Return to Transcripts main page
New Day
Interview With Rep. Tom Reed (R-NY); New York Times: President Trump Demanded Jared Kushner Get Top Secret Clearance; CNN Reality Check: Are We Forgetting The Lessons Of 9/11?; Beyond The Call Of Duty, Lake Michigan Rescue; Former Trump Executive On Michael Cohen's Explosive Testimony. Aired 7:30-8a ET
Aired March 01, 2019 - 07:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[07:30:00] REP. TOM REED, (R), NEW YORK: -- 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.
What I do want is Congress to be coequal in a national emergency declaration and that's what this amendment that I'm proposing and many of my colleagues in a bipartisan way are proposing is we make sure Congress plays a role in this.
We've got 31 national emergencies on the books from the Carter administrations and beyond that are still there because the president has just acted. President Carter declared a national emergency and it's still in effect today?
Congress has abdicated its role. Congress needs to step up and take its authority back.
ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Congressman Tom Reed, we appreciate talking to you on NEW DAY. Thank you.
REED: Always good to do it.
JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Michael Cohen -- sorry, Michael Cohen's testimony could be trouble for some Republican supporters of the president, and it could be trouble for some of his Democratic critics. Why both may now be in a no-win situation. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BERMAN: So, is blood thicker than intelligence? That is the question this morning following this report in "The New York Times" -- the report that "President Trump ordered his chief of staff John Kelly to grant his son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, a top secret security clearance last year, overruling concerns flagged by intelligence officials and the White House's top lawyer Don McGahn."
[07:35:14] Joining us now to discuss this and much more, Michael Smerconish, the host of CNN's "SMERCONISH". Michael, thanks so much for being with us this morning. You've read the report, you've listened to some of the coverage, and you have a slightly different take on what is most important here. What do you see?
MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, HOST, CNN "SMERCONISH": Well, I think that all of the attention on why the president would be again at odds with the Intelligence Community -- because that's really what this is about -- is worthy and of interest.
But I keep wondering what is it about Jared Kushner that created all these questions to begin with? Is it the meeting at Trump Tower with the woman who was arriving promising dirt on Hillary Clinton? Is the meeting that he never disclosed with Sergey Kislyak? Is it the idea that he had to set up a backdoor communication with the Russians and using the Russian embassy as sort of home base for that?
What's the substantive grounds that he couldn't get the approval that was necessary when, clearly, he was the choice of the president to run this Middle East peace effort?
CAMEROTA: Is it possible you've just answered your own question since you've just laid out a laundry list of things that he didn't disclose? I mean, that was part of the problem --
SMERCONISH: In --
CAMEROTA: -- is that in the security clearance paperwork he didn't talk about the meeting with the bank chief in Russia with ties to the Kremlin. I mean -- so what would he want the FBI and CIA to feel if he's not disclosing this?
SMERCONISH: Well, you -- listen, you raise a great point and maybe the answer is then they should have flat-out denied. I can't help but wonder if they wanted to deny but that they were sort of held in check by the realization that this is the president's son-in-law, and so they dithered.
It sat for a while and created this opening where the president could go to John Kelly and say this is what I want you to do. Kelly papered the filed, McGahn papered the file in classic CYA fashion, and then the president got what he wanted.
BERMAN: Michael, if I can change the subject for a moment, seven hours and 21 minutes, Michael Cohen testified in public yesterday.
CAMEROTA: With a lunch break.
BERMAN: With a lunch break, and that's not including the two days of behind-closed-doors testimony.
But I want to focus on the public testimony. At the close of that hearing, what was the feeling you were left with? That you had just witnessed a long gathering at the Algonquin Round Table or was it something different?
SMERCONISH: I thought it was a preview of coming attractions. This is what an impeachment process will look like. It'll be -- it'll be little on facts and huge on partisanship. Everybody's suited up in their -- in their usual armor.
I had one observation though, and that is that check. I bet that Roy Cohn, who was the original fixer for Donald Trump, is probably rolling over in his grave at the realization that Trump signed a check, regardless of what the intent was. I know that there's a tendency to look at that check and say aha, there it is, exhibit A for him violating campaign finance regulations.
But there's a different interpretation. Michael Cohen said that Donald Trump and those at the highest level of the campaign never expected to win that election.
By the way, that comports with my own knowledge of the Trump campaign. The figure that I heard is that they thought they'd tap out at 240. And regardless of what they say, they never expected to exceed 270.
