Return to Transcripts main page
Cuomo Prime Time
Trump "Waiting To Hear" From Saudis Before His Decision; Gabbard Rips Trump For Saudi Deference After Oil Attack; Warren Wins Working Families Party Endorsement. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired September 16, 2019 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00] ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: News continues right now. Want to hand it over to Chris for CUOMO PRIME TIME. Chris?
CHRIS CUOMO, CNN HOST, CUOMO PRIME TIME: I'm a donor, my wife is a donor, for exactly this reason. Thank you for putting the word out, my friend. All right, I am Chris Cuomo. Welcome to PRIME TIME.
A new front in the battle over President Trump's taxes. What is his best argument to keep resisting transparency - transparency? We're going to test with one of the leading players in the Conservative movement.
And we're also going to try to figure out what is behind this President's obsession with our last President. Does he think that attacking Obama may hold the key to winning a second term?
And Elizabeth Warren may have taken a step closer to winning. We have the head of a group that just gave her a key endorsement that used to belong to Bernie Sanders.
What do you say? Let's get after it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: "Locked and loaded," the catchy phrase President Trump tweeted about a possible American response to the armed drone assault on the Saudi oil fields. He thinks Iran did it. He has the backup of U.S. officials.
But look at some of the words that surround locked and loaded.
"There is reason to believe that we know the culprit." "But are waiting to hear from the Kingdom as to whom they believe was the cause of this attack, and under what terms we would proceed."
The President's taking his cues from MBS?
2020 contender, and Iraq War Vet, Tulsi Gabbard made a stunning analogy a short time ago. Here it is. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. TULSI GABBARD (D-HI) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Your offering our military assets to the Dictator of Saudi Arabia to use as he sees fit, is a betrayal of my brothers and sisters in uniform.
My fellow Service members, and I, we are not your prostitutes. You are not our pimp.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: All right, provocative words. Obviously, it's going to get coverage. Now, we will discuss the impact, and what eyes are on this situation by those who support this President.
We have Matt Schlapp here. He leads the American Conservative Union.
Always good to have you.
MATT SCHLAPP, CHAIRMAN, AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION, GOP CONSULTANT & LOBBYIST, FORMER GEORGE W. BUSH CAMPAIGN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Good to be here, Chris.
CUOMO: Thank you for being here. All right, so--
SCHLAPP: Yes, of course.
CUOMO: --this is not petty "I'm bad, you're worse" politics going on here. Do you have confidence that the President has the people around him to help negotiate this very tight space with Iran?
SCHLAPP: I think it's a tough question. I think it'd be tough for any President to negotiate this. And I have great confidence in the team he has pulled together.
I think that as the President has proceeded in his Presidency, as the first outsider President, since probably George Washington, he's figured out the job as he's gone, and I think he's pulled the people around him who he trusts.
CUOMO: But he just got rid of the National Security Advisor. He's going on his fourth one. He doesn't have one right now. Little bit of a gap, no?
SCHLAPP: He has an Acting National Security Advisor. He likes this title of Acting. And look, I don't - look, he and John Bolton clearly had disagreements. And the President has the right to make changes.
CUOMO: 100 percent.
SCHLAPP: As you know, Barack Obama made changes at the Chief of Staff and Deputy Chief of Staff level almost every year he was President. Bill Clinton went through Chiefs of Staff very rapidly.
These are high energy people. It's around the clockwork. The Chief of Staff has got to be one of the toughest jobs-- CUOMO: True.
SCHLAPP: --in politics, and same for the National Security Advisor. I've been there. I've watched it. I've seen it.
CUOMO: National security though is much more sensitive than Chief of Staff.
SCHLAPP: Well they're similar jobs in the sense that the only difference with Chief of Staff is there's one. And the difference with the National Security Advisor, you have almost like a whole war cabinet.
CUOMO: Right.
SCHLAPP: So, it's Mike Pompeo was very able. We have a new Secretary of Defense who's very able. We have - I know several of the people that are involved in Deputy roles and it's a good--
CUOMO: But Chief of Staff--
SCHLAPP: --and solid team. But this is--
CUOMO: Chief of Staff is a political functionary organizing. National Security Advisor is what it sounds like. And we have to be honest. This is not this President's strong point, figuring out this.
SCHLAPP: He had the least experience of all the things he deals with in foreign policy. But remember, that's who we've been electing, President.
Barack Obama didn't have a lot of foreign policy experience. George W. Bush didn't have a lot of foreign policy experience. The last President to have a significant amount of foreign policy experience was George Bush 41.
The American people are OK with electing people that have a steep learning curve on foreign policy. We've done it over and over and over again.
The question is what is he going to do with the challenges before him? You know, I've talked to several people who've advised him on national security. And they say, "What are we going to do when this country is challenged?" It's the question every President asks. This is a serious, you know, challenge to the country.
CUOMO: He's set a hard table for himself because he's got a divided populous that he spends a lot of time attributing and fomenting division. Now, this is something of his own reckoning.
He blew up that Iran deal, to our next topic, which is negating Obama, which is certainly something of fundamental importance to this President. He blew up that deal for that reason. He had nothing to replace it with.
[21:05:00] He just thought that doing this is disruptive. This is why they brought me here. He loosed that country on the Middle East. They are vindictive and old and savvy, as we both know, as students of history.
He started this. This is maybe the biggest threat to his Presidency, Matt.
SCHLAPP: So, Obama let loose a $150 billion in assets to the Iran regime, which is the number-one funder of terror.
Now, you can make an argument whether those were assets that they had a legal right to, but there's no question where that money will go to, and it'll go to fomenting jihad around the globe.
I actually urged the President to pull out of the Iran deal, not because I don't want to have a different Iran deal, but the Iran deal that we had had no proper verification.
CUOMO: It's not true.
SCHLAPP: And that was the - it is true.
CUOMO: No, it is not.
SCHLAPP: It is true. We had to give them--
CUOMO: It had more verification than we had before it and that that we've ever had on a situation.
SCHLAPP: We - we had to give them a notice before we could walk in any facility, so that they could cover their tracks.
So look, what we did in North Korea, both parties did this, Presidents of both parties did it. We didn't want to have a confrontation with North Korea, so we just tried to extend the timeline by which they would nuclearize.
And it is the similar policy that Obama approached with Iran, extend the time, and hope that something changed.
