Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Two Ukrainians Named by Whistleblower Offer Differing Accounts; Anchors Called Out Misinformation on Sunday Morning Talk Shows; Boeing 737 Max Design Removed Earlier Safeguards. Aired 10:30-11a ET
Aired September 30, 2019 - 10:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JULIAN EPSTEIN, FORMER CHIEF COUNSEL FOR HOUSE JUDICIARY DURING CLINTON IMPEACHMENT: -- impeachment, if you look at the Mueller report. I think both of those stories are stories of partisans overplaying their hand. I think that certainly happened with the Republicans in 1998, and I think it happened with the liberals in 2018 with the Mueller report. They overplayed their hand, and weren't able to kind of deliver on the facts.
Here, it's very important for Democrats not to overplay their hand. And I think it's critically important for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler and the others who are leading the effort, to make it clear that they are sort of driven by facts and not by politics.
And I think this is not a time for partisanship, this is not a time for --
POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR, NEWSROOM: Right.
EPSTEIN: -- celebration, it's not a gleeful time. It's a sad moment for the country. But I think they need to make it clear that the facts are driving the outcome, and the meta-message, I think, will be that no one is above the law, including the president of the United States.
And I think they are doing that. I think Nancy Pelosi has shown herself to be just a brilliant, brilliant tactician and a brilliant leader of the party, and I think has them exactly where they need to be.
Remember, you're playing -- your audience right now, if you divide your audience -- or the voting public crudely into three segments, there's about a third who are going to be with Trump no matter what, there's about a third -- a little bit more -- who really, I think, believe that you've met the standard for impeachment, we should proceed with impeachment.
Then there's that middle third. And you have to play to that middle third. And that middle third, the moment that middle third thinks you're playing politics, is the moment that you lose them. And that was the lesson from '98. The moment you make it clear you're being driven by the facts, as I think Adam Schiff is doing very, very skillfully and Jerry Nadler's doing very skillfully, that's when I think you win the public argument. HARLOW: Well, just to that point, then, would you have advised --
would you advise Chairman Schiff, you know, for the next go-around of hearings, not to open the way he did this one? Because he is getting flack from the president's defenders, Republicans, for his parody, if you will, of the Ukraine call transcript.
EPSTEIN: No. I think it was -- I think he was rather effective. I think -- look, there's going to be -- there's probably at least two dozen to three dozen witnesses inside the White House, the State Department, the Justice Department, the intelligence agencies, who have some knowledge of the Ukraine matter and other matters where the president may have been involved in gross misconduct.
And I think the interesting question you're going to see here with Adam Schiff -- playing sort of the role of the FBI, if you will, and the Judiciary Committee kind of sort of plays the role of the prosecutor -- I think what you'll sort of see in the next several weeks is -- or the question that's interesting to everyone is, which of the several dozen witnesses inside the White House, inside the State Department, inside the Justice Department are going to flip and talk on this White House because they have a lot of knowledge about what happened in the Ukraine matter and the cover-up around the Ukraine matter.
And which of those witnesses are going to be kind of the loyal palace guard, who are going to double down --
HARLOW: Right. Well --
EPSTEIN: -- on the obstruction, to those --
HARLOW: -- we know -- to your point --
EPSTEIN: Sorry.
HARLOW: -- we know who's going to be the latter, and that's Rudy Giuliani. So how would you handle Rudy Giuliani, who couldn't even give a straight answer to George Stephanopoulos, when asked if he would comply with subpoenas from the Intel Committee, or not?
EPSTEIN: Yeah, I would sort of interview Rudy Giuliani under oath in private. I think he's a little bit of a cartoon at this point. He's -- he's kind of a -- a little bit of a circus clown in this effort. And I don't think giving him a public forum really advances the conversation, but I would put him under oath.
