Return to Transcripts main page
Cuomo Prime Time
House Democrats Announce Impeachment Articles Against Trump: Abuse Of Power & Obstruction Of Congress; Trump Dismisses Articles As "Impeachment-Lite"; Trump Calls FBI Investigators "Scum" At Rally. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired December 10, 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]
BRIAN STELTER, CNN ANCHOR, RELIABLE SOURCES, CNN CHIEF MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: --main thing keeping him around 40 percent in the polls, you'd wonder if he'd be at 20 percent or a 30 percent in the polls were it not for those daily cheerleading sessions on Fox.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: Brian Stelter, appreciate it.
STELTER: Thanks.
COOPER: All right, thanks very much.
News continues right now. Want to hand it over to Chris for CUOMO PRIME TIME. Chris?
CHRIS CUOMO, CNN HOST, CUOMO PRIME TIME: All right, thank you, Anderson. I am Chris Cuomo and welcome to PRIME TIME.
The articles of impeachment are out and will be debated by the Judiciary Committee starting tomorrow.
We're going to ask a key player about the two charges, got abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. Is this the best case? Why no Mueller report included? No mention of trying to bribe Ukraine? Is this safe or too safe?
And we're going to get reaction from a Trump defender about the impending impeachment. Why won't they just admit the obvious?
And, on this day, of all days, guess who Trump rolled out the red carpet for? Russia. He lets Putin's puppet just lie to our faces about not interfering. What is worse? The perception or the reality? That's the question.
What do you say? Let's get after the answer.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP) CUOMO: Two counts, abuse of power, obstruction of Congress. Now, question is did President Trump get off easy or is this the easier way to get all the needed Democrats on board?
The President decided to fight the fact that the charges aren't worse.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: You saw their so- called articles of impeachment today? People are saying they're not even a crime. What happened? All of these horrible things, you remember, bribery, and this, and that, where are they? They send these two things. They're not even a crime. This is the lightest, weakest impeachment.
This is impeachment-lite.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: He may be right, by the way. I think he got a really good deal on the way these articles of impeachment have been expressed thus far.
Now, by next week, as light as it may be, Donald J. Trump may have a permanent place in history as one of only three Presidents to ever have impeachment attached to their name forever.
One of the names floating around is a possible House Manager.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: ONE ON ONE.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Manager is the term for one of the Representatives who may argue the case for impeachment at the expected trial in the Senate, is Judiciary Member, Hakeem Jeffries, the Chairman of the House Democratic Caucus. He joins us now on this monumental night.
Good to have you on PRIME TIME. Thanks for being with us.
REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY): Great to be with you, Chris.
CUOMO: So, what's the news, Congressman? Are you going to be one of the Managers?
JEFFRIES: No, we're focused right now on getting through the markup, which will start tomorrow. We will debate these two articles of impeachment.
This is a serious or solemn or sober moment for us. We didn't come to Congress to impeach this President or any President. We came to get things done. We continue to do that.
But we do have to confront the reality that we have a President who has abused his power, and betrayed his oath of office, and essentially tried to corrupt American elections, and that's highly problematic.
CUOMO: I'll ask you about the charges. Pop that thing back in, so you can hear me ask this question again, Congressman.
JEFFRIES: I got you.
CUOMO: "No, you're not going to deal with whether or not you're a Manager right now," or "No, you will not be a Manager?"
JEFFRIES: Well that's premature for any of us to think through that. We continue to work through the issues that will be before us, in terms of the Judiciary Committee, and then we'll see what happens from there.
But I'm focused, one, on just getting things done, on behalf of the American people.
We made the announcement about the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement today. That was incredibly important for the American worker. It was a victory for everyday Americans. We promised that we would try to get to yes, and we have gotten to yes.
So, there's a lot of things that are going on before we even deal with a possible trial in the Senate.
CUOMO: Yes, look, and it's also politically helpful also, to show the American people that you're doing something that arguably is a positive move by this President. That - that reads well in the architecture of - of reality, as the country watches right now.
These charges, you heard the President right now. "Where is the bribery? Where is the Mueller stuff?"
I got to tell you, he's right. Why are the articles of impeachment, as currently explained, so light on all of the things that you guys have been arguing that he did wrong?
JEFFRIES: Well the President pressured a foreign government to target an American citizen for political gain, and at the same time, withheld, without justification, $391 million in military aid from a vulnerable Ukraine, and solicited foreign interference in the 2020 election. That is as serious as it gets.
The Framers of the Constitution were concerned with three primary things. A, abuse of power, B, betrayal of the Constitution, and the American people, in part by soliciting foreign interference, and three, corrupting our free and fair elections.
[21:05:00]
And so, essentially, what we've seen is that the President's behavior has implicated all three concerns that alarm the Framers of the Constitution. He's undermined American national security.
CUOMO: Right.
JEFFRIES: And he's violated the principle that in America no one is above the law.
