Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Biden To Deploy 3,000 U.S. Service Members To Europe "In The Coming Days"; Sen. Bob Menendez, (D-NJ), Is Interviewed About U.S. Troops Deployment, Russia, Ukraine; Trump Admits He Wanted Pence To Overturn 2020 Election; National Archives Plans To Give Pence Docs To Jan. 6 CMTE; Biden To Pick Next Supreme Court Justice By End Of February; White House Announces Advisory Team For Supreme Court Process; Biden To Visit NYC Tomorrow To Talk Crime, Gun Reduction; Poll: Majority In U.S. Feeling Frustrated, Tired Of Pandemic; NASA Will Retire International Space Station By Crashing It Into Pacific Ocean. 5-6p ET

Aired February 02, 2022 - 17:00   ET

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

[17:00:00]

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): One day after Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin spent hours at the White House, the Biden administration briefing the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees, followed by briefings to all of Congress Thursday.

WILLIAM TAYLOR, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO UKRAINE: Part of being ready is to deter him, is to show that the United States is willing to take active measures, is willing to move troops in the direction of the eastern part of the NATO alliance to deter him.

LIEBERMANN (voice-over): New satellite images from Maxar Technologies show the latest Russian military deployments to Belarus on Ukraine's northern border, and Russia has added housing for troops in occupied Crimea. A comparison of images from September and now shows new tense for troops, which suggests an increase in readiness.

A Tuesday phone call between Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and his Russian counterpart didn't yield any breakthroughs. But the option of diplomacy isn't dead yet.

NED PRICE, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: We are engaging in dialogue and diplomacy just as we pursue the path of defense and deterrence.

(END VIDEO TAPE)

LIEBERMANN: Even as we see these troops head over, one thing we will not see or rather hear is the word imminent coming from the administration because the White House explained it seems to imply that Vladimir Putin has made the decision, the imminent decision to invade Ukraine. And that, they say, is a decision they don't believe he's made yet. Jake.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: All right, Oren Liebermann at the Pentagon for us. Thanks so much. Let's bring in CNN Senior International Correspondent Matthew Chance who is reporting live in Kiev, Ukraine for us.

Matthew, how are the Ukrainians and how are the Russians responding to these deployments of U.S. service members to Eastern Europe?

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, well, I've just been speaking to a senior Ukrainian official. And, you know, there's been no sort of formal reaction here in Ukraine yet. But this official said, look, you know, Ukraine welcomes this bolstering that NATO's eastern flank by the United States.

But you know, there's a little bit of sort of reticence in their comments, because obviously, the troops are going to Poland to Germany and to Romania, they're not coming to Ukraine. And so what Ukraine is saying is, look, we hope that this deployment is accompanied by continued supplies of sophisticated defensive weapons to Ukraine, including air defense systems. And so, you know, while the United States is, you know, bolstering NATO's eastern flank in this way, Ukrainian authorities are calling on the United States really to continue and to step up its supply of sophisticated weapons in this country so they can better defend against the Russian threat.

In terms of Russia, I've been sort of frantically trying to get some kind of reaction from the Kremlin and the Russian Foreign Ministry tonight, that's not been forthcoming. There's been no formal reaction at this point. Although, you know, a, a Russian lawmaker has commented on social -- on his social media page and saying that he regards this as muscle flexing by the United States and he regards it as destructive.

And so, that's a sort of hint at the probably more formal response we're going to be getting within the next 24 hours or so from the Russians. They don't view this very kindly. And in fact, see as, I expect, a further escalation from their view by the West, by the United States in this very tense situation, Jake.

TAPPER: And we still don't know what President Putin is going to do, of course, but do you have any sense of who he's listening to as he makes this decision?

CHANCE: Yes, that's a good question. But because of the way, you know, power works in Russia, the answer probably is just one man. He just -- this is to his own garden (ph). And obviously, he's got ministers, he's got aides, he's got people who would be advising him about the pros and cons of whatever course of action or non action that he chooses to take.

But you know, because Russia is an autocracy, run essentially at the whim of just one man, it will ultimately be Vladimir Putin that makes that decision. Of course, it's the opinion of the Russian public to take into account. This is the opinion of the country's parliament to take into account.

