Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Democratic Field Soars to 18 Candidates; WSJ: Feds Gather More Evidence on Hush-Money Payments; NYC Declares Public Health Emergency. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired April 10, 2019 - 08:30   ET

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

[08:30:00] JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Could not determine whether investigators ever learned the answer to that question.

ELIE HONIG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, well, if he did, then, again, that's going to go right to the president's knowledge of this whole scheme.

BERMAN: All right, Elie, thank you for helping us digest this article. Again, just crossing us right now, a much bigger investigation than we had previously known, according to "The Wall Street Journal," and did the president's specific role in the hush money payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal.

We'll have much more. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: It is official, the Democrats now have the largest presidential primary field in modern history. This week, Congressman Eric Swalwell became the 18th candidate to join the field. That's one more than the 17 candidates who ran on the Republican ticket in 2016. It doesn't count Joe Biden, by the way, who we largely expect will get in very soon.

Joining us now, one of those 2016 Republican candidates, former senator from Pennsylvania, Rick Santorum. He's now a CNN senior political commentator.

And, senator, this is a conversation I wanted to have with you for eight years since I've covered your presidential run in 2012.

RICK SANTORUM, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: OK.

BERMAN: When you look at this field of 18 Democratic candidates, the question I think people ask is, does every one of them really think that he or she has a chance to win?

SANTORUM: No. I think that people run for different reasons. I mean if you look -- just even -- even the last go round in the Democratic Party, I mean Bernie Sanders, I think when he originally got in, I don't think he really felt he was going to win. But Bernie is someone who is really driven by a set of issues and trying to move the country in a direction and he sees this as a platform to get those policies. Now, obviously, he did almost win and I think he has a legitimate chance of winning this one, but I don't think that's why he got in, in the first place.

And so people run for different reasons. They run because they have an agenda or ideas they want to promote. Maybe they want to promote themselves and put themselves up for, you know, for a cabinet position or whatever the case may be. Some may feel like it's their destiny. That, you know, they've always wanted to do this and it's, you know, and now when you've got 20 candidates, you never know, lightning could strike and things could happen. So there's all sorts of reasons people are in and -- and it's -- there is some legitimacy in that with that big of a field something weird could happen and -- and you could have that moment in the sun where you actually could take advantage of a -- of a moment.

Look at, you know, the mayor of South Bend, for example.

BERMAN: Yes.

[08:35:05] SANTORUM: I mean he had a moment and all -- no one would have ever thought that he had a chance. And all of a sudden, you know, he's now in the discussion.

BERMAN: So what you're saying is those people from zero to one percent, they think something might happen. There's something -- it's not impossible something could happen.

SANTORUM: It's not impossible. I mean I'm sort of living proof of that. I mean I -- you know, look, I ran in 2012, you know, having the last time I ran for elected office I, you know, I lost and actually lost pretty badly in 2006. I went out there and, you know, I ran because I had some issues, some things that I thought were really important to try to change the focus of the Republican Party and I thought I could deliver that message effectively. And it turned out to be true because a lot of -- a lot of -- a lot of things happened that sort of aligned for me and I was able to win the Iowa caucuses.

So, again, those things can happen and particularly with a crowded field it's more likely to happen.

BERMAN: And I was one of the reporters back in 2011 and you faced these questions all the time. You did interview after interview with people telling you, you don't have a chance.

SANTORUM: Why are you doing this?

BERMAN: You don't have a chance.

SANTORUM: Yes, you don't have a shot. Right.

BERMAN: Let me just play a little bit. It gets to the framing of this, just to that interview I did with you in 2011.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Any doubts that you are the right man at the right time? SANTORUM: No, I really don't have any doubts. I mean I wouldn't be

doing this. If I thought someone else could do the job that I believe I can do and be successful and winning this race, which I think I'm in the best position to do --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: So it is interesting, you know, you can see it there, first of all, we both haven't aged a day since then.

SANTORUM: No, not a bit.

BERMAN: But, you know, you had people telling you, you have no chance, you have no chance.

SANTORUM: Yes.

BERMAN: And I learned a lesson then because you went and won the Iowa caucuses at that point. You might as well let the voters decide who has a chance or not.

SANTORUM: Yes, I think, in some respects, I mean, I don't think any Democrat would admit it, but I'm sort of the poster boy of the -- of the candidate that has no shot. I mean there's no reason that -- that I should have been able to win 11 caucus states against Mitt Romney. But I did, because it was the right message at the right time. You know -- you know it's a matter of having that message, having -- being able to connect with voters and having the resources to be able to compete.

