Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

NYT: Trump Ordered Kelly to Get Top-Secret Clearance for Kushner; Cohen to Give More Testimony to Congress Next Week; Washington Governor Jay Inslee Enters 2020 Race; Interview: Rep. Tom Reed (R-NY). Aired 7-7:30a ET

Aired March 01, 2019 - 07:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: John Kelly believed that he was ordered by President Trump to make sure Jared got a clearance, despite the concerns.

[07:00:09] LAURA JARRETT, CNN LEGAL CORRESPONDENT: Trump's hand- picked White House counsel and chief of staff said, "No, we have a problem here. There were real concerns."

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I was never involved with the security. I don't want to get involved in that stuff.

CHRIS CHRISTIE (R), FORMER GOVERNOR OF NEW JERSEY: This is the biggest problem with having family in official positions, because it's much harder to be objective.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA), CHAIRMAN, INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: He was able to shed light on a lot of issues. None of the questions we had for him went unanswered.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They're doing exactly what they said before the election, that their whole goal is to try to impeach the president.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Weisselberg is definitely in our sites. He knows everything. He's been there 40 years. He has the keys to the kingdom.

MICHAEL COHEN, FORMER LAWYER FOR DONALD TRUMP: I will be back on March 6. There's more to discuss.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

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

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to your NEW DAY.

"The New York Times" has a bombshell report this morning, revealing that President Trump ordered his then-chief of staff John Kelly to give his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, a top-secret security clearance. "The Times" says the president made that demand despite concerns from intelligence officials, even the top White House lawyer.

BERMAN: General Kelly was apparently so disturbed by what was going on that he reportedly made a contemporaneous memo about the president's order. And this report directly contradicts the president's public denials that he had any role in Kushner's security clearance, which adds to the number of lies that we have learned about this week.

CAMEROTA: Joining us on the phone now is one of the reporters who broke this story, our friend Maggie Haberman of "The New York Times."

Good morning, Maggie.

MAGGIE HABERMAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST/"NEW YORK TIMES" REPORTER (via phone): Good morning.

CAMEROTA: How did Jared Kushner get his security clearance?

HABERMAN: Well, according to our reporting, it was ordered by the president, by way of John Kelly, despite the objection of some career personnel security office folks and the White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn.

John Kelly wrote a memo saying that he was -- the president ordered that Jared Kushner get a clearance. Kelly clearly thought whatever it was that the president was saying, he took it as an order.

Why it's striking, among other things, look, Alisyn, the president has the authority to do this. But he told me when I asked him in the Oval Office several weeks ago that he had no role in this. Ivanka Trump said publicly her father had no role in it.

And Abbe Lowell, Jared Kushner's lawyer, said last year that this went through a normal process, a point that he made, I think, on CNN, as well as to us, after the clearance came through.

There has to be a reason why it was that everybody did not want to point to what had actually happened. And we don't know what that reason is. Again, the president legally can do this, so why say he didn't?

CAMEROTA: Good point. And we have that audio. And I just want to play it for everybody because, I mean about, we get to why people were so concerned about giving Jared Kushner security clearance, let's just play the exchange that you had with the president where he's not telling the truth about what he did.

Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HABERMAN: Did you tell General Kelly or anyone else in the White House to overrule security officials? The career veterans?

TRUMP: No, I don't think I have the authority do that. I'm not sure I do.

HABERMAN: You do have the authority to do it.

TRUMP: But I wouldn't. I wouldn't do it.

HABERMAN: You never (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

TRUMP: Jared's a good -- I was never involved with his security. I know that he, you know, just from reading, I know that there was issues back and forth about security for numerous people, actually. But I don't want to get involved in that stuff.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: He said, "I wouldn't do it." Maggie, this is weird, because often, when the president breaks protocol, he does so proudly. And so the idea that he would lie directly to you, why?

HABERMAN: I don't know. I mean, I don't know and, you know, all we've gotten back from the White House is that they don't discuss security clearances.