But you know, Putin isn't accountable either to the parliament or to the Russian people directly. And so, that's what makes this a dangerous situation because he could decide the wrong thing. He could miss calculate what the consequences would be of a military action against Ukraine.

TAPPER: All right, Matthew Chance reporting for us live in Kiev, Ukraine. Thank you so much.

Let's talk about this with Democratic Senator Bob Menendez of New Jersey. He's the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Mr. Chairman, thanks for joining us. You sat in on a joint classified briefing today where Ukraine was expected to be discussed. Based on what you're allowed to tell us, how urgent are these deployments of 3,000 U.S. service members to Eastern Europe? And is this going to be enough to deter Putin?

SEN. BOB MENENDEZ (D-NJ), CHAIRMAN, FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE: Well, Jake, good to be with you.

Look, I think these deployments speak to our -- assuring our NATO allies particularly in the Baltic region and in the eastern flank that our commitment to them under NATO is a strong result and unequivocal.

[17:05:18]

It also sends a message to Putin that one of the things that Putin has wanted out of his saber rattling and the threats he's posed is to not just deal with the question of Ukraine, but to push the United States out of Europe. Well, he's ultimately facing a totally different consequence as a result of what he's been doing. So, if he doesn't want to see U.S. troops in Europe, what he has done is actually create the opposite of that. Hopefully, that among other things, like what we're doing in the Senate, has him recalculate that this is not a good idea in terms of invading Ukraine.

TAPPER: Right. You were you are on State of the Union with your Republican counterpart talking about the intense sanctions that you're preparing, should Putin give the order to invade.

So these 3,000 U.S. service members, they're headed to Germany and Poland and Romania. The Pentagon didn't rule out further announcements of deployments. Why are those three countries the most critical place to send these 3,000 service members?

MENENDEZ: Well, I would think that certainly Poland feels the threat significantly. You know, Germany is a place for the ability to reposition troops to other parts of Europe as necessary. So I think they're calculating exactly what they need to do to be responsive to our allies and to be flexible to move troops where they may need him in terms of reassuring, particularly our Baltic Allies, but others as well within the NATO orbit. In any event, I think it just sends a powerful message to Putin that one of the goals that he wanted to achieve is not only not being achieved, but the consequences are quite the inverse.

TAPPER: The Pentagon stressed today that U.S. service members are not deploying to Ukraine itself, and obviously Ukraine is not a NATO member state, do you envision any scenario ahead in which US forces enter Ukraine even to provide support?

MENENDEZ: I do not. And I think the President has been very clear about that.

Look, we do not seek conflict with Russia. But we also cannot allow Russia by force to change the territory of a country, to subject an independent sovereign country to its will to do what it wants. We cannot have another Munich moment as a 1938. We saw the history of that. And Putin only understands strength.

That's why this troop deployment I think, is incredibly important. That's why the bill that I hope we will finalize this week on a bipartisan basis, the mother of all sanctions and a whole host of other things, in terms of helping Ukraine and deterring Putin are so incredibly important.

You know, we believe that Russia has a different path. It just needs to choose it, if it wants to talk about its security concerns and security guarantees in a different context in reciprocal ways, that is possible. You just can't bludgeon your way and change the map of Europe.

TAPPER: I mean, with all due respect, the map of Europe has changed. You know, Putin sees parts of Georgia under the Bush administration, he sees Crimea under the Obama administration. I mean, was the fact that the U.S. did not do enough in response then the reason why we are where we are today?

MENENDEZ: Well, I've said that the 2008 response to Georgia and the 2014 response to their annexation of Crimea, not just by the by the United States, but Europe and the West in general was too weak to send a very clear message to Putin that there would be real consequences and don't do it again. If anything, Putin took away from that experience, that it is possible for me to try to change the map of Europe. I think people have awoken to the reality that, in fact, he will continue to march on unless he has real serious consequences, not only to devastating Russia's economy, but how many body bags he wants to take back of Russia's sons.

TAPPER: The Russian President yesterday accused the U.S. of being the provocateurs here. And yet, we see these new satellite images appearing to show Russia steadily bolstering its frontlines even further in multiple local throughout Belarus, Crimea, Western Russia. Does anyone even believe Putin when he says he's not the aggressor here? I mean who is the audience for that? Is it just his domestic audience?

