Return to Transcripts main page
Cuomo Prime Time
Rudy Giuliani Facing FBI Counterintelligence Probe; Trump's Bizarre "Tough Guy" Letter To Turkey's President; House Approves Bipartisan Resolution Against Trump's Withdrawal Of Troops In Syria. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired October 16, 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] ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: -Mr. Pozner has also filed a defamation case against Radio Host, Alex Jones, which is ongoing.
Before I hand it over to Chris, don't miss Full Circle. It's our new daily digital news show. You can catch it streaming live, weekdays at 5 P.M. Eastern, at CNN.com/FullCircle, or you can watch it there later, on-demand.
All right, that's it for us. News continues. Want to hand it over to Chris for CUOMO PRIME TIME. See you tomorrow.
CHRIS CUOMO, CNN HOST, CUOMO PRIME TIME: All right, thank you, Anderson. I am Chris Cuomo and welcome to PRIME TIME.
We have news of an arrest in the Giuliani probe and new information that changes the scope and the timing of a clearly-widening FBI investigation into this President's lawyer. This is far bigger than just a criminal probe.
What do you say? Let's get after it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: All right, so here's our new understanding. Since at least early 2019, the FBI has been investigating counterintelligence concerns regarding Rudy Giuliani and his activities abroad.
This is not speculation. It's from a lawyer who says he was questioned by the Feds about these issues.
Now, think about what this means.
At the same time the President was allowing his personal lawyer to run a shadow foreign policy agenda in Ukraine, if not elsewhere, the Feds were looking into whether Giuliani was posing a national security risk.
A source tells CNN, the counterintel investigation partly hinges on whether foreign actors were trying to take advantage of Giuliani's business connections to reach the White House.
This comes, the two guys, that were indicted, who paid Giuliani, known for not the best kinds of activities, news now of a fourth being taken into custody.
Today is the 1000th day of the Trump Presidency. Did you ever think we'd be where we are?
Let's bring in the FBI insiders to make sense of this, Andrew McCabe and Jim Baker.
Thank you so much. There's too much to just bandy about here, so we got the wall going, tonight.
JIM BAKER, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER FBI GENERAL COUNSEL, DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL SECURITY & CYBERSECURITY, R STREET INSTITUTE: Yes.
CUOMO: Just to show, you know, a little bit of a flowchart of what we see as the spokes coming off the hub that is obviously Giuliani. And now, just to bring people up to speed, on what we're looking at, these highs - these highlighted references.
Counterintelligence is different than criminal. It's not just about looking at statutes. It's about looking at the nature of behavior, and what it could mean from a national security perspective.
You now have - Iran and speeches, let's leave that to the side, for now, the two fellows may work it in.
But State Department with what was going on with Ukraine, how that dovetails with his work for Turkey, and now, one or maybe more clients that needed something from the United States government, was he their lawyer? He hasn't been clear. Was he supposed to register as a lobbyist? There are a lot of big concerns.
So Andrew, let's start with you. When you look at the new information about what Giuliani was trying to do for people involved in Turkey, and the meetings that were had, what stands out to you that is new in the state of play?
ANDREW MCCABE, FORMER FBI DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well Chris, I think it's helpful to - to remind ourselves that the standard for opening an FBI counterintelligence case is when you have information, credible articulable facts that indicate a threat to national security might exist.
When you think about that standard, and you look at the facts, the few facts that we know - and mind you, the Southern District, I'm sure, has many more facts than we do.
But you see Mr. Giuliani, reportedly, repeatedly lobbying the President, and others in the Administration, to return Fethullah Gulen to the Turks, something that has been very high on Erdogan's list.
CUOMO: And just to remind people, Gulen is a cleric. He was here. He now has residence in the United States. Erdogan believes he was part of a coup to get him. He wants him back.
Giuliani, all the sudden, goes to the United States President, and says, "You should give Gulen back."
So Jim, the question becomes "Why?" He says, "I wasn't working for Turkey." Well who else would want, assuming he's telling the truth, who else would want Gulen returned?
BAKER: Well this is exactly right. So, as - as Andy was saying, starting an investigation, I would think of it as asking a question. Do we have a basis to open the investigation? And, if so, what is going on here, exactly what you're saying.
What - what was Mr. Giuliani doing? Who was he working for? What level of knowledge did he have about what the foreign government authorities were trying to do?
And so, that is what I assume that the FBI is trying to sort out. The facts are very confusing. But that's typical with a counterintelligence probe because the adversaries are trying to make it difficult for us to figure out what's going on.
[21:05:00] And the key thing here, I think, one of the things that I expect the FBI is focused on is not Giuliani per se, but what the foreign actors were trying to do, and trying to assess whether - whether Mr. Giuliani - Mr. Giuliani, did he know what was going on?
