Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Trump Irate at Outgoing Intel Chief Over Russia Briefing to Lawmakers; Democratic Candidates Make Final Pitch Ahead of Nevada Caucuses; Senator Warren Crafts Form to Release People from Bloomberg's NDAs; Sources: Intel Officials Say Russia is Trying to Get Trump Re-elected. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired February 21, 2020 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:20]

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Good Friday morning, everyone. I'm Poppy Harlow. Jim Sciutto has a well-deserved day off. And we have a lot of news today.

The president is clashing this morning with the intelligence community as we are learning Russia is already taking steps to interfere in the 2020 election in an effort to help get President Trump re-elected. Hacking, weaponizing social media, attacking election infrastructure, lawmakers briefed about this last week. And the fact that that happened angered the president who says Democrats will just use it against him.

And he took it all out on the acting director of National Intelligence, Joseph Maguire, for letting that briefing happen at all and for briefing Congress before briefing him. Maguire is now being replaced by a Trump loyalist, Richard Grenell.

A lot of twists and turns in this story. And new reporting from our Dana Bash who joins me now with this.

Good morning.

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning.

HARLOW: Let's walk through this step by step. It's important. The big picture here is that the intelligence community briefed Congress on this and what did they say?

BASH: So we have more details about what went on during what we already heard was a pretty explosive briefing.

HARLOW: Yes.

BASH: And what I'm told is the following. First of all it was comprehensive about how foreign interference is going on as we speak with the American election. And that specifically, the briefer said, not once, but twice that the observation in the intelligence community is that Russia has a preference for Donald Trump. This is according to a source familiar with this. The source said that the briefers were not ambiguous about that. And just to be clear, the fact that they were not ambiguous is based on the assessment that they have. The intelligence community never says point blank, A, B or C.

HARLOW: Right.

BASH: They say this is based on the assessment. So there was a shock among a lot of the members but particularly Republicans.

HARLOW: Right.

BASH: I am told that Will Hurd, who has a background in intelligence.

HARLOW: Yes.

BASH: Was an intelligence officer, said to the ranking Republican, Devin Nunes, I need some time to ask questions, and that what Will Hurd said was, to the briefer, how do you know this? Can you give us any information? How many reports said this? And the answer by the briefer was that they do not have the underlying data. They just had the assessment. And so --

HARLOW: For people at home hearing this.

BASH: Yes.

HARLOW: The question I would be asking is, how can you assess something without the underlying data.

BASH: Right.

HARLOW: And as I understand from your reporting, the Democrats in the room said this is so politically explosive, controversial, we need to see the underlying data.

BASH: Precisely. And that seems to be -- even though this is very partisan, from what I'm told, that was a bipartisan request.

HARLOW: OK.

BASH: Obviously, things got very heated. Very, very hot in that room because of the questioning, because of the desire to see why they came to this -- not conclusion, but assessment about Russia being preferring President Trump. And the answer is they didn't have it at their fingertips. And so that is something that --

HARLOW: The briefer didn't have it?

BASH: The briefer didn't have it at -- which in fairness, the briefer is not unusual. I mean, they come. They are required to brief key members of Congress, key committees on issues like this, particularly intelligence issues. And what they have is the assessment that is put together by the intelligence community on any given issue. And that's what happened here. HARLOW: One of the arguments that we -- that your reporting is, and

"The Times" reflected this a bit last night is Republicans, including Chris Stewart, vehemently stating over and over, how can that be? You know, their assessment is, look at all of these things that the president has done to be tough on Russia. Now there's another side to that, too, where he is not, Syria, for example.

BASH: Right. No, and I'm told the same thing that Chris Stewart and other Republicans who are on the committee in this briefing, you know, kind of raised their hand and raised holy hell, frankly, saying that this doesn't make any sense. The president has been tougher on Russia than anybody else to which the Democrats said, OK, this has now become a partisan discussion that shouldn't be happening in here, in this forum where we are getting an intelligence assessment. Let's go back and take a breath.