And I think all of these witnesses -- Rudy Giuliani, there are a lot at the Justice Department, including the attorney general, there's a lot of witnesses at State Department, the intelligence agencies -- I think these -- all of these individuals that may have been involved in the Ukraine matter or other misconduct, where the administration was trying to deep-six information in this secure -- in the codeword security system, where they put the Ukraine transcript, whatever their misconduct may be, I think they would be well advised to get attorneys at this point --
HARLOW: Wow (ph).
EPSTEIN: -- because, as you know, the federal obstruction statute is about a five-year -- is a five-year statute. And I think probably, every Democratic candidate is going to ask -- presidential candidate, is going to ask -- get asked the question, if there are individuals inside the Trump administration who are participating in a cover-up, will you commit to legal process if you're elected president? I think all of them will answer that affirmatively.
So I think there's a lot of exposure and a lot of pressure on a lot of witnesses to start talking as we --
HARLOW: OK.
EPSTEIN: -- go through this investigative process.
HARLOW: Julian Epstein, good to have your perspective on this, given what you guys went through. I appreciate it. Thanks so much.
EPSTEIN: Thanks, Poppy.
[10:34:41]
HARLOW: Still ahead, Ukraine, is increasingly alarmed over the fallout of the Whistleblower report, officials there have been tight- lipped. But our own Clarissa Ward was able to catch up with two of the people mentioned by name in that whistleblower complaint. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HARLOW: Welcome back. Ukraine's president says he is, quote, "unlikely to release a transcript of his conversation with President Trump." That is new reporting from Reuters.
Well, last week, the White House released that five-page summary, essentially, or transcript of the 30-minute call from July 25th. The whistleblower complaint about the call alleges that the president repeatedly pressured President Zelensky to investigate former President (sic) Joe Biden for political gain. You saw it yourself, from the transcript.
[10:40:00]
Our Clarissa Ward is live in Kiev this morning. You were able, Clarissa, to track down two of the Ukrainians who are actually named in the whistleblower complaint.
CLARISSA WARD, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Poppy. And these two men could not be more different, they could not be more ideologically opposed. They have completely different takes on everything that's been going on. But they share one common agreement. And that is that the president's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, was actively and ardently engaged into trying to open an investigation into President Trump's political opponents here.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WARD (voice-over): Ukraine is struggling with the fallout of America's political crisis. Officials here aren't talking, but we tracked down two of those mentioned in the whistleblower's complaint, each with a very different perspective.
Former diplomat Andreii Telizhenko says President Trump's personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani approached him in May for a meeting. Telizhenko is known for his claims that Democrats colluded with Ukrainian officials against Trump in 2016. He says the two men spent six hours discussing a range of issues.
ANDREII TELIZHENKO, POLITICAL CONSULTANT: My insights (ph) on what's happening in the U.S.-Ukrainian relationship and the DNC-Korean (ph) collusions was also mentioned. Mr. Giuliani also asked me about Vice President Biden, what my thought was, what my insights were on him.
WARD: So you had the sense that this was a priority for Mr. Giuliani?
TELIZHENKO: Yes, that's the -- he doesn't hide it, it's his work, that's what he was hired to do, to represent the president of the United States and his personal interests. And --
WARD: By trying to further conspiracy theories about the president's political opponents?
TELIZHENKO: No. There is no conspiracy theories there (ph), I'll just -- we need to investigate this properly.
WARD (voice-over): Sergeii Leschenko disagrees. He was an advisor to Ukrainian President Zelensky's campaign, and says Giuliani began applying pressure to investigate the Bidens, shortly after the election.
SERGEII LESCHENKO, FORMER CAMPAIGN AIDE TO PRESIDENT ZELENSKY: I knew it for sure. Because for Giuliani, it was only interesting Ukraine to get this information about Biden and to use this information in the U.S.
WARD: You think that he was focused on it for the president, or --
LESCHENKO: For sure. Not for his private purposes. We know who is Giuliani. We know what is his role, we know that he is acting not just a private person, but on behalf of your -- of his client.
WARD: So this wasn't a secret?