Was he participating? What level of involvement did he have? Or was he merely a dupe who was being used by more sophisticated actors to try to influence U.S. policy because of Mr. Giuliani's direct access to the President of the United States?
That was something that they would cherish, a foreign adversary would cherish that type of access--
CUOMO: Right.
BAKER: --directly to the President.
CUOMO: Now, Jim?
BAKER: And were they - were they playing him?
CUOMO: Jim, I have one more question, but I do have to say, just a - editorial point for the audience. I find it so hard to believe that anybody could play Rudy Giuliani on this level.
The players that we know about so far, these guys who've been indicted, it would be shocking to me, if the man that I've known all these years could be manipulated by people at this level. I just have to put it out there because my interest is fairness.
Now Jim, when we look at this, just to - help me out here Ellie (ph), my Director, with.
So, the cleric, all right, that's Gulen. That's what we're talking about. This is a question of who was Rudy helping to deal with this because he hasn't said "You know, I just felt it was unfair, so I talked to my pal, the President."
That takes us - a little sloppy, I'm not the Wizard of Odds, this gold dealer here also, OK, that he was helping out.
Andrew, again, this - the question there is he says at - at the same time, he says, "I'm not working for any government. And I don't have to register as a lobbyist. But I can't talk to you about why I was trying to get this Iranian Turkish gold dealer out of a criminal situation with the United States because of attorney-client privilege."
OK. So, he's the lawyer.
MCCABE: Right.
CUOMO: Does that mean that he is exempt from any laws requiring registration?
MCCABE: It does not. There are certain technicalities built into that exemption from FARA that you're referring to that - that his activity and basically lobbying on Reza Zarrab's behalf to the President might not qualify him for that - for that exemption.
But Chris, the important thing here is not just that he pushed for Fethullah Gulen or that he pushed for Reza Zarrab, but that he did both.
These were two people who were incredibly important to the President of Turkey to get them back, Gulen, because he's got a vendetta against the guy, and Reza Zarrab, because he allegedly has all kinds of information about Turkish corruption that leads right back to Erdogan. So, they--
CUOMO: What if I'm getting paid by somebody--
MCCABE: --desperately wanted him back.
CUOMO: --else who's not a part of the government but has some type of affinity to Erdogan, do I escape scrutiny, Jim?
BAKER: No. I mean, it's - the question is whether you were working for a foreign principal, and not registering as - as--
CUOMO: So, it doesn't have to be a government. It can be a person. It could be a corporation.
BAKER: A foreign principal. Now - yes, I think - I - I think that's right. Yes, I think that's right. And so, the question is what was Giuliani doing? What was he intending to do?
I do - and - go back to the question we were talking about before, Chris, I mean I do think that there is - you know, the - the Russian Intelligence Services are more sophisticated than Rudy Giuliani, I'm sorry to - to tell him, but - but they are. And so, could they have been playing him through these cutouts? Could these people in the middle have been cutouts, either for Russian Intelligence or Ukraine?
CUOMO: All right.
BAKER: Turkish, somebody else, I mean, so we - we just don't know.
CUOMO: All right, so look, on - on this side, this whole circle of consideration, this is all about money, all right?
Who was Rudy paying? That's supposed to be a "U" technically, right? It's U.S. It's a dollar sign. Who was paying Rudy to help the cleric? Who was paying with the gold dealer? What were these speeches about in Iran that you're going to start hearing more about?
The idea of him being pro bono, "I'm doing this for free with the President," takes us into this whole other side of the analysis. That's why it wasn't surprising to me here that it was counterintelligence and criminal.
Because, Andrew, just in terms of what we are looking at, in terms of what we've heard of all of this coordinated testimony of people saying, "Yes, it was shadow foreign policy going on with Ukraine. Yes, we didn't like it. Yes, we wanted to push Giuliani back. Yes, we didn't understand why the President was doing this," where does that lead you, as an investigator?
MCCABE: Well, on the counterintelligence side, one of the things you're always concerned about are what we call access and influence operations. So, that's someone who has access to a government decision-maker and that may be being used by a foreign power.
So - so, it doesn't matter, in essence, you know, the counterintelligence investigators are not going to be so focused on what State Department's reaction was to Giuliani's activity. They are simply looking at what he did, and who he was acting on behalf of.
[21:10:00] The fact that he was in there lobbying for, in the case of the Turks, it appears to be for - on several different - several different fronts, we also know that he was doing a lot of work in Ukraine, which, as I understand it, he explains by saying, "Well my foreign business ventures, I'm not representing those foreign governments to the U.S. government. I'm just helping them in foreign countries."