[17:10:11]

MENENDEZ: Yes, that's purely a domestic audience. He may try to -- internationally try to get some allies in that regard to the extent that he gets any of -- those are ones that already within his orbit. Look, there's no one in the world, that's why I'm glad the Biden administration took the issue to the United Nations to show that there is a global concern and condemnation of the actions here. There's no one who doesn't believe Russia is the aggression. Look, when's the last time that another country had 130,000 troops at its border at threatening to the potential to invade, you don't do that at the end of the day and not be considered the aggressor. Maybe on some news cable channels they might think about that in a different way. But the bipartisan view here in the Senate is that Russia's the aggressor. And I tell you from speaking to counterparts in Parliament's and different parts of Europe, they have a clear vision that Russia is the aggressor here.

TAPPER: Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, thank you so much.

Coming up, the leader of the Oath Keepers, that extremist group, is talking to the January 6 committee from jail. Plus, a member of the Kennedy family will weigh in on RFK Jr.'s Nazi reference in his anti- vaccine speech. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:15:49]

TAPPER: We're back with our politics lead, over the last week former President Donald Trump has spoken out quite loudly and quite clearly about what has been obvious to many of us, that Trump tried to undermine the will of the American people surrounding the 2020 election. And that if he has empathy for anyone surrounding the travesty of the January 6 2021 insurrection, it is for his supporters who stormed the Capitol, not for those who tried to protect it or for those who were inside the building and terrorized.

Well, I am not a physician equipped to make a diagnosis of Mr. Trump himself, the claims that Mr. Trump is making are untethered from reality. On Sunday night, Trump admitted that on January 6, 2021, he wanted then Vice President Mike Pence to, quote, "overturn the election." Yes, he actually wrote that. Pence ultimately did not bend to the pressure from Trump and his allies to participate in that scheme, a plot Trump described last night in an interview on Newsmax.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Then had Mike Pence sent it back to the legislatures, you wouldn't have had the same kind of anger, there wouldn't be in anger, because the legislations would have done whatever they want to do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Let's be perfectly clear here, Vice President Pence had absolutely no power to change the outcome of the election. And a bipartisan group of lawmakers is right now working to reform the Electoral Count Act to make sure that any vagueness in that law is not exploited by any future demagogues.

Now, in that same interview, Mr. Trump went on to claim that those MAGA insurrectionists are being unfairly punished for violently storming the U.S. Capitol, for attacking police officers, for making threats towards lawmakers. And Trump restated his pledge to pardon them if he is reelected in 2024.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: These people are being treated horribly. I would absolutely because some of them are being treated very unfairly. Yes, I would absolutely give them a pardon --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That the punishment --

TRUMP: -- that's being should work out fairly.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: No sympathy for the police officers who were injured and traumatized, sympathy for those who were part of the mob who were attacking them. A pardon pledge that prompted this from a defense attorney for one of the accused January 6 rioters.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERT JENKINS, ATTORNEY FOR ACCUSED JANUARY 6 RIOTER: Knowing that that is awaiting you at the end regardless of the risk you might take by moving forward with the litigation, absolutely, it would impact not only the attorneys perspective, but certainly to clients also.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: So, less likely to cooperate potentially?

JENKINS: Far less likely to cooperate. But he certainly putting his fingers on scales, I'll say that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Far less likely to cooperate. As always, all of this is playing out right in front of our eyes with very few Republican officials willing to criticize Mr. Trump in any way. As a notable exception to that sad rather pathetic rule, Republican Congresswoman Liz Cheney of Wyoming who put it bluntly this week, quote, "Trump uses language he knows caused the January 6 violence, suggests he'd pardon the January 6 defendants, some of whom had been charged with seditious conspiracy, threatens prosecutors, and admits he was attempting to overturn the election. He'd do it all again if given the chance."

Now, the House Select Committee investigating the Capitol insurrection met today with the leader of the Oath Keepers, a right wing extremist group, Stewart Rhodes, testified from jail. He's awaiting trial on accusations of organizing a group that took part in the Capitol riot and also of continuing to plot against the Biden presidency by purchasing weapons and gear after January 6.