CUOMO: Do you--
JEFFRIES: That's why we're proceeding in the way that we're proceeding.
CUOMO: Do you think he tried to bribe Ukraine's President?
JEFFRIES: Well I think that he solicited foreign interference and a thing of value--
CUOMO: But isn't that a bribe?
JEFFRIES: Well, listen, I'm--
CUOMO: I mean you went to NYU. I went to Fordham. But, you know, we learned, in law school, that if you solicit a thing of value, which seems to be exactly the case here, it's a bribe. Some of you had been saying it. Now it's absent, why?
JEFFRIES: Well here's what the President did. He abused his power. That is clear. We've got the evidence that is overwhelming in that regard, including the rough transcript of July 25th call where the President, through his own words, "Do us a favor though."
CUOMO: Yes.
JEFFRIES: And so, we're going to lead with the evidence, we're going to follow the facts, we're going to present the truth to the American people, we're going to be guided by - guided by the Constitution, and that's where we're at right now.
CUOMO: Right. That signal--
JEFFRIES: In a unified fashion.
CUOMO: Just so, Hakeem, just so people know, that signal is signaling votes in Congress. There's no alarm. The Congressman is fine.
Obstruction of Congress, not obstruction of justice, meaning you're not including any of the things that Mueller apparently left to your reckoning.
I've been told that there will be more oversight and that what Mueller laid - laid out there will get attention from Congress, but not in an article of impeachment. Why not?
JEFFRIES: Well there was a set of troubling information that I think was contained in the Mueller report that is problematic.
As Jerry Nadler indicated, earlier today, it is part of a pattern of obstructive behavior, and part of a pattern of welcoming foreign interference into an American election. And so, it will be incorporated in the debate, in the discussion, I think, that you'll see beginning tomorrow, as we proceed with the articles of impeachment. But in terms of the formal charges, the decision was made to keep the focus on the Trump-Ukraine scandal, because that is an active crime scene. That's a matter of national urgency.
And if we don't address it, if we don't hold the President accountable, he's already made clear that he's willing to try and do it again.
CUOMO: Right. Yes, his - doing this right after the Mueller call, his saying he would ask China, he's definitely pushing your buttons, and he is creating the perception that he thinks he's done nothing wrong.
The reason I was pushing you on the Manager issue isn't because I'm hunting for a headline. It's, you know, so you start debating this tomorrow. You're going to have a party line vote, at best.
You'll have to see how many of your own Members you lose on these two counts. My argument would be that's why you kept them narrow is to keep the biggest consensus on your side.
But then you're going to go to the Senate, Hakeem Jeffries, and everything switches. So, your Managers become really important because they're going to run the rules.
And they're going to have a lot of information about Beau Biden, Burisma, Ukraine, not Russia, maybe even Rudy Giuliani comes in, I think he's got some issues if he gets up there because he's going to have to explain his relationship to the President.
But your Managers will matter. How do you deal with all of that information coming in that you kept out on this level?
JEFFRIES: Well we think that the President and his defenders are really bluffing because Lindsey Graham, I think, a few months ago said, "We're going to have a hearing and we're going to bring Rudolph Giuliani." What happened to that?
Rudolph Giuliani is nowhere to be seen because he has no exculpatory information. He has nothing that can demonstrate innocence, as it relates to the President. He'll just make the situation worse.
CUOMO: But if they can prove--
JEFFRIES: The same holds--
CUOMO: No, here's their play, I think. Now, if they're bluffing, that's - that's an interesting take. I haven't heard that before.
But if they're running the rules, and they bring in Giuliani to say, Hunter Biden - I said Beau before. May he rest in peace. Obviously, it's not Beau. He represented, I think, the best of leadership in my generation, but he's gone.
"Hunter Biden was dirty. His father was dirty. They're dirty, dirty, dirty. Ukraine, it was them, not Russia, Russia, Russia," if they put that on, how do you deal with it? JEFFRIES: Well I think it's pretty easy to deal with. You've got every single national security professional from the Trump Administration, who has essentially made clear that it was Russia, who interfered in our elections, and Ukraine did not.
And this entire thing is just a Right-wing conspiracy, cooked up to try to excuse behavior as it relates to Donald Trump's wrongdoing that is hiding in plain sight before the American people.
And it doesn't even appear that there are enough Senators on the Republican side who are willing to go along with a charade of a trial defense, in terms of calling somebody like Hunter Biden.
[21:10:00]
CUOMO: That is an interesting take. They need a simple majority to pass their procedures, what the rules are, for how this Senate trial will go, assuming the President gets impeached by the House.
That'll be really interesting to see if you're right about that, Congressman. We'll be keeping tabs on it, obviously, and that's why the Managers will matter so much.
Hakeem Jeffries, thank you, on an historic night, for being with us and speaking to the audience.
JEFFRIES: Thank you, Chris.
CUOMO: All right, be well.
