Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson is Leading Candidate for Secretary Of State; Two Large Explosions Near the Center of Istanbul; World's Tallest Animal Has Seen Dramatic Drop in Numbers, At Risk of Extinction. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired December 10, 2016 - 16:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:00:22] POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: Top of the hour. I'm Poppy Harlow in New York. You are live in the CNN NEWSROOM. So glad you're with us.

We begin with president-elect Donald Trump taking on U.S. intelligence agencies, agencies that he will soon oversee as commander in-chief. In a stunning move, his transition team slamming the CIA over reports that the agency believes Russian hackers intervened in the election specifically in an effort to help Donald Trump win. Russia is asking, where is the evidence?

This is Trump's transition team releases a statement reading. These are the same people who said that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The election ended a long time ago in one of the biggest Electoral College victories in history. It's now time to move on and make America great again.

The CIA for its part not commenting. Trump's assertion, though, that the intelligence team of today, is the same as 13 years ago, with the faulty WMD intelligence, it's just not true.

Here's how Republican senator Lindsey Graham reacted today on twitter to all of it. Quote "I'm not challenging the outcome of the election. But I'm concerned about Russian interference and attacks at home and throughout the world. Don't have to be a Sherlock Holmes to figure out what Russia is up to. They are trying to undermine democracies all over the world."

Our Ryan Nobles is live for us today in Baltimore. That is where the president-elect is watching, the army navy college football game.

And Ryan, someone else there (INAUDIBLE) who you just spoke to, that is Senator John McCain. And he spoke with him about Russia's relationship with Trump's leading candidate right now for secretary of state. That is Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson. What did senator McCain say?

RYAN NOBLES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Poppy, senator McCain has concerns. He is a harsh critic of Vladimir Putin and the Russian government. And he is hoping that he gets some answers to questions that he has if Rex Tillerson becomes the secretary of state nominee. He has concerned that Tillerson and his deep relationship with Russian president Vladimir Putin could be a problem. And if those concerns aren't taken care of, McCain told that he wouldn't hesitate to vote no. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: I have obviously concerns of reports of his relationship with Vladimir Putin who is a thug and a murder, but that's -- we will have hearings on that issue and other issues concerning him will be examined. And that's the time to make up your mind as to whether to vote yes or no.

NOBLES: So what kind of questions would you ask Rex Tillerson that would make you feel comfortable about him in a role like that.

MCCAIN: His view of Vladimir Putin and his dwell in the world. And for example, the fact that (INAUDIBLE) as the leader of the opposition was murdered on the orders, I believe, of Vladimir Putin and the shadow of the Kremlin.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NOBLES: But you know, McCain's role in this can't be understated. He is obviously a powerful voice in the senate. And you know conventional wisdom is that because of Republicans have the majority in the Senate, that most if not all of Donald Trump's cabinet appointments will sail through. But if someone like McCain joins up with other moderate Republicans and also have similar concerns, this could be a confirmation battle for the incoming Trump administration.

So we need to caution that we don't know yet if Rex Tillerson is going to be the nominee for secretary of state. We are told he is the leading candidate. But Poppy, the transition tells us that no official announcement will be made today. And we shouldn't expect anything at the earliest until the coming week -- Poppy.

HARLOW: It is interesting when you talk about Russia, the two men, Romney and Tillerson, could not have more different views, at least publicly, about what they said about Russia. And Romney in the 2012 election said it's the greatest geo political foe of the United States. And many people question that at the time. Hindsight certainly is 20/20 on that. Tillerson, back in 2014, at his company's annual meeting said about sanctions on Russia. He was critical of them saying we encourage people who are making these decisions to consider the very broad collateral damage of who they are really harming with these sanctions. I mean, there's a big difference between these two picks.

