Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

State Department's I.G. To Hold Urgent Briefing On Capitol Hill; Pompeo Says, Yes, I Was On Ukraine Phone Call; Democrats To Subpoena White House To Produce Documents; Putin Jokes Russia Will Definitely Interfere In 2020 Election; New York Times Report That Trump Suggested Moat With Alligator, Snakes Around Electrified Border Wall Topped With Flesh-Piercing Spikes. Aired 10-10:30a ET

Aired October 02, 2019 - 10:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:00:00]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN NEWSROOM: A good and Wednesday morning to you. I'm Jim Sciutto.

POPPY HARLOW, CNN NEWSROOM: And I'm Poppy Harlow.

In just a few minutes, we're going to hear from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, as well as the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff, as the State Department pushes back on congressional demands related to the ongoing impeachment inquiry.

In a few hours, there will be a private briefing on Capitol Hill with the State Department's inspector general. He plans to show staffers copies of documents related to the State Department and Ukraine. And this is an urgent briefing that he apparently asked for.

SCIUTTO: So far, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has denied requests to turn over documents, accusing Democrats of, quote, intimidating and bullying witnesses. That doesn't seem to be true because several witnesses are volunteering to testify. Democratic leaders are fighting back, accusing Pompeo of having a conflict of interest since he failed to mention repeatedly being on that Ukraine call with President Trump until this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE POMPEO, SECRETARY OF STATE: I was on the phone call. The phone call was in the context of now, I guess, I have been Secretary of State of coming on a year-and-a-half. I know precisely what the American policy is with respect to Ukraine. It's been remarkably consistent and we will continue to try to drive those set of outcomes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: It's actually not remarkably consistent when you withhold aid. But that aside, all of this would seem to make Pompeo a fact witness in this probe, and that's what Democrats are, in part, up in arms about. We're covering this from all angles this morning. Let's start with our Senior Congressional Correspondent Manu Raju.

There's a lot of finger-pointing between House Democrats and Pompeo. Where does this thing go from here?

MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, today, there is a high interest in what happens with this inspector general from the State Department, Steve Linick, who sent this email to Capitol Hill about an hour, I'm told, after Mike Pompeo sent a letter saying that he would essentially not comply with the Democrat's request. Initially, a subpoena that they provide, asked for documents related to the Ukraine matter but also scheduling depositions for five current and former State Department officials.

Afterward, Steve Linick said that email saying it was urgent that he had to have this briefing with key congressional staffers with several committees in the House and the Senate. Linick himself has been the inspector general since 2013. He was appointed by President Obama. He was confirmed by the Senate by a voice vote. So he had bipartisan support.

But Republicans and Democrats are not sure about what this is, the email that was sent to Capitol Hill. It simply said this is related to the Ukraine matter. There were documents that provided -- planned to share documents that he obtained from the legal adviser of the State Department.

So what that exactly means is uncertain, how much fuel that adds to the impeachment fire is uncertain or does that do anything to dissuade Democrats in anyway. That is all a major question. But as you guys know, inspector generals operate essentially independently of these agencies. And it was the inspector general of the Intelligence Community who deemed that whistleblower complaint credible and urgent, which fueled this investigation right now. So we'll see if this other inspector general, Steve Linick, gives any more fuel to this fire, guys.

SCIUTTO: Well, that's why you have inspectors general so that they can provide a non-partisan view and oversight of government. We'll see if it works. Manu Raju, thanks very much.

A lot to discuss here, we're joined now by Rachael Bade, she's Congressional Reporter for The Washington Post, and Anita Kumar, she's White House Correspondent and Associate Editor for Politico.

Rachael, it strikes me, when you look, for instance, Rudy Giuliani last night seeming to point the finger at some degree at the State Department saying, hey, they told know do this. Now, Josh Rogin is saying that, well, Volker, the, until recently, special envoy for Ukraine, he's going to testify that he was just trying to contain the damage of this president. It strikes me that you're starting to see division within the ranks in the Trump administration here on what actually happened over this Ukraine call.