LESCHENKO: It was a clear fact.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
WARD: Now, Giuliani has repeatedly defended his actions, here in Ukraine. He has denied any wrongdoing. This, Poppy, even in the face of consistent statements from both previous prosecutors, also from senior officials in the current prosecutor's office, that there is no evidence of any wrongdoing or of any Ukrainian law being broken by either of the Bidens -- Poppy.
HARLOW: It's fascinating to hear from both of them. Clarissa, before you go, what more can you tell us about that Reuters reporting that President Zelensky, at this point, is not willing to release their transcripts of that July 25th call?
WARD: The president's in a really awkward position here, Poppy, because Ukraine has to be seen as being independent. It cannot be taking sides in the U.S.' domestic political turmoil. Ukraine relies heavily on U.S. aid , $400 million already this year alone.
Also, this could be embarrassing for Zelensky. He has been heard to be disparaging France and Germany in the U.S. transcript or summary of that conversation. For a number of reasons, he says Ukraine will not be releasing that information -- Poppy.
HARLOW: But is there reason, Clarissa, to think that it's different from the White House version?
WARD: There's no reason, so far, from anything that we've been told, for Ukrainian officials. But as I've said, Poppy, they are being incredibly --
HARLOW: OK.
WARD: -- tight-lipped, even cagey, about this. They simply don't want to set a single foot wrong.
HARLOW: Understood. Clarissa Ward, great reporting, as always. Thank you so much.
[10:44:11]
Coming up, some of President Trump's allies, trying to push debunked claims as they defended the president over the weekend. They were fact-checked, though, at every juncture.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (voice-over): Big-budget productions, Hollywood's top talent, only available on your phone.
JEFFREY KATZENBERG, FOUNDER, QUIBI: I think it's the biggest idea that we've ever done.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (voice-over): That idea? A mobile-only video streaming platform called Quibi, short of Quick Bites.
MEG WHITMAN, CEO, QUIBI: What we're trying to do is bring together the best of Hollywood and the best of Silicon Valley.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The service will offer highly produced original programming in episodes no longer than 10 minutes. And you'll be able to watch the shows, holding your phone vertically or horizontally.
KATZENBERG: We have 2.5 billion people walking around with these televisions in their pocket? I just know it's going to work. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (voice-over): The executives behind Quibi are
already giants in tech and media. Now, they're betting that people will shell out $5 a month for mobile-only short-form video. And it comes at a time when the video streaming space is only getting more crowded.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The average consumer tells us they want to spend about $40 a month on some of these services, so there's not a lot of growth here necessarily, from the wallet spend on a monthly basis.
KATZENBERG: There are things that have been fundamental for Meg and I from the moment we got together. Every day, get up and think about who is your audience. And if we can tell them great stories, if we can give them a convenience in this, those are the things that are going to make us successful.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice-over): "CNN Business Risktakers," brought to you by BMW of North America, the ultimate driving machine. Go to CNN.com/risktakers for stories on the leaders and innovators who are pushing boundaries and transforming the way we do business.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[10:40:41]
HARLOW: Welcome back. President Trump and his allies continue to push those debunked claims about Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter's, ties to Ukraine. But this weekend, that wave of misinformation crashed, as many Sunday morning anchors fact-checked those claims in real time.
Our Oliver Darcy is here with me. To watch it, whether you were watching Jake with Jim Jordan, or Chris Wallace with Stephen Miller, it was, you know, it was so instructive of the point we are at and how much needs to be corrected in the moment.
OLIVER DARCY, CNN SENIOR MEDIA REPORTER: Sure. And how much homework the anchors need to do to counter a lot of this misinformation that is being spewed by these Trump administration officials and offenders.
And I think you saw a lot of these right-wing narratives that are pretty -- these administration offenders can peddle with ease on the right-wing media machine and "Fox News" -- they came crashing down when they were countered by the facts. And we have some video from Jake Tapper and "Fox News." Let's play some of those clips.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): And then when the company that's paying him that money is under investigation, guess what. Daddy comes running to the rescue, the vice president of the United States comes running and says --
(CROSSTALK)
JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR, STATE OF THE UNION: That's not what happened. Sir.