CUOMO: Well but you had a deal.
SCHLAPP: Maybe the regime will fail.
CUOMO: Multi-coalition, big countries that Iran had to worry about for today.
SCHLAPP: But Iran would have a nuclear weapon at the end of that term.
CUOMO: No.
SCHLAPP: And I don't - I'm not--
CUOMO: It was only about--
SCHLAPP: --I'm not comfortable with that. CUOMO: --enriching. It was a decade. And now, you have nobody looking at what they're doing. They ran around in Syria, made it very hard on our men and women who were there. They're doing it in Yemen in a situation that is out of control.
SCHLAPP: I--
CUOMO: And now, they are bombing his buddy in his backyard.
SCHLAPP: I get the idea that--
CUOMO: If that's true.
SCHLAPP: People love the idea that a treaty was somehow going to keep Iran in a box. And the fact is a lot of people, and I will say, I was one of them, believed that that treaty actually was an appeasement to Iran. It gave Iran all the funding it needed to do all this evil around the globe.
I am OK with the President saying that that - that deal which would have guaranteed that Iran gets the weapon, the nuclear weapon, we should try a different way.
CUOMO: It did not guarantee that.
SCHLAPP: It did.
CUOMO: I don't understand - I don't understand this argument.
SCHLAPP: It did.
CUOMO: Because--
SCHLAPP: Just like North Korea.
CUOMO: No, hold on.
SCHLAPP: We made - do you agree that on North Korea that it would be better if we had taken steps 10 and 20 years ago to prevent North Korea--
CUOMO: I don't believe--
SCHLAPP: --from getting a nuclear weapon.
CUOMO: --I don't believe that you can look back that way. I think you have to deal with where you are all the time.
SCHLAPP: So, it's inevitable that everyone nuclearizes and there's nothing we can do.
CUOMO: No. You make deals like the one you made with Iran with partners that they worry about.
SCHLAPP: Which all--
CUOMO: And your idea is--
SCHLAPP: But all that did was delay the time in which--
CUOMO: No--
SCHLAPP: --they'd get the nuclear weapon.
CUOMO: It delayed a window. But it gave you a pause. It gave you something to work with.
SCHLAPP: It gave.
CUOMO: You removed it and have nothing, except you think that--
SCHLAPP: I--
CUOMO: --Iran would have bombed, if that's true, and the President says he believes it's true, because U.S. officials are telling him, and it's nice that he believes his Intel folks.
SCHLAPP: What is true?
CUOMO: That Iran was behind what happened in Saudi Arabia.
SCHLAPP: I can't know. I could know what I read. And it sure appears that that's the case.
CUOMO: Right. I mean that's what the President's saying. That's what he says that the officials say. That takes us to another issue is will the American people believe this President about something like this? This is--
SCHLAPP: Chris - Chris--
CUOMO: --reaping what you sow.
SCHLAPP: Chris, I know that you talk about the President fomenting division.
CUOMO: Yes.
SCHLAPP: The fact is, is that Barack Obama, at this same point, in his Presidency, was at 39 percent in his Presidential approvals.
I know that people with the voice and the opinion that I have, we didn't like what Obama was doing to the country. We disagreed with what he was doing vehemently. And a lot of us felt like we couldn't voice it as extensively as people who hate Trump can voice it.
This country - country is not more divided under Trump. We were very divided under Barack Obama.
CUOMO: I covered that Administration. We weren't dealing with anything like what we're dealing with right now. And that goes for Obama also.
He was coming out of one of the worst economic situations this country has ever seen. And, as is Fair Play, he wound up paying a price for that early on. And he still had spikes over 50.
SCHLAPP: But the difference with--
CUOMO: Hold on. This President has had no spikes over 50. He never gets a majority of this country behind him--
SCHLAPP: Barack Obama has--
CUOMO: --because of what he's about.
SCHLAPP: Barack Obama had a spike over 50 for two significant periods of time.
One, when he assassinated Osama bin Laden. He did the right thing. Good for him. He - he got rewarded for that in the polls. The second time was as he approached re-election, as he approached November 2012.
If you track where Obama has been in his first term, as he was leading up to his re-election, Trump is about where he is or higher. And the fact is the direction of the country. This is the other thing--
CUOMO: I have not seen that. This President--
SCHLAPP: It's a fact and his--
CUOMO: --has the highest negative ratings--
SCHLAPP: Let me try - let me try it--
CUOMO: --we've ever seen.
SCHLAPP: Let me try to keep going.
CUOMO: You have over half the country who thinks--
SCHLAPP: Well that's a different--
CUOMO: --he can't be believed.
SCHLAPP: That - that's a different question. Now, let me - let me - let me--
CUOMO: Pretty central.
SCHLAPP: --let me bring it to this.
CUOMO: Wait, let's do this. I want you to make all the points.
SCHLAPP: OK.
CUOMO: Let me take a break. Let's come back and talk about what we think is going to matter in this next election cycle. We'll finish on this point.
SCHLAPP: OK.
CUOMO: We'll take a look at taxes and where you are on that about what transparency means.
SCHLAPP: Sure.
CUOMO: And then, we'll go forward from there, all right?
SCHLAPP: OK, yes.
CUOMO: So let's take a quick break. I gave you a little cheek there on what the tease is. But obviously, what is going to matter in this election? Will transparency matter? Is this going to wind up being about impeachment? Do guns wind up being in the mix?
I want to get the take of somebody who knows where Conservative heads and hearts are. Stay with us.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:10:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: ONE ON ONE.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: All right, back with Matt Schlapp, trying to get a feel for where Conservatives are coming forward into this next election with the President.
Thanks for staying. So, we were talking about where he is popular or unpopular.
SCHLAPP: Right.
CUOMO: All right, we - they heard both sides on that. But--
SCHLAPP: But the - the numbers are the numbers. And the fact is--
CUOMO: Yes.
SCHLAPP: --is that the people who say that Trump is so demonized and so hated by the American people that somehow his polls are low, it's important to remember he's higher than where - where Bill Clinton was, he's higher than where Barack Obama was.
In fact, Barack Obama, in September, the same time, the year before, the 14 months or whatever before his re-election, he was at a lower approval rating than Donald Trump.
As much as people focus on those who don't like him, there's a whole other part of the country that love him. Matter of fact, his approval with Conservatives and Republicans is the highest recorded in modern history.