NOBLES: Yes. It's interesting too, Poppy, because this might be the most important cabinet pick that the president-elect has. And it looks as though he is ready and prepared for a fight if it ends up being someone like Tillerson. And it's not just the ties to Russia, but it is also the fact that he is the CEO of a global oil company. That's going to raise concerns up from the environmental right activists as well. So this won't be an easy go of it for president-elect Trump if he ends

up going in this direction. But you know, our sources tell us that he has been very impressed with Tillerson from the very beginning of this process. And Tillerson started as someone who kind of an outside looking in and he is slowly moved his way up to the top. And we know that Tillerson was at Trump tower this morning. So, there's no doubt that he is the leading candidate.

[16:05:19] HARLOW: Ryan Nobles, thank you so much there in Baltimore.

Also with me now from Moscow tonight is Jill Doherty. She is a global fellow for the Woodrow Wilson institute and CNN's former Moscow bureau chief.

Jill, let me get your take given how well you know Russia, how you studied President Vladimir Putin, how does he view Donald Trump? Because I know at one time during the campaign Trump noted that Putin called him brilliant. That actually didn't turn out to be the exact translation?

JILL DOHERTY, GLOBAL FELLOW, WOODROW WILSON INSTITUTE: Right, but then just about a week ago, president Putin repeated that and actually he said smart. So in the context of that was interesting because he said, Mr. Trump is a smart man because he has to be, because he was a smart businessman. And so we expect him, you know, to continue. And the context was he will learn the ropes and he will know the responsibilities of a president.

But he actually has called him smart now. And I think that they have a similar world view in the sense that it's quite realistic, you know. Let's do a deal. Let's work together. Keep it pretty black and white. Don't worry about extraneous issues. You know, focus like Donald Trump is saying let's fight terrorism together. Mr. Putin has been talking about that for years. So I think it's pretty, you know, pretty transactional, let's say, relationship that Mr. Putin would like to have with Trump and probably Trump with Putin.

HARLOW: Jill Doherty will be watching live from Moscow. Thank you very much. We appreciate it.

For its part, the Republican National Committee is siding with Trump. Spokesman Sean Spicer slamming that Intel report in that fire exchange to CNN's Michael Smerconish this morning on must see television. Here it is.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN HOST, MICHAEL SMERCONISH SHOW: All right, I want to understand. I want to understand facts. You are telling me that you know to a certainty that the RNC was not hacked by the Russians or anyone else. And so to the extent whether it is "the Post," "the Times," CNN, to the extent that anyone reports including the CIA that the RNC was hacked, Sean Spicer knows that to be a falsehood?

SEAN SPICER, CHIEF STRATEGIST & COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR, RNC: I know that we have worked with intelligence agencies right now that are saying that we have not been hacked. Our own systems show that we have not been hacked. I'm not a forensic, you know, computer person, so I can't say - but I know that the intelligence agencies that we are working with, tell us with certainty that we haven't been hacked. We have said it before and we have tried to work with these media outlets to explain that to him and to show him but they have chosen not to engage in that conversation. That's not my fault, Michael.

So - and again, look at what the reports. If they're so certain it happened, why won't they go On the Record and say it? I don't understand it. It doesn't make any sense. Go out there and say --.

SMERCONISH: There's an obvious answer to that which is - there is an obvious answer to that, I imagine, which is to say that they don't want the Russians to know of the way in which they have been able to assemble this case. Let me move to a slightly different aspect of it.

SPICER: Hold on.

(CROSSTALK)

SPICER: Please don't make excuses for them. They did when they came out --.

SMERCONISH: I'm not making excuses for anybody.

SPICER: Hold on. Michael, they came out and said with respect to the DNC. And the DNC confirmed it, OK. So I don't understand why - look. There's questions on that side, we have been willing to talk to people to show that it wasn't true. And people are willing to ignore it. So on the flip side, there was a difference. When it came through what happened on the DNC. And I'm just trying to get the facts out is there, and somehow, it's, you must be lying. You must not be accepting the facts. No, I'm trying to get the truth out there.

SMERCONISH: I didn't say that you.

(CROSSTALK)

SPICER: Hold on, Michael. With all due respect. You impugn. You said that why won't we accept the facts? And we are suiting up in taking our positions, no. I'm actually trying to get the facts out. I'm trying to make reporters understand what's really happening and actually bring them into the process.