BERMAN: So --

SANTORUM: And those -- all those three things have to happen. I had two of the three and that wasn't enough.

BERMAN: What -- and what did you learn, though? Because I do remember that when it started to happen, there was some confusion in the campaign with, well, what do we do now with all of this? What's your advice to these candidates if and when that moment comes?

SANTORUM: Well, I mean, I just mentioned, I mean there's -- you know, you have to have the right message, you have to be the right messenger and you have to have the resources to be able to get into the fight.

And, you know, if you look early on here at this Democratic primary, I mean you're seeing remarkable resources flowing to candidates, some of whom are fairly obscure. That's -- that -- that is, again, probably encourages more people to get in because there is a willingness on the part of the Democratic contributor to take a shot on somebody that's not the favorite, to fund people and, in fact, in large amounts of, you know, a diverse amount of folks.

So there -- there is even -- even from my -- my -- you know, my race in 2012 or in 2016, I think there's more possibility for a dark horse in this race to emerge than maybe at any time in electoral history.

BERMAN: Rick Santorum, thank you for helping us understand this. A discussion I've been wanting to have for a long time.

SANTORUM: Thank you.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: That was really candid and really interesting and I appreciate him saying all of that.

BERMAN: Yes. No, I mean it's interesting. You always wonder, do they really think they have a chance? And he's like, no. No. They don't. There're running for different reasons.

CAMEROTA: And that's why today I'm announcing my candidacy.

BERMAN: Yes.

CAMEROTA: All right, up next, we have much more on our breaking news. "The Wall Street Journal" is reporting, just out this hour, that the probe into those hush money payments by the president has gone much deeper into the president's inner circle than previously known.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:41:11] ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

CAMEROTA: OK, we want to bring you this developing story.

"The Wall Street Journal" has just put out an article reporting that federal investigators are looking into those hush money payments made by Donald Trump to those two women who allege that they had affairs with him and they have gathered more evidence from inside the president's inner circle than previously reported. Apparently prosecutors spoke with Hope Hicks, who, of course, was very close for years to Mr. Trump, as well as his former security chief, Keith Schiller. And they have some information about what those two may have been involved in.

So joining us now is John Avlon, CNN's senior political analyst, and Chris Cillizza, CNN politics reporter and editor-at-large.

OK, so, John Avlon, let's just get into this.

So, we knew that Michael Cohen and Donald Trump were involved in these payments. We've seen the checks from Donald Trump signed to Michael Cohen.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: We've seen the receipts, yes.

CAMEROTA: And, in fact, there was a suggestion that Allen Weisselberg, the chief financial officer, might have been involved because in that taped recording that Michael Cohen made he brings him up. But we did not know the involvement of Hope Hicks or Keith Schiller. So it says here, prosecutors have interviewed Hope Hicks, very close to Mr. Trump, about these, as well as speaking to Keith Schiller, the former security chief. Investigators learned of calls between Mr. Schiller and David Pecker, who is the chief executive of the parent company of "National Enquirer."

So, I mean, this is -- in other words, it's much closer and maybe these two were somehow implicated?

AVLON: Right. And I think the two -- the key points are that Schiller and Hicks are incredibly close to Donald Trump, both as candidate and president in terms of shear day to day proximity. And so the fact that they've been making calls to American media, this is Donald Trump's infamous David Pecker problem, and the catch and kill that they have been alleged to conduct with Karen McDougal, this all brings these figures closer together. And the issue is not just campaign finance, it's whether it was designed to deprive the American people of information that could have changed the result of an election.

So this is a significant ratcheting up, but it's a reminder that the ongoing investigations of the president are significant, could have a significant impact on his presidency over and above the Mueller report.

BERMAN: And Hope Hicks, in particular, Chris, with as a campaign staffer. So the argument that this wasn't a campaign expense or a campaign concern, if she had knowledge of or was connected to or involved in, that does raise problems.

CHRIS CILLIZZA, POLITICAL REPORTER AND EDITOR-AT-LARGE: Absolutely. And, look, let's go back to what Michael Cohen has testified to in the Southern District of New York has agreed to. Remember, as part of his plea agreement, they acknowledged that they believed his allegation that he was directed and coordinated by the president of the United States, then candidate of the United States and president of the United States, to do these things, to make these payments, that that was a fact, right? Cohen was alleging it, but part of their plea agreement was, yes, we agree to that.

So, you know, that's not just Michael Cohen's word against Donald Trump. That's the Southern District of New York's word against Donald Trump. Many people -- we've talked about this on this show before, many people said they thought the Southern District of New York investigation was potentially more problematic for Donald Trump than the Mueller probe. May wind up being the case.

