Return to Transcripts main page
Cuomo Prime Time
McConnell: Trump's Nominee "Will Receive a Vote"; CDC Abruptly Removes Guidance About Airborne Transmission, Says It Was Added "In Error" Amid Concerns Over Politics; Justice Department Labels New York, Portland and Seattle as "Anarchy" Jurisdictions. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired September 21, 2020 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS CUOMO, CNN HOST, CUOMO PRIME TIME: Hello everyone, I am Chris Cuomo. Welcome to PRIME TIME.
Of course Trump sees his response to the pandemic as deserving an A- plus. As you watch all those names on your screen, we prepare to pass 200,000 lives stolen. Of course, we should be doing much better.
Look at the schools, the people we say matter the most. Look at how we're treating our kids. You don't need me to tell you, you're living it. Many schools have no testing or inadequate testing. They shut down over a single case, why? No guidance. No leadership. We're failing our kids. And Trump gives himself an "A."
Like I argued earlier, we are caught in a supreme WTFIDK mode. IDK, "I Don't Know," WTF, "What The" you do know. Obvious things that shock the conscience, WTF, still have people split. Our school situation is horrible. And yet, we shrug, "I don't know what to think."
Now, Justice Ginsburg, gone. Her legacy's greatness marked by the hole she leaves and what it exposes about how different she was from those who seek to replace her.
McConnell and every Republican senator, every one, told us "Nine months out from an election? That's too close. That's too soon. We can't seat a new Justice."
But in something that should bring a blush to even his blank face, the mastermind of the Merrick Garland power grab, the blockade of 2016, Senator McConnell came out today, and said, "I'll tell you why it's OK to do it now, because the Democrats."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): President Trump's nominee for this vacancy will receive a vote on the floor of the Senate. Now already, some of the same individuals who tried every conceivable dirty trick to obstruct Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh are lining up, lining up to proclaim the third time will be the charm.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: I mean, the unmitigated gall!
Just so you understand the situation, Senator McConnell, you got your judges, denied the other side their chance, but they're playing dirty, not you, and because they are the ones who did the wrong thing, not you, you can now break your word and do what you said should never be done.
All of you Republicans in the Senate said it was wrong to do it with an election that close. And now, you all just smile and admit you lied to everyone.
WTF, right? This must be obvious to all of us. No, Divided along the same lines no matter how blatant the hypocrisy. Do so many really expect so little, nothing better than this?
And while Trump had nothing to do with the sins of 2016, he did talk about it. You haven't heard it. But he said something, directly on point, directly to me.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: You have a vacancy on the Supreme Court. The Constitution says the president is supposed to pick a nominee. He says he's going to do that today. Now, it's for the Senate to do its job.
You say, "No. Don't do it, wait for the next election." Why? You say that "Washington's broken. They don't do their job enough. They all play games." This is one of those games if they don't hold hearings. Why continue the problem?
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Because I think the next president should make the pick, and I think they shouldn't go forward, and I believe I'm pretty much in line with what the Republicans are saying.
I think that the next president should make the pick. We don't have a very long distance to wait. Certainly they could wait it out very easily. But I think the next president should make the pick. I would be not in favor of going-forward.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Imagine if the President of the United States came out today, and when asked about whether or not this should happen, he said, "Well, look, I remember 2016."
He's President, right? You can trust him, right? It's fake news. I make it up when I tell you that he's lying to you, that he's a hypocrite, right?
Now, listen to this again.
[21:05:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Because I think the next president should make the pick, and I think they shouldn't go forward, and I believe I'm pretty much in line with what the Republicans are saying.
I think that the next president should make the pick. We don't have a very long distance to wait. Certainly they could wait it out very easily. But I think the next president should make the pick. I would be not in favor of going-forward.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: A man of his word, right? If that word is "Me," because when it's about him, everything's OK.
So, where is Trump now? The answer, "The outsider who would come in and break up what's going on, drain the swamp," he's right in there with the rest of them, arguably the biggest gator with his own unique bite, basically accusing RBG's granddaughter of lying about her grandmother's wish to have her seat held open until after the election.
Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Well, I don't know that she said that, or was that written out by Adam Schiff, and Schumer and Pelosi. I would be more inclined to the second, OK? You know, that came out of the wind.
Yes, it just sounds to me like it would be somebody else.
It was just too convenient.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: That's because you lie with no shame in your game. Integrity is an extra. There is no empathy, not even for the family of the dead.
And while so many of you, I would argue, basically all of you, would never say anything like that, never, now, "No problem. IDK, I shrug." OK, fine.
