidential Candidate Bernie Sanders, Wolf Blitzer pressed Senator Sanders, why won't you call Maduro a dictator. And Senator Sanders wouldn't call him a dictator. Is he, in your mind, a dictator?

MENENDEZ: Oh, absolutely. He's a corrupt dictator. He has a combination of an absolute dictatorship and a narco traffic state. He keeps the generals around him in line by a combination of making them part of that narco trafficking and the moneys that proceed from it and at the same time by Cuban security that he has dividing the generals, one against the other, so they won't think about creating a coup. So there's no question that he is corrupt.

BERMAN: Is it a mistake, in your mind then, for Senator Sanders not to call it by its name?

MENENDEZ: Absolutely. Dictatorship is dictatorship whether it comes from the right or the left. And dictatorship oppresses their people. And so I'm really surprised that Senator Sanders could not simply at least call him a dictator.

BERMAN: Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey, thanks so much for being with us.

MENENDEZ: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: All right, Democrats in the House are set to vote to block the president's national emergency declaration today. Will they get any Republican support? We ask a Republican who has spoken out against this move, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:41:06] CAMEROTA: The House will vote to block the president's national emergency declaration today. Democrats have the votes to pass it. So, will any Republican representatives cross party lines to vote that way as well?

Joining us now to discuss this and so much more, we have Utah Republican Congressman Chris Stewart. He serves on the House Intel Committee. And we have questions for you on that, too.

Congressman, good morning. But let's talk about what's happening today. So you have said in the past that you think President Trump is making a mistake by declaring a national emergency. So today will you vote to block that?

REP. CHRIS STEWART (R), UTAH: Yes, you know, I've never questioned, at least after talking to many scholars, it's become clear to me the president has this authority. I don't doubt he doesn't have the authority. What I wonder is if it's a good idea.

And I've been pretty consistent on that. When President Obama did things like declaring his fix for DACA, something I actually supported his policy, I said, I don't think he has the authority to do this. The Constitution is pretty clear this is a mandate of Congress. And that's my fear. The president having authority or whether it's a good idea are two separate questions.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

STEWART: And I think it's much better if we have something where we work together on Congress on this and -- as we've done now 32 times over the last generation or so where presidents independently declare these emergencies.

CAMEROTA: So it sounds like you will vote to block it.

STEWART: Well, I -- again, this is something that -- that the language of this bill is so tightly construed, it said that the president doesn't have this authority and it says that there isn't an emergency on the border. I disagree with those two things. He does have the authority. There clearly is an emergency. I just wish the president didn't have this authority.

And I've said I think to you and others, I worry about what a future president will do. A president from a Democratic Party who says, you know, gun violence is a -- is a national emergency or climate change.

CAMEROTA: Yes. Understood.

STEWART: And, again, I think we're better if we work these problems out with Congress, as our founding fathers intended.

CAMEROTA: You've made a great case. So it sounds like you'll vote to block it.

STEWART: No, once again, the way this is written, I can't because it's written in such a way that isn't true. It says that there's no emergency on the border, and I disagree with that. There clearly is an emergency on the border. If this -- if this language said we should relook at this president's authority broadly, I would support that. But this is very specific regarding an emergency on the border and it's just not accurate.

CAMEROTA: Oh, OK. So the way this is written you're going to vote to support the president's national emergency because you believe there is an emergency on the border. So though you don't like that the president has declared a national emergency, you are going to vote to support the national emergency?

STEWART: Yes, I would support a broad effort to rescind or to confine any president's ability to declare emergencies. This language today specifically says there is no emergency. Actually what it says is the emergency on the border is over. And that's clearly not true.

And it's really too bad because there's a wasted opportunity here. There's a lot of conservatives who have always been uncomfortable with this emergency power presidents have. If the Democrats had been willing to work with us on something more broad and something that would have applied in future situations, I think they would have had a much more bipartisan response to that.