If - if those foreign ventures are turning into conversations with the President and - and Secretaries - Cabinet Secretaries in the White House, that excuse doesn't hold up.
CUOMO: And some of the testimony today, we have Senator Chris Murphy coming on for some perspective on this.
He heard testimony from some - someone today that substantiates the idea that Rex Tillerson, then Secretary of State, was pressured by the President to help Giuliani with what he was talking about on this Turkish front.
And who would have guessed that so quickly we would have gotten to a point where the best thing Rudy Giuliani has going for him, and our President, frankly, was this belief in a nonsense conspiracy theory about who was out to get the President in 2016.
That's the only part of this that's clean, fellas, is that if they believe this conspiracy theory that the Ukrainians were out to get Trump, that was the only legit, you know, corruption that they could have been thinking about, and it's completely made-up.
MCCABE: Yes.
CUOMO: Andrew, Jim, thank you so much for helping us to understand this. There's so many questions going forward. I will need you then. I appreciate you now.
MCCABE: Thanks, Chris.
CUOMO: All right, we're going to pick this up with another counterintel authority. This is complicated stuff, this FARA. It's easy to say an acronym.
But to understand, "Well what do you have to register for, and when? It's just this penny ante stuff, why do we care about any of this?" follow the foreign money trail. When does it become criminal? When does it become at least a concern?
An expert, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:15:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: All right, so let's try to get a little deeper into what we're going to be hearing about with this Rudy Giuliani probe.
The Foreign Agents Registration Act, you'll hear me mangle it as FARA and FARA. It's an acronym, F-A-R-A. It is not a - area of the law that you hear a lot. But the implications are high for our democracy, and frankly, for Mr. Giuliani.
Now, David Laufman knows this corner of the law well. He oversaw enforcement of this law for the DOJ, and now helps clients navigate this complicated framework.
It is so good for you to come in. I appreciate this.
DAVID LAUFMAN, FARA ATTORNEY, FORMER CHIEF, DOJ COUNTERINTELLIGENCE & EXPORT CONTROL SECTION: Good.
CUOMO: All right, let's start macro, get micro.
LAUFMAN: Sure.
CUOMO: Why do we care about this? When you look at how often it's used, it's very discrete, it's irregular. With Flynn, it was used as a political "Gotcha," we were told. Why does this matter, this area of the law?
LAUFMAN: Well this was a statute that was enacted in the 1930s in response to activities by pro-Nazi German elements in the United States, some of whom were engaged in subversive propaganda and activities.
And, at its core, the statute is about promoting transparency and disclosure, for example, in lobbying activities or public relations activities, so that the American people, or U.S. lawmakers, when confronted with content, whether it's lobbying or an op-ed, can make an informed assessment, based on who they know the real party is behind it.
And if it's a foreign party, then the American people should be able to take that into account, and assigning whatever weight to it they want.
CUOMO: So, for Rudy Giuliani, that means if you are involved with something that is of significance to a foreign power, and you're being paid to solicit any help from the United States, in the form of the President or whatever, you need to register.
LAUFMAN: The way it works is that if you are acting in the United States, on behalf of a foreign principal, broadly defined to include not only governments, but foreign political parties, it could be a foreign corporation, a non-profit, and you're engaged in certain conduct, described in the statute as triggering registration, like lobbying, for example, or public relations activities, then you have an obligation to register with the Department of Justice within 10 days of even entering into agreement to do those things, unless you come with an - an exemption to registration.
CUOMO: All right, so let's take it one step at a time. One, on the basis of the meat of what it's about, you think Rudy has exposure?
LAUFMAN: I think there are legitimate questions for the department to be devoting investigative resources to, to unpack what he did, on whose behalf he did it, what knowledge he had at relevant junctures.
This effort to bring about the removal of Fethullah Gulen is--
CUOMO: The cleric.
LAUFMAN: --the cleric is right out of President Erdogan's playbook, which is--
CUOMO: He says, "I'm not representing Turkey."
LAUFMAN: Well that would be something that investigators would look into.
You know, if he's not representing a foreign interest, then whose interest is he representing, and seeking to bring about something that is among the highest priorities of the Turkish President?
CUOMO: And then he dovetails that with saying, in general, again, he hasn't been very specific, certainly not to the - the media or the American public.
LAUFMAN: Yes.
CUOMO: And he has, to our understanding, not been with investigators yet. He says he doesn't even need a lawyer.
But he'll say, "Attorney-client privilege, can't talk to you about these things," all right, so he's suggesting he's working as an attorney, whether it's in the Gulen matter and/or with the Iranian Turkish gold trader who he was trying to help.
LAUFMAN: Right.
CUOMO: If he is working as a lawyer, when is he exempt from registration?
