Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

CNN Poll Shows Trump's Approval Rating Drops Slightly To 40 Percent; Trump Cancels Denmark Visit After Greenland Sale Rejected; Trump Moves To Expand Detentions Of Migrant Families; Trump Says, Jews Who Support Democrats Show Great Disloyalty; Trump Caves On His Pledge For Meaningful Background Checks. Aired 10-10:30a ET

Aired August 21, 2019 - 10:00   ET

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

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN NEWSROOM: -- the topic this weekend at the G7 with other world leaders.

[10:00:03]

Of course, we should remind you, Russia was kicked out of the G8 for its annexation and invasion of Crimea, part of a sovereign European country, Ukraine. That has not changed.

This is all happening as the new CNN poll out this morning gives us a closer look at how the public views all these issues and the president's handling of them.

Let's bring in CNN's Senior Political Analyst Mark Preston. A lot of numbers in here, big ones, a lot of them don't look so great for the president.

MARK PRESTON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Let's break them down for you, Jim, and good morning to you. Yes, if you look at these new approval numbers that have out this morning regarding President Trump, he's now at 40 percent. This is the lowest approval rating, Jim, we have seen with the president since February. He's been ticking along around 43 percent, 42 percent.

Where is he historically though? Because if we look at the historical matchups, when we talk about re-election, he is right about where Ronald Reagan was in 1983. Ronald Reagan, of course, went on to be re-elected. Look at Jimmy Carter at that Point, 32 percent. He is not near that point. But once he dips into the 30s, Jim, that's when all bets are off.

But it really comes down to issues. Where is the president on the issues? Look at that on the economy. 50 percent of Americans right now approve of how the president is handling the economy. And then as you look going all the way down to race relations, you can see the numbers just get worse.

SCIUTTO: What's interesting about those issues is that the president maintains strong support among Republicans, but on those issues, if you're only polling in the 30s, for instance on gun control, that means some Republicans as well are not approving of his handling. PRESTON: Absolutely. And that's why the economy -- it always comes back to the economy as the linchpin, as his strongest issue. Because when he's soft on the other issues, Jim, that's where he starts to lose some of that soft Republican support.

If you go look at these numbers right here when you talk about the support with the economy, look at where the president is, at 50 percent right now. When you talk to people about how they're doing right now, how are they doing economically, you have half the country right now saying the economy is doing well.

Now, that's ticked down a little bit to 65 percent right now from what it was back in May. Those are still pretty strong numbers, though, Jim. And it's really being fueled by Republicans, as you say, nearly nine in ten Republicans right now, 90 percent of the Republicans support the way the president is handling the economy, Jim.

SCIUTTO: Well, we know the White House is concerned about the economic numbers based on public statements, and the president looking at tax cuts, and if it continues to tick down, I suppose, is the key question. We mentioned gun control concerns, race relations as well. The president not polling well there.

PRESTON: Yes, not too much of a surprise. He's come under a lot of criticism, as he should, for a lot of the statements that he has made. And a lot of people think that he is giving rise to white nationalism right now by supporting that. 32 percent, that is largely fueled by minorities too.

We should note that his support amongst Latinos and African-Americans is dismal at best right now. And when we look at those numbers too, where he started to lose support over the past few months when it comes to that issue was among whites. So, again, to your point, starting to soften up a little bit on these other issues where Republicans might not be able to stomach some of the things the president is saying.

SCIUTTO: Mark Preston, always good to have your wisdom. Thanks very much.

PRESTON: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: Joining me now to discuss all this and that's happening this morning, there's a lot of it, CNN Political Analyst Jackie Kucinich, she's Washington Bureau Chief for The Daily Beast, and Anita Kumar, She is White House Correspondent and Associate Editor at Politico.

So, Anita, look at these numbers here. I mean, the trend lines -- and it's not just CNN polling that has shown this, of course, Fox News polling and the president did not like this, showed the president losing to all the top Democratic contenders right now, frontrunners. Is the White House concerned about these numbers?

ANITA KUMAR, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF AND ASSOCIATE EDITOR, POLITICO: I think they have to be concerned about it, and they have to be concerned, as you just mentioned, about the economy here, because that is the thing that his aides, his campaign has really wanted him to base his re-election campaign on. I mean, there are a lot of Republicans that feel like if he based it on the economy, then he could win re-election. If that falters at all, then he's in trouble.