The GOP has become the Party of Trump. Why would I say that? Look at the evidence. Look at this strategy they've employed here. We've never seen them do anything like it. "Admit nothing, deny everything, blame everyone, who says otherwise, except Russia." I want to bring on a Trump defender from Congress, and ask if he has
any regrets about not trying to make a deal to save the President from this fate. And why is this President nicer to Russia than he is to many in our own country? 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 Trump asked you can't - Ukraine's President to announce an investigation into the Bidens, and to help show that Russia was not to blame for interference in 2016, that Ukraine was.
The GOP is now forced to say "All that? It's OK. And you want to ignore Congressional subpoenas? That's OK too." That's a tough spot.
Republican Markwayne Mullin is in that spot, and that's one of the reasons that I welcome him on this show, to make the case.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: ONE ON ONE.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Congressman, as always, thank you for being with us.
REP. MARKWAYNE MULLIN (R-OK): Thanks for having me on, Chris.
CUOMO: So, articles of impeachment are as expected, I would argue, more mild than I expected. Do you agree?
MULLIN: Well--
CUOMO: And what does it mean to you?
MULLIN: Well absolutely they're more mild because there's nothing impeachable.
I still ask the question of what was the impeachable offense. They started with quid pro quo, then they moved to bribery, and when the articles of impeachment came out, they say it's high crimes and misdemeanors.
And - and here's the thing about this, Chris. From day one, they have been in search of a crime. They've been trying to explain to the American people why they're impeaching a duly-elected President, President Donald J. Trump.
You know, underneath - underneath the past impeachments, it was very clear. Clinton committed perjury. Andrew Johnson, he removed a Secretary of War illegally. And Nixon broke into the DNC. Those are impeachable offenses.
I ask the question--
CUOMO: That's not what impeachment was about.
MULLIN: --what's impeachable?
CUOMO: You know.
MULLIN: Well--
CUOMO: And I have to tell you. The - and you weren't there, Markwayne. Anybody can tell just by looking at the color of your hair. You are not responsible for what the Republicans did during Clinton.
MULLIN: True.
CUOMO: But the idea that you start off with an investigation into screwy real estate deals, and you wind up with an extramarital affair, and that's what you impeach on? Can you imagine what would happen--
MULLIN: But he committed a crime.
CUOMO: --if they caught this President--
MULLIN: The - the - Clinton committed a crime.
CUOMO: Not all crimes are impeachable. And not all impeachable things--
MULLIN: You know, well--
CUOMO: --must be a crime.
MULLIN: Chris?
CUOMO: That's what the Founders said and meant.
MULLIN: Yes. But when it says treason, bribery--
CUOMO: They are--
MULLIN: --high crime or misdemeanor--
CUOMO: --examples.
MULLIN: --committing perjury is a crime.
CUOMO: They are examples of corruption.
MULLIN: President Trump hasn't committed a crime.
CUOMO: I disagree. Let me tell you something. Clinton's in the past. And if we wanted to punish--
MULLIN: Sure.
CUOMO: --that kind of behavior this way, it was a political decision. But I'll tell you what. Your brothers and sister on that side of the Party were arguing very differently, back then, about what was a crime and what was needed to impeach and what wasn't.
Your champions, Lindsey Graham, even Bill Barr, said "Man, why are they giving Starr such a hard time for going far afield of where he started?" That's his role.
MULLIN: Well, Chris, you still--
CUOMO: Now, they say the opposite.
MULLIN: Chris, you still - I still asked you a question. What has the President done that's impeachable? CUOMO: This is what he's done.
MULLIN: OK.
CUOMO: According to the Democrats and the facts as we understand them.
He used his power to put his own political advantage first. He said to them you will not get the Congressionally-appointed aid, you will not get access to this Office, like I gave Russia today, and I've given them before, even though they interfered in our election, and lied to us.
MULLIN: None of that was - none of that was said.
CUOMO: It was said.
MULLIN: Who - who testified that that was said?
CUOMO: "Do us a favor, the Ukraine stuff and the Bidens."
MULLIN: He said "Look into it. It's important to the"--
CUOMO: That's what he mentioned in the call.
MULLIN: --"it's important to the people." That's what he said. That is not - that - and it is important to us. It was corruption. Ukraine is known for corruption.
CUOMO: I'm putting it up for the people right now.
MULLIN: That doesn't mean that's impeachable.
CUOMO: Well, first of all, it's impeachable if what it is, is an abuse of his power to--
MULLIN: He didn't ask for anything.
CUOMO: --put things that are good for him - of course, he did.
MULLIN: He said "Do me a favor."
CUOMO: He said "Do me a favor."
MULLIN: That's all he said.
CUOMO: "Look into the Bidens. Look into what happened with Ukraine." He then had his--
MULLIN: Chris, that's conversation.
CUOMO: Hey, Congressman?
MULLIN: If I were to ask you--
CUOMO: If you want an answer, let me offer it. MULLIN: --if I were to ask you to do something, if I were to ask you to do something, I would say, "Hey, Chris, you do me a favor." I'm not asking for anything in return. It's just conversation piece.