LAUFMAN: If he were a lawyer, engaged in civil or criminal proceedings, before an agency, or in a judicial proceeding, and this activity was connected to that, he could come within the scope of this exemption for lawyers.
But that exemption is narrowly confined, if he's engaged in other things, like trying to influence U.S. government policy, for example, we want to kick this cleric out of the United States to placate our - our friend, Recep Erdogan, or he wants to can a U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, because the Trump Administration doesn't think she's with the program, those things would fall outside the protection of this exemption--
CUOMO: How easy a case--
LAUFMAN: --for legal services.
CUOMO: --is that to make?
If Rudy says "You're wrong, I'm not representing any of these people, and you're not going to get your hands on them, as foreign nationals," how do you make the case?
LAUFMAN: Well he invited the government to examine his digital devices, for starters. I mean, look, the government is going to unpack the facts of this case, like they would undertake any investigation. [21:20:00] They're going to interview witnesses. If they have a Grand Jury empaneled, they could subpoena bank records, they could issue search warrant for his e-mail records.
You begin to develop an evidentiary mosaic of what happened, through all - through the exercise of all logical--
CUOMO: And it's - and it's not like Congress--
LAUFMAN: --investigative steps.
CUOMO: --where you can say - you - you're supposed to obey their subpoenas also. But they don't have the teeth--
LAUFMAN: Yes.
CUOMO: --of the DOJ.
LAUFMAN: Oh, these are Grand Jury subpoenas. Anyone who defies a Grand Jury subpoena does so at their peril.
CUOMO: So, now you have those two instances that we've learned about, and it's per counterintelligence.
That means it's not so much about a crime, but it's about national security issues, and then you move over to the people who were indicted, for supposedly trying to funnel Russian money into, the accusation is, into U.S. elections.
Rudy was also being paid for them. They seem to have had aligned interests in removing then-Ambassador to Ukraine from the United States.
LAUFMAN: Right. That's right.
CUOMO: Where does that take you?
LAUFMAN: Well that portion of the indictment that you're referencing seems to cry out FARA. But they weren't charged with FARA. They were charged with campaign finance violations.
But it's likely, I imagine, that the Southern District of New York, if they are conducting as broad-based an investigation, as the newspapers tell us they are, that there's some element of that that includes whether Mr. Giuliani committed a violation of FARA.
To commit a criminal violation of FARA, one has to willfully violate the statute. That means you knew you had an obligation to register, and you willfully failed to do so. That's a higher burden of proof for the government to establish. But that's what investigations are for.
CUOMO: I got to tell you. Mr. Laufman, this is complicated stuff.
But, you know, the more we learn, the more it seems to fit into these areas where Rudy has obviously not the legal burden, that's for the government to make, but to the American public, in his representation of the President, he has some explaining to do, about who he was helping, why he was doing these things, because they're starting to stack up.
Thank you so much.
LAUFMAN: My pleasure.
CUOMO: In advance, I ask you to help me understand these things, as we go forward and we get more meat on the bones.
LAUFMAN: Happy to do so.
CUOMO: All right, I appreciate it.
LAUFMAN: Thank you.
CUOMO: The beginning of what I think will be a long relationship.
LAUFMAN: Good to be with you.
CUOMO: All right, so foreign policy concerns, things are starting to dovetail, on a very separate issue, but of course of major importance to us, the letter from the President, to the President of Turkey, today, nothing about any of the Rudy things, but about the Kurds.
Senator Chris Murphy is here, and he's got two purposes for us today. He can help us understand the state of play on Syria, and our allies, and what's going to happen about it.
And what did he hear in Congress today in testimony that helps understand the range of concerns about what happened in Ukraine with this President, and his lawyer, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:25:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: You know, just the more we learn, the more troubling this situation is, and just as demonstrable fact. There's no supposition necessary. President Trump reportedly wanted his then Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, to help broker a deal to get a Turkish gold trader out of water.
Why would a President deal with something that discrete? Well guess who was working on the matter, and guess who the President wanted our Secretary - Secretary of State to work with? Rudy Giuliani. The President is going to have to answer for how he paid Rudy back for his free legal work. I don't even know legally whether this President could accept something of that much monetary value for free.
Now, on top of that, all of these new questions about what Rudy's interests were, financial and otherwise, those questions take us to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Today, they had testimony from a senior State Department official.
Let's get to Democratic Senator, and Member of that Committee, Senator Chris Murphy.
I got to tell you, Senator, the questions have been stacking up faster than I expected here. I thought we were going to be one and done with Ukraine, as an analysis. Where is your head after what you heard today?
SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): Well I mean this is really hard to understand, how Rudy Giuliani effectively became the most powerful foreign policy figure in the Trump Administration, how he became the shadow Secretary of State.
We are learning more and more about how he was essentially running our Ukraine policy, and directing a whole host of senior officials that were operating through his direction.
But we're now learning more and more, by the hour, about how integral he's been to the President's bizarre policy with respect to Turkey.
As you mentioned today, we heard testimony from a senior official at the State Department who confirmed that he had taken a couple meetings with Rudy Giuliani with respect to this request Giuliani was making to let off this gold trader from prosecution for avoiding U.S. sanctions.
CUOMO: Did Rudy admit to that man, Senator--
MURPHY: And we do have these huge questions about--
CUOMO: --just - just to like have the audience follow along, did Rudy tell this, the official, "I represent this guy. I'm his lawyer."
MURPHY: So, we certainly didn't learn that today.
What - what Brian Hook, the State Department official said was that former Attorney General, Mukasey, came in to talk about Reza Zarrab, and he brought Rudy Giuliani with him, both times.
We also have this other reporting, suggesting that Trump asked Tillerson, on Giuliani's behalf, to try to step in.
And I think it's important to note. There's no national security rationale for letting somebody like this off the hook for avoiding sanctions.
[21:30:00] Remember, Trump has been making a huge deal over the course of the last 2 years about how he is imposing these crippling sanctions on Iran, and actually there's truth to that.
So, why on earth was this one individual afforded preferential treatment other than he had Rudy Giuliani showing for him?
CUOMO: So, where does that take you in terms of what your concerns are when you look at the broader question of this President and his abuse of office with what we learned about with Rudy Giuliani and Ukraine?
MURPHY: So, listen, I think it's hard, right now, to jump to conclusions. I mean you hinted at one possible explanation.
If Rudy Giuliani was running Ukraine policy, for the President, and trying to get the Bidens and the Clintons investigated, and wasn't charging the President for that work, was the President giving him consideration in some other form through Turkey policy changes that benefited Rudy's bottom line?
I mean, listen, we don't - we don't know that to be the case today. But we can't come up with any policy reasons why Trump was doing Giuliani's bidding, and we can't figure out why Giuliani was doing the Ukraine work for free, on behalf of the President. So, there's lots of dots to connect here. But it does suggest that
this Ukraine story, which we know is corruption at its core, may be connected to some of the strange things that have been happening surrounding Turkey.
CUOMO: I am shocked that Rudy Giuliani believes he does not need a lawyer at this time.
He's got a counterintel and a criminal investigation going on by Trump's DOJ. I know it belongs to the American people. But it cannot be easy to get that kind of probe started against the President's lawyer in this current political climate.
Now, to the bigger concern, the President had this letter that had to be penned by him today.
Here's the letter that was released, I guess, to kind of help bolster the idea that this President is serving American interests in Turkey, kind of insulting the Turkish leader about "Don't be a fool. I'll come after you. Do the right thing."
Is it fair to say, Senator, that the only reason we're in this situation of watching the Kurds, fighting for their lives, is because of what this President did?
MURPHY: Well absolutely. The President green-lighted Turkey into Syria.
He cleared the way, so the Turkish troops could enter, and slaughter, annihilate the Kurds. It's the most massive, most horrific, double- cross, perhaps in the recent history of the Presidency, and the President is now panicking.
I mean he realizes that there's no constituency that supports this. Republicans don't support it. Democrats don't support it. Nobody in the foreign policy community supports it. And the Kurds are being annihilated, as we speak. ISIS--
CUOMO: So, why did he do it?
MURPHY: --detainees are fleeing.
So, why did he do it? Listen, I - I don't know the answer to that. Obviously, we've got to get to the bottom of the Giuliani story. We need to understand Trump's financial dealings.
I will say this. You know, the President has been pretty clear from the get-go that he wanted our troops out of Syria. But if that were the case, there was a way to do it that made a lot more sense than pulling them out with a day's notice.
Our troops ran for their lives. We are tonight bombing our installations inside Syria because we left so quickly, we couldn't get rid of all of our stuff. He didn't have to do it this way, even if this was a policy choice he's have - he's wanted to make for a while.
CUOMO: You saw the reports from a Russian journalist who's inside U.S. bases. You know, they were there just a couple of days ago. Now, the Russians are in there, and they're doing stories about how Americans lived on the base, just crazy, crazy days.
Senator Chris Murphy, thank you for helping us understand the state of play, and make some sense of where we're headed. Thank you.
MURPHY: Thanks.
CUOMO: Now, look, a lot of these questions wind up playing to big ideas about what our elected leaders is supposed to be about.
