Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Republican Reaction to Trump Corruption Allegations?; Impeachment Inquiry Timeline. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired September 27, 2019 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:00]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Did he name names?

MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Not yet.

KEILAR: OK. All right.

RAJU: I asked him specifically that. He declined to comment.

KEILAR: All right, Manu, thank you.

And "THE LEAD WITH JAKE TAPPER" starts right now.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Welcome to the special edition of THE LEAD, "The White House in Crisis." I'm Jake Tapper.

And the biggest development today, top Democrats in the House earlier today laying out their plans for when and how they will move forward with the impeachment inquiry into President Trump.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff tells CNN that he's preparing to move -- quote -- "as expeditiously as possible."

Schiff tells us that his committee is preparing for hearings as soon as next week. In just a few hours, the full House of Representatives will go on recess for two weeks, but sources say members of the House Intelligence Committee, which is leading the impeachment investigation, have been told to be prepared to return to Washington, D.C.

Those sources are also detailing how quickly Democrats hope to potentially finish this process, potentially impeaching President Trump by Thanksgiving of this year.

The other seismic development today in Washington, the White House acknowledging yet another key part of the whistle-blower complaint about President Trump is true. White House officials admitting that they did move records of President Trump's call with the president of Ukraine to a highly secure computer system, a move that a White House official told the whistle-blower was -- quote -- "an abuse of this electronic system, because the call did not contain anything remotely sensitive from a national security perspective" -- unquote. CNN senior White House correspondent Pamela Brown joins me now.

And, Pamela, not only is this the first time the White House has admitted this. It also proves yet another big part, key part of the whistle-blower's story is true.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: It does lend credibility to a key part of the complaint, Jake.

And what the senior official from the White House is saying is that, yes, NSC lawyers did direct for the classified document, this transcript between President Trump and President Zelensky, to be handled appropriately, to be moved to the classified system.

But this official said that it was done appropriately. So the argument that White House officials are making is that it was already a classified document because it was a head of state call. And officials say that they did this because it was a way to cut down on leaks after the leaking of conversations that the president had with heads of state from Mexico and from Australia.

And, of course, there was President Putin's phone call as well that leaked out. And so, basically, officials are saying that that was really the reason why, that there wasn't really a cover-up just to protect the president.

But, of course, this statement leaves a lot of questions unanswered. Who else was involved in this, beyond this NSC lawyer directing this? We know that this practice of limiting access to head of state transcripts began in earnest last year.

So it does make you wonder, why was it done? We know that this transcript in particular, that the Zelensky transcript didn't fit the criteria that would normally be required to be moved to this code word system. That is for documents that contain intelligence secrets, military secrets, covert operations.

We have seen the transcript. It didn't contain any of that. It was just politically sensitive to the president, Jake.

TAPPER: Not just politically sensitive, in the view of some lawyers, potentially even criminal.

Pamela, President Trump today attacked the whistle-blower on Twitter, suggested that he or she is a -- quote -- "partisan operative." That's a claim that his own director of national intelligence and the intelligence inspector general have already addressed, the alleged bias of the whistle-blower.

BROWN: That's right.

I mean, they have made it very clear, with the acting DNI saying to Congress yesterday that the whistle-blower acted in good faith. But you see this concerted effort by the president to attack the credibility of the whistle-blower. The president and his aides continue to point out that the whistle- blower had this secondhand information, even though, as we know now, some of the -- at least some of the complaint has already been corroborated by the White House itself.

And what's interesting here, in light of these attacks from the president on the whistle-blower, Jake, is that a senior administration official tells me that the president and the White House at large doesn't even know the identity of the whistle-blower.

But yet the strategy here is to try to keep the focus on the whistle- blower, call the whistle-blower a partisan to perhaps take away from some of the other fallout that's happening right now, Jake.

TAPPER: All right, Pamela Brown, thank you so much.

I want to turn to CNN White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins, who's with me now.

And, Kaitlan, when you step back from this, we know some facts here. We know that the military aid to Ukraine was being held up by President Trump. We know that President Trump and Rudy Giuliani, acting on his behalf, were pushing Ukraine to investigate his political rivals.

And we know now that the transcript of that call was put into this computer server. I mean, this looks really, really bad. How worried are White House officials?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, it's interesting, because, typically, people in the past, they have lived under this drumbeat of impeachment for so long. They have been convinced so many times that this is the time it's going to happen, and it never has.

[15:05:01]

This week's events have essentially left a lot of people in the West Wing shell-shocked, not just in the West Wing, Trump allies as well. People who typically have been dismissive of these, saying that these investigations Democrats were doing were overreaching and too much, this actually has prompted a lot of concern inside the White House, especially once that transcript was released.

