Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

President Trump Does Not Commit to Peaceful Transfer of Power after 2020 Election; Three Officers Involved in Death of Breonna Taylor Not Charged; Trump Claims He Could Override FDA on Stricter Vaccine Standards. Aired 8-8:30a ET

Aired September 24, 2020 - 08:00   ET

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


[08:00:00]

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: I will read this. The president of the United States just refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power. That, of course, is a bedrock of our democracy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Will you commit to making sure that there is a peaceful transferal of power after the election?

DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We're going to have to see what happens. You know that I have been complaining very strongly about the ballots. And the ballots are a disaster.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I understand that, but people are rioting. Do you commit to making sure that there's a peaceful transferal of power?

TRUMP: We want to have -- get rid of the ballots and you'll have a very peaceful -- there won't be a transfer, frankly. There will be a continuation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: We're taking the president very seriously this morning that he doesn't want a transfer, he wants a continuation, and he's willing to have violence.

Also this morning, a grand jury failed to issue a single indictment for the killing of Breonna Taylor. One police officer was indicted, but only for firing shots into a nearby apartment.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Shots fired. fired.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Officer down, right there.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Officer down?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: That was from overnight where two police officers in Louisville were shot during protests. Both officers are in stable condition, we're told, at this hour. One suspect is in custody. We're also getting reports of vehicles driving into protesters in Buffalo and Denver.

But first, we want to get to President Trump being willing to break the constitutional principle of a peaceful transfer of power. CNN White House correspondent John Harwood and CNN political correspondent Abby Phillip. Guys, great to see you. Let's just play the moment one more time so everybody can hear what the president said yesterday unapologetically.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Will you commit to making sure that there is a peaceful transferal of power after the election?

DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We're going to have to see what happens. You know that I have been complaining very strongly about the ballots. And the ballots are a disaster.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I understand that, but people are rioting. Do you commit to making sure that there's a peaceful transferal of power?

TRUMP: We want to have -- get rid of the ballots and you'll have a very peaceful -- there won't be a transfer, frankly. There will be a continuation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Abby, the president of the United States would not commit to one of the fundamental principles of a peaceful transfer of power. I said this last hour, but I will say it all day long and up through Election Day, this is the moment, this is the moment we have to mark down in our calendars because this is the moment that was different than the other chaotic mornings that we report on every morning. This is the moment where he told us what to expect on Election Day.

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Alisyn, I think this is actually the most important American principle that there is. Without the peaceful transfer of power, we don't have a democracy anymore. And I think that we've come to expect public officials, presidents, candidates, to, without even saying it, not even contemplate the idea that they would not accept the results of an election, that they would not leave office if they are voted out peacefully.

And that is what the president did yesterday. And what is astounding to me is that there has been really no response to it at all. This is part of a months-long effort by the president to undermine faith in our electoral system. And this is the end point of it. This is where it all comes to a head. If we have a system in which people don't agree to pass along power peacefully, there is no American democracy at all. And I do think that this is something that lawmakers, especially on

the Republican side, need to be forced to say something about because, frankly, there's no backstop, there's no mechanism in the United States system to prevent the president from doing what he just said he might do.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: And John, before I had my microphone on, what I was trying to say is by refusing to commit to the peaceful transfer, that in and of itself is an implicit threat of violence if he loses. It is extraordinary.

JOHN HARWOOD, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely it is, John. This is un-American behavior, it's authoritarian behavior. As Abby said, peaceful transfer of power is what makes American democracy a model for the world. Even when Richard Nixon became the first president forced to leave office by resignation, we had a peaceful transfer of power. It's dangerous. We saw last night armed vigilantes walking along the streets of Louisville alongside of Breonna Taylor protesters. We've seen people lose their lives in Portland and in Kenosha. The more the president talks like this, the more likely it is that more people will lose their lives as a result of this.