Candidly, I felt there was a real chance. when I asked him that question that he was going to say, yes, he did do it. Not more than a real chance. I had assumed that is what he was going to say, but he chose not to for whatever reason.

Again, we don't know. It is within his authority to say, "Regardless of what people think of it, Jared Kushner is who I want to have looking at Middle East peace and looking at a host of other global issues, and therefore, he needs this clearance, because he can't do his job without it." They could have just said that, and they chose not to.

CAMEROTA: So now let's get to why people in the intel community and beyond were so concerned. Why didn't chief of staff then, John Kelly want Jared to have this? Why didn't Don McGahn, White House counsel at the time, want him to have this? Why didn't the FBI and the CIA think that this was appropriate for Jared Kushner?

HABERMAN: So I should note here that, according to our reporting -- we reported this past last year -- Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump were very frustrated about the clearance issue when Jared Kushner's clearance was downgraded in February of 2018 after a review of the clearance process. They felt like John Kelly and Don McGahn were targeting them for petty reasons, not for anything legitimate.

[07:05:08] The FBI and the CIA, during the course of Jared Kushner's background check, had flagged concerns. Among those concerns was that he had not disclosed initially, on his application for security clearance, some contacts with foreign officials, including a meeting with a Russian banker during the transition. Jared Kushner's folks said that was a clerical error, that it was fixed over time.

But there was concerns flagged by intelligence officials about questions of whether he would be susceptible to foreign influence. They noted how many interactions with foreign governments and officials that he personally had, as well as due to his family's real estate business. And this went on for a very long time. It was a source of enormous frustration to the White House that Jared Kushner's security clearance is getting such attention, as I said, a source of frustration to them.

And the personnel security office was divided as to whether he should get one. The White House counsel office erred on the side of recommending that it not happen.

CAMEROTA: So Maggie, what does this mean? What is Jared Kushner privy to now that the intel community didn't think he should see?

HABERMAN: We obviously don't know the details, but he's privy to sensitive security information about foreign countries that is a key part of his portfolio as somebody who deals with Middle East peace and deals with other international issues, deals with trade. But it is stuff that FBI and CIA officials have voiced concern about.

He still does not have an SCI clearance, which is the one that's attached to a CIA review.

CAMEROTA: Maggie Haberman, thank you very much for all of your reporting and sharing it with us.

HABERMAN: Thanks, guys.

CAMEROTA: Have a good weekend.

BERMAN: All right. I want to bring in Rebecca Buck, CNN political reporters; Joe Lockhart, former White House secretary under President Clinton; and Margaret Talev, senior White House correspondent from Bloomberg News, who if I'm not mistaken, Margaret just got back from Vietnam flying on Air Force One on that flight. So thank you for waking up. I don't know when the last time you slept was. We're going to do one more segment.

MARGARET TALEV, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: I don't even know what day it is so we're all good.

BERMAN: We'll give you a second to rest up. I'm going to Joe first with this question since you worked in the White House. A few issues raised by this story. No. 1, why did intelligence want Jared Kushner to have the clearance? No. 2, why did the president basically say, "Meh," when all of his intelligence officials are telling him don't do

this. And No. 3, why is he lying about it?

JOE LOCKHART, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I'll take the third first, because it's the easiest; because Trump's instinct on any hard question is to lie first and then to backtrack.

You saw that -- you've seen this multiple times, thousands of times, that when he gets pressed on a question where he doesn't know the answer, he just denies.

I think on the reasons that the intel community were concerned are a couple. One is his veracity. He didn't tell the truth. He had to file his form four times. He has a well-respected lawyer in Washington. He had the resources to do it right. He chose to not -- to withhold.

The second is -- and this goes to the broader Trump Organization and the president -- he's continued to do business. He's continued to -- with his family, be involved in a multibillion-dollar business around the world that does -- that is constantly trying to raise money, and that makes him susceptible to influencing U.S. policy to benefit his business.

