Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Biden vs. Warren; Mick Mulvaney Under Fire; Joe Biden Prepares for CNN Town Hall. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired November 11, 2019 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:07]

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN HOST: We continue on. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. Thank you for being here.

In a week where House Democrats take their case for impeaching President Trump directly to the public, one of his top aides may be hoping to stay out of sight, at least until a judge tells him to do otherwise.

His name is Mick Mulvaney. He is the president's acting chief of staff. He's trying to get his name added to this federal lawsuit that would force the courts to decide whether Mulvaney should listen to Congress or to his boss when it comes to answering a subpoena for his testimony.

In just a couple of hours, he may have his answer, as a judge hears arguments about Mulvaney's requests.

So, for that, let's go to see CNN justice correspondent Jessica Schneider there in Washington for us.

And so Mulvaney's decision comes as his name has popped up multiple times now in these depositions about President Trump pressuring Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden in exchange for that military aid.

But, Jessica, the White House says any suggestion the Mulvaney is working against Trump, that there is any distance between the two men is absolutely incorrect.

So what can you tell me about today's hearing?

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, so, we're hearing from the White House now. And the judge will ultimately decide, this hearing happening at 5:00 p.m.

And it is solely to decide if Mick Mulvaney can join this already ongoing lawsuit. But we're actually learning this afternoon, in just the past few minutes, that the person who brought this lawsuit doesn't even want Mulvaney added on.

It's former Deputy National Security Adviser Charles Kupperman. He's the original plaintiff here who asked the court to decide whose orders he should be following, the White House, who claimed Kupperman had absolute immunity as a former White House official and did not have to testify, or House Democrats, who requested his testimony and eventually subpoenaed him for it.

And Kupperman now says, well, if Mulvaney wants to ask the court to decide the same question, well, Mulvaney should file his own and separate lawsuit. And Kupperman's new filing is even referencing the fact that Mick Mulvaney said a few weeks ago in the White House press Briefing Room before cameras that there was in fact a quid pro quo when it came to Ukraine and it promising investigations in exchange for military aid.

Kupperman's attorneys now say, hey, since Kupperman himself has never publicly disclosed any information relating to his official duties at the White House, he should not be lumped into the same suit as Mick Mulvaney.

So, really, House Democrats here have already said they do not want to prolong this fight in court. That's why they withdrew a subpoena for Kupperman last week. And, really, if Mick Mulvaney is not allowed to join this lawsuit, it's possible that he could file his own.

But, Brooke, this could really all be just an effort at stall tactics, since while these lawsuits are being fast-tracked, they're really not fast enough, because, at this point, the judge in the original lawsuit says he won't even likely be able to hear arguments on this case until December 10.

And with all of these hearings moving fast and furiously, and potentially even wrapped up by Christmas, that could really be too late to really force Mulvaney anyway.

So we will see, that hearing today at 5:00 p.m. -- Brooke.

BALDWIN: OK.

I want to analyze precisely what you just reported out. Jessica, thank you so much.

I have got Dana Bash joining us. She's CNN chief political correspondent. Asha Rangappa is a former FBI special agent. She's also a CNN legal and national security analyst.

And so, ladies, let's go.

Asha starting with you. This official working on the impeachment inquiry tells CNN that if Mick Mulvaney has nothing to hide, then he should be eager to testify. But my question is, does Mulvaney have a point when he says his dual roles both as acting chief of staff and OMB director put him in a unique role, and should that be considered?

ASHA RANGAPPA, CNN LEGAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, I think that the argument that he's trying to join this lawsuit to delay the inevitable is probably right.

This lawsuit is really a separation of powers lawsuit. It's basically saying, does this claim of absolute immunity, how does it balance out against Congress' oversight and subpoena power?

Absolute immunity, Brooke, is something that's broader than executive privilege. Executive privilege is about specific communications, deliberations, advice between people and the president.

Absolute immunity is basically saying certain senior officials cannot be called in front of Congress at all. And, basically, what Kupperman meant and Bolton have said is, too bad, so sad.

Number one, you already waived any kind of absolute immunity when you admitted on camera that there was a quid pro quo.

BALDWIN: The press conference.

(CROSSTALK)

BALDWIN: Do you agree with that? Do you think it's waived? That's a key point.

RANGAPPA: Well, I think the absolute immunity argument, it has not fared well in court. This is a pre-Trump creation of the executive branch. And I don't think Mick Mulvaney is going to succeed on it.

