Return to Transcripts main page
New Day
Redacted Mueller Report Released on Thursday; Moore and Kudlow Once Slammed Trump's Policies; Loughlin and Husband Plead Not Guilty in College Scam. Aired 8:30-9a ET
Aired April 16, 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] BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: With regard to any Russia relations over the course of not only the two-year span, but obviously during the campaign and leading up to it. The two countries and this administration in particular have been very tight lipped about what we know, what their relationships have been, Vladimir Putin obviously saying nothing ill was done. We have no bad relations.
And, going forward, though, I am also curious to see Don McGahn and the role that he played in this. Thirty hours of testimony. It will be really interesting to see what we have in this report from him.
JOHN AVLON, CNN ANCHOR: Yes.
POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: Expand on that, why Don McGahn has the White House -- should the White House be freaked out about that?
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: Well, he is apparently the person who stopped the president from firing Mueller, at least one and perhaps more occasions, and sort of the issue of obstruction of justice, which, of course, is the key unresolved question in -- in the Mueller report. We know that from Barr's letter. McGahn's testimony is both crucial and largely unknown.
I mean the sort of larger point I'm interesting in is, you know, a lot of these subjects have been pretty well covered by those of us in the news media. What did Mueller learn that we didn't learn? That's sort of a general question that I have.
GOLODRYGA: And also, if Mueller lays out in particular on the issue of obstruction who he wanted that to be defined by, was this meant for Congress to define whether or not the president obstructed justice --
HARLOW: That's a great question.
GOLODRYGA: Or whether it was William Barr. I would believe that if it was William Barr, that William Barr would have written that down specifically in the four-page memo. He did not.
TOOBIN: Another point about Mueller himself, I'm interested to see if Barr -- if Barr identifies whether Mueller asked for any of the redactions as opposed to Barr himself imposing the redactions, because if Mueller agreed to some of the redactions, I think that will give Barr a lot of political cover -- HARLOW: Cover.
TOOBIN: That he wouldn't otherwise have. So Barr -- Mueller's involvement in the redaction process will be something I'm interested in.
HARLOW: Can I just ask you, if -- if Mueller declined to see the four- page summary letter --
TOOBIN: Yes.
HARLOW: Because Barr testified that he offered it to Mueller and Mueller declined.
TOOBIN: Correct.
HARLOW: Do -- why would Mueller be a party to overseeing any of these redactions or, you're saying, he would have stipulated in handing over to the attorney general, I suggest you redact x, y and z.
TOOBIN: All of that is possible. I don't know.
HARLOW: Yes.
TOOBIN: But particularly of the four categories that Barr said he's going to do redactions, classified information, other investigations --
HARLOW: Right.
TOOBIN: Privacy interests.
HARLOW: Grand jury.
TOOBIN: Grand jury. That's the one. I'm sorry. Good work.
HARLOW: You're never --
TOOBIN: Good work, Poppy Harlow.
HARLOW: Can we just -- never is Toobin stumped for a word, especially grand jury.
AVLON: On --
TOOBIN: Grand jury. I know. Yes.
But, anyway, those four categories, the one about continuing investigations --
HARLOW: Yes.
AVLON: Yes.
TOOBIN: That is one that Mueller may have weighed in on and it will be interesting to see if Barr, you know, puts that on Mueller as opposed to takes that himself.
GOLODRYGA: And -- and don't forget, Mueller's team had, as we now know, made their own summaries, right?
AVLON: Right.
GOLODRYGA: In putting this letter forward at the very beginning. So I'm curious to see what those summaries entailed and why they weren't included in the four-page memo that Barr initially released.
TOOBIN: And if they're redacted.
GOLODRYGA: Right.
TOOBIN: And if these summaries are redacted.
GOLODRYGA: Yes.
AVLON: Well, and, look -- I mean, look, news is what's new. And in the 400 pages, there will be new information. But we know from reporting from Maggie Haberman and others that the White House strategy is going to say, there's nothing to see here. That this is really an extended addendum.
And we're getting some insight into the White House posture, which is not surprisingly playing offense.