And that's why, you know, the intel community and the FBI, you know, I think just look at this right and do it by the book.

The really significant part is the White House counsel, a political appointee, said no. And he not only said no, he said no to the son- in-law of the president. That's -- that's a pretty courageous decision. And, you know, again, why did he lie? Because he lies.

CAMEROTA: I guess, Joe, though, I see it differently, because often, the president is unapologetic when he does something that breaks convention and does something controversial.

So I hear this differently, this lie here, that when he tells Maggie, Rebecca, "No. No, I don't think I have the authority to do that. No, I wouldn't do it anyway." That is so brazen. I mean, that is such a bald-faced lie. I'm not sure why he went there. Do you have any insight into this?

REBECCA BUCK, CNN POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Right. Well, it's extremely puzzling, right? If the president has the authority to make this decision and he does, and as you said, he has no problem breaking with convention, elevating Jared and Ivanka within the White House, then why wouldn't he own this decision? Why wouldn't he just explain that he assessed the analysis of the intelligence community and thought that their concerns were without warrant?

And so this is exactly why -- these questions are exactly why we are likely to see congressional Democrats look into this issue further. Elijah Cummings on the Oversight Committee has said that he believes this is an issue worth examining, that they're considering subpoenaing the White House for documents relating to this decision.

So I think this is just -- Maggie's great reporting is just the beginning here; and we're going to be seeing this -- this issue continue and, hopefully, get some answers to these very important questions.

BERMAN: "Congressional Democrats are going to look into this further" could be the title of any one of six stories today --

TALEV: That's right.

[07:10:08] BERMAN: -- Margaret, because that's where we are. Michael Cohen finished his third day of testimony yesterday behind closed doors. We learned Michael Cohen's coming back next week to testify behind closed doors to House Intelligence. Felix Sater is coming to testify. Allan Weisselberg, the CFO of the Trump Organization.

There are a couple of different committees that want him. This seems to be the beginning of what the White House feared when the Democrats took over Congress and what the Democrats rejoiced in, which is oversight, aggressive oversight and investigations that won't go away for some time, Margaret.

TALEV: Yes. And, John, you know, I think we can see, at this point, the Democrats' investigation seems to be heading much closer to questions about the Trump Organization, whether it's -- what happened inside the, you know, internal finances of the organization, whether it's related to golf courses or development or contacts overseas.

And this, I think, is where the Jared Kushner security clearance nexus and where the Democrats are going have the potential to meet in the middle. We have no idea what, if any, Jared Kushner's exposure is in Bob Mueller's investigations.

But we do know that, over the course of the last several months, when you talk to lawyers around the White House, around Congress, what many of them say is that the fact that Jared Kushner had gotten his security clearance and then was able to go forward, had given them the sense that he was not, sort of, in the crosshairs of the investigation. And I think we may see some new questions about that, although, as I said, we don't know the answers to that.

But, yes, I mean, look. Ever since November, we all know the difference between a divided Congress and a Congress that is of the same party as the president. And we're certainly beginning to see it now. And Michael Cohen's testimony this week is the beginning, not the end of that.

CAMEROTA: Hey, Joe, big picture on Michael Cohen. Now that we've had a day or so to digest all that he revealed, and he revealed crimes.

LOCKHART: Right.

CAMEROTA: He revealed criminal activity, some of which he says opened in the Oval Office, some before. But there was a whole litany of crimes that any regular people would have to pay for. Having lived through impeachment, as you did up close and personal, what are Democrats supposed to do now?

LOCKHART: Well, I think what Democrats are going to do is -- and I think you saw Nancy Pelosi give a strong hint yesterday, which is they're not going to -- they're in no rush to get to impeachment. What they want to do is establish a pattern of abuse of power, of criminal activity from within the White House, and a culture of corruption that is not just the president, it goes to the president's family, the president's cabinet.