SMERCONISH: No, I'm making a different point. I'm actually making a different point. I'm casting doubt on whether Sean Spicer could definitively know the answer to the question of the extent of the Russian hack. And my frustration is at the idea that until this thing is fully developed, already, president-elect Trump is saying move on, folks, there's nothing to see here.

But I need to ask you an additional question. Speak to the point that I -- I want you to address this, I'm also concerned. Come on. I'm being fair to you but I got to get a word in every once in a while. I'm also troubled by the idea that my president-elect, he is going to

be all about president, is already throwing under the bus the intelligence community with whom he is going to have to work on life and death matters. Wasn't that a troubling thing to do at 9:34 last night in that very night--?

[16:10:13] SPICER: No, no. Michael, "the New York Times" in their story, said that they base their conclusion on the fact that the RNC was hacked, OK. If the RNC was not hacked, then that casts doubt on their conclusions. I don't understand why this is that difficult to understand.

(CROSSTALK)

SMERCONISH: OK. Regardless of whether the RNC was hacked and that would be a g and new development, I think we know to a certainty given Podesta and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz that the DNC was hacked. Why aren't we as Americans upset about the fact that a foreign hostile actor, apparently, put its thumb on the scale in our election, and why doesn't Donald Trump want to get to the bottom of that as he takes office. That's the issue.

SPICER: Well, first of all - OK, there is a couple of things. One is I am outrage. I don't think any foreign entity, any individual, any --

SMERCONISH: Why don't you say that? And why Trump didn't say that?

SPICER: OK. I just said it. Let me, actually, take yes for an answer. I said it. OK. I don't think Donald Trump doesn't think. No one thinks that a foreign entity should be interfering with the U.S. elections. Bottom line, full stop, I said it. Now, let's get to the next thing, what proof does anyone have that they effected the outcome because I heard zero. OK. So show me what facts have actually shown that anything undermines that election. Donald Trump won with 306 electoral votes, 2300 counties, 62 million Americans voted for him. So what proof do you have or does anyone have that any of this affected the outcome of this election?

SMERCONISH: I'm just an American whose trying to dis-earn all that I'm reporting on.

SPICER: No, that answer the question, Michael. You are asking me - show me what - I need one fact that an outcome was changed.

SMERCONISH: Ask Debbie Wasserman -- I can't say it impacted the ultimate outcome. But that it took place.

SPICER: Go ask Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

SMERCONISH: Thank you. Do be continued, I do appreciate you being here, I really do. By the way, love to talk to your boss on this. He is a watcher. He tweets about my show. Mr. President-elect, I'll treat you with dignity and respect, come here and let me ask you these questions.

Thank you, Sean. I do appreciate you.

SPICER: Thank you, Michael.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HARLOW: The man, Michael Smerconish, is with me next. Don't miss this.

You are live on the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:15:39] HARLOW: Before the break, you heard the heated exchange between our very own Michael Smerconish and Sean Spicer, the RNC communications director. Michael asked Spicer about the Trump transition team slamming the CIA over reports that the agency believed that Russia meddled in the election specifically in an effort to help get Donald Trump elected.

Here's a short expert of one of the most heated moments.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SMERCONISH: Why aren't we as Americans upset about the fact that a foreign hostile actor apparently put its thumb on the scale in our election, and why doesn't Donald Trump want to get to the bottom of that as he takes office. That's the issue.

SPICER: Well, first of all, OK, there is a couple of things. One is I am outrage. I don't think any foreign entity, any individual, any --.

SMERCONISH: Well, why don't you say that? And why didn't Trump say that?

SPICER: I'm saying it, Michael. I just said it.

(CROSSTALK)

SPICER: OK. I just said it, let me actually take yes for an answer. I said it. OK.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: If you have not seen that full interview, you need to go online and watch it all right now.

Michael Smerconish, host of "SMERCONISH" joins me now.