CUOMO: Look, your choice of language isn't only irrelevant, it's also immaterial, and here's why.
MULLIN: OK.
CUOMO: If you were going to ask me in an official capacity, you wouldn't ask me for a favor.
A favor, intrinsically, inherently, suggests you're doing something for me because if it's "Clean up your house," that's not a favor. That's what you're supposed to do to have my trust as an ally. But "Do me a favor," Congressman, is exactly what it sounds like--
MULLIN: Well here's the thing is that--
CUOMO: --something for me.
MULLIN: --you are trying to interpret - interpret a conversation, between President Trump and the President of Ukraine, who both attest, or both have came out publicly and said that there was no pressure, that there was no quid pro quo, there was no bribery. And that is why they have moved from quid pro quo to bribery.
CUOMO: Of course, the President said it.
MULLIN: Then now to misdemeanor or high crime.
CUOMO: Of course, the President said it. But I am sorry to say. I'll tell you what. I pray about this all the time, maybe more than anything else other than my own sins. I am sorry to say--
[21:20:00]
MULLIN: You and I both.
CUOMO: --that I don't believe this President just because he says it. And Zelensky--
MULLIN: Well--
CUOMO: --suffers from a huge inequity of power.
And he just said the other day, OK, "Hey, you know, if - if you're my - if you are our strategic partner, then you can't go blocking anything for us. I think that's just about fairness." He said that too because he didn't like it then.
MULLIN: That - that doesn't mean it's impeachable.
CUOMO: His people didn't like it. And they were worried about it. And so many people involved were worried about it because it was an abuse of power, it was a solicitation of a thing of value, also known as a bribe, and he did it to help himself, not the American agenda.
MULLIN: The entire articles of impeachment, all eight pages of them, is all trying to justify their actions because there has been no misdemeanor, no high crime, no--
CUOMO: Hey, if he hadn't had the call with Ukraine--
MULLIN: --treason or bribery.
CUOMO: --they'd have nothing. If he hadn't had his people--
MULLIN: In the call to Ukraine, there was nothing wrong with that call.
CUOMO: --trying to run around and get hooked up with WikiLeaks, and say that Russia was trying to help them, they would have had nothing. It's his mouth.
MULLIN: This - this is all about them in search of impeaching the President for 2.5 years. In fact, it was Nancy Pelosi who just said yesterday, this is 2.5 years in the making, 2.5 years in the making.
CUOMO: It all stems from the concerns--
MULLIN: That doesn't mean the last four months. That means they've been trying to impeach him for 2.5 years.
CUOMO: But Markwayne Mullin, you're ignoring--
MULLIN: And trying to explain it.
CUOMO: --what is obvious. This all stems from concerns about--
MULLIN: Hey, I'm trying to find it.
CUOMO: --Russian interference. It's all.
MULLIN: Russian interference? I thought this was about Ukraine.
CUOMO: It's foreign interference.
MULLIN: And now we moved to Russia?
CUOMO: We were worried about foreign interference, says the FBI. So, they looked into it. The IG says they had a lawful basis.
MULLIN: So - so since there's - so since there's no bribery--
CUOMO: Then, the day after Mueller testifies, he asks Ukraine of this.
MULLIN: --in Ukraine, now we're moving to Russia.
CUOMO: It's foreign interference, exactly what the Founders were worried about.
MULLIN: I thought this was all about the phone call and the whistleblower. I thought that's what this all started about was Ukraine with - with the whistleblower and a phone call, and now we're switching to Russia, and we're trying to--
CUOMO: But what difference--
MULLIN: --tie the two together?
CUOMO: --what difference does the source of the information matter if the information is true?
MULLIN: Because, once again, the Democrat Party is in search--
CUOMO: I know. I know you keep saying it.
MULLIN: --of an impeachable offense.
CUOMO: But that would have been fair to say, back in '98, when you started with a land deal, and wound up with a tryst.
MULLIN: Hey, we didn't lie to--
CUOMO: But here, you started with foreign interference.
MULLIN: --we didn't lie to the Grand Jury.
CUOMO: And you ended with foreign interference.
MULLIN: That was Clinton who lied to the Grand Jury.
CUOMO: He shouldn't have lied to the Grand Jury.
MULLIN: Well and that's - that's a misdemeanor, and a - and a crime.
CUOMO: But it is not necessarily an impeachable offense unless the politicians--
MULLIN: By defining it--
CUOMO: --vote that same way.
MULLIN: --in the Constitution, it is. And there is nothing that the--
CUOMO: There is no description in the Constitution--
MULLIN: --President has done that's defined inside the Constitution.
CUOMO: --of what is and is not. Now, in The Federalist Papers, there is. When you look at the legislative history of what happened at the Constitutional Convention, and why they did this, there is.
MULLIN: Yes.
CUOMO: And the more homework you do, the weaker your resistance becomes. But I think you're betting on--
MULLIN: And the weaker the defense of-- CUOMO: --people not doing their homework.