CUOMO: Within party, very strong.
SCHLAPP: Yes.
CUOMO: But do you remember any other President being told six out of 10 of us think you don't deserve a second term?
[21:15:00] SCHLAPP: There's no question. I - I will agree with you. As much as there are people, the 45, 47, the RealClearPolitics has him at 44.1 percent today, that love--
CUOMO: But he's never had a spike over 50.
SCHLAPP: --that love him - that's not true.
CUOMO: When?
SCHLAPP: There's tons of polls that have more - there's a - there's a poll--
CUOMO: Not - not - not polls that we would accept.
SCHLAPP: Well then I don't--
CUOMO: Like Rasmussen or something like that.
SCHLAPP: No offence. That doesn't matter to me. What matters is that do pollsters accept them? And there's no question that he's been at 50--
CUOMO: But if they're - if - but if they're Conservative slanted and getting more people in your party that gives you a representative sample--
SCHLAPP: I - I'm not talking about polls that are slanted. What - what I'm saying is, is that I will agree with you that there is no question that he has people on the other side that don't like him strongly.
CUOMO: Majority of people.
SCHLAPP: By the way, most people in Barack Obama's Presidency didn't like what he was doing.
The difference with Donald Trump is you can't find a policy on a major issue that is different from what he said he would do. Under Barack Obama, you can find many differences.
Donald Trump, you can't be surprised. You don't have to like him. You can say I don't like the - the Twitter. You can say he's dividing people, all that you want. He said what he was going to do, he's simply doing it. It's pretty simple.
CUOMO: But all I'm saying is this. You can - look, the problem with numbers is you can always find one you like. In terms of what we accept in polling-- SCHLAPP: I'm happy to talk about numbers I don't like.
CUOMO: I but - well then here's one that other than Carter, and again, unprecedented problems at home, and abroad, which is something that we're going to have to start thinking about, because if this China situation keeps going this way in roiling markets, and if Iran decides to be a problem for us to show that it can flex its power, he might wind up - have created his own problem.
SCHLAPP: Hong - and Hong Kong where we had--
CUOMO: But no other President--
SCHLAPP: --democracy protestors--
CUOMO: True.
SCHLAPP: --that's a real challenge.
CUOMO: Other than Carter, nobody has been at 39 percent at this stage in their election. They were at 42, 43, 44, not where he is.
SCHLAPP: That - that is - I just walked through the numbers with you where - where Obama is. Now, you can say that--
CUOMO: It's not the numbers that we--
SCHLAPP: --Jimmy Carter is the base - is the basement.
CUOMO: Obama was at 43 in the CNN poll at this time in his Administration.
SCHLAPP: I told you the - with the way I look at polls is this, instead of cherry-picking one - and I know, look, you have a CNN poll. I get the fact that you guys will lead (ph) the CNN poll. Fox will lead (ph) a Fox poll.
I look at the - the average of all the polls. That's why I go to RealClearPolitics. And you can see what all the polls are saying, the polls that some people say are skewed to Trump, and some people will say that are skewed against Trump, I think that's a waste of time.
Let's look and - let's compare numbers to numbers. The RealClearPolitics for Barack Obama, at this time, he was lower than where Trump is at this time. Now, it doesn't mean that Trump wins automatically. This is, you know, I'm not cocky or overconfident.
CUOMO: There are few one-term presidents. The time that you get screwed up is if you have a bad economy, and a risk abroad, which is - which is what he's been making for himself on top of--
SCHLAPP: What if you have a big scandal?
CUOMO: That's right.
SCHLAPP: And this is what the Democrats have gone for. And they're going for it with my friend, Brett Kavanaugh.
CUOMO: Well that's what he's presented him with.
SCHLAPP: No. I don't think that's true. I think collusion story--
CUOMO: Kavanaugh is a separate issue.
SCHLAPP: --was crap from the very beginning. We spent 2.5 years covering it. And I think--
CUOMO: This campaign--
SCHLAPP: --I think a large majority of the American people are sick and tired of talking about his taxes, and they're sick and tired of talking about--
CUOMO: Not his taxes.
SCHLAPP: --Russia.
CUOMO: His taxes make no sense--
SCHLAPP: And they're sick and tired of talking about--
CUOMO: --to anybody.
SCHLAPP: --the scandal because Trump is--
CUOMO: I'll give you the scandal.
SCHLAPP: --simply doing what Trump said--
CUOMO: I'll give--
SCHLAPP: --he would do.
CUOMO: No. He did not say I'm going to distract and lie and--
SCHLAPP: I don't think he's doing that.
CUOMO: --create tension the way nobody--
SCHLAPP: See but that--
CUOMO: --ever would.
SCHLAPP: But don't propagandize that.
CUOMO: What's the propaganda?
SCHLAPP: He is doing what he said he was going to--
CUOMO: A 11,000 lies.
SCHLAPP: I'll go - I would love to go through with who determined what those lies are. I've spent a lot of time researching those lies. CUOMO: Yes?
SCHLAPP: And a lot of it is political spin, and yes, some errors. And sometimes, when he's gotten things wrong--
CUOMO: Just today, "I never said I'd meet with preconditions."
SCHLAPP: I saw the--
CUOMO: "Fake news." You know that that's a lie, right?
SCHLAPP: I saw the coverage of what's going on. And I think what President Trump does with these regimes--
CUOMO: Yes.
SCHLAPP: --I don't like the Iran regime.
CUOMO: No, no, no, that's different. That's different.
SCHLAPP: I don't like the North Korean regime.
CUOMO: Listen, he abuses the truth. You'll never convince me otherwise.
SCHLAPP: He's trying to negotiate with these folks.
CUOMO: But on taxes--
SCHLAPP: I realize that.
CUOMO: --nobody gets it, Matt. Nobody gets it. You say there's nothing in your taxes. Show them. It will show transparency that we can take you at your word, and maybe you're right.
SCHLAPP: OK. So let me - we have talked about this issue so many times. There's a lot of people who believe that Trump is not giving his taxes because he has something to hide.
And the fact is, in a democracy, he's up in just 14 months, Chris. The right way to handle this is that if you think that what's in his taxes show that somehow he's tied to Putin, which I've heard all those fantastic and ridiculous stories.
CUOMO: So, you don't think someone who wants to be President should have to show their taxes?
SCHLAPP: I don't think it should be mandated, no. I really don't.
