Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Benjamin Netanyahu Requests Immunity; Buttigieg Raises $25 Million in Latest Quarter; Protesters Again Attack U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired January 01, 2020 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:01]

ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN HOST: And Boris Johnson is nothing, if not prominent.

Grace Hauck, thanks very much for joining.

GRACE HAUCK, "USA TODAY": Right. Thanks so much, Alex.

MARQUARDT: Well, before Beyonce, before Lady Gaga, Linda Ronstadt was the first female pop icon.

CNN Film's "Linda Ronstadt: The Sound of My Voice," that premieres tonight at 9:00 Eastern time on CNN.

Good afternoon, and happy new year. I'm Alex Marquardt, in for Brooke Baldwin. Welcome to a special holiday edition of CNN NEWSROOM.

Day one of 2020, and, already, there are two global crises that are escalating for President Donald Trump.

For the second day in a row, Iranian back protesters have attacked the U.S. Embassy in the Iraqi capital of Baghdad. This comes after more U.S. troops arrived to help secure the area. At one point, they fired tear gas and rubber bullets into the crowd.

A reporter from "The Washington Post" just obtained and posted this video of those demonstrators retreating just hours ago. And in that video, you can see them celebrating and chanting declarations of victory as they march through the streets of Baghdad.

So, while the violence has for the most part stopped for the time being, the situation is still extremely tense. And there's no better illustration of that than Secretary of State Mike Pompeo deciding to not travel to Ukraine on Friday, so that he can continue to monitor the situation in Iraq.

President Trump and Iran's leader are now in a war of words.

And then, completely separately, there's Kim Jong-un, the North Korean dictator sharing a new nuclear message for the new year, threatening to unveil what he calls strategic weapons.

Let's start with Baghdad. And senior international correspondent Arwa Damon is there.

Arwa, those protesters, as we just mentioned, they have retreated. In at least one clip, we saw them, heard them claiming victory. How does this episode over the past 48 hours change things on the ground?

ARWA DAMON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, it makes what is already a very complicated country even more so.

And we saw those protesters as they were departing a few hours ago. We were outside of the U.S. Embassy They were not just chanting victory. They were stomping on the images of President Trump. And they were saying that they were retreating because they had delivered their message to America.

And they were very quick to emphasize that, even though this protest had ended, their demand that America leave Iraq has not. They said that now they're going to be keeping a very close eye on Parliament, leaving it for the time being, at least, in the hands of the Iraqi government to figure out how to handle this situation, and, from their perspective, how to handle America leaving this country, claiming that they want to accomplish that now through political means.

But this whole situation over the last 24 to 36 hours has really cut to the very crux of a number of very complicated issues here in Iraq. The Iraqi security forces were down there when we got there a few hours ago.

The question is, where were they while these protesters were trying to storm the U.S. Embassy compound? And we saw the minister of interior. He said, well, it took us a while to rally the troops that we needed.

We spoke to one member of the Iraqi security forces who said, what were we supposed to do? If we were to try to fight them, then it would have potentially ended up in a bloodbath that we wouldn't be able to dial back.

And that, Alex, is because of who these protesters are. They are mostly either members of or supporters of what's known as the Popular Mobilization Force. This is a paramilitary force that is, by and large, made up of former Shia militias who had very close ties to Iran, who, incidentally, Alex, got most of their fighting experience fighting in Iraq's sectarian civil warfare and against U.S. forces during America's occupation here.

So they are also very politically active. They have members of Parliament and are very strong within the Iraqi government. So, you have this very complicated, multilayered issue within the country itself. And you have this proxy battle that is becoming even more intense between Washington and Tehran.

MARQUARDT: As you say, Arwa, making a complex situation even more complicated.

Arwa Damon in Baghdad, thanks very much. And joining me now to get into this a little bit more are Michael

Crowley, a White House correspondent for "The New York Times," and Dan Lamothe, the national security reporter for "The Washington Post."

Gentlemen, thank you both for joining me. Happy new year to you both.

MICHAEL CROWLEY, "THE NEW YORK TIMES": Thank you.

DAN LAMOTHE, "THE WASHINGTON POST": Same to you.

MARQUARDT: Dan, I want to start with you.

The Iranian-backed protesters from this militia group, they are Iraqis. They have retreated from the U.S. Embassy. And we have seen more U.S. forces coming in.

Now, those protesters declared victory, according to a reporter on the ground from "The Washington Post." What do you read into that? Do you think that situation now is this sort of tit for tat, that the U.S. airstrikes were carried out, and then this was the response?

[15:05:08]

Do you think that that is the end of things?

LAMOTHE: It's really hard to say when it -- when we might reach the end of things. But I think we're in a situation where every action could have a equal or unequal reaction going forward.

That can apply not only in Iraq, but at sea. We're going to have to worry about navy shipping. We're going to have to worry about other scenarios and other countries. It's pretty broad-based with a number of potential fronts.

MARQUARDT: Yes. And I just meant be the end of things in this chapter. Of course, this is a significant, ongoing crisis between the U.S. and Iran.

President Trump last night was asked if he foresees going to war with Iran. Listen to his answer.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I don't think that would be a good idea for Iran. It wouldn't last very long.

Do I want to? No. I want to have peace. I like peace. And Iran should want peace more than anybody. So I don't see that happening, no. I don't think Iran would want that to happen. It would go very quickly.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MARQUARDT: Michael, what do you make of that sort of more diplomatic message on camera to reporters vs. the threats that we have seen on his Twitter account? CROWLEY: Well, definitely, President Trump sends mixed messages when

it comes to Iran in particular and in other areas of foreign policy, where he -- obviously, his political style throughout is about projecting strength, hitting back harder than he gets hit by multiple factors.