I want to play for you a clip from Rudy Giuliani on a radio show just the other day. And, Jeff, I want to get your reaction.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RUDY GIULIANI, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ATTORNEY: I think it was the product of -- you want to call it a political dirty trick or you want to call it a crime, I don't know, criminal conspiracy. But in any event, I think that collusion will leave that question open. How did this come about?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TOOBIN: That's -- they want to turn this into an attack on the Steele dossier and the origins of this investigation.
One thing I think the White House is completely right about is that it won't change people's minds. You know, one of the touchstones of the Trump administration has been the polls don't change. You know, we make a big deal when his approval goes from 40 to 42 percent, 44 percent to -- it's all noise. The -- no event, not Charlottesville, not Helsinki, not the children at the border, nothing has changed the president's popularity --
HARLOW: I -- I believe (ph) --
TOOBIN: And I don't think this will either.
HARLOW: I believe that's because of the economy and the economy being this strong. I don't know if this could be sustained through (INAUDIBLE).
AVLON: But that's --
HARLOW: But that's not the topic of this segment.
AVLON: That's measurable.
GOLODRYGA: No, but I do agree with you --
HARLOW: I digress.
GOLODRYGA: I agree with you on that point, but in this polarized society, I think that the president could even turn a bad economy into blaming the Democrats and the focus too much on the Mueller investigation and what have you.
HARLOW: Why --
TOOBIN: Bad and --
HARLOW: Why is this coming out on Thursday, the day before Good Friday, before -- it's not just like a Memorial Day weekend. This is a religious weekend for Christians. It's Passover. For Jewish Americans, you've got a lot of folks that took off work, you know, Friday and Monday --
[08:35:02] AVLON: Are you suggesting this is more than a coincidence?
HARLOW: Not me. I'm just wondering.
AVLON: Just asking.
GOLODRYGA: Well, it's --
HARLOW: But it's up to Barr to say when it comes out.
GOLODRYGA: So you're saying it's not optimal television viewing time.
HARLOW: I mean just --
AVLON: Well, no.
GOLODRYGA: We -- we will be watching it. CNN will be covering it. It is going to be optimal viewing time.
TOOBIN: I'm working. I don't know about anybody else.
GOLODRYGA: Thursday is still a day before Good Friday.
AVLON: Is it a way of playing the ref in the court of public opinion, put it out late enough so that there's not the kind of sustained attention?
GOLODRYGA: You know, look, I think we would be talking about this if they put it out on Friday. I think the fact that it's Thursday is not that big -- not that big of an issue. Obviously the president thinks he owns the narrative going into this when he says that he was vindicated, right? And we shall see. I agree with Jeffrey, I think that those who supported the president going into this will feel the same about him coming out of it as well. There will probably be a lot of embarrassing information in these 400 pages. The White House has been schizophrenic all over the place initially saying let it all out, let it all -- you know, there's nothing to hide. And now, once again, it's a witch hunt. Thirteen angry Democrats. We shall see.
But I think that the polls may not change as much as people would like to think they would.
TOOBIN: And, remember, the tremendous advantage that Donald Trump has that Richard Nixon didn't have in 1973, '74, which is Fox News.
HARLOW: Twitter. And Twitter.
TOOBIN: Well, but -- but, you know, Twitter is independent actors. Fox News is a voice that is a guaranteed this is a nothing burger, you know --
GOLODRYGA: And muddying the waters, too, you know, even with Bill Barr suggesting that there was spying involved.
TOOBIN: Right.
GOLODRYGA: There's so much confusion now going into this, so it's not going to be as clear cut as just, let's release the 400 pages and we'll get our answers solved.
AVLON: But don't you think the president, because he can -- he can't say he was exonerated because that -- even in the four-page letters we know that's not true, but vindicated. So this could be more than a play to the base moment for the president if he was trying to play beyond the base. Why is that not his impulse?
GOLODRYGA: Well, look, this is a president -- and I believe his administration now and even his acting chief of staff -- has laid out a thought process going forward, and that is the American public knows who they got. They know this president. That's why he was elected without having seen his tax returns. That's why even some of the problematic behavior people seem to give a pass to.
