Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

U.S. Extracted Top Spy From Inside Russia In 2017; Rescue Operation Underway Off Georgia Coast After Cargo Ship Capsizes; Campaign Manager: Trumps Will Be A "Dynasty" That Will Last Decades; Trump Heads To GOP District Up For Grabs In 2020 Test Run; Harris Unveils Criminal Justice Reform Plan; Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-OH) Discusses Sen. Kamala Harris' Record As Prosecutor, Harris' Criminal Justice Reform Plan. Aired 2:30-3p ET

Aired September 09, 2019 - 14:30   ET

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

[14:30:00]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: Those concerns grew in early 2017 after the U.S. Intelligence Community released its public report on Russian meddling in the 2016 election, which said Putin himself ordered the operation.

The Intelligence Community also shared a classified version of the report with the incoming Trump administration, which included highly protected details on the sources behind that intelligence.

Senior intelligence considered extracting at least one Russian asset at the time, but did not do so, according to the former senior intelligence official.

Then the meeting with the Russians happened in the Oval Office. That raised new talks and concerns in the Intel Community continued to grow in the period after Trump's Oval Office meeting with Kislyak and Lavrov.

Weeks after the decision to extract the covert source, the president met privately with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the G-20 summit in Hamburg. You may recall that at the meeting, he took the unusual step of confiscating the interpreters notes.

Afterwards, I'm told, intelligence officials again expressed concerns that the president may have improperly discussed classified intelligence with Russia. This, according to an intelligence source with knowledge of the intel community's response to the Trump/Putin meetings.

It's key there. It was not just one incident.

ERICA HILL, CNN HOST: What does that say?

SCIUTTO: I reached out to the White House and the CIA. A U.S. official said that before this secret operation, there was media speculation about the existence of such a covert source. And such coverage of public speculation poses risks to the safety of anyone a foreign government suspects may be involved. However, this official did not identify any public reporting to that effect at the time of this decision. And CNN could not find any related reference in media.

As for comment, Brittany Gramell, the CIA director of public affairs, told CNN, quote, "CNN's narrative that the Central Intelligence Agency makes life-or-death decisions based on anything other than objective analysis and sound collection is simply false. Misguided speculation of the president's handling of our nation's most sensitive intelligence, which he has access to each and every day, drove as alleged extrication operation, is inaccurate."

A spokesman for Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declined to comment to us. White House press secretary, Stephanie Grisham, said, quote, "CNN's reporting is not only correct it has the potential to put lives in danger."

However, we should make this clear, this removal happened at a time of wide concern in the Intelligence Community about mishandling of intelligence by Trump and his administration. Those concerns were described to me by five sources who served in the Trump administration, the intelligence agencies and Congress.

I should also note, Erica, that we're were withholding several details about the spy to make it more difficult to identify.

HILL: Understandably, and for very important reasons.

You noted at the top there was no equal alternative to this spy, this asset. What's the cost of losing this person and losing that information coming out of Russia?

SCIUTTO: That description, by the way, was a quoted description from a source involved in this.

It has big effects. It left the U.S. without one of its key sources on the inner workings of the Kremlin, as well as the plans and thinking of the Russian president.

This at a time when tensions between the two nations have been growing. The U.S. intelligence Community considers Russia one of the two greatest threats to U.S. national security, along with China.

A former senior intelligence official put it to me this way, quote, "The impact would be huge, because it is so hard to develop sources like that in any denied area, particularly Russia, because the surveillance and security there's so stringent." The source added, "You cannot reacquire a capability like that overnight."

So the extraction is a big deal, and the consequences are enormous.

HILL: Absolutely. That should give everybody a moment of pause as we process that.

Jim, excellent reporting as always.

SCIUTTO: Thank you.

HILL: Appreciate it.

(CROSSTALK)

HILL: We've been hearing from intelligence and national security experts in reaction to Jim's exclusive reporting. Today, former CIA operative, Bob Baer, called the removal of this Russia spy an enormous and unprecedented loss for the U.S. intelligence Community. Here's more.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BOB BAER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: This guy apparently had access to the Kremlin, which is very rare. He would have been handled by the CIA on a list. That means five, six, seven people knew his identity and his position. And that's very few people. That would be the director, the deputy director and so forth.

And Russia -- losing someone like this, it's huge> It's just -- I never heard of a case where an agent was ex-filtrated, brought out of Moscow because the White House had the potential to expose him. That's what the CIA thought.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Chilling when you think about it.

Up next, a story that is escalating by the day. After more illnesses and deaths possibly linked to vaping, one lawmaker making a big demand.