Michael, I told you I was watching at the gym and I almost fell off the treadmill this morning. Truly watching all of this, but on a very serious and important note to all Americans, no matter what your political persuasion, you know, it took you a good five, maybe almost 10 minutes in that interview before, you know, Sean Spicer would say or said, I am outraged. That struck me, did it strike you? SMERCONISH: It not only struck me, but it made me wonder, why did it

take so long to get him to condemn that? And more importantly, why last night at 9:30 at night, didn't the statement that was set out by t transition team lead with that either. I mean, in other words, why not lead with the idea that they condemn the nature, the notion of any hack whatsoever. And then make whatever point they wanted to make.

And the frustration, Poppy, that you heard in my voice is that I don't think this is a case where we should suit up in our Republican and Democratic or even Independent jerseys and decide, do we like the outcome of the election? And then act accordingly.

No, this is one of those circumstances where you would hope we would unite as Americans and say, wait a minute, whether I was for Hillary, whether I was Donald, you are telling me that perhaps Vladimir Putin had his thumb on the scale? We need to get to the bottom of that first.

HARLOW: You know, Sean Spicer said to you in the interview at one point or was indicating that it was almost sort of outcome determinative. Meaning, well, Michael, where's the proof that any hacking actually swayed the election? That is actually secondary.

SMERCONISH: I think it is secondary because I don't think it makes it any less serious an idea if in fact there were a hack. And by the way, you know, how these interviews are. I'm kind of kicking myself for not having asked a better follow-up or made a better follow up point which is this. If I had it to do over again, I would say, hold on, Sean. We are really talking about only 80,000 votes in swing states. And you know, she did win the popular vote. So maybe I should not have been so dismissive of the idea that this didn't alter the outcome.

HARLOW: So as when we look at the next moves that the president- elect's team will make. The next pick they have to make is secretary of state. And as you know, CNN is reporting is that Rex Tillerson, the CEO of Exxon Mobil, is now at the top of the list. Why does that matter as we talk about Russia and Russian hacking won't matters because he, as the head of Exxon, aimed a huge oil deal with Russia as one of their biggest oil company? This Russia, the state is a big player in. That he receive an award from Russia just three years ago. That beg a lot of questions including, you know, questions that John McCain just brought up to our Ryan Nobles this morning who will be part of this confirmation process. How dicey will that be if it is Rex Tillerson?

SMERCONISH: I think it will be very dicey. I would like to think that this issue has raised the stock of Governor Romney, given the statements that he has made in the past. And as you pointed out during the course of this broadcast, put him diametrically opposed to Rex Tillerson.

And of course, I'm rewinding in my mind, Donald Trump in that clip having said during the campaign that he invited Vladimir Putin to please release whatever emails they may have had from Hillary Clinton's private server. So I think the whole situation is really unsettling and the ball is

now in the president-elect's court to say something like that which Sean Spicer said well into the interview.

[16:20:22] HARLOW: Michael, it was, well, a breathtaking interview that almost knocked me off the treadmill. Thank you for being with me.

SMERCONISH: I'm glad you didn't, Poppy.

HARLOW: I'm glad because you would be anchoring this show right now and I would gel to hospital.

Michael, thank you very much.

SMERCONISH: Thank you.

HARLOW: And for all of you, watching -- if you missed it this morning, you can see the entire interview that Michael did with Sean Spicer. 6:00 p.m. eastern only right here on CNN.

Back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:24:26] HARLOW: Breaking news right now from Turkey, two large explosions near the center of Istanbul.

(VIDEO CLIP PLAYING)

HARLOW: Again, this is in central Istanbul after a soccer match in a busy Saturday night game at a huge sports stadium there. Witnesses say two separate explosions went off outside of the stadium. At least 20 people are injured. Turkish officials say, at least one of the explosions was caused by a car bomb. And a state news agency says the police officer is the apparent target of the attack. No claim yet of responsibility. Of course, we are following developments tonight in Istanbul very closely. We will bring you more as we have it.