Well, if Michael Cohen is right that the president never expected to win the election, doesn't that embolden the president's argument that he wrote that check to protect his brand, his marriage, his ability to have another reality T.V. show, and not to dissuade voters in the Eleventh Hour of the campaign? Because after all, as Michael Cohen said, he didn't think he was going to win anyway.
CAMEROTA: Yes, but he wrote it when he was in the White House. He wrote it after he won.
SMERCONISH: Also -- right, but having cut the deal via Michael Cohen before -- your great point, but he cut that deal before he became president. Why did he cut the deal?
Mueller has to get into his head and assess his intent --
BERMAN: No --
SMERCONISH: -- and I think it'll bolster the argument that his intent was to protect himself because he didn't think when he woke up on Wednesday morning he'd be the president-elect.
BERMAN: What the prosecutors look at there -- they say the timing of it right before the election does draw that into question.
And, AMI, as part of their agreement -- that's the owners of the "Enquirer" -- said in writing as part of those legal proceedings, that their role in this was purely for political and campaign purposes. That's part of the legal process right now.
But, you're right. If and when this ever does come to a crime to the president, they will have to prove intent.
Michael, I want to get your take on North Korea also, and the meetings that the president walked out of yesterday with Kim Jong Un. The president is back in the White House now.
The president -- people say it was better to walk away from a bad deal than accept a bad deal. But should he have ever been in that position in Hanoi if they weren't going to make a deal?
[07:40:00] SMERCONISH: Usually what transpires is that all the work is done by the underlings and by the time that the principals get together they're just dotting the i's and crossing the t's.
So I'm critical of the president for being there if the deal wasn't already cut, but willing to give him credit for walking away because I was one of those who, as the Michael Cohen hearing was unfolding -- the public hearing -- I was very worried that as a diversionary tactic the president would cut a deal -- any deal -- just to try to change the narrative of what was being discussed at home.
To his credit, he did not do that and instead, he packed his bag and got on that plane.
CAMEROTA: Michael Smerconish, great to talk to you. Thanks so much.
SMERCONISH: You, too.
BERMAN: Be sure to watch Michael's show tomorrow morning at 9:00 a.m. Eastern right here on CNN.
CAMEROTA: All right.
After years of blasting President Obama's "arbitrary" quote, and "hasty" quote timetables for pulling out of Afghanistan, it looks like President Trump is about to do the same thing. We have a reality check for you, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CAMEROTA: A new report in "The New York Times" outlines a Pentagon plan that could have all U.S. troops withdrawing from Afghanistan in the next three to five years. Are we forgetting the lessons after 9/11?
John Avlon has a reality check for us -- John.
JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Marines are learning the lessons of 9/11 after they enlist now, literally. After all, some of them weren't even born when the attacks occurred.
Welcome to America's longest war, now in its 18th year. Now, that's more than four times longer than World War II.
And what do we have to show for it? Well, "The New York Times" is reporting that the U.S. military is offering to withdraw from Afghanistan entirely over the next five years, leaving the Taliban in control of a majority of the country. So much for learning the lessons of September 11th.
[07:45:07] A Taliban-controlled failed state is what created the safe haven for Osama bin Laden in the first place, which gave rise to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) GEORGE W. BUSH, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Every nation in every region now has a decision to make. Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
AVLON: That was the Bush Doctrine and it led us into Afghanistan and ultimately, into a war of choice in Iraq.
But currently, as our Clarissa Ward showed us with powerful, exclusive footage, the Taliban still control or are fighting for roughly 60 percent of Afghanistan.
Their ideology not only coddled terrorist training camps and blew up priceless statues of the Buddha, but its Seventh Century former Sharia law left girls uneducated, women virtually enslaved, and the population brutalized.
Now we are negotiating a one-sided peace deal with these people. And part of the reason why, "The New York Times" reports, is to fit into Trump's more isolationist instincts, no matter the cost.
It's the same policy that is precipitously pulling our troops out of Syria, seeding crucial ground to Vladimir Putin. The same policy that caused Defense Sec. Jim Mattis to quit in protest.
Now, keep in mind that while he always pushed for withdrawing from Afghanistan, private citizen Trump repeatedly blasted President Obama's quote "weakness and withdrawal timetables" -- all things Trump appears to be engaging in now.
So after almost two decades of war, more than 2,300 troops dead, and more than $1 trillion spent, the Taliban is stronger and controls more territory than at any point since the conflict began.
And the loss of ground isn't just happening over there. The 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund, which is supposed to cover the long-term health needs of the first responders who ran into the flames, is about to run out of money, again. And one of the reasons it's running out is that first responders are dying at a faster rate than ever before. And still, Senate Republicans can't seem to make the fund permanent.