So we know this president. There's nothing in this report. There are -- I think their narrative is going to be, that's going to be so shocking, so surprising, that hasn't been out there. And even Bill Barr said that when it comes to at least obstruction, most of it played out in the public.
I'm curious, actually, to see what we -- what hasn't been played out.
AVLON: Yes, most is not all.
GOLODRYGA: Right. Yes, not all.
AVLON: Fascinating.
HARLOW: There you go.
Thank you both very, very much.
AVLON: Thanks, guys.
GOLODRYGA: Yes.
HARLOW: No one go on vacation.
OK, Actress Lori Loughlin pleading not guilty in that college admissions scandal. What is that legal strategy? We'll ask two very smart lawyers ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[08:41:43] HARLOW: All right. Welcome back.
Time now for the "5 Things to Know for Your New Day."
Number one, firefighters have extinguished the catastrophic fire at Paris' Notre Dame Cathedral. The French interior ministry says some weaknesses, though, have been identified in the structure and several neighboring buildings have now been evacuated.
AVLON: Attorney General William Barr will release his redacted version of the Mueller report on Thursday morning. This comes as House Democrats have issued subpoenas to Deutsche Bank and JPMorgan Chase as they investigate President Trump's finances.
HARLOW: Former Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld has officially entered the 2020 presidential race. He becomes the first Republican to challenge the president for the GOP nomination.
AVLON: The CDC reports there are 90 new cases of the measles in the U.S. in just the last week alone. It's the second highest level in the U.S. in 25 years.
HARLOW: Actress Lori Loughlin and her husband Mossimo Giannulli pled not guilty to two conspiracy charges in that college admissions scam. Each of those charges are punishable by up to 20 years in prison.
For more on the "5 Things to Know," go to cnn.com/newday for the latest.
AVLON: It's time for "CNN Business Now."
Two of President Trump's advisers on the economy made some unflattering comments about then candidate Donald Trump's policies.
CNN's K-Files has unearthed a 2015 radio interview with Larry Kudlow and Stephen Moore in which they disparaged Trump.
Chief business correspondent Christine Romans joins us now with more.
Christine.
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Hi, guys.
Yes, and there's the audio here. This comes amid new scrutiny, of course, of President Trump's picks to sit on the powerful Federal Reserve board. One of those men, Stephen Moore, once criticized Trump's position on immigration as extreme, nativist, crazy and dangerous. Here's more in 2015.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHEN MOORE: I think it's a crazy policy. I think it's -- it's bad economics. And I think it's even worse politics.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROMANS: At the time, Trump endorsed a plan to revoke citizenship rights for children of immigrants born in the U.S. He wanted to restrict legal immigration. He repeatedly called for deporting illegal immigrants from the U.S.
Today, Larry Kudlow the president's chief economic adviser. Here is what he said back then when asking Stephen Moore about Trump's then plans of mass deportations.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LARRY KUDLOW: Shocked a lot of people. You know, going house to house and deporting illegals, repealing the 14th Amendment. The Republican Party's very much against what Trump wants.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ROMANS: In a statement to CNN, Kudlow said now he never should have made those comments, calling it speculative radio chatter that turned out to be wildly inaccurate.
Moore, who was once a contributor CNN, acknowledged he has said a lot of negative things about Trump before he met him. Moore's position under scrutiny here, guys, as the president's pick for an open seat on the Fed board. Moore last week told Erin Burnett he no longer supports going back to the gold standard he once did. He also told K-File he no longer wants to abolish the Fed and he no longer holds the position that there shouldn't be a minimum wage.
HARLOW: It's called evolving, Romans.
AVLON: Is that the spin?
ROMANS: Evolving.
HARLOW: Evolving.
ROMANS: Or flip-flopping depending --
HARLOW: Or, you know.
AVLON: Well, it's also called the K-File strikes again. ROMANS: I know.
