Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

President Trump Walks Away from Talks with North Korean Leader Kim Jong-un with No Deal on Denuclearization; Michael Cohen Testifies Before Congress; Interview with Rep. David Cicilline, (D-RI). Aired 8- 8:30a ET

Aired February 28, 2019 - 8:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:00:10] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is CNN breaking news.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to your NEW DAY. It is Thursday, February 28th, 8:00 in the east. And we do begin with breaking news. President Trump is on a plane right now on his way back from his second summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong- un and he's coming back with nothing. The meeting was cancelled midway through. He walked away, cutting the meeting short. President Trump said talks fell through after the north insisted the United States should lift all sanctions. The president noted that he and Kim also don't see eye to eye on exactly what denuclearization details.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: He has a certain vision. And it's not exactly our vision, but it's a lot closer than it was a year ago. And I think eventually we'll get there. But for this particular visit we decided that we had to walk. And we'll see what happens.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: It is already a very busy news morning here. CNN has just learned that the president was actually advised by senior members of his national security team that a deal would be unlikely, even though the president himself thought that Kim was ready to deal. According to an official, President Trump was advised by senior people on his staff including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Adviser John Bolton that he should walk away from the talks if they proved unfruitful.

Meanwhile, as all this was happening in Vietnam, President Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen was giving damning testimony on Capitol Hill. In a dramatic flip Michael Cohen claims President Trump committed crimes while in office. Cohen will be back on Capitol Hill today meeting with the House Intelligence Committee this morning behind closed doors. President Trump, meanwhile, is calling Michael Cohen a liar.

So joining us to discuss all of these developments, we have Maggie Haberman, White House Correspondent at "The New York Times" and a CNN political analyst. Maggie, great to have you here. It's been a busy morning. We all have our breaking news for people who are just waking up, the deal fell apart. I guess I should say the deal. A potential deal that the president was hoping he would strike in Vietnam never came to pass. But it seemed abrupt, the ending, because the table was set for lunch.

BERMAN: Literally.

CAMEROTA: Literally, the table with the settings was waiting for the leaders. It never came to pass. The signing ceremony had to be cancelled. And so our reporting is now that it was really the president alone who felt he would be able to sway Kim Jong-un when his advisers around him were saying it would be unlikely.

MAGGIE HABERMAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: I think it became pretty clear that the image of the two of them sitting together over lunch when the president had been warned that this was not going to happen, this would be problematic for the president going forward, especially after the day back home with Michael Cohen's testimony.

Look, this is, ironically the president is going to be praised by members of his own party for what he did in terms of walking away. He will not be praised for giving Kim cover about the death of Otto Warmbier and saying he takes his word for it. But he is going to be able to say, look, I didn't stay and continue with this.

That said, to your point, the only person who really seemed to think that this was possible going ahead under this dynamic was the president. This is why you have national security advisers and national security professionals and foreign policy professionals and why previous presidents have tended to listen to them instead of just going with their own gut.

So this might end up fine, but it is a waste of time. It's not clear that he actually -- he literally got nothing. And it became clear yesterday that he was going to get nothing out of this. And they're going to put the best spin they can on it, but when the president repeatedly over and over describes these things in grand terms as possibilities, when they fall apart it is notable.

BERMAN: It really is interesting, Maggie. And you raise the point that there were a lot critics on both sides of the aisle concerned that the president would give away too much. He didn't. He left without giving away what these people were worried about giving. On the other hand, even though you have to be prepared to walk, as the president said repeatedly this morning, it's a long way to fly, 8,000 miles is a long way to fly literally and figuratively. Going to Kim Jong-un for a second time, it is a long way to fly just to walk with nothing.

HABERMAN: On the one hand what the president I suspect would say, and his defenders would say is we tried. It's good to show that you were actually serious about getting this kind of a deal. That said, what his critics will say he continues to act as if he can have a good faith negotiation with a dictator who doesn't have any interest in denuclearizing. And I think that became pretty clear to the president. I think this is an interesting moment in his presidency where he seems to be acknowledging objective reality on a foreign policy matter that he has tried to will into existence. We'll see what the aftereffects of it are. But it's an important moment.

CAMEROTA: I agree with you it's very interesting because it's also I think a really stark illustration of, as you know well, Maggie, that President Trump believes that no one is immune from his charms really.

[08:05:09] And in his past life as the head of the Trump Organization, his powers of persuasion did go a long way. And now he's running up against real world international realities. And he can't close the deal. And I just think we have just watched all of this play out over the past 72 hours.

HABERMAN: It isn't even can't close the deal. There was no deal. I think that's the important point. This isn't like there were terms on the table and then they just couldn't agree to final stages. This is that the president wanted something to be that his own advisers were telling him was not going to happen. And so I think again, the problem has been for the president over and over, over the last two years, he has treated government as another version of what he did in his real estate business. And it's just not the same.

