Return to Transcripts main page
Cuomo Prime Time
Judge Orders Johnson & Johnson To Pay $572 Million For Role In Oklahoma's Opioid Crisis; Monmouth Poll: Sanders, Biden, Warren At Top; NFL Quarterback Stuns Fans With Sudden Retirement. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired August 26, 2019 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00] NICK PATON WALSH, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: You burn the land, then you clear it, then you put cattle on it, then you make your money, and you sell your beef. So, there's a process happening here, which could permanently damage the ecosystem of the Amazon. We all depend on it for our oxygen.
The question is, is it nearing a tipping point where the dryness caused by deforestation and fires becomes irrevocable and causes a sort of self-fulfilling cycle of damage here, more fires every single year.
We just don't know, John, but it's perilously close.
JOHN BERMAN, CNN CO-ANCHOR, NEW DAY: All right, Nick Paton Walsh, thank you so much for being there and showing us what's going on.
The news continues now. So, I'll hand it over to Chris for CUOMO PRIME TIME.
CHRIS CUOMO, CNN HOST, CUOMO PRIME TIME: J.B., my man, thank you. I am Chris Cuomo. Welcome to PRIME TIME.
One of the most trusted name brands in America is being held liable for its role in the opioid crisis. We have never had a - a judicial decision. We have settlements, but never something like this, a Judge saying "Yes, you broke the law with how you sell your drugs."
We have the man behind the fight in Oklahoma and the member of the Office who argued the case. Couldn't have better guests! Let's talk about the basis, and what this means for the rest of the country.
Also, a 2020 eye-popper, one new poll shows a three-way tie for the lead in the Democratic race. How? We just had the CNN poll. What happened to Joe Biden? Let's get inside this new set of numbers.
And, a major head-scratcher, the President says he only does what is right, quote, "Nothing for politics." So, why didn't he show up at one of the most important meetings at the G7 today? And why did the Press Secretary mislead us about it? One of America's most influential Conservative leaders is here to assess this state of play.
One week until we all celebrate our hard work. What do you say? Let's get after it. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: You know I was surprised to hear people in the media playing down this decision because the state didn't get the money it wanted. They wanted $17 billion, over 30 years, to help deal with the epidemic of opioid addiction.
They got $572 million from Johnson & Johnson, from a Judge, wasn't a jury trial. It was a bench trial. It was a Judge. And it makes history in Oklahoma and, in fact, in this country. It could have major implications all over America for other drug-makers.
Think about it. If other people get addicted, it's on you, if you sell it the wrong way. This is the first case of its kind. We've never had anything like it before. There are 2,000 similar cases pending nationwide.
So, let's bring in the men at the center of this, OK? We have the Oklahoma Attorney General, Mike Hunter, and the Lead Counsel who successfully argued the case for the state, Brad Beckworth. Gentlemen, thank you for being with us on PRIME TIME.
MIKE HUNTER, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF OKLAHOMA: Good to be with you, Chris.
BRAD BECKWORTH, LEAD OUTSIDE COUNSEL IN OKLAHOMA OPIOID LAWSUIT, PARTNER, NIX PATTERSON: Thank you.
CUOMO: All right, so A.G., let's talk policy, and then Counsel Beckworth will get into what changed, because I got to tell you, as a lawyer, the nuisance law kind of threw me. But when we look at this from a policy perspective, A.G., why did this case matter, and what is the statement it makes to America?
HUNTER: The statement it makes to America is if you can put a team together that's talented, that's committed, that's courageous, that's willing to spend two years, plowing through the records of this monstrous company, I think their market cap's over $300 billion, and you're willing to go to court, you're willing to face off with the legal team that they put together, and I guarantee you, they spent millions of dollars on their legal team, you can win.
And so, I'm very proud of my team. We proved to the - we proved to the Judge, Chris, that Johnson & Johnson was the cause of the epidemic. They were behind the stream of commerce from the start to the finish.
Their poppy farm in Tasmania furnished 60 percent of the active pharmaceutical ingredient for the rest of the industry. They misrepresented their products. They misrepresented the industry's products. They mismarketed their products. And the Judge has held them responsible.
We're going to be able to put almost a billion dollars to this problem in Oklahoma with the other two settlements. So, we're happy with the verdict.
Obviously, would have - we would have liked more. But we're very happy with the Judge, again, finding that Johnson & Johnson was culpable for what's happened in Oklahoma.
CUOMO: A.G., two big terms that came out of this, and then we'll get to the strategy in court, what they call, the defendants, pseudoaddiction, and it is this really just such a - a wicked dynamic that you guys outlined in court, convincing doctors that patients who exhibited signs of addiction, like asking for higher doses of opioids, or came back early, you know, and used up the prescription before they were supposed to, they weren't actually suffering from addiction, but from the under-treatment of pain, so they should give them more.
And they told doctors, "Don't fall into the addiction ditch. Avoid negatives like using the word addiction, and emphasize the positive of supposed efficacy." What do you see behind those terms and what was really going on here?
HUNTER: Well I'll give you a couple of terms, Chris, devious and diabolical.
[21:05:00] What was happening here is they made a decision that there was an opportunity for them to make billions of dollars, off of misrepresenting these drugs, brainwashing physicians, using pseudoscience and trumped-up studies, and then they'd go even further to pushback against doctors who are seeing addiction, calling it pseudoaddiction, and telling them to prescribe more.
They knew damn good and well what they were doing to Americans, and Oklahomans, they just couldn't afford to stop.
CUOMO: Right. And you didn't argue in the case, very interesting, very important to note this, Brad Beckworth, Counselor, thank you for being with us as well, "Hey, we don't need opioids. Opioids don't work. There's no such thing as pain," you know, it's all real, and we need pain treatment, and we need different medicines.
But it's about how often they're used and - and what they are told to doctors from these companies. Now, you used a very interesting legal theory here, nuisance.