Will the president actually act on the words that he says? He's full of it most of the time with his rhetoric. He behaves more like a weak person than a strong person, so he may not have the nerve to act on this. But that doesn't make it any less dangerous. And it's why Mitt Romney condemned it last night as unacceptable. We saw earlier that when the president talked about moving the election, which is also authoritarian behavior, other Republican leaders pushed back on that. To minimize the risks of what he did last night, it's very important for them to do that again this time. This is a more dangerous moment.

[08:05:07]

CAMEROTA: And just to be clear, John, he doesn't have to act on it. That's part of what's so pernicious. He doesn't have to do anything. What he does is signal to his -- if there are any overly passionate/violent supporters, that this is what he is open to, that this is what he expects, that when he says, we're going to have to see what happens, he's washing his hands of it. But if in the streets, there's lots of rioting, well, then, that's just what he is open to, Abby. Go ahead, John. That's what I think that he's talking about.

HARWOOD: I was going to say, absolutely that that is what he's signaling. That's why I said people could lose their lives as a result of this.

I think we also have to note that what the president is doing here is amplifying the same kind of message that his allies in Republican -- in Russian intelligence have been spreading. We've heard that from our intelligence officials. They are trying to sow chaos and doubt about the election. The president and Russian intelligence are on the same wavelength it spreading that message. It is a very dangerous moment for American democracy.

BERMAN: And in terms of what we know is happening, whether or not it's just words, Barton Gellman we had on earlier has an article in "The Atlantic" that came out overnight, which is remarkable. It includes reporting that the Trump campaign has been in discussions with state legislatures, or at least Republican leaders in states, to go around the vote in those states and have the state legislatures appoint electors for Donald Trump if they do not like the outcome of the election. If you're wondering whether or not that's constitutional, yes, actually. The Constitution gives the state legislators the power to appoint electors however they want, however they want. I say it's constitutional. That's what's the Constitution says, whether a court approves it or not we will see. But the bottom line is that these discussions apparently, reportedly, are already happening.

As to what Republicans are saying, Abby, we heard from Mitt Romney overnight. Steve Stivers from Ohio put out a statement, and Marco Rubio just put out a statement. And I want you to weigh in here on how sufficient this is. Rubio writes, "As we have done for two centuries, we will have a legitimate and fair election. It may take longer than usual to know the outcome, but it will be a valid one. And at noon January 20th, 2021, we will peacefully swear in the president." He doesn't use the words Donald Trump. I suppose he could have literally called Donald Trump out and said, Mr. President, you're wrong about this. But on the themes, I suppose, he's dead on.

PHILLIP: What he just said is the hope of this country. But of course, the question is we are in the middle of -- it's not just something the president said yesterday. I think that this is the point that Barton Gellman's piece makes, it's the crux of the reporting that we've been doing here at CNN for months. There is a massive communications effort underway to undermine the election, and a legal campaign underway that could cast doubt on millions and millions of votes that are cast by mail. That is the big picture here.

And so it requires a little bit more than just saying we want to have a peaceful transfer of power. I do think that the reality is that we have to examine what is actually being done. And the president's campaign, the Republican National Committee is in court against Democrats on the issue of whether ballots cast by mail should count if they are received after election date, if they are mailed before election date, received after election date, if there are errors in the signatures. These battles are real. They will make a difference, and this is why the president is trying to link the peaceful transfer of power to the throwing out of ballots. They are linked in his mind, and I don't think that it's enough for Republicans to just say, I hope that this is not what happens. They have to actually start acting on it and condemning some of the president's attacks on mail-in voting specifically.

BERMAN: So far, we're up to three.

HARWOOD: Guys, one final note, one final note on this point Abby just raised. It is worth pointing out that for all of the stocking of the federal judiciary President Trump has done during his term, he has been losing more of these major battles in court over voting access and voting rights than he has been winning. Of course, things may get to the Supreme Court, but so far, the courts have been substantially vindicating Democratic claims.

BERMAN: That's a great point. John Harwood, Abby Philip, our thanks to both of you.