If you're not going to judge anybody, on the basis of the integrity that they bring to the office, OK, I understand why you might not, given how many times you've been frustrated, how many times you've been played for a fool, for thinking that they would do what they're supposed to do.
But if you are about the Constitution, and that's why you - but we got to get back to the Constitution, got to stop extending over, it can't have it, this move is clearly at odds with what's in the Constitution. So now, President Trump says, "Forget what I said then, I didn't mean
it, or it doesn't work for me now, and you don't care, because I can shoot somebody on the middle of Fifth Avenue, and you wouldn't care. So, I'm going to do what's good for me, and this time, I think it's good for you. I'm going to get you a nominee, and by the end of the week."
Let me ask you this. The speed here is a reflection of the importance, right? He's doing it right away, because he really wants it to happen. This matters to him, right? We all agree on that, right? OK.
So, what does that say about the delay in getting on top of testing? Hell no, I'm not forgetting about it. My kids are home right now. They're supposed to be in school. People are dropping all over this country because we can't track it.
Why aren't we testing in a smart way yet? Why aren't our kids in schools right now? Why aren't we able to track this virus the way they were doing it in Third World countries?
Why doesn't he talk about that with the same urgency? When is the last time you heard him talk about wanting to do better with testing, and what his plan is, and how the states are screwing it up, but he can do better. When? Not just the last time, the first time?
"Who knows, IDK? It is what it is." You know where that attitude is getting us? 28 states, seeing a spike in cases again, only six seeing a decline. The number of new cases back up over 40,000.
But IDK, right? Shrug, "We'll stick with this masks are optional, in communities with spread." Schools, "Yes, figure out on your own." Vaccine, "Magic, baby. It's going to make it disappear."
You don't really believe any of that, do you? You're not really following that in your own life, are you? Maybe for show at some Trump rally!
But for God's sake, put a mask on, if you're around other people, socially distance when you can, really wash your hands like you were constant - sticking them in something really dirty.
It's the only way we're going to get out of this until they figure out how to test in a way that gives us some advance notice. I really hope you do that, for your own sake, because nobody's telling you to that matters it seems. And that's really, really wrong.
[21:10:00]
Now, one of the few right things that we're doing right now is we're paying respect to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, her SCOTUS seat draped in black. She's going to lie in repose at the Supreme Court on Wednesday and Thursday, so that the public can do the right thing, pay its respects.
You really have to ask yourself, looking at what's going on right now, I'm not even playing the political hypocrisy game. Yes, I know, I know, both sides, both sides, I know.
But what do we respect anymore? It really doesn't matter to you that they just lied right to your face because it now benefits them, so that makes it OK? Now, what are the Democrats going to do? I don't see a move.
Let's bring in Senate Judiciary Member and former 2020 presidential hopeful, Senator Amy Klobuchar with us. Good to see you, Senator.
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR (D-MN): Hi, Chris.
CUOMO: So, what's the move? Better angels! Give me a break.
KLOBUCHAR: The first move is to push our Republican colleagues, not just us here, in the Senate, but also the people of this country, to say, "Do your job and look at the fact that you yourself set a precedent. You set a precedent that you now have to respect."
And all of them had said, "Well, you got to let the voters decide, and then the voters pick the President, and then the President picks the Justice."
And look at this, and you're a student of history, when you go back through time, the closest any Justice died to the election, anything like this, was when Abraham Lincoln was President.
CUOMO: Right.
KLOBUCHAR: And what did he do? He waited because he was a wise leader, got through the election, and then made a decision based on who won the election. And to me, that's what you do.
And I think one of the things, as we look at people voting - and I was listening to everything you said, and I appreciate that you pay homage to those 200,000 people that have died.
And you and I both, you personally having experienced, my husband getting so sick, near the beginning, when we now know Donald Trump knew that this virus was deadly, we knew that he knew it was airborne, and for anyone that's had it in your family, you take it personally, so I appreciate you saying that.
Because the other thing about this Supreme Court moment is that everything is on the line. Healthcare is on the line. There's going to be, on November 10th, an oral argument before the Supreme Court.
And so, as people vote and respect that dying wish of Justice Ginsburg, they know that they have to stand up for our democracy and make sure that we don't let Mitch McConnell spew it away from us again.
CUOMO: So, two points of pushback, one is theoretical, which is the majority, what the polls say.
Our elected process is no longer about the majority. You have a president who gets picked by the minority of the country on a regular basis, so I don't know the majority rule is really working for us right now.
But specific to the back-and-forth on this one, Senator, in 2016, you and many others said, "We need a full bench. We need a full bench. We've got to do this. We need to."
