Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Crisis in Syria; Trump Lashes Out at Republicans Not Defending Him. Aired 4-4:30p ET

Aired October 21, 2019 - 16:00   ET

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

[16:00:01]

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: THE LEAD starts right now.

Walk-backs, blowback, fighting back. President Trump goes off. With more witnesses expected in the impeachment investigation this week, he tells Republicans to get tough to protect him.

Desperate protesters throwing rotten vegetables at departing U.S. troops, pleading for them to stay to save their children's lives, as President Trump insists he knows more about the situation in Syria than his critics.

Plus, running like there may be not a tomorrow. A 2020 underdog says she is riding a wave of momentum and new cash, as Senator Elizabeth Warren finding herself continuing to be a target for fellow Democrats.

Welcome to this special edition of THE LEAD: "White House in Crisis."

We begin with the politics lead today.

With cracks in the normally united GOP front starting to emerge, President Trump this afternoon called on Republicans to get tougher against the fast-moving impeachment inquiry that poses a existential threat to his presidency.

The president said his party needs to stick together better, like Democrats, whom he called vicious.

Republicans, ranging from Senator Mitt Romney of Utah to Congressman Francis Rooney of Florida, have publicly expressed shock and dismay at the president's actions and an open mind towards what might come next.

Rooney telling me that he is skeptical of Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney's attempt to walk back his clear confession of a quid pro quo.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. FRANCIS ROONEY (R-FL): I don't see how you walk back something that's clear. I would say, game, set, match on that.

TAPPER: And is that impeachable? I mean...

ROONEY: I don't know. That's the question. (END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: As CNN Boris Sanchez reports, President Trump in his newly weakened state is now making moves to attempt to placate Republicans.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Facing questions about the future of Mick Mulvaney during a Cabinet meeting today, President Trump declined to talk about his embattled acting chief of staff, instead launching attacks on the House impeachment inquiry and making a false claim about House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: All they have is a whistle-blower who has disappeared. Where is he? He's gone. Or there was actually an informant? Maybe the informant was Schiff. It could be shifty Schiff. In my opinion, it is possibly Schiff.

SANCHEZ: Trump also lamenting that Democrats are more united than Republicans.

TRUMP: I think they're lousy politicians. But two things they have, they're vicious and they stick together. They don't have Mitt Romney in their midst. They don't have people like that. They stick together. You never see them break off.

SANCHEZ: Trump trying to stick with his party by backing down from a controversial decision which resulted in bipartisan backlash, that next year's G7 summit of world leaders would take place at Trump's property in Doral, Florida.

TRUMP: It would have been great. But the Democrats went crazy, even though I would have done it free, save the country a lot of money. Then they say, oh, but you will get promotion. Who cares? You don't think I get enough promotion. I get enough promotion than any human being that has ever lived, I think I get.

SANCHEZ: Behind closed doors, growing doubts about whether Trump will break off with his third chief of staff in three years.

While aides say Mick Mulvaney got a show of support, a round of applause during a senior staff meeting today, sources say that Trump believes his acting chief of staff is mishandling the White House's impeachment strategy.

Trump increasingly agitated after spending the weekend indoors watching negative news coverage of last week's disastrous briefing, in which Mulvaney acknowledged the president sought a quid pro quo with Ukraine, military aid for political favors.

One source close to Mulvaney says that, after 10 months on the job, the former congressman is searching for an exit, though he publicly denies it.

MICK MULVANEY, ACTING WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: Listen, I'm very happy working there. Did I have the perfect press conference? No. But, again, the facts are on our side.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: Now, Jake on the subject of Doral, President Trump said that he wish he could have held it there, that it would have been the best G7 ever.

The president also lamenting what he called the phony Emoluments Clause, incorrectly suggesting that he's the only president ever to donate his salary, and possibly also George Washington -- Jake.

TAPPER: Wait, the president said something that wasn't true?

(LAUGHTER)

TAPPER: Boris Sanchez, thanks so much. Appreciate it.

SANCHEZ: Thank you.

TAPPER: Let's talk about this with our experts here.

And, first of all, Toluse, President Trump said that if the G7 had been held at his resort in Doral, Florida, it would have been free. What on earth is he talking about? That was -- no one ever said anything about he would pick up the expenses for it. That's made up.

TOLUSE OLORUNNIPA, "THE WASHINGTON POST": Yes, the chief of staff -- acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, had a long press conference last week where he said that it would be done at cost.

He said nothing about it being free. It was not part of the talking points from the White House as they were trying to defend this over the 48 hours that it was a thing.

[16:05:01]

And then after it became not a thing, and the president pulled it back, he said, oh, I would have done it for free.

(LAUGHTER)

OLORUNNIPA: So, there is some sort of revisionist history here, where the president is trying to make it look better than it would otherwise.