When people think nuisance law, you know, for - for the uninitiated, non-lawyers here, they're thinking your dog is too loud, you know, what you did with your fence, how you play your music, you know, you're bothering my enjoyment, my peaceful enjoyment of my property.
How does this involve nuisance?
BECKWORTH: Well, thanks Chris, we appreciate all your work.
And look, we can answer that with two things. One, Oklahoma law just doesn't require the use of property when you're talking about nuisance. Some states does - do that, but Oklahoma, very clearly, doesn't. One of the elements of a nuisance in Oklahoma is conduct that offends
decency. And, you know, we've prosecuted tobacco companies, you name it, we've done it, sexual molesters in the clergy, all kinds of conduct.
I've never seen conduct that rises to the level of what J&J did here. Every time a Sales Rep came into the State of Oklahoma, and talked to doctors, a 150,000 times they denied their drugs were addictive.
But at trial, we forced Johnson & Johnson to admit that they never did a study to show how addictive their drugs are. They didn't know whether it was zero percent or a 100 percent. One of their witnesses said it's a 100 percent. One of their experts, we found a videotape of him saying it was as high as 25 percent.
So, you know, Chris, if you or your family went to talk to your doctor, and said, "Look, I had chronic back pain, and I want to take an opioid, what are - what's my chance of getting addicted?" what you want your doctor to say is say, "Chris, this is a tough decision. We don't know. The science is still out there, and maybe you'll get addicted, maybe you won't, but it's as high as 25 to 100 percent."
But that's not what happened here. They lied and said it was zero. And on the pseudoaddiction thing, I mean, one of the things that J&J funded was a book that came out into Oklahoma.
They led doctors to believe that if someone came in, and said, "Look, my kid is stealing my prescription drugs, and what do I do," if the kid said he was still in pain, they call that pseudoaddiction.
CUOMO: Right.
BECKWORTH: They told doctors and policy leaders that when you got to things like sex trafficking and prostitution to get your opioids, that might be addiction. And that's just--
CUOMO: Right. It really reminds--
BECKWORTH: --that offends decency.
CUOMO: --it reminds of the days when we used to be talking about antidepressants, and they said, "Don't say side-effects. Say unintended consequences," and a lot of this can be very deceptive.
Now, they feel confident, J&J, because they believe that nuisance law is such an unusual application that they may be able to beat it. But the underlying facts, and what this Judge says he believed tells a story that goes far beyond what is just clear in the nuisance statute.
A.G., Counselor Beckworth, thank you both for being with us. Mike Hunter, Brad Beckworth, we will follow this because the implications are huge. Thank you, Gentlemen. Good luck going forward.
HUNTER: Thanks, Chris.
BECKWORTH: Thank you very much.
HUNTER: Thank you. CUOMO: All right, months hanging out solo at the top, the former VP, Joe Biden's got some company, if you're listening to the Monmouth poll. This new poll has a three-way tie.
I don't get it. So, you know what that means, time for a better brain, the Professor is here. Professor Brownstein will help us understand what happened, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:10:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: All right, you have to follow the race to the end because you never know when things can change. We got evidence of that. New polling from Monmouth University, a three-way race at the top, obviously, Sanders, Warren, and Biden.
Now, what is the real big anomalous factor in this particular poll? Biden. The other two numbers size up with what we just saw in the CNN poll, not Biden's.
Let's get some insight from the Professor, Ron Brownstein.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: PRIME TIME PRIMARY
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Ron, so--
RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST, SENIOR EDITOR, THE ATLANTIC: Hey, Chris.
CUOMO: --help me understand.
BROWNSTEIN: Yes.
CUOMO: Is this about methodology or is this about a change in the actual mechanics of the election?
BROWNSTEIN: I think it's probably a sum of both. And Monmouth is a good pollster.
CUOMO: Yes. BROWNSTEIN: But this is one poll, it's a relatively small sample, 300. And, as you note, and not only the CNN poll, but a Fox poll, and a Pew poll, roughly the same period of mid-August, had a similar result with Biden somewhere around 30, Warren usually in second, and - and Bernie Sanders just behind her.
I would say that the magnitude of this may be somewhat questionable that they're - that they're all even at this point, but the direction is probably right, right?
CUOMO: Wait but hold on a second.
BROWNSTEIN: Which is that Warren is clearly gaining--
CUOMO: Let's take one step sideways.
BROWNSTEIN: Yes.
CUOMO: Because this is the one part I don't get. I hear you. It's a smaller sample. It's all about who they ask and maybe they got--
BROWNSTEIN: Yes.
CUOMO: --different concentration of who people want.
BROWNSTEIN: Right.
CUOMO: Except the numbers for Warren and Sanders are kind of like what we've been seeing in all the other polls, only Biden is different. How do you explain that?
BROWNSTEIN: Right. Well - well the sample is a little younger, among other things. I saw probably a fewer older voters, and that's where Biden's strength is when compared to the 2016 actual primary electorate voting.
But like any, you know, the - the idea that any single poll, you know, is - is the reality, and - and is measuring change--
CUOMO: They're just snapshots.
BROWNSTEIN: --from the polls just before it.
CUOMO: But it's just weird a week later.
BROWNSTEIN: Right. It's just - it's just - exactly. It's weird a week later. I think you can say, pretty clearly, looking at the crowds over the weekend, and everything else, Elizabeth Warren is gaining ground.
[21:15:00] Bernie Sanders has an audience. He seems to be holding it, may be building on it again a little bit. And Joe Biden is drifting down after his initial start. Now, whether he's really down to 19 percent, I don't know. But I think it is reasonable that the trajectory that this poll identifies is - is, you know, is happening.
CUOMO: Right. BROWNSTEIN: I'm not sure about the magnitude.
CUOMO: What do you think about this? As always, feel free to bat it aside. But--
BROWNSTEIN: Yes.
CUOMO: --look, obviously, if you're in Biden's camp, you don't want to see his numbers go down, but his story doesn't change. He's about electability and--
BROWNSTEIN: Yes.
