Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

President Trump Orders All U.S. Troops to Withdraw from Northern Syria; Turkish Offensive Fuels Fears of ISIS Resurgence. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired October 14, 2019 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:00]

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: -- to testify. Remember, he didn't a week ago. Now he's going to respond to a subpoena. And he's expected to say that there was a quid pro quo in the president's dealings with Ukraine but he believes it was not a corrupt one.

Much more on that in a moment.

Nearly overshadowing the impeachment drama, another decision by the president, ordering the withdrawal of nearly all remaining U.S. troops from northern Syria as Turkey moves in and hundreds of captured ISIS fighters escape.

And this morning the "New York Times" is reporting on a gruesome video shown at the president's Miami golf club by a pro-Trump organization. We are not going to show you this video. It is taken from a violent scene in a 2014 movie, and it shows President Trump's head edited on to the body of a man opening fire in what is shown as a church of fake news. That Trump character shoots and then stabs other people with the heads of political rivals or media organization logos superimposed over their faces.

A spokesman for the pro-Trump group said they condemn political violence but said nothing about how or why the video was shown there. That echoed similar words from Trump's re-election campaign and this morning White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham says the president has not seen the video but will shortly, and said, quote, "Based on everything he's heard, he strongly condemns this video."

Our national correspondent Suzanne Malveaux joins us live this morning.

Good morning, Suzanne.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, good morning. We just saw Fiona Hill arrive here on Capitol Hill for her behind-the- scenes testimony that she'll give today. And I spoke with one of the committee members this morning to say that they're excited and anxious to hear from her because she can speak her mind.

Doctor Fiona Hill is somebody who is a top adviser in Russian affairs on the National Security Council and she left her post one week before that critical phone call -- the Ukrainian call with Trump. She also left the administration in August, and so she is free to give testimony and to give it freely.

Another thing about her, according to a source, is that she was unaware, however, of much of the dealings and the controversy that -- the ongoing controversy regarding the Ukraine scandal, but what Democrats are going to want to know is what would be the impact of holding up that military aid to Ukraine, being in a proxy war with Russia? What was the -- who was behind the decision-making process going into that? Was it the president? Was it Giuliani or was it some sort of shadow network of people who were trying to be engaged and be involved in this?

And finally, she's a skeptic of Russian president Vladimir Putin. She really had to navigate a rather rocky relationship between the United States and Russia during those times. And so it will be very interesting to get a full perspective, her story behind this. And as you have mentioned, Poppy, there's going to be some other very important key members.

HARLOW: Yes.

MALVEAUX: Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, abruptly cancelled last week. He is going to be back in the hot seat. And according to "The Washington Post," saying, yes, OK. There was a quid pro quo for this Ukrainian arrangement, but that it was something that was not necessarily corrupt.

HARLOW: Yes.

MALVEAUX: So all of that unfolding this week.

HARLOW: Now, a really critical week. Suzanne, before you go, vice president, former vice president Joe Biden, obviously the frontrunner in most polls in the Democratic Party, right, ahead of the debate tomorrow night, his rhetoric on impeachment and the president getting stronger by the hour. What is he saying now?

MALVEAUX: Well, his latest tweet, Poppy, he says Donald Trump is a threat to our democracy. He must be impeached. But quite frankly he's a bit behind from some of the other Democratic presidential nominees. And this comes at a time when he said over the weekend in no uncertain terms that family members will not be in his White House, will not be engaged with foreign companies or entities, really trying to set the stage for setting himself apart from President Trump but also providing some political cover for tomorrow, the debate, when he actually --

HARLOW: Right.

MALVEAUX: -- deals with some of those other contenders.

HARLOW: OK. Suzanne, thank you very much for the reporting on all of those fronts.

And as we told you just a moment ago, the White House this morning is saying the president has not yet seen that violent and deeply disturbing video that "The New York Times" says shows a fake Trump shooting, stabbing and assaulting of political opponents and news organizations.

We, at CNN, are not showing the contends of that video for obvious reasons. Our chief media correspondent Brian Stelter is with me now.

