Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
Wildfire in Simi Valley Forces Evacuation of Reagan Library; Trump Judicial Nominee Breaks Down in Tears At Hearing; Immigration Chief Fires Back Against Accusations He's A Racist; Cuccinelli Says He's Not A White Supremacist After Democrat Suggest He Only Wants Whites Allowed into the U.S.; Op-Ed Piece Says Don't' Bet on Bolton to Be An Impeachment Hero; White Candidates Lead The Most Diverse Field in History. Aired 3:30-4p ET
Aired October 30, 2019 - 15:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[15:30:00]
BALDWIN: Fluid indeed, it's incredible how you walk just a couple feet, Bill, and it clears up and then five more feet and you can just see the smoke. I can't even imagined the smell, how pervasive that is all throughout both southern where you are and northern California. Bill Weir, I have a feeling your going to hitch a ride with some of those firefighters and get even deeper into it. So I'm going to let you do it, Bill Weir and crew, thank you very much for that.
BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN HOST: Back here in Washington, President Trump's acting immigration chief Ken Cuccinelli says he is not a white supremacist. The grilling just got quite heated over controversial immigration rules. Plus, what caused one of the President's judicial nominees to cry this morning at his confirmation hearing?
[15:35:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BALDWIN: One of President Trump's judicial nominees ended up in tears today on Capitol Hill during his confirmation hearing. Lawrence VanDyke is up for a spot on the Appeals Court but just last night the American Bar Association issued a scathing letter rating him as not qualified. The group says it conducted 60 interviews and concluded that Mr. VanDyke is quote, arrogant, lazy and an ideologue. It also claimed that VanDyke's peers raised concerns about whether he could be fair to the LGBTQ community and he said the accusation was deeply hurtful. Here he was.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LAWRENCE VANDYKE, TRUMP NOMINEE FOR 9TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS: I did not say that. I -- apologize.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That's all right.
VANDYKE: I'm sorry. No, I did not say that. I do not believe that. It is a fundamental belief of mine that all people are created in the image of god. They should all be treated with dignity and respect, Senator.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can you commit today to this committee that you will treat -- if confirmed -- that you would treat every litigant who came before you with respect and dignity?
VANDYKE: Absolutely, Senator. I would not have allowed myself to be nominated for this position if I did not think I could do that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: Wow. VanDyke is the former Solicitor General of both Montana and Nevada and is currently a Deputy Assistant Attorney General at the DOJ.
There was another exchange on Capitol Hill today that I want to show you. This is outside of the realm of impeachment. Democratic Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz accused a Trump immigration official of being a white supremacist and enacting policies that only benefited Caucasian, English-speaking immigrants.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (D-FL): My constituents, Americans across the country aren't fooled by this administration's specious attempts to distinguish between documented and undocumented immigration. You and Mr. Trump don't want anyone who looks or talks differently than Caucasian Americans to be allowed into this country.
KEN CUCCINELLI, ACTING DIRECTOR OF THE CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES: That's false.
Schultz: I'm sorry, please don't interrupt me. And I'd like the time --
CUCCINELLI: That's defamatory.
SCHULTZ: Excuse me, there's nothing defamatory about it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentlelady controls the time and the witness will get a chance to respond.
SCHULTZ: Thank you very much. You want to block all immigration and make life harder for immigrants and you have demonstrated that you will pursue this heinous white separatist ideology at all costs, even if it means making critically ill children your collateral damage in the process. And this goes to a comprehensive pattern of harm at USCIS under your leadership. In August you announced the
administration's new public charge rule for example which would deny legal status to immigrants who use social services. Mr. Cuccinelli, has USCIS done analysis of how many children they stop receiving critical services due to fear of losing legal status under this rule? And I'd like you to answer that question, please.
CUCCINELLI: After declaring that I am not a white supremacist as you alluded. Nor is the President.
SCHULTZ: OK. Facts matter.
CUCCINELLI: Yes, they do. Yes, they do. Truth matters.
SCHULTZ: Right. That's why I'm stating them here today. Please, answer the question.
CUCCINELLI: Yes, no. You certainly are not.
SCHULTZ: Please answer the question.
CUCCINELLI: You are certainly cloaked in legislative privilege but that means that you can get away with not telling the truth.
SCHULTZ: How many children they stopped receiving -- reclaiming my time.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: CNN justice correspondent Jessica Schneider is here with me and wow, that was quite a back and forth, can we just 30,000 feet -- what led to that? What was this hearing about?
JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, this was actually supposed to be a hearing about USCIS ending a policy that would have allowed immigrants who had serious medical conditions to remain here in country. They rolled it back and then thy reinstated it. So that's what the hearing was about. But as you can see, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, she changed the subject and she really came out swinging.