CUOMO: --stability, and a return to normal. I don't get how--
BROWNSTEIN: Right.
CUOMO: --Warren and Sanders stay being so nice to each other?
And I'm not advocating for animus in politics. We have enough of that. But only one of these two people can fill that lane. Warren's starting to get more and more crowd size. Bernie's starting to attack us. Which is the better indicator?
BROWNSTEIN: Yes. Look, I - I think that, you know, there are some differences in their support. But you're right that essentially what - for Warren, what we are seeing is that she is a candidate, right now, who is strongest with college-educated White liberals.
And that is a role that has been filled by a long line of candidates, going back to Gene McCarthy in '68, to Gary Hart in '84, to Paul Tsongas in '92, to Bill Bradley in 2000, and Howard Dean in 2004, none of them have won the nomination.
All of them have kind of fallen short because they were unable to reach out beyond that Starbucks Ghetto, if you want to call it that, and - and - and appeal to some of the other constituencies in the Democratic Party, in particular, to African-American voters, and that is still a big challenge for her.
Biden is best among older and moderate Whites and African-Americans at the moment. That has been more of what I--
CUOMO: Yes.
BROWNSTEIN: --I have called in the past the Beer-Track candidate. Warren is more of the classic Wine-Track candidate.
And Biden - Biden's problem is that in those first two states, Iowa and New Hampshire, heavily White, a lot of college-educated liberals, they don't play to his strengths. He's - he's stronger as you go along into March, and you get to some of those diverse states, particularly in the South.
So, we could see a very familiar kind of divide, and I think it is ultimately, the onus remains on Warren to show that for all of her strength, any place where there are a lot of White college liberals, like Seattle, where she drew 15,000 people over the weekend, she's going to be very strong. But traditionally, that has not been enough to win.
CUOMO: So, you got the Wine-Track, you got the Beer-Track for Professor Brownstein--
BROWNSTEIN: Beer-Track that's--
CUOMO: --it's the Aperol Spritz.
BROWNSTEIN: --that's it.
CUOMO: A weird drink, but he pulls it off.
BROWNSTEIN: Yes.
CUOMO: Thank you very much, Ron.
BROWNSTEIN: Yes.
CUOMO: Always.
BROWNSTEIN: Thanks, Chris.
CUOMO: All right, I want to open it up for debate. If a progressive, whatever that means these days, right, we're going to have to play with the labels also, but if Warren wins the Democratic Party, what does that mean for the party in going head-to-head with Trump?
What do you think? Is electability still what Joe Biden wants it to be? Look at this line-up for The Great Debate. Let's get after it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:20:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Pitch in two cents so everybody else gets a chance to make it in this country.
(CROWD CHEERING)
WARREN: Two cents.
(CROWD CHANTING TWO CENTS! TWO CENTS! TWO CENTS!)
WARREN: Two cents.
(CROWD CHANTING TWO CENTS! TWO CENTS! TWO CENTS!)
WARREN: Two cents.
(CROWD CHANTING TWO CENTS! TWO CENTS! TWO CENTS!)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: All right, that was the rallying cry at Elizabeth Warren's latest campaign event, to date, according to her team, a stark contrast to the smaller, arguably more intimate events being held by the former VP, Joe Biden. His biggest selling point has been electability.
Now, polls are just a snapshot of a moment. They're just a suggestion. But this Monmouth poll, maybe it does skew younger, maybe the smaller sample size does make a difference, but if you have all three of these people, knotted up at the top, Biden, Warren, Sanders, what does it mean for this party?
That's the start of tonight's Great Debate with Ana Kasparian and Ana Navarro. It's great to have you both, thank you.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: THE GREAT DEBATE.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANA KASPARIAN, HOST & EXECUTIVE PRODUCER, "THE YOUNG TURKS": Thanks for having us.
CUOMO: All right.
ANA NAVARRO, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: That's a lot of Anas in your life.
CUOMO: Hey, look, I'll take it. More Ana, more better. So, this is the thing. Let's not play with methodology and all that. I just did that with Ron Brownstein. Let's just deal with the fundamentals of what this means inside the party.
Ana, if it's - Navarro, if it's about electability, Biden has been showing pretty solid strength, but Warren has been growing, Bernie Sanders is always there. Is electability still pointing to Joe Biden and why?
NAVARRO: Look, practically, every poll I've seen about electability shows that any of the Democrats on the top can beat Donald Trump. And so, that does not help Joe Biden.
The - the - what Joe Biden has going for him is that he appeals to people like me, to disenfranchised Republicans, to centrists, to independents, to Right-leaning independents. That is his, you know ace, in the hole right now. That is his big card to play.
But I will also tell you, I think Elizabeth Warren is growing on people. She has shown a work ethic during this campaign that is impressive.
CUOMO: And she knuckles up.
NAVARRO: I - I can just talk to you about--
CUOMO: A lot of Democrats, as you know, every time we're on location, the Democrats are in fight mode. They're always saying "They want to fight or who's our fighter."
NAVARRO: Right.
CUOMO: She - she knuckles up. And - and that's something that we're seeing. We'll see what happens on the debate stage. And again, I'm always going slow on this stuff.
NAVARRO: And she hustles. She hustles.
CUOMO: She hustles.
NAVARRO: That woman hustles.
CUOMO: She's working hard. She's showing energy.
NAVARRO: Yes.
CUOMO: You know, all that stuff that we just put labels on, but it can matter to people. All right, so Ana, the other Ana, Kasparian, I call you by your last name as a term of endearment.
KASPARIAN: I like it, yes.
CUOMO: I do that a lot. Everybody calls me Cuomo. It just works. So, the idea that they're catching up to him, you still have a problem, because you have a bifurcated race in that other lane. You have Warren and Sanders.
And I'm not look - again, I'm not looking for animus. We have enough of it. But I don't know how they can both stay so friendly. Yes, yes, their bases are a little different, Warren and Sanders, but not that different.