RACHAEL BADE, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, certainly some finger- pointing here. I mean, clearly, Giuliani wants to say he's not the only one involved here and that everything was kosher with the State Department when folks at the State Department have sort of suggested, according to reporting, that this was a shadowy Trump operation within the State Department, that they were sort of operating on their own and not exactly following orders.

So what is interesting here, I think, if you look at Capitol Hill right now, is we have seen for the past couple of weeks -- couple of months, really -- the White House really stonewall ever single effort congressional Democrats have had to try to investigate the president. And this is the first time we're really seeing folks from the administration, current or former, go around those orders and come to Congress both to the state I.G., who's going to be coming to the Hill today sort of defying Pompeo, and then other State Department employees who have left the State Department, who are involved in these Ukrainian matters, who are going to be coming to talk to Congress.

[10:05:02]

And I think that's really a game changer for Democrats right now because they have people who are willing to cooperate to sort of get down in the weeds and find out exactly what happened here.

HARLOW: Rachael, let me ask you about something that struck me -- Anita rather, sorry about that. Chuck Grassley yesterday coming out with a statement yesterday afternoon defending the whistleblower and essentially taking a swipe at his Republican colleagues who have tried to undercut the process for filing these whistleblower claims and spreading disinformation. How significant is that from Grassley knowing that, yes, he is a huge advocate of whistleblower protection, but for him to feel the need to put out a statement like this at a moment like this when Pompeo is blocking Congress from getting the depositions they need and the documents they need on this front?

ANIT KUMAR, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT AND ASSOCIATE EDITOR, POLITICO: I do think it's very significant. I don't think you can underestimate that.

Now, Chuck Grassley is the kind of guy that has gone out there before and broken with his party on a couple of things, but I think it's significant also because of what the president is saying. The president is out there. His rhetoric is getting stronger every day, saying the whistleblower should be outed. He wants to talk to the whistleblower. And so I think that he was sending a message both to his colleagues on Capitol Hill but also to the president that we need to let this take its course, we need to protect the whistleblower. And so I think it is very significant.

Now, whether other Republicans will follow right away is unclear. We need to see you know what more is going to come out of this.

I think this is extremely fast-moving, though. I mean, we just haven't seen something like this in all these months we have been waiting on these investigations. It's just the last couple weeks that we've really seen movement. SCIUTTO: I figure it's Wednesday this week. I mean, where were we last Monday?

HARLOW: Not here.

SCIUTTO: I mean, it's really developed over a little -- over a week. I mean, the pace is remarkable.

I want to ask you, Rachael, about the secretary of state here, where his credibility is on this. One, he was on the call, a lot of interviews where where he was claiming complete ignorance about this call prior. But he also has the president's personal lawyer, I don't if taking shots is the right word, but pointing some fingers, as you said.

HARLOW: At the state.

SCIUTTO: He's with the state. He's worried about his long-term political aspiration, Mike Pompeo. How does he view this? Does he stay in lockstep with the president here?

BADE: Especially if he wants to run for Senate at some point. Yes, absolutely, he's got to worry about that. And, clearly, he's done a two-step, first, trying to sort of brush off this and act like he didn't know anything, but then admitting this morning that he was on that call.

I think from somebody who covered him when he was in the House, I covered when he was on the select committee on Benghazi, when the Republicans were investigating Hillary Clinton at the State Department. And Pompeo, over and over again, would demand documents, demand witnesses over countless times. And so it's sort of interesting to see him on the other side just blocking this, sort of going along with the White House strategy of complete stonewalling when he was making the total opposite argument a couple years ago when he was in Congress.

And the other thing that, of course, we're going to hear again from Democrats, and I assume I would expect Pelosi to bring this up in her news conference in a few minutes, is that, in admitting that he was on the call, as you guys mentioned, that's, in their view, a conflict of interest. And he needs to recuse himself. They're going to argue, when it comes to all these documents and witnesses. He should not be the one to green light or red light what's happening.