CUOMO: Really?
SCHLAPP: And I think if you think especially somebody who has the complicated financial structures that he has, which we haven't seen in a President, in the time in which people had - have traditionally given their taxes over, I think the American people, Chris, are exhausted. At least half of us are exhausted from this-- CUOMO: You think that Conservative believe--
SCHLAPP: --search and destroy mission--
CUOMO: --that--
SCHLAPP: What - what--
CUOMO: --Presidential candidates should not reveal their financial position through their taxes to the American people.
SCHLAPP: I think they're OK with the fact that Donald Trump gave an explanation to the American people as to why he wasn't turning them over. And I think that we spent two years - by the way, Bob Mueller had the ability to look at Donald Trump's taxes. If there was something in there that was inappropriate, it would--
CUOMO: He did not look at the taxes.
SCHLAPP: You don't know that.
CUOMO: I have good feelings--
SCHLAPP: You don't--
CUOMO: --that he didn't do it.
SCHLAPP: Your feelings--
CUOMO: Well they didn't - they didn't put it out there.
SCHLAPP: I love you, man, but your feelings don't matter.
CUOMO: They - they didn't put it out there. Well look--
SCHLAPP: They didn't say one way or the other. But they had access to every document they wanted. If they thought this--
CUOMO: We don't know that he had access to the taxes.
SCHLAPP: --if they - yes, he did. If they - if they--
CUOMO: How do you know?
[21:20:00] SCHLAPP: Because the White House said, including the President's lawyer, on several occasions, they were given every--
CUOMO: Not the taxes.
SCHLAPP: --document - they were given every document, they didn't have to go through the President's taxes.
CUOMO: Did Mueller get the taxes?
SCHLAPP: I believe that Mueller--
CUOMO: You - now you believe.
SCHLAPP: I believe - not my feelings.
CUOMO: That's your feeling.
SCHLAPP: Not my feelings.
CUOMO: It's, of course, it's a feeling.
SCHLAPP: I believe that Mueller looked--
CUOMO: Neither of us know whether they had them.
SCHLAPP: --at every financial document--
CUOMO: You don't know whether he had the taxes.
SCHLAPP: I believe that--
CUOMO: True or false?
SCHLAPP: --Mueller looked at every financial--
CUOMO: You don't know whether he had the taxes, neither do I. Leave it at that.
SCHLAPP: He had the access to the taxes, yes. I do know that.
CUOMO: We do not know what he had access to.
SCHLAPP: He had access to the taxes.
CUOMO: No, you think he might.
SCHLAPP: If he wanted to go through them, he had every ability to go through them.
CUOMO: Listen, if he'd turn these over, we wouldn't even be having the conversation.
SCHLAPP: No. No. That's not true because the Democrat strategy with Trump is not to beat him on the issues. It's to beat him on scandal and personal impropriety. Why do they want to see the taxes? Because they want to find the next phony story within the taxes--
CUOMO: But everybody else puts out the taxes.
SCHLAPP: --that they can distract us for a year.
CUOMO: But people put out their taxes.
SCHLAPP: But nobody in modern times has had as complicated taxes as Donald Trump.
CUOMO: They are not complicated.
SCHLAPP: And that - they are complicated.
CUOMO: Come on, Matt. Either--
SCHLAPP: Well when's our last billionaire President?
CUOMO: We have--
SCHLAPP: I'll be quiet and listen to the answer.
CUOMO: We - I don't know that we have one now. We have tax professionals who could look through this. I don't know that he's a billionaire.
SCHLAPP: Then you're - then you're saying the Forbes 400 is wrong? You're saying--
CUOMO: You know where they get their information?
SCHLAPP: --that the FEC filings--
CUOMO: You know where they get their information?
SCHLAPP: From a lot of sources.
CUOMO: From him.
SCHLAPP: Yes.
CUOMO: Yes. And you know--
SCHLAPP: So, do you--
CUOMO: --you know, what they do when they look at it?
SCHLAPP: So - so Chris, this--
CUOMO: You should go ask O'Brien over at MSNBC who was at The Times what happens when you look at it.
SCHLAPP: The--
CUOMO: The number goes down, down, down, down.
SCHLAPP: All I'm saying is the fishing expedition, whether or not it's - it's--
CUOMO: But Matt, and anything else if he--
SCHLAPP: --impeachment hearings or whatever else--
CUOMO: --showed the taxes, all the intrigue goes away.
SCHLAPP: No. It's untrue. It's just the opposite. You're saying exactly the opposite of the truth. You really believe - CNN - look at CNN alone. If they had 10 years or eight years of Trump's taxes, you don't think they're going to take the next 14 months, trying to find any small flaw that they can find in there, and say that this disqualifies him for re-election?
The American people get the game on this, at least half of us do. And what we want to talk about is the issues. Even in this conversation, let's go ahead, and talk about Iran, let's talk about Saudi Arabia, let's talk about guns, let's talk about taxes, let's talk about socialized medicine, let's talk about these issues.
CUOMO: First of all, he got this--
SCHLAPP: But instead so much of the coverage--
CUOMO: --hold on, just be clear.
SCHLAPP: No. Let me finish. So much of the coverage is dominated--
CUOMO: Be clear. He doesn't talk about those things.
SCHLAPP: So much of the coverage is dominated--
CUOMO: Because he doesn't talk about those things.
SCHLAPP: 2.5 years on Russian collusion. My Lord!
CUOMO: He doesn't--
SCHLAPP: That was exhausting.
CUOMO: I'm sorry. When Russia interferes in our election and the President's campaign--
SCHLAPP: They have--
CUOMO: --is going out of its way--
SCHLAPP: And Barack - and Barack Obama--
CUOMO: --to get close to it.
SCHLAPP: --didn't stop them. And he could have done something to stop them.
CUOMO: He did not know what he needed - he did not know what he needed to do what we knew eventually.
SCHLAPP: They - they decided to try to trap Trump.
CUOMO: And when he went to McConnell, McConnell wouldn't do it in a bipartisan way. And this President - that President didn't want to come off bias.
SCHLAPP: That - that he doesn't have to go. He doesn't have to do what Mitch McConnell wants. CUOMO: He made a mistake.
SCHLAPP: Barack Obama didn't do plenty of things--
CUOMO: He made a mistake.