KASPARIAN: Actually, I - I do think that they differ in various policies. Bernie Sanders has a track record of Leftist policies throughout his entire career. And he's offered a little more--
CUOMO: Do you say Leftist as a good thing or a bad thing?
KASPARIAN: I think it's actually a--
CUOMO: Leftist-good or Leftist--bad?
KASPARIAN: I actually think it's a good thing. So-- CUOMO: OK.
[21:25:00] KASPARIAN: --I'll give you some specific examples.
When it comes to the student - student loan debt issue, Bernie Sanders is saying, "Let's not get too overwhelmed with details and complications. We need to cancel student debt," whereas Elizabeth Warren has certain caveats, certain thresholds that individuals would have to meet in order to get that - their debt canceled.
And I think the most important thing to look at is not necessarily the polling among the candidates, but more importantly the polling when it comes to the specific policy proposals.
And poll after poll indicates that the Democratic base wants to cancel student loan debt. The Democratic base wants a single-payer healthcare system.
I know there have been a bunch of tricky polls in terms of methodology when it cake - when it comes to polling Medicare-for-All. But if you are specific and you say that individuals would not lose access to their doctors, in poll after poll it indicates that the base--
CUOMO: All right.
KASPARIAN: --is in favor of it.
CUOMO: All right.
KASPARIAN: So, I think that's what's important.
CUOMO: All right, so let's change - let's change the lens here a little bit, which is, you're talking policies, and I think that's good, but you also have to prepare for the fight you're going to have.
And once you get into the general, Ana, you may never hear the President talk about healthcare, except to say, "Your plan stinks. My plan is going to be the best ever. And, by the way, you're a bunch of socialists who want no more ideas of gender or any kind of moral propriety in this country anymore, and you're for open borders," that's the kind of fight you're going to have.
Who gives you the best chance of winning that fight, Ana Navarro?
NAVARRO: Listen, if you ask me, I think it's Joe Biden. I think there is no doubt that that is--
CUOMO: You think he can go toe-to-toe with Trump?
NAVARRO: --where the Republicans are going.
CUOMO: When Trump's calling him Sleepy Joe and, you know, What Do You Know, you know, I mean that - that's the kind of fighter he is.
NAVARRO: I actually do think he can go to - toe-to-toe with Trump because, listen, the guy who is calling Joe Biden "Sleepy Joe" is frankly "Sleepy Donald," right, who likes to sit in his bedroom, eat hamburgers, and watch Fox News all day, and not do much other than Executive Time, doesn't like to go to meetings, doesn't like to read briefings, doesn't know the difference between the Kurds and the Quds.
You know, you talk about Joe Biden making gaffes, how about the gaffes that Donald Trump makes on a daily basis?
CUOMO: Yes, the--
NAVARRO: He thinks the kidney is part of the heart.
CUOMO: --I'll tell you what the difference is.
NAVARRO: He thinks, you know--
CUOMO: I'll tell you what the difference is.
NAVARRO: --Charles is the--
CUOMO: There's a difference.
NAVARRO: --Prince of Wales with H. I mean--
CUOMO: I - listen - and he thinks--
NAVARRO: --we could--
CUOMO: --Melania, the First Lady is good friends with Kim Jong-un, and she's never met him, but here's the difference.
NAVARRO: Exactly.
CUOMO: His base doesn't care. He's not going to lose a point. You guys eat each other for the sport, on the Left.
NAVARRO: Well that - listen--
CUOMO: I know you're Republican.
NAVARRO: --that's absolutely right. And I--
CUOMO: But you guys eat each other for sport.
NAVARRO: But I do think - I - I do think at a - my - my hope is that the lesson that comes out of 2016 for Democrats, and for people who want to beat Trump, like I do, is that every - but once this primary on the Democratic side is over, everybody has got to coalesce. It has got to be all-hands-on-deck, and it's got to be all about beating Donald Trump.
CUOMO: But will that happen?
NAVARRO: Forget the bitterness. Forget the scars.
CUOMO: Will Kasparian get behind a Joe Biden?
NAVARRO: Forget the nostalgia. Get over it. And vote for whomever is running against Trump.
CUOMO: Will Kasparian get behind--
NAVARRO: I will vote for a stump--
KASPARIAN: Ana--
CUOMO: I know you will.
NAVARRO: --over Trump.
CUOMO: One Ana to the other. Will you get behind--
KASPARIAN: Sure.
CUOMO: --a Joe Biden?
KASPARIAN: I want Trump out, so I do agree that it's important to support--
CUOMO: Look how you're back-loading it.
KASPARIAN: --whoever ends up winning the Democratic--
CUOMO: Look how you're back-loading it.
KASPARIAN: No, no, no, I'm not back-loading it. I mean I did not like Hillary Clinton as a Democratic candidate. But when push came to shove, the right thing to do was to vote for her and that's what I did, even as someone who lives in California who could have very easily casted a protest vote. But let's - let's cross that bridge when we get there.
CUOMO: And we're a long way from it.
KASPARIAN: I actually would--
CUOMO: Long way. I--
KASPARIAN: We are - we are a long way from it.
CUOMO: I - yes.
KASPARIAN: But - but I just want to quickly talk about or answer the question about who would be the best challenger to Donald Trump.
CUOMO: Yes.
KASPARIAN: I mean, look, Biden's got to figure out which state he's in first before her - before he talks about fighting Donald Trump. I mean he is campaigning in New Hampshire, he thinks that he's in Vermont. He's had one gaffe after the next after the next.
And Biden has this habit, and I think you see this with a lot of established - establishment Democrats, where he thinks he can work with the Right-wing and compromise with the Right-wing. I think that establishment Democrats are really missing the point. We don't want someone who's going to concede to the Right-wing. We want a fighter.