That was a question about the public charge rule, this was something that was announced in August and it would make it easier for the agency to reject visa and green card applications for any immigrants who accepted public assistance. Things like food stamps, housing vouchers, also Medicaid.
[15:40:00]
So that's what she was asking about, calling some of the policies, you know, white supremacist policies, but, Brooke, it's possible as well that Wasserman Schultz might have come out swinging against Cuccinelli because we've learned he's at the top of a list to potentially if possible be successor for the current Acting DHS Secretary Kevin McAleenan. McAleenan is scheduled to leave that post tomorrow. He said that it's possible that that departure date could get delayed but the White House would of course would potentially like Cuccinelli in that post.
He's a hard-line immigration activist, policymaker, just like the Trump administration. But we've learned that the White House has been advised that Cuccinelli actually wouldn't be eligible for this Acting DHS Secretary post, because it doesn't fall in line with the Federal Vacancies Act, but we've also found out that the White House has found a loophole that would allow him to be named something else first, and then slide into this role.
So that potentially is why Democrats particularly the Congresswoman there might be taking particular aim at Cuccinelli. But of course, Cuccinelli is this hard-line immigration policy person that falls in line with the President, of course, and we've seen the administration you know make it harder for asylum claims. In fact, just yesterday we saw something that really falls in line with the Trump administration wanting to limit the refugees who come here to this country. We've learned that we're on track this October, this month, not to admit any refugees and the State Department hasn't admitted any in the month of October and of course President Trump has wanted to limit the refugees here to about 18,000 in the fiscal year.
So I mean, really, Ken Cuccinelli falls in line with everything the administration wants to do that's why they're potentially pushing him and of course here we saw the Democrat, Debbie Wasserman Schultz really pushing back.
BALDWIN: Sure. Sure. Perhaps that is why the target on his back may be in her perspective is much larger. We'll see how this plays out for him. Jessica, thank you very much.
SCHNEIDER: Thanks.
BALDWIN: Back to our other breaking story up on Capitol Hill. New witnesses testifying today that former National Security Adviser John Bolton had warned the Trump White House about Rudy Giuliani's involvement with Ukraine. Would Bolton ever testify? My next guest says you shouldn't expect Bolton to be an impeachment hero.
[15:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BALDWIN: He left the White House after months of reported tension with President Trump but if he returns to testify in this impeachment inquiry do not expect John Bolton to spill the beans on his former boss. At least that is the finding of my next guest, John Gans who recently wrote this piece for "Politico" titled, "Don't Bet on John Bolton to Be an Impeachment Hero." He is also the author also of "White House Warriors, How the National Security Council Transformed the American Way of War." So, John Gans, good to have you on, sir. Thank you for coming on.
JOHN GANS, WROTE " DON'T BET ON JOHN BOLTON TO BE AN IMPEACHMENT HERO": Thanks for having me on.
BALDWIN: Let me read what you wrote. Quote, the power of the modern presidency is Bolton's career legacy. When Trump and his defenders question the legitimacy of today's inquiry, they're not just speaking Bolton's language they're using his talking points. Tell me what you mean.
GANS: Well, John Bolton sort of came up in Washington at a time where the presidency was really at its lowest point. Right? He sort of arrived in Washington after Watergate. He was a Nixon White House intern and he actually thought Congress really overreacted to Watergate and spent much of his career sort of much of the 1980s defending the President and the White House from investigations into foreign policy. He fought against Iran/contra. He actually fought against Congress' investigation into a drug deal.
So as this impeachment fight shapes into a battle between Congress and the White House over the ability to hold the President accountable for foreign policy, it's really hard to imagine John Bolton coming out and sort of counteracting everything he's done over his entire career just to sort of get revenge or perhaps undermine President Trump.
BALDWIN: We know that Bolton's attorneys are in negotiations for a deposition in this impeachment inquiry and you think he should testify but you also say Trump critics shouldn't get their hopes up about what he'll say. I want to play something that he told Fox News just last year.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOHN BOLTON, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: The President's entitled to do what he wants to do. That's what the Constitution says. The executive power resides in the President.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BALDWIN: So, John what is Bolton likely to say? Even if he believes the President is constitutionally authorized to do what he wants, he was raising red flags about the pressure placed on Ukraine?
GANS: Absolutely. And I think that you know some of what we're seeing reported in some of what we're hearing from the testimony of some of the people that worked for John Bolton suggested Bolton was concerned and then he started to work to sort of establish a paper trail with the lawyers both at the White House and at the State Department. But I think that quote gets to the point of why we should expect John Bolton to only testify sort of rather unwillingly, and then when he does, it will be relatively I think it will be not expansive. So we see so far in the quotes that he has blamed Ambassador to the EU Sondland. He's blamed Mick Mulvaney the Chief of Staff and he's blamed --
BALDWIN: You're talking about the drug deal, come on, the drug deal quote?
