Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

House Removes Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) from Committees; Trump Rejects Request to Testify at Second Impeachment Trial; Yankee Stadium Opens Today as Mass Vaccination Site. Aired 7- 7:30a ET

Aired February 05, 2021 - 07:00   ET

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

[07:00:00]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN NEW DAY: Welcome to our viewers in the United States and all around the world. This is New Day.

And Marjorie Taylor Greene is a congresswoman without a committee, but still with a party this morning. The House of Representatives took the unprecedented action of stripping a sitting member of Congress from her committee assignments. The vote was bipartisan with 11 Republicans joining Democrats to remove Greene from the education and budget committees.

The 11 was a bigger number than House Republican leadership thought they would lose, as they decided to stand behind Greene and the violent, outrageous things she said and supported, including endorsing the killing of top Democrats.

Greene never apologized to Congress or anyone, including the school shooting survivor she harassed. David Hogg will join us next hour. Instead, she seems to blame some giant, mystical force that allowed her to believe it all and repeat it all and lie all over the place.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN NEW DAY: And that leads us right to the second Trump impeachment trial. House managers making a high-stakes gamble, asking the former president to testify, Mr. Trump's defense team shooting down that idea.

And breaking this morning, moments ago, Vice President Kamala Harris cast a tie-breaking vote to pass a budget resolution that allows President Biden's $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package to go forward without Republican support.

BERMAN: Joining us now, CNN Senior Political Reporter Nia-Malika Henderson and CNN Political Analyst David Gregory.

And, Nia, you say, Marjorie Taylor Greene, while she lost her committee assignments, you say QAnon won and keeps winning. Why?

NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER: I think that's right. Even if you listen to her words in that speech, at some point, she equates the media with QAnon, and says that both are equally guilty of presenting truths and lies. So the question there is, what are the truths? She thinks that QAnon is still presenting and whether or not she believes him. And I think it's pretty clear from that speech if you were somebody who is QAnon, you saw in her a fellow traveler.

The problem here, I think, for the Republican Party, and more broadly, of the country, is that there is no moral authority in the Republican Party that is going to stand up to her. That ship has sailed. Kevin McCarthy and other leaders in the Republican Party had a chance to do that when she was bubbling up in those Republican primaries in Georgia. They passed on that opportunity.

And, of course, more importantly, the head of the Republican Party is a kind of messianic figure among QAnon followers. So he, of course, is not going to reject them or denounce them. In fact, he has all but embraced them, certainly embraced Marjorie Taylor Greene. So this is a real inflection point for the Republican Party and for the country. They have essentially opened the door to conspiracy theorists like Marjorie Taylor Greene.

These are dangerous ideas. The FBI has called QAnon a domestic terrorist threat. And so this was a real missed opportunity. And it came down to Democrats to be the kind of authority there and say, this will not be present on these committees in Congress.

But going forward, I think you'll see these conspiracy theorists flourish in the Republican Party, much different from what happened in the 1960s, when there were leaders of the Republican Party who said no to the Birchers and effectively kicked them out of the Party.

CAMEROTA: David, remember when the Republican Party liked to claim the mantle of personal responsibility? They felt that they were for personal responsibility. The ethical pretzels that they have now had to twist themselves in to support Marjorie Taylor Greene are almost as tortured as the language that she used yesterday in trying to explain why she used such violent rhetoric. Let me just play it for you so you can try to parse it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R-GA): I was allowed to believe things that weren't true. And I would ask questions about them and talk about them. And that is absolutely what I regret. Because if it weren't for the Facebook posts and comments that I liked in 2018, I wouldn't be standing here today and you couldn't point a finger and accuse me of anything wrong.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: She was allowed to believe them? By whom? Who's controlling her mind?

DAVID GREGORY, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Did her mom and dad allow her to believe that or was it Kevin McCarthy? Or who -- who was the adult in the room who allowed that? Look, it's sad that someone like Representative Greene can become a congresswoman. But the bar is low, I mean, and by the founders, that something like this could happen. So that's a reality. I would underline everything that Nia just said, because I agree with it.

[07:05:00]

And I was thinking this morning, as we were coming on, imagine this were 2002. Way back in 2002, still much fresher off the 9/11 attacks, Dennis Hastert, Republican, was speaker of the House. Can you imagine what would have happened to a Democrat who said that 9/11 didn't happen or that there was no plane that was flown into the Pentagon? They'd be out in a New York minute. And that's because that was the prevailing views of the time, but would not countenance those kinds of conspiracy views.