And I do think that if there were any such privilege, he's waived it. But, also, he does not work in any kind of sensitive area like specifically national security, which is also the claim being made by Bolton and Kupperman.

[15:05:08]

(CROSSTALK)

RANGAPPA: I think...

BALDWIN: Go ahead.

RANGAPPA: Go ahead.

(CROSSTALK)

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: No, we're obviously talking about...

(CROSSTALK)

BASH: I'm sorry. Go ahead.

BALDWIN: We're also polite. Were so polite.

BASH: I know.

BALDWIN: Dana, go ahead and take it. Take it. Take it off of what she was saying.

BASH: The -- you were talking about a lot of very important legal terms. My non-legal term for what he's doing is CYA, because he understands

where the train is heading on a couple of different tracks, first of all, just on the question of a fall guy.

If, in fact, it is determined, as a lot of these witnesses, all of the witnesses have suggested in depositions, that there was a quid pro quo, the beginning of the argument you're starting to hear is, but the president didn't really know about it, it was the people on his staff.

Well, he is -- was the director of Office of Management and Budget. So he wasn't just chief of staff, but in charge of this kind of thing from the White House perspective. So that's number one.

And, number two, he also is a former member of Congress and somebody who is in the executive branch now, understands, as we were just hearing from Asha, the real, real constitutional separation of powers question.

And as much as he wants to listen to his boss, and say that I'm not going to go testify, he might not have a choice.

BALDWIN: But I love your point about CYA, but...

(CROSSTALK)

BASH: Yes.

BALDWIN: And we're talking to Kaitlan last hour. And she was saying, does anyone know about the relationship between the Mick Mulvaneys and then the -- Charlie Kupperman and John Bolton? And they're not exactly buddies.

So the notion that Mick Mulvaney wants to get in on this...

BASH: No exactly.

BALDWIN: Right. That's just an interesting piece of color to all of this.

Asha, let me pivot it to you, and let's talk Rudy Giuliani and those two Ukrainian associates who -- of Giuliani's who've been indicted on campaign finance violations.

And a lawyer for one of them -- this is according to "The New York Times" today -- says that Giuliani directed his client to issue this ultimatum regarding the military aid and an investigation into Joe Biden to a representative of President Zelensky over in Ukraine.

And Giuliani denies that. Others who attended the meeting say the issue of aid was never brought up. All of these guys lack credibility. So how do you decide who is telling the truth?

RANGAPPA: I think, at this point, it is very hard to parse this out.

But let's just take the if-true scenario. If this is true, we're getting farther and farther away from the claim that this is some kind of official foreign policy, which has been one of the defenses that has been floated by the president.

Obviously, Giuliani, his private lawyer, was engaging in this, but now if it's an associate of Giuliani who's also doing the shakedown on the side, it's really hard to see anything other than some kind of personal interest being facilitated here.

The other important thing here is that this is extending the timeline even wider than we previously knew. And I think this is part of the reason that the president is really trying to keep the focus on just the phone call, as though there was nothing happening before or after, because that takes away a lot of the context.

So where this is relevant is that it adds one more potential data point, if it is credited and if it is true, to this pattern of events that is taking -- that is unfolding over time and that points to this abuse of power by the president.

BALDWIN: And then, looking ahead, Dana, just to Wednesday, I mean, let's just take three steps back and just talk about where we are.

BASH: Yes.

BALDWIN: For the third time in modern U.S. history, the House has voted to begin a formal impeachment inquiry into the president of the United States. How much do you think this will sway the public, and then thus potentially lawmakers?

And speaking of the public, do you think this is must-see TV, a la Nixon Senate hearing?

BASH: Absolutely.

BALDWIN: And will Americans really stop to watch?

BASH: Well, whether or not it rises to that level in terms of the important the consequences, we don't know yet, right?

But it is absolutely crucial. It is crucial, depending on what the witnesses say, and, perhaps more importantly, how the members of Congress draw them out.

And it is so interesting that the way that Adam Schiff designed this is that we're not going to have a typical congressional hearing, where you watch every member of Congress start to either pontificate and barely get a question in before their time is up.

There's a 45-minute chunk for the Democratic chairman, 45-minute chunk for the ranking Republican. And we're also going to hear from their counsels, who are really steeped in the details of this, to be able to draw them out.