[15:50:00]
GANS: Exactly. Exactly. All of these quotes are about other people than the President. So I think that's because right there is the tension between John Bolton's long held principle that the President does have the authority to do what he wants on foreign policy. And his concerns about what looked like a basically potentially illegal operation. That was being run out of the White House. And so that's the tension you see. So my hunch is that he will do what he needs to do and say what he has to say but he won't go beyond that or threaten to undermine the presidency itself.
BALDWIN: This was the quote, in case people don't remember, not only did he call Rudy Giuliani, a hand grenade, he also specifically called out Sondland and Mulvaney. As you point out saying he was, quote, not part of whatever drug deal
Sondland and Mulvaney are cooking up. But he doesn't to your point, he doesn't name check the President, do you think then that is foreshadowing if and when he testifies or is subpoenaed, doesn't cite executive privilege, that is more or less what he'll say? That it wasn't the President?
GANS: I think so far that is what we have to go on. But I think this also sort of you have to go on what he's done over his entire career which is to stand up and say the President deserves to do say and deserves to do what he thinks is right. And so what this is running into is sort of these long-held tensions that he's had, and I think his career and his time in the Trump White House where he had his long-held positions on Iran and North Korea were in tension at times with Donald Trump. John Bolton has a long time to go along and get along. He a hard time doing that in the Trump White House and I think and I suspect he'll have a hard time doing that in the resistance in Washington in the impeachment inquiry. So whatever he says I think it will be narrow, it will be lawyerly and he will follow and sort of stay within his own sort of parameters of the letter of the law.
BALDWIN: I have a feeling you and I ware going to do this dance again if and when the former National Security Secretary is up on Capitol Hill. Thank you so much, John Gans.
Coming up, it is the most diverse Democratic field in history. But the top four presidential candidates, according to polls, are still white. Why is that? Let's talk about it.
[15:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BALDWIN: Speaking of John Bolton, as we were just discussing, here is the news now from Capitol Hill. We have learned that House impeachment investigators have invited the former National Security Adviser to appear next week on November 7th, according to a source familiar with these conversations. A House intelligence spokesperson declined to comment.
Heading into 2020, the Democrats have the most diverse group of Presidential candidates ever. Two black Senators, a Latino former cabinet secretary and Asian-American businessman and the first American Samoan elected to Congress, and an openly gay mayor. But the top tier is all white with Mayor Pete Buttigieg joining frontrunners Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders and this all the subject of this "New York Times" piece, "Democrats Have the Most Racially Diverse Field Ever, The Top Tier Is All White."
The co-author of that piece, "New York Times" political reporter, Astead Herndon is also a CNN political analyst and he joins me. And Astead, man, I read this morning and I thought, why?
ASTEAD HERNDON, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes. That's the question on a lot of Democrats' minds. I mean there is a lot of overlapping reasons as we lay out a kind of a combination of race, money and politics, all kind of working in one. The first reason is that black and Latino voters which make up a big portion of the Democratic electorate just frankly aren't the nominees that look like them. Joe Biden continues to have a real stranglehold on the black and Latino working-class vote which has changed the kind of dynamics of this race.
Campaigns like Cory Booker and Kamala Harris were kind of banking on that support particularly in South Carolina to fuel their viability and that just hasn't happened yet. But there's also some overlapping factors, money has been flowing to candidates like Pete Buttigieg and grassroots donors have been going to Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. You also have the question of electability that looms over this race. So many Democrats are fearful about losing to President Trump and are thinking about that white working class voter and when we talk to Julian Castro and Cory Booker they said they think that's been hurting the nonwhite candidates because some of the Democratic voters themselves think that nominating them would be a quote/unquote, risk, for that electorate.
BALDWIN: Wow. Remember that's what people wondered about then Senator Barack Obama but then we saw what he did in Iowa and the story changed. Speaking of the former President, there's this incredible quote in here. This is Theodore Johnson who you spoke to. Said this, their road is easier because of Obama but their ability to secure the nomination is harder because they're not Obama. Talk to me a little bit more about that and you alluded to maybe part of this as fundraising. Is that part of the issue?
HERNDON: Yes, it looms over particularly the black Senators you mentioned. Senator Cory Booker and Senator Kamala Harris, they have this implicit measuring stick against their campaigns of the historic first black President who was among Democrats a unique political talent that they are kind of held to against as a standard that can sometimes come down pretty hard on them. There's donors, there's voters who are always implicitly measuring them against former President Obama and that can sometimes be particularly difficult.
Senator Cory Booker has said that donors or voters will say, well, is America ready for another black man to be President? He had a quote in our piece saying, I'm sure that something that's not been asked of the white candidates is America ready for another white candidate?
BALDWIN: Astead Herndon, thank you for writing about it. We'll continue this conversation as we watch the field. Thanks for being with me. I'm Brooke Baldwin.