CAMEROTA: I mean because your statement that you put out two weeks ago, I read just a portion of it, but it goes on to say, whether the president has the authority or not, it sets a dangerous precedent and places America on a path we will regret. It deeply worries me that a future Democratic president may consider gun violence or climate change a national emergency and what actions they may take then.

STEWART: Yes.

CAMEROTA: So I understand that you're saying you don't like the wording, you don't like kind of the letter of how this is written. But you certainly don't like the principle of what the president is doing, so why not vote against it?

STEWART: Well, once again, because I don't have that opportunity to vote against that principle. This is a very tightly written, very tightly confined resolution.

And if you go back to my original statement there, I said, whether the president has this authority or not. That was a question originally. And that was -- the reason the question is, we didn't know yet at that time what the president was going to do and how broad this would be. Now we do know the answer to the question now. It's really quite tightly confined within the Department of Homeland Security revenue. As someone who sits on the appropriations committee as well, that's something I'm very protective of, Congress' ability to control the purse strings, as we say, and to mandate where that money is spent.

[08:45:26] But, once again, very broadly I'm concerned that the president becomes more and more powerful in this particular case with this resolution that says the emergency on the border has passed. That's clearly not the case.

CAMEROTA: OK. Thank you for explaining all of that.

STEWART: Yes.

CAMEROTA: Let's move on to what else is happening this week in Congress. Michael Cohen will be testifying in front of your committee, House Intel, on Thursday. What's your burning question for him?

STEWART: Oh, my gosh. Well, this will be the third hearing that he'll have here this week. And I guess what I would ask him first is, one more time, do you have any information in any way about collusion, conspiracy regarding the Trump campaign and Russian agents or Russian efforts? And that is, after all, the mandate of the Intelligence Committee. It has been our focus. It should be our focus.

I think he's going to tell us what he told us before, and that is, no, I have no evidence of any collusion or conspiracy. But we have to approach him a little skeptically because we know he hasn't been honest with the committee and with other committees in the past.

CAMEROTA: Yes, but, let's say that he testifies to President Trump having engaged in some sort of criminal conduct.

STEWART: Yes.

CAMEROTA: Then what will you do?

STEWART: Well, for one thing, my jaw will drop because if he suddenly says that, it will so clearly be against everything that he has said to the committee and frankly publicly about that. And the second thing is, my jaw would drop because he will be the only person who will make that claim.

And Mr. Mueller has made that pretty clear in his expansive investigation. He has not charged any U.S. person with conspiracy or with collusion with the Russian government.

CAMEROTA: Well, I just mean any criminal activity. Let's say that in the course of testifying to you all, he brings some sort of evidence, he testifies that the president has engaged in some criminal activity, anything, then --

STEWART: Yes, well --

CAMEROTA: Then would you support impeachment proceedings?

STEWART: Well, of course that entirely depends on what he says and if there's evidence of it.

But, again, you've got to be a little bit skeptical on this. I mean if he were to come forward and say, a, the president did this and this is clearly going, we should impeach him. Surely as a journalist you would be a little skeptical of that given his history and given what we know so far is a lack of any corroborating evidence regarding that. So if he were to make some claims that, you know, would suggest impeachment, we, of course, we would have to pursue that. But I think any reasonable person would pursue it very responsibly because --

CAMEROTA: Oh, for sure.

STEWART: Yes.

CAMEROTA: No, I mean if he brings some sort of concrete evidence. If it's not just his word, if he brings some sort of corroborating evidence, if he has -- I mean it sounds like he has -- it sounds like he had a mountain of things that he was gathering, from audiotapes, he might have notes, who knows, OK? STEWART: Yes. Yes.

CAMEROTA: But I'm just saying that you're open -- you're open to whatever he says you might have to follow up on?

STEWART: Well, of course. I mean anyone -- any reasonable person would be. If someone makes accusations, you have to look at those and pursue them. But I am extraordinarily comfortable that that's not going to be the case. If he shocks us, then we'll look at it. But I think it's very unlikely.