So, Brian, Stephanie Grisham says the president will see it soon. He strongly condemns this. What else do we know about the group and the conference at which this video was shown over the weekend?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN SENIOR MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: This took place at Doral, one of the president's golf clubs in Florida. And the group who's sponsoring this is called American Priorities. It's a pro-Trump group. Donald Trump Jr. and Sarah Huckabee Sanders were scheduled to attend. They say they didn't see the video either. And the group is distancing itself saying that this was an unauthorized video that played in a side room at the conference. This was part of an exhibit showing off memes, digital videos that promote President Trump.

[09:05:01]

In fact, this video has been on YouTube for more than a year but the fact it's being shown at a Trump conference, at a pro-Trump conference is disturbing. It shows the extent to which this kind of hateful beliefs have been normalized.

Here is part of what "The New York Times" story says about what exactly is shown in the video. We can read a little bit of the story. Says, "The video depicts a scene inside the Church of Fake News where parishioners rise as Mr. Trump dressed in a black pinstripe suit and tie walks down the aisle. Many parishioners' faces have been replaced but the logos of news media organizations, including PBS, NPR, Politico, the "Washington Post" and NBC. Trump stops in the middle of the church, pulls a gun out of his suit jacket pocket and begins a graphic rampage. As the parishioners try to flee, the president fires at them. He shoots black lives matter in the head. also shoots Vice News."

Now this video goes on and on for a couple of minutes. It's a parody of the movie called "The Kingsman" in 2014. It shows this fake version of President Trump killing John McCain, attacking Democratic lawmakers as well, attacking CNN and other news outlets. It's despicable but it speaks to this broader sense that the president has created an environment where some of his supporters would think this might be somehow funny.

HARLOW: The climate, your point is the climate that has been created.

STELTER: Yes, it's about so much more than a single video. It's about a president and his supporters who are sowing seeds of hate and division so that it's possible to hate and dehumanize news outlets or political opponents. Typically, in this country presidents not just condemn this kind of content, they would actively discourage it and distance from it.

We'll see if the president ever actually does that, but so far his actions have always been in the opposite direction.

HARLOW: And CNN has obviously issued a statement responding to this.

STELTER: Yes. CNN is saying that this is of all the examples we have seen of this kind of attack, this is one of the most vile. Here's part of the statement, saying, "It's not the first time supporters of the president promoted violence against the media in a video they apparently find entertaining. But it is by far and away the worst. The images are vile and horrific."

This statement was calling on the Trump White House and the Trump campaign to denounce the video, and that came out -- this came out overnight. And just in the past few minutes as you mentioned the White House press secretary has said that the president denounces this video. But it's not about a single statement. It's about years and years and years of rhetoric, verbal attacks against the media, eventually when you call someone the enemy over and over and over again the president shares responsibility for what happens as a result.

HARLOW: Brian, thank you very much. Of course, we'll bring you the president's words when hopefully he'll weigh in.

STELTER: He says something. Yes.

HARLOW: On this video. Thank you very much, Brian.

To talk about all of these headlines our political analyst Seung Min Kim, she's White House reporter for the "Washington Post," Susan Page, Washington bureau chief for "USA Today" and CNN national security and legal analyst Susan Hennessey joins me.

Good morning to you, guys. And let me begin with you, Seung Min. What should the president say on this video?

SEUNG MIN KIM, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: You know, I feel like he should echo what his press secretary has said in the tweet a little bit ago. You know, us reporters never want to be part of the news, but I really can't say it much better than what the White House Correspondents Association has said, what CNN has said in saying that these images are awful, they are gruesome, every American from the president on down should not support depictions of violence like this.

HARLOW: Susan Page, turning the page here if I could just for a moment, there are a lot of headlines over the weekend that are flying through the radar but they're really important, namely among them the president's acting Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan resigned saying essentially he did, you know, the best job that he could do but now you've got this department crucial to the president's immigration enforcement and vision, they'll have their fifth leader in three years. What do you expect to come?