We want someone who's going to make the Republican Party bend to our will because we've been conceding to their side for far too long, far too often, and that has created the type of political climate and the political situation we're dealing with today.
CUOMO: No - I hear you both, and I appreciate it very much. It really is a tale of two different wants in that party right now, and it'll be very interesting to see how it develops.
Ladies, thank you very much. Appreciate you being on the show.
NAVARRO: Wait, wait, wait, Chris. It's National--
CUOMO: I'll give you the last word.
NAVARRO: Do you know it's National--
CUOMO: Oh boy! Oh boy!
NAVARRO: --it's National Dog Day, Chris.
CUOMO: Kasparian, never bring a dog on this show, do you understand?
NAVARRO: And Chacha Cardenas--
CUOMO: Only one person to do it.
NAVARRO: --wants to say National Dog Day. Happy National Dog Day to Alabama and to Tennessee.
CUOMO: What is on its head? What's on her head?
NAVARRO: A bow that matches my shirt. What's wrong with you? Don't you have--
CUOMO: Oh! I'm sorry--
NAVARRO: Are you colorblind?
KASPARIAN: Oh my Gosh!
CUOMO: Obviously, my fashion sense isn't what it should be. But it's always nice to know she has a dog on her lap the whole time. And that--
KASPARIAN: Now I got to give Charlie a shout-out. So, shout-out to Charlie. That's my first love.
NAVARRO: That's what - listen, that's what - that's what Donald Trump has turned me into. Now, I need an emotional support rodent, passing as a dog.
KASPARIAN: All the--
[21:30:00] CUOMO: And if dogs tell the story of the person, Chacha is Ana. I have these two dopey rescue Labs at my house, Alabama and Tennessee, that's where they come from, and my brother has a Wolf. So, if dogs tell you who somebody is, you can see that I got some work to do. Very much thanks to both of you.
NAVARRO: No, we're all diva here.
CUOMO: Take care.
All right, so the President is now home, all right? And, look, he made noise at the G7. He did what he does best. He was disruptive. Was it for the better or for the worse? We had this problem with this environment meeting that he skipped.
Why? Why did he skip an important climate crisis today? Why did they kind of mislead us - no, they kind of lied. They definitely misled us. Let's talk about the state of play.
One of his staunchest supporters, one of the biggest Conservative voices in the country, Brother Matt Schlapp is here. Let's get after that, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: America First! Russia Second?
This weekend, the President of the United States made time to campaign to have Russia readmitted into the G7. By the way, Russia was launching missiles, right near the NATO border, during the G7. Now, just as interesting as what this President didn't have time for, a crucial meeting on the climate crisis.
Let's bring in Brother Matt Schlapp to talk about this, always good to have you on prime time. Thank you, Sir.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: ONE ON ONE.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATT SCHLAPP, CHAIRMAN, AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION, GOP CONSULTANT & LOBBYIST, FORMER GEORGE W. BUSH CAMPAIGN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Good to be here, Chris.
[21:35:00] CUOMO: This isn't about whether or not there is global warming. You know I accept the science on that.
What I don't understand is the methodology of the President's decision here. You don't want to go because you don't believe in it, or you don't want to go for whatever reason, be straight.
Why does the Press Secretary said he had meetings scheduled with two world leaders that were at the meeting?
SCHLAPP: I - I don't know why they said what they said, Chris. I wasn't on the trip. I'm happy he didn't go to the meeting.
I actually don't want European leaders telling me that I have to pay more per gallon to fill my truck up with gas or - or that the middle- class of America has to pay higher home heating bills to heat their houses in the winter.
I think their solutions are the wrong solutions. The solutions that they talk about won't have any impact on the temperature around the globe. And I actually think a lot of Americans were just fine with the fact that he said "You know what? I don't agree with what you guys are talking about."
CUOMO: Well let's focus on that part. I mean, look--
SCHLAPP: Sure.
CUOMO: --just for the sake of the record, I do not agree with your analysis that making those kinds of changes that would deal with carbon emissions wouldn't make a difference because that is what's causing the problem. But let's--
SCHLAPP: Well why don't they ever tell me how--
CUOMO: --put the science aside.
SCHLAPP: --tell us how much the temperature will be impacted by the solutions they propose.
CUOMO: Well listen--
SCHLAPP: You notice they never do that.
CUOMO: --listen, on the - on the back of a bottle of Aspirin, it doesn't tell you how much your fever will come down if you take it, but you still take it because it reduces your fever, right?
SCHLAPP: Because in most--
CUOMO: So, it's not about exact--
SCHLAPP: --in most cases, your fever does come down.
In this case, what we have seen with every kind of thing they've formulated from cap-and-trade to Al Gore's BTU tax, all it is in the end is making middle-class and poor people pay more for energy, and for America to shed manufacturing jobs. It's not good for America.
CUOMO: But that's--
SCHLAPP: And we don't have to listen to European capitals--
CUOMO: That's - that's - that's not true.
SCHLAPP: --to tell us what to do.
CUOMO: And you could very easily invest in different--
SCHLAPP: It is true.
CUOMO: --businesses to offset it that we shouldn't have new energy that we shouldn't have and we don't know--
SCHLAPP: It's--
CUOMO: --whether it works to help the global warming--
SCHLAPP: Chris, if any--
CUOMO: --because we haven't tried it.
SCHLAPP: But look, let - let me just respond to that. I'm for any alternative energy that's economic, I'm for it. And I think that we've seen that with ethanol. There's a role for ethanol to play. There is a role for wind to play. There is a role for solar to play. We need everything.
CUOMO: All right.
SCHLAPP: But we also need coal and we also need fossil fuels. And for Bernie Sanders to say--
CUOMO: Well but you want to eventually move somewhere - I don't want to talk about Bernie Sanders. Let me just stick with this for a second because--
SCHLAPP: Sure.
CUOMO: --here - here - I - this is a fundamental problem I have, and I think it's a fundamental problem that you and guys on your side of the line have, which is you want to talk about policies and all this, you want to be taken seriously, integrity, credibility, you wouldn't say something like what he just said, what the Press Secretary said.