What's different now is Republican leaders want very much to court Greene's supporters, Trump's supporters in this party. They will condemn it, but they don't want to strip her of her committees, because McCarthy wants to be speaker of the House and feels very strongly that he's got to have this element of crazy in the Republican Party in the fold, in that tent he talks about, in order to prevail. And that's what Trump believed and that's how he acted, as well.

So, really, this is a risky move for Democrats. They're assuming this risk to take this action against another party. But it is risky and it's simply a reflection of the fact that Republicans, the leadership refused to come down as hard as they should have on a member who would espouse this nonsense.

BERMAN: The 2002 point is such a good claim. You couldn't even say French fries back in 2002, 2003.

GREGORY: Oh, my gosh. I mean, really, think about that for a second. It was just absolutely unimaginable.

BERMAN: And it's why, by the way, that some of the Republicans who did vote to the remove Marjorie Taylor Greene from her committees come from New York, the Staten Island members, members from New Jersey, members from South Florida, the Republican members for whom Parkland is close by, because they know it, because they were there. You can't say this stuff out loud when you live through it like that.

In terms of what this means for the party going forward, Nia, I was struck by Republican Senator Ben Sasse, who is dealing in his state with a move in the party, the Nebraska Republican Party wants to censure Ben Sasse, who's got like a million percent conservative voting record. I mean, no one questions Ben Sasse's conservative credentials, and they want to censure him, because he has supported in the past the notion of impeaching or convicting maybe even the former president.

Listen to how Sasse is making his case.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. BEN SASSE (R-NE): You are welcome to censure me again, but let's be clear about why this is happening. It's because I still believe, as you used to, that politics isn't about the weird worship of one dude. The party could purge Trump skeptics, but I would like to convince you that not only is that civic cancer for the nation, it's just terrible for our party.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: The weird worship of one dude. That really does sum it up.

HENDERSON: It really does sum up where the Republican Party is right now. I described Donald Trump as messianic figure. To QAnon, he's a messianic figure, to Republicans, more broadly. You saw Kevin McCarthy go down and get his marching orders from Donald Trump. And he, of course, hung very heavily over all of the Marjorie Taylor Greene proceedings there.

Marjorie Taylor Greene is Donald Trump's girl. And that is why a lot of those Republicans didn't want to cross him. Those are the same Republicans who told the big lie about the election, which, of course, led to what we saw on January 6th and which will lead to an impeachment trial in the Senate next week of this president.

Republicans cannot quit Donald Trump. It's not clear that they have much of a kind of governing philosophy. What is the ideology of the Republican Party at this point beyond Trumpism? It's hard to really say.

So now, people like Sasse, people like Lisa Murkowski, people like Susan Collins, they're the fringe of the Republican Party. And then people like Jim Jordan, even Marjorie Taylor Greene, I would argue, are much closer to the mainstream of the party. So you have these moves all over the country to censure people like Cindy McCain, censure people like Ben Sasse, censure the folks like Liz Cheney, who will certainly face a primary in her state, because she voted to impeach this president.

So, listen, I mean, we always talk about this war within the Republican Party. There really isn't a war. I mean, it's sort of been settled and settled around the ideology and the persona of Donald Trump.

CAMEROTA: David, let's talk about what happened this morning. Vice President Kamala Harris was the tiebreaker to advance the procedure that allows Joe Biden to go it alone with Democrats to get that $1.9 trillion relief, COVID relief, for Americans.

And so have any voters ever punished any president for giving them $1,400?

[07:10:04]

I mean, how risky -- is this a risk for Joe Biden?

GREGORY: Well, I don't think it's a risk in this respect? One, I think the American people recognize the need for government to step in and provide this kind of relief. Two, Dick Cheney said 20-some-odd years ago, my second reference now to the Bush years, that deficits don't matter and, of course, Trump ran up huge deficits. I don't think that's the immediate concern. So the American people support this. The president wants to go big and he wants to go fast. And I think, again, the calculation there is, when there is a turn in the economy, that they will reap the benefits. And those who sat on the sidelines will not. And that's the -- I think that's the political calculation. The real world calculation is, you've got to pump money out there for vaccinations to be distributed for schools to fully open, and to help people get back on their feet who have been devastated. And so in that respect, I think this is -- any political risk is certainly worth taking.