No other top story this morning, no charges against the three officers who are responsible for the death of Breonna Taylor. Breonna Taylor this morning is dead. None of the three officers were charged in any way with her killing. One officer was charged with firing shots into a nearby apartment.

[08:10:00]

Joining us now is Steve Romines, attorney for Breonna Taylor's boyfriend Kenneth Walker. Also with us, Lonita Baker, she is the attorney for Breonna Taylor's mother Tamika Palmer. And Counselor Baker, I want to start with you, Tamika Palmer, when was she notified, how was she notified about this decision, and what exactly was she told?

LONITA BAKER, ATTORNEY FOR BREONNA TAYLOR'S MOTHER: It was disappointing. Tamika Palmer was notified about the decision at the same time that America was getting to watch the report of the grand jury being made to the circuit court judge. We walked into Daniel Cameron's office at approximately 1:15 yesterday where Daniel Cameron informed her that Brett Hankison had been indicted for three counts of wanton endangerment. It was truly disheartening to see that he did not even have the courage to inform her that those three counts did not relate to Breonna Taylor but related to the three neighbors who were endangered and who, properly there are charges filed with them.

But if they were in danger -- but if Hankison's behavior was so reckless he endangered their lives, he also endangered the lives of the people in Breonna Taylor's apartment, and he also -- and the officers present also recklessly endangered the neighbors in the upstairs apartment for who there are no charges as well.

The result of the grand jury does not make legal sense to me. I've been a prosecutor, I've been a criminal defense attorney, and I have to question whether Attorney General Daniel Cameron actually even presented any questions as it relates to the murder of Breonna Taylor to the grand jury for the grand jury to make the determination, or if his office unilaterally made that decision.

BERMAN: Steve Romines, the case laid out by Daniel Cameron, as he puts it, is when the police went into the apartment, it was your client, Kenneth Walker, who shot first and shot officer Jon Mattingly in the leg. It was because Kenneth Walker shot, Daniel Cameron says, that the officers were justified in returning fire, and therefore no charges could be filed. Your response to that, counselor?

STEVE ROMINES, ATTORNEY FOR BREONNA TAYLOR'S BOYFRIEND KENNETH WALKER: Well, first of all, it's not in dispute that Kenny fired the first shot, after they break in the apartment at about 1:00 in the morning, without announcing that they're police. And Mr. Cameron said, well, the police said they announced. They're the targets of the investigation. We're going to take their word for it? There he said there was another witness who corroborated that.

There were 12 independent witnesses who said they did not announce that they were police, neighbors in the neighboring apartment. The witness that they say corroborated it, in his initial interview with the police, he said they did not announce. And the police had to interview him multiple times after that to eventually get him to say, yes, they may have announced. And he has a language barrier. English is not his primary language.

And so that's back to the problem, though, when you've got a politician summarily declaring these people were justified, that's what a jury is for. I've defended multiple homicide cases with self- defense as a defense. My clients don't get the benefit of the prosecutor saying, we're not even going to charge them. It was justified. We have to present our evidence to a jury and let a jury decide if they were acting in self-defense or not. And by declaring them immune via prosecutorial fiat, you're completely ignoring our entire system of justice.

And there are mechanisms in Kentucky law to assert self-defense immunity. And it is done after you're charged, and via a hearing in front of the judge. You actually don't even have to go all the way to trial. None of that occurred.

The other thing Attorney General Cameron did not address, and there are multiple factual statements he made that are not true. But one of the things that he did not address is you are not entitled under Kentucky law to claim self-defense, when you shoot a third party. You must identify the party who is putting you at imminent risk of bodily injury, and you are allowed to use self-defense against them. You don't get to recklessly shoot bystanders. It's like pulling out a machine gun and wiping out a group of people and saying that guy pulled a gun on me. You do not get to do that under Kentucky law.