CNN's Ryan Nobles is live on Capitol Hill for us.

Ryan, what are you learning about the testimony today?

RYAN NOBLES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Rhodes' attorney tells CNN that he was as forthcoming as he could be in his interview with the January 6 Select Committee. It took place this morning, as you mentioned, it was from behind bars as he is facing charges of sedition and conspiracy from the federal government. According to Rhodes' attorney, he and the committee worked out a plan where the questions that they would ask that would fall under an area where he would plead the fifth because of his pending legal issues would be asked after the questions where they thought that they could get some information out of them, those were the ones that were asked first.

[17: 20:02]

We don't know exactly what those questions were, what they were about or what the committee was trying to figure out, but it does seem, Jake, at least from the perspective of his attorney, that he was forthcoming with some of the information that the committee was looking for.

TAPPER: And Ryan, the committee is also looking to get a slew of records from former Vice President Mike Pence soon?

NOBLES: Yes, that's right. And it seems as though the National Archives is set to hand those documents over. Some of 100 documents will be handed over to the committee and it looks like that process is already underway. This despite the fact that former President Donald Trump is asked to keep them secret. The archives have decided not to wait for a court battle this time around, given the fact that they have already or the Trump -- former Trump administration has lost court battles as it relates to keeping documents secret, both the archives and the Biden administration which has custody over things like executive privilege have said that because of these court rulings and the fact that we're talking about vice presidential records as opposed to presidential records make the opportunity for Trump and his associates to prevent the committee from getting these documents unlikely that they'll move forward with that process.

Now, Trump could still sue, that's still a possibility. We don't know if that's going to take place. But again, Jake, we know that the committee is very interested in the role that the former vice president played given the fact that they've talked to many in his inner circle, they've expressed an interest to talk to Pence himself. So these documents will certainly be a key part of the investigation. Jake.

TAPPER: All right, Ryan Nobles on Capitol Hill. Thanks so much.

Let's talk about this with former Republican Congresswoman Mia Love of Utah and former Democratic Congressman Joe Kennedy of Massachusetts.

Congresswoman Love, let me start with you. Let's start with these comments from former President Trump because many Republicans have tried to defend Trump's actions in the month since the January 6 insurrection saying, oh, this was just about registering concerns about the process, about how rules changed in various states. This wasn't about overturning the election. But Trump saying out loud, I wanted to overturn the election. I wanted Pence to throw out the votes. I mean, he's knits it.

MIA LOVE, (R) FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE: Yes. And which, again, I agree with Lindsey Graham in saying, you know, first of all, that was inappropriate and to go ahead and pardon those people on the January 6 rioters is actually inappropriate also. So, I -- there are times where this president jumps to a different planet and I can't seem to understand this former president. I can't seem to understand where he's going. And he doubles down on, let's be very clear, an attack from one branch of government to another. And he thinks that that is incredibly -- that's totally inappropriate to accomplish what he wants to accomplish for his own good. He's forgotten that the president of the United States is to serve the American people, not himself.

TAPPER: Congressman Kennedy, you're former district attorney, what's your legal take on how these admissions might play into the committee's investigation?

JOE KENNEDY, (D) FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE: Jake, you heard -- we heard testimony from or an interview from a lawyer who said it absolutely influences the strategy. And look, I haven't looked at the actual federal statute here. But at least back in Massachusetts, that interference, what was often regarded as a witness tampering statute, it was broadly drawn here at the state level.

But if you're offering an inducement for a witness to change their testimony or not cooperate, everybody would think if I said, hey, you know, here's $100,000 to change your testimony or to not testify, that clearly would qualify as witness tampering. Saying you're going to get a pardon if I win, I mean, I don't know how more weight you can get than that. And you heard from a lawyer himself say it would certainly influence my strategy and it would influence that of our client. So, I mean, again, he's -- they're saying the quiet parts are loud here.

TAPPER: Yes. Congresswoman Love, we've seen a number of top Pence aides testified before the committee this week. And now we're hearing that many of Pence's records are going to be turned over to the committee. Sources say those -- sources say that those around say -- or those around Pence say that there's no need for Pence himself to testify since all this information is being given to the committee and all these aides are testifying. What do you think? Will ultimately former Vice President Pence to cooperate or testify before the committee?