AVLON: But, Christine, is -- the president, you know, doesn't take kindly to this criticism. He has really doubled down in support of Stephen Moore, even as Herman Cain's prospect for the Fed have fallen away. Does that still look as secure today?
ROMANS: And, look, the president clearly trusts Larry Kudlow. Larry Kudlow, who's also still supporting Stephen Moore's position there on the Fed.
[08:45:01] There are those who say that maybe Herman Cain will be the candidate who will not make it all the way to a nomination for the Fed, but that Stephen Moore might be more secure there. The Republicans will say no to Cain but yes to Moore.
HARLOW: Romans, thank you.
AVLON: Fascinating.
ROMANS: You're welcome.
HARLOW: All right, see you tomorrow.
So, ahead, why did Lori Loughlin not take a plea deal like fellow actress Felicity Huffman did in this college admissions scam? We're going to talk to our legal minds about that ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HARLOW: All right, this story gets more and more wild.
Actress Lori Loughlin and her husband, the fashion designer Mossimo Giannulli, plead not guilty to conspiracy charges in the college admissions scandal. Prosecutors say they paid $500,000 to a fake charity to get their two daughters into USC as crew recruits, even though, well, neither of those girls had ever rowed competitively. That's a head-scratcher.
[08:50:01] This comes a week after 13 other parents, including actress Felicity Huffman, pleaded guilty to charges.
With us now, two great legal minds, legal analyst Paul Callan and Joey Jackson.
I don't know, Paul Callen, this whole thing is so crazy. My kids are doing so much homework so that I never even feel compelled to do something like this. I wouldn't.
AVLON: Clearly.
HARLOW: So is there any explanation, legal explanation, for pleading not guilty here?
PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Oh, I think there is. The lawyer that Lori Loughlin has hired is this guy, Sean Berkowitz, who's at Latham and Watkins, one of the biggest law firms in the world. A money laundering expert. The person who was at the Department of Justice in charge of the Enron task force.
HARLOW: Wow.
CALLAN: He knows his stuff on the criminal side.
And it's obvious to me that they have looked at these charges and have said, at least the money laundering charges are going to be hard to prove against Lori Loughlin because you have to be able to prove that she was aware that money laundering was going on in the handling of the $500,000 she used to pay off William Singer. That's number one.
The second important thing is that I think jurors are going to be a little bit upset about the fact that this guy, William Singer, who made all the money on the scheme, who set up this key corporation, is getting a deal to testify against the parents who were supplying the money. Now, that's like Vito Corleone getting a break in a case against one of his hit men because --
HARLOW: Why do you always have to go to the mob, Paul Callan?
AVLON: I'm in favor of a "Godfather" reference as the next guy, probably more, but it doesn't really seem to apply.
JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes.
AVLON: First of all, Joey, if you're going to pay half a million dollars to get your kids into USC, it seems that you'll pony up for a first rate lawyer. But the fact pattern seems bad, call me crazy. You've got 10 other folks in the case, including Felicity Huffman, pleading guilty. You've got evidence, the prosecutors apparently have phone conversations, and there's even an e-mail --
JACKSON: Right.
AVLON: That Loughlin was cc'd on to Singer, I'll read it to folks, quote, I have some concerns and want to fully understand the game plan. Make sure we have a roadmap for success as it relates to our daughter. That all seems like a lot of evidence that's going to make it hard to weasel out of this one.
JACKSON: Yes, it's problematic. And here's what I was thinking. You know, at an arraignment, in context, it's customary for people to plead not guilty. It's an arraignment. And so the first time out, it never happens that it's the case where people say, I'm guilty, throw me in. Generally after the arraignment is when negotiation begins.
To Paul's point, apparently they're holding the government to the proof. We can only hope for their benefit that the government does something called a reverse proffer. And what they do in that, John and Poppy, is they'll call you in and they'll go over their proof and they will go over things, as you mentioned, John, we have this text message here, right?
HARLOW: Which we understand includes, I believe, some video prosecutors say they have.
JACKSON: Ah-ha. And -- which makes it even stronger. But in addition to that, they also, remember, have the phone conversation.