And the Republicans were the ones that really caused this to be pulled back. It wasn't Democrats. It wasn't the media, as the president said.

But, over the weekend, he talked to a lot of Republicans who said, this is not a good idea, not only the constitutional problems with the Emoluments Clause, but also politically it doesn't look good to have the president basically awarding himself a federal contract.

It's very easy for Democrats or anyone to put this to the public and say, this does not look good. The president is awarding his own hotel, this government contract, and having foreign leaders pay to stay at his hotel. It's a very easy argument to make for Democrats. And that's why Republicans were like, let's go a different route.

TAPPER: Yes, this stinks. Exactly.

And, Carrie, the president went on a bit of a rant about Doral. And he mentioned the Constitution, a specific clause, a very, very real clause. I want you to take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I don't run my business. I actually put all the stuff in trusts. They run my -- and I didn't have to do that, but under no obligation to do it.

I don't think you people, with this phony Emoluments Clause -- and, by the way, I would say that it's cost be anywhere from $2 billion to $5 billion to be president.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: We have absolutely no idea where he gets that number from. And, of course, we have no idea what his tax returns look like, because for the first time since the '70s, he hasn't released them.

But, that said, I want to focus on this phrase, this phony Emoluments Clause.

It's not a phony clause. But why don't -- and the president sometimes watches cable news, I believe. Why don't you try to explain what the Emoluments Clause is?

CARRIE CORDERO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Sure.

So this is the Constitution.

(LAUGHTER)

CORDERO: And in the Constitution, there are two different references to emoluments. Emoluments means fee or compensation.

And there's one part of the Constitution that talks about domestic emoluments, which means that he can't accept an emolument or a fee from the United States government or from the states. And then there's a second part in the Emoluments Clause which talks about foreign emoluments.

And that means that, as president, he can't receive a fee or emolument from a king or a foreign government or a foreign state. And they're both in the Constitution. It's not phony. It's right here.

TAPPER: And just not to put too fine a point on it, but the fact of the matter is, he's violating these every day, because people are staying in his hotels.

One of the unspoken parts of that rough transcript with the president of Ukraine is when the president of Ukraine says, hey, I stayed at one of your hotels.

CORDERO: That's right.

TAPPER: I mean, that was the least of the crimes in that thing. But, I mean, this is something that the president violates every time.

Poor Jimmy Carter had to sell his peanut farm.

AMANDA CARPENTER, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, I mean, first of all, who doesn't love a girl who carries a pocket Constitution? Props to Carrie right here.

(CROSSTALK)

CARPENTER: But what's amazing about this is that it shows Republicans can have influence over the president when they choose to exercise that power.

He still has an emoluments problem that needs to be dealt with. But this reminds me somewhat of the "Access Hollywood" tape, when Donald Trump's nomination was really in trouble, and Republicans were ready to possibly abandon him.

And they essentially forced him to go to the camera and issue that weird apology. Donald Trump gets backed into a corner sometimes. And so I hope Republicans who realize that the president presents political problems for them understand that, if they speak out in truth when they're right on constitutional issues, they can force him to take a better course.

And, Jen, I want to ask you about Mick Mulvaney, because when you worked for Obama, you saw lots of different kinds of chiefs of staff, whether Bill Daley, or Peter Rouse, or Rahm Emanuel, and on and on and on.

A senior White House official tells CNN that Mulvaney got a round of applause by colleagues at the White House, senior staff meeting this morning.

I asked Jeremy Diamond, what the hell were they applauding? And he said it was just a show of support because he's been through a tough time.

But I don't know. I mean, he said it wasn't the perfect press conference. It was more than just not the perfect press conference. He basically admitted that the White House was guilty of what they have been accused of doing.

JEN PSAKI, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: True.

And, now, the reality is, we didn't need Mick Mulvaney's press conference to tell us that, because we have the transcript, or the notes from the transcript of the call. We have the whistle-blower. We have the investigations that are under way on Capitol Hill.

Mick Mulvaney, I think, clearly went out there with the knowledge that Donald Trump wasn't particularly thrilled with him. He has an audience of Donald Trump. My bet is other people in that room have experienced that heat as well, and they were trying to give him a little love.

But the fact is, he went out there and not just -- did he not just confirm it. He also pushed forward two inaccurate pieces of information. One is this conspiracy theory around CrowdStrike that has been so debunked across every news organization and by his former Department of Homeland Security head, Tom Bossert.

But the other one was this reference he made in the press conference -- now I'm forgetting what it is. I'm totally having a...

[16:10:01]

TAPPER: Let me come back to you.

But, Carrie, I want to just ask you very one quick question, which is, the quid pro quo, is that a crime? Is it against the law for a president of the United States to say, I'm only going to give you this military aid if you do this political favor for me, him or his advisers?