LOVE: Well, I've always believed that a great indicator of what's been done in the past is what's going to be done in the future. And I believe that if former Vice President Mike Pence is called to testify that he will go. I think that he's actually -- I would -- I find it hard to believe that his former chief of staff, Marc Short, would go and testify without his blessing. So, I think he's hoping that he wouldn't have to, but I do believe that if he were called to testify, he would go and testified before the committee, the January 6 committee.

And I'd also like to remind everyone that you've got some good people there. You've got Liz Cheney that's there that's not trying to throw the vice president under the bus. She actually respects what he's done in doing his job and making sure that those votes were certified. So, he -- it's not like he's going into lion's den there. They're just trying to figure out what happened, so it doesn't happen again. [17:25:05]

TAPPER: And Congressman Kennedy, speaking about disinformation, I'm not responsible for things my uncle says and vice versa. But I do have to ask you because your uncle, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., is a known spreader of anti-vaccine propaganda. He has been for decades. And he made a lot of news not long ago in this rally against vaccinations and vaccination mandates when he invoked Nazi Germany talking about the vaccine rules in the United States. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR., ANTI-VACCINE ACTIVIST: Even in Hitler's Germany you can cross the Alps into Switzerland, you can hide in an attic like Anne Frank did. In 1962, East Germany, my father had met people who had climbed the wall and escaped. So it was possible (INAUDIBLE), but it was possible. Today, the mechanisms are being put in place. I will make it so none of can run and none of us can hide.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: I mean, this is a bizarre version of history and somebody should really tell him about how the Anne Frank story ends. But he did apologize after widespread condemnation, including from his wife. But I wonder what your response is when somebody in your family who has a platform, who has the gift of the Kennedy name so that people listen and care what he thinks when he makes comments like that.

KENNEDY: And Jake, look, the comments were abhorrent and they're horrifying and they're wrong, full stop, right? They're painful to hear. Yes, he's my uncle and we love our family. But these comments, he needs to stop.

We have as a family, resoundingly and repeatedly spoken up and spoken out about the safety of, particularly this vaccine, COVID-19 vaccines, and vaccination in general. And we've done that repeatedly and we've done that publicly. And we'll continue to do so. But the comments here are obviously beyond the pale and there's no reason for no excuse for it.

TAPPER: Thank you, Congressman Kennedy. Thanks to Congresswoman Love as well. Appreciate -- good to see both of you as always.

In an exclusive interview, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is revealing why Biden's bold plans stalled in the Senate. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:31:44]

TAPPER: In our politics lead, President Biden is facing something of a flashpoint in his presidency with headaches at home and abroad. Now the White House is assembling a team with the goal of a successful confirmation hearing for Biden's pending Supreme Court pick. But as CNN's Phil Mattingly reports, the uphill battle to convince a majority of the Senate to boost his nominee to the highest court just got a little steeper.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I want the advice of the Senate as well as the consent --

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): President Biden now fully engaged in a critical moment of his presidency.

BIDEN: I intend to take this decision, make this decision and get it to my colleagues by the end of the month.

MATTINGLY (voice-over): An Oval Office meeting with the top Democrat and Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, a phone call to Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and settling on a Sherpa or outside point person to guide the Senate process on a Supreme Court nominee, official say. And former Alabama Democratic Senator Doug Jones, with several more additions set to be named in the days ahead.

JEN PSAKI, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I can reiterate that we intend to have that team in place before the President makes us election and that team will be more than one person.

MATTINGLY (voice-over): Inside the West Wing, Vice President Kamala Harris and White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain playing key roles. With White House Counsel Dana Remus, her deputy Paige Herwig and Biden Senior Adviser Cedric Richmond, also playing critical parts. But the risks of the threadbare Senate Democratic majority laid bare this week.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY), MAJORITY LEADER: Our thoughts, our prayers, our most fervent well wishes go out to Ben Ray and his family.

MATTINGLY (voice-over): New Mexico Senator Ben Ray Lujan hospitalized last week with a stroke and expected to be absent in the near term. Official say it hasn't shifted their search or nominee shortlist, but the effort to secure bipartisan support now all the more important in the 50-50 Senate chamber.