People did not think that was a wise decision. And so you're seeing a lot of people who in the past have not been concerned really be concerned about this, and not so sure what their strategy is going to be going forward.

TAPPER: And what are you learning about the president's mood as this impeachment inquiry progresses? He's been on Twitter nonstop railing, but that's not necessarily a new thing.

COLLINS: No, but it's been interesting to watch privately what he's been saying to people, because after Nancy Pelosi announced that this was going to happen, they were launching this formal impeachment inquiry, the president was kind of incredulous.

He just couldn't believe that it, that she actually went forward with it. He thought he was going to be able to convince her not to. And in the days since then, people who have spoken with the president say they think he's in denial, that he just doesn't realize the gravity of the situation that he's facing, that he's not taking it seriously enough, and that he doesn't realize that it's not a guaranteed outcome here that it'll just be the House that impeaches him and he will be able to go on about his way.

People are trying to convince the president that he needs to realize just how grave and dire potentially the situation is. And, right now, they just don't think he's there yet.

And we reported that yesterday. We only heard more people start to say that today.

TAPPER: And the whistle-blower mentioned both Rudy Giuliani and Attorney General William Barr in the complaint as individuals who would help this pursuit of a prosecution or investigation of Trump's political rivals the Bidens.

Is the president going to be willing to defend Giuliani and Barr with the same verve as he defends himself?

COLLINS: Well, that will be the question going forward. That's going to be something really interesting to watch, especially Rudy Giuliani, who is on the nerves of a lot of people inside the West Wing, who don't think he's doing his best to serve the president. They think he's actually getting the president in so much turmoil, potentially getting him impeached by operating this way, speaking with these Ukrainian officials.

So that will be something to watch. The other thing, though, with people who actually work inside the administration, Bill Barr and such, the president has drawn a lot of people into this. He's not only bringing Bill Barr into it, as he did five times, I believe, during that phone call.

He's also talked about the vice president's conversations with the Ukrainians, the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, even the commerce secretary, Wilbur Ross. He's really bringing a lot of people into this situation with him.

So whether or not he sticks by them or he lets someone take the blame will be really interesting to watch. And what Pamela was just talking about, another thing we're trying to report out is, did the president direct that National Security Council lawyer to move that transcript?

Or whoever did it, who were they doing it at the direction of?

TAPPER: All right, Kaitlan Collins, stick around. We're going to want to talk to you more.

Let's go now to CNN congressional reporter Manu Raju. He's on Capitol Hill. And, Manu, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff tells CNN today that it's not only impeachment hearings that could start as soon as next week, hearings, not voting, but hearings, but also he might actually start potentially issuing subpoenas and ordering depositions.

RAJU: Yes, I asked him directly, what are your next steps here? Do you plan to have hearings next week?

And he said, we do plan to have hearings next week. He also said he plans to bring forward individuals for depositions. He also made clear that subpoenas could go out very soon to get documents.

Now, I asked him, how are you going to handle if the White House stonewalls, does not provide this information to Capitol Hill? After all, Democrats have been battling with the administration all year about their document requests and have not gotten a number of them.

He said that will only add to their contention that the president is trying to obstruct Congress, which, of course, was part of one of the articles of impeachment for then President Richard Nixon, presuming that could also be a part of an article of impeachment for President Trump.

So Adam Schiff plans to move forward pretty aggressively over the next two weeks, when the rest of Congress is in session -- on recess. Other members of the House Intelligence Committee plan to skip parts of their recess to come back here to plan the hearings.

Now, he would not say who specifically will be the first people to be interviewed. But they do want to bring forward the whistle-blower himself or herself and interview that person, presumably behind closed doors, Jake.

TAPPER: And, Manu, a lot of House Democrats have voiced concern, if not outrage, about the role that Attorney General Bill Barr played in this saga, in this scandal.

Do they plan to call him before the Congress? Do they want to interview him?

RAJU: A lot of Democrats who are on that committee are telling me they do want Bill Barr to come and testify.

And, also, Speaker Nancy Pelosi herself raised concerns earlier today about Barr's alleged role.

TAPPER: We're waiting for sound.

(CROSSTALK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): I do think the attorney general has gone rogue. He has for a long time now. And since he was mentioned in all of this, it's curious that he would be making decisions about how the complaint would be handled. (END VIDEO CLIP)

[15:10:00]

RAJU: But, again, the big question here, Jake, is whether or not they will get any cooperation from Bill Barr, any cooperation from other Cabinet officials, including Mike Pompeo, who the Intelligence Committee and other committees have already asked for documents and threatened to subpoena this week, if they do not turn over what may have occurred in the conversations with Rudy Giuliani in his efforts to communicate with Ukraine.