Because that's clearly what went on here.

CORDERO: So, if we're talking about criminal statutory law, there's an argument that there are potentially could be violations of bribery statute, so, in other words, offering an official act in exchange for something of value.

So there is a theory that that could apply. And then there's the separate constitutional issue, which is the potential abuse of his office, whether or not he is abusing his constitutional authority to conduct foreign affairs by using an instrument of U.S. national defense and foreign affairs to obtain political information that would be helpful to him personally in his political...

(CROSSTALK)

TAPPER: So, one is a matter of criminality. One is a matter of impeachment for the Congress.

CORDERO: One is criminal statutory law, and one is constitutional.

TAPPER: All right, everyone, stick around.

New reporting about the status of the impeachment inquiry and why it may take longer than Democrats initially expected.

Plus, he's the one who sent the text message calling what was happening with Ukraine military and aid -- quote -- "crazy." We're now learning more about that key witness as he prepares to testify tomorrow.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:15:58]

TAPPER: We have brand-new reporting in our politics lead today. It does not appear as if Democrats will be able to wrap up the impeachment inquiry as quickly as Democrats had planned to do so.

CNN's Manu Raju is on Capitol Hill right now with the breaking news.

And, Manu, what are sources telling you about the timing of this impeachment inquiry? They wanted to get it wrapped up quickly.

MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, there was a hope this could be done by Thanksgiving, but more and more Democrats are saying it looks like it could go past Thanksgiving, potentially up until Christmas. It really depends on what else they glean from the closed-door depositions.

What I'm hearing from a number of Democrats is that because of these depositions, more leads have emerged to force them to chase down more information, they had to schedule more witness interviews, seek more records and some witness interviews have been rescheduled.

Just this week, there were seven witnesses who are expected to come in. Now, there are only two, in part because of memorial services for late Congressman Elijah Cummings but for other reasons as well.

And, Jake, this is only the first part of the impeachment investigation. Afterwards, they're going to have public hearings. Afterwards, they're going to write a report making recommendations. And then at that point, the House Judiciary Committee would have to vote and any articles of impeachment and the full house would vote.

So, you could see this taking a while and getting it done in the next month now seems increasingly unlikely, Jake.

TAPPER: All right. Manu Raju on Capitol Hill.

And we have some breaking news and more new reporting for you about a key witness in the impeachment inquiry. Bill Taylor is the name that you're going to hear a lot tomorrow. He was the diplomat who sent that text message writing, I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign. That's the quid pro quo.

Sources tell CNN that Taylor, who is the acting ambassador to Ukraine right now, was initially hesitant to take the role.

CNN's Kylie Atwood has the breaking news.

And, Kylie, Taylor clearly had reservations heading into his new position.

KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yes, he was heading into the position right after Ambassador Yovanovitch had been ousted. At the time, we didn't really why she left that role. Now, we know because she told lawmakers that it was because President Trump wanted her out. He pressured the State Department to let go of her.

So, when they came to Ambassador Taylor at the time, who had already resigned -- he had already, sorry, taken off time from the State Department, he had already been the ambassador, he was weary to take over the role. So he came in, he met with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and some other senior officials at the State Department and asked them about U.S. policy toward Ukraine. He didn't want to talk about the politics, he wanted to know what the policy was. And he was convinced that there was a strong policy in the meeting.

But even at the end, he still didn't agree to take the job. He was texting with Kurt Volker after that meeting, he was a special representative to Ukraine at the time, essentially saying, why don't you take the job if it is so great?

TAPPER: Right.

ATWOOD: And Volker said to him, you know, listen, I've got my hands full. I'm dealing with Ukraine, I'm dealing with NATO, I'm dealing with Washington. You need to take this job. You are the experienced professional we need there.

So he did end up taking the job. That was in early June. And then fast forward a few months and we see these text messages. There was reason for him to believe that there was a quid pro quo, that the Trump administration was with holding the security assistance for Ukraine for political reasons.

Now, he was told by the U.S. ambassador to the E.U. that he was wrong. That that was not the intention of President Trump. But the key here is that there is a reason that he thought that and that's what members of Congress are going to try to get to the bottom of when he has his testimony tomorrow.

TAPPER: All right. Kylie Atwood, thank you so much.

Coming up, the strategy President Trump keeps testing to push back against the impeachment inquiry. That's next.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:24:25]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The whistleblower gave a false account. I happen to think there probably wasn't an informant. You know, the informant went to the whistleblower. The whistleblower had second and third-hand information.

You remember that. That was a big problem. But the information was wrong.

So, was there actually an informant? Maybe the informant was Schiff. It could be Shifty Schiff. In my opinion, it's possibly Schiff.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: President Trump this afternoon floating a lot of nonsense and fact-free statements in a cabinet meeting. Let's discuss.