SUSAN PAGE, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, USA TODAY: And this is no easy job. You know, this is a job in which you are well served if you have some long experience, some time to take over the bureaucracy, the authority to do so and not just be an acting director but to be a Senate confirmed official at the head of the agency. So, I think it's of concern across -- at Homeland Security and also in other parts of the government. The number of acting officials we have running government agencies is unprecedented. And that is a problem for them. It doesn't give them the authority to act.

It's a problem for the government as well because you don't have the Senate weighing in as its constitutionally supposed to do on the worth.

HARLOW: Sure.

PAGE: And the value and the appropriateness of these folks. So I think it's a big deal. And as you say, there's so much news going on. Who even noticed that?

HARLOW: I know. Well, also, Susan Hennessey, to you, I mean, a number of setbacks from the courts for the president on the immigration front over the last 48 hours. Friday alone you had Friday afternoon four federal courts rejecting the president's immigration policies, one judge ruling against his emergency declaration for that funding to build the border wall, three judges tearing apart the administration's rule that would have made it more difficult for any immigrants that rely on public assistance to get green cards or visas.

The administration is appealing. But is this a demonstration of the system working the process playing out?

[09:10:04]

SUSAN HENNESSEY, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY AND LEGAL ANALYST: Potentially it is. All of these will of course face additional challenge through the appeals court system, but this is the judiciary sort of strongly asserting basic rule of law principles. That said, it's not clear how much the president actually cares about accomplishing any of his goals. We've seen this in the past that the president will essentially issue a big policy proposal, do something without really thinking about the legal ramifications and then when weeks or even months later a court comes in and overturns it, either the president supporters have moved on or the president actually points to the courts and says, look, I as president wanted to give you what I promised.

You know, these judges stepped in and essentially thwarted my will. And so because of the way the president sort of -- the rhetorical approach he brings to these issues and the fact that he doesn't appear to really care all that much about concrete policy, actually implementing things, you know, either way I think we will see ultimately sort of the president resorting to that same strategy of basically blaming other branches.

HARLOW: So -- all right. So, on the testimony this week, I think Seung Min, Fiona Hill's testimony today is going to be very compelling her view on Russia has always been interesting in terms of a fit in the Trump administration. But looking ahead to Gordon Sondland, the E.U. ambassador, who didn't show up last week, he's showing up on Thursday, we think. And somewhat knowledgeable about what he will say in his prepared remarks tells the "Washington Post" that he's going to talk about having a phone call with President Trump and being directed and told, you know, to explicitly say back to Bill Taylor and those texts, there's no quid pro quo here, having to do with Ukraine, and that he will say that he believes there was a quid pro quo but not a corrupt one and then finally saying about whether, you know, the truth is being told here from the president, quote, "It's only true that the president said it, not that it was the truth." If all three of those things happen under oath before Congress, how big is that?

KIM: I mean, his testimony this week is incredibly a huge deal. And the reason why -- what the person familiar with his testimony told the "Washington Post" why that's so significant is because the president, Republicans in Congress who are the president's defenders, have been really hanging on that text message saying from the E.U. ambassador that there was no quid pro quo as evidence that indeed there was no quid pro quo, but now that we know and now that -- Mr. Sondland will testify before Congress that that directive came directly from the president and the fact that, look, you know, it's only true that the president said it, not that necessarily it's the truth is a big deal and Democrats will really, you know, hone in on that in these hearings.

And what I think is also significant, too, is that the fact that he is even testifying before the Congress at all is a major deal. Because we know last week the State Department blocked him from doing so. We know that -- we also know that the Defense Secretary Mark Esper kind of hinted that he may comply with the congressional subpoenas that House Democrats have levelled toward him.

HARLOW: He did. Yes.

KIM: It shows that while, you know, we saw this eight-page (INAUDIBLE) from the White House Counsel's Office last week essentially saying they are not going to comply with this impeachment inquiry, that -- you know, in the lower levels from the White House, or in the other parts of the administration there are people who are willing or at least considering complying and it's a really big deal for both, you know, House Democrats and the White House.