So, I mean, really, when you look at some of these polls, the number one thing that Americans say that they're supportive of him for is the economy. If you don't have that, a lot of these issues come back. Things with him, you know -- we'll talk about him picking fights with other people or countries, some of the foreign policy moves, some of his rhetoric. So I think all of those things are going to come into play if it's still going this way.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Jackie, though, you know, it's interesting. I was speaking to a reporter from Iowa just a few moments ago asking about how Iowa voters see this. Of course, the first voting state, first caucus state. What are the Democratic candidates' message here? Because the Iowa reporter made the point that, listen, they are interested to hear what the alternative is there.

[10:05:00]

How are you selling me on you taking over for Donald Trump in 2020? Is there a consistent, contiguous message from the Democrats on that?

JACKIE KUCINICH, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: you know, I think when you're talking about the economy, what you're hearing from Democrats is a lot about the people who have been left behind by -- even though the economy is doing well for a lot of people, minorities, women, there are people that have been -- that aren't seeing the benefits.

Not to mention, if you're talking about Iowa, you hear a lot of Democratic candidates talking about how the farmers are being impacted by the president's trade war with China. That has been a huge talking point and, frankly, a reality in that state. So not only that, you're hearing they're bringing in the healthcare message, how much people are paying for their healthcare, what happens if Obamacare goes away as the president has advocated.

So it's kind of multifaceted. Is it, you know, everyone saying the same thing? No, they're not. But you can imagine if a recession is impending, if it does come, you're going to hear Democrats talk even more about the economy than they are right now.

SCIUTTO: Part of the president's strategy beyond a transparent play to his base on every issue, including gun control, is try to peel away some voters from typically Democratic strongholds, one being among Jewish voters. And the president taking an attack that struck many Jewish voters, many Jewish-Americans, as inherently offensive, saying in the Oval Office, that American Jews who vote for Democrats are being disloyal.

And, Anita, help me, because we could be overwhelmed by, I think, the pure volume of moments like this in this presidency, but what's the significance of this one in particular? KUMAR: Yes, I mean, it was very harsh language. But, I mean, obviously, we see harsh language from him abrupt all the time. And I think that people really took -- were struck by how he said it, not just the message but sort of how he said that, as you said, in the Oval Office.

But, look, the president is interested in keeping this feud that he has going with these four Democratic congresswomen going. This, he feels like, is a great thing for him where he's sort of saying, look, these women who he's accused of not liking Israel or being against Israel, he thinks this is a great way for him to say these women represent the Democratic Party, and from the states that they're from, this is a very good message for him.

So he wants to win, as you notice, when this feud has died down, he still brings it up. He talks about Israel. He Tweets about them. So I think he wants to continue this. We're going to continue to see this rhetoric from him at campaign rallies as well.

SCIUTTO: So, Jackie Kucinich, I'm going to ask you a question now, and I'm not making this up. It's not a parody. The U.S. President canceled, last minute, a visit to U.S. ally, Denmark, because Denmark would not accept his offer to buy a sovereign piece of its country, Greenland. That's a true statement.

KUCINICH: Yes.

SCIUTTO: I'm curious, is there anyone in the president's circle of advisers who is advising him against this?

KUCINICH: You know, the thing about the president, and we've seen this on any range of topics, they initially deny that this was something that was serious. It was something the president had talked about, that maybe they had bantered about, but he wasn't actually going to try to buy Greenland. And the president came out and said that, yes, in fact, this was something he was considering.

So at this point, we just have to listen to what the president is saying, because he's clearly not listening to any advisers that push him one way or another. He is going to do what he wants. But, yes, Jim, there will come a day and a couple weeks where I'll look at you and say, remember when the president tried to buy Greenland, because it just sounds so absurd on its face.

SCIUTTO: The thing is though it has genuine effect, does it not, Anita, on important U.S. alliances, as these comments and positions do. Denmark is a NATO ally. Denmark sent hundreds of troops to Afghanistan, lost 43 of them. They did very dangerous duty there. I was there, I saw them. They took on dangerous operations. There are real consequences to this, are there not?

KUMAR: There is. I mean, we are all sort of smiling and kind of laughing and scratching our head about it. But the reporting out of the country, out of Denmark today is that they consider this, as they should, a complete snub. This was a state visit that had been planned. Remember, this is only going to be -- you know, they've been preparing for this. His visit was coming in just a couple of weeks.