[14:34:34]

Plus, the Trump campaign says the president's family and children will be a, quote, "dynasty for years to come." New CNN reporting just in on what he's envisioning.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HILL: Four South Korean crew trapped inside a capsized cargo ship off the Georgia coast are alive. The Coast Guard made contact with the crew. Now they're trying to get them off of that vessel. The ship slipped onto its side early Sunday morning with about 20 crew members who were rescued. It's the last four, though, that are trapped inside after the ship caught fire.

Now, of course, the race is on to free them.

CNN's Natasha Chen is on St. Simon's Island off the coast of Georgia.

So what more do we know about this operation to get those four crew members out?

NATASHA CHEN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Erica, right now, what we're seeing behind us is the Coast Guard and specific teams trying to assess the stability of the ship and trying to formulate an exit strategy for those four crew members.

[14:40:03]

What we learned is the Coast Guard heard some tapping noises over night from what is the propeller shaft area. Today, after they made sure the vessel was OK for another team to actually get on board, that team drilled a hole in that propeller shaft area to be able to communicate with those crew members.

They confirmed that all four of them are accounted for there. They are alive. But they don't know the conditions of those people.

By now, they have created a larger hole to be able to give them water, food and a more breathable space.

But the difficulty is coming up with that strategy to get them out of there, because, after all, we're talking about a 656-foot cargo vessel on its side, with a lot of vehicles in there. That's what they were transporting.

We are also expecting, within the next hour, a press conference by the U.S. Coast Guard, and we're hoping for more good news there.

I will say, Erica, I did speak with a couple crew members rescued initially on Sunday morning, one of the initial 20 people. There was a little bit of a language barrier there. But they said they don't know what happened. They were asleep when the ship started to list.

Hopefully, we'll start to get more details as time goes on -- Erica?

HILL: Natasha Chen, with the latest for us from the Georgia coast on St. Simon's Island. Thank you.

As the president prepares to stump for a special election in North Carolina, we'll take a look at why it's being called a major test for both 2020 and the president himself.

Plus, Senator Kamala Harris unveiling a criminal justice plan as she calls attacks on her prosecutorial career hurtful.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:46:40]

HILL: President Trump's campaign manager predicting the Trump family will have an influence on politics well after the president leaves the White House.

Noting in prepared remarks at an event over the weekend, quote, "The Trumps will be a dynasty that will last for decades, propelling the Republican Party into a new party. One that can adapt to changing cultures. We must continue to adapt while keeping the conservative values that we believe in."

CNN's Chief Political Correspondent, Dana Bash, is here with more.

Dana, this is your reporting. Put this into context for us. What else was said about this apparent dynasty.

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: It's the word "dynasty" that's caught so many people's attention. The fact that Brad Parscale used that word.

He's gotten some criticism for this given the fact that Republicans, including the president himself, criticized one of the big criticisms of the notion of a Hillary Clinton presidency is to avoid having a "dynasty." Whether the president used that word or not, that was the gist of what he was saying, too much of a family who is an institution.

And that was also used against the notion of a Jeb Bush presidency and even a Republican nomination. That's why there's so much focus on that.

The prepared remarks you showed, I obtained because we had simply seen a quote from the Associated Press. There was a reporter there at this meeting of Republicans in California.

And the gist, I'm told, according to a campaign source, at least the intent of this speech, we're not to say, oh, we're going to see campaign runs from Don Jr, Eric Trump, Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner, but more to the notion of using California.

This is a place where the Republican Party has been decimated. Even the few Republican House seats that have existed up until a year ago, are gone. Democrats defeated them.

So he was trying to say that the Trump family is strong, is obviously very vast, and will continue to raise money for and campaign for Republicans and continue to take the party in a new direction.

Erica, that, to me, is one of the biggest takeaways from this, is that we have seen the Republican Party change so dramatically under Donald Trump. It is the Trump party, no doubt about it.

You saw him defeat Republican after Republican more on the traditional GOP vein. Even over the weekend, Mark Sanford, who is probably the most traditional Republican to say he's going to try to oppose Donald Trump, he's probably not going to get anywhere under those traditional Republican guidelines and values.

To me, it's another example of how Donald Trump, the man, has changed the party and they hope that will continue through his kids.

HILL: Not just changing it dramatically, but very quickly --

BASH: Very quickly.

HILL: -- when you think about the short time.

Before we let you go, as we mentioned, the president hosting a rally in North Carolina on behalf of the Republican who is running for a House seat. This is a special election there. We know stakes are high. How big of a test is this for the president? BASH: I think you can look at it this way, this is a classic

district. It's a do-over, a special election, as you mentioned, in a North Carolina suburban district. When I say classic this is the kind of district that Republicans lost big time in 2018 and allowed Democrats to take control of the House.