[15:10:05]

BALDWIN: OK, it all starts Wednesday. We will be all over it.

Dana, Asha, thank you. BASH: Thank you.

BALDWIN: And, Dana, we will see you in the big chair at 4:00 on "THE LEAD."

Thank you, my friend, very much.

BASH: See you soon.

BALDWIN: Coming up next, former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley claims she was recruited to try to subvert the president by his former chief of staff and secretary of state. We have details on why she said no and why she says she is against impeachment.

Plus, Joe Biden in a back and forth with Elizabeth Warren ahead of his CNN town hall tonight. Hear how she fired back after he suggested she was angry.

And, later, some frightening moments for passengers on board a plane that skidded off the runway in Chicago -- details on the hundreds of flights canceled because of the icy weather.

You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin. We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:15:40]

BALDWIN: We're back. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin.

Another raw glimpse into the closed-door conversations of the Trump administration. In a new memoir, former Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley details how former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly and former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson tried to get her to join them in undermining President Trump.

In an excerpt of Haley's book obtained by "The Washington Post," this is what Haley writes -- quote -- "Kellyanne and Tillerson confided in me that when they resisted the president, they weren't being insubordinate. They were trying to save the country. It was their decisions and not the president's that were in the best interests of America. They said the president didn't know what he was doing."

Haley also talked about this on CBS about her interactions with both Kelly and Tillerson.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

QUESTION: You memorialized that conversation? It definitely happened?

NIKKI HALEY, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS: It absolutely happened. And instead of saying that to me, they should have been saying that to the president, not asking me to join them on their sidebar plan. It should have been, go tell the president what your differences are

and quit if you don't like what he's doing. But to undermine a president is really a very dangerous thing. And it goes against the Constitution and it goes against what the American people want. It was offensive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: In response to all of this, Rex Tillerson did not give a comment to "The Washington Post."

As for John Kelly, according to the paper, he declined to comment in detail, but he did say that if providing the president -- quote -- "with the best and most open legal and ethical staffing advice from across the government, so he could make an informed decision is considered working against Trump, then guilty as charged."

Senior political commentator Matt Lewis is a senior columnist for The Daily Beast.

And, Matt, welcome back.

With this book, what do you think Nikki Haley is getting at and why do you think she's writing about all of this now?

MATT LEWIS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I mean, I think part of it is she is planning her future.

So I see this, as -- I know she doesn't like the word ambitious, so I will say opportunistic. I think that she is trying to frame herself as -- kind of have her cake and eat it too. She wants to be seen as a smart, thoughtful conservative, but also loyal to Trump.

And I think part of this is an audience of one. She wants Donald Trump to like her. And it worked. He sent out a tweet recommending her book.

BALDWIN: We will back to the having the cake and eating it too.

But she did make news when she was talking to CBS about the president's quid pro quo with Ukraine. She said it is not an impeachable offense because Ukraine never initiated the investigation into the Bidens.

And just reading your piece today, you say that that is B.S...

LEWIS: Yes.

BALDWIN: ... and that you thought Nikki Haley was better than that. Why?

LEWIS: Well, look, I thought Nikki Haley was a real, bright shining light and the conservative movement and a future leader.

But this shows you how Donald Trump has really compromised so many of the bright conservative leaders, people that a few years ago we thought might carry that mantle. And now they're all sort of complicit in Donald Trump's sins.

And I think Nikki Haley now is among them. Look, this argument she's making is the exact same argument that Kellyanne Conway made on "STATE OF THE UNION" last week and on "FOX News Sunday" last week. It's a really bogus, B.S. argument, because, yes, the aid didn't flow, and that is because, after holding the money up all summer long, Donald Trump finally released the money after the inspector general alerted the House Intel Committee.

So they were covering their tracks, trying to, you know, prevent what happened from happening, impeachment from happening. And the Ukrainian President Zelensky was actually prepared to go and hold a -- do an interview and announce that he was investigating Biden.

So, basically, what Nikki Haley is saying, we can't impeach him because it was just attempted extortion or attempted bribery.

(CROSSTALK)

BALDWIN: Which is what we have been hearing from another number of Republicans.

And I mean, you're making so much sense, but she could be like, it's politics, baby.

And back to your cake and eating it too, I mean, I'm sure she's sharpening up her elbows, maybe for 2024. Do you even think -- what do you think of the Trump 2020 running mate rumors?