It's back to the same thing, though. Release the entire file, let everybody see it, be transparent about it, and it will show that the information they presented to the grand jury was simply designed not to charge these officers.

[08:15:03]

BERMAN: Lonita Baker, you were shaking your head when I was laying out the case made by Daniel Cameron, the attorney general. Again, just to restate it, he says, counsel does not dispute it, it was Kenneth Walker who shot first, shot Jonathan Mattingly in the leg, says the attorney general.

ROMINES: We dispute that.

BERMAN: You dispute he was shot in the leg and still say it was the police even though the FBI ballistics says, Cameron, show that it was Kenneth Walker's bullet. Yes?

ROMINES: Actually, he didn't say the FBI ballistics. He said ballistics. The only ballistics we have been -- had access to are the initial Kentucky state police was showing Kenny actually was hit. BERMAN: OK, but you're not disputing, you're not disputing that he

shot first at this point? That was my only point.

(CROSSTALK)

ROMINES: No, there's no dispute. There's no dispute they knocked.

BERMAN: OK, my question --

ROMINES: There's no dispute they knocked, There's no dispute that he shot first.

Everything that Kenny Walker said to the police the night of this incident turned out to be true --

BERMAN: All right. I want to give -- I want to give Lonita Baker a chance to weigh in here obviously because you represent Tamika Palmer, the mother of Breonna Taylor here. And, again, you were shaking your head when I was laying out the case that Daniel Cameron made that the officers, he says, were acting in self-defense and therefore, he says, cannot be charged here, what questions remain to you?

LONITA BAKER, ATTORNEY FOR BREONNA TAYLOR'S MOTHER: Well, I was shaking my head, because I agree with Attorney Romines, in that these officers are not entitled to self-defense. The -- Breonna Taylor did not pose a threat to them. Sergeant Mattingly, in his own statement, says Breonna Taylor was unarmed. And so, you don't get that self- defense justification for Breonna Taylor.

So, just as I said, if the neighbors were in danger, the three neighbors were, so was Breonna Taylor, so were the upstairs neighbors, who also black mails, so there's -- we have an indictment, as should be against three white neighbors, but you have black neighbors upstairs, there was no indictment returned and you have a black victim, Breonna Taylor, who was not -- who was not protected here.

Daniel Cameron failed. He needs to learn the law of self-defense in Kentucky, because as he stated it yesterday he was off base, completely off base.

BERMAN: Lonita Baker, Steve Romines --

BAKER: One shot that Kenny Walker fired does not justify 32 shots being fired blindly into Breonna's apartment without target acquisition. Police officers are trained not to shoot unless they actually have a target in mind. They had no target acquisition, nearly hit a furnace.

Their actions were completely out of line. And for Daniel Cameron to sign off on that kind of reckless behavior is just beyond me.

BERMAN: Breonna Taylor was hit six times.

Lonita Baker, Steve Romines, thank you both for being with us this morning. We appreciate it.

And we should note, we did invite Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron to come on our show. He declined.

President Trump also claims he can overrule the FDA if they -- the president of the United States last night threatened to overrule the FDA's discussed standards on vaccine approval. We'll discuss it, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:22:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It's extremely political. Why would they do this when they come back with great results? Why would we keep delaying it?

But we're going to take a look at it. We're going to take a look at it, and ultimately the White House has to approve it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: That's the president threatening to override the FDA. The FDA has been in discussions over new guidelines for emergency approval of a coronavirus vaccine, and the president right there just indicated he's not happy about it and might ultimately overrule their guidelines.

Joining us now, CNN chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta.

When you heard that, your reaction?

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: I didn't know what to make of it. You know, I was watching it real-time and right after that, I was on with Dr. Francis Collins, who's head of the NIH.

And Wolf asked Dr. Collins as well, have you ever heard anything like this? You know, what do you make of it? And Dr. Collins had the same reaction. He didn't -- he never heard anything like it. He didn't know if it was possible, even what the president was saying and whether it's a medical or legal thing.