I think, you know, we're going to see a little bit more about some of these people who have left who are under investigation. And they are in no rush because, again, once they move towards impeachment, then the battle lines are drawn. There's no -- you can't go halfway in and stop. So I think you'll see this for the whole -- this whole year, you'll

see them establishing a case, particularly if the -- we have a year- long court fight on whether the Mueller report is made public or not. That plays right into the Democrats' --

CAMEROTA: But they establish a case, and then they hope for the best at the ballot box?

LOCKHART: I think they establish a case, and then they in 2020, they run a Democrat against a president who is under investigation by five jurisdictions and the House; and they let the voters decide.

BERMAN: But Rebecca, there's a tension there. Democrats keep on saying, "Crime, crime, crime, crime, crime," like they do when they come on the show -- "Crime, crime, crime, crime, crime" -- while on the other hand, Nancy Pelosi says, "No impeachment, no impeachment, no impeachment," there is a tension there.

BUCK: Absolutely. And I think Joe is right, though, that Democrats are laying out the case not for impeachment, but for the president to be judged by the American people. They are -- if they're the prosecutors in this case, the voters are the jury.

And this is for a couple of reasons. One, I think Democrats feel they're running out of time before the 2020 election. Joe mentioned the potential legal battle that could ensue over the Mueller report and the release of that report. That could take a while in the lead- up to the election.

And then, of course, there's the political reality here, which is that Democrats don't control the Senate. It would be very difficult for them to get the 67 votes that they need for impeachment. And so this is -- this is what they're up against.

And so I think they're just dealing with the political reality that's in front of them.

CAMEROTA: So Margaret, tell us about that flight home from Vietnam on Air Force One. What did they come back and tell you about why the -- they left empty-handed?

TALEV: Alisyn, I wish I had an awesome, juicy briefing about what really happened. But we didn't -- we didn't really get visitors to the press cabin, neither the president himself nor aides.

Of course, we're very interested to know at precisely what point things had turned. I'll say that during that rally in Alaska, where the president spoke with the troops, we were expecting to hear him kind of give them his analysis of what had happened in the summit. And he really didn't. He mentioned he had been in Vietnam. He didn't really talk about Kim at all.

We certainly took that as a sign that he wants to put this behind him now and move on.

But you know what? You look at this in the political context, you know, the experts that I've talked to, what they were really worried about was that President Trump would give away too much.

And I think his instinct was probably to be able to say, "We reached, you know -- here's the declaration of peace, or here is an office that we're going to open in North Korea."

But most of the experts that I talked to, I think, were really relieved that he didn't do anything like dialing back the U.S. military posture.

In terms of 2020, I'm not sure how much voters are going to care what happened with the second North Korea summit. I think in terms of what he's coming home to this week. He's probably pretty frustrated that he wasn't able to gain a little bit more ground on that summit, as he comes home to Michael Cohen and to all of these investigations.

BERMAN: I've got to say, there's a much different Friday than he was anticipating. You get the sense that he wanted to be out there celebrating some kind of achievement today. That doesn't appear to be the case.

All right. Margaret, Rebecca, Joe, thank you very much.

We have breaking news in the 2020 race. A new name joining the field of Democratic contenders, the crowded field. Washington's governor -- this is governor of the Washington state -- Jay Inslee just announced he is running in a new video statement posted just moments ago.

CNN's Vanessa Yurkevich is live in Seattle with that -- Vanessa.

VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, John.

Yes, Governor Jay Inslee here in the state of Washington announcing that he is throwing his hat in the race for president. He is the 11th individual, the 11th major Democrat to announce a run or an exploratory committee.

It's notable that he's the only governor to have announced so far in what is largely a sea of Democrats. Governor Jay Inslee is in his second term here in the state of Washington. He was also a member of Congress.

But what's really interesting is that, in that announcement video that just came out a short time ago, he is running on a single issue, and that is climate change.

Often when we hear people come out and announce, they talk about a couple issues: healthcare, immigration, income inequality. But for Governor Inslee, that issue that's most important to him is climate change.