Now, you're arguing, "Don't have a full bench," even though, on November 10th, when the ACA case, arguably the biggest one on the shortest calendar here, you would then want a not full bench for the biggest case that's coming up? Sounds like politics are play there too, no?
KLOBUCHAR: Let me respond.
CUOMO: Please.
KLOBUCHAR: They set that rule in 2016. This is the Modern Age. I'm not talking about something that happened 100 years ago. It was in 2016 that they all set this new rule, the rules of the game. And that rule is, when it's an election year, and especially when it's this close, you let the people decide.
The people are already voting, Chris. 25 states, something like that, they're already voting in my State. They're mailing in their ballots. They're doing early voting. They have the right to decide this.
And I just think the cynicism of my colleagues, and by the way, we already have had two Republicans that have come out, and said, "You should wait until after the election, wait, let the people decide," and there are still many more that haven't said what they thought, so we are continuing to push.
I'm not going to give up, because Ruth Bader Ginsburg never gave up. People told her she shouldn't - couldn't go to law school as a woman. She graduates number one in her class.
People tell her, "Oh, you shouldn't argue the Equal Protection cases, a man should do it." She argues and wins. Then she lands herself the second woman ever placed on the highest court of the land and goes on to become a cultural icon in her 80s.
Anything and everything is possible.
CUOMO: Listen.
KLOBUCHAR: And that's what she stood for, and that's what we must do.
CUOMO: I think, I don't know, I don't want to go too far. But I think that one thing that most Americans can still agree on is that this was a very impressive person, The Notorious RBG.
And my father, may he rest in peace, was involved with the Supreme Court thing a little bit also. He referred to RBG as "The Upgrade" from him. So, her greatness, I don't think is in dispute.
KLOBUCHAR: Yes. CUOMO: But she was - while she was theoretically, in terms of how she saw jurisprudence, open to application of the Constitution, she knew what was in there, in arguing that.
[21:15:00]
In 2016, the argument from the Democrats was the Constitution was on your side to fill it, because the president's supposed to do it. Now, doesn't that mean by extension that now it's on the Republican's side and that they're supposed to fill it?
KLOBUCHAR: We valiantly tried to make the argument, and then they set the new rules. They can't have one set of rules under a Democratic President and another set of rules under a Republican President.
And the one thing that makes me hopeful in all of this is that the people are turning out in droves. Joe Biden is ahead in states we never thought possible.
In a Reuters' poll, just of this weekend, the closest one we have, 62 percent of Americans said that the next President should pick the Supreme Court Justice. Five out of 10 Republicans said the same thing in that poll. So, people are on to this guy.
They don't want to see raw politics when it comes to the Supreme Court. They're tired of the divide. All the same reasons that they were turning out in droves to vote for Joe Biden, before we lost Ruth Bader Ginsburg, are even stronger today.
CUOMO: Senator Klobuchar, as always, thank you for making the case on this show.
KLOBUCHAR: Thanks, Chris.
CUOMO: God bless and good health to the family. You're always welcome here. Obviously, the country will be watching.
KLOBUCHAR: All right.
CUOMO: If we didn't have enough to pay attention to already.
KLOBUCHAR: Thank you very much.
CUOMO: Be well.
All right, so what's the deal with the COVID guidance being mixed up again by the CDC, them saying somebody pushed "Send," it was a mistake? They're playing politics with what you should know and what you should do about a deadly virus. What is going on here?
Let's bring on a former CDC Head for his take on how things are supposed to work, and what the implications are for what's going to happen in this country, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Quick point here on election security and election availability to you, right? A second federal court has now ruled against the United States Postal Service.
But really, that means they're voting in favor of our Postal Service, because they're saying to the Postmaster General that was put in by Trump, who's his buddy, who gave him a ton of money, "Undo the BS that you did to slow down the mail and deprioritize balloting."
They want them to put back in all of the things that needs to be - need to be done to make all mail First Class or Priority Mail Express that has to do with ballots, and to pre-approve all overtime requests for the two weeks surrounding Election Day to make sure absentee ballots are processed properly.
Make no mistake about it they are still fighting to slow down our democracy. So, take advantage, you can vote right now.
You don't like what's happening with RBG or you do? You don't like what's happening with our kids in school? I'm not giving you another option on that because it's terrible. Vote now, vote right now, that's what you need to be doing because you can.
So, another reason for you to get out of your house and do something to make a change now, instead of complaining about what's happening, is what's going on at the CDC.
First, it was testing, messing with who has to be tested and who doesn't. Why? I have no idea. I can't see any good reason to do it. And now, I have the same question about transmission science.