And potentially we could even see Rudy Giuliani being asked to least provide records, if not testify. So the committee wants to move quickly. The question is, if they don't get the cooperation, what do they do next and how quickly do they move to impeach?

But some Democrats want this all wrapped up, Jake, by Thanksgiving, if not sooner.

TAPPER: All right, Manu Raju on Capitol Hill for us, thank you so much.

We're going to have much more on our top story, with President Trump already in counterattack mode. Are Democrats taking any sort of risk when it comes to the 2020 elections by pursuing this impeachment inquiry?

You're watching a special edition of THE LEAD, "The White House in Crisis."

We will be right back after this quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:15:47]

TAPPER: We're back with our politics lead for this special edition of THE LEAD: "The White House in Crisis."

Democrats barreling forward towards the impeachment investigation. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff telling CNN today that his committee may hold hearings as soon as next week.

Let's chew over all this with our experts here.

Sabrina, let me start with you.

Sources say Democrats want to wrap up the entire investigation, potentially even have a vote by Thanksgiving, perhaps, and certainly at the latest the end of the year.

Is there any concern that that might be moving too quickly?

SABRINA SIDDIQUI, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, there isn't agreement within the Democratic Caucus over whether or not they should do this as quickly as possible or take more time and build a real case in public to the American people.

I think House Democratic leaders, they don't want this issue to fester, especially as we go into the 2020 campaign. And that's why they want to try and expedite this and get through it as quickly as possible.

But we don't know what will happen if and when the White House stonewalls many of their requests. This could very well turn into yet another protracted fight that will be settled in the courts. And there are a lot of Democrats who say it's taken them so long to get here, so do all the due diligence, subpoena all of the relevant witnesses and documents.

There is no rush, because they don't want to feed into Republican talking points that this is all politically motivated and part of a foregone conclusion on the part of Democrats impeach the president.

And, Shan, if there are -- if there is that stonewalling by the White House, the refusal to turn over documents, the refusal to let witnesses testify, et cetera, which I understand is -- they have -- the White House has less of a case to make, given the fact that this is a formal impeachment inquiry, but if that happens, Schiff said that this will strengthen the case on obstruction of justice.

Is that how you see it?

SHAN WU, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: I see that it could strengthen the case for another article of impeachment.

I mean, Nixon completely stonewalled, end up getting article three on that basis. I think obstruction, they could also go down the contempt route, and the courts would tie it up.

I would love to see them return to the old days of having their own sergeant at arms force the contempt.

TAPPER: And, Jackie, one of the problems for the White House as they attack the whistle-blower, especially President Trump, who is attacking the whistle-blower, one of the problems is, the major charges in the complaint, that President Trump and Rudy Giuliani have been pushing Ukraine to investigate the Bidens and that the transcript was put in this code secret sensitive server, those have been proven to be true.

JACKIE KUCINICH, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, right.

And that's one of the problems with the Republican argument that there's -- that this is a secondhand account. We have a firsthand account. It's a primary source document. We have a partial transcript or a memo, because it's not a complete transcript, obviously, of the conversation the president had with the Ukrainian president.

It was released on Tuesday. So we know what that conversation was. So I don't know how they can keep making that argument. It kind of goes in line with the fact that they say they haven't read it, read the complaint that came out yesterday.

It's a little hollow.

TAPPER: And let's talk about the Republican reaction to this, because I know you have the Kool-Aid drinkers, the ones who will just defend President Trump no matter what.

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Very big vat of Kool- Aid.

TAPPER: Yes.

(LAUGHTER)

TAPPER: But, you know, like the Matt Gaetzes of the world, who will just say anything.

But what about the body of the Republican Caucus? I know that they support President Trump, but do the Republicans you talk to, do they understand that this looks really, really bad?

BASH: Yes. For the most part, yes.

There are some who, just as you said, they just -- they have their blinders on and they don't care because their constituents are so much in Trump's corner, that Trump can do no wrong.

But the thing that we need to look at, particularly now on a Friday going into most members of Congress being home for two weeks with their constituents, are those front-liners, people like Jason Crow, who you talked to on this program yesterday, who turned a Republican district Democratic, who was one of the first people among those veterans to come out with an op-ed, changing the tide of this story, making it so that Nancy Pelosi could do this impeachment inquiry.

They are already getting hammered in an unofficial way by Republicans. It is going to change very quickly to an official way. Look for TV ads. Look for other paid political strategies to get at them.