What we're talking about here, just in case people didn't sort of follow this, is that as part of this vaccine trial, one of the things the FDA has to do is basically lay out their protocols or policies in terms of how they're going to determine whether this is safe and effective. In the past, they already talked about the fact they will present a 50 percent defectiveness data to basically allow an authorization.

Then, they're coming back and saying as far as safety goes, we think two months need to pass for the majority of these participants before we can say that this thing is safe, because there are side effects that are going to occur, they are likely to occur within these two months.

So, it's that two month window the subject of the discussion yesterday. And what the president said is that, you know, the White House will have to approve that, approve the FDA's protocol on this.

Now, what we've learned subsequently, it's ridiculous. I didn't know this could even be done. What has to happen is the FDA submits their guidelines to the Office of Management and Budget, OMB, they review guidelines, they approve guidelines, they are a division of executive branch of government.

And I think that's the point where the president is sort of at least signaling that he may get involved, and saying, hey, we may sort of influence the OMB to say, don't -- don't accept these guidelines from the FDA. That would be really, really worrisome, not only for this vaccine, but I think just for the overall trust in these types of processes in the first place.

You know, we have a certain amount of trust when the FDA approves something that it is safe and effective. This would, you know, possibly really undermine that.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Americans are already dubious, as you will hear in my voter panel coming up in a few minutes. They already think the process has been politicized and it makes them wary, as you can imagine, Sanjay.

But I want to get to something on Capitol Hill, Dr. Fauci and some other experts were testifying at a congressional hearing.

[08:25:07]

And Senator Rand Paul challenged Dr. Fauci and I want to get your take on Dr. Fauci sort of pushing back here. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES: The things that are going on in New York to get their test poverty 1 percent or less is because they are looking at the guidelines that we have put together from the task force of the 4 or 5 things of masks, social distancing outdoors more than indoors, avoiding crowds and washing hands.

SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY): Or they've developed enough community immunity that they're no longer having the pandemic because they have enough immunity in New York to actually stop --

FAUCI: I challenge that, Senator.

(CROSSTALK)

FAUCI: I want to -- please, sir, I would like to be able to do this because this happens with Senator Rand all the time.

You are not listening to what the director of the CDC said, that in New York, it's about 22 percent. If you believe 22 percent is herd immunity, I believe you're alone in that.

(END VIDEO CLIP) CAMEROTA: How about that, Sanjay?

GUPTA: You know, I mean, there's two things that really strike me, one, the substance, I will tell you about. I've known Dr. Fauci for a long time, 20 years, and I talk to him a lot of times not on camera, you know, on the phone or background. He can get animated at times.

That was -- that was strong for Dr. Fauci. He's always very measured. But I can tell and you could tell that he was really seething. I mean, this is certainly getting to him and frankly understandably.

The point he's making I think is a very fundamental point. The idea if you just let the virus spread through a community ultimately enough people would become infected you could develop herd immunity.

It's a bad idea because a lot of people would get sick and die and the hospital systems could become overwhelmed, all those things we talked about at the very beginning of flattening the curve, it's a bad idea.

But the more fundamental point is, when do you achieve herd immunity? What percentage of the population needs to be immunized against this virus in order to get that. And that is an objective thing you can measure.

It's based on how contagiousness of the virus is, and there's an equation. You can basically say, based on the contagiousness of the virus, you need to have this percentage of the population. In coronavirus, it's right around 67 percent, when you do the math. I did the math last night.

To give you some context, measles, which is really, really contagious, it would be 94 percent. The point is, we're nowhere close to herd immunity. Ten percent in the country and 20 percent in New York, we -- that's not a good strategy.

BERMAN: Sanjay, thank you for the reality. Appreciate it.

So, President Trump has refused to commit to a peaceful transfer of power if he loses the election. We've been counting all morning long and so far, a whopping four Republicans have spoken out to condemn this, four. The count goes on, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)