BERMAN: And there's an interesting contrast that has developed between the White House and what's going on in Congress. Because while everyone else is talking about Marjorie Taylor Greene and impeachment and everything else, the White House has just continuously pushed forward this relief bill, and they may be able to show they've produced something at the end of it all and it could benefit them politically, and as you say, more importantly, the question will be, whether it benefits the American people in this situation.

David Gregory and Nia-Malika Henderson, thanks so much.

Major developments in the impeachment trial to have the former president. He has refused to testify, but what do we know about which witnesses, if any witnesses, will be called, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:15:00]

CAMEROTA: The House impeachment manager is raising the stakes by asking former President Trump to testify in his second impeachment trial. That offer was quickly rejected by Mr. Trump's defense team.

In response, lead impeachment manager, Congressman Jamie Raskin replied, quote, we reserve any and all rights, including the right to establish at trial that your refusal to testify supports a strong adverse inference regarding your actions, end quote.

Joining us now is CNN Contributor and Republican Election Lawyer Ben Ginsberg.

Ben, explain this. Should they subpoena former President Trump to testify? Do they want him to testify? Would that be helpful to their case?

BEN GINSBERG, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I think they want him to testify. It would be helpful to their case, because Republican senators are now going to rest their vote against impeachment, on the very process- oriented, the proceeding isn't constitutional. But, honestly, the subpoena is not a realistic tool for them.

Remember that Democrats in Congress have subpoenaed any number of Trump administration officials over the past four years, and, really, Trump administration officials have not shown up to testify under those subpoenas.

The dirty little secret is, Congress really doesn't have much teeth to enforce a subpoena and it doesn't happen quickly.

CAMEROTA: Well, okay, I mean, here's what President Trump's attorneys said in response to getting that request for him to testify. Quote, we are in receipt of your latest public relations stunt. The use of our Constitution to bring a purported impeachment proceeding is much too serious to try to play these games. Can they dismiss it out of hand like that?

GINSBERG: Well, honestly, I think they can. I mean, the -- the Democrats can't get a subpoena enforced in the next week, and they know it. They subpoenaed former White House Counsel Don McGahn in the summer of 2019. He's not testified yet. So I think that's not realistic.

And Jamie Raskin talking about an adverse influence is a little bit of snorting a breath and stomping the ground, simply because this isn't a normal trial. They've already impeached him. That's the ultimate negative inference. And Jamie Raskin and the House Democrats telling Republican senators to draw an adverse inference in this case is not really going to have any weight with the jury.

CAMEROTA: Let's talk about what else we can expect next week. If you were an impeachment manager, would you call witnesses or would you let the mound of videotape speak for itself?

GINSBERG: Well, I think both. Certainly, the mound of videotape put together effectively will tell a hugely negative story about Donald Trump, that will make Republican senators the swing votes on the Senate jury very, very uncomfortable.

And there are two types of witnesses that would actually make a great impact on Republican senators and make it hard for them to hide behind the constitutionality argument. Number one, if there's a witness that's shown up through the FBI investigation process, really, who can say, yes, we instigated the riot and we had direct contacts with Donald Trump or somebody in the White House, that would be extremely impactful.

And number two, we still don't know the president's state of mind during the riot on January 6th. And so, you know, who was the White House steward who was serving him Diet Coke? What can he tell about the way the president reacted during the riot?

Now, there are all sorts of executive privilege arguments to be brought over that, but those are the two areas where there could be an impact.

CAMEROTA: What about the witnesses who we have already heard on tape and through their lawyers, who say, we went to the Capitol because Donald Trump told us to? Not that they had any direct contact with him, but they heard him loud and clear on his Twitter feed, they heard him loud and clear at that rally, for weeks leading up to this, because he told us the election was stolen, and he told us to go to the Capitol.

[07:20:06] What about that evidence? I mean, that's not direct, but is it compelling?

GINSBERG: Well, I think it's compelling. It's certainly going to be a compelling public story. Whether it's compelling enough to actually move the jury, the Republican senators, I think that's doubtful.

CAMEROTA: Because there's a lot of that stuff. You know, that's what -- there's a lot of videotape of people who are storming the Capitol, saying, we're here for the president. And they're echoing his words. I mean, they're parroting his words.

What about, Ben, calling a Capitol Hill police officer, what had to fend off the mob, would that be a good witness to call?