So, you can't just slide over it. They lied to us about why he didn't go to the meeting. Why?
SCHLAPP: I don't know. I don't know why he--
CUOMO: He but - but - but I know. I'm not asking you why they lied.
SCHLAPP: I don't - I can't look inside the--
CUOMO: I'm asking you to condemn them for lying because they shouldn't lie to the American people.
SCHLAPP: I'm not going to condemn them for lying.
CUOMO: Why?
SCHLAPP: I don't have any idea why there was - why he didn't go to that meeting, I have no idea.
CUOMO: Yes. But you know that they lied about the reason that he didn't go.
SCHLAPP: Why - why - why do I get to be the person that determines whether someone who else speaks is lying or not?
CUOMO: An excellent question! Here's why.
SCHLAPP: That's not really what my--
CUOMO: Here's why because you're a leader--
SCHLAPP: --that's not--
CUOMO: --of conservative thought.
SCHLAPP: --my judgment.
CUOMO: No - of course it is. You - you do it - judge people all the time. You are a leader of Conservative thought in this - in this country. And part of the building block of your Conservative philosophy, you tell me all the time, is integrity, credibility, and character.
SCHLAPP: Right. And if I thought they would--
CUOMO: They just lied.
SCHLAPP: Hey Chris, if I thought--
CUOMO: About why he didn't go to the meeting.
SCHLAPP: --if I thought they were lying about something like this, I'll call them out on it.
CUOMO: How could they not be lying? He - they said he was in a meeting--
SCHLAPP: Have you ever--
CUOMO: --with two other people who were at the meeting that he skipped.
SCHLAPP: I don't know why. He was - maybe he didn't know the meeting was at that time. I don't know. You know, most of the work, just so that listeners understand, on these summits, most of the work does not happen around the official table. Most of the concrete--
CUOMO: But that's a - come on!
SCHLAPP: --most of the concrete successes--
CUOMO: Come on! Come on! Come on!
SCHLAPP: --happen unofficially. For instance, you're not talking about the fact--
CUOMO: Matt, come on! Come on! Come on!
SCHLAPP: --that we did have a--
CUOMO: They had a meeting.
SCHLAPP: --bilateral trade agreement with Japan. Shinzo Abe and the President are getting along great. Boris Johnson and the President are getting along great. There's a spin out of this--
CUOMO: It's not the point.
SCHLAPP: --meeting that somehow it's all a disaster with these world leaders.
CUOMO: No, it's not about--
SCHLAPP: It is not accurate.
CUOMO: I'm just saying just don't lie. Don't say you had meetings with Merkel and Modi so you couldn't go, and then Merkel and Modi are at the--
SCHLAPP: Are we--
CUOMO: --at the meeting.
SCHLAPP: I just--
CUOMO: Just don't lie.
SCHLAPP: I feel like people shouldn't lie. I also feel like--
CUOMO: They shouldn't lie, not people.
SCHLAPP: No one should lie--
CUOMO: The President - the Press Secretary--
SCHLAPP: No one should lie unless you're doing it to like save someone's feelings or something or it's national security.
CUOMO: No.
SCHLAPP: And I don't know why he didn't go to this meeting. I'm perfectly happy he didn't go the meeting. CUOMO: Why won't you say "They shouldn't have lied? We're better than this."
SCHLAPP: Don't put words in my mouth. Hey, how about--
CUOMO: I'm - I'm doing you a favor.
SCHLAPP: --how about the fact that I think that the coverage of this Summit should be more responsible? I'm not calling the coverage "Lying," but I'm saying it should be more responsible. There were plenty of good things that came out of it.
CUOMO: But I'm not saying nothing good came out of it.
SCHLAPP: I'd love to see a trade deal with Japan.
CUOMO: I'm saying I don't like the White House lying to the American people, makes it very hard--
SCHLAPP: I--
CUOMO: --to talk about policy.
SCHLAPP: Chris, I don't like--
(CROSSTALK)
SCHLAPP: --I don't like it when Andrew McCabe lied either. And so, I don't think that we should--
CUOMO: But he's not my President.
SCHLAPP: What did you say? He was - he was the--
CUOMO: He's not my President. And he was punished.
SCHLAPP: --Deputy Director of the FBI.
CUOMO: And he was punished for lying.
SCHLAPP: He's getting rewarded too.
CUOMO: Oh, why? Because he works at CNN?
SCHLAPP: Well I'm just saying, look, you shouldn't get on your high horse about who's lying and not lying.
CUOMO: Why not?
SCHLAPP: I don't know - I don't have some kind of magical machine to know when someone's lying.
CUOMO: Hey, Matt.
SCHLAPP: Or not lying. CUOMO: If I said, I - I can't have you on the show tonight, turns out that, you know, X and B were available, and neither is on this show, and I don't have you on, you'd call me, and you'd be like--
SCHLAPP: I would.
[21:40:00] CUOMO: --"What the heck! Why'd you lie?"
SCHLAPP: I would.
CUOMO: But you won't say it about him. And I think it's a big problem for you guys because--
SCHLAPP: You're calling--
CUOMO: --there are people who would take you seriously well won't--
SCHLAPP: You're calling the Press Secretary a liar.
CUOMO: Yes.
SCHLAPP: And I'm not going to do that.
CUOMO: I know. Why?
SCHLAPP: Because there could - they could have just been confused. It could have just been a simple mistake.
CUOMO: Like Melania's really good friends with--
SCHLAPP: There could have been a miscommunication.
CUOMO: --Kim Jong-un, and they've never met? Come on, man. They're just lying to people for a fact. I don't see how it helps the--
SCHLAPP: I--
CUOMO: --Conservative cause to embrace it.
SCHLAPP: Chris--
CUOMO: Or to ignore it and therefore empower it.