And there is something interesting that a number of Republicans signed on to rebuke this President for abandoning Kurds as our allies, but not all of them, not the Co-Chair of The Problems Solver Caucus. Why not?
Congressman Reed is here to make the case, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:35:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: All right, there's bipartisan backlash against this President, and specifically, his decision to withdraw troops from Syria. There was a big vote today. A House vote overwhelmingly condemned the
President's move, 354 to 60. We don't see that kind of bipartisanship these days. It shows you what a stark issue this is.
Less than a third of Republicans stuck by Trump on this issue, and I don't get why any of them did.
Now, one of them is Congressman Tom Reed of New York. Congressman is part of - Co-Chair of The Problem Solvers Caucus. Question is, does today's vote show more of a problem ducking disposition?
Congressman, I appreciate you coming on to make the case.
REP. TOM REED (R-NY): Chris, it's good to be with you. Thanks for having me on.
CUOMO: Now, the concern is obvious, Congressman that if you don't vote--
REED: Yes.
CUOMO: --the way your colleagues did today, you are saying it was OK to abandon our allies.
REED: No.
CUOMO: Is that the message you want to send?
REED: No. The message I'm sending is Congress needs to do its job. The - Congress have been playing - playing fast and loose with authorizing our men and women to be put in harm's way.
And when Obama came to us, and asked for our approval in Congress, for putting boots on the ground in Syria, I was against that.
And, right now, I don't know how Members of Congress, in the hypocritical way that they voted today, said it's OK to have troops on the ground, when they're not authorizing those troops, and making the argument that - that the President didn't have authority to put those troops there, on Syrian ground.
CUOMO: Now, I'm with you.
REED: I say do - Congress do its job.
CUOMO: I'm with you. We use the hashtag, "Do your damn job" here. We're so vulgar.
REED: Amen!
CUOMO: About AUMF. I've been talking about this forever. But I don't know that I can give you credit for it on that because, one, when he bombed in Syria, you didn't say not to. I can't find anything about you on that.
REED: Yes. CUOMO: And I get not wanting troops in Syria. That's a principled position. I'm not going to attack it. But abandoning your allies is the best way to get troops out of Syria? That's the - what you wanted to see?
REED: Now, I understand the concern and the impact that it has on our allies, and the Kurds. But, at the end of the day, we, as Congressmen, owe an obligation to those men and women who are going to risk their lives.
[21:40:00] We, in Congress, should be on the record whether or not we support those men and women being on the ground in Syria. And it's not there. There's no authority by Congress to do this.
And we act stronger, Chris, when Congress backs our troops up by going on the record, and nobody wants to take that vote, because that's politically toxic--
CUOMO: But that's what they say this vote was, Congressman.
REED: --for some of these Members.
CUOMO: The men and women who are on the ground there--
REED: Yes.
CUOMO: --you've seen the stories about how betrayed they feel. I'm not talking about the Kurds.
REED: I understand.
CUOMO: I'm talking about the Americans. And this was a chance for you in Congress to say, "Hey, Mr. President, I don't know what's going through your head. But this isn't the way America behaves." You sent the opposite message.
REED: No. I sent the message that if we're going to put our men and women, I owe my primary duty to our men and women in our military. And if we're going to send them into harm's way, we better, in Congress, be on the record, supporting that action, as a Congress.
And what these guys did today was duck that responsibility. And they were able to say, "We're going to contempt Trump." But, at the same time, when this question comes about re-deploying troops to Syria, are they going to say, "President Trump had the authority to do it?"
No. I bet you those folks will say at that point in time, "No, President. You don't have authority to do that" when they're condemning him--
CUOMO: Well I'll tell you what.
REED: --exactly that today.
CUOMO: I don't see the two things as the same. And I - although I hope you are right, in the second part of the analysis, my criticism of you guys is you let this President, and Presidents before him, take your authority. Congress--
REED: I agree with you.
CUOMO: --is supposed to declare war. And you guys won't even negotiate a - AUMF. And, by the way, Republicans stop it, so you should go after--
REED: I--
CUOMO: --your own colleagues. But that's not--
REED: I totally--
CUOMO: --what today was.
REED: I totally go against my colleagues. And that was what the vote today was.
CUOMO: No. Today was--
REED: When I went to the floor of the House--
CUOMO: --you should not have--
REED: When I went to the floor of the House--
CUOMO: --abandoned the Kurds.
REED: No. When I went to the floor of the House, that was my objection to my Republican and Democratic colleagues, "You have not done your job."
There's no authority in Congress to have these men and women on Syrian ground. And that's what President Obama asked me. That's why I took the position then, and I reaffirmed that position today.
If we're going to do this, give me a clear mission, give me authority in Congress, Congress do its job, and then we send the message to all our allies, Congress is backing up our Commander-in-Chief.