Meantime, coming up here live in the CNN NEWSROOM, he is the billionaire investor that president-elect Donald Trump leans on to help select cabinet members and his economic team. And when it comes to the EPA, Carl Icahn has -- well, he says he is supportive of climate change denier that is now been chosen to lead the agency. Why he says he changed his tune on this pick? Part two of my interview with Carl Icahn is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:28:44] HARLOW: Billionaire, activist, investor Carl Icahn, the man that many thought might be the next treasury secretary told me a few weeks ago, he never worked for anyone in his life and had no desire to go to Washington. But he has been integral especially in the recent weeks because he was the president-elect's ear. He was heavily involved with selections for his cabinet especially the selection of Scott Pruett, Donald Trump picked to lead the EPA. Here's more of my interview with Carl Icahn.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HARLOW: Scott Pruett, obviously, of Oklahoma and a climate change denier. He wrote this in "the National Review." Scientists continue to disagree about the degree and the extent of global warming and its connections to the act of mankind.

I know you had your reservations about him at first. And you met with him four times, what changed your mind on him.

CARL ICAHN, BILLIONAIRE (on the phone): Yes. Look. I have spoken to him a number of times. I feel very strongly on the business side here. In other words, you know, I like to know what I know. I think I have made a lot of money and a lot of success by being sort of -- almost obsessively concentrating on the areas that I really feel I understand until you make it into simplicity in choosing something. And the thing that I see with the EPA is they have done a horrible job in making perception of -- in making the perception that the government is anti-business. And they have done a lot of harm to businesses. In fact, at this point there are a number of refineries on the verge of bankruptcy because of the EPA's capricious actions.

The EPA has gone in and does - and government is not supposed to do. And I think they even would admit it but ignored what they are doing which is dictating a transfer of wealth for no reason from certain companies, and penalizing companies for no reason -- I don't want to get into too much detail, making them obligated bodies. They are going to refineries.

[16:30:59] HARLOW: You're talking about ethanol requirements for example and mixing fuels and having to pay to another company if you don't have that, and I understand that. And you also obviously have interest in companies that this affects. I'm just wondering how you balance, Carl, you know, the impact on business, and their task of protecting the environment for generations to come.

ICAHN: Yes, well, look it, if you look at what I'm talking about, there is really no relation to changing the obligated party and the RFS and people don't understand that. So capriciously, the EPA has decided to penalize these businesses. Now, when you say Iona refinery, it's a small part of my portfolio. And that is to say when I made billions of dollars for Texaco, you could have criticized Texaco shareholders. You could criticize me and say, well, you owns the Texaco. Sure I do.

I mean, I'm not telling you I'm doing it for charity. But it also helps hundreds of thousands of shareholders when we get in and clean up a company or make do search things over the years. We pay hundreds of billions of dollars to Sheldon. So to say that my input shouldn't be -- should be criticized because I own a refinery which is a small part of my portfolio, I just want to clean that up.

Now, let me go into the criticism you have. I'm not here telling you I'm an environmental expert. There are other people that are more expert on that than I am. I am not a critic of the RFS, you know, the Renewable Fuel Standard. I do believe that to some extent we have gone overboard concerning the environment. But I leave that to the experts in that area.

But what I will tell you what I'm an expert is, I'm an expert in seeing stupid things being done. And you know, I'm almost -- I have it on my twitter or one of those things I put out. Some people make a living studying artificial intelligence. I make it studying natural stupidity. And what the EPA is doing is just naturally stupidity. Because what they are doing is ruining companies at no reason, with no reasons.

HARLOW: Let me jump in on this. We are not going to get on huge environmental debate. But when you talk about stupidity on one end, in terms of an impact on business, you also have to talk about what's stupid in the long run for our environment.

So my question is to you, and then we move on to other agencies, the fact that this pick, Scott Pruett, who you did have questions about at first, is a climate change denier. Even Donald Trump, the president- elect said recently in an interview with the "New York Times," that he, you know, is leaning more toward believing there is a correlation between global warming and human action. Does it concern you at all what Pruett believes?