SCIUTTO: Well, and not like Barr being mentioned on the call as an interlocutor. And, by the way, he's the --

HARLOW: Yes, you are right to bring up Barr. So, Anita, to both those points, Rachael's and Jim's, you can like holler all you want if you are a Democrat in Congress about that and there is a conflict of interest, and you're a fact witness, and you need to recuse yourself, but that doesn't mean he does. I mean, where does this -- right?

KUMAR: Right, absolutely not. I mean, we've seen, as Rachael mentioned, for the last nine months Congress saying all sorts of things to the administration. You need to do this. It's the law. You need to give us these documents. You need to testify in certain ways. And they just have ignored them. And so that's why Republicans and Democrats are in court right now.

So Mike Pompeo, you know, is going to do what Mike Pompeo wants to do, what the White House wants him to do, you know, talking to people in the White House and outside the White House that are close to the president.

What he did yesterday was not surprising at all.

HARLOW: Yes. Can I just --

KUMAR: There are a lot -- yes.

HARLOW: Can I just add to that point though? There's a good piece, opinion piece, in The Washington Post today about inherent contempt, and it's a phrase that was brought up in that Washington Post op-ed by those seven vulnerable House Democrats. Remember last Monday that sparked -- or two Mondays ago that sparked all of this? It is a move that Congress has, Anita, right, inherent contempt. They haven't done it in 100 years but it is a power they hold.

KUMAR: You're right. I was actually talking to someone on the House Oversight Committee, Gerry Connolly of Virginia, the other day, a Democrat, who was saying that he's actually pushing. He would like them to use it. But there are other people in Congress, obviously, leadership, that are not willing to take that step yet. It could come to that point.

But, so far, they're allowing everything to move to the court and letting judges decide. The problem with that is that it takes a long time.

[10:10:00]

HARLOW: Yes.

SCIUTTO: So we got some news in. This is a tweet from the president's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani. I'll read it here.

It says, we're carefully considering our legal options to seek redress against Congress and individual members for engaging in an organized effort to exceed their limited powers under the Constitution and to trample on the constitutional rights of citizens in an illicit carried out by illegal means to remove the president of the U.S. on deliberately falsified charges.

There's a lot in there, but that would seem to indicate, does it not, Rachael, that this administration is not going to cooperate with this impeachment?

HARLOW: Wasn't that a threat to sue Congress? Do you know what that is?

BADE: I don't know -- yes, definitely, for sure. I mean, the interesting thing about that tweet is that he's saying Congress is exceeding its authority. Everybody who has been watching this and who has watched Congressional oversight for the past few years, for the past few decades, know that we have seen Congress' oversight authority totally trampled by this president, such that a lot of legal experts say that where is the separation of powers?

Congress used to be able to ask for documents to hear from witnesses, bring them up to the Hill, even when Republicans have the majority just a few years ago. The Obama administration reluctantly did that with a lot of their investigations. And that has totally been thrown out the wazoo.

And so the fact that Giuliani is saying that they are exceeding their authority, everybody, even Democrats who want to fight this administration, are saying, he's trampling their authority and they feel powerless. So that's very ironic that they are accusing Congress of overstepping.

SCIUTTO: So we have to develop a whole new vocabulary to handle all this news. Thank you, Rachael, for adding to it there.

HARLOW: I don't mean to smile because it's so serious, but that's your next book, Rachael, out the wazoo.

BADE: Yes, thanks.

HARLOW: Thank you, ladies. We appreciate it.

That's a big deal. We'll talk more about that, Giuliani's --

SCIUTTO: Suing Congress.

HARLOW: -- tweet ahead.

Still to come, shocking new reporting, highlighting the president's ideas of how to try to curb the flow of undocumented immigrants. Among them, shoot migrants in the legs to slow them down and that is not all.

Also, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Intel Chair, Adam Schiff, will speak in just a few minutes. This is a standoff. It's under way between House Democrats and the Secretary of State.

SCIUTTO: Another story we're following. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle suing a British tabloid, the Duke of Sussex accusing the paper of, quote, ruthless campaign against his wife while invoking at the same time the memory of his mother, Princess Diana.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:15:00]

HARLOW: Breaking news into CNN. Let's go to our Manu Raju on the Hill for more.

