Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Rep. Lauren Underwood (D) Illinois is Interviewed About Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen's first time appearing before Congress since Democrats Took Control of the House; Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R) Illinois is Interviewed About President Trump's Emergency Declaration to Fund his Border Wall; Reporting Indicates President Trump Ordered for Daughter and White House Adviser Ivanka Trump to be Granted Security Clearance; ISIS Fighters in Remaining Stronghold Surrender. Aired 8-8:30a ET

Aired March 06, 2019 - 8:00   ET

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


[08:00:00] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: It can be frightening when somebody becomes unhinged in front of you. And she just sticks to the questions and lets him unravel in front of all of our eyes.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Fascinating to see. All right, Sara, thank you very much.

Up next for us, we have new CNN reporting about how Ivanka Trump got her security clearance differently than she said. That's now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

IVANKA TRUMP, SENIOR ADVISER TO PRESIDENT TRUMP: The president had no involvement pertaining to my clearance.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: President Trump pressured John Kelly to grant his daughter security clearance against recommendations.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When you cannot get information, you cannot be objective. It's not some witch hunt.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Eighty-one people or organizations got letters. It's a disgrace to our country.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The judiciary has the right to look at all of this. I hope they just provide us the documents.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is all about setting up the stage for impeachment proceedings. That's pretty clear.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota on John Berman.

CAMEROTA: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to NEW DAY. It is Wednesday, March 6th, 8:00 in the east. Up first, we are learning more about the extraordinary lengths that

President Trump has gone to to overrule top White House officials so that his family can work in the White House. CNN has learned that the president pressured his former chief of staff and White House counsel to grant his daughter Ivanka a security clearance. Sources say both men refused to grant the clearance or pressure other officials to because of concerns from intelligence officials. However, the president did it anyway.

BERMAN: So this directly contradicts Ivanka's denial in a television interview just three weeks ago. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

IVANKA TRUMP, SENIOR ADVISER TO PRESIDENT TRUMP: The president had no involvement pertaining to my clearance or my husband's clearance. There are literally close to a million people in the federal government who are in the pipeline to get their permanent clearance and are on temporary status.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So no special treatment?

IVANKA TRUMP: No.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Is it possible she didn't know that her father pushed through the clearance? We'll discuss that.

Overnight, the White House rejected Congressional requests for information about Jared Kushner's security clearance which the "New York Times" first reported last week that the president also ordered to be granted. Joining us now on that note, Maggie Haberman, White House correspondent for the "New York Times" and a CNN analyst. Maggie, credit where credit is due. You were part of the team that broke this wide open last week. And your story focused primarily on Jared Kushner and a contemporaneous memo the chief of staff John Kelly wrote saying that he was concerned that the president was overruling him in forcing him to allow the security clearance for Jared Kushner. Ivanka Trump adds some color to that. It also adds color to it with her televised denial, which is not unlike the president's denial to you.

MAGGIE HABERMAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: I think it is within the realm of possibility that Ivanka Trump did not know what took place. I think it is unlikely, but I think it is within the realm of possibility.

I think when it comes to the president, and I asked him this question in an Oval Office interview in January, it's a yes or no question. Did you order official -- I asked about Jared Kushner. Ivanka Trump's clearance came through, I think it was a few days later, but it was around the same time as Jared Kushner's in May of 2018. It was a yes or no question, did you tell officials to give him clearance. And he not only said no but said I don't think I have the authority to do that. He does have the authority to do it, which is why it's interesting that there was such an effort, and I do know, we have reporting as well, that he had said to a number of officials why can't this be dealt with in terms of both of their clearances. He had spoken to a couple officials about whether they could help, and those said no.

This is one of these things where he was going to have to take action if he wanted it done. And it is within his power. Again, this is really important to keep pointing out that this is why it gets complicated when you have family members in the White House advising you. It is going to raise questions about whether things are being done out of different concerns.

CAMEROTA: It is within his power, but people around him didn't like it.

HABERMAN: Correct.