BERMAN: Maggie, one of the things it's also interesting to do when there is breaking news is to follow you following the news. Yesterday I was paying attention to your analysis of Michael Cohen's testimony on Capitol Hill. And one of the moments that caught your attention is when Michael Cohen testified that the president instructed him while Cohen was speaking with a reporter, Emily Jane Fox, instructed him to lie about the hush money payments and the president's involvement in those hush money payments. Why is that significant?

HABERMAN: Because I think -- look, I think the argument from Cohen's detractors is we didn't learn a whole lot new. And on the broad stroke level that's true. It's still breathtaking to hear this being said on the record, on camera, under penalty of perjury, especially about a president who tends to act like as if something is not either on audio or on video, it doesn't exist. And so this was undeniable what Michael Cohen was saying, that this was his version of events.

But things that Michael Cohen talked about the president doing while he was president, it's not that they are worse, but they are different. And they do when it comes to Congress's oversight role gets much more in the wheelhouse of what they can do something about. So as president, instructing his former lawyer to lie about his involvement and knowledge about payments that we now know are related to a campaign finance violation, a federal campaign finance violation, is striking. The fact that he was making these payments as president still, signing the checks himself, is striking and significant.

And what significance it has doesn't move any Republicans in the Senate, possibly not based on what we have seen over and over and especially as you saw Republicans attack Michael's credibility. But if it affects the American people and impacts how they see things, I think that's where you could see a difference. CAMEROTA: For whoever these people are that think there was nothing

new yesterday, I don't know how jaded you have to be. We saw the checks --

BERMAN: That's my copy. That was my copy.

CAMEROTA: That's your check, I know. I'm afraid you're actually going to cash it soon at a bank you have been carrying it around so long. But we saw the checks. We saw him spell out, Michael Cohen spell out how he and Allen Weisselberg, the CFO, were tasked by President Trump. He said, OK, we're going to pay the 130. You guys go back to Allen's office, you guys figure out how this is going to happen. All the color behind the scenes. That's just one example.

HABERMAN: The color is the news. I think that remember, it's important to bear in mind the breathtaking amount of information we already have about this case. So for instance, that audio that we reported on and then CNN obtained of Michael Cohen talking to the president before he was the president when he was the candidate about reimbursements, about the "National Enquirer," about AMI and David Pecker, Michael Cohen mentions Allen Weisselberg on the tape. We have reported previously that Allen Weisselberg was involved in setting up these payments. But to your point, it is hearing it from Michael Cohen's own mouth that has a very different impact.

BERMAN: Have you had a chance to check in with any White House insiders to get their feeling on how it went yesterday? What are their biggest concerns?

HABERMAN: Most White House advisers were trying to avoid this and pretend it was not going on and look at other things. The folks in North Korea clearly wished it was not going on all around them as they were dealing with this potential summit that they were hoping, or the president was hoping to make some progress with. They were concerned about how the president was going to react. Everyone I spoke to yesterday said he was pretty calm. But, look, he often has a delayed reaction about these things, I'm not sure how much of the coverage he's seeing. But the coverage is devastating for him.

CAMEROTA: Maggie Haberman, thank you very much for giving us the analysis of everything that happened yesterday and in the past 24 hours.

BERMAN: When Maggie Haberman is a little bit surprised you know it was significant.

CAMEROTA: I lit my hair on fire at that point.

BERMAN: Exactly. If Maggie is oh, that was a little interesting, you're like, whoa.

Now that Michael Cohen has testified in public, the big question is what are Democrats going to do about it? What's the next move?

[08:10:03] We're going to talk to a key House member next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: In about an hour Michael Cohen will be back on Capitol Hill for a third day of testimony, this time behind closed doors to the House Intelligence Committee. The president's former lawyer accused the president of repeatedly lying and really committing crimes while in office.

So what is next for Democrats in the House of Representatives? Joining me now is Democratic Congressman David Cicilline. He is on the House Judiciary Committee which has a keen interest in all of this. Congressman, thanks for being with us. I want to start this conversation by listening to something that Chairman Elijah Cummings said after this dramatic hearing yesterday with Michael Cohen. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you believe that the president committed a crime while in office?

REP. ELIJAH CUMMINGS, (D) CHAIRMAN, HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE: Based on what, looking at the texts and listening to Mr. Cohen, it appears that he did.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: So, congressman, yes or no, has the president committed crimes while in office?

REP. DAVID CICILLINE, (D) JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: I think Chairman Cummings is correct based on the testimony that we saw yesterday. It does appear in fact the president engaged in crimes while in office. We saw evidence really of a crime spree that began before he became president and continued into the White House.

This was the first public oversight hearing of the Oversight Committee. The Judiciary Committee will begin its oversight work very shortly.