The CDC is backtracking on guidance it posted Friday, all right? Here's what went up that was now removed.
"There is growing evidence that droplets and airborne particles can remain suspended in the air," aerosolized that's called, and then "be breathed in by others. Travel distances beyond six feet, for example, during choir practice, in restaurants or in fitness classes. In general, indoor environments without good ventilation increase this risk."
You know what places don't have good ventilation? Schools. Schools. The CDC says that guidance was posted in error. What? Scientists have
long called attention to the risk of aerosols and aerosolization. Why would they change it? What is the good reason?
I want to bring in a friend of mine, Dr. Richard Besser, former Acting CDC Director. We worked together for years at ABC News. I trust him inherently and implicitly.
It's good to see you, Doc.
DR. RICHARD BESSER, FORMER CDC ACTING DIRECTOR, PRESIDENT & CEO, ROBERT WOOD JOHNSON FOUNDATION: Good to be here, Chris.
CUOMO: Help me on this. That's the right guidance. We both - even I know, from hearing it from you, and all the other clinicians, that's the right guidance. Why take it down and say it was sent out by mistake?
BESSER: Yes. I talked to a former colleague at CDC, a leader there, and the word I get is, "It's going to be coming, but the version that was up was not final. It hadn't gone through all of the clearance."
So, I think that what we're going to see coming out from CDC is very similar to what was up, but it wasn't ready to go yet. And it begs the question, why isn't it ready to go, when there's been so many cases now of transmission that looks like it could have been aerosol. It should be up there in some form.
CUOMO: Same thing with testing. They did the same thing about who has to be tested. "Oh, you don't have symptoms? You don't have to be tested."
We know the science. We know that if you're asymptomatic, you could still have it. They know all these things. I mean isn't the answer whether they want to say it or not that somebody else is controlling what the CDC can put out?
BESSER: Well I think that those are two different circumstances, and both undercut the trust in CDC. And one, where you have political interference or political manipulation of science is the most devastating to trust. But when you put something up, and you have to pull it down, it begs the question why did that happen.
And if we were hearing from CDC every single day, if from the beginning, back when Dr. Messonnier was talking about--
CUOMO: Sure.
BESSER: --how bad this is going to get, if that had continued, then we would have a relationship ongoing with CDC, and they would tell us what they're learning in terms of science. They would - they would foreshadow when a changing guidance was coming.
And if they made a mistake, that they put something up too soon, they could say, "Hey, it will be here Thursday, Wednesday"--
CUOMO: Right.
[21:25:00]
BESSER: --"or whenever it's going to be up," and you would - you wouldn't lose the trust.
With the situation we're in right now, every time this happens, it begs the question, "Why did it happen? Who had their fingers on it? Can you trust what's coming out of there?"
CUOMO: I mean, look, for me, it's not about the CDC. It's about what the pressure is on them, if they want to keep their jobs.
It can't be a coincidence that we heard the same thing, when they changed the guidelines for testing. "Oh, it wasn't ready yet," or "Just has to be vetted," and the stuff with the schools, "Oh, the directives, we have - we weren't completely done, it went out too soon." That's too many times with the same excuse.
Brett Giroir the other day, saying "Oh, you know, you really don't have to test somebody, if they don't have symptoms," what is he, trying to time-travel back to January, Doc? We know that symptoms--
BESSER: Yes--
CUOMO: --isn't dispositive. Why would he say that?
BESSER: Yes. I mean this plays into the biggest challenge in this pandemic, where you have public health on message with trying to get the U.S. to do its work in every other country around the world, and the political message saying, "There's really nothing to worry about. Masks are a matter of personal choice," and we're approaching 200,000 deaths. And thousands of those deaths could have been prevented had a different approach been taken.
And Chris, we've talked about it before. This is hitting every community, but it's not hitting every community equally.
CUOMO: Right.
BESSER: It's hitting communities of color, it's hitting low-income Americans. And what does it say about us, as a nation, if we're willing to say, "Hey, not all lives in this country carry equal value?"
CUOMO: Look, and even if you've bought into the "Us versus them" game of the political moment, what about your own kids? Our schools are so screwed up, Rich. They don't have the tests, or if they do have the tests, they're not the right ones, or they're picking up positives of people--
BESSER: Yes.
CUOMO: --who aren't contagious. And when they get a positive, they're like shutting down the entire school because they don't have the resources to contact trace. And we both know that while education is a state priority, this is a national emergency. And it's got federal government written all over it, and we've never heard--
BESSER: Yes.
CUOMO: --the President talk about wanting to address it once.