MULLIN: --the - of the Democrats' opinion of how they're trying to impeach the President is also weakened, if you read The Federalist Papers.
CUOMO: If you ask a foreign power for help in your election, you--
MULLIN: They did not--
CUOMO: --are abusing your power.
MULLIN: You're - you are adding a lot to that, Chris, by saying it helped in election. That is absolutely false.
CUOMO: What - what would it do, going after Biden?
MULLIN: No. He was going after Biden's son's relationship with Burisma.
CUOMO: He was going--
MULLIN: Who was under investigation at the time.
CUOMO: --after Biden. He said Biden by name. He gave money to Ukraine twice before.
MULLIN: He said Biden's son.
CUOMO: He never mentioned corruption.
MULLIN: He said Biden's son.
CUOMO: He never mentioned corruption when you had a corrupt President in place. He just gave the money.
MULLIN: You don't have to mention corruption when you're saying to--
CUOMO: Now, you've got a new guy, and you mention corruption.
MULLIN: --look into it. You - what - what - it was - it was Lieutenant Colonel Vindman who even testified that the conversation between the President of Ukraine and President Trump was accurate. And then so, if it was accurate, you can't add to it. You've got to read it word for word on what was said.
CUOMO: I am.
MULLIN: And then the only two people that understands the intent--
CUOMO: That's all you need is a transcript.
MULLIN: --of that conversation is the two people--
CUOMO: No way.
MULLIN: --that the conversation was between.
CUOMO: No way. There were other people on the call. And you know that's not true, Markwayne Mullin.
MULLIN: But the conversation was between two.
CUOMO: You don't get to judge what your words mean if other people hear them.
MULLIN: You're judging - you're judging what President Trump and the President of Ukraine's words means. So, what's the difference?
CUOMO: I am judging the words for what they mean on their face as has been evinced at the testimony level.
MULLIN: Me too. And there was no bribery.
CUOMO: With all these other people.
MULLIN: And there is no high crime in those two, in that conversation.
CUOMO: Look, let me just give you one piece of caution.
MULLIN: OK.
CUOMO: Do not ask a foreign power to go after anybody you're running against.
MULLIN: He was asking a foreign power to look into an investigation--
CUOMO: Will you please do me that favor, so I don't lose you as a member of the show?
MULLIN: --that was put to a stop by then Vice President Biden.
CUOMO: That's not true. And you know it.
MULLIN: It is absolutely true.
CUOMO: That is demonstrably false.
MULLIN: Vice President Biden even - even--
CUOMO: Joe Biden did nothing to stop the investigation.
MULLIN: He even admitted to it.
CUOMO: No. He admitted to getting rid of the prosecutor--
MULLIN: Chris?
CUOMO: --which Ukraine wanted--
MULLIN: That was investigating.
CUOMO: --and so did a lot of Western intuitions and you know it. MULLIN: That was investigating it at the time.
CUOMO: Ah!
MULLIN: Isn't that convenient?
CUOMO: I'm out of time.
MULLIN: If President Trump did that--
CUOMO: It - it - it is--
MULLIN: --it would be - it would be all over your all's news network--
CUOMO: It may have been convenient.
MULLIN: --if President Trump did the same thing.
[21:25:00]
CUOMO: It may have even been wrong. And if you thought it was, go to the DOJ, go to your pals in the Senate, have them investigate it.
MULLIN: You - you and I have both agreed--
CUOMO: Don't do it the way the President did.
MULLIN: --that that was wrong.
CUOMO: Listen, then there was a way to go about it, and that's not what this President did. I'm out of time.
MULLIN: And there's a way to go after this too with the President. But dragging the American people through an impeachment process that they know will go nowhere in the Senate is absolutely a waste of time.
CUOMO: Well yes then--
MULLIN: And it does nothing but divide the country.
CUOMO: Markwayne Mullin, I appreciate your argument. All I'll end it with is if they didn't do this, what precedential value is it that this President can't do these kinds of things? But we'll argue it out another day as well. You're always welcome here.
MULLIN: Thank you, Chris.
CUOMO: Be well until then.
MULLIN: Appreciate it.
CUOMO: All right, one thing's for sure. As you see with Congressman Mullin, the President is getting a lot of help. Every GOP Member of the House is all about his fate. They're not about oversight right now. They're about overseeing his fate. That's their choice. He even has an Attorney General doing whatever he can to keep his boss out of the hot water. But here, hype has to lose out to the facts. We will test what the A.G. wants you to believe about his boss, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: No disrespect, but I call the A.G., Bill No-Holds Barr because he seems to be willing to say and do anything to protect this President. And that's not his job. And he knew that when he was trying to sell you that he could get the job.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAM BARR, ATTORNEY GENERAL NOMINEE: I feel I'm in a position in life where - where I can do the right thing and not really care about the consequences.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: The right thing, like discredit your agency, the Mueller probe, even your own Inspector General, a man Barr himself described, just last month, as "A fiercely independent investigator, a superb investigator, who has conducted this particular investigation in the most professional way, he'll be a credit to the department."