Now, the phone conversation doesn't have Ms. Loughlin saying much, although in response to, hey, do you know what, we're doing this, you have this $200,000 payment you need to make and, you know what, you've got to make it and you've got to send a picture of crew. And you're like, that's not necessarily a repudiation.
And so ultimately, no matter how powerful, no matter how skilled your attorneys are, it turns on the facts. And I think when you impanel a jury, and juries are critical to this, right? The fact is, is that this doesn't play very well where you have people who are playing by the rules, who are going over things with their daughters and sons and saying, look, study hard, you're not going out this Friday, you won't be going out Saturday, make sure you do the debate stuff right. And so jurors are really inclined to listen to that in the event that it doesn't sound too good they're inclined also to convict.
And so, at the end of the day, you can challenge money laundering if you want, you could pars the statute if you want, you could talk about how it's really not fraud or I didn't get that it's fraud, this is a problematic case and if I were the adviser, based on what I know, and they know more, they have the discovery, I would be saying, you've got to get out while the getting's good.
CALLAN: Joey, that depends on who's on the jury.
JACKSON: Yes.
CALLAN: And there's an attempt here to turn on Becky into el Chapo and I think --
HARLOW: What? That is the line of the (INAUDIBLE) --
JACKSON: Mob references. You've got el Chapo --
CALLAN: Do you like that?
AVLON: All day long.
CALLAN: I thought that was better than the Vito Corleone play.
AVLON: (INAUDIBLE).
CALLAN: So -- and in order to do that, they have to prove that she had knowledge that money laundering was going on.
Now, I'm not saying, John, that the other charges against her, which the other Felicity Huffman and others have pled guilty to, mail fraud in connection with the bribery scheme, they're proven easily. But money laundering's a more sophisticated thing and that's the thing that jumps the penalty up to 20 years against Lori Loughlin.
HARLOW: But even -- but even -- right. CALLAN: I think they're going too far here.
HARLOW: But even if they can't, Joey, get them on money laundering, and that's what brings it up to the 40 years total, right?
AVLON: Yes.
CALLAN: Yes.
HARLOW: Still, if they got them on the initial charge, that -- doesn't that carry jail time?
JACKSON: And that's the issue. You know, Poppy, you hit the nail on the head. This is what prosecutors do.
HARLOW: I tend to do that by 8:54 in the morning.
JACKSON: Yes. See.
AVLON: Ready for nail hitting.
JACKSON: Because it's important because prosecutors charge multiple count indictments, right, not that there's many counts here, but all you need is one. And the fact is, if you go down on one, that's a problem.
[08:55:08] I do think that they're prove the money laundering charge. And let's be clear about it, it's no mystery, money laundering is the disguising of money. And how they disguise it is, if you're paying money to a charity but you know in effect you're paying money and it's going to be used to get your daughters into school, that's money laundering and that's what the jury will be instructed, not that they have --
CALLAN: Hey, Joey -- hey, Joey, who certified that charity as being a legal charity?
JACKSON: It -- no, no.
CALLAN: The IRS.
JACKSON: Yes.
CALLAN: It was submitted to the IRS. They certified it as a legitimate charity. And these parents contribute to a legitimate -- IRS-certified charity and you want to send them off to the hoosegow (ph). I don't know. I don't know --
JACKSON: And they say, send me a picture because we know how skilled you are in crew and if you could do that and you pay 200, 400, 500 grand, we will make it happen.
HARLOW: Can I just -- can I just say to Mr. el Chapo reference over here, Paul Callan, I -- I hear what you're saying because, you know what, people do a lot of crazy stuff to get their kids into school that is legal, like all of these donations that essentially guarantee it. I'm not saying what they did is right. It's not. But I wonder how a jury is going to see it as that much difference.
CALLAN: There it is.
JACKSON: Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
CALLAN: Call me before you try to get your kids into college.
AVLON: Clearly, Paul Callan for the defense there, folks.
All right, fantastic conversation.
"NEWSROOM" with Ana Cabrera picks up after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[09:00:00]