SCHLAPP: Chris, all I will tell you is that you guys will stay here all day long about all the things you think the President says that you find to be what you use the word "Lie." I think what's important out of the Summit to understand is that the American President said to these European capitals, these European leaders--
CUOMO: Yes.
SCHLAPP: --we're going to do what's best for America. And I think most people in America think that's the right thing--
CUOMO: I don't have any problem with - with--
SCHLAPP: --for the President to do.
CUOMO: He can argue whatever he wants. But he also said to them that Russia should be let back into the G7 at the same time, making it the G8 obviously, at the same time, they were bombing--
SCHLAPP: Right.
CUOMO: --right near NATO. They still have Crimea. That's why they were kicked out. Not that President Obama kicked him out. You know that that's not accurate. They interfered in our election. And he wants to reward this guy?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(RUSSIAN DEFENSE MINISTRY VIDEO - RUSSIA FIRES ROCKETS)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHLAPP: I don't think he wants to reward this guy. But I think what President Trump believes is that with our adversaries around the globe, just like with Kim Jong-un, and with the Premier in China--
CUOMO: Xi.
SCHLAPP: --he wants to deal with him. He wants to sit down and talk with him. It's controversial. A lot of Republicans don't like that approach. They think there should be world leaders that we just kind of give an arm's-length treatment to. He has a different view.
Look, and his re-election is going to come down to these big bets. Did he do the right thing, vis-a-vis China, in taking them on, or didn't he? The American voters are going to decide that.
Did he do the right thing in putting a hand out to go meet, literally in North Korea, with - with Kim? Or are these the right decisions, are these the wrong decisions? The American people are going to make that decision. And I think--
CUOMO: The lying is going to come up also, by the way. It's going to be a character contest, as well.
SCHLAPP: Yes, but--
CUOMO: It's going to be an identity politics election, and who he is, is going to be a big part of it.
SCHLAPP: I think the key thing that you - you miss with that kind of coverage is look at the words, and look at his policies.
CUOMO: You're right.
SCHLAPP: You're trying to find every foible.
CUOMO: You must look at both.
SCHLAPP: And what you're going to forget is that the American people will make a judgment on Donald Trump, not to his accuracy level. They're going to make a judgment on Donald Trump--
CUOMO: Well I think that's going to be part of it.
SCHLAPP: --is to whether or not they liked his policies.
CUOMO: But I agree with you. We should not pick out every foible. In fact, in the Closing tonight, I was trying to remember some things, and the kinds of horrible things that he said, that I've already forgotten, just show how the sheer volume of it makes it impossible to track.
But Matt Schlapp, you are always welcome here to make the arguments to my audience, and I appreciate you taking the questions.
SCHLAPP: Thanks for having me on.
CUOMO: Be well.
All right, the NFL regular season doesn't start until next week. But there's already a huge story about who won't be on the field. Did you hear about Andrew Luck? Beautiful quarterback, maybe even a more beautiful person.
D. Lemon and I discuss why, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:45:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: One of the best quarterbacks in the League, 29-year-old Andrew Luck, from the Colts is done with football. Fans were not happy.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(AUDIENCE CROWD BOOS AT ANDREW LUCK FOR HIS SUDDEN RETIREMENT)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: The Colts owner says that Luck is likely walking away from nearly half a billion dollars. He's probably already made like a $100 million. But it is why he's walking away that I want to discuss with D. Lemon. Let's bring him in.
Here's what I find so impressive. For a man who was like an archetype of a man's man in our culture, right--
DON LEMON, CNN HOST, CNN TONIGHT WITH DON LEMON: Like me.
CUOMO: --he's walking away because - the opposite of you, the - he's - pain, injury, and then rehab to get over it, and the cycle, it's too much.
LEMON: Yes.
CUOMO: And I am so proud of him for standing up and saying things that men aren't supposed to say. "It hurts too much. I keep getting hurt. The pain is unbearable, you know, the rehab cycle, I don't want to live this way," I dig it.
LEMON: Well I wish we had a point of disagreement. But we don't. I feel the same way. And you - listen, you and I talk about this all the time, especially in this environment.
How much more do you need? How much more money does he need? He's already done very well. You know, who needs - why - why do people need such big homes? Why do you need a bigger house? Why do you need more money?
At a certain point, enough is enough, and the man has had enough. And he has realized for the lifestyle that he wants to live, for the amount of time and energy he wants to give to his family, and himself that it is--
CUOMO: It's the best move for him.
LEMON: --this is the best move.
CUOMO: He should have done it at the end of the season instead of the beginning of the season because he kind of puts the team in a bad position.
LEMON: Well--
CUOMO: But that's - that's about football.
LEMON: Yes, but--
CUOMO: And he's got to find his way.
LEMON: --I'm not going to fault him for that. Maybe this is just the moment that he needed, and it was maybe he was - maybe he thought that maybe I can get through this, and I can get, you know, through the season.
CUOMO: Yes.
LEMON: And then, at that moment, something clicked, and he said--
CUOMO: And, look, I can't even--
LEMON: --I can't do it.
CUOMO: --imagine it because, you know, I only played like little boy ball, and I'll tell you, getting hit by, you know, refrigerator - you know, Toyota's--
LEMON: Yes.
CUOMO: --you know, these guys are hundreds of pounds and running at 20 miles an hour. I want to ask you about something else while I have you.
LEMON: Yes, sure.
CUOMO: I am blown away by this decision in Oklahoma about the opioids.
LEMON: Oh, yes.
CUOMO: You know, because when you look at what they said, this company was telling doctors, "Hey, when people say that they want more of that stuff, and they seem like they're addicted, oh, no, no, no, they're being undertreated. You have to give them more. And don't fall into that addiction ditch, Doc. You know, don't - don't even use that word. It's really about efficacy. We don't say addiction. Addiction is actually it needs more of the drug."
LEMON: Yes.
CUOMO: They proved they were saying that stuff. These companies have to be held responsible. This is disgusting, right?
