Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Democrats Debate Next Steps After Robert Mueller's Testimony; House Judiciary to Go to Court to Enforce Don McGahn Subpoena After Mueller Hearing; House to Vote Today on $1.3 Trillion Budget and Debt Limit Deal; North Korea Test Fires New Ballistic Missile. Aired 9- 9:30a ET
Aired July 25, 2019 - 09:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[09:00:30] POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: All right, good morning, everyone. Top of the hour. I'm Poppy Harlow.
JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Jim Sciutto.
After the hearing Democrats plotted, set to unleash legal battles in the aftermath of Robert Mueller's testimony. At the same time the party is grappling with growing internal pressure, even division, over the question, a crucial one, of impeaching the president.
HARLOW: That's right. And the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is telling her caucus now is still not the time to impeach and to let the investigations play out in the courts.
Let's go to our Lauren Fox. She joins us on Capitol Hill this morning.
Look, I mean, Pelosi saying now is not the time still. There's reporting about Nadler and her having a big rift on that, you know, a big divide, yesterday. I guess the fundamental question is where does the party go from here.
LAUREN FOX, CNN POLITICS CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, at this point, more than 90 House Democrats support opening an impeachment inquiry. But at this point after Robert Mueller testified yesterday a lot of Democrats argued there wasn't necessarily a seminal moment. Right? There wasn't this big reveal from Mueller's testimony that would sort of boost the conference into (INAUDIBLE) move forward with impeachment at this point.
There were more than 200 instances in which he deferred to answer a question or didn't answer the question at all. And so I think that right now Democrats are sort of at a loss for what exactly the momentum would be. But behind closed doors yesterday, you're right, Nancy Pelosi met with her caucus to discuss what the future look like. And she tried to get them to focus on upcoming court battles, to focus on the investigations they already have into the president's tax returns, obstruction of justice and the U.S. census.
So that's where her focus is at this point, that's where she wants her caucus to be. And she said, look, if some of you have to go home and talk about opening an impeachment inquiry, if that helps you in your district, you know, you can be talking about that, but she wants her caucus to have the strongest possible case for impeachment if that's where they're going to go. She said publicly yesterday, quote, "The stronger our case, the worst the Senate will look for just letting the president off the hook."
So that gives you a sense of where the speaker is at this point despite the fact that there are plenty in her caucus who want to move forward with an impeachment inquiry -- Jim and Poppy.
SCIUTTO: Lauren Fox on the Hill. Thanks very much.
Let's talk more about it with Jeffrey Toobin, CNN chief legal analyst, Molly Ball, national political correspondent and "TIME," and Ron Brownstein, senior editor at the "Atlantic."
Jeffrey, if I could begin with you. There's been a lot of focus on how he said it, Bob Mueller. Let's focus on what he said, though, and here's just some key facts from what came out of his testimony. He said that Trump welcomed Russian interference and lied about it. He said that generally Trump's written questions to the special counsel were untruthful. He said that Trump encouraging of WikiLeaks was problematic. In fact, he said that that word was an understatement.
He said Trump was not exonerated on the question of obstruction. He said that accepting foreign help is a new normal. He also contradicted the president that he was seeking the job as FBI director as Trump has repeated and falsely accused him of.
Can what Bob Mueller said break through the way in which he delivered those comments?
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: It doesn't look like it has. I mean, it could but it doesn't look like it has. You know, Mueller promised going into this testimony that he was going to keep to the four corners of his report. He basically kept that promise. I mean virtually everything, all the news in his testimony was already in the report. And the report itself has generated a substantial amount of interest in impeachment on behalf of Democrats but not anywhere near a majority even of members even in the House.
I mean, 93 is a lot of members. It's less than half of all the Democrats so Nancy Pelosi is not fighting an uphill battle to keep impeachment out of the news. She is actually with most of her conference in the House of Representatives.
HARLOW: So, Molly, you have the great "TIME" cover piece on this and the party in general heading toward 2020, the headline "Strike for the party, the Democratic debate will shape America's future." And you talk about in it the insistence of Pelosi and Democratic leadership that 2020 is the best way to get the president out of office. But you've got half of Democrats, Molly, furious of Pelosi for not going harder against the president, and half of them petrified, and that is quite a stark divide. So what's your reporting on where they go from here?
MOLLY BALL, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, this is the debate that the Democrats are having.
[09:05:02] They're having it in the Congress and they're having it in the presidential campaign, and it's a debate about policy. It's a debate about tactics, whether you're talking about impeachment or other types of, you know, electoral tactics, what is the party's theory of the case for how they're going to beat Trump. But at the end of the day it's about what does the party stand for and what are they going to offer to voters, the voters that they are going to ask to reject Trump, assuming Trump is still in office in November of 2020.