CAMEROTA: As you reported, Don McGahn didn't like it. He wrote a contemporaneous note. John Kelly didn't like it. The FBI wasn't advising it. I don't know about Ivanka, but I do you with, as your reporting with Jared, the CIA, they didn't like it. So he had to circumvent them.

HABERMAN: Right. It's fine -- again, it's not fine. Let me rephrase that. It is within his purview to do that. But then lying about it is going to raise a lot of questions, and they ought to expect that. And one of the things that keeps coming up from people who are supportive of Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump is you should all bear in mind that Don McGahn and John Kelly were basically at war with those two for much of their time there for both of them in the White House, that the relationship was toxic. And could that have played a role? And maybe it could have. And John Kelly has been accused of others of playing favorites in terms of the security clearances and who was impacted negatively by them.

That said, it is a yes or no question as to whether the president did this. And he said no. And what we later learned is that that wasn't true.

BERMAN: And again, since your report, and it is a little bit similar to the CNN report. Since that has come out, people have defended the president's power to do this, which is not in question. What they haven't tried to explain is the lie.

[08:05:10] HABERMAN: Right.

BERMAN: And that's just hanging out there.

HABERMAN: Right. Look, again, and I think we have discussed it before. When I asked the president that question, we were already in the process of trying to report on whether this had taken place because we had gotten a tip that there was a memo that had indicated that the president had either directed or ordered this clearance to be issued.

So frankly, at that point I expected the president to say yes. And I thought we were going to be -- honestly, it did not occur to me that the likely answer he was going to give was no. And it was confounding to me at the time.

CAMEROTA: Maggie, one of the other questions is why didn't intel officials want Jared and Ivanka to have security clearance. So with Jared, a part of it is he didn't fill out his paper accurately, his documents accurately. And he overlooked some meetings he had had with Russians, and that was a red flag. Do we have any idea why they wouldn't want Ivanka Trump to have security clearance?

HABERMAN: We don't. She has her own business ties and foreign ties because of the business that she was running. They are also a married couple, and I think that sometimes what happens with a spouse ends up impacting the other half of the couple in terms of the clearance. But I don't want to suggest I know more than I do. There's a lot of open questions as to why it is that officials had raised questions.

And to be clear, on the Jared Kushner issue we should note that there was a split in the Personnel Security Office as to whether he should get one. Some of the career officials thought that he should. Some thought that he shouldn't. Don McGahn went with what he told people at the time was an abundance of caution that Jared Kushner should not get it. But again, this was always going to become -- this was inevitably going to become an issue.

I think it is important to note, too, that at the time Jared Kushner's clearance was granted and at the time that his lawyer spoke very publicly about how this had been a normal process, Jared Kushner was -- there were questions about whether he was connected or how closely he might be connected to the Mueller probe and to investigations that were going on. And so the conclusion that people around him were asking reporters to come to was, well, look, he got a clearance, so he couldn't be under investigation. And the fact that we now know the president directed this to happen, I have no idea what's going on in terms of Jared Kushner and that investigation. We have heard nothing more in that respect. But it does change how we looked at it back then.

BERMAN: All right, Maggie Haberman, scoop machine, we've been talking about last week's scoop. Let's talk about this morning's scoop, because overnight you and Peter Baker reported on checks that you obtained that Michael Cohen says were given to him by President Trump. This is in addition to the ones that he produced last week, Cohen did, at the testimony, and Michael Cohen says that these were reimbursements for the hush money payments that he made to Stormy Daniels. What's striking in addition to the fact that you see Donald Trump's signature, the president is on it again and again and again, as you line up what was going on in the White House on those days. Whether it was meetings with Angela Merkel, whether it was meetings with senators about tax cuts, the turkey pardon. We'll leave that one there.

CAMEROTA: Will we?

BERMAN: Probably not. But also phone calls to Benjamin Netanyahu. It is jarring to see the business of the country being conducted while, as Michael Cohen puts it, the business of paying off porn stars is conducted at the same time.