BESSER: Yes.
CUOMO: What do you think about what's happening in the schools, Rich?
BESSER: I'm a pediatrician, and like you, I'm a parent. I know how critically important it is to get kids to school.
It's really, really important, but it has to be done safely not just for the kids but for the staff, and for the teachers, who are at greater risk, of having - having severe illness. We need to make sure that every school has what they need. They're not getting the federal dollars that are required, to make sure that air flow is good.
CUOMO: Yes.
BESSER: So, whatever component aerosols play in this, you're able to decrease the risk from that not able to hire the staff that's needed.
And we're seeing the same breakdown, in terms of schools that serve low-income communities. How do we value Black and Brown children? And how do we show that if we're not providing the same resource to those schools that we're providing to schools in wealthier neighborhoods?
CUOMO: Best-case scenario is you got kids doing it at home. The hybrid thing is the worst. So, it's not safe enough for them to be there full-time, but you're going to expose them to each other one another anyway, and then bring them back home, where there could be vulnerable people?
BESSER: Yes.
CUOMO: It's just I can't believe that this is the best we can do by the people we say who matter the most. And I see politics and bad politics all over it. Dr. Richard Besser?
BESSER: Right.
CUOMO: Thank you for your perspective. I trust everything you say all the time. Thank you for talking to my audience.
BESSER: Thanks, Chris.
CUOMO: All right. I'm telling you, he would never be a part of something like this. I know the man. He was at the CDC. People handle pressure different ways. But these excuses we're getting don't make sense to the science.
And here we are again. Us and them, the SCOTUS battle, it's going to be unprecedented. But it might not be the slam-dunk Republicans expect, OK? I get the hypocrisy point. But this is a power play, right? It's about
what they need to do to consolidate power, show they used power well, to keep power.
Well what if this doesn't work for McConnell? What if it threatens him? What if he doesn't have the power he thinks? Now, those are big questions. You need big brains to think through them, and here they are two of the best to take us through the subtleties of this, 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)
CUOMO: Our democracy is in unchartered territory, well kind of. Republicans had charted the course for us in 2016, saying when you get close to an election, you should wait, to see what you guys want, before doing something as important and permanent as seeding a Supreme Court Justice.
Now they're racing ahead, even though we don't even know who the nominee is. Where do we go from here, and what does it mean, and what may be different than what it appears on its face.
Could this actually be more dicey for McConnell than it seems that it's not all upside? And is what's going on right now, as a process, proof of a change that you guys don't really matter that much anymore. It's really not about rule reflecting a majority.
Let's bring in a couple of good men, who has been thinking about these things, all right? Senior Editors for "The Atlantic," both of them.
RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST, SENIOR EDITOR, THE ATLANTIC: Yes.
CUOMO: The Professor, as I call him, Ron Brownstein, and David Frum, good to see you. It's been a minute, David.
DAVID FRUM, SENIOR EDITOR, THE ATLANTIC: Thank you.
CUOMO: Good to see you. I've been watching you.
FRUM: Thank you.
CUOMO: I've been reading your stuff. All good! So, first on the micro, then we'll go to the macro. Micro is you, David Frum, that McConnell may not have an as easy a play, as it would seem. How? I don't see it.
FRUM: Well he's won so often that people assume he'll win all the time.
There are not a lot of days left between now and the election for the Senate. Although it's a month and a half to voting day, the Senate is scheduled only to meet for 12 more days before it adjourns so that senators can fight the election. That's not a lot of time.
[21:35:00]
Now, maybe McConnell has in mind that he can start the process now, and complete it after the election, before the Inauguration.
But we're heading to an election, which may be 145 million Americans will vote. And if the polls are right, President Trump will lose by a margin of about 10 million votes. In the face of that massive popular repudiation is the idea things just go ahead, and what if the Republicans have lost the Senate? Things just go ahead? You could--
CUOMO: Oh, David froze, so let me bounce it to--
FRUM: --make it harder.
CUOMO: Oh, good. Is he back?
BROWNSTEIN: Yes.
CUOMO: Good. I lost you for a second, David. Finish your point quickly.
FRUM: OK. You can say, "Yes, he'll just go ahead." But in the reality of what the world will look like, after an election, that may not be so easy to do. Senators may flinch. The nominee may flinch.
CUOMO: OK. But if it were to go this way, Ron, why wouldn't that be a reflection of the reality that you point out in your piece, which is it's not about rule--
BROWNSTEIN: Yes.
CUOMO: --by the majority anymore? It's a president who doesn't win the popular vote and it's senators in power, as a majority party, with numbers that don't reflect a majority of the country voting for them. This is the new normal.