It's also notable that it's in direct contrast to what the president has said about climate change. Often questioning its validity, often questioning officials and scientists in his own administration and his own government on the issue.

But let's take a listen to a little bit of Jay Inslee's campaign video that he released just a short time ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. JAY INSLEE (D-WA), DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We have an opportunity to transform our economy, run on 100 percent clean energy that will bring millions of good-paying jobs to every community across America. Create a more just future for everyone.

I'm Jay Inslee and I'm running for president, because I'm the only candidate who will make defeating climate change our nation's No. 1 priority. We can do this. Join our movement. This is our moment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

YURKEVICH: We can expect to see the governor a little later today. He will have his first event as a candidate at a solar panel installer facility that's very much in line with his messaging.

We'll also see him hit the road in Nevada and Iowa later this week. And, Alisyn, he'll be out there sort of road testing this single issue as we get further and further into the race and more and more candidates announce.

It will be interesting to see, Alisyn, whether or not voters are very much interested in a single-issue candidate and whether or not that issue is climate change -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Vanessa, really interesting. Just another candidate announcement that we bring you first on NEW DAY. And we'll be watching to see what Governor Inslee does next.

All right. So President Trump has claimed he could not make his tax returns public, because they are under audit. But his former personal attorney casts doubt on that story. So we talked to a member of the House committee that could get the president's taxes, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:23:22] CAMEROTA: Michael Cohen casting doubt on President Trump's repeated claim that he cannot release his taxes because they are under audit. So, what will lawmakers do now?

Joining us now to discuss is Republican Congressman Tom Reed. He serves on the House Ways and Means Committee, whose Democratic chairman has the legal authority to request President Trump's taxes.

Congressman, thanks for being here.

REP. TOM REED (R), NEW YORK: It's great to be with you.

CAMEROTA: Do you want to see President Trump's taxes?

REED: You know, I think going down this path of having the chair of the Ways and Means Committee request tax returns is a dangerous path. I mean, that's a tremendous amount of power, and if you weaponize this in this political environment, I will tell you, don't be surprised in the future years that other chairmen are going use this for political purposes. And that's just -- that's a danger that we need to recognize on this issue.

CAMEROTA: So your interest hasn't been piqued as to what's in President Trump's taxes?

REED: You know what? What I'm interested in, and there was a good conversation. I'll give credit to Chairman Neal. We had a hearing on this issue, and what we focused on in some of that conversation, OK, these disclosure forms, that we all file as candidates to protect the privacy of those that are affiliated with a candidate that's running for president.

Why don't we focus on the disclosure forms, amend those, get all the information out in a more detailed analysis, so that innocent bystanders also -- their privacy has to be respected in this conversation -- are not brought into this political warfare.

CAMEROTA: Do you believe the president's taxes are under audit?

REED: I believe, my understanding of the general audit policies out of the IRS, yes, a business of that magnitude, a business of that size is under a general audit type of situation. But I don't know that first.

[07:25:02] CAMEROTA: I mean, he -- of course you don't know it firsthand, and you don't know if for a fact, because he hasn't produced any evidence or any letter that he's under audit.

REED: Sure. But knowing how the IRS operates, knowing the standard of audits for businesses such as what the -- we're dealing with here, that wouldn't surprise me that that's the situation.

CAMEROTA: Did you change your opinion when you heard Michael Cohen, who worked with the president for ten years very closely and knew a lot about his finances, when -- let me remind everybody what Michael Cohen told the Oversight Committee on Wednesday? Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL COHEN, FORMER PERSONAL LAWYER FOR DONALD TRUMP: What he didn't want was to have an entire group of think tanks that are tax experts run through his tax return and start ripping it to pieces, and then he'll end up in an audit.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So could you presume from that statement that he wasn't under audit?

COHEN: I presume that he's not under audit.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Michael Cohen thinks that the president that the president is not under audit and he just is trying to avoid scrutiny.