HABERMAN: Right. And what people close to the president have said is they are not sure that he actually knew what the payments were going toward, that he thought he was getting a legal fee to repay Michael Cohen. Michael Cohen's lawyer Lanny Davis I think has said that that is not a plausible explanation.

This is not the first time that you have had a president of the United States who was wealthy, right? There were others who were wealthy who had to take care of private citizen business. But this is obviously a different realm of private citizen business, and it is going to continue to dog him, I think, for the next couple of months.

And look, the public may not care. This might be something that is already baked into their opinion, because one of the things that Rudy Giuliani was very smart about was right out of the gate in May of 2018 saying, yes, he reimbursed him. I think voters have been hearing that for a year. And I'm not sure that much of this is getting through to them, but just in terms of the public record it is important to document.

CAMEROTA: That is absurd, Maggie.

HABERMAN: Which part?

CAMEROTA: The part that Donald Trump would every month would sign by hand a check --

HABERMAN: It's not absurd. I don't agree with that.

CAMEROTA: Hold on, for $35,000 and not know. This is a man who didn't even pay his vendors when they completed work for him. This is somebody who doesn't part with $35,000.

HABERMAN: I'm just doing this for a theoretical here. Let's say that he thought that he was reimbursing Michael Cohen for other things that he might not want people to know about. I'm talking specifically about the stormy Daniels thing. So no, I disagree with you that it's absurd.

CAMEROTA: Wait a minute, you're talking specifically that there might have been other things we didn't know about connected to Stormy Daniels --

HABERMAN: No. I'm saying that there might have been other things that are in the realm of things he didn't want the public to know about. I don't think we should all presume just because we see something that it is giving us complete visibility into everything.

[08:10:01] CAMEROTA: OK. That's intriguing. And you're right, that is possible. But as has been pointed out there was no retainer contract at the time.

HABERMAN: Right.

CAMEROTA: And this wasn't an automatic online payment where you might overlook it.

HABERMAN: I don't think that means anything either. I think that he was getting a bunch of bills and he was signing them. And whether he knew that he was reimbursing Michael Cohen for this, only two and maybe a handful of other people at the Trump Organization would know. But the two people are Michael Cohen and Donald Trump. Donald Trump actually has not said, frankly, more recently whether he did or not. Folks around him have made the point. Michael Cohen has said under oath and penalty of perjury the president did know.

So again, I think the people who are trying to undercut Michael Cohen's credibility are going to have to take into account that this was taking place under oath. But Alisyn, I think that it is a mistake to say, and therefore this is the only possibility, this is the only thing it could be. I don't personally think --

BERMAN: Maggie, very quickly, you also note in your story that there are those who believe that these checks could be part of a case that could be made against the president when he's out of office.

HABERMAN: Yes. And that is a real issue here. There is a real question, and people around the president, some of them, not all, but some of them are concerned about this that he could have possible legal exposure with the Southern District of New York that is very aggressively continuing to look into these issues that have spawned from Michael Cohen and whether the president would have some legal jeopardy. That could impact the degree to which he would want a second term and be looking to run for reelection, because the Justice Department does not believe that a sitting president can be indicted.

CAMEROTA: Maggie, fascinating, as always. Thank you very much.

We have some breaking news to get to right now, because thousands of people are fleeing the last ISIS held territory in Syria. U.S.-backed Syrian democratic forces have helped 6,000 people leave in just the past two days. But among those escaping are ISIS fighters. And CNN's Ben Wedeman has been live in eastern Syria. He's been watching all of this and has all the breaking details for us. What's happening, Ben?

BEN WEDEMAN, SENIOR INTERVIEW CORRESPONDENT: Alisyn, it's important to underscore that these people are not fleeing. They are surrendering. These are ISIS families and ISIS fighters who have essentially come to the conclusion that this battle cannot be won given the intensity of the bombardment that's been going on for quite some time. And this bombardment, it appears, has resulted in a very large number of casualties among men and women and children. I must stress the women and children as well. We were able to shoot some video of some children who were badly injured. They are being treated by a group called the Free Burma Rangers, which is an American-led group that we saw also operating around Mosul as well and Raqqa as well.