BROWNSTEIN: Right, I think there's - I think there's no way to look at the last decade, except to conclude that the Republican Party is increasingly looking for means to continue to wield power after it no longer represents and can command a majority of the country.
I mean you can think about all the voter suppression laws and the states, gerrymandering, the efforts to tilt the census that President Trump is now engaged in, the decision in 2016, to hold open the seat that Merrick Garland was nominated for, and now, of course, doing this in kind of a last-minute rush.
The reality is, Chris, if Joe Biden wins the popular vote, Democrats will have won it in seven of the last eight elections. That's never happened in American history.
The current Republican majority of 53 senators won about 15 million fewer votes than the 47 Democratic senators in the minority. I - they may have the votes to do this, and, as David said, whether they go through with it after the election, but I just don't see it.
I mean generations born in 1981 and after are now a majority of the population. At some point, in the next decade, they're going to be the majority of the voters.
And I don't see them just kind of quiescently accepting a court that reflects an earlier America and an earlier majority, knocking down their priorities and everything from climate, to abortion, to civil rights. It just doesn't seem to me sustainable.
We lived through something like this in the 1850s and the 1930s. In each case, a court appointed by the earlier majority made big decisions on Dred Scott--
CUOMO: Right.
BROWNSTEIN: --in the 50s and the New Deal in the 1930s, and ultimately that court was preempted, and a way was found around them.
CUOMO: Yes, but look - look at the state of play. He is no shame in his game. The Democrats are the ones playing the games.
BROWNSTEIN: Yes.
CUOMO: Same way. We're going-forward with this.
He's basically saying, "Look, I lied the last time." Some of them will try to trick you with this word salad about how well "No, no, our point was, the President was one Party, the Senate was another Party, so the people have given a mixed mandate."
Now that's BS to anybody who respects the Constitution. But again, they're making a play.
And if that's the play, Ron that "Look, we're doing it because we can," then doesn't that indicate that this is the path to success for the Republicans? "Might makes right. Do it now, and get it done. He controls the calendar. Who cares if there's not a lot of time? He decides"--
BROWNSTEIN: Right.
CUOMO: --"how much time he needs."
BROWNSTEIN: Well this is the vision, right? I mean as people pointed out, the Republican Party has had two choices over the past decade.
One is to try to reach out to the changing, evolving America. The other is to try to maintain power on a base, almost entirely reliant on White voters, particularly White Christian voters in a country that's growing more diverse, and to break - and to change the rules, kind of shred the norms as the way of holding power instead.
And pretty clearly, with Trump, and all the things that he has done from the census, to the Post Office, to extorting the Ukrainian government, and Republicans going along with that, they have made the choice of trying to break the rules. And that, you know, it can work at times in the short run.
But again, if you are looking at the level of demographic change and generational change that is coming, in the 2020s, I look at this as very much like the 1850s.
1857, Dred Scott decision, seven of the nine justices, at that point, had been appointed by pro-Southern Democratic presidents of an earlier era, and they ruled in a way designed to block the priorities of the emerging majority in the North to restrain the growth of - constrain the growth of slavery.
I think you're going to see similar kind of conflicts coming, if they seat this Justice on things like climate, and abortion--
CUOMO: Right.
BROWNSTEIN: --gay rights, civil rights, racial justice, and I don't see that it is sustainable that this majority, which could last 15 years, is going to block the agenda of the generations that are emerging into becoming the majority of the country.
CUOMO: Well I mean look, we both know that by Congressional fiat (ph) they can pass a law that expands the number of justices. Dianne Feinstein, she says - said she didn't like that. Joe Biden said he didn't like it. We'll see. Again, once you have power--
BROWNSTEIN: It's 2020.
CUOMO: --sometimes you feel differently.
BROWNSTEIN: Wait until 2023.
CUOMO: Well right, but I mean you want to win now.
So, got David Frum back.
BROWNSTEIN: Yes.
CUOMO: While his shot is holding up, let's give him the last point.
[21:40:00]
For people who say "Look, he's going to do it now. He controls the calendar. And you take the win when you get it," maybe Ron is right, and this will be punished down the road. They'll still have a 6-3 right now.
FRUM: There are a lot of players here deciding upon (ph). There is the nominee. Who wants to stick her neck, as it will be a woman, into this, and who wants to have the risk of having her reputation in history be remembered this way?
And then there's the wild card of the President, who's driven by ego, he has no commitment to any of these ideas. He's looking for his own deal for legal impunity. And he may react to a defeat by sulking.