Really? Yet Barr, the same man who thought Ken Starr was being unfairly fussed about when he overreached in Bill Clinton, he thought that was OK that Starr did that.
He now thinks Mueller's efforts and the FBI's were a sham.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARR: I think our - our nation was turned on its head for three years, I think, based on a completely bogus narrative that was largely flam - fanned and hyped by an irresponsible press.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Bogus narrative!
Can it be that the A.G. actually doesn't think Russia should be singled out? The answer, yes. Keep in mind of the four people investigated by the FBI, Papadopoulos, Carter Page, Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, three, now convicted felons.
The A.G. even seems to argue that foreign money is just fine, the new normal.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARR: And in today's world, presidential campaigns are frequently in contact with foreign persons. And indeed, in most campaigns, there are signs of illegal foreign money coming in.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: First of all, if it's illegal, it's wrong, it's not OK. And then his agency successfully prosecuted Paul Manafort for his foreign money.
Right now, they're actively investigating Rudy Giuliani for his potential contact with wrong foreign money, and connection to the Trump campaign, in the same way.
This idea that foreign influence is just fine sounds a lot like Trump special guest today, the Russian Foreign Minister. However, it's the exact opposite of what the people protecting our elections say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRISTOPHER WRAY, DIRECTOR OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION: My view is that if any public official or a member of any campaign is contacted by any nation state, or anybody acting on behalf of a nation state, about influencing or interfering with our elections, then that's something that the FBI would want to know about.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Hmm!
But more important for Mr. Barr, apparently, is to show that investigating this President and his pals for exactly that should be seen as bad. And he hand-picked a prosecutor to investigate just that, and he calls the Russia probe thin justification.
"Trump is the victim." All right, that was what was promised from this IG's report, 476 pages. No Trump as victim. Trump even says that that's what this says. It doesn't. He's lying to you about the report.
Please, do yourself the favor, do the homework. He's lying to you. You can discover it if you want, just like there was no proof of him being a victim in the 568-page report that the IG put out in June of last year even though they told you it would.
It wasn't there in the 412 pages of the Declassified Carter Page FISA application. There were mistakes. But he was no victim.
The 83 pages that examined James Comey's behavior, the 39 page report that examined Andrew McCabe.
This President and his Attorney General are distorting fact and playing victims (ph). But the truth is just not that complicated. People around this President have been up to no good from the start. The institutions that are designed to catch that worked. The only question is what should be the consequence.
Now, the smears never stop. The President is still peddling lies tonight, now about the FBI, just a little.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: They spied on our campaign, OK?
Their lives have been destroyed by scum. OK? By scum.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Calls the FBI "Scum." I never imagined a President and he just keeps disappointing. There is no proof of spying, zero, and we'll take you through it with an FBI vet, who's owed an apology by our President, next.
[21:35:00]
(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: Gives me no pleasure to say this. But our President wanted this Inspector General's report to make him look like a victim. It didn't. So now he's lying to you and saying that it does that anyway.
And as the story comes out, that he's not telling you the truth, he's slamming everybody who opposes him, the media, even the FBI. Listen to what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Folks, they spied on our campaign, OK? They spied.
When the FBI uncovered evidence showing that we did absolutely nothing wrong, which was right at the beginning, they hid that exonerating. You know that. They hid it. They hid it, so nobody could see it.
They've destroyed the lives of people that were great people that are still great people. Their lives have been destroyed by scum, OK?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: All right, Andrew McCabe is here. It's good to see you, as always. Let's put the descriptive adjective to the side.
ANDREW MCCABE, FORMER DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FBI: Sure.
CUOMO: Because this President, he doesn't care about the institution. He doesn't--
MCCABE: No.
CUOMO: --care about how necessary or respectable something is. If it's getting a bad result, where he has an interest, it's going to be treated this way. That's who he is.
[21:40:00]
So, put the adjective to the side. "You guys hid exonerating," big word, OK? I'm not making fun of the President. That means you had proof of innocence on this President, and you hid it. I don't see that in the IG report.
MCCABE: That's because it's not there. That's not what the IG report concludes. The IG report found numerous and significant mistakes with the FISA, with the initiation, and the three renewals that came behind it.
The sort of mistakes that were made were representing a certain fact, later finding out through investigation that that fact might not be true, and then failing to point that out to the court.
So, things that went to the balance between derogatory information about the subject of the application, and information that tended to - tends to show the person might not be an agent of a foreign power.
You have to remember, the question we're asking the court is to say, "Do you - we believe this person is an agent of a foreign power." The court does not do its own investigation.
It relies entirely on the information that we give them to make the determination, so it's important that the FBI present all of the information, not just an argument on one side, but all the information we have about the person.
CUOMO: Now, when he's saying spying, he can only be talking about this, because the IG talks about--
MCCABE: That's right.