REED: I didn't hear that from Michael Cohen. And to believe Michael Cohen is a questionable foundation to start with. But you know, he said "presumed." If you're his personal attorney, why don't you know that? You're talking about all the private information. You presume that he is?

CAMEROTA: Well, he said --

REED: I mean, that shows credibility issues with Michael Cohen.

CAMEROTA: Let me just read to you exactly verbatim, "What he didn't want" -- he's speaking about the president -- what the president didn't want "was to have an entire group of think tanks that are tax experts run through his tax return and start ripping it to pieces, and then he'll end up in an audit." That's from his conversation with the president.

REED: And then -- and then when he was asked the follow-up question from my colleague, he said, "I presume." Why would you have to presume? If you're your private attorney, you either know that or not. Why do you make an assumption in that situation?

CAMEROTA: I don't know.

REED: So I don't think that's a smoking gun type of situation. I think, you know, the facts are -- the bottom line on the Trump tax issue, in my opinion, is you know, we've got to -- if we go down this path of weaponizing the Ways and Means Committee for political purposes, we do it eyes wide open. Maybe there's a better way, and that's the alternative that I was advocating for. Reform these disclosure forms so people have information about the president and the vice president candidates, not everybody that's ever been associated with them over decades worth of business relations.

CAMEROTA: So just to be clear, Congressman, you think that, if President Trump has to release his taxes, that there will be -- that willy-nilly, all sorts of private citizens, the IRS is going to and the Congress is going to force them to release their taxes? That's what you're afraid of?

REED: Yes, that's -- that's on the tax returns. That's on -- that's in the schedules. That's in the additional exhibits. Absolutely. A complicated tax return like that is going to get incidental business relationships disclosed -- unless you redact everything.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

REED: And then you'll have the question, well, is this really a credible release of tax returns, because someone's hiding something?

CAMEROTA: Well, I'm glad that you brought that up.

REED: But that's the problem with this.

CAMEROTA: Do you ever wonder what the president is hiding by not releasing them?

REED: You know, I'll defer to the president. It's his decision to release them. He did this openly. He did this with the American people knowing he was not going to release them. He became --

CAMEROTA: No, he promised --

REED: -- president. The American people spoke on this.

CAMEROTA: -- he was going to, actually. That's not true, Congressman. He promised at some point he was going to release them, and then he didn't.

REED: And he didn't. But at the time that people were voting, they knew exactly where the president stood on it.

And that's where I trust the people of the wisdom on this election. He was duly elected our president. And now we're going to go through a year's worth of political theater on impeachment and other issues that are coming down the pipeline on the other side.

And you know who loses in that entire conversation, is the American people, where we have an opportunity to do something substantively for the people rather than to distract on these -- these attacks on impeachment.

CAMEROTA: OK. Let's move on, because I know that you're part of a bipartisan effort and legislation to prevent future presidents from being able to declare national emergencies and go around Congress. So, why did you support the president doing it this time?

REED: Absolutely. Because remember, the resolution we voted on was under the National Emergency Act. And that is exactly the problem.

Congress, under that act, has given tremendous authority to the president. And when we gave that authority away as Congress, because Congress and congressional leaders don't want to have the hard votes on record, the president has the authority to make these determinations and act.

And when I looked at the border, I saw the crisis at the border. Given the fact that Congress delegated the authority, president has the authority to make that determination. I agreed with the assessment that it's a crisis.

Now, what I'm very concerned about is why did we delegate that authority to the president? Congress needs to take that authority back and so that a president doesn't have this broad discretion that even this president and future presidents will have if we do not act.

CAMEROTA: Yes. But I mean, you could have blocked it this time. You could have voted to block it this time.

Since you object to the overarching principle of a president being able to declare a national emergency and take the purse strings from Congress, you could have voted to block it this time.

REED: But when there's a crisis and the law is the law, you have to follow the law as it exists. And the crisis, I agreed with the crisis determination by the president. END