HARLOW: Let's step back for a moment and talk about why this all made the president so angry because this is the House select -- you know, this is the Intelligence Committee. They, by law, are required --

BASH: Exactly.

HARLOW: -- to be briefed regularly by the intelligence community. Is the president upset that they were briefed at all? Is he upset that they were briefed before him?

[09:05:02]

Is he upset that Adam Schiff got this information as the chairman of the committee?

BASH: Well, our understanding is that it's the last thing you said. I mean, look, in the words of Maggie Haberman, Adam Schiff is a trigger for Donald Trump and that is true. It's obvious. I mean, he was the lead antagonist during all of impeachment. Impeachment was investigated in his committee. They didn't have a good relationship to start with. And it's terrible now.

But the fact of the matter is he's the chairman of the Intelligence Committee and impeachment or politics aside, this is a very important issue. And so, yes, he -- our understanding is the president was upset about Adam Schiff getting it because he is worried, given the context in which what we just went through that Schiff will use it, not to figure out a governmentwide strategy to combat Russia, no matter who they have a preference for, but to use it as a political weapon.

HARLOW: Yes.

BASH: One other thing to add here is that Jake Tapper has some reporting that the -- part of the concern in -- according to a source he talked to is that the notion that Russia has a preference for Donald Trump isn't as clear cut in the intelligence as perhaps this briefer Shelby Pierson communicated to the House Intelligence Committee. And that might be part of what's going on and part of the explosive nature of this.

HARLOW: Are they going to, behind closed doors in a classified setting, get the underlying data?

BASH: Good question. I don't know the answer to that. Given where we are now and how this all spilled into the open, it's hard to imagine they won't. I mean, underlying intelligence data isn't always that easy to read. And, you know, they probably -- the answer is, it's hard to imagine they won't ask for it, and certainly members of the Intelligence Committee, they understand the basics. People like Will Hurd who I'm told, again by a source, asked exactly the right questions and didn't get an answer that was satisfactory, frankly, in a bipartisan way.

HARLOW: Yes. Of course. Dana, stay here.

Let's also bring into the conversation our national security analyst Juliette Kayyem and our political analyst Lisa Lerer.

Good morning to you, ladies.

Juliette, what's your read on all that Dana just reported?

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: So it's terrific reporting. And I think it would be helpful just to sort of explain the role of the ODNI and what was happening. This was not the larger House Intelligence Committee. This was not the Gang of Eight. You would not anticipate that they would get sources and methods that would actually threaten the intelligence of, say, CIA assets or others.

What the ODNI does is takes a couple dozen intelligence agencies around the government, everyone from the Coast Guard to the Defense Department, merges them into an assessment and sets two things. Sets priorities and potential policies regarding that intelligence. So it sounds like they put together a bunch of materials, presented it to the larger subcommittee for the House Intel and House Intel wanted more at this stage.

I will say one thing. Assuming everything is accurate and that maybe the assessment was stated too clearly, it's not at all clear the Russians want Trump, Donald Trump's reaction is something that the Russians are watching because Donald Trump's reaction was not, let me see the sources and methods. His reaction was, I want Maguire out. That tells the Russians one thing which is, of course, we're going to keep doing it.

HARLOW: And Lisa, to build on Juliette's good point, it's Maguire out, Grenell, a staunch loyalist in for now, and, oh, maybe another loyalist of mine, Congressman Doug Collins who doesn't have intel experience should take this job. Now Doug Collins said on another network this morning he doesn't want the job. He wants the Senate seat that's open in Georgia. That's a tough interparty fight right there. But what does it tell you that the president is eyeing him for this?

LISA LERER, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think the president's reaction to this is fairly predictable. We've seen this happen before. Whenever talk of Russia getting involved in the election comes up, the president takes it intensely personally and sees it through the lens of his own election and, you know, questions about legitimacy of that, you know, of his victory. So that's a well-known fact here in Washington and probably across a lot of the country, too.