Voters are going to want to hear from the Democratic Party, if not Trump, then what? And that's still very much an open question for the Democratic Party. The visions being offered by even the front running candidates in the presidential field are quite different. And so, as you said, there is a real divide among Democrats about how to approach the impeachment question and there's a real divide about the political strategy and there's a real divide about what the presidential candidate is going to take as the message to the American people.
SCIUTTO: Ron Brownstein, Adam Schiff, no one deeper into this issue in the overall Russia investigation than Schiff, the current chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. He was on our broadcast this morning on "NEW DAY." Have a listen to what he said. I want to get your reaction.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): 2020 is unquestionably the only way he gets removed from office. So we can never lose sight of that. I have tried to put the political question out of my head. That is, does an impeachment help us in 2020 or does it hurt us politically? Because I don't think it's the right question to ask. But we do need to be realistic and that is the only way he's leaving office at least at this point is by being voted out.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: So some pretty powerful voices saying, listen, you've got to wait until 2020, forget impeachment. Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff there. Who wins out?
RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: I think they do. Look, I think there was a logic error in assuming that Mueller would dramatically change the opinion about impeachment. I mean, for Mueller to radically change the opinion about impeachment you'd have to assume that not enough people thought that Donald Trump did something worth impeaching. But in fact the people -- the share of Americans who felt that he, you know, violated the law or did something wrong was always higher than support -- has always been higher than support for impeachment.
I mean, the objection on impeachment may not be about his conduct. It may be rooted more in just practical concerns. It is late in his term. That, as Adam Schiff talks about, the Senate is not going to convict and I think there are a lot of Americans are going to look at that and say, well, why go through this grueling process?
Having said that, I think Mueller made a big mistake yesterday. I think he had a failure of imagination. He refused to accept any civic responsibility beyond his legal responsibilities. I know Jeffrey can talk about the mindset of a prosecutor, but he did not -- he was the person who had the best overview of what Russia did, how Trump responded and then how Trump responded in office to the inquiries into points one and two.
He could have given the American people a much more comprehensible big picture of what happened. He chose deliberately not to. And in some ways that undermined even what he -- what the message he wanted to send about the threat, the ongoing threat of Russia. I mean, he did not bring that issue to life for people at all.
HARLOW: Jeffrey.
TOOBIN: You know, I -- I'm sorry, go ahead, Poppy.
HARLOW: Yes. No, no, no, go for it.
TOOBIN: Well, I just think, you know, Ron illustrates one of the big problems with Mueller's testimony which was, you know, he was determined, not because he had to. I mean, I don't think he was legally compelled to say as little as he did. It's part of his temperament, it's part of his personality, it's part of the tradition he came out of in the Justice Department that prosecutors talk in the courtroom and nowhere else.
HARLOW: Yes.
TOOBIN: That is not a legal obligation. He could have within even the rules that he established talked more especially about the issues of Russian involvement in the 2016 election. He chose not to. He chose simply to refer people to his report. That didn't really change anything politically and I don't think it changed anything substantively.
BROWNSTEIN: Yes.
TOOBIN: If he wanted to call attention to how dramatic the threat is from foreign powers interfering in our elections he could have done that. He chose not to.
SCIUTTO: Let me ask you a question, without judgment, if I can, Jeffrey and Molly, and Ron, if you want to pipe in. Was Mueller the man for the time? Because this is an unusual challenge. This is an unusual presidency, it's a challenge from Russia. It's a president who has questioned that challenge and that threat and has lied about it repeatedly and fought this in the public sphere and not based on facts.
In light of the point you just made that Mueller had the freedom within the law to paint a bigger picture here, did he show that he wasn't quite the man for this? TOOBIN: You know, I'm going to say the three words that you're not
allowed to say on cable news, which are, I don't know. I don't -- it's very hard to sort of put yourself in the history of and say a different person could have done it. Ron Brownstein maybe knows the answer to this and Molly Ball.
[09:10:04] BROWNSTEIN: Look, I'd say real quick. I'd say yes -- you know, mostly no. I mean, he -- certainly in the investigation exemplary service to the country and untangling an incredibly complex story. But I think he failed to under -- as I said he had a failure of imagination of his civic responsibility. In this day and age a fractured media and polarized kind of electorate to provide a common set of facts from which all Americans could move forward. And I think it is kind of symptomatic, Jim, to your question of our institutions are having trouble adapting to a president who is this far outside of -- I did a story this week talking to corporate leaders and others, and other institutions, educational institutions, nonprofits who all said that telling someone to go back where they came from in their own institution unquestionably will lead to discipline or firing and yet almost none of them are willing to say so publicly.