So yes, this is coming at a high cost. But what you are seeing behind me here is, it was 6,000 in the last 48 hours this morning. But more people, many more, several hundred at least, have arrived. And they are being assembled in this spot behind me. We have spoken in the last 24 hours so women from Belgium, Finland, France, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Russia, and elsewhere. And most continue to insist that they remain loyal to the Islamic State. I heard one woman shouting that someday the Islamic State will return and take revenge on all of you -- "you" being the enemies of the Islamic State. Whether it is the U.S.-backed Syrian democratic forces, the British, American, and French intelligence who are just over the hill behind me interrogating all of the men who are separated from the women. So yes, they are leaving what's left of the Islamic State. The problem is, what happens to them next? Alisyn, John?

BERMAN: These are such important questions. And we are only asking them on CNN them because you are there as a witness. Thank you so much, Ben, for giving us that report.

President Trump's homeland security secretary set to be grilled soon on Capitol Hill. We're going to speak to one of the Democrats who will do some of that questioning, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:18:03] JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: In about an hour, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen will be in the hot seat, facing questions before a House panel. This will be the secretary's first time appearing before Congress since Democrats took control of the House.

Joining us is now Congresswoman Lauren Underwood. She's the vice chair of the Homeland Security Committee, will be part of that questioning today.

What do Democrats -- what do you want to hear and ask the secretary today?

REP. LAUREN UNDERWOOD (D), ILLINOIS: I think we are going to hear a lot of questions from my colleagues on the panel today. But I'm not approaching this as a lawyer. I'm a nurse.

And so, I'm looking to hear from Secretary Nielsen very clearly about the impacts of her family separation policy on the physical and mental health of the children.

BERMAN: And that will be a topic -- family separations.

This hearing also comes on the heels of news and new numbers put out by CBP, Customs and Border Patrol about apprehensions at the border. Now, we have talked here about historically speaking illegal border crossings were at or near an all-time low. But they are going up, 76,000 in February, which is the highest in February in the last 12 years.

How do you explain the increase?

UNDERWOOD: Well, I think it's very clear that the Trump administration has taken a posture where they are treating every individual who is seeking asylum in the United States as an illegal activity, contrary to long-term U.S. policy. And so, this is part of what we want to know. When we think about

border security, this is our first opportunity to question Secretary Nielsen on these policies ranging from the border wall to drug apprehension, individual detainees and the family separation policy. And so, we're looking for answers.

BERMAN: In many of them, the CBP makes this point so that the reports out this morning that many of these people being apprehended are presenting themselves, families presenting themselves seeking asylum. That doesn't change the fact that the numbers are increasing a huge amount.

And CBP said it just can't handle the numbers. So, do Democrats have ideas on how to handle this -- apparently was an enormous increase?

[08:20:06] UNDERWOOD: Well, what we saw in the recent appropriation was increased dollars to help with judges in processing these cases, increased amount of money for Customs and Border Patrol officers. Every time they have come with funding requests relating to these very common sense border security measures, we are here and willing to step up and make sure that the agency has the resources that they need to keep this country secure and safe.

BERMAN: Does the increase in number -- again, that big jump in February, February -- over February of last year, does that constitute an emergency to you?

UNDERWOOD: I don't believe that the president is within his constitutional duties to issue this emergency declaration. And I believe that the Senate is going to vote in the coming days to pass that joint resolution that we passed out of the House.

You know, Article I of the Constitution was very clear that the Congress -- the Congress uniquely has the power of the purse, the power to appropriate dollars. And his unilateral circumventing of the United States Constitution is inappropriate.

BERMAN: I want to ask you about a vote that you will be asked to take in the House that condemns anti-Semitism and now also anti-Muslim bias. This stems from comments that Representative Ilhan Omar of Minnesota made about support of Israel. And she suggested that she didn't feel she should be asked to pledge loyalty or allegiance to Israel.

And some people said it was tantamount to suggesting that American Jews or supporters of Israel have to pledge allegiance to Israel, the idea of dual loyalty. Which was an issue when John F. Kennedy was president, people said, oh, is there dual loyalty with the Vatican and the United States? And some people took that as an anti-Semitic remark.