[08:15:00]

This is really the beginning of congressional oversight and investigation of this administration. We haven't been able to do oversight for two years because our Republican colleagues were unwilling to do that with us. And that's changed and we will now begin this work.

This is serious. These are serious allegations. We have a responsibility in the Judiciary Committee to fully investigate these and many other claims made with respect to the president and this administration. We intend to do that.

BERMAN: So, you just said yes, based upon the evidence, crimes in office and a crime spree, you said, before office. What are the first areas you think that Congress needs to investigate? CICILLINE: Well, I think we need to investigate both the payment of

hush money to influence the outcome of the presidential election. I think we need to look at the financial crimes that have been alleged. I think we need to look at all of the evidence that's been presented. Some of it presented during the course of the special counsel's investigation, some of it that was revealed yesterday.

We intend to do a robust review of all of the information and conduct oversight. We'll set out in the coming weeks our strategy and what areas we'll focus on. But there is a lot of oversight that's been building up for two years that we haven't been able to do. We pleaded with our Republican chairman to begin oversight hearings.

We are going to do our oversight responsibilities even if our Republican colleagues want to behave like defense lawyers for the president rather than independent members of another branch of government with oversight responsibility.

BERMAN: I want to read you part of the Constitution. This is Article II, Section 4.

The president, vice president and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for and conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

You used the phrase crime spree. You talked about evidence of crimes while Donald Trump has been in office.

Do either of those or any of that constitute in your mind high crimes and misdemeanors?

CICILLINE: Well, I think there is no question that we have seen evidence both in what has been made public in the special counsel's investigation and certainly what Mr. Cohen testified to which constitutes crimes. I mean, there's no question about it. We now have the ability to investigate these.

The special counsel has been at work for two years. But Congress really is only beginning its oversight and investigative work because it was in Republican hands and they refused to do it. So, we have a lot of work to do.

We've got to corroborate evidence. We've got to bring in witnesses. We've got to subpoena documents.

So, this will -- you know, we have a lot of investigative and oversight work to do.

BERMAN: I get that.

With some Democrats it seems there is a hesitancy to use the I-word, impeachment. I'm trying to understand the space between what you are willing to say today, which is evidence of crimes. Where is the space between crimes, evidence of crimes and impeachment proceedings?

CICILLINE: Well, I think, you know, everyone wants to be careful. We recognize you have one occasion to proceed with impeachment. We ought to do it when we have gathered all of the evidence that would support it. And I think it's -- you know, people want to be sure they don't appear they have prejudged it in some way.

If you are asking me if it seems likely the president could be removed from office based on what we know, is it more likely today than it was on Tuesday, I think the answer to that is yes.

But this is really the beginning of the congressional investigation work. We ought to be clear about it. If the facts and the evidence warrant removal of the president from office, we have a constitutionality responsibility to do it. If they do not, then we cannot do it.

It shouldn't be done for political reason, and it shouldn't be avoided for a political reason. We have a duty. We have an oath. We've taken on oath.

So, we've got to gather the evidence. We've got to conduct a full investigation, bring in the witnesses, gather documentary evidence, and then make a determination as to whether or not it's appropriate to move forward with impeachment.

BERMAN: Seven hours and 21 minutes as Alisyn keeps telling me, I leave out the 21 minutes. What were the most surprising things to you?

CICILLINE: I mean, I was struck by Mr. Cohen's testimony about how he was really -- the line where he said to the Republican members of the committee: I'm doing what you did for ten years. I did for ten years what you are doing today. I defended the president at all costs. I now understand how dangerous and wrong it is.

And his willingness to share in a very honest way many things we didn't know about, and with really no expectation that he's going to get anything. He has everything to lose by in any way being dishonest to Congress. I think he was a very compelling witness and a broken man. But someone who recognized he had to look his children in the eye and could control the future, maybe not the past.

BERMAN: I'm out of time, but you used the phrase "honest man" in combination with Michael Cohen. The Republicans would say those aren't words that should go together. Just very quickly, do you think he's credible?

CICILLINE: Oh, I do think he's credible. I think that he acknowledged he was untruthful and he lied for the president. You know, the prisons are filled with people who are convicted because someone from inside the organization came forward and told the truth, and it's really the only way to penetrate large criminal organizations.

[08:20:10] So, prisons are filled with people like that. It happens all the time. It's up to the American people and members of Congress to assess his credibility to look at the other evidence to support it. But I thought he was credible. I thought he was honest with the

committee and acknowledged his past misdeeds and his past failings of being honest to Congress. I think he brought in documentary evidence that supported many things he said.

BERMAN: David Cicilline of Rhode Island, thanks for being with us, Congressman.

CICILLINE: My pleasure.

CAMEROTA: OK, John.

So, what exactly is the legal jeopardy for President Trump after Michael Cohen's testimony? We discuss that, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: It was a riveting display on Capitol Hill yesterday.