Our leaders are failing I think to step up to upholding this kind of norms at a moment when we have a president this determined to shatter.
SCIUTTO: Wow.
HARLOW: Guys, thank you so much, Jeffrey Toobin, Molly Ball, Ron Brownstein.
Big day yesterday. A lot of post-gaming today. And looking ahead, up next the Democratic member of the House Judiciary Committee who questioned Mueller yesterday on where that moved her.
Plus, he's out. After days of massive pressure Puerto Rico's governor is resigning amid scandal.
SCIUTTO: And no more Mr. Polite Guy? Former vice president Joe Biden says that he is going to get tougher at the next presidential debate. Are we seeing a preview with his latest public attack on two of his Democratic rivals?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[09:15:00] POPPY HARLOW, CO-ANCHOR, NEWSROOM: All right, welcome back. Democrats are planning out their next moves following Robert Mueller's testimony on Capitol Hill. House Judiciary Chair Jerry Nadler says the committee will go to court today or tomorrow to try to get access to grand jury material.
They also want a judge to enforce their subpoena against former White House counsel Don McGahn, of course he's the one who talked to Mueller for 30 hours of interviews. With me now is a lawmaker who questioned Mueller yesterday, Texas Democratic Congresswoman Sylvia Garcia. It's so nice to have you, thank you for being here. We'll get to Mueller in a moment. But let's just begin with what Nadler made very clear I think yesterday is incredibly important to you guys. He was emphatic, saying we need to be able to compel Don McGahn to come before this committee and answer our questions. If you're successful in that, what is the single most important question you have for him?
REP. SYLVIA GARCIA (D-TX): Well, first of all, thank you, Poppy, for having me this morning. And I agree with the chairman, we do need to hear from McGahn, and we may need to hear from Lewandowski. For McGahn -- for me, it's about having the live witness, obviously we've read in the report that the president called him and then asked him to fire Sessions.
So hearing from him that it did happen, hearing from him explaining why he didn't do it, and why he decided to resign and the conflicts, I think would be very important not only for the committee to hear, but for the American people because while the report presents a lot of facts, there's nothing like a live witness, direct testimony, bringing the words to the American people.
HARLOW: We'll see, and clearly that's what Democrats were banking on yesterday from Mueller to really move the needle on public sentiment which is not there. You don't have the majority of American people believing that impeachment proceedings could begin. I'm not sure that Mueller moved that needle a whole lot yesterday.
But let's play part of -- one of your exchanges as you were questioning the --
GARCIA: OK --
HARLOW: Special counsel yesterday about what would happen if you made false statements to investigators. Here's that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GARCIA: What if I had made a false statement to an investigator on your team, could I go to jail for up to five years?
ROBERT MUELLER, FORMER SPECIAL COUNSEL: Yes.
GARCIA: Yes --
MUELLER: Although there's -- it's Congress, so --
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HARLOW: You elicited I think the only laugh line by the way of the day yesterday. But let's combine that with what he told Congresswoman Val Demings later in the day. Here's that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. VAL DEMINGS (D-FL): Director Mueller, is it fair to say that the president's written answers were not only inadequate and incomplete, because he didn't answer many of your questions, but where he did, his answers showed that he wasn't always being truthful?
MUELLER: Yes, I would say generally.
DEMINGS: Generally.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HARLOW: So, Adam Schiff; the chair of the House Intel Committee just said on CNN less than an hour ago, the only way to get the president out is through the 2020 election. Is he right? Meaning what do Democrats do with all of what you heard yesterday? Do you still favor moving to impeach as you have?
GARCIA: Well, actually, I'm not properly called for an inquiry or impeachment. And I think I'm one of a handful now of Democrats on the Judiciary who have not. But I think what's important --
HARLOW: Well, you did, just correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you vote not to table the impeachment pushed last week by Al Green?
GARCIA: That's correct, but that was a procedural move, it was a move to --
HARLOW: OK --
GARCIA: Try to vote -- get a vote on the actual resolution. And our hope had been for the resolution to go to Judiciary. So, for me, I consider a procedural vote and not a substantive vote, but I don't want to get into the semantics of that. I think what's important was, yes, I got the laugh line, but it really was about underscoring the point that even if I had lied to Congress, I would have been held accountable, and I could have faced the jail time for five years.