ICAHN: Well, I talked to him. And I think that he also has a view toward change of climate that is not complete denial. That said, I feel that he does understand the problems. And I think Donald feels that way about it. I want someone in there that does understand the problems, but I'm not here to criticize or not criticize on the basis of climate change. But I would say that the EPA must be changed drastically. And --

HARLOW: OK.

ICAHN: You -- that belongs in, and he's going to do that, OK. That's my whole point.

HARLOW: OK. I hear you, I'm -- on some of these other big picks, you tweeted, (INAUDIBLE) and Wilber Ross (ph) will both help do what Americans need most stimulate companies to invest. What is the number one thing they can do to ensure that? Because I know you are not a supporter for example of repealing Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform. So what should they do?

[16:35:13] HARLOW: I warrant to say I'm not a supporter of completely changing it. But that's a, you know, big complicated question. I think there was a need to the Dodd -- some of the Dodd-Frank rules and in 2008 was much to blame for the problems for the mortgage backed securities. And they can't deny that. And even though a lot of them are my friends, I still follow that.

So the point there is -- I want to make it clear, I'm not anti- regulation. I'm anti-the stupidity of some of these regulations, and it's just run amok. So to say that I'm anti-all regulation is wrong. And I don't agree with that, but if you want to get back to --

HARLOW: Yes, what do you want to see Minuchin and Ross do most?

ICAHN: OK. Let's begin with (INAUDIBLE), you are going to lower taxes. And I think it should be lowered to stimulate business. I think Steve also agrees, and I -- actually, with me on one of the interviews, twice was nice enough to join me in talking with Pruett. And he too, you know, came to conclusions that at the beginning we doubted him. And then we came to the conclusion that he was pretty damn good. And so, I think Steve will do -- for instance, if you want to get into the nitty-gritty, I think you're going to lower the ability to or increase the ability for depreciation. So that will stimulate businesses to invest. So you are going to have more depreciation. You are going to lower taxes. I mean, that's what a secretary treasury is going to be involved in. And I think that's going to be very positive for the economy.

HARLOW: Do you think that those --

ICAHN: I'm not telling you they're going to turn around tomorrow because of this. They're the simplistic and basic things you have to do.

HARLOW: On that note, on that depreciation note, for example, money then saved, do you expect that and hope that will be invested back in these good paying, you know, middle class American jobs?

(CROSSTALK)

ICAHN: Because if you are stimulated by the government to invest in machinery and factories, a CEO will do that and we will get more about. Today the CEO is scared.

HARLOW: But Carl, the last time -- the reason I ask you is because history is often a lesson for us in these things, right. And the last time under the, you know, tax holiday back in 2004, you know, a lot of that went back into share buy backs and you know, making the rich richer which there is no problem with that unless it comes at the cost of --

ICAHN: My answer to that is.

HARLOW: Unless it's going --

ICAHN: Yes, let me answer that, because you are talking to Steve. And just talking generally, buy backs should be restricted a company should have to have a certain amount of cash before they do buy backs, a certain amount of excess cash, and they shouldn't be able to just -- and you're very right, they shouldn't be able to get a benefit, you know, because if you're getting lower taxes and because you're getting depreciation because you don't use them because you are going to buy back. You shouldn't be able to take that money and go buy back stock. If they have so much excess case, they do it.

And you are right. The buy backs are done. And look, certain companies, I want to see buy backs because I don't think the company knows how to use the cash and they got too much of it. But in many cases you are absolutely right that you can't blame the CEO's, because right now, the CEO says, hey, on the one hand, I'm going to go build a factory, and build machinery. And I'm going to have these guys from the EPA company and drive me nuts. I'm not going to make any money on that investment. On the other hand I'll buy back the stock, stock will go up. And by the way, the investment bankers tell us to do it. And I'm going to play golf the rest of my life with my 50 million I just made?

HARLOW: Carl Icahn, I do not expect you to play golf for the rest of your life.

ICAHN: Not me. I'm not saying I'm doing it. I'm saying the CEO's look at it that way.

HARLOW: I hear you. This has been fascinating. I appreciate your time. Thank you very much.

ICAHN: Sure thing. OK.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HARLOW: Carl Icahn there.