[15:20:01]

LEWIS: You know what? I think I actually might have been the first person to float the idea at The Daily Beast, the first kind of national person to float the idea that Donald Trump might seek to replace Mike Pence with Nikki Haley as his running mate.

And I think it actually makes a lot of sense. If you look at what we have been seeing in the midterms, and most recently in Kentucky and Virginia, the suburbs are the real problem for Donald Trump. He has a real problem, especially with college-educated soccer moms who used to be Republicans.

I don't know if Nikki Haley can deliver them, but she would seem to be a pretty good choice if you were that desperate.

BALDWIN: Especially if there's a woman on the Democratic ticket.

LEWIS: Yes.

BALDWIN: We will remember this conversation, Matt Lewis, and maybe right around the RNC, we will replay it, and you can say, told you so.

LEWIS: Right.

BALDWIN: Matt Lewis, thank you very much.

LEWIS: Thanks.

BALDWIN: We are hours away from a live CNN presidential town hall.

We will take you to Iowa, as Joe Biden prepares to answer questions from voters in a state his lead has slipped.

Plus, Senator Amy Klobuchar goes after Pete Buttigieg on his record -- why she thinks a female with his resume would not be doing as well.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:26:53]

BALDWIN: In just a couple of hours from now, former Vice President Joe Biden will be answering questions from Iowa voters.

The live CNN town hall is happening in Grinnell, Iowa, at 9:00 Eastern.

And the former vice president has some ground to make up in that critical state. A recent Quinnipiac poll shows him in fourth place behind Warren, Buttigieg and Sanders among likely Democratic caucus- goers.

Nationally, Biden, though, he is neck and neck with Senator Warren.

So let's go to the town hall site.

Jessica Dean is there.

And, Jessica, set us up for what we're going to be seeing tonight.

JESSICA DEAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, hi, Brooke.

Well, tonight, we will have an auditorium full of voters that want to talk to Joe Biden. And I think you can absolutely expect he's going to want to talk about health care. There's no question about it, that is an issue that comes up number one for people in the Democratic primary.

It's also an issue that Biden and his campaign feel they are very much right on, that they feel like they can really continue to build a coalition behind that. He went so far as this weekend district to kind of try out calling his public option Bidencare, that maybe he wants to create Bidencare.

But just remember this is an issue that we have seen this campaign really come out forcefully for. This is where we have seen him really start to drive that criticism of Elizabeth Warren and Medicare for all, calling it gymnastics in terms of her saying that she could pay for all this of without raising any taxes on the middle class.

And that kind of brings up a second point that we should all kind of look out for tonight as well. You mentioned it is a very tight race here in Iowa, a very, very tight top tier of those four candidates. Will we see Joe Biden criticize his fellow Democrats? Will we see him talk about Elizabeth Warren? Will we see him talk

about Pete Buttigieg? Is there room for an electability and an experience argument that Joe Biden might make?

Because, Brooke, remember here in Iowa, Buttigieg has been really soaring in the polls. So is that something that Biden will want to address tonight? But, more than anything, he wants to connect with people in this room and sway their support.

BALDWIN: Jessica, thank you.

Again, the live presidential town hall moderated by Erin Burnett starts tonight 9:00 Eastern here on CNN.

Joe Biden is also doing a bit of cleanup after a messy back and forth with Senator Elizabeth Warren. The former vice president lashed out at his rival for saying he was running in the wrong primary because he's not on board with Medicare for all.

In an online post, he wrote in part: "These kinds of attacks are a serious problem. They reflect an angry, unyielding viewpoint that has crept into our politics."

Warren responded swiftly in a fund-raising e-mail to her supporters.

This is what she said -- quote -- "Over and over, we are told that women are not allowed to be angry. It makes us unattractive to powerful men, who want us to be quiet. Well, I am angry, and I own it. I'm angry on behalf of everyone who is hurt by Trump's government, our rigged economy and business as usual."

And in an interview with Dana Bash, Biden said his comments had nothing to do with gender.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOSEPH BIDEN (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The strong women in my life are angry, and they get angry about -- I mean, that has nothing to do with it.

What I was responding to was her saying that if you disagree, because I disagree with her Medicare for all proposal and didn't think it was forthrightly stated exactly what it was going to do and how much it was going to cost, that I -- I'm running in the wrong primary.

[15:30:00]