And it's so well known that we even reported in "The New York Times" that some of the briefers, people in the Intelligence Committee, later sort of said to the briefers that they should have delivered the message perhaps a little less bluntly knowing that, of course, it was likely to leak because a lot of things from Congress leak out and that was likely to trigger the president as Dana put it out -- said earlier in the program.

So I don't think his reaction is particularly surprising. Particularly in this moment where he's coming after impeachment -- coming out of impeachment and really battering down the hatchets and putting loyalists in a lot of positions.

HARLOW: Dana, let me ask you about one detail that struck me. It was near the end of "The New York Times" piece on this last night in terms of where we go from here.

[09:10:04]

They report this. We can put it on the screen. "Since the impeachment inquiry, tensions have risen between the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the committee as officials navigate these disputes. The intelligence agencies have slowed the amount of material they provide to the House."

This is "The Times" reporting, according to multiple officials. That is significant if that is happening. We have a member of the House Intelligence Committee coming on the show next hour and I'll ask him about that. I mean, if this critical information is getting slowed down to these relevant committees for political reasons, that's alarming.

BASH: It's the real-world ramification of the partisan arena that we're in but more importantly, of impeachment. I mean, it just is. Things got so incredibly toxic and still are toxic because, again, it was the Intelligence Committee which, you know, I guess you can say historically isn't the one that does impeachment inquiries.

HARLOW: Right.

BASH: It's the Department of Justice but because of the nature of what they were looking at, Ukraine, and because, frankly, Nancy Pelosi really likes Adam Schiff and he's a good prosecutor.

HARLOW: Right.

BASH: She put them in charge. And now we're past that and we're in a situation where the election is happening. The intelligence community, whether it is, you know -- the assessment is clear cut or not that they're trying to help Donald Trump, they're meddling. And I'm told this briefing was much more broad than just that.

HARLOW: Yes.

BASH: It was about the infrastructure and every other aspect of voting and the basic democratic function that foreign governments, including and especially Russia, are trying to do. And if the Congress, which again by law is supposed to be informed of this and help come up with a strategy to fix it and they're not told about it, that's terrible.

HARLOW: And this should not come as a surprise, guys, to the president. I mean, Christopher Wray, the president's hand-selected lead to the FBI, testified to this in July. Testified again saying just as much a month ago. Listen to the former director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, who was on last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES CLAPPER, FORMER UNITED STATES DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: It is not a big surprise but it illustrates the tremendous challenge that the intelligence community has where they're teeing up facts that our president doesn't want to hear and with the result that the messenger got shot in the form of Joe Maguire being asked to leave.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: So, Juliette, what are the real-world consequences when that messenger is someone who may very likely toe the line of the president when Maguire is out?

KAYYEM: Well, there's -- I mean, I sort of think of this as three audiences. I mean, the first is, of course, the briefers themselves and their willingness to tell Donald Trump what's going on in the world. We're not just talking about election security. We've got terrorism and war and a pandemic and all sorts of issues that, if you are the briefer, you know, you don't want to get fired but you also want to provide information.

The second is that Trump clearly only wants to hear things that he wants to hear. There's a real world out there that Donald Trump has to sort of look at, which is not going to -- not consistent with the world that he wants. So he -- that gap creates, I think, risks for all of us. The third, I want to say, is us. We are the beneficiaries of the intelligence agencies. They protect us, whether it's election security and how we vote and whether we're going to be able to vote in a meaningful manner or what's happening to our kids with the pandemic or the rise of white supremacy terrorism.

We are the audience for the intelligence agencies. The American public. They're never even discussed by the president. Our needs, our protections, our families and communities are never even discussed by this president.

HARLOW: Right. Yes. Juliette, thank you. Lisa Lerer, thank you. Dana, great reporting. Thanks for bringing it to us.