CUOMO: Have you said to this--
REED: And where they're until the mission is complete.
CUOMO: Have you said to this Commander-in-Chief, "I want you to understand what my vote is today."
REED: Yes.
CUOMO: "I don't believe we should be in Syria. But what you did with the Kurds was cowardly, and it was wrong, and it was un-American, and now we look terrible, and we don't have any guarantee of allies to fight against ISIS, who you just enhanced."
REED: And Chris, I guess you - you approve of men and women being in Syria under our military banner, and doing that without Congressional authority. That's my--
CUOMO: Listen, I've been asking you guys--
REED: --fundamental objection to this.
CUOMO: --to do your job. You haven't.
REED: Amen!
CUOMO: You didn't speak out against this President when he bombed in Syria, so I don't know where this genuine belief that you have now is in terms--
REED: When you--
CUOMO: --of consistency.
REED: When you're bombing--
CUOMO: But if they're there already--
REED: When you're bombing, Chris--
CUOMO: --you can't double the wrongs.
REED: Chris, when you're--
CUOMO: You don't - you did a double-wrong here.
REED: OK, Chris. And I appreciate that judgment. But what I will say, when you're bombing, seeking intelligence, that's different than putting men and women on the soil, boots on the ground--
CUOMO: True. But they're both use of--
REED: --as what the authority was not lacking here.
CUOMO: --military force. And you're supposed to do both.
REED: Amen!
CUOMO: The only time the President could do it himself, as you know, is imminent threat to us, our people--
REED: Correct.
CUOMO: --or our foreign interests.
REED: And that's what--
CUOMO: That bombing didn't qualify. But you never said anything.
REED: And when - when we bring our men and women home, I would share that concern about our Amendment - men and women, and that's why I'm going to continue to stand. If we're going to go into harm's way, Congress needs to do its job.
That's the message I sent today. That's how I read the resolution. And I'm proud of the vote that I put down--
CUOMO: But then what--
REED: --for marker (ph) of the people.
CUOMO: I hear what you're arguing, Congressman.
But why did you argue that you recognized the long relationships that we have with our allies, and that this President knows who our friends are across the world, and will stand with them, through thick and thin.
Did he stand with the Kurds through thick and thin?
REED: I understand that concern. I accept that - that criticism. But, at the end of the day, this is about prioritizing men and women of the military over the Kurds. I chose to stand with the men and women of the military.
CUOMO: But couldn't you have done both?
REED: Well that's exactly the point. We should do both. And that's where Congress needs to do its job. This political cowardice has to stop. Congress has to do its job, have this vote on - on the floor of the House and in the Senate.
But, for years, they've been ducking this question. They ducked it with President Obama. They're ducking it with President Trump.
CUOMO: I agree with you about all of that.
REED: And I totally--
CUOMO: I agree with you about all of that on the AUMF.
REED: --totally think that's where we've had--
(CROSSTALK)
CUOMO: I don't see this as an AUMF issue. But I'll give you that.
REED: Yes.
CUOMO: Let me just ask you something--
REED: I understand.
CUOMO: --about cowardice, just to make sure.
This group is 60. I can't make you a monolith. But just for you, personally, Congressman Reed--
REED: Yes. CUOMO: --if this President has a compelling case made against him of an abuse of power based on what happened in Ukraine, and maybe otherwise, are you even open to voting for articles of impeachment?
REED: Well it depends on where we go with this process. But it right - I see, right now, I don't see impeachable offenses. But I can't predict the future. I - and I will just tell you right now--
CUOMO: So, you're open?
REED: --right now, what I see is not an impeachable offense.
CUOMO: I understand that.
REED: I don't see this level of aggression or transgression that the Democrats think that impeachment is worthy of.
CUOMO: Understood. But you're open?
REED: Well, of course, anytime you have evidence that's new or a different presentation of the facts, of course, you're always open to that.
CUOMO: All right, Congressman Tom Reed, I appreciate you come - coming on to make the case. You're always welcome to do that, Sir.
REED: Chris, it's always good to be with you. I appreciate it.
[21:45:00] CUOMO: All right. Does today's Syria vote - why - why am I asking these questions about impeachment? What does that have to do with this? Here's my argument that's coming up.
Why did these 60 men and women stay with the President on something that is so wrong? I gave Tom Reed his say about authorization for use of military force. I argue that's not what today was about.
I'm going to make the argument to you about what today says about what's coming in our future, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CLOSING ARGUMENT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: All right, my hope is that you're seeing what's happening.
By all accounts, the Kurds are in a desperate struggle after this President gave Turkey a green light to start an operation that anyone with a modicum of intelligence had to know would lead to exactly what you're seeing, OK?