HARLOW: I have one minute left, Susan Page, to you first, and Susan Hennessy, your thoughts on Seung Min's points.

PAGE: Yes, I totally agree. The fact that they're testifying is as important as what they're going to say because each time one of these officials testifies, it encourages other officials to either want to or feel compelled to step forward and answer questions themselves.

HARLOW: Susan?

HENNESSEY: I think it is a good illustration of how impeachment has really shifted the momentum and the burden here. Executive privilege has just been keystone to one of the White House's sort of stonewall strategies.

HARLOW: Right.

HENNESSEY: It doesn't work if executive officials don't want to actually follow it. And so it is really, really significant that these people are coming forward in some cases, you know, continuing to work for the executive branch and basically saying, we're just not going to -- we're going to go along with Congress. We're going to give this testimony. It really does change sort of the pace and momentum of what we're going to see.

HARLOW: We just saw Fiona Hill come in for her testimony today and then looking ahead to Sondland on Thursday.

Thank you, one and all. I appreciate it very much. We have a lot ahead this hour.

Still to come the president orders all U.S. troops out of northern Syria. Huge, significant move now prompting global fears about the resurgence of ISIS.

Also, Joe Biden stepping up efforts to defend his son against the president's attacks. Is this a preview of how he may take this on on the debate stage tomorrow night?

And outrage building in a Texas community after a black woman was shot and killed by a white police officer inside of her home. The family of that woman now calling for an independent investigation. We'll take you live to Ft. Worth.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:15:00]

HARLOW: All right, this morning, President Trump is pushing back at criticism for ordering all remaining U.S. forces to pull out of northern Syria. This morning he claims, quote, "big sanctions on Turkey are coming, following alleged war crimes against the Kurds and civilians there."

And reports that ISIS prisoners who may escape from prisons once guarded by the Kurds can easily be captured again. It comes as Russian-backed Syrian government forces move into the region after the Kurds made a deal over the weekend with Syrian President Bashar al- Assad who of course is backed by the Russians.

One Kurdish commander arguing they had no options but to make a deal, and I quote, "the U.S. is leaving us to be slaughtered."

[09:20:00]

Barbara Starr joins me this morning from the Pentagon. Barbara, Defense Secretary -- the acting Defense Secretary Mark Esper said yesterday, look, the U.S. forces there were facing grave danger.

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, he did. Mark Esper; Secretary of Defense very much defending the decision on the basis of the security needs for the 1,000 U.S. forces that will now be coming out of there. And explaining early yesterday why they had to go.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) MARK ESPER, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, UNITED STATES: Where we find ourselves as we have American forces likely caught between two opposing, advancing armies, and it's a very untenable situation. So, I spoke with the president last night after discussions with the rest of the national security team, and he directed that we begin a deliberate withdrawal forces from northern Syria.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STARR: The security situation over the last 24 hours continuing still to deteriorate as ISIS and al Qaeda-backed fighters are on the roads, key highways have been cut that the U.S. needs to be able to operate safely in Syria. There is now air cover, armed air cover over all U.S. military positions as they begin to consolidate and to find their way out of Syria.

They hope they can do it in a very orderly fashion. The security situation will dictate that. Poppy?

HARLOW: And Barbara, before you go, what do we know about these reports that hundreds of people with links to ISIS have escaped from the detention camps in northern Syria, and, if so, where they are going?

STARR: I don't think there's any reason to doubt at this point that some of these people have escaped. The numbers are sort of all over the place. Let's call it hundreds for purposes of discussion. Nobody can really verify it with certainty at this point. No indication as the president might have suggested that the Kurds are letting them out of there.

Many Kurdish guards have moved north to fight against the Turks. Some facilities still under control. Where they are going, it's very hard to say. A lot of concern, this all leads to ISIS --

HARLOW: Yes --

STARR: Back on the rise. Poppy?