Jon Stewart, who has remained committed to this mission long after most celebrities moved on, has been to Capitol Hill several times on this issue already and can't believe he's back again.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JON STEWART, COMEDIAN, FORMER HOST, COMEDY CENTRAL "THE DAILY SHOW": This is nonsense. You guys know it, I know it. This is theater.
We're all down here today. There's no reason to have dragged these people down here. There's no reason to have to have these conversations. It's bull (bleep).
(END VIDEO CLIP) AVLON: He's right. Congress shouldn't need to be asked twice for this.
I'm old enough to remember after the attacks one very popular slogan -- "Never Forget." But now, nearly two decades later, we seem to have forgotten as we prepare to turn over a majority of Afghanistan to the Taliban after America's longest war. And, Congress can't even properly fund our first responders' relief fund without prodding from a comedian.
We can do better and they deserve better. And that's your reality check.
CAMEROTA: John, such a good point. This one should be an easy one.
BERMAN: I can't believe we keep seeing Jon Stewart having to go to Washington to lobby for this. It really is stunning.
CAMEROTA: Thank you very much.
AVLON: That's what it takes to get the attention.
BERMAN: All right.
Intense body cam video captures Chicago police going beyond the call of duty. They rescued a man stuck in freezing cold water after he went in to save his dog.
CNN's Ryan Young has the story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
POLICE OFFICER: Set it up. Come on over here.
RYAN YOUNG, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Intense body cam video shows the moment Chicago police walked into a frozen Lake Michigan beach to rescue a man who had fallen through the ice.
POLICE OFFICER: Give me a little space. Got a little space.
RYAN: The man fell into the lake while trying to save his dog in several feet of freezing water. He became stuck between large, crashing waves and blocks of ice too big and slippery to climb over. A look from above shows the danger officers faced.
After a 9/11 call from a woman on the beach, at least five Chicago police officers rushed to the frozen beach, including Sgt. Alex Silva.
ALEX SILVA, SERGEANT, CHICAGO POLICE DEPARTMENT: There was a lot of wave action, it was windy.
It was extremely cold. It was below zero, I believe, that day. The water temp was probably 34 -- 33, 34 degrees -- just above freezing.
YOUNG: Silva says icing water rescues aren't something he and his fellow officers train for, but with a man yelling that his hands were started to go numb, waiting for firefighters to arrive wasn't an option.
SILVA: We realized we were actually walking out over ice to get to him, which was nerve-racking. But we had to get to him quickly.
YOUNG: The officers didn't hesitate, lying down on the unstable ice to form a human chain, using a dog leash to try and pull him out.
MIGUEL DEL TORO, POLICE OFFICER, CHICAGO POLICE DEPARTMENT: And then we just kind of -- not even really talking to each other, we just kind of fell into place, you know. He went first, I went next to him. Everyone behind us grabbed onto our belts.
POLICE OFFICER: Come on, give me your hand. Push.
Hey, pull yourself out.
RESCUED MAN: I barely can --
POLICE OFFICER: Come on.
RESCUED MAN: Hold me.
POLICE OFFICER: Hold on. You got this.
Hold on. Here you go. Here it goes, here it goes.
Come you. You're good, you're good.
RESCUED MAN: Thank you so much.
POLICE OFFICER: You're good, you're good.
[07:50:00] YOUNG: The man the officers saved has chosen to remain anonymous since the rescue but remains forever grateful for their heroic action.
He wrote them a letter, which partly reads, "They absolutely saved my life and I will be forever grateful. I have no doubt that I would have died without help."
POLICE OFFICER: OK, you want to give him the dog?
POLICE OFFICER: Yes.
POLICE OFFICER: Give him the dog. Give him the dog right in his lap.
DEL TORO: I'm a police officer, absolutely. But, you know, you're a person first and if someone is in distress I like to think that most people, given the opportunity, would try to help that person. It's all good. You know, the accolades are great, but you just feel good that you saved the person's life.
RESCUED MAN: Oh my God.
POLICE OFFICER: Thank you for the --
RESCUED MAN: Oh my God.
POLICE OFFICER: You're good, man -- you're good.
RESCUED MAN: Oh my God.
YOUNG: Ryan Young, CNN, Chicago.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CAMEROTA: Oh my gosh. God bless those officers for that rescue.
All right, now to this. She worked with Donald Trump for 18 years, so does she think the president is a con man, and a cheat, and a racist as Michael Cohen described? We ask her, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[07:55:35] CAMEROTA: Michael Cohen called President Trump a racist, a con man, and a cheat. Critics of Cohen say that he is not a credible witness.