[14:50:08]

It's also a district for the president who won handily in 2011. So I think what you can see is, if the Republicans win, President Trump, who's going there, will take credit for helping.

If Republicans lose, you're going to hear people in Trump world and Republicans who support the president say, well, it doesn't matter because the president himself is not on the ballot.

Regardless, we're going to be looking probably for the numbers on who comes out, even though it's going to be difficult to compare apples to apples. It's an off year and a special election almost at the end of the summer.

HILL: This is true, but that will not stop all of us from zeroing in on this.

BASH: It is still important.

HILL: It is still important.

Thank you as always.

At this moment, the president is speaking with reporters. He's talking about why he's scrapped talks with the Taliban. We'll have more of that for you. Standby for that.

Also, Actress Felicity Huffman making her final plea to avoid jail time as part of that massive college emissions scandal. What did she have to say and will it carry any weight?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:55:54]

HILL: On the Democratic side, a sweeping new plan for criminal justice reform today from Senator Kamala Harris. The proposal comes in advance of Thursday's Democratic debate and it's amid criticism about her time as a prosecutor. Harris is calling for an end to mass incarceration, federal mandatory minimum sentences and the death penalty. She also wants to phase out for-profit private prisons and cash bail and legalized marijuana.

Ohio Congresswoman Marcia Fudge has endorsed Senator Harris for president and she joins us now.

Congresswoman, good to have you with us.

As we look at Senator -- (CROSSTALK)

REP. MARCIA FUDGE (D-OH): Thank you.

HILL: Thanks for taking the time.

As we look at Senator Harris' record, she often points to her time as a prosecutor as being so important for what she understands about the criminal justice system.

That being said, that record is at odds with parts of this new plan. In 2004, as San Francisco's U.S. attorney, she pushed for higher cash bails. In 2010, we know she did not support legalizing marijuana. We know that has changed. In 2014, as California attorney general, she didn't back independent investigations for police shootings.

Which is a record voters should be looking at? Is it her record as a prosecutor or her record as a candidate?

FUDGE: I think it's a record as her prosecutor and a candidate. You have to take a person's total record. You can't just look at bits and pieces of it. She has determined and knows now that the things she may have supported in the past, were not the proper things. We all grow and evolve.

I think it's important to know what has happened. In 1994, we did not know that mass incarceration would be where it is today. So no one could guess that she needed to change her plan. No one could guess what was going to happen with solitary confinement. No one could guess what was going to happen with persons who were put into a process basically because of mandatory minimums.

I think you do grow and you do evolve.

The plan I support is the she has now.

The plan she has now, to your support, growing and running, it's an important part all Americans, whether running for office or not as you learn more.

Yet, she told "The New York Times, it was not her core ideology that had shifted in terms of this plan. She told "The Times" it was the political environment. Why not just stay, to your point, I grew, I evolved, I learned, instead of, hey, there wasn't the political capital back then?

FUDGE: That's a question you'd have to ask the Senator. I don't have the answer to that.

What I do have the answer to is the fact that this plan is the most comprehensive plan that has been brought forth today. Her plan is the one that no one outside of the system could have written. She's best prepared to assess, know what is good, know what the flaws are in the system and know how to change the system.

Clearly, she doesn't like the laws, as a prosecutor, she enforces them. Just as I'm sworn to uphold the Constitution and the laws of this country, so was she.

I think that to accuse her of not doing what she thought was right or changing her mind is really unfair, quite frankly.

HILL: I don't think anyone's accusing her. But --

(CROSSTALK)

FUDGE: -- the conversation.

HILL: No. What I asked you is, looking at the record, and you said she grew and she evolved, which makes a lot of sense because it happens all the time.

FUDGE: Absolutely.

HILL: Please learn, they're educated.

That being said, that wasn't the reason that she gave the "New York Times." She said her core ideology hadn't changed.

So it begs the question, do you think, as you look at her record, she could have pushed for more, even as recently as when she was attorney general of California? If she felt as strongly about things as she felt now, do you believe she could have done more despite what she believed the political environment thought?

FUDGE: We could all do more. But she said her values have not changed. She was opposed to the death penalty then. She's opposed to it now. She was opposed to solitary confinement. She's opposed to it now. She was opposed to locking people up solely because they can't pay their bail and criminalizing poor people. Her values are the same.

The policies may be different, but the values are the same.

HILL: The Senator had been criticized in the past for not citing forcefully or quickly enough to attacks from her rivals on the trail or in the debates. She talked about that criticism. Do you think that she has addressed it as well as she could have? Have you given her any advice on that?

FUDGE: We didn't discuss it.