CAMEROTA: The article goes on to say -- you know, Michael Cohen, as you guys know, has suggested that he has a treasure trove of audiotapes and e-mails and texts, et cetera. So here it says, investigators possess a recorded phone conversation between Mr. Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, and a lawyer who represented the two women. Not surprising, but, of course, it's -- we need to know what's on that.

So what is Michael Cohen saying? What's the lawyer saying? What are these negotiations sound like? I mean, obviously, prosecutors that is just gold for them, John.

AVLON: Yes, because that takes you well beyond the he said/she said of it, or the he said/he said as it may be.

CILLIZZA: Yes.

[08:45:04] AVLON: And, again, this is about the circle closing because the more people who are in close proximity to Donald Trump in real- time towards the end of the campaign, the more it's going -- it's potential that Donald Trump directly knew about it. We already have had some recordings, but these communications become really, really key, and they've got them apparently.

BERMAN: Yes, and, again, I just remind you, prosecutors asked Hope Hicks whether she -- amassed a witness whether Hicks had coordinated with anyone at American Media concerning a journal article on November 4, 2016, the first article that talked about the possibility of these payments. There are people having if Hope Hicks was involved in the spin around this article, Chris.

CILLIZZA: And, John, just very quickly, remember, there's so many untruths that have already been told. Remember when this initially came out, "The Wall Street Journal" has done a ton of great reporting on this. They were the first to reported about these payments. When it first came out, Michael Cohen said, oh, it's nothing. Oh, I paid for it myself. When it was, oh, well, I don't know where the money came from. Then it was, I got a home equity loan. Then it -- I mean there's so many things here that are fishy. And, again, the Southern District of New York, in their plea agreement with Michael Cohen acknowledged they believe that Donald Trump directed and coordinated these payments, which Donald Trump absolutely says he did not do (INAUDIBLE) in that tape of Air Force One.

AVLON: And it's in -- and it's in the context -- it's in the context of the final days of the campaign which is so crucial.

CILLIZZA: Yes.

AVLON: Remember, he wins by 78,000 votes in three states and those -- that last, for example, Comey letter about Hillary Clinton seems to have had an impact on some polls. So this is all incredibly high stakes when it comes to determining in those final days and hours who becomes president of the United States.

CAMEROTA: Chris, John, thank you very much.

CILLIZZA: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: All right, New York City officials are trying to stop this measles outbreak from getting worse. We discuss a controversial idea to get everyone vaccinated, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:49:57] CAMEROTA: A public health emergency has been declared in New York amid this intensifying measles outbreak. The CDC reports 465 cases of measles now nationwide, two decades after the disease was eradicated.

So joining us to talk about what's happening here in New York and more we have chief medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Group. We also have Dr. Oxiris Barbot. She is the New York City health commissioner.

Dr. Barbot, thank you for being here.

Sanjay, great to see you.

What is New York doing to try to curtail this?

DR. OXIRIS BARBOT, NEW YORK CITY HEALTH COMMISSIONER: So I have declared a public health emergency because we have 285 cases of measles. And with that emergency, what we then are doing is requiring that all individuals who live in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, or work there, get vaccinated for the measles vaccine within the next 48 hours.

CAMEROTA: How is that differently than what currently exists?

BARBOT: So what we have done up until this point is enforce regulations that are in place, mandating that children who are unvaccinated be excluded from schools. We have seen some improvement over the last several months, over 8,000 people have gotten vaccinated, as compared to the previous year, but we're still seeing way too many cases and we're concerned that measles has consequences and we want to avoid any bad outcomes.

CAMEROTA: What if parents don't want to vaccinate their children?

BARBOT: So part of what this order says is that a child who is unvaccinated and exposed to measles needs to be vaccinated within three days. And what we're doing is providing parents with as much information as possible so that they feel good about vaccinating their children because we really feel that that's the best way to protect their health and safety.

In the event that a parent chooses, in spite of all of that information, not to vaccinate their child within this outbreak, then they are at a potential of facing $1,000 fine for every child that they have who is not vaccinated.

CAMEROTA: Is that the answer nationwide, Sanjay?

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think the idea of mandatory vaccines nationwide is a -- is a larger issue. Right now you're dealing with a public health emergency. So I think -- I think your -- the stakes are a little different right now because there is people who are becoming infected with measles that, you know, there's no need for that to be happening.

And the numbers, as you know, continue to spread. It's likely that this will be the highest year on record in the last 20 years in terms of patients with measles in this country. Something we didn't talk about, you know, in 2000 at all because it was gone.