Coming up, president-elect Donald Trump taking in a little football today attending the annual army/Navy game. And in the box with him, Rudy Giuliani, one day after we have learned that he has pulled himself out of any contention for secretary of state or any other role in the administration.

Also, the president-elect is with Mike Pompeo. It should be an interesting conversation there. We will talk about all of that ahead and what comes next for the incoming president and America's intelligence agencies.

You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:44:08] HARLOW: President-elect Donald Trump is getting closer to naming his pick for secretary of state. That news expected sometime next week. CNN has learned, though, that Rex Tillerson is the leading candidate right now. Tillerson is the CEO of Exxon Mobil, and has never served in government. He also has ties to Russian president Vladimir Putin, ties that have caused even some Republicans to raise concerns. All of this comes as Trump's transition team continues to slams U.S. intelligent agencies about reports about meddling by Russia in this year's election.

"The Washington Post" saying the CIA is concluding that the Russian interference with the election was specifically to help Donald Trump get elected. Trump's transition team releasing this statement last night.

Quote "These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction the election ended a long time ago in one of the biggest Electoral College victories in history. It's now time to move on and make America great again." Lanhee Chen is with me. He is a CNN political commentator and a

former public policy director for Mitt Romney. He is also research fellow at the Hoover Institution.

Thank you for being with me, Lanhee. And let's just jump into this, because Trump and the RNC are casting doubts on this Intel from our intelligence agencies. And they are doing two things through this statement that I just read from Trump's team. Either he is questioning the veracity of U.S. intelligence and what their officials found, or he is questioning the motives of these intelligence officials and whether they are politicize things.

Do both concern you?

LANHEE CHEN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I think we have got the best intelligence agencies in the world. And I think we have great gathering, great analysis, and obviously, you know, I think we want to be very careful about making assertions about what the intelligence community is doing. Certainly we want to be careful when we make assertions about what their intentions ar.

I understand there's some evidence in dispute here, in terms of what happened with the hack itself. But I think pretty much everyone's agreed, the Russians have incredible hacking capability. They got incredible ability for cyber warfare. And it's something we have to be very careful about. This administration, the Obama administration I think took far too rosy a picture of the Russians in the first couple years. And I think it is important that this administration and the next one treat the Russians with clear eyed sort of intentions. And that we analyze this clearly.

[16:46:33] HARLOW: Is that what you see the president-elect doing right now?

CHEN: Well, it seems to me that they are making the political argument about the CIA. You know, the much better argument for them to make would be to say, look, there is evidence that we are not sure about. Let's get to the bottom of this. Let's all agree that we need to get to the bottom of this and see what's going on, rather than attacking the agencies themselves. I think the more productive thing to do, and all Americans would agree upon, is look, let's figure out what happened here. And let's actually get to the bottom of it.

HARLOW: CNN has also learned, as I said that Rex Tillerson, the CEO of Exxon Mobil, is right non on the top of Trump's list for secretary of state pick. Let me read you a quote from the "Wall Street Journal" writing about Tillerson.

Quote "friends and associates said few U.S. citizens are closer to Mr. Putin than Mr. Tillerson, who has known Mr. Putin since he represented Exxon's interests in Russia during the regime of Boris Yeltsin.:

We know that Exxon has a huge oil deal with a big, big oil player on Russia, a player that the Russian state has stake in. Here is what John McCain just told our Ryan Nobles about his concerns.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MCCAIN: I have obviously concerns of reports of his relationship with Vladimir Putin, who is a thug and a murder. But that's the -- we will have hearings on that issue and other issues concerning him will be examined. And then it's the time to make up your mind as to whether to vote yes or no.

NOBLES: So what kind of questions would you ask Rex Tillerson that would make you feel comfortable about a role like that.

MCCAIN: His view of Vladimir Putin and his role in the world. And for example, the fact that (INAUDIBLE), as the leader of the opposition was murdered on the orders I believe, if Vladimir Putin, in the shadow of the Kremlin.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: Lanhee, what concerns are legitimate, and what concerns are not when it comes to the man who will deal not only with Russia, deal with China, deal with Iran, et cetera? Are you concerned about ties that Rex Tillerson has in his corporate role to Russia.