HARLOW: Barbara Starr, thank you for your incredibly important reporting this morning. Let's talk a lot more about this with Republican Congressman Michael Burgess of Texas. Good morning, congressman, thank you so much for taking the time.

REP. MICHAEL BURGESS (R-TX): Good morning, thanks for having me on.

HARLOW: Your fellow Republican in the Senate, Lindsey Graham calls this ethnic cleansing by Turkey and Syria. "Fox News" is reporting that there have been executions of civilians as well as Kurdish fighters. Do you support the president's move to remove U.S. troops from northern Syria?

BURGESS: Well, what I will tell you is, this was a very poor time for Congress to be out of town for two weeks. Look, in the previous administration, this administration, there's never been an authorization for use of military force in Syria. Now would be the time if Congress feels that way, now would be the time to perhaps provide that direction to the executive branch.

HARLOW: So, congressman, let me just ask you again --

BURGESS: Delineate what exactly our objectives are --

HARLOW: I hear you --

BURGESS: And what the -- and what would define success.

HARLOW: Let me ask you just a direct question again because there's reporting of two ISIS attacks since last Wednesday, since the Turkish incursion. So again, do you support the president's decision to remove U.S. troops from northern Syria?

BURGESS: I support the president in his effort to remove the United States from entanglements abroad --

HARLOW: Right --

BURGESS: That have diminished our -- diminished our treasury and sacrificed United States lives. So the president made no secret about this when he ran. He made no secret about it about six months ago that this was his intention. Congress has had every opportunity to provide him with an authorization for use of military force and they won't do it.

HARLOW: So congressman, I hear you, but the U.S. just committed 1,800 --

BURGESS: Now, today, I understand that there will be significant sanctions levied against Turkey --

HARLOW: Perhaps --

BURGESS: And I think that is a -- that's a good idea.

HARLOW: OK, we'll talk about the sanctions in just a moment. But do your point about ending endless wars in the president's campaign promises the U.S. just made last week, committed 1,800 U.S. troops to the region, to Saudi Arabia.

So, again, do you support the president's decision to remove these U.S. troops from northern Syria, given what we have seen take place since that happened?

BURGESS: I don't think the president made any secret about what his intention was.

HARLOW: Yes, and I'm asking, do you support that move? Was it a good idea --

BURGESS: Yes --

HARLOW: To take our forces -- OK, even though the leader --

BURGESS: Yes, and he had telegraphed that move -- HARLOW: Of the Syrian Kurds, our allies, 10,000-plus of whom have

died on the battlefield fighting ISIS. General Mazloum Kobani Abdi said quote -- about the United States --

BURGESS: Look --

HARLOW: Let me just read you what he said because his words are so important. Quote, "you have given up on us. You are leaving us to be slaughtered." Given that, what should the United States do today?

BURGESS: Well, look, the United States has asked for help from its European allies in policing this area, and that's what it was. After all, it was a police activity.

[09:25:00]

No help forthcoming. We've asked our European allies to take those ISIS fighters that were being held in the prisons in northern Syria. No help from our European allies. The president was essentially having to do this entirely on his own. No help from Congress, no help from European allies --

HARLOW: But I'm asking you -- so, I'm asking you --

BURGESS: I think the president made the decision that he had to make.

HARLOW: What the U.S. should do today? What should the U.S. today, for example --

BURGESS: The president made --

HARLOW: Secretary -- Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said that, you know, with word from the president, the Treasury could end for example all U.S. dollar transactions with the Turkish government. Is that a sanction and position that you think is necessary at this moment?

BURGESS: Well, I don't know all of the details of sanctions, but I think there will be very severe sanctions coming Turkey's way. And again, that was not -- the president did not make that a secret. He warned the President Erdogan of Turkey that this was likely going to follow. And I expect that will.

But you know what? Again, how unfortunate for Congress to be out of town for two weeks. We could have passed a fairly robust sanctions package last week, and had that ready to go for the White House. But --

HARLOW: The result --

BURGESS: We went home.