Blood is flowing. And yet, here is the reckoning of this President.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: So, I view the situation on the Turkish border with Syria to be, for the United States, strategically brilliant.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:50:00] CUOMO: Our view? Whom does that include?
Because I argue to you that how our leaders deal with this obvious bad act by our President is a window into our future. We start with the fact that some of the President's strongest supporters in the Senate disagree.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): He will have American blood on his hands, if he abandons Kurds, because ISIS will come back. And if any American is killed anywhere because of resurgent ISIS, it will fall on Trump Administration.
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): But I think it was a mistake.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Senator?
MCCONNELL: And I hope it's not too late to stop this aggression.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: All right, now you're not used to hearing that, right? That tells you about how clearly they see this. Takes us to the House, and a window into our potential future, and by that, I mean impeachment. Why?
Because this situation in Syria is such clear proof of bad judgment, bad policy, and bad leadership that it serves as a litmus test for whether the right is about principle or patronage.
354 Representatives voted to approve a resolution opposing the withdrawal from Syria. That included 129 Republicans. That's a show of force, and it proves that Left and Right can still be reasonable.
But not all could own what should be obvious. 60 Members stood with this President, and I argue that evidences a problem. If you're against having troops in Syria, fine. But that can't justify abandoning allies who depend on us for their survival, can it?
Take Louisiana Congressman Ralph Abraham. He told the Kurdish TV station this, a year and a half ago.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. RALPH ABRAHAM (R-LA): The Kurds that are fighting alongside our American troops, they all shed blood with us, and we need to respect that. We need to honor that, and we know who our friends are now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: He's right. But this President did not honor that. And yet, Abraham showed him the respect of obedience anyway, as did Representative John Carter from Texas, who said this the summer before the election.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JOHN CARTER (R-TX): Trump will - will do the right thing by those who stand up for America. And the Kurds have stood up for the United States of America.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Well, Trump won. He was right about that. But then, this President did decidedly the wrong thing to the Kurds by his own reckoning. Yet, Representative Carter supports him, despite the President spitting in the Kurds' face.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I'm not going to get involved in a war between Turkey and Syria, especially when, if you look at the Kurds - and again, I say this with great respect, they're no angels.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: With great respect, this was a bone-headed decision.
And who is an angel among us? Not me and certainly not our President. But one would think a measure of respect would be found for the 11,000 Kurdish fighters killed, fighting for our interests against ISIS.
But our President is not alone in exercising bad judgment, even surrendering American ideals in this instance. I argue some, or many, or maybe close to all of these 60 Republicans, who stood with him, they're no angels either.
So, will they similarly ignore their oath, and reality, out of fealty to this President, if asked to judge his dealings with his Ukrainian counterpart?
More importantly, will the significant number of the Right in the Senate make the same play to this President?
Will they ignore an obvious case of bad judgment and abuse of office, holding up money to Ukraine, back-door dealings to mislead diplomats, the movement of information to a secret server, all of which was identified by and stupefied a number of his own people. The question is whether these 60 and, more importantly, GOP Senators of the same disposition, will they stay true to their oath or to Trump? Now, if it's a matter of conviction, fine. All we can ask is integrity.
But as with the Syria vote, if you turn a blind eye to the facts, showing the same willful blindness it takes, to think that turning tail on allies is OK, then this President may have nothing to fear when it comes to removal. But we have a lot to be worried about, in terms of the integrity of our leadership. That's my argument.
Now, here's my question, going forward. We're going to show you what's happening to a top Republican who has not chosen fealty. Why did these 60 do what they did? I'll show you. A campaign is afoot.
[21:55:00] BOLO! Be On the Look-Out for an impeachment-era attack, 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: Be On the Look-Out. It's BOLO time. Today's House vote on Syria shows the conviction of some, and the craven disposition of others. But fear, leading to fealty, makes sense with this President.
Take Senator Mitt Romney. He blasted the President's attempts to get Ukraine and China to investigate the Bidens. He says they were brazen, those attempts, and appalling.
Now, Club for Growth, the conservative pro-business lobbying group is running this ad in Utah.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Posing as a Republican, he tried to infiltrate Trump's Administration as Secretary of State.
SEN. MITT ROMNEY (R-UT): President-elect Trump is the very man who can lead us to that better future.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Now, his cover's blown, exposed by news reports as a Democrat Secret Asset.
(END VIDEO CLIP) CUOMO: This to a man who was once the Republican Party's Presidential nominee! BOLO! Other Republicans may fear a similar warning shot, and stay silent on issues they might actually oppose. Be On the Look-Out. So will we.
Thank you for watching. CNN TONIGHT with D. Lemon, the man, starts right now.