Up next, candidates blitz Nevada before the crucial test, of course, it's tomorrow. The Nevada caucuses. Another battle for much-needed cash to keep these campaigns going.

Also we're outside of the courthouse in New York again this morning where disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein is still awaiting a verdict from the jury in his sex crimes trial.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:15:00]

HARLOW: All right. Right now, the 2020 race is heating up as Democrats make their final pitch before the Nevada caucuses, those are tomorrow by the way. Almost every candidate out on the trail out west today, the majority of them focusing on sin city, Las Vegas.

Meantime, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren not letting up on her attacks on New York City's former Mayor Michael Bloomberg. With me now to talk about the strategy and a final push, Patti Solis Doyle; former campaign manager for Hillary Clinton and David Swerdlick; assistant editor at "The Washington Post". Good morning, guys, happy Friday.

DAVID SWERDLICK, ASSISTANT EDITOR, THE WASHINGTON POST: Hey, Poppy --

HARLOW: Patty, let me go to you. Look, this is what Warren needed, right? We've learned that she took out this $3 million line of credit. Now she's got this huge cash infusion. She nailed --

PATTI SOLIS DOYLE, FORMER CAMPAIGN MANAGER FOR HILLARY CLINTON: Right --

HARLOW: That debate, if you ask anyone who is pouring money into her coffers right now. What do you make about what she said last night in CNN's town hall that she is actually drafted a contract that would release the women from the NDAs they signed with Bloomberg?

DOYLE: Yes, well, listen, she really had a great night on Wednesday night at that debate as you said. She -- you know, she clear out won it. And she did it by eviscerating Michael Bloomberg, and she did it in such an effective way, particularly on the NDA issue. And what she -- you know, and it worked. It spiked her fund-raising numbers. It spiked her earned media. Everybody was talking about it. Now, what she did last night is she doubled down on that strategy.

You know, she saw that it worked, and she doubled down. And we'll see whether or not it will actually help her in Nevada, 75,000 people already voted, it could be too late for Nevada --

[09:20:00]

HARLOW: Right --

DOYLE: But --

HARLOW: Right --

DOYLE: Moving forward, let's see what happens for her.

HARLOW: What does she need, David, in Nevada to get off life support for her campaign?

SWERDLICK: Yes, good morning, Poppy. I think Senator Warren just needs to come in maybe first, second or third. She would obviously like to come in first or second. She's got more money now, I think she can parlay a third place finish even into a better finish in South Carolina.

But in South Carolina then, she'll have to do really well first or second because by the time we get to Super Tuesday on March 3rd, she will be at a disadvantage in terms of money compared to Mayor Bloomberg and she'll also be campaigning in a number of states where she can't do that face-to-face, handshaking and baby-kissing that she has become very good at.

I think one thing that she wants to do -- I agree with Patty, that she eviscerated, or as the kids say, she really ether-ed Bloomberg on Wednesday night and she reinforced it last night with that NDA, but now --

HARLOW: Yes --

SWERDLICK: I think she wants to get back to her core message.

HARLOW: I think people want to hear more from Bloomberg. Good thing that he agreed he's going to do the CNN town hall ahead of the --

SWERDLICK: Yes --

HARLOW: Ahead of South Carolina and he'll get to take some questions from the voters, right? And hear more, not just the ads that he pays to put out there. Turning the page though to the Biden-Bernie Sanders battle, Patty, I think it's interesting that I have noticed that we have seen the vice president himself and also his surrogates really start to focus on Bernie Sanders' record on guns.

And the fact that, yes, he did vote against the Brady bill five times, and yes, he did vote so that there would not be liability for gun owners. And he said, you know, those -- that was my constituency that I was representing in my state. Is that a smart tactic heading into Nevada and South Carolina for him?