So they don't -- they're baffled. They thought it was a joke. They didn't understand what was going on. And this is really going to hurt relations not only with that country but with other countries that are sort of looking at this and wondering sort of what's going on. Are things this tenuous, this fragile that he can have this idea and then just kind of by Tweet just cancel a visit?

So, I mean, I do think there's going to be repercussions.

[10:10:00]

People are going to be talking about this. Other foreign leaders will be talking about this.

SCIUTTO: Let's see who's the first to offer to buy Hawaii. Jackie Kucinich, Anita Kumar, thanks to both of you.

KUCINICH: Thanks.

SCIUTTO: The Trump administration has just announced a new rule to increase the amount of time it can hold migrant families, including children, in detention. Right now, migrant children cannot be held in federal custody longer than 20 days, and facilities like the one you're seeing here. The administration says the old rule, also known as the Flores Settlement Agreement, forced officials to either release immigrant families altogether or separate them and keep just the adults in detention.

Joining us now, CNN National Correspondent Alex Marquardt. Alex, that's the administration claim here. What are the facts?

ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jim, the bottom line here is that this new rule will allow the Trump administration to hold migrant families for much longer, perhaps indefinitely. There are two core provisions here, that families are kept together during immigration proceedings and that the standards of care for children is much higher.

The acting Secretary of Homeland Security, Kevin McAleenan, rattled off a long list of improvements on the way that children would be held under this new rule. But, Jim, the fact of the matter is that this administration will now be allowed, if this rule goes into effect, and that's a big if, hold families for a longer period of time.

This is in response, of course, to this record surge of migrant families arriving at the border. And as you noted, under current conditions, under the Flores Settlement Agreement, the administration is not allowed to hold children for longer than 20 days.

And what the administration is saying, what McAleenan said just moments ago, is that this provides an incentive for families to come, because they know that after 20 days, the children will have to be released with their families into the United States.

So this new rule, McAleenan says, will end what he called a catch-and- release program. It will stop migrant families from using their children as what he called passports or pawns.

But as I mentioned, Jim, this is far from a done deal. This rule was announced this morning. It will be published on Wednesday. They are fully expecting opposition in court. If all goes well for them, it will go into effect in 60 days. But, Jim, you can be absolutely certain that there will be some opposition to this new rule. Jim?

SCIUTTO: And that comment was revelatory, was it not, saying that these things, in the administration's view, are incentives, in other words, these are meant, these new measures, to be a deterrent. I mean, it's a fact, and officials have said that in public before. Alex Marquardt, very good to have you on the story.

Still to come, fierce backlash against President Trump's latest comments claiming that Jewish people, Jewish-Americans, are disloyal if they support Democrats. We're going to get a response from the CEO of the Anti-Defamation League ahead.

Plus, sources say the president is telling the NRA that background checks are now off the table. Why does it seem President Trump continually caves on this important issue?

And a small plane loses power midair, plunges into a California bay, but authorities are calling what happened afterwards a miracle.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:15:00]

SCIUTTO: This morning, President Trump under fire for offensive comments, questioning the loyalty of Jewish people. The controversy surrounds President Trump's claim that Jewish people are disloyal if they support the Democratic Party. Have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Where's the Democratic Party gone? Where have they gone, where they're defending these two people over the state of Israel? And I think any Jewish people that vote for a Democrat, I think it shows either a total lack of knowledge or great disloyalty.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: 2020 Democratic candidate and frontrunner Joe Biden slammed President Trump's comments, Tweeting, Mr. President, these comments are insulting and inexcusable, just like your previous dual loyalty insinuations. Stop dividing Americans and disparaging your fellow citizens. It may not be beneath you, but it is beneath the office you hold.

I'm joined now by Jonathan Greenblatt. He is CEO, National Director as well for the Anti-Defamation League. Mr. Greenblatt, we appreciate you taking the time this morning.

JONATHAN GREENBLATT, CEO AND NATIONAL DIRECTOR, ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: Thank you for having me.

SCIUTTO: I want to quote from something you Tweeted after the president made these comments because it was quite strong. And you said, it's unclear who POTUS, president of the United States, is claiming Jews would be disloyal to, but charges of disloyalty have long been used to attack Jews. As we've said before, it's possible to engage in the Democratic process without these claims. It's long overdue to stop using Jews as a political football.

Explain what you mean by that.