One candidate, U.S. District Court Judge J. Michelle Childs already drawing positive words from South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): I can't think of a better person for President Biden to consider for the Supreme Court, the Michelle Childs.

MATTINGLY (voice-over): And Ketanji Brown Jackson, the D.C. Circuit Court judge at the top of many Democratic lists, drawing three GOP votes in her favor and her most recent confirmation. But as several Republicans questioned Biden's pledge to nominate a black woman --

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): He's saying nobody else doesn't matter your credentials, doesn't matter your background, doesn't matter who you are. I, Joe Biden, will discriminate based on race.

MATTINGLY (voice-over): The White House firing back.

PSAKI: The fact that not a single black woman has served on the Supreme Court is a failure in the process, not a failure -- or a lack of qualified black women to serve a Supreme Court justices.

MATTINGLY (voice-over): And pointing to this pledge from Biden's predecessor.

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I won't be putting forth a nominee next week, it will be a woman.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MATTINGLY: And, Jake, the process very much underway here at the White House. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer arriving a short while ago to meet with the President on the potential Supreme Court nominee and the White House also announcing the formal addition of other outside advisors. We mentioned former Senator Doug Jones but also many and more, the former political director for President Bill Clinton and Ben LaBolt, a top communicator for President Biden and -- or President Obama and former candidate Obama, is also joining the team. They will be operated from the outside and working with those west wing officials, Jake.

[17:35:03]

TAPPER: Yes, I remember working with LaBolt in the 2008 Obama campaign. Phil, President Biden also made another major announcement today. It's a cause that's very personal to him and his family.

MATTINGLY: Extremely personal. And, of course, he was deeply ingrained and actually leading during the Obama administration. The Cancer Moonshot effort, the President trying to reignite that effort today. And as you noted, it's very personal. His son Beau died of brain cancer in -- or 2015. The President pledging today to try and cut cancer deaths by 50 percent in the next 25 years, making clear that for all the other issues that are going on in his administration, this will be a primary focus for years to come.

TAPPER: All right, Phil Mattingly, thanks so much.

Also in our politics lead today in an exclusive in-depth interview, the Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York revealed new details about why Biden's Build Back Better agenda stalled last year plus the promises he faces now, especially with the shocking news. The Democratic Senator Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico is out of the Senate right now recovering from a stroke.

CNN's Manu Raju spoke with Leader Schumer. Manu, let's start with what he told you about a letter he and West Virginia Democratic Senator Joe Manchin signed about what Manchin would be willing to support in Build Back Better. Apparently, Speaker Pelosi and President Biden never knew about this letter?

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, that's right. They felt blindsided by this (INAUDIBLE) speaker. Certainly, in the White House did not know about this either. Recall where they were at that time. It was in July. Joe Manchin and Chuck Schumer were negotiating how to move forward on the larger agenda. Manchin laid out what he could agree to, $1.5 trillion.

At that time, Democrats were trying to actually piece together a larger plan, $3.5 trillion to move the Biden agenda. But Manchin had made clear he could not go that far. Now, it wasn't until a couple of months later, when news broke about exactly what Manchin and what ultimately could agree on.

At that point, the Democrats were left scrambling trying to reconcile their approach with what Joe Manchin ultimately could agree to. But they still push forward in the House with a massive proposal went through and got approved by the House then later Joe Manchin hit the brakes altogether. And this week, he said that plan was dead.

Now when I asked Chuck Schumer why he did not inform the White House and why he did not inform Speaker Pelosi, he said, "People knew Joe Manchin's positions. He speaks to the press regularly, speaks to the White House regularly. He talked to Pelosi regularly. People knew his positions."

Some critics say Democrats should just embrace what Manchin said, force progressives in the House to accept that. But progressives in the House at the time were threatening to kill anything below their demand. So it shows the dilemma that he and Democratic leaders faced in confronting the majority.

TAPPER: But it sounds as though a lot of this progressives in the House are willing to accept whatever Manchin is willing to do. What did Leader Schumer tell you about any prospects for passing any of Biden's priorities this year?