CHEN: Well, look. I think senator McCain's tone there was exactly right. We are going to have hearings if he is indeed the nominee. They will have hearings before various committees to assess whether Mr. Tillerson is the right, you know, it is whether the senate should consent to that appointment by president-elect Trump or now. And all these issues will be explored.

The mere fact that he is involved in a business which is a large multinational corporation that may have ties to folks in Russia. That, in of itself, I don't think is a problem.

HARLOW: But that's not it. I mean, that's not it. He got the order of friendship from Russia two years ago. He also spoke publicly in 2014 at an annual shareholder meeting against some of the U.S. sanctions against Russia, saying, you know, we have to be very careful here about who this really impacts, et cetera. So it's not just that, Lanhee.

CHEN: Yes. Well, I recognize that. And I think those are issues, you know, to the extent that there are those issues, they are going to be explored in the hearings. I do think with respect to the sanctions, failing to impose sanctions or relaxing sanctions; that, in my mind would be wrong-headed. I think we have taken a much better line toward the Russian regime in the recent years of the Obama administration than we did when we tried that silly reset the first couple of years. So these issues are going to get explored, Poppy, in the hearings, and we'll see what happens.

HARLOW: Lanhee, I have to leave it there. Thank you for joining me.

CHEN: Thank you.

[16:50:00] HARLOW: All right. Coming up, live in the CNN NEWSROOM, we are going to switch gears and talk about this. Imagine a world without these beautiful creatures, a world without giraffes. The world's tallest animal has seen a dramatic drop in its numbers and is now at risk of facing extinction. We head to Kenya to find out if it is too late to save the giraffes.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:44:02] HARLOW: The tallest land mammal is at risk of facing extinction after suffering a devastating decline in numbers. The world lost 40 percent of our giraffes in the last 30 years. This information coming from the international union from conversation of nature.

CNN's Farai Sevenzo goes on safari to find out how experts are trying to conserve the giraffe population.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

FARIA SEVENZO, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A trip to Nairobi can bring you face-to-face with one of the most iconic creatures, the giraffe. Here at the giraffe center, these giraffes are raised in a controlled environment where school kids and adults can learn more about them in close quarters.

Hello, Betty. I love a tall girl.

So you've heard that a bunch of elephants are called a herd. And that a bunch of lions are called a pride. Now what do you call a bunch of giraffes? They are called a tower. And they certainly make me feel very small.

But scientists have found what they're calling a devastating trend. Giraffe populations have decreased almost 40 percent in the last 30 years. Leading the international union for conservation of nature to classify them as under threat of extinction. These animals, which are so big, so visible, yet their decline has gone largely unnoticed until now.

EMMANUEL NUMBI, AFRICAN FUND FOR ENDANGERED WILDLIFE: We focus so much on big species like elephants, sometimes the rhinoceros, sometimes the lions, and we forget about these tall gentle giants.

SEVENZO: A drive through Nairobi International Park ends at one region of the horizon. Africa's urban landscape is eating up more of what used to be the giraffes' habitat.

All over the continent, cities are growing with increasing numbers of people, and the giraffes are running out of grazing space.

PAUL GATHITU, KENYA WILDLIFE SERVICE (through translator): Part of our planning should put into account we have wildlife. And wildlife that requires big spaces, and requires specific habitats. So in the planning is where we are calling for the planners to include wildlife as one of the land uses.

SEVENZO: Saving giraffes will not be a simple task. Conflict, habitat degradation, poaching have all contributed to the decline in giraffe numbers. An ancient fable has it a long time ago the giraffes were the soothe sayers. They could lift their heads to the clouds, look back and see the past. Look forward and see the future. But one thing no one, not even the giraffes could have predicted is that by 2016, their numbers could have dropped, and they could be facing what the conservationists are now calling a silent extinction.

Farai Sevenzo CNN, Nairobi.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)