Seven hours of testimony from President Trump's former fixer. He was venerated by Democrats. He was called a liar by Republicans. Which one is it?

John Avlon joins us now with his five big take as in the reality check, John.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: That's right, guys.

So, look, it was the most consequential congressional testimony from a former aide since John Dean helped bring down Nixon.

[08:25:03] Seven hours of hearings and lots of grandstanding, you can bet there is plenty of reality checks.

So, here's five. Number one: President Trump is in real legal trouble. As Chairman Elijah Cummings stated, it appears the president committed a crime writing personal checks as president to reimburse Michael Cohen for hush money payments to Stormy Daniels and telling him to deny it. That's frowned upon.

But not only that, Cohen testifying he heard Roger Stone telling Trump he'd been in contact with Julian Assange of WikiLeaks, and proving new evidence that Trump may have committed bank fraud, tax fraud, insurance fraud, as well as indicating President Trump is under an undisclosed investigation by the southern district of New York.

Number two, partisan divide was stark. With an honorable exemption to Congressman Justin Amash, not a single other Republican on the committee asked substantive questions about Cohen's mini troubling allegations about the president. Instead, it was all attack, distract and deflect -- a move they learned from the president.

Congressmen called Cohen a convicted liar, without noting that moist of his past lies were in service of Trump, and pretending they barely knew the guy, who up until recently was not only the president's personal lawyer, but the deputy finance chairman of the RNC, partisan inquiry gap showed Republicans put party above country in this inquiry.

Number three, Congressman Mark Meadows harped on Cohen's alleged failure to fill out a testimony disclosure form correctly. This became a very big and very loud deal. The problem is the forms don't actually ask for what Meadows said they did, as "Daily Beast" reporter, Lachlan Markey, pointed out.

Instead, like Cohen stated they asked about contracts with foreign governments, not foreign companies or clients.

Number four, a repeated refrain was that the hearings were a distraction from the truly important things facing the country. For example, freshman Congressman Chip Roy declared without irony people supported the president because they are sick and tired of the games we are seeing here today. Then said Congress should be focused on more important things like balancing the budget and deficit reduction. I agree.

But someone should tell him that deficit and debt have ballooned under President Trump and Republican rule.

Number five, too many Democrats used their time to give mini speeches rather than elicit new information. Perhaps those memorable example, Rashida Tlaib using much of her time to accuse Mark Meadows of acting in a racist fashion because of this strange stunt. He used Trump HUD appointee Lynne Patton as sort of a cross between a human exhibit A and Frank Pentangeli's brother, all to pressure Cohen to back off the claim that Donald Trump is racist.

Meadows took offense at Tlaib's comments and pointed out his nieces and nephews are people of color, which carried more moral weight before this 2012 tape emerged showing Meadows saying he wanted to send President Obama back to Kenya. But in a heartening surprise, Meadows that Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings, who he'd been butting heads all day, is in fact one of his closest friends, which Cummings confirmed. And that's the kind of across the aisle, good faith, respect and affection we'd like to see going forward.

And that's your reality check.

CAMEROTA: John, and those were just some of the points.

AVLON: Just some.

CAMEROTA: Just some of the moments that were attention-grabbing. Thank you very much for that reality check.

All right. Michael Cohen is actually headed back to Capitol Hill this morning, testifying behind closed doors before the House Intelligence Committee.

What more will they learn beyond yesterday's explosive public testimony that accused President Trump of committing crimes while in office.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) MICHAEL COHEN, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S FORMER PERSONAL ATTORNEY: A copy of a check Mr. Trump wrote from his personal bank account after he became president to reimburse me for the hush money payments I made to cover up his affair with an adult film star and to prevent damage to his campaign.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: All right. Joining us now is Neal Katyal. He's a former acting U.S. solicitor general and a law professor at Georgetown University.

Neal, great to see you.

So, that was a big moment yesterday --

NEAL KATYAL, FORMER ACTING U.S. SOLICITOR GENERAL: Good to see you.

CAMEROTA: -- where Michael Cohen produced two of the checks he says President Trump gave him in service to cover those hush money payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal. What was the big headline for you?

KATYAL: Yes, the big headline for me is almost cultural. The checks are part of the southern district investigation in the campaign finance and the Trump organization, all of that. They are not Mueller.

And for a year now, I think a lot of the public has been focused on Mueller, and Russia, and what he's going to do. The most important thing to come out of yesterday is to refocus American attention on the fact that federal prosecutors have already named Donald Trump -- they call him individual one -- as orchestrating two serious federal felonies, serious ones, campaign finance violations back in a November filing.

And now you see the pictures don't lie. You see the images of checks with the kind of silly Donald Trump signature on them. And it's really, really hard and looking problematic for the president.

And remember, this is a president who unlike I think members of the public has understood --

[08:30:00]