This is a very complicated and unprecedented maneuver McConnell is trying to execute. I just don't think people should blindly assume, "Well he always gets away with it, it's just hopeless. He'll get away with it."
CUOMO: I don't know what stops him. Trump's not going to stop him. He said he wants to put out a nominee this week.
He said to me, in 2016, "The next president should do this, I'm against it." I said "But you say you're against the games in Washington. Isn't this one of the biggest ugliest games?" "No, I'm with the Republicans. We should wait."
Now he's doing the opposite. Trump does what's good for him. How is this not good for him?
FRUM: Friction stops him, just the sheer difficulty of walking across the room, in carpet slippers, carrying the egg in the spoon.
CUOMO: Boy, you are deep! Ron Brownstein--
BROWNSTEIN: Yes.
CUOMO: David Frum, thank you very much. "Carrying the egg in the spoon!"
BROWNSTEIN: Thanks, Chris.
CUOMO: It's going to take me about another 15 minutes to truly absorb that, but I already know it's going to be time well-spent. Thank you very much, Gentlemen.
Look, a lot of this may not be as obvious as it seems right now. And that's why we bring in people to help us think through the different machinations of how it may not be as obvious as the WTF we all see it as. But I'll tell you what is.
If you live in New York, Seattle or Portland, there are live shot, oh, you see all that anarchy? Holy cow! Are the lights going off in New York City? Oh no, it was my eyes deceiving me, because these three are anarchy jurisdictions. That's what they've just been called by the Trump Administration. "Why? What?" Right? WTF!
Trump just is trying to use a gimmick to once again breach the Constitution. He doesn't have the power of the purse. Congress says what cities get what money. Now he wants to pull it because he says these places are about anarchy, they can't be given money. "What?"
This is a game that they have played before. You know how I know? Because I know somebody who was there when it was being played. Former Trump White House insider will tell us what is going on and how badly it stinks, next.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: You're never going to have safe areas in those Democrat-run areas.
They're not peaceful protests. That's anarchy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Honestly, I didn't really catch the first part of what he said. He was having one of those moments where his mind and his mouth weren't working. But the idea is almost impossible to absorb.
He's ramping up a narrative through the Justice Department. See, that's the key. Bill Barr is behind these things. The man who's supposed to safeguard our laws, and he is part of labeling three cities, New York, Seattle and Portland "Anarchy" jurisdictions.
The Administration says how those cities responded to police brutality, which was largely peaceful by the way. We all saw what was ugly. We know that's crime. We know it's not protest. We know it's wrong. But it wasn't the majority. It wasn't 50-50, and you know it.
However, the DoJ is now playing to fear, right? That's the campaign.
"Be Afraid. The Blacks are coming with their kooky White friends. They're going to break down the gates of where you live. They're going to come to your houses," almost as bad as that Brown Menace we had to stop from the Southern border. Thank God we built that wall, all 3 miles of it.
The DoJ though is now doing something we haven't seen. Or have we? They want to pull money from three major cities. Just politics, can it be? Miles Taylor is a former senior Trump administration official.
Welcome back to PRIME TIME.
The suggestion they shake "Oh, don't say it's about politics. It's about national security," what's your experience with this?
MILES TAYLOR, FORMER SENIOR TRUMP ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL, ENDORSED BIDEN FOR PRESIDENT, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF TO DHS SECRETARY KIRSTJEN NIELSEN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: I mean, Chris, look at the words the President said. He said Democratic-run city. He basically gave away his full intention behind doing this. The President of the United States is weaponizing the powers of his office for political purposes.
Now, Chris, the background on the story is that, on September 3rd, just two months before the election, the President issued an Executive Order on these anarchist cities. That should show you that this is a crass political point in the lead-up to the election.
The timing is no coincidence. The President could have done something like this two years ago, three years ago. He chose to do it two months before an election, to try to paint Democrats as not being consistent with his law and order narrative.
This is - we've seen this before. When I was in the Administration, the President tried to get us, at the Department of Homeland Security, to cut off Homeland Security funds to sanctuary cities that harbored immigrants here in the United States.
And he wanted to do that for political purposes because he didn't think those areas of the country supported him, so he told us to cut off the money. Now, we did not do that, Chris, we did not cut off those funds.
[21:50:00]
And do you know why we didn't cut off those funds? Because that money is used to protect these municipalities against terrorist attacks, natural disasters, mass shooters, and other public safety challenges.
CUOMO: And also to add to the point of the obvious political nature of it, Kenosha, Wisconsin has had some trouble also. The State of Minnesota has had some pretty ugly incidents there.