So how do other people who worked for the Trump Organization feel about that testimony?
Joining us now is Barbara Res. She's a former executive vice president with the Trump Organization and author of "All Alone on the 68th Floor: How One Woman Changed the Face of Construction".
Barbara, great to see you.
BARBARA RES, FORMER EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, THE TRUMP ORGANIZATION, AUTHOR, "ALL ALONE ON THE 68TH FLOOR: HOW ONE WOMAN CHANGED THE FACE OF CONSTRUCTION": Nice to see you.
CAMEROTA: You thought that Michael Cohen's testimony rang true to you?
RES: It did, very much so. Yes, I mean, you know, I emoted -- I reacted when he would say something.
CAMEROTA: Like what?
RES: Like when he said code. I understood what he meant by that.
CAMEROTA: That the president spoke in code.
RES: Yes.
CAMEROTA: What does that mean?
RES: In other words, he didn't have to say what he wanted you to do exactly. He just implied what would be good, what would be the right outcome, what be something he'd like to see. And then, you know, that was make that happen without him telling you what to do.
CAMEROTA: Did you ever feel that you were asked to lie for the president -- for Donald Trump, at the time?
RES: Yes, I mentioned this in an article I wrote. I was asked to sign off on the functional obsolescence of the Bonwit Teller building before Trump Tower was built.
And I'm an engineer and I could do that but I had no knowledge of it, so I said no, I won't do it. And I think that that set a tone for him where he really didn't ask me to do things that he knew I wouldn't do.
CAMEROTA: Why do you think that people -- if you believe the people around Donald Trump were willing to lie for him, as Michael Cohen was, why was that?
RES: Well, I think that -- you know, you should've have broken into it slowly. It's a little thing, and then it's a bigger thing, and the next thing you know you're really entrenched in it. And you stop believing what Donald says and you think it's true, too. You know, that kind of thing. So it sort of reels you in.
And people want -- you know, they want to win his favor. I did, too.
I did things for him that, you know, I said to myself, hmm. But, you know, to curry favor and say oh, yeah, you know. He's the boss and get the promotion or get the money or whatever. So, you do -- you get lured into it.
CAMEROTA: And so, when Michael Cohen testified to all of these various crimes -- I mean, the paying off of the porn star, the defrauding of a charity, the insurance fraud, the tax fraud -- could any of that have happened without Donald Trump knowing about it?
RES: I can't imagine anything happening of any importance at all at the Trump Organization, which is what we called it, without him knowing about it.
CAMEROTA: He knew about things little and small?
RES: Well, not little. I mean, it depended on who he was talking to.
Remember, years ago, he had a lot of faith in people and let them do their jobs, like me, and architects, and other people. I see him doing less and less of that now. People tell him what to do and he does just the opposite. So my inclination is to say he probably gets into the little things, too, at this point.
But anything major back then, and something like the Trump Tower meeting with the Russians, that was major, major. He would know about that, absolutely.
CAMEROTA: Why do you think it is that you are one of the only people from the Trump Organization that will speak out about what your experience is? Why don't more people, past and present, speak about this?
RES: Well, I think present people all are under a nondisclosure agreement. CAMEROTA: And you didn't have to sign an agreement?
RES: No, didn't. The only people back when I was working for him -- if you were fired you'd get severance pay. And in return for that, you'd promise not disparage. I was never fired so I didn't -- you know.
So I spoke to a lot of people that were there and some people want to maintain their privacy, which is understandable. And others are afraid.
I thought maybe I was going to help with the contribution to win the election for the Democrats back when, and I thought I was doing my part, to be honest with you.
CAMEROTA: But also, let's be honest, you have been on the receiving end of some threats when you spoke out. From whom?
RES: Well, Michael Cohen called me -- I have the first article I wrote, which I thought was somewhat flattering to Trump, it was very balanced -- and said something like you have my home number to the effect that it was slanderous -- not slanderous, libelous or defamation. And he was sort of going in that direction.
I said, Michael, I have people here. I really can't discuss this now but I will call you back. Give me your number. And I just never called him back and that was the end of it.
CAMEROTA: But, I mean, you took it as a threat?
RES: Oh, yes, definitely.
CAMEROTA: Barbara Res, thank you. We appreciate you being able to shine a light on what your experience was. Thanks so much for being here.
RES: My pleasure.
CAMEROTA: All right.
There's a new report exposing another potential lie by President Trump. NEW DAY continues right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Jared Kushner's background check has been a problem.
END