HARLOW: The result, congressman, of the Turkish incursion has not only been the deaths of these U.S. allies and as "Fox News" reported the execution of civilians there. But now you have the SDF over the weekend, cutting a deal with the Assad regime backed by Russia to fight off Turkey in northern Syria. That only gives Russia and Iran more power in the region. Is that a successful outcome? Is that a good --

BURGESS: Fairly no --

HARLOW: Outcome from the president's --

BURGESS: No --

HARLOW: Move?

BURGESS: Well, it's not an ideal outcome, but look, that this was not just the president. The Congress had a role here and didn't step up and fulfill that role.

HARLOW: This was a decision --

BURGESS: We also have a role to --

HARLOW: Made by the president --

BURGESS: Look, we have not --

HARLOW: Even Defense Secretary Mark Esper said -- hold on!

BURGESS: Funded the Department of Defense for this fiscal year --

HARLOW: Let me just -- the facts matter here, congressman --

BURGESS: The Department of Defense is running on --

HARLOW: And Defense Secretary Mark Esper said that he spoke with the president over the weekend and it was the president's decision to remove nearly all, if not all, of those U.S. troops from northern Syria. And I'm just trying to ask you as a member of Congress, as a member of the president's party --

BURGESS: Well, the secretary said in your earlier segment --

HARLOW: Is that a good --

BURGESS: That was because the United States troops were in an untenable position with combatants on both the north and southern flank. I don't know that there was --

HARLOW: How did --

BURGESS: Any other decision that could have been made.

HARLOW: They get into -- but congressman, Turkey has been wanting to lead this incursion for years. How did the U.S. troops get into that situation with the threat from the north and the south?

BURGESS: Well, realistically, how did we get into Syria in the first place --

HARLOW: Was not the president's decision to pull back?

BURGESS: Without any congressional authorization?

HARLOW: OK, I'd like to move on to another domestic topic before you go, sir, and that is the call between the president and the president of Ukraine in July. Just to a fundamental question about that because I know where you stand on impeachment. But just a general question around the topic.

Is it acceptable in your mind for any president of the United States to solicit help from any foreign government to dig up dirt or pursue an investigation on a political rival?

BURGESS: Well, but that's not what the phone call was about and we both know that. So that's a disingenuous question --

HARLOW: I read the entire transcript --

BURGESS: It is legitimate for the president to have a conversation with the leader of another country --

HARLOW: It is such a straightforward question. Is it -- is it OK in your mind for the president of the United States to ask a leader of a foreign country to pursue an investigation, to dig up dirt on a political rival as the president did --

BURGESS: But again, that was not --

HARLOW: According to the transcript released --

BURGESS: The purpose of that conversation. That was not the purpose of that conversation --

HARLOW: It is part of a content --

BURGESS: No, of course --

HARLOW: It is part of a content of it --

BURGESS: It's not a good idea for that to happen --

HARLOW: OK --

BURGESS: But that was not the purpose of that conversation.

HARLOW: OK, but it happened in the conversation and you're saying it's not a good idea.

BURGESS: No, it did not --

HARLOW: I asked you --

BURGESS: The president was concerned about the level of corruption in the Ukraine --

HARLOW: OK -- BURGESS: As was the previous administration.

HARLOW: So, Congressman, I have one more question and I'll --

BURGESS: USAID was going to Ukraine, the president wanted to be certain that, that aid was well used and not used for the purposes of any corrupt activities. I think that's a legit -- I want the president to have that type of --

HARLOW: OK --

BURGESS: That type of input --

HARLOW: I will -- I will -- I will let all of our viewers re-read the transcript and green from it what they would like. But I asked you because I just want to go back to your own words in 2011, and this is according to the "Fort Worth Star" telegram, you were speaking to a local tea party group, you were asked then by someone if the Republican-controlled house should push for impeachment proceedings against President Obama from quote, "pushing his agenda."

Let me read two things you said to that group, quote, "it needs to happen, and I agree with you, it would tie things up, no question about that." You're quoted as later saying, "we need to tie things up, the longer we allow the damage to continue unchecked, the worse things are going to be for us."

[09:30:00]