RAJU: He said the conversations were ongoing. But it's very clear that the priority now is proving a Supreme Court nominee, that is the front and center once Ben Ray Lujan cover turns from his stroke, expecting about four to six weeks time. Schumer told us that he wants to move quickly, get a nominee confirmed. Potentially, it could be a month time or up to 40 days that could put it into early spring. But getting a bigger agenda done, Jake, seems to be on the wayside at the moment.

TAPPER: And finally, Schumer made a big point of trying to change the filibuster rules, making it 50 vote threshold or 51 vote threshold instead of 60. So as to pass the election reform bills. Sinema and Manchin wouldn't go along with that. There are a lot of Democrats who want to support primary challengers to Sinema and Manchin. What does Schumer say about that?

RAJU: Yes, he actually would not say if he would support Manchin or Sinema in a primary, which is somewhat remarkable because leaders typically will support their own members in the Senate if they are facing intraparty challenges. But he told us, "I am focused on 2022, getting things done and winning the election on 2022. I am not at all focused on 2024 right now, and neither should anyone else be. And that's just how you lose in 2022." And recall that Schumer pushed to have those votes earlier this year, last month on the Voting Rights effort and to change the Senate filibuster rule knowing where Sinema and Manchin were. But he told us he doesn't regret that strategy, Jake. He said that they needed to vote, senators needed to vote and show where they were.

TAPPER: A lot of Democratic senators regret that strategy. Manu Raju, thank you so much. Appreciate it.

A final badge of respect. New York police officers fill the streets to say farewell to one of their own. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:43:39]

TAPPER: In our national lead today, a final salute for 27-year-old New York Police Officer Wilbert Mora, one of the two NYPD officers gunned down in a shooting in Harlem nearly two weeks ago. President Biden will visit New York City tomorrow to talk crime and gun violence with New York City Mayor Eric Adams who is a former police captain. This all comes as Biden's effort to get Congress to pass policing reform has stalled.

Let's bring in CNN Crime and Justice Correspondent Shimon Prokupecz live in New York. And Shimon, the NYPD says major crimes in New York City have risen 38 percent over the past year. What is Biden's plan to try to tackle this dramatic uptick?

SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Right. One of the things that the President is going to come here and meet with the NYPD and the mayor is part of that is going to entail some of the initiatives that they want to try and curb some of the gun violence. The guns that are coming in to New York City, other major cities that are being brought from out of town into the cities.

And what they're trying to do is to use federal resources. The Department of Justice, the Attorney General Merrick Garland is coming with the President here to talk about some of the ways in which they can use federal resources, U.S. attorneys, ATF agents, the FBI to try and tackle some of these problems. The other thing that the Mayor here, Eric Adams has talked about is the possibility of hiring more police officers.

[17:45:04]

That's going to require money, more programs, some of the anti- violence projects and some of the programs he wants for violence interrupters. That's all going to require money. So perhaps, we could hear from the President more money coming this way to try and stop some of these guns and try and stop some of the violence that's going on. Really all across the country, Jake.

TAPPER: Is that the hope? That's the expectation that when Biden comes, he'll be making an announcement of some sort that will create some sort of tangible change? PROKUPECZ: Yes, certainly, that is the hope, you know. And for the NYPD, what they're hoping is just for support. You know, when the former president was in the White House, they felt a lot of support from him. From time to time, you always hear certainly from the NYPD officers, they -- NYPD officers, they have felt that they don't have the support from the White House, from public officials.

We're seeing a very different stance here from the mayor here, Eric Adams, who's kind of leading the charge here across the country, is that the NYPD police officers, all countries, all around the country really need the support of elected officials if they want change to happen. So that is one of the things that they are hoping to hear from the President when he comes here.

TAPPER: All right, Shimon Prokupecz in New York City, thank you so much.

American optimism is at a level not seen in decades. Is that good news or bad? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:50:51]

TAPPER: In our national lead, the great philosopher Pharrell Williams once said, "Clap along if you feel like happiness is the truth." But if happiness is not your truth, right now, you are far from alone. For the first time in half a century, the number of Americans who say they are unhappy is higher than those who are feeling very happy.