CAMEROTA: I think we need to start the conversation with parents are trying to protect their kids, OK. So let's just all accept -- you know, I think that sometimes the parents who don't want to vaccinate are depicted as tinfoil wearing crazies. They're trying to protect their kids, OK. So perhaps they have bad information and perhaps, Sanjay, you know, let's -- I hate to open Pandora's Box, but let's just acknowledge, there are occasional, very rarely, vaccine injuries, and parents know that.

GUPTA: Yes.

CAMEROTA: And so they're trying to protect their kids. And every time we pretend that vaccines are 100 percent safe, while they have saved millions of lives, we need to say, I think that you can understand why parents are a little skittish about some of this.

GUPTA: Well, look, I mean, risk is a difficult thing to assess, I think, for the average person because, you know, when you hear about a single case of a problem -- and, look, the medical community acknowledges that there are risks to vaccines. I don't think they say it's 100 percent safe. And there can even be serious adverse events. But they are rare, right? When people say one in a million chance of that happening, I mean, look, out of 10,000 people who take an aspirin, ten of them are going to have a bleed in their brain. Taking Tylenol is the most common reason someone ends up in the hospital for liver failure. You're more likely to get hit by a car crossing the street than you are to have an adverse event from a -- from a vaccine and yet no one's saying you shouldn't walk across the street, right?

So, I mean, risk is a difficult thing to assess. And I appreciate that we're not trying to portray people as wearing tinfoil hats and whatnot, but this is a really serious issue. And I think that anytime it's given sort of this equivalency, I'm trying to do the safe thing for my child, therefore I didn't vaccinate, I just don't -- I don't think that's a very fair or safe even comparison.

BARBOT: I --

CAMEROTA: I think that's really important context.

BARBOT: And I would add that very much so our approach has been to help parents feel good about vaccinating their kids because, you're right, all parents are trying to do the best for their children. We're working with community leaders, faith-based leaders, other trusted voices in the community that will be there to answer any questions at all. Because sometimes, you know, people may not believe information that's coming from public health or from the government and we want them to feel good about protecting their children.

CAMEROTA: Well, this is -- we really appreciate you sharing the information with us here and we'll see if New York becomes a model for how to tackle it around the country since we're seeing this outbreak that is so troubling.

Thank you, Dr. Barbot. I really appreciate it.

Sanjay, great to see you, as always.

GUPTA: Good to see you too.

CAMEROTA: Join Sanjay Gupta as he journeys around the world. He is looking for the secrets to living a better life for the mind, the body and the soul. It's an all-new CNN original series "Chasing Life." It premieres Saturday at 9:00 p.m. on CNN. Can't wait to watch it.

[08:55:05] We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: All right, so there was this moment on Capitol Hill yesterday. The Treasury secretary, Steve Mnuchin, was testifying before the House Banking Committee. Chairman Maxine Waters. And he wanted to go.

CAMEROTA: He had somewhere to go. He had --

BERMAN: He needed to be somewhere else.

CAMEROTA: He needed to be somewhere else.

BERMAN: He had an important meeting with someone from Bahrain.

CAMEROTA: A very important person.

BERMAN: As one does. All right. So he wanted to go. And I should preface this by saying, we all mispronounce words. We all say things incorrectly. But this one, you know, it came with an extra added little twist.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVE MNUCHIN, TREASURY SECRETARY: Please dismiss everybody. I believe you're supposed to take the gravel and bang it. That's --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: (INAUDIBLE).

BERMAN: Bang the gravel, he said. Bang the gravel.

CAMEROTA: I thought you were going to play the two-minute long version.

BERMAN: I was hoping. Believe me, I was hoping we had the two-minute version. A much longer version of that.

CAMEROTA: I think you needed to hear the whole wind up before he mispronounces it.

BERMAN: But he mispronounces gavel and says I was -- you know, I need you to bang the gravel.

So along those notes -- I have nothing more to say. I would like this show to end as soon as possible. So I would like you to bang the gravel.

CAMEROTA: You want me to drop the gravel on this show.

BERMAN: I would like you to bang the gravel. All right, thank you.

So, Steve Mnuchin -- that was brilliant.

CAMEROTA: How you do it. Ba-bam.

BERMAN: We feel you.

CAMEROTA: OK.

BERMAN: We feel you.

CAMEROTA: That's -- if you'd like to try it, I brought more gravel for you to bang and to drop the gravel on the show.

BERMAN: All right.

On that note, much more on the breaking news regarding "The Wall Street Journal" report on what the president knew about hush money payments to Stormy Daniels.

[09:00:02] That's next.

END