CUOMO: --no other meaningful surveillance.
MCCABE: That's right.
CUOMO: And I know you guys don't like the word "Spying." And I know it's weird that the Attorney General uses it because you guys don't like it because you see it as--
MCCABE: Totally bizarre.
CUOMO: --assuming nefarious conduct--
MCCABE: That's right.
CUOMO: --which you wouldn't do to an American.
MCCABE: It's insulting. But--
CUOMO: I get it.
MCCABE: OK.
CUOMO: But I don't get the Carter Page rationale because you guys started looking at him before Trump ran. Then, you got an application on him while he was with the Trump campaign. But they say he was a "Nobody." The President says he didn't even know him.
So, if you wanted to get access into the Trump campaign, why did you pick this guy who was on the outside?
MCCABE: It is undeniable that we never made any attempt to get someone in the Trump campaign.
If you actually read the report, which I'm quite certain the President has not, you will see that those opportunities came to us through other sources, people who offered us information. And we consistently said that's not what we're doing here. We are not investigating like that.
We're investigating this individual, Carter Page. And we will use confidential sources to get close to him, to collect information about him, completely consistently with our guidelines, and our policies. That's of course what the IG found.
And we went to the FISA Court to get electronic surveillance authority on him. We did not spy, get electronic surveillance authority on the campaign.
CUOMO: Two more quick things.
MCCABE: Sure.
CUOMO: It's not unusual for an IG to do a report and come back with finding problems. It is very rare that they find nothing.
MCCABE: That's right.
CUOMO: The idea that these 17 things, when you look at that list, does that list impress you in terms of "Holy Cow, we messed up here more than we normally should?"
MCCABE: It does. I mean here's - here's why I say that. The Department of Justice runs, every year, runs a rigorous oversight
program on the FISA program. They send teams of lawyers out to every FBI field office. They walk in the door. You don't know very odd - you don't know when they're coming.
They tell you to pull FISAs at random, and they check to see that every fact in the package is verified. And occasionally, they find a mistake here or there, something that we need to fix and tell the court about.
I have never seen one with this number of mistakes in it, so this is - this was notable to me. It's clearly errors that should not have occurred. And I am confident that Chris Wray and his team will address this.
CUOMO: The IG says it didn't affect the outcome. But, you know, 17 errors, it's something that's worth looking at. And, you know, we welcome the FBI Director, currently Chris Wray, to figure out what he's going to do.
MCCABE: That's right.
CUOMO: And to please come on and present us. I say "Currently" because the President seems to have gone bad on him. But that's for another night.
The A.G. says this. "Here's how this happened. The Russians were hacking into the DNC on July 23rd. WikiLeaks dumped the emails. A foreign official comes in, and says, "You know, back in May, this guy said something to me in a bar." And that's all it took for them to start an investigation."
What do you think of the A.G.'s reckoning?
MCCABE: Patently false. He either has no understanding of what we actually did or he is deliberately misrepresenting the work that we did, and the way that the IG reports it in his report.
The facts are, very briefly, we had been watching Russian malign cyber activity from the fall of 2014. So, he knew the Russians were coming after us, not just one Intelligence agency from Russia, but two.
We saw that activity directed at political institutions, government institutions, think tanks, into the beginning of 2016. We saw them probing the DNC. We told the DNC about that.
Ultimately, we see them stealing information from the DNC, and then we see that information leaked on the eve of the Democratic National Convention, for the purpose of impacting candidate - then-candidate Clinton.
CUOMO: So, it wasn't one guy in a bar?
MCCABE: No. We don't find out about the guy in the bar until after the information is released.
CUOMO: Right.
[21:45:00]
MCCABE: And then we learn that the guy in the bar, George Papadopoulos, made that statement months before. So, he knew, long before we did, that the Russians had made some sort of an offer to the campaign, to help, by releasing derogatory information about Clinton. That is undeniable predication.
CUOMO: Thank you very much. Appreciate you setting the record straight.
MCCABE: Sure.
CUOMO: Always good to have you on the show.
MCCABE: Great to be here.
CUOMO: All right, of all countries, on the day when you're getting impeached for foreign interference, who do you not invite to the White House?
I'll give you a choice, multiple choice, ready? Russia. That's the only choice of people you don't invite. And yet, that's who the President picked. Why? I think I know, and I'm going to argue to it, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CLOSING ARGUMENT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: First, a correction.
[21:50:00]
Even when Jim Baker, the former General Counsel of the FBI, he's not on the show, he's still watching it. There was no open case on Carter Page until, and no FISA application, until after he left the campaign. Just to keep the timeline straight. Thank you, Jim Baker.
Now, politics, my argument, politics, sometimes perception is reality. You got to be careful about that to keep fact and fugazi separate, like today.
As articles of impeachment come down, as a result of this President's penchant for doing the wrong thing with foreign powers, guess whom he chooses to meet with? Russia's top envoy, Sergey Lavrov.