GINSBERG: Well, I think it would. I mean, I think all of that is effective in terms of setting the tone about the president's really indefensible actions during that afternoon. But, again, it's not direct linkage in the way that would be particularly persuasive to the Republican senators. And you run into the political realities of the situation, which is, there is important business before the Congress that President Biden and his administration want to get done.

So there is going to be a sort of a weighing between witnesses like that who will be compelling and the fact that that will lengthen the trial a great deal and keep the Senate away from the other business, such as COVID relief and economic stimulus.

CAMEROTA: Yes. Ben, last, I want to ask you about this typo, I guess, but it seems like an important one. And this is from President Trump's lawyers. They misspelled United States, okay? They did not spell the United States right. They spelled it, Unites, I guess, States. Do you see this as minor typo or do you see this as something bigger than that?

GINSBERG: Well, typos in briefs are never career-enhancing moves for lawyers. And this has, I think, a couple of ramifications beyond the fact it's a silly mistake. Number one, Donald Trump is going to look around and see those typos and the mockery it brought on his case and say, who are these guys? And so when it comes time to try and guide the president it, stands to take away a bit of their credibility with the president.

And number two, if you're a United States senator who is Republican, who is in kind of an uncomfortable position in this case anyways, and he sees the lawyers in whom Donald Trump has placed his trust, that's going to make those Republican senators a bit squeamish, also.

CAMEROTA: Well, I mean, maybe President Trump should give them a break. He doesn't get an A for spelling, you know? I mean, covfefe on his Twitter feed, I could go on. That wasn't his strong suit, let's just say.

But, Ben Ginsberg, thank you very much for walking us through it all.

GINSBERG: Thanks, Alisyn. CAMEROTA: One of the largest coronavirus mass vaccination sites in New York is about to be open to the public. We have a live report from Yankee Stadium, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:25:00]

BERMAN: This morning, Yankee Stadium here in New York opens as a mass vaccination site. Good news to be sure, but worth noting the Yankees finished second once again behind the Red Sox, who opened Fenway Park earlier this week.

CAMEROTA: Is that worth noting?

BERMAN: I think it is worth noting. Why were we in Fenway on Monday? It just shows the New York bias, the Yankee bias we have in all of our reporting.

CNN's Athena Jones live in the Bronx with a review. This is good news for New Yorkers. I mean it.

ATHENA JONES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, John. It is good news. This is something that many in the city have been waiting for. City officials hoping that it will be a game changer when it comes to getting more vaccines to more people more quickly and more equitably.

This mass vaccination site, one of several they're planning to open across the city, this site will be open from 8:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. It will only serve Bronx residents. And there will be 15,000 appointments available during the first week of operation. And this is exclusively for residents of the Bronx who are eligible, people like health care workers, people over 65, people who work in restaurants, taxi drivers, rideshare drivers and the like.

Officials decided to focus here on the Bronx because it is the neighborhood that has the -- the borough that has the highest rate of COVID positivity tests in the city. Just to compare Manhattan, hovering around 6 percent, here, hovering around 6 percent, Manhattan, around 3.5 percent. This borough also has the highest poverty rate in the city and is home to a large black and Latino population.

And we know that not just here in New York City, but all across the country, the black, Latino and poor communities have been hardest hit by the COVID epidemic. And so city officials say this is a key component of fairness and social equity when it comes to reaching these hardest hit communities.

Now, this is, of course, good in terms of access, but there are still concerns about people wanting to take a vaccine, convincing enough people to come and get a vaccine shot, because there's a lot of distrust in the black and Latino community when it comes to vaccines. That's why we're seeing of these15,000 appointments, there are still thousands open. And the city is aware of that, they're canvassing, they're trying to get information out to folks, but that is what we will be watching here. John?

BERMAN: Athena Jones at Yankee Stadium, perfectly positioned to help those most in need here in New York City, thanks for being there at the end.

Johnson & Johnson this morning asking the FDA for emergency use authorization for their one-dose coronavirus vaccine. Researchers found that the J&J vaccine is 72 percent effective against moderate to severe cases, 85 percent effective in preventing the most serious illness and the most important statistic might be none of its trial participants died of COVID or needed hospitalization.

Joining us now, CNN Chief Medical Correspondent and future guest host of Jeopardy, Dr. Sanjay Gupta.

[07:30:01]

Sanjay, great to have you here with us this morning.

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: I couldn't answer the questions, I just wanted to ask them.

CAMEROTA: Better. Smart. Smart.

BERMAN: You have the answers going in. And it's perfect.