So I understand, Manu, something about new subpoenas in this to the White House?

RAJU: Yes, that's right. Elijah Cummings is the House Oversight Committee Chairman who's going to -- is warning that they will issue a subpoena as soon as Friday to the White House to get documents related to the Ukraine probe. He is doing this in conjunction with the two other committees that are now involved with this investigation. It's the House Intelligence Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. He actually sent a memo that we have obtained to his colleagues, saying that, by Friday, if these documents are not turned over, then they will issue a subpoena.

In this letter that is about to go out to the White House Counsel's office, Pat Cipollone, they warn that there is -- they say there is concern about Rudy Giuliani's efforts in Ukraine and they say that there are questions about exactly what occurred and they're saying that they are asking for a range of communications and documents. They're saying the White House needs to preserve documents about communications that the White House may have had in terms of urging Ukrainian officials to move forward with an investigation to the president's political rival, Joe Biden.

And they say that they want all these documents by -- immediately. And they said if they don't get these documents, then this will happen, the subpoena will come out by Friday.

But this is an escalation after we saw last week, the House Foreign Affairs Committee issuing a subpoena to the State Department, saying that they should turn over documents because of part of this investigation into Ukraine and part of the efforts by Rudy Giuliani to go over to Ukraine. Those subpoenas -- that subpoena has not yet been complied with.

There has also been a subpoena issued by the House Intelligence Committee for Rudy Giuliani to turn over documents related to his communications and everything he has done since the beginning of the Trump administration as the president's personal attorney. And now, we're seeing this, a subpoena that could be issued in just a matter of days to the White House asking for more documents.

So what we're seeing, putting all these pieces together, Poppy, a rapidly escalating impeachment investigation, Democrats demanding records. We'll see if the White House complies. But so far, what we have seen from the Trump administration is resistance on all fronts to turning over these records, which could presumably be what Democrats are warning an article of impeachment, which is bstruction of Congress, in their view. Poppy?

HARLOW: That's a very good point. Manu Raju, thank you very much for bringing us that.

SCIUTTO: Joining me to discuss, Democratic Congressman Adriano Espaillat of New York. He sits on the Foreign Affairs Committee and as a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

So tell us -- help us understand the significance of this here. The White House has been stonewalling on documents. [10:20:02]

Congress will now subpoena them, and they have special powers under the impeachment inquiry that are more expansive than other subpoenas. But with know this White House and they have resisted subpoenas before. What do you do if the White House says, we ain't going to answer you?

REP. ADRIANO ESPAILLAT (D-NY): Well, we will proceed with this. We will fight back any attempt to obstruct this impeachment investigation. We know that we want to find out what was Rudy Giuliani's role. Once Pompeo admitted to being a part of that conversation, he's now a witness to this impeachment investigation. And we want to get to the bottom of this.

We submitted these subpoenas and we are expecting them to be there. And we reject any and all attempts by the Trump administration to stonewall or intimidate witnesses from coming forward.

SCIUTTO: If they do not comply, if the White House does not comply with these, does that become another article of impeachment for obstruction?

ESPAILLAT: That may become another article of impeachment. We will look at any and all legal possibilities to move forward and go to the next level, as we should and as it's entrusted to us by the U.S. Constitution.

SCIUTTO: You and I were discussing just before Rudy Giuliani, the president's personal lawyer's tweets, again, just moments ago. This is happening very quickly here. We'll put those tweets back up on the screen here.

But when you read that, in effect, it seems that he is saying we are carefully considering our legal options to seek redress against Congress and individual members. It sounds like they're going to sue Congress and members like yourself. What's your reaction?

ESPAILLAT: The first question is who are we? Is it Rudy Giuliani, the private citizen? Is it Rudy Giuliani, the president's lawyer? Is it Rudy Giuliani, the quasi-State Department officer? What was he doing in Madrid? What was he doing attempting to meet with Ukrainian officials? That's the real question. The real question is, what was his role and what authority he had?

SCIUTTO: Right.