SCHLAPP: --that Mitch McConnell wanted. What he should have done--
CUOMO: No. Mitch McConnell didn't do plenty of things that Obama wanted.
SCHLAPP: OK. Maybe--
CUOMO: Remember he said--
SCHLAPP: --maybe--
CUOMO: --"I'm here to make him a one-term President?"
SCHLAPP: Well that's how the parties work. We try to beat each other. I know this is shocking news.
CUOMO: Well no, you're--
SCHLAPP: But we do try to defeat each other.
CUOMO: --no, you're supposed to represent people who have similar ideals.
SCHLAPP: Well let me ask you a question.
CUOMO: Not just be oppositional. That's not what our systems--
(CROSSTALK)
SCHLAPP: And same for the news media. Their job is not to try to prevent Donald Trump--
CUOMO: I'm asking for the man to put out his taxes--
SCHLAPP: --from getting a second term.
CUOMO: --so we can know what he's about and what he isn't about.
SCHLAPP: No. You're - you - you, look, you're a journalist. You want more information so that you can say he's a crook. And that's what you want.
CUOMO: No. I would love the ability to say--
SCHLAPP: Come on.
CUOMO: --"Hey, we have these people scrub the taxes."
SCHLAPP: Come on.
CUOMO: --"The Democrats have spent too much time on this."
SCHLAPP: Will you--
CUOMO: "There's nothing to do--
SCHLAPP: Will you give me that the--
CUOMO: --there's nothing to do here."
SCHLAPP: --the - the vast majority of the news media in this country wasted the American people's time--
CUOMO: No.
SCHLAPP: --on Russian collusion.
CUOMO: No way.
SCHLAPP: So, if you get this--
CUOMO: It happened. The President denied it on the international stage next to the guy who did it. His campaign was making a jackass out of themselves, running around, trying to have meetings they shouldn't have had, and trying to make contacts that they shouldn't have had.
SCHLAPP: So you're--
CUOMO: Did they commit crimes? No. I don't believe they did.
SCHLAPP: OK. So, when it comes to the taxes, you're saying, you'll give them a fair shake. You put your taxes out there.
CUOMO: A 100 percent.
SCHLAPP: You put their taxes out there for eight years.
CUOMO: He can give them just to me and an accountant.
SCHLAPP: OK, fair enough.
CUOMO: OK?
SCHLAPP: And you're saying they - that they won't be transfixed on the idea that now we can find a new way to get him. My view on all this is that we are distracting ourselves from the issues that matter. If people don't like Trump's policy--
CUOMO: He doesn't talk about policy, Matt.
SCHLAPP: Let me try to--
CUOMO: And you know it.
SCHLAPP: Yes, he does.
CUOMO: He does not. SCHLAPP: I - I disagree with you.
CUOMO: When's the last time he talked about--
SCHLAPP: He does--
CUOMO: --his vision of tax policy for this country by saying--
SCHLAPP: He passed a tax--
CUOMO: --"Hey, we're working on a tax cut."
SCHLAPP: He passed a tax bill.
CUOMO: That he said was a middle-class tax cut. And $0.83 of every dollar went to me.
SCHLAPP: Well now - OK. Now this is a fair conversation. The fact is, is that this is what I was trying to get to with the polls before we took to the break.
Under Donald Trump, more Americans feel better about their economic situation, which is predominantly middle-class people, than they did under the socialism of Barack Obama.
CUOMO: Listen.
SCHLAPP: The fact is his policies are working to help people in their lives. And here's the deal. Here's the bet. If what I'm saying is hyped, he won't win.
CUOMO: Not true.
SCHLAPP: If what I'm saying is--
CUOMO: Not true. You could be totally wrong on your numbers analysis--
SCHLAPP: If what I'm saying is - is accurate--
CUOMO: --and he could still win.
SCHLAPP: If what I'm saying is accurate, he will win the - he will win a second term because guess what? You can go through all the fantasy of like Russia changed your vote. They didn't change one vote in this country. The fact is--
CUOMO: I never said they changed the vote.
SCHLAPP: Well OK well then there's really no conclusion to worry about. And the fact is, is that--
CUOMO: No. Collusion is you doing things you shouldn't do--
SCHLAPP: --the American people--
CUOMO: --to try to get close to people-- SCHLAPP: They didn't do that.
CUOMO: --who are an inimical foreign power.
SCHLAPP: They didn't do that.
CUOMO: What was that meeting about?
SCHLAPP: They didn't do that.
CUOMO: What was that meeting about?
[21:25:00] SCHLAPP: They - they asked to have a meeting to talk to them, and they took the meeting, and then they realized that there--
CUOMO: No. He was told--
SCHLAPP: --was nothing to the meeting.
CUOMO: --we've got stuff from Russia--
SCHLAPP: Oh my God, you're still--
CUOMO: --about Clinton.
SCHLAPP: Chris--
CUOMO: But you're not supposed to take a meeting like that.
SCHLAPP: --let it--
CUOMO: You wouldn't take a meeting like that.
SCHLAPP: --let - let it go.
CUOMO: So you'd be OK with me doing that if it - if the parties were flipped?
SCHLAPP: I--
CUOMO: I'm running against you.
SCHLAPP: --I think--
CUOMO: I have Russia offer me information.
SCHLAPP: I have told you--
CUOMO: You say I take the meeting?
SCHLAPP: I have told you on your show--
CUOMO: Come on!
SCHLAPP: --that I wouldn't have had that meeting.
CUOMO: Of course you wouldn't. Of course.
SCHLAPP: But it doesn't mean that anything was untoward done in the meeting.
CUOMO: No. Untoward - no, well they didn't get the information. They went there for bad reason.
SCHLAPP: Can we talk about the economy?
CUOMO: Yes.
SCHLAPP: Can we talk about guns?
CUOMO: How are you going to pay for the tax cut?
SCHLAPP: Can we talk about the issues?
CUOMO: Yes. We can. I got to go now though.
SCHLAPP: Let's not talk about any more Russian collusion.
CUOMO: Well--
SCHLAPP: It's not going to do any good.
CUOMO: --listen, I - I am not somebody who believes in beating a dead horse. I think that--
SCHLAPP: The horse is not breathing, Chris.
CUOMO: --when you have a Russian interference plot, and the President denies it, he is asking for investigation.
SCHLAPP: He got it.
CUOMO: If you - if you--
SCHLAPP: Got 2.5 years ago.