And the other quote that you had from Representative Demings --
HARLOW: Yes --
GARCIA: Underscored the point that he did lie -- and remember, they worked over a year to try to get him to testify and to come in and talk, and he just refused.
[09:20:00] And then half the questions that he answered were all I do not recall, I don't remember.
HARLOW: Right --
GARCIA: So we really gleaned nothing from it. So Representative Schiff may be right, the chairman may be right, the only time that we know for sure that we'll have a way to remove him from office will be the power to vote, and that will be in the hands of the people.
HARLOW: And is it a mistake for those 90-plus Democrats who are calling to move forward on impeachment? Is it a mistake tactically, politically, are they hurting the party's chances in 2020 if American sentiment doesn't change a lot?
GARCIA: Well, I don't know that the needle will or will not be moved by the hearings yesterday. Quite frankly, I think it's still a little too early to make that call. We'll see how that --
HARLOW: OK --
GARCIA: Response we get. I know, I'm looking forward to the Summer recess to hear more from my district.
HARLOW: OK --
GARCIA: But everyone needs to do that, and I think that as we hear more and as the public, you know, lets this hearings from yesterday sink in and we digest it, I think it will move some people because let's face it, not everyone's read the Mueller report.
HARLOW: Right --
GARCIA: And none of us really do expect everyone to read it. So, the more we tell the story, the better off we are.
HARLOW: I'm fascinated to hear what all of you hear when you come back from this six-week recess, from your constituents, what they say to you. Because that's more telling, you're right than anything. Look, before you go, Mueller's the headline, but something really important for all American people is happening today.
The house is going to vote on this two-year budget deal. As you know, it raises spending by $320 billion over existing caps. The non- partisan committee for a responsible federal budget, Congresswoman, says this will raise the federal deficit by $1.7 trillion over the next decade.
This is not even including the interest payments on the debt that has accumulated, the compounding effect of that increased debt. I'm just wondering, do you and your fellow members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans just sort of no longer care what this means --
GARCIA: No --
HARLOW: For our children?
GARCIA: No, I think we do care, and I think what's important is that we maintain a level of spending that meet the needs of not only domestic, but foreign issues that face our country. And we need to do that prudently and wisely, and this maintains a level that's achievable. And we're going to have to really take a hard look and set a plan for reducing the deficit. So --
HARLOW: But when? I mean, honestly, Congresswoman, it's not just Democrats --
GARCIA: I don't think we ignore it --
HARLOW: It's Republicans now too, when? GARCIA: Well, it's all our responsibility --
HARLOW: When do you actually make that very difficult decision about what you're actually going to cut when your staring at a national debt of over 22 -- federal debt, $22 trillion?
GARCIA: Well, I know that, I'm looking at it. I'm a new member, I certainly have not -- I don't see it on any of the committees of jurisdiction, but I'm willing to sit down and work with anybody that can come up with a plan to do this. So, I plan to put my arms around it as best I can from my vantage point, listen to my district and do what I can to reduce it.
HARLOW: But you are voting yes for this, right?
GARCIA: Yes, ma'am.
HARLOW: OK, well, Congresswoman Sylvia Garcia, come back after the recess, let us know what people tell you. Thank you --
GARCIA: Sure, thank you so much for having me.
HARLOW: Of course, Jim.
JIM SCIUTTO, CO-ANCHOR, NEWSROOM: Just days after the U.S. and South Korea said they will hold a new round of joint military exercises, North Korea test fires a new type of missile, more missile tests from North Korea.
And we're just moments away from the opening bell on Wall Street. The Dow set to rise this morning a little bit as investor groups will be watching for any news on the U.S.-China trade war. We haven't heard a lot about that for some time, but there is a key meeting set for next week.
[09:25:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HARLOW: All right, breaking news. A source tells CNN that accused sex trafficker and disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein has been found injured in his cell.
SCIUTTO: Epstein is accused of abusing dozens of young girls in New York and Florida. CNN's Jean Casarez, she is following the story. Jean, do we know what caused the injuries?
JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think that's a big issue, and I think authorities are now trying to determine if this was self- inflicted or if in fact someone else did it to him which would be an alleged assault, and if so, what was the motive in all of that?
Now, this stems from -- it was just a week ago today that his attorney had presented a bail package because he is charged with sex crimes against minor girls right here in New York. And the judge determined that the bail package which was presented by his defense attorney, very unique, saying home confinement at his mansion in the Upper East Side of New York, armed guards and then also a trustee to live with him just wasn't sufficient.
That he was such a danger to the community because of the alleged victims and other victims that have not come forward.
[09:30:00]