ESPAILLAT: And what role did he play vis-a-vis the State Department?

SCIUTTO: Well, what Giuliani seems to be claiming in those tweets is that Congress is going beyond its role, it's impeachment power, he's calling this impeachment inquiry, in effect, invalid. If they sue, what happens?

ESPAILLAT: I will suspect that we will hear a lot from Rudy Giuliani as the weeks and months come forward. Nothing surprises me from him. But the real question is, what was his role in all of this?

SCIUTTO: Does this threaten, because Nancy Pelosi has proposed a very ambitiously fast timeline for this impeachment inquiry? She wants it to be done, in effect, by Thanksgiving. That's less than two months away and have a vote by then. As you see the White House and others throw up road blocks here, is that timeline still realistic?

ESPAILLAT: I think most of the American people want to get access to this information as quickly as possible.

SCIUTTO: But the White House doesn't want you to.

ESPAILLAT: Well, we'll fight back in any and all attempts to obstruct this impeachment investigation.

SCIUTTO: I want to talk about another issue because this relates to the 2020 election and interference. The president of Russia, who interfered in the 2016 election, made it like a joke today, talking -- he was asked about interfering in the 2020 election. He jokingly said, I'll tell you a secret, yes, we'll definitely do it. In reference to interfering in the election again, he added in sort of an aside, a stage whisper, just don't tell anyone. But the fact is U.S. intelligence does believe Russia will attempt to interfere again. Is the president, in your view, taking that threat seriously?

ESPAILLAT: I don't think so, because let's take a look at this whole matter. The Russian involvement in the past election was in the past, and the president was not in office. He was not able to use government to assist the Russians, Putin's involvement in the election. He uses campaign apparatus.

But now, this is prospectively. Now, the president is a part of government. And he's going around asking foreign powers to investigate one of his opponents. I think that gives the green light to people like Putin that, come in and do whatever you need to do to get me re-elected. This is far, far too aggressive for any citizen, for any American. And I think that's why the American people want this impeachment investigation to move forward.

SCIUTTO: What does that say though? You are saying now that the president not only is not only defending against Russian interference, but he's participating in interference, asking a foreign power, in this case, Ukraine, to investigate a political opponent for folks at home who are watching this election closely and want to use their cherished right to vote. Do they have confidence in this election?

ESPAILLAT: That's an assault against a fundamental right of a democracy, which is your vote and my vote, the validity of your vote and my vote, which is a great equalizer. Your vote and by vote at the polls, well, it's the same. And so any attempt to erode that is an assault against democracy, it's an assault against the United States of America.

[10:25:02]

SCIUTTO: Okay. I want to talk to you about the immigration issue. I'm sure are you aware of a New York Times report. The president has talked seriously, it seems, about ideas, including shooting migrants in the legs so that they can't cross the border and fortifying the border with a border wall and a trench filled with snakes and alligators.

ESPAILLAT: This is vigilantism coming from the White House. This kind of attitude, this kind of mind frame promotes vigilantism. It promotes the theory that you, as a private citizen, could take a gun, maybe even an assault weapon, and shoot randomly people who may or may not be immigrants. This is horrendous. This is government at its very worst. Vigilantism comes into play when government erodes, when government collapses.

SCIUTTO: Thankfully, his staff quoted in The New York Times did tell him, not surprisingly, it would illegal to shoot people in the legs as they come towards the border.

But on other issues like a moat with snakes and alligators, and, folks, I'm not making this up, you could read it in The New York Times, they took steps to do a cost estimate. What do you say to the president's aides who, when they hear ideas like that, pursue them?

ESPAILLAT: Look, this is mind-boggling to me. This is medieval. This is having crocodiles and sharks before you get to the castle, right? This is just mind-boggling. I have no answer for that.

SCIUTTO: Well, listen, Congressman, you know, we're going to keep up the conversation as we're at the very beginning of what appears to be a very inquiry. Congressman Adriano Espaillat.

HARLOW: All right. The president is now claiming that Democrats' attempts to potentially impeach him are a coup, this as his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, issues a threat to Congress.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:30:00]