CUOMO: I know. And if you want to investigate them now, go ahead.
SCHLAPP: And now they want to investigate his taxes.
CUOMO: And we'll cover that.
SCHLAPP: And I'm telling you, it's not going to help--
CUOMO: Transparency is something else.
SCHLAPP: --get any voter to understand how they should vote.
CUOMO: Transparency is something else. I like the conversation. I like it about issues. And I like disagreement with decency. Thank you for checking that box.
SCHLAPP: Yes. And that goes back to you as well. CUOMO: Matt Schlapp, be well.
20 Democrats, three Republicans are out to replace President Trump. The one politician though, this President talks about all the time, got a lot of run with me, and Matt Schlapp, just now, President Obama.
We're going to debate the value of that to this President and to the process, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:30:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Let's look into Obama the way they've looked at me from day one.
President Obama thought it wasn't a good thing to have Russia in.
President Obama.
President Obama.
President Obama.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Hey look, and obviously, there's some thinking behind this President going after the last one. You saw how it was a point of comparison for Matt Schlapp. So, what does this mean, all right?
Let's get into that as The Great Debate. We got two great people for you tonight. Show them. Who wants to see my face?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: THE GREAT DEBATE.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Thanks for being both here.
So Ana, let me start with you. Why do you believe this President is going after President Obama the way he does? And what does it mean in the election analysis? ANA NAVARRO, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Because he's jealous of him, because he's haunted by him, because he's obsessed with him, because he can't stop thinking about him.
Look, you know, people talk about Trump Derangement Syndrome. Well Trump has Obama Derangement Syndrome.
And Trump always needs a foil. Whether it's crooked Hillary, or whether it's Pocahontas, or Sleepy Joe, or Crazy Bernie, or the Squad, or whomever, he always needs a foil to keep the flames alive, somebody to fight against. That's just who he is.
But he's also been obsessed with Obama from the get-go, even before he was President. Let's remember that one of the ways that he became relevant in politics, unfortunately, and sadly, for the Republican Party, is by peddling the conspiracy theory--
CUOMO: Right.
NAVARRO: --about Birtherism--
CUOMO: But--
NAVARRO: --against Obama.
CUOMO: But Mike, that was before. Now he is President. And what is the calculus here? Is this a reminder to the base that "You put me here to undo, and I want to remind you what I'm undoing. Judge me by that."
MIKE SHIELDS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER RNC CHIEF OF STAFF: Well look, I think it's a couple of things. First of all, every President, Republican and Democrat, comes into office, and says, "I'm here to fix the mess of my predecessor."
Barack Obama did that. His entire re-election was "Look at what I inherited. Why would you want to go back to the way that - the horrible world of George W. Bush?" And he used George W. Bush as a foil.
The first few months that Barack Obama was in office, he had Congress. He didn't have a foil. He picked on Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative talk radio.
So, I - first of all, I just think that's partly normal. I don't think that's some obsession or some mental thing for President Trump to do. I think a lot of people do that.
Secondly, he likes to contrast. There are millions of Americans who did not - who suffered under the slowest recovery in modern history. When he won Michigan, he won it by winning counties that had voted very significantly for Obama that swung to vote very significantly for Donald Trump.
Look at the last three quarters of economic growth under Barack Obama, 1.8, 1.8, 1.9. Then you get to 3.0, 3.2, 3.6, under Donald Trump. And so, this is a contrast that benefits him. It's not about some kind of obsession. It's actually--
CUOMO: Only for his three--
SHIELDS: --pretty smart political move.
CUOMO: But yes - right. Except that's not the best rationale.
NAVARRO: Well but listen that would - that would be true--
CUOMO: I hear you on the other part. But Ana--
NAVARRO: --if what we were talking about was--
CUOMO: --that would be the last--
NAVARRO: But that would be true if what we were talking about was policy. But when you have a President, Trump, who is questioning Obama's book deals, and Obama's Netflix deals, it's - it's obsession. It's ridiculous. It's petty. It's "Why him, not me?"
SHIELDS: That a way to get it in the news.
NAVARRO: Look--
SHIELDS: He tweeted about it. And now we're talking about it.
NAVARRO: --the bottom line is the Obamas are--
SHIELDS: And he's a master at doing it.
NAVARRO: --out there--
CUOMO: But that's a fair point.
NAVARRO: --living their best lives.
CUOMO: But here's the one thing. Sometimes--
NAVARRO: They're incredibly popular.
CUOMO: --what you put out there--
NAVARRO: And he's jealous.
CUOMO: Right. But Ana, sometimes - first of all, the apples-to-apples comparison doesn't really work economically because really their rates of growth are about the same. You're taking the worst three quarters from Obama and the best three of Trump.
SHIELDS: That's - that's--
CUOMO: His numbers have started to slide now, and that's why his economy is a little bit of a concern.
SHIELDS: That's just not true, Chris.
CUOMO: It is absolute true.
SHIELDS: I - I can't let you say. It's absolutely not true.
CUOMO: Trump's last--
SHIELDS: We - we have the slowest recovery in modern history. And there were millions of Americans who were suffering, especially in the manufacturing sector--
CUOMO: Hold on a second.
SHIELDS: --and the President was saying "Everything's getting better. It's getting better. And it's getting better."
CUOMO: Mike.
SHIELDS: And these Americans said "It's not getting better for me."
CUOMO: Mike, he--
SHIELDS: And President Trump--
CUOMO: Hold on.
SHIELDS: --was a rejection of that.
CUOMO: Mike, wait a second. That's--
SHIELDS: That's why he got elected.
CUOMO: You - but you could not let me say it. But I got to say it because it's true. Obama was in a huge hole, right, that certainly was not of his making, so you can't use it--
SHIELDS: Well now you're making my other point--
CUOMO: But you can't use that--
SHIELDS: --which is he's blamed Bush for it.
[21:35:00] CUOMO: But you can't - I'm not blaming anybody. I'm just telling you the reality. I covered it, OK? It was an economic reality. Politicians and pundits like to ascribe blame. I just like to deal with what it is.
So, he was coming out of a big hole, right, so that's not a fair starting point because Trump was inheriting, which is OK, a tailwind economy, he inherited one.
SHIELDS: He was inheriting an incredibly slow recovery. And he was inheriting anemic growth that were especially - wasn't necessarily affecting people in Manhattan and L.A.