JORDAN: -- Fire that prosecutor.
TAPPER: Sir, that's not what happened. The European Union, the Obama administration --
JORDAN: What, you don't think Joe --
TAPPER: -- the International Monetary Fund, pro-clean government activists in Ukraine thought that the prosecutor --
JORDAN: So you're saying --
TAPPER: -- was not prosecuting corruption.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RUDY GIULIANI, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S PERSONAL ATTORNEY: If I change the names of Joe Biden and Hunter Biden to Donald Trump and Donald Trump Jr., 8 million from Ukraine while under an investigation, 1.5 billion from China while negotiating with China, would I be sitting here --
(CROSSTALK)
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC ANCHOR, THIS WEEK: (inaudible), sir, sir, again --
GIULIANI: -- no, George, please let me finish my --
(CROSSTALK)
STEPHANOPOULOS: -- no, no. You just made --
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: I know it's a damaging sentence.
STEPHANOPOULOS: -- the 1.5 billion is simply not true.
GIULIANI: It is simply true.
STEPHANOPOULOS: That is -- it is not true.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS WALLACE, FOX ANCHOR, FOX NEWS SUNDAY: Why did he use three private lawyers to get information on Biden from the Ukrainian government rather than go through all of the agencies of his government?
STEPHEN MILLER, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S SENIOR POLICY ADVISOR: Two different points. Number one -- WALLACE: How about answering my question?
MILLER: -- John Durham, as you know --
WALLACE: Wait a minute. John Durham is investigating something completely different.
(CROSSTALK)
MILLER: (inaudible) no, there's --
WALLACE: Stephen, I'm asking you a direct question. Why did the president use private attorneys rather than go to the State Department? If you don't know, that's an acceptable answer. But let's not talk about John Durham, who's --
MILLER: -- I don't (ph) --
WALLACE: -- investigating the Trump (INAUDIBLE).
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HARLOW: I mean, those were three master classes in interviewing, frankly.
DARCY: Right. And I think it was so remarkable, particularly that Jim Jordan interview where Jim Jordan is floating right-wing talking point after right-wing talking point, and Jake is just countering, consistently, with the facts, with the key context that he's missing. And you really see this narrative, that he's able to push, that Jim Jordan's able to push on shows like Sean Hannity's, come crashing down under the lightest scrutiny.
HARLOW: "Fox News," very, very important for how this is all going to play out, and important to hear and watch Chris Wallace do that, week after week after week. Thank you very much, Oliver.
DARCY: Thank you.
HARLOW: Good to have you.
[10:53:42]
President Trump is demanding to meet face-to-face with that whistleblower, while spending the morning trying to discredit that person and even suggesting that the House Intelligence chairman, Adam Schiff, may need to be arrested for treason? Stay with us. The latest, ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HARLOW: All right. CNN has learned that Boeing chose not to include safeguards on the Boeing 737 Max passenger plane that were included on earlier versions of that same plane that were used by the military.
Our aviation correspondent Rene Marsh is with me this morning from Washington. If that's the case, why?
RENE MARSH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right. So, you know, Boeing says that these planes are nothing alike. That the size of the planes are different, they handle differently, the military plane is a refueling plane that has to be in the air a lot longer.
So it is conceivable that all the controls on a military plane wouldn't be the same as a smaller passenger plane like the 737 Max. But the problem for Boeing is, the failure of this flight control system that we all now know as MCAS, has been linked to two of those fatal crashes. And the fix that Boeing is coming up with to prevent future crashes, will operate more like the version that they designed for the military. So the big question is, why didn't they do it this way in the first place?
Just to back up a little bit, Poppy, Boeing built the 737 Max passenger jet without the safeguards that the U.S. military required for a similar flight control system on one of its military airplanes. So now that we know this, the big question is, why didn't they put those safeguards in on the 737 Max? They're going to have to answer to that to regulators as well -- Poppy.
[11:00:09]
HARLOW: Yes.