[15:20:05]

And so that's on the one hand. And then the flip side are the Republicans, getting back to what you're asking, who are in purple states, who need their base -- on the Senate side in particular, who need their base to vote for them, so they can beat the Democrat in 2020.

But they also need some Democrats to come over to vote for them. So they are in the biggest pickle of all of them. And they are the ones who are running from reporters, frankly, understandably, until they get more information.

I'm talking about, to name names, Joni Ernst of Iowa, Cory Gardner of Colorado, people for whom their winning and losing will determine whether Republicans keep majority of the Senate in 2020. TAPPER: And it's largely dependent on how independent voters come to

think of all this by November of next year, which is an unknown. Nobody knows how this will happen.

It's been pointed out, Sabrina, that Nixon had a much better legal apparatus to defend him, and Bill Clinton did as well, during their impeachments than President Trump has.

But President Trump has something that Nixon did not have. He has FOX News. He has an army of trolls. He has sites, Web sites that will defend anything he says or does. And that could very well come into play. They are already coming to his defense.

SIDDIQUI: And you already see the president and his allies taking a page from the Russia playbook, where they're trying to frame this as a another witch-hunt.

You see some of them pushing conspiracy theories and trying to refocus the attention on Joe Biden, even though there is no evidence to suggest wrongdoing on the part of former Vice President Biden.

I think that that's the key here for the president, is whether or not he's able to once again try and frame this in sharply partisan terms. And it'll be very important for Democrats in their messaging to not focus so much on impeachment, but I think to continue and put this under this umbrella of corruption, which is the way that they have tried to frame their message on the campaign trail.

I had a Democratic strategist tell me that Democrats shouldn't be celebrating impeachment. They should make the case to the public that it's actually a tragedy to impeach an American president, but this is the responsibility that they hold as the oversight branch of the U.S. government.

BASH: Can I just add one thing to the -- there are many differences politically between then and now, Nixon and now?

President Trump is in the middle of a reelection campaign right now. Even for Bill Clinton, he'd already won a second term. His political apparatus had been winding down. President Trump's is winding up. And they have been quietly building a massive war chest, along with the RNC, in order to get him to win reelection.

There is no better way to spend that money, from their perspective now, to get him to win reelection than to use that money to hit back at his opponents on impeachment.

TAPPER: All right, everyone, stick around.

Our next guest knows a little something about impeachment. The senior counsel for Ken Starr's team investigating then President Bill Clinton, he will join us next.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [15:28:04]

TAPPER: Welcome back to our special edition of THE LEAD: "The White House in Crisis" and an impeachment inquiry in overdrive.

Today, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff told CNN that he is preparing for hearings on the impeachment inquiry to begin as soon as next week possibly, and he expects that subpoenas will be issued expeditiously.

Let's talk about this.

I'm joined now by Paul Rosenzweig. He was a senior counsel for Kenneth Starr's Whitewater investigation into Bill Clinton, which ultimately led to the Clinton impeachment. Rosenzweig was one of many former prosecutors who signed a letter -- signed onto a letter back in May stating that he believed President Trump's actions described in the Mueller report should amount to obstruction of justice.

Paul, thanks for joining me. Really appreciate it.

PAUL ROSENZWEIG, FORMER SENIOR COUNSEL TO KEN STARR: Thanks.

TAPPER: So Republicans are pushing back on the president's actions in the call with Ukraine, saying there is no direct quid pro quo. In other words, the president doesn't specifically say, you can only have a White House visit and this -- these hundreds of millions of dollars in aid if you investigate the Bidens.

It's never delivered in that clear-cut a fashion. What do you think?

ROSENZWEIG: Well, I think there's two things to say about it. First off, that's not the law.

The Supreme Court has said quite clearly on a number of occasions that a quid pro quo can often be with a wink and a nod. If you made it explicit only, then every quid pro quo would be a wink and a nod, and we'd never criminalize anybody who exchanged a thing of value.

The second response, I think, really is that, if you read the memorandum of the record for the telephone call, it really is pretty darn close to an actual quid pro quo.

Immediately after President Zelensky says, I need these Javelins, President Trump says...

TAPPER: Right, these missiles, right.

ROSENZWEIG: The missiles -- President Trump says, I have a favor to ask, though...

TAPPER: Right.

ROSENZWEIG: ... as if it was an explicit quid pro quo for those Javelin missiles.

So...

TAPPER: The favor was an investigation into CrowdStrike, which is the data firm that investigated the DNC after the hack. And then the president says after a conversation about CrowdStrike, and another thing, and he brings up the Bidens.

ROSENZWEIG: Exactly.

So, I mean, one of the arguments that I have heard made is that the

[15:30:00]