DOYLE: Absolutely it's a smart tactic. In fact, I -- you know, he should have been doing this much earlier in this process. Bernie Sanders is now, as we speak, the clear front-runner in this race. And the idea that nobody on that debate stage on Wednesday night really went after that front-runner, and instead went after Bloomberg only lifted Sanders up even more.

So the fact that Joe Biden is now taking this on, is great for him, and probably good for the rest of the field in all honesty. But again, is it too late and too little at this point? Nevada is tomorrow. And if Bernie Sanders comes out victorious, again, this would be his third win in the popular vote. Will that momentum sort of have him do even better in South Carolina? Joe Biden needs to win South Carolina to stay viable in Super Tuesday.

HARLOW: What do you think this week has meant, David, for Mayor Bloomberg when it comes to the upswing he had been seeing --

SWERDLICK: Right --

HARLOW: In African-American support nationally? Is he going to hang on to that now?

SWERDLICK: Well, I think the next week or two is going to tell us. Look, he's got a ton of money, a $100 million is a rounding error for him. He's put in $400 million so far. He can put in another $500 million, $600 million and not have even spent or spent just a little over 1 percent of his net worth. So he can buy that name recognition, he can keep running those ads that show President Obama praising him even though President Obama hasn't endorsed him.

And I think to voters who haven't really locked into this race yet, it does present a good message for him. But that was blunted in this debate. He's now going to have to do this town hall with CNN, go out there and actually campaign a little more face-to-face with these voters.

But because of money, he's not out of this yet. I just want to say one thing. I half-agree with Patti and half don't, Poppy. I think that on the one hand, yes, the candidates have to go after Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, I don't -- I think they all realize they're not getting his voters, even Senator Warren. So I think they want to go after the other candidates' voters.

HARLOW: All right, thank you both, have a good weekend. We'll see what shakes --

SWERDLICK: Thanks --

HARLOW: Out tomorrow. David, Patty, appreciate that. Let's take a closer look at the Biden camp now, thrilled to be joined again by campaign senior adviser Symone Sanders. Symone, good to have you here. What's a win for you guys in Nevada?

SYMONE SANDERS, SENIOR ADVISER, JOE BIDEN CAMPAIGN: Well, look, Poppy, I think a win for us would be coming in very close in the top of the bunch. Look, we have been campaigning hard in Nevada. I was listening earlier to the program, over 75,000 Nevadans have voted early. Early vote was three days. We were pounding the pavement hard.

Vice President Biden did a lot of early vote events, actually high- fiving people as they went to the polls. So, we feel good about what's going to happen on Saturday. But we have to see what happens when the caucus --

HARLOW: Yes --

SANDERS: Closes, whenever that is.

HARLOW: Well, let's just hope we get some results right away, and there's no Iowa situations --

SANDERS: Well, Poppy, I won't hold your breath, OK? I won't hold your breath -- HARLOW: Symone, OK. Symone, when it comes to South Carolina, that has

just been so important for you guys coming up on the 29th. The former Vice President said that he's going to win Nevada, said he's going to win South Carolina, said this a few weeks ago. One "Politico" reporter, I know you saw this last week, that one of this other senior advisors on your campaign said, quote, "we're going to win South Carolina. If we don't, we're done. Is that right?

[09:25:00]

SANDERS: Well, Poppy, we intend to win South Carolina, so we will not be done. I'm here in the state right now, I'm in Greenville, I'm heading up to Gaffney, South Carolina shortly for a meet-and-greet event. And what I can tell you is what I've seen on the ground is our organization is strong. People are engaged.

We had about 3:30 p.m. yesterday, we had almost 65 folks coming out in the middle of the day in Pickens County with a threat of a hail storm. So, I will say that folks are primed and ready for Vice President Biden's message. They know the stakes of this election. And we think that we'll be victorious on February 29th.

HARLOW: Talk about the African-American vote. It's been so crucial, and that support has been so important for the former vice president. In that Quinnipiac poll in the last week and a half, it showed that his national support among African-Americans has fallen 20 points from, you know, 49 percent to 27 percent. This is as Mayor Bloomberg has seen an increase in African-American support. Are you worried to see that decline amongst such an important voter set for him?