Let me play Eliot Engel, congressman from New York, said about it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ELIOT ENGEL (D-NY), CHAIRMAN, HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: I think the remarks she's made have been very troubling. I have spoken out publicly and forcefully about it and saying that she should apologize.

Look, you hope that people who get elected to office and they grow. I would hope the same would happen to her.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Should she apologize for those statements?

UNDERWOOD: I believe that she should apologize to the individuals who have been hurt by her remarks. And I think she certainly has in the past.

BERMAN: This is a new case though. She has apologized in the past for past statements. This is yet another case.

Did you take them to be offensive, that statement?

UNDERWOOD: You know, I didn't hear or see her original comments. I know she was engaging back and forth with other colleagues of mine. But what I do know is expressions of hatred in any form -- Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, homophobia, racism, those are unacceptable.

And in the last election, the American people spoke out and said that we do not want elected officials to be engaging in this effort to spread hate. So I'm hopeful that we will be able to move past this issue in a way that we can respect each other as colleagues and the diversity of this country.

BERMAN: So you are two months into the job at this point, Congresswoman. We are thrilled to have you on. We do like hearing from the new members of Congress.

What has the environment been? Is this what you anticipated? You came in during a shutdown in month one, month two. Now there is the Michael Cohen hearing. Now requests for documents from the White House.

Is this what you thought it would be?

UNDERWOOD: You know what? Business as usual in the Capitol, that's not happening. The freshmen came in, we have shaken things up. It feels like we're making a difference, making a change.

Last week when we passed the universal background check bill for the first time in my lifetime, we have had this type of gun safety legislation, it felt really important. My community was one of these that was touched by gun violence, the shooting in Aurora, Illinois. And so, to be able to be with my community through the tough time and come to the halls of Congress and stand on the floor of the House and cast a vote to keep my community safe is really important, rewarding and I'm grateful that we have a Democratic-led majority that recognizes the importance of these issues to families across America. BERMAN: Congresswoman Lauren Underwood of Homeland Security -- we

will see you today during this hearing. And thank you for coming on NEW DAY. We'll look forward to seeing you again.

UNDERWOOD: Thanks, John.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: OK, John.

The White House is trying to keep more Republicans from blocking his emergency declaration to fund the border wall. So, up next, we talk to a Republican congressman who's been to the border. And he'll meet with the president today. What message does he have?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:28:32] CAMEROTA: Four Republican senators say they will vote with Democrats to block President Trump's emergency declaration to fund his border wall. The president is vowing to veto the resolution when it gets to his desk.

Joining us now is Republican Congressman Adam Kinzinger. And he recently deployed to the southern border with the National Guard, and plans to meet with President Trump about all of this today.

Good morning, Congressman.

REP. ADAM KINZINGER (R-IL), FOREGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: Hey, good morning. How are you?

CAMEROTA: What are you going to share with the president when you see him today?

KINZINGER: Well, I'm going to talk about what I saw. You know, I was down there in Tucson. So, I went to see the overall operations, as well as was part of the overall operations.

And what I saw was a really bad situation, something I think is deserving of a national emergency. Not because of the immigration issue but because of the drugs and human trafficking. If you think about the cartels, the Sinaloa and Zetas, they basically make money on two things. One is trafficking humans, the other is trafficking drugs, both of which are over the border.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

KINZINGER: And I saw lots of people die every year as a result of coyotes running and abandoning them. And so, I think it's important to share that.

CAMEROTA: But just explain how 200 miles of a new border wall will stop the 90 percent of heroin and other drugs that come through legal ports of entry?

KINZINGER: Well, it's two different issues. So, yes, you have the port of entry. So, if somebody can get a semi through filled with drugs, that's what they prefer. So, everybody that opposes the active duty deployments at the border,

not to be confused with the guards deployment, but the active duty is on the border hardening ports of entry. My friends on the other side of the aisle say that's a problem so they should support that.

END