But it was certainly, that anemic growth was affecting people in the Midwest and - and the manufacturing sector, and they voted for President Trump. They really elected him. And then, as soon as he gets into office, we start getting 3 percent, 3.4 percent growth.
CUOMO: He'd - but why wouldn't we?
SHIELDS: When he comes into office.
CUOMO: Why wouldn't we?
NAVARRO: OK.
CUOMO: You had a relatively strong economy.
NAVARRO: And I got back to asking you--
CUOMO: And he juiced it with a tax cut.
SHIELDS: The last three--
CUOMO: But one more thing for you, Mike.
SHIELDS: --the last three quarters of Obama--
CUOMO: The last there quarters of Obama--
(CROSSTALK)
SHIELDS: --1.8, 1.8. 1.9.
NAVARRO: --what the hell does that have to do with a Netflix deal?
What the hell does that have to do with a Netflix deal, which is a completely private sector thing, and something that consumers will judge on? What the hell does that have to do with a Random House deal? It has zero to do with that. But he wants Obama as a foil.
Look, it's true. A lot of Republicans thought that Obama had over- regulated everything. And so, Trump has come out. And if Obama was for puppies and apple pie, then Trump is against puppies and apple pie, because he feels that it feeds his base.
But his obsession with Obama is to the point that he's going after a Netflix deal. Look, maybe he'll get a Netflix deal and a Random House deal. God forbid, he actually have to read a book, much less write a book, one of these days when he's out of the Presidency.
He's been beneficiary of TV contracts. He's probably in the White House because of TV contracts. So, what he has with Obama is this like crazy competition of, you know, and Game of Chicken, who's--
CUOMO: Well look, here's the - here's the good thing.
NAVARRO: --who's the - the biggest dude.
CUOMO: We will see how it pays off or not, and relatively soon.
Look, it's one thing, I'll tell you it gives the American people confidence, Mike. If this President can be talking about Obama's Netflix deal, with what's going on with Iran right now, and China, maybe he's got a better plan than some of us suspect.
But I appreciate you making the case. Ana, you too. Best to both of you.
Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, neck and neck in the polls this summer. Tonight, a major voice in the progressive movement picked who they want to win.
Last time, they wanted Sanders. This time, they chose Elizabeth Warren. Why and what does it mean? Next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:40:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Thousands of people showed up for Elizabeth Warren's rally this evening here in New York.
The Senator had some new ammo on her side, an endorsement from the Working Families Party. They are a progressive group that had previously given its support to Bernie Sanders in 2016.
We have Maurice Mitchell. He's the National Director for the Working Families Party, joining me now.
Pleasure to see you.
MAURICE MITCHELL, NATIONAL DIRECTOR, "WORKING FAMILIES PARTY": Pleasure, Chris. Thanks for having me.
CUOMO: So, why Warren and not Sanders?
MITCHELL: So, let me just first say that it's 2019, and we have two structural change, big bold progressive candidates that have built huge grassroots followings in the Democratic process.
CUOMO: But you picked one. Why?
MITCHELL: Right. And so, our grassroots members, and our volunteers, and our state committee, we engaged in a very long process, and we came out, and I'm so proud of the process, and so proud that we chose Elizabeth Warren.
And let me tell you why. So, I mean if you look at her, you know, they joke about "She has a plan for it," right? But if you look at it and - and you take a step back, so Green New
Deal, so we could save the planet, a historically big picture housing policy, you know, the Medicare-for-All, to take the insurance companies between you and your doctor, right, so, healthcare could be a right and not a commodity that's - that's traded, right?
CUOMO: Bernie does the same things.
MITCHELL: Right.
CUOMO: And he wrote the damn bill.
MITCHELL: That's - that's absolutely right. And - and we have so much respect for Bernie, and his followers. And, in 2016, we endorsed Bernie.
In 2020, you have a field of dozens of candidates. And so, we wanted to engage in a process that was deeply Democratic, where we could decide early what to do, even as the field was still shaking out.
And the reason we did it is because that time is one resource that when you lose it, you never could recoup them.
CUOMO: Fine. So, what was the difference between the two with so much sameness?
MITCHELL: So, what I could talk about positively is why we endorsed Warren.
And again, like I've - I've nothing but positive things to say about Bernie, his followers, and his movement, and I think it's a plus for working people, the people that we represent that we have two candidates that are advancing this.
And I think, you know, you saw the debate stage where they flanked each other, right? And so, we want to encourage that with, you know, with fellow travelers who agree with the policy change in both camps to - to flank these ideas and to - and to organize. And we encourage other organizations--
CUOMO: I'm with you. But here's why I'm questioning.
MITCHELL: --to throw in. Please.
CUOMO: Here's why - here's why I'm questioning.
MITCHELL: Please, let's go. Let's go.
CUOMO: Because - no, no, let's get after it. Here's why.
MITCHELL: Yes.
CUOMO: Because you could argue they're splitting a vote, OK? And I'm asking you "Why her and not him when it was him the last time?" And when you say why you picked her, and I'm - I'm not arguing with you reasons. MITCHELL: Yes. Yes.
CUOMO: You're allowed to your process. But they check the same boxes.
MITCHELL: Well listen, we did a ranked choice vote, so we didn't just--
CUOMO: So, this was a vote of members.
MITCHELL: This was a vote of members and our National Committee, which are grassroots - grassroots activists that are part of people's organizations, different institutions.
CUOMO: And more voted for her than him.
MITCHELL: Absolutely.
CUOMO: So that's what it was.
MITCHELL: And - and - and - and now, we're moving forward with our candidate, and we couldn't be more proud.
And the other thing I want to say is that we want to encourage other organizations to choose their candidate and to organize under their candidate. Our message is that we have to start organizing.
CUOMO: What if one of them doesn't win? What if it's Biden?
MITCHELL: Look--
CUOMO: What if it's Buttigieg? What if it's one of the others? Will you back them?
MITCHELL: Look - look, let me be clear, right?
What's clear to me was clear to everybody watching TV right now is like when you look at the Democratic stage, and you look at the - the last debate, those folks, there's a sea between them and Donald Trump, right? There's a sea between them and Donald Trump.
[21:45:00] But right now, the conversation is about the nomination. And we think that the right strategy is a bold progressive policy prescription. We think that that's the right strategy to be the - the Democratic nominee, and to de - defeat Trump.