Carrie, I mean, seriously, just a 30-second bite and you could spend hours fact-checking it. But let's just focus on the idea that the whistleblower has been discredited.

[16:25:04]

The whistleblower's main allegation, one, there was a quid pro quo for foreign aid to Ukraine in exchange for political investigations that would help the president. The White House chief of staff, the rough transcript and testimony have suggested that's true. The whistleblower alleged that the rough and transcript was moved to a top secret secure computer system. The White House has admitted that that's true.

The whistleblower alleged that Rudy Giuliani was running off the books foreign policy operation. Other witnesses have testified that that's true. Everything we learned has backed up the central allegations by the whistleblower.

CORDERO: It is. There's -- I haven't heard any credible allegation that the whistleblower's information is wrong. And, in fact, the inspector general of the intelligence community did an assessment, determined that the whistleblower was credible and that's why the inspector general wanted to provide the report and the whistleblower's information to Congress. And then that is when the White House put the stop on it.

So, there's no reason to suspect that the whistleblower is not credible. As you mentioned, all of this different information released by the White House itself has demonstrated the whistleblower's credibility and Congress I would say has been really effective in the closed behind-door testimonies of the current and former government officials by creating a record that is not in front of the cameras, not a spectacle but a serious gathering of evidence to back up the claims.

TAPPER: And, Toluse, also, the whistleblower, it's not true the whistleblower has no firsthand information. The whistleblower, according to the inspector general of the intelligence community, a Trump appointee we should note, said that he had -- he or she has firsthand some information and also got information from other people with firsthand information.

OLORUNNIPA: Yes. When you hear President Trump make the argument that the whistleblower is discredited or that he got the call wrong, you only hear the president making that. You don't hear Republican allies of the president echoing that because it's not true. And instead, they're going for process argument, saying that the Democrats aren't giving them enough information or due process rights and haven't held a vote. You only hear the president sort of engaging in some of these

conspiracy theories similar to the idea about the server and the president is somewhat isolated on this and part of the reason the Republicans have been so concerned that there's no war room, there's messaging apparatus within the White House to tell them exactly what they should be saying because every day, you hear a different message from the president and in a lot of messages from the president aren't things that Republicans can back up. They can't say that the whistleblower got it wrong because if you look at the transcript and put it next to the whistleblower report, all of those points are corroborated by the actual notes of the call that were put out by the White House.

So, President Trump is sort of operating in an alternate reality where he's saying the whistleblower got everything wrong.

TAPPER: Yes.

OLORUNNIPA: -And maybe Adam Schiff gave him the information.

TAPPER: Right.

OLORUNNIPA: And there is no informant or sources that the whistleblower had, and he's really isolated on that and made it hard for Republicans to defend him because there are no talking points from the White House.

TAPPER: And, Amanda, let's talk about the Schiff part. Obviously, there is no evidence that Schiff provided information for the whistleblower, and, obviously, the inspector general and the intelligence community has made that clear.

But let's talk about Schiff for a second, because more than 170 Republicans in the House are pushing a censure movement against Schiff because he had said something that wasn't true about his -- his office had been contacted by the whistleblower. This is what President Trump seems to thrive on, is finding a foil.

CARPENTER: Yes, absolutely. I mean, listen, Adam Schiff has made mistakes. If you look at the censure resolution, they're nailing him for talking about a parody conversation that made the president look bad in testimony during a hearing. That was not a good look.

And then secondly, for misleading the public about communications with the whistleblower. OK. So if that rises to the level of censure in the House of Representatives, you better call up a lot more votes.

TAPPER: Yes. Well, I mean, all of a sudden, they're offended by things that are lies.

Jen Psaki, let me ask you, do Republicans have a case to make about the fact that so much is being behind closed doors and I understand why they're doing it, they say, look, during Whitewater or during Nixon impeachment, Watergate, they had separate bodies that did this behind closed doors and presented it. They don't have that in this case. But Republicans are able to make the process arguments and it is not

in front of the public. At some point, aren't Democrats going to have to bring this in front of the public?

PSAKI: I think so. And I think they will and I think the circumstances are pretty important. One is they are hearing from career foreign service officers who are not accused of wrongdoing for the most part and they're sharing information about what happened. Some of that information should be behind closed doors.

There are Democrats and Republicans who are in these hearings and who are asking questions and having the discussion. But I do think a lot of this information will need to be brought to the public because the public will need to hear it and understand the entire case before this goes to the floor.

TAPPER: All right. Stick around. We've got more to talk about.

American troops being pelted with rotten food as they leave Northern Syria. But for a handful of troops who are staying there, there are new questions about their mission. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:30:00]