GREENBLATT: Well, as I Tweeted, while it's a bit unclear what the president was trying to say in terms of who Jews are disloyal to, are we disloyal to him or the Republican Party or to America? While he wasn't exactly clear about that, I will be exactly clear on what that was, anti-Semitism.

The charge of disloyalty or dual loyalty has been used against Jews for thousands of years.

[10:20:01]

In Europe, it was used for 1,500 years to say that Jews were not sufficiently loyal to the church or the crown. And so they justified persecuting, marginalizing and murdering Jews in the countries where they lived. And over the last hundred years in the Middle East, they would say that Jews were more loyal to Israel than the countries where they lived and use that as justification to persecute, marginalize and murder these people where they lived.

So, today, in this country when we're seeing a rise of white supremacy, when we're seeing a rash of anti-Semitic attacks, look, it's almost two years to the day of the Charlottesville march. We're getting on the year anniversary of the Pittsburgh massacre, the most violent anti-Semitic act in American history. It is bewildering that we even have to have this conversation and that these words are coming out of the Oval Office.

SCIUTTO: Yes. you know, the president has used that anti-Semitic attack against these congresswomen in particular, but you also hear other administration officials and Republican lawmakers using that term while at the same time the president has been reluctant at times to call out white supremacists in this country who are explicitly and, by definition, anti-Semitic.

I wonder your reaction to that contradiction.

GREENBLATT: It is extraordinary and almost inexplicable that our Commander-in-Chief would use his Twitter feed to go after Hollywood celebrities and other random individuals but can't seem to call out the racist, xenophobic, anti-Semitic, white supremacist movement that is indeed growing. I mean, we see this. White nationalism is a global terror threat, and we need our Commander-in-Chief to call it out. But I will tell you this, Jim. I have said this before. It is long past due for politicians to stop tokenizing Jews. We are not political props to be used for partisan gain, whether by the president or members of his cabinet, or, I'll be honest with you, members of Congress shouldn't talk to us about where we have our allegiances. We are Americans, first and foremost. And we need to be recognized for that and treated like everybody else.

SCIUTTO: That's a strong statement. This morning, the president went a step further. You may have seen this. He Tweeted a thank you to a conservative radio host who said that Israeli Jews think Trump is like a second coming of God. That's a direct quote from the president of the United States' Twitter account, some 50 million followers. Your reaction?

GREENBLATT: It is truly breathtaking. First and foremost, I guess we shouldn't be surprised that the president is quoting a conspiracy theorist because he's done that many times before. But the idea that the White House is using that kind of person, you know, it's extraordinary.

But I will say that it is the height of hypocrisy to use Christian theology to bully Jews and to push out some messianic complex. Literally, it's hard to think of something less kosher than telling the Jewish people you're the king of Israel, and therefore, we should have some fidelity to you for that reason.

I don't know if he's read the bible, but in the Old Testament, that's not what we believe.

SCIUTTO: Listen, I feel the strength of your views, Jonathan. I appreciate you taking the time to come on the program.

GREENBLATT: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: Well, just over two weeks ago, 31 people were killed in two mass shootings in America. What's changed, and where are our gun laws headed next? We're going to discuss coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:25:00]

SCIUTTO: Please take a moment to listen here if you can. A little more than two weeks ago, 31 people were killed in two mass shootings in the span of fewer than 13 hours. At the time, we asked the question, as I imagine many of you did as well, will this time be different? What will change following the latest in what has become a uniquely American problem, mass murders with high-powered weapons?

In the days after those shootings, the president signaled an openness, at least, to change, specifically the possibility of universal background checks for gun purchases.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We need intelligent background checks, okay? This isn't a question of NRA, Republican or Democrat.

I think we have now a chance to do something really much more meaningful.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: That expression of support lasted about ten days. Just yesterday, crucially, after speaking with the NRA president, Wayne LaPierre, Trump backed away from support for expanded background checks, echoing NRA talking points, as he did.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We have very, very strong background checks.

A lot of the people that put me where I am are strong believers in the Second Amendment, and I am also. And we have to be very careful about that. You know, they call it the slippery slope. And all of a sudden, everything gets taken away. We're not going to let that happen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Well, now The Atlantic is reporting that President Trump has told the head of the NRA just yesterday afternoon that universal background checks are now off the table.

[10:30:02]

Surprised? You shouldn't be because we've seen this before.

Just like last year after Parkland where 17 --