LEMON: That is beyond false advertisement. That is beyond deceptive marketing that--
CUOMO: Fraud.
LEMON: Yes. And I saw the two attorneys on your show. And they've - they made, you know, really good arguments, obviously. They went up against some very, very powerful folks and wealthy people. And, you know, they proved their arguments.
Now, listen, it went down what from I think it was like $14 billion or billions of dollars--
CUOMO: $17 billion.
LEMON: $17 billion.
CUOMO: They got $570 million. But that's about the award from the Judge. I'm talking about legal liability, responsibility.
LEMON: Right.
CUOMO: That could make all the difference if companies have to think about being on the hook--
LEMON: Yes.
CUOMO: --legally for what they do.
LEMON: Well I'm going to about it. Dr. Sanjay Gupta is going to talk about that with us, coming up in just a little bit. And also, we're going to get the legal part of it from Jennifer Rodgers. You know her. You've had her on the show. You've interviewed her. She knows her stuff when it comes to legal.
[21:50:00] But you know what? I'm going to talk to John Kasich about everything that's going on, what happened at the G7, and all the - the political environment.
But you know what I'm really looking forward to? I have a farmer, and a manufacturer on, and they're going to talk to us about what the tariffs are doing to them, and it is a story you need to hear, and I think the President probably doesn't want to hear it, by the way.
CUOMO: Well it's important for the audience. Good job, my friend.
LEMON: See you.
CUOMO: All right, let's take a quick break, Closing Argument. Look, why am I fighting with Matt Schlapp about what the Press Secretary did and what the White House did, because it's all got to start with trust, and what you're being sold by your leaders.
And this President is making a very specific pitch to you that I think he never lives up to. That's the argument, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CLOSING ARGUMENT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: My point with Matt Schlapp was that it all has to start with trust.
You don't want to go to the meeting? Don't go. But don't give an excuse that you were meeting with two people who were at the meeting that you didn't go to, and you said you couldn't go because you were with them, it's lying, don't do it.
[21:55:00] Now, this President is regularly selling himself as something that he is not, all right, which is an honest to goodness expert. Listen to this today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I think I know more about the environment than most people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Really? It is a true deluge of delusions.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I know more about ISIS than the - the Generals do, believe me.
I know more about courts than any human being on Earth.
Nobody knows more about trade than me.
I know more about Steelworkers than anybody that's ever run for Office.
Nobody knows more about construction than I do.
I know more about drones than anybody.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Look, if it were just bragging or a wink and hyperbole, OK. But this President acts on his perverse notions in ways that could hurt this country. And arguably, that's what this election will be about.
Like what? All right, let's start small. His "Genius" tells him it's OK to make money off the Presidency. He wants to hold the next G7 Summit at one of his golf clubs. Seriously?
His "Genius" led him to say that global warming is a hoax that China created, and then reportedly suggests nuking hurricanes. Think about that! This President reportedly thought it was a good idea to set off nuclear bombs to combat extreme weather. Is that "Genius?"
Then he says he is a legal "Genius". Also suspect, the Washington Post counted, federal judges have ruled against this White House more than 60 times in just the past two years on everything from the environment to immigration.
He's made deregulation part of his sell to the American people. He's only won 6 percent of the cases involving agency regulations. Other Presidents, they won about 70 percent of the time.
More "Genius," bring Russia back into the G7, or G8, if they're involved. Putin fires rockets. That's what you're seeing on your screen right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(RUSSIAN DEFENSE MINISTRY VIDEO - RUSSIA FIRES ROCKETS)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: This was during the G7 Summit. He fires them near the NATO border, OK? That's who he is. That's what he's about. But our President praises Putin, says he's better than Obama, and then botches how Russia got ousted in the first place from the G7. Annexing Crimea is what get them kicked out by a majority. President Obama didn't do it. By the way, Russia still holds Crimea today. And, oh yes, it's trying to infiltrate our democracy, and this President praises him? That's "Genius?"
He released Iran from the only controls that the world had on them. He gifted North Korea's despot with legitimacy, then said the First Lady has gotten to know this guy well. They've never even met!
He started a Trade War with China that now has CEOs reportedly dumping their own stocks, as market fears grow, farmers are feeling the pain. He says it's all part of how he negotiates.
Please remember, he went bankrupt a lot, and most often was negotiating with creditors in busted businesses. You would know where his money comes from if he would show you his taxes. But that type of hiding is apparently part of his "Genius."
And where is the "Genius" in saying things that make the hateful happy? His people swear we've got him wrong about seeing good people on both sides in Charlottesville, he didn't mean that.
He condemns White supremacists. Well you know who else doesn't get it? These guys. This is from a KKK rally in North Carolina. They're carrying a banner that says "Help Make America Great Again."
You don't see any Obama signs there, do you? You don't see "Let's Get After It" on any of the signs, do you?
Diversity is strength. Why are they using his slogan and writing in support of him online?
Bottom line, telling someone you're a "Genius" doesn't make you a genius. In fact, it probably suggests the opposite. But would a "Genius" lie in such easily discoverable ways?
Would "Genius" convince you that America is best unified by pushing the poison of division, emboldening those who want to see the world in terms of us and them, exclusion over inclusion, as who is less than, and that there's nothing more righteous than indignation?
But there is a bad fact against my argument. This President has exhibited what might be fairly assessed as near-genius by pulling off an amazing feat of politics.
He sold himself to legitimately disaffected voters, many of whom were White, middle-class, angry at the moneyed class, and their perverse plays for power. And I have never seen someone who is guilty of exactly what outrages the same people winds up accepted as a champion for them.
And yet, in this context, as a leader, I don't think that's genius, because I think true genius would be defined as that application of intelligence that promotes a society's virtues that enlightens, elevates, appeals to our better angels, not to bring out the devil in us all. Thank you for watching. CNN TONIGHT with D. Lemon starts right now.