SANDERS: Well, Poppy, I think it's -- one is just one poll, but secondly, we're not taking any votes for granted. And so, the reality is Vice President Biden does have a strong relationship, strong ties and history with African-American voters across this country. But we are still working for every single vote. I think that the dynamics of this race have been up in the air for a long time.

People are getting in and getting out. But I think the thing that has remained constant is Vice President Biden's commitment, his relationship with voters, voters know him. He knows the voters. And I think that's why he has continued to lead. And so going into -- we have another debate next week right here in South Carolina. And I think that will be another opportunity on the debate stage for Vice President --

HARLOW: OK --

SANDERS: Biden to speak directly to the voters. African-American voters especially, and why he is the best choice to be the Democratic nominee.

HARLOW: I'd like to dig into something and see if I can get an answer from you on it, that I wasn't able to get previously with one of your colleagues on the campaign. And that is the vote that the former Vice President made when he was a senator in '96 in favor of welfare reform. As you well know, that ended the Social Security administration's cash

assistance program. It changed it into what's known as TAN-F. And the reason I ask you that is because when you look at the center on budget and policy, they dug into these numbers, and they have found that TAN- F's, you know, declining reach has disproportionately adversely affected black Americans for years now. Does he still think that was the right vote, Symone?

SANDERS: Well, I think what Vice President would say is look at the totality of his record and what he has done.

HARLOW: I hear you -- I hear you --

SANDERS: Vice President has been an ally -- yes --

HARLOW: I like having you on because you're straight with me. And I just want to know how he feels in his heart. Was that the right vote in '96? Does he regret it or does he stand by it?

SANDERS: Well, Poppy, I have to be honest, I have not asked Vice President Biden specifically about this vote. But I can tell you what he feels and what he thinks about what has happened. And I think if we look at the most recent budget, if we look at what the Trump administration has done, if we look at what some other folks who have gotten into this Democratic primary have done in terms of suggesting to test folks who are eligible for food stamps.

That is not something that he is in line with that he believes in. Vice President Biden believes that we should be doing the most to ensure that everyone has a shot at the middle class in America. That includes poor people, whether they are white, black, Latino, Asian American --

HARLOW: Yes --

SANDERS: Native American, Asian-Pacific Island --

HARLOW: OK --

SANDERS: Or otherwise. And the reality is that the Trump administration has failed on that front, and Vice President Biden if elected president will do everything he can to turn that thing around.

HARLOW: Symone, final question to you. He's run for president three times. Obviously, he ran in '88, 2008, now, and he's never won a single primary or a caucus. So, if people look at his performance in Iowa and New Hampshire and get a little bit worried that he may not be the most electable candidate, what do you say to them?

SANDERS: Well, I will say to those folks, Poppy, that electability is not about who can win Iowa and New Hampshire. But rather, it's about who can win in places like Pennsylvania and Michigan and Wisconsin. Electability is about the totality of your plans, about bringing a broad coalition together. And I think Vice President Biden hits that mark. And the last thing I will tell those folks that might be skeptical is

the fact that, you know -- I remember Bill Clinton, OK, Poppy, who did not win -- only won one of the first 11 contests in 1992 --

HARLOW: Fair enough.

SANDERS: And he went on to be the Democratic nominee --

HARLOW: All right --

SANDERS: And the president of the United States of America. So, I think we've got a good shot here.

HARLOW: Symone, good to have you. Thanks again.

SANDERS: Thanks, Poppy.

HARLOW: Our special live coverage of the Nevada caucuses starts tomorrow at 2:00 Eastern right here on CNN. Ahead for us, the nation's top Intel officials have been warning since the last election that Russia would do it again and meddle in this race. Why are those warnings still being dismissed by the administration, ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)