CAMEROTA: OK, Congressman Chris Stewart, thank you very much for taking time out of your busy week to talk to us on NEW DAY.

STEWART: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: Obviously, we are waiting -- awaiting this with bated breath.

Thank you.

STEWART: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: John.

BERMAN: All right, they put on a steamy performance at the Oscars, but Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper got our Jeanne Moos thinking about another couple in the news this week. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:52:56] CAMEROTA: I told you we'd find a way to get it in the show.

BERMAN: It had to be done.

Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga, they had their steamy Oscars duet. It got a lot of us thinking about a lot of different things. But it got CNN's Jeanne Moos thinking about another couple spending time together this week. Remember, President Trump said of Kim Jong-un, we're in love. Jeanne investigates.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JEANNE MOOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): With everyone going gaga over Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper, not quite consummating their Oscar duet with a kiss --

LADY GAGA, MUSICIAN (singing): We're far from the shallow (ph) now.

MOOS: We got to thinking about another couple preparing for their close-ups.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Now we have this great relationship and let's see what happens.

MOOS: All eyes fixed upon them as they take center stage. TRUMP: We see eye to eye.

I like him, he likes me.

He likes me. I like him. Who knows what's going to happen?

MOOS: Heart throbs in Hanoi. Will the bromance once again blossom?

MOOS (on camera): President Trump treats Chairman Kim almost like a diplomatic virgin.

TRUMP: He's never had a relationship with anybody from this country.

He hasn't had lots of relationships anywhere.

I don't want to rush anybody.

MOOS: After all, look what happened --

EMMANUEL MACRON, FRENCH PRESIDENT: Thank you.

MOOS: When President Trump and French President Macron rushed their bromance.

TRUMP: I like him a lot.

MOOS: They couldn't keep their hands off each other. But then disagreements arose and the next thing you know President Trump was breaking up by tweet. The problem is that Emmanuel suffers from a very low approval rating in France, 26 percent. Make France great again.

Make bromance great again.

TRUMP: Kim Jong-un said some terrific things about me.

BILL MAHER, HOST, "REAL TIME WITH BILL MAHER": Great. Maybe he'll sign your (EXPLETIVE DELETED).

MOOS: Will it turn out to be just a shallow relationship or is this something deep?

LADY GAGA AND BRADLEY COOPER (singing): In the (INAUDIBLE).

TRUMP: And then we fell in love, OK?

LADY GAGA AND BRADLEY COOPER (singing): In the (INAUDIBLE).

[08:55:00] TRUMP: He wrote me beautiful letters. And they're great letters.

LADY GAGA AND BRADLEY COOPER (singing): In the (INAUDIBLE).

TRUMP: But we have a special feeling.

MOOS: You can almost imagine President Trump and Kim Jong-un crooning their own diplomatic duet at the piano. But Lady Gaga may have bigger hands.

LADY GAGA AND BRADLEY COOPER (singing): In the (INAUDIBLE).

MOOS: Jeanne Moos, CNN.

TRUMP: We fell in love.

MOOS: New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CAMEROTA: Oh, my gosh.

BERMAN: There is so much that happened in the last 30 seconds of the piece.

CAMEROTA: I agree. I had never seen it -- had never seen the verbiage through quite that lens before that Jeanne -- but I do feel that Lady Gaga has better taste in a mate than President Trump does in this case.

BERMAN: Than Kim Jong-un?

CAMEROTA: Yes. Yes.

BERMAN: We'll see. We'll have to see. And I don't even know if Kim plays the piano. I just want to be clear about that. I don't know if, you know, he has any musical talents.

CAMEROTA: There's a duet in our future.

BERMAN: Oh.

CAMEROTA: All right. Let John know what you feel on Twitter, please.

BERMAN: This is a great day for you not to be on Twitter.

CAMEROTA: President Trump is set to land any minute now in Vietnam, as Michael Cohen starts his testimony just minutes from now on Capitol Hill. It's a very busy morning. So Poppy Harlow is going to pick up our coverage, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

END