CUOMO: All right.
MITCHELL: We think both are aligned.
CUOMO: So, here's what I want to do.
MITCHELL: OK.
CUOMO: You are the blue-collar component of that party in its most active form, right? That's why your endorsement matters. That's why I'm happy to have you here. MITCHELL: Absolutely.
CUOMO: As we go on with the campaign, I believe that whoever captures the head and heart of the working families in this country is going to be the true product of change, culturally.
MITCHELL: That's right.
CUOMO: Because they are the people who now must recognize that culturally and economically they have the most at stake.
MITCHELL: No argument here.
CUOMO: So, let's keep a dialog going where when you get "Here's why this matters to us, and here's why it doesn't,"--
MITCHELL: Yes.
CUOMO: --got to come back, got to have a salon effect.
MITCHELL: All right, is that a promise?
CUOMO: A 100 percent.
MITCHELL: Absolutely.
CUOMO: A 100 percent. All right? Maurice Mitchell, thank you very much.
Big night for Elizabeth Warren! What will it mean? We'll see in the polls soon enough.
Now, the President now, what is his big threat? Elizabeth Warren, whoever comes out of the Democratic Party, sure, sure. But I have an argument for you that there is a bigger threat to his re-election, and it is one of his own creation.
The Argument, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CLOSING ARGUMENT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:50:00] CUOMO: This President may have created a monster. You know, there are very few one-term presidents. If you have a good economy and that country is not facing a severe foreign threat, President usually wins.
That takes me to Iran. A U.S. official tells CNN the Saudi oil attacks were launched from inside Iran. The President actually even sided with the Intel experts, for a change, and agrees that that's what it seems like.
Now, we have to remember, this situation started as one more way to show that Trump would undo all things Obama, by getting rid of the Iran Nuclear Deal.
But now, it may be the key to his own undoing.
The problem started with breaking the only check we had on Iran, all right, and replacing it with nothing, reviving an active enemy in Iran, and insulting a number of our allies, who signed on to the deal.
So now you have an economy that is skittish, as we saw just today, and Iran, with reason to believe, that this President is more mouth than muscle.
Look at today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I don't want war with anybody. I'm somebody that would like not to have war.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: For the record, great, diplomacy, soft force like sanctions, if you do it in concert with allies it can work as well as the military. You bring pain and pressure that creates cooperation, if not capitulation.
The problem is this President blew up the coalition when he broke the deal, and he can't even seem to stick to message. And message matters.
Look at yesterday versus today.
Yesterday, "Saudi Arabia oil supply was attacked. There is reason to believe that we know the culprit, are locked and loaded depending on verification, but are waiting to hear from the Kingdom as to whom they believe was the cause of this attack, and under what terms we would proceed!"
Think about the message in that one tweet to Iran. The mighty U.S. is waiting on Saudi Arabia to dictate how they proceed? And they know the U.S. knows what happened.
So, now what happens if there is no action?
And they know President Trump reportedly ordered military strikes against Iran after that American drone was shot down. Remember that? And he called it off last minute. What message that - that sent?
Now, again, I'm not arguing in any way that force is the answer. This country has spent too much blood and treasure on unending conflicts. And this President knows that too.
So, there better be no military action in this situation, even if the President calls for it, without Congress. It is time for that authorization for the use of military force to be re-debated, re- negotiated, and re-issued. That's what the Constitution calls for. And now, it matters.
But here's the political impact. It's not easy. And the President owns all of it. And he is not well-equipped to deal with this. And now, he doesn't even have a full team around him.
Iran just said they won't meet with this President, even though they're going to be here at the U.N. next week. And they're watching him struggle, not even get the talking points straight. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you have preconditions for that meeting?
TRUMP: No preconditions. No. They want to meet, I'll meet.
You want to talk good. Otherwise, you can have a bad economy for the next three years.
CHUCK TODD, NBC'S "MEET THE PRESS" MODERATOR, NBC NEWS POLITICAL DIRECTOR: No preconditions?
TRUMP: Not as far as I'm concerned, no preconditions.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: OK. So, he said that, time and time again. Then, this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: There were always conditions, because the conditions - if you look at it, the sanctions are not going to be taken off. So, if the sanctions - that's a condition. So, you know, that's why the press misreported it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Listen, this is not the typical situation of just exposing this President for obvious and ugly doublespeak. It's about exposing this country to a major threat, and this President owns it, because he created it.
Now, making this problem was the easy part. The hard part is how to solve it, and we will be watching.
All right, I'm going to take a break. When I come back, D. Lemon and I are going to debate SNL firing its brand-new cast member because of what they perceived as bigoted comments he made last year.
Right move? Next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:55:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: SNL fired Shane Gillis today, just days after it was announced he was going to join the cast.
He tried to explain bigoted comments and slurs about gays and Chinese Americans on his podcast by saying he's a comedian who pushes boundaries. Sometimes, he misses, and he apologizes to anybody who was actually offended.
Let's bring in D. lemon. Right move? Wrong move?
DON LEMON, CNN HOST, CNN TONIGHT WITH DON LEMON: For what?
CUOMO: SNL.
LEMON: For - I'll leave it up to SNL to decide if they want to fire him. I'm actually torn on this one because, on the one side, I really hate cancel culture, and I hate the whole boycott culture. I just think it's you know.
So, I think SNL made the decision whatever decision they wanted to make. I also think that people should be, if they did something wrong, then they have to face the repercussions.
But I think comedians, you know, we were just talking about this. I was just talking about this with the guys. And comedians are going to go to the way of clowns if we, you know, continue to just, I don't know, to scrutinize everything they say.
But the one - the one rule of comedy, I think that applies to this is that it has to be funny.
CUOMO: Yes. You know, somebody was just saying that to me.
LEMON: And what he said was--
CUOMO: I don't agree.
LEMON: Well but hang on - hang on.
CUOMO: I don't agree. Sometimes people are offensive.
LEMON: Hold on, let me finish my thought. Let me--
CUOMO: Go ahead.
LEMON: --let me finish my thought. What he said was not funny.
And he didn't say it - if he was doing a stand-up routine, and he was making you think, and he was using offensive language, in - in some way that it may - have made you uncomfortable, but then it made you think, this was not that.
This was a podcast, basically like me and you talking now. We were just having a conversation like there was no performance here, there's no whatever. We're--