They're not anarchy cities, I wonder why? Maybe it's because he really needs those two states, and something like this may lose them for him. Safe assumption?
TAYLOR: Absolutely. And look, I mean, you need to go further and explore the actual effectiveness.
If the President is saying "We are cutting off these funds from these places because their local leaders are not doing enough to protect them," under what conceivable theory would you then say, "And now the federal government is not going to help protect you?" So, if the President's goal is really to defend all Americans and ensure the public safety of all Americans, which it should be, because he's the Commander-in-Chief, then why would you cut off federal funds that help prevent, again, terrorist attacks, mass shooting incidents, ensure law and order, in those places?
What the President is doing is the bottom line he's making Americans less safe, in these places, to prove a political point. That's recklessness of the highest order.
CUOMO: The good news is doubtful that in court he would be successful with this because he does not have the power of the purse. Congress does.
Miles Taylor, thank you very much for taking us in-house, and saying you've seen this before, and it's as ugly as we think. Thank you for the honesty. We'll be right back.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEXT: CLOSING ARGUMENT.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: I'm about to make a Closing Argument that I am often told not to do.
"Don't blame people for anything. You know, this is all about teams, man. As it is, at 9 o'clock, you got, the Left has one team, the Right has another team, I mean you're fighting in the middle as it is. Nobody likes a referee, no matter how nice your suit is every night."
But I don't care about that. I think you are better than being pandered to. And I think that the conscience of the collective has to be reawakened. We are stuck in a never-ending cycle of WTF and IDK moments.
Shocking things, "WTF, Ruth Bader Ginsburg is gone? Now? Right before the election?" God bless her family. We mourn her passing. She was special. But I'm afraid more dies with Ginsburg than just an amazing human and Judge.
We are witnessing epic hypocrisy. The Republicans looked you in the eye, and said "Look, nine months out from an election, we got to let the people decide." The sitting president now said that to me. He said it. I played it for you earlier. It will be on my social media. Listen to him.
I say you say you don't like Congress not doing its job. You don't like games like this in the Senate. Why are you saying they're doing the right thing?
Back in 2016, he says, "Because we're too close to the election, the people should decide." Well now what? And you're OK with that? You know what the answer is.
Blaming Mitch McConnell is easy. He is a symptom. More instructive would be understanding how we got here.
Democrats were the ones blocking judicial nominees in 2003. Trent Lott and Republicans responded with threats of rewriting the rules with what he called the "Nuclear option," remember that, eliminating the ability to filibuster judicial nominees. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRENT LOTT, FORMER UNITED STATES SENATOR: We can't continue to filibuster men, women and minorities unfairly that surely are qualified for the federal judiciary. We've got to find a solution.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Harry Reid, the Leader of the Democrats went there in 2013. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): The changes we made today will apply equally to both parties. When a Republican's in power, these changes will apply to them as well.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: He was making the majority all powerful. And you know who warned him that he would pay for this? Mitch McConnell.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MCCONNELL: Say to my friends, on the other side of the aisle, you'll regret this, and you may regret it a lot sooner than you think.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Three years later, you know what he did when Obama tried to fill a seat in an election year. Remember what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MCCONNELL: The Senate will appropriately revisit the matter when it considers the qualifications of the nominee, the next president nominates, whoever that might be.
(END VIDEO CLIP) CUOMO: Now, at the time, he made it an integrity play about you. It wasn't about you.
It was about consolidating the power of a minority. That's what it has been about then, now, for the Democrats, always. Power! The letter in front of the name is irrelevant. None of them is supposed to control the power in the system. You are.
Now the part I'm not supposed to say. You don't use your power not enough, not in enough places. And I'm not saying you don't have good excuses to not trusting the system and not want to be involved.
But this is what you get. When you don't vote, you have a system where money can beat out marginalized masses. Once either Party grabs power, they use it. The main objective is to perpetuate the position.
And if they're not worried about you, what do you think they're going to be worried about? The special interest and the insiders and the deals.
We have a larger problem, OK, Larger than parliamentary rules and Trump, one seat, either Party, it's not just about the swamp. It's about the ocean of us that is supposed to flush it clean with our good conscience and our voting. We're not doing it.
We face legitimate questions about whether the government works for the majority. Republican presidents now regularly don't represent the majority of this country. The senators who are in the majority don't represent the majority.
Look at some of the examples from this Administration of what an overwhelming majority of you say you want the government to be doing. Universal background checks, more spending on infrastructure, none of it happens. Why? Because they play to power and they do not fear you because you do not vote.
But you know what you can do tonight? Vote.
It's time for "CNN TONIGHT WITH DON LEMON."