Joining us now CNN Senior Data Reporter Harry Enten. And Harry, it's been a tough few years. What are you learning from the data?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: It's been a very tough few years. The grays in my beard are starting to grow and outnumber the blacks in my beards, unfortunately. So look here, satisfied with the State of the Nation, this is averaged across 29 different metrics.

Look at where we are in 2022, just 38 percent say they are satisfied with the State of the Nation on average. That's even a drop from last year when it was 41. And a big drop, a 10-point drop in 2020 when it was 48 percent. And keep in mind, this 38 percent is the lowest recorded this century. But it's not just about the state of the nation. It's about how we are all feeling, how we're feeling about ourselves.

So this is the general social survey and they asked, given everything, how do you feel these days? Do you feel very happy, not too happy, pretty happy. I have the very happy and then not too happy here. And I think it's so important to look at this trendline because what do we see? Only 19 percent say very happy, that is outflanked by the 24 percent who say not too happy.

And you'll notice, that's a reversal from 2018 when it was 31, 13 and a reversal of 2016 when it was 30, 15 and this is the first time, ,Jake, since 1972 when there were more people saying they were not too happy than very happy. So we are a sad folk.

TAPPER: What role do you think COVID and COVID fatigue are playing here?

ENTEN: I have to be honest, I think it is playing an absolutely ginormous role because feelings about the COVID 19 pandemic, this is a recent Kaiser Family Foundation poll. Look at this, frustrated, 79 percent of Democrats, 73 percent of Republicans, 73 percent of Independents tired, just tired. I'm tired all the time to be honest with you. 74 percent of , 72 percent of Republicans, 80 percent of Independents.

And you know what, why that is? It's partially because we feel like the COVID pandemic will never end because when will the U.S. get COVID under control and normalcy will return. Look at this trendline from January 2022 versus January 2021. Back in January 2021, most of us thought by summer or the end of the year. Now, the vast majority say longer than that. 60 percent do not believe we will get it under control by the end of the year, Jake.

TAPPER: So does that mean that most Americans are not feeling particularly good about the future?

ENTEN: I would say they are not feeling particularly good about the future. Are you more optimistic or pessimistic about the next year? Heading into 2022, less than a majority said optimistic. Right nearby within the margin of error was pessimistic at 47 percent. This is the first time that Marist College has asked this question in which more people said that they were -- less than a majority of people were saying they were optimistic.

And you know what? There's this whole idea, OK, maybe politics could potentially change this. But this is a great question from Monmouth University. Who would you rather see and control of Congress? Republicans, Democrats, or it does not matter? Look here, 35 percent, 33 percent does not matter. 32 percent of folks just don't even care. We don't even care anymore, Jake.

TAPPER: Oh, man. People aren't feeling very good out there. Harry Enten, I'm sorry to hear that. Thank you --

ENTEN: I'm sorry to hear too. But hopefully watching this segment and you and me interact they feel a little bit better.

TAPPER: All right. I hope so.

ENTEN: There we go.

TAPPER: Because this is -- there's never been a better time to be alive in 2022.

ENTEN: I agree with you on that. We got beautiful things, iPhones, we can do whatever the heck we want. We could jump on a plane train. So wonderful times.

TAPPER: All right, Harry Enten, thanks so much. Coming up -- ENTEN: I'll see you later, buddy.

TAPPER: -- a massive spacecraft crash into the Pacific Ocean. But not anytime soon, it is a very different Finding Nemo story. Stick around.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:59:18]

TAPPER: In our out of this world lead, a retirement of epic proportions NASA announcing plans to crash the International Space Station by 2031. Into the furthest place from land on Earth, it's called Point Nemo, it's an introvert's paradise. The stretch of the Southern Pacific Ocean is popularly known as a spacecraft cemetery.

Since the early 1970s, the U.S., Russia, Japan, other countries in Europe have sent more than 263 pieces of space debris crashing into its depths including a Russian space station in 2001. The closest humans to this wreckage are usually the astronauts in the International Space Station or ISS as they pass over the location while in orbit. Until splashdown NASA assures the ISS will close out its third decade of operation strong continuing to provide critical research for an eventual Mars transit mission. After the ISS plunges into the ocean, it will be replaced by commercially operated space platforms.

Our coverage continues now with Wolf Blitzer in "THE SITUATION ROOM." See you tomorrow.