If there were any doubt whether this President is all about the "Me" over the "We," the Russian pulled a Trump and just lied to your face.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SERGEY LAVROV, MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION (through translator): We have highlighted once again that all speculation about our alleged interference in domestic processes in the U.S. are baseless. There are no facts that would support that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: This ain't Russia. We have all the facts. The U.S. Intel report, "We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S. presidential election."
Listen to Mueller.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERT MUELLER, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE SPECIAL COUNSEL: There were multiple systematic efforts to interfere in our election, and that allegation deserves the attention of every American.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Now, he knows that, Lavrov. But, remember, it's not about fact for him. It's about the painting of reality as a farcical perception of the same. Deep? Not really. Here are some of the broad strokes of this broadside of reality.
Listen to our Secretary of State's response.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MIKE POMPEO, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF STATE: On the question of interference in our domestic affairs, I was clear. It's unacceptable.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Man, he's a lot tougher when he's talking about us than when he's talking about Russia. Not only was his tone less than severe, but if it's so unacceptable, then why does lying Lavrov get the Red Carpet treatment?
Did you see this? The guy tries to sabotage your election, and he gets this. "Oh, yes, great to see you. Have a - great to have you."
You know why Trump allows this kind of chummy thing to go on? Forget about his foreign interest. We have no proof that he's a foreign agent. It's his domestic interest. He would rather cultivate Russian lies than face the truth that they tried to help him, no matter who or what he must throw under the bus to do so.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TRUMP: I have President Putin. He just said it's not Russia. I will say this. I don't see any reason why it would be.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: You don't know why our biggest enemy would want to mess with us.
On the world stage, he'd rather embarrass us than admit Putin's preference, even though it doesn't take away from his win. It's just more proof that this President is not about you. He's not about your interests, if they compromise his own.
Remember the last time Lavrov stopped by the White House? May 2017. It was the day after Comey was fired.
Remember how they yucked it up about that? Remember how Trump reportedly revealed code word classified information to him, reportedly said he was unconcerned about Moscow's interference in 2016?
So, here is Putin's reality now, thanks to our President.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VLADIMIR PUTIN, PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA (through translator): Do you know, for example, that in Ukraine, following the elections, some people, and these were public officials, sent congratulatory telegrams to Hillary Clinton, even though Trump had won? Look, what do we have to do with it?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: So, he was spreading that mess, and now the President and his people are following up on it. I think you're going to hear about it in the Senate trial.
The next month, after that meeting with that first Lavrov thing, June of 2017, that's when Giuliani met with Ukrainian leaders. The month after that, that's when the President tweeted about Ukrainian efforts to sabotage his campaign.
Trump may not be doing Russia's bidding per se to help Russia. He's doing it because it helps what he cares about most, himself. And while Russia is getting all this love, Ukraine, our ally, who is at war with Russia, has gotten none. I guess the deal was real, "No Bidens, no meeting."
This President allows Russia to come here and lie and rewards them with access. He lies to you about the Inspector General report because he assumes you won't read it. And he attacks our institutions, the very things that keep us together, because he thinks it's good for him.
The worst part of this is not what he does. It's why he does it. And the answer is because he can, because that's how he uses power, to do what is good for him.
You know, I wonder if our President knows the oath that he took. I would love to make a wager about whether or not he could recite it because he has such a funny way of keeping it. That's the argument.
Now, here's a tease. Heavy day, but there is something uplifting that just happened in Washington, and we must remember there can be better than what we've seen. BOLO, next.
[21:55:00]
(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: Criticism, yes, cynicism, no, so the BOLO, Be On the Look-Out, is for compromise.
Even in the most partisan times, within the span of one hour today, House Democrats unveiled articles of impeachment against President Trump, and gave him his biggest legislative win of the year, a deal on the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement.
Strange times when both Speaker Pelosi and President Trump can claim victory.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NANCY PELOSI, SPEAKER OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: We are declaring victory for the American worker and what is in this agreement.
TRUMP: They approved today the USMCA, and I call that the silver lining to impeachment.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: I don't know that it has anything to do with impeachment, but it does have to do with progress and bipartisanship, something that we need much more of.
Let's bring in D. Lemon.
DON LEMON, CNN HOST, CNN TONIGHT WITH DON LEMON: I'm still - I'm still not--
CUOMO: You OK, Don?
LEMON: No, I was getting ready. I wasn't ready yet.
CUOMO: No, you look good.
LEMON: Am I ready?
CUOMO: Your looks are not your problem.
LEMON: My shirt's too big. I'm losing a little weight.
CUOMO: Yes?
LEMON: Yes.
CUOMO: Maybe you bought a bigger shirt.
LEMON: It's an old shirt. So, I'm good now.
Yes, look, I wouldn't get my hopes up on that.
CUOMO: Boy, you are just a rain cloud on humanity.
LEMON: It's true.
CUOMO: You have to take progress where you find it.