He likes to project toughness and strength. But the reality is that it's very clear that, when it comes to foreign policy, and I think most especially in the Middle East, President Trump does not want conflict. He does not want to get further entangled in the different theaters that America has been kind of bogged down in since 2001.

And he's very clear and consistent about that. So he's trying to reconcile, on the one hand, his political style, which is very threatening and tough, with, really, I think his gut sense that it's been a huge mistake for past presidents to get into these conflicts.

You can't get out of them. They're unpopular. He's worried about his reelection in 2020. And I think I would say that the tone we heard on the red carpet at Mar-a-Lago last night with party music thumping in the background was probably his truer belief that I think -- and I think Iran understands this, which is why they have some leverage.

I don't think he wants a war with Iran or with anyone going into his reelection.

MARQUARDT: I think, guys, one of the things that the three of us are going to be watching very closely later this week is Secretary of State Pompeo was -- Secretary of State Mike Pompeo going to Ukraine. He was going to meet with Ukrainian leadership, bit of a show of solidarity after the fallout over the Ukraine scandal.

Now Secretary of State Pompeo is staying to monitor this situation with Iran in Iraq.

Dan, what do you make of the symbolism of Pompeo postponing this trip?

LAMOTHE: Symbolism-wise, I mean, it appears that they want to show that they're taking this seriously, show that they realize that this could flare up in a number of different ways.

He could, of course, be monitoring -- monitoring this virtually from anywhere with the technology they have. But I think, optics-wise, there's a clear demonstration of intent there.

MARQUARDT: Guys, I want to switch gears quickly.

But before I get to questions for you, I want to go to CNN's Will Ripley on the escalating tensions with North Korea

Now, Will has reported, of course, many times over the years from North Korea, and has this context about what we're hearing now from Kim Jong-un.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) WILL RIPLEY, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: When you think about

where we were, at this time last year, when there was so much optimism, so much hope about the prospect of diplomacy, and then the Hanoi summit fell apart, and, well, we know what's happened since.

There has been escalating rhetoric for months between the U.S. and North Korea. North Korea has been testing short-range weapons. So this new announcement doesn't really come as a big surprise.

We have known that North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has been likely preparing for a major shift in policy. And that's what North Korean state media announced. They said, because the United States hasn't moved on the issue that's most important to them, sanctions, that they no longer feel obligated to abide by the issue most important the United States, which is North Korea's self-imposed moratorium on nuclear and long-range missile tests.

In fact, North Korea is saying they're going to bolster their nuclear defense, basically reversing course entirely, because, remember, the whole reason why United States and North Korea decided to sit down, why President Trump and Kim Jong-un met in person, was to solve this problem of a rapidly nuclearizing North Korea.

[15:10:01]

And now we could be right back there yet again, Kim Jong-un talking about a new strategic weapon that the world will witness very soon, but, as usual, being very cryptic, not saying what that weapon is.

This is what North Korea often does. They're very deliberate in the way that they issue these messages. They kind of want the world to be guessing about what their next move is going to be. And, at the same time, they put the information out there, and then they wait to hear what the response will be from the United States, primarily, but also other stakeholders, including their ally and patron China, which, of course, doesn't want to see any sort of instability on the peninsula.

Kim Jong-un also gave us some insight into why he has decided to do this now.

I will read you a portion of his statement.

He said: "The United States' real intention is to seek its own political and diplomatic interests, while wasting time away under the signboard of dialogue and negotiations, and at the same time keep sanctions upon the DPRK, so as to weaken the DPRK."

Of course, North Koreans needs sanctions lifted. They have acknowledged that. But they said -- Kim Jong-un said it in his own words -- we're not going to sell out our dignity.

And that is the key kind of at the heart of all of this. The North Koreans feel that they have lost some of that dignity because of the embarrassment in Hanoi and the subsequent rhetorical escalations that have followed. And this might just be their first attempt, as we begin this new year, to get that back. Will Ripley, CNN, Hong Kong.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MARQUARDT: Our thanks to Will Ripley for that.

The president is still saying nice things about the North Korean dictator.

Michael, does the Trump administration still have hope that new North Korea will denuclearize?

CROWLEY: Well, I don't think that anyone in the Trump administration who is a foreign policy professional has that hope.

I'm not aware of anyone who does. I'm not aware of really anyone in the foreign policy community who has followed this issue for years who thinks that there's a significant chance of that happening without really dramatic American concessions that are just starting impossible to believe, and even then.

The question is whether President Trump, who thinks that, when it comes to foreign policy, basically everyone is wrong and he is right on a lot of these things, still has that vision in his head of that possibility.

Or has he been pursuing something? And I think this would make a little more -- kind of be a little more -- intuitively make sense. Is he pursuing some kind of a deal where there's a lot of fanfare, Kim makes some kind of commitment, maybe makes some concessions, heads down the road to denuclearization; President Trump understands we're not going to get to zero, but it's a big political winner for him, again, I don't mean to be too cynical about the politics, but going into a reelection campaign?

And I think even that prospect right now is looking pretty dim. And Kim Jong-un is frustrated. He understands he has leverage. One reason his nuclear missile program has advanced to this state is because North Korea has a lot of strategic leverage. It's very difficult to mount, for instance, a preemptive attack on North Korea's nuclear and missile programs.

The United States and other countries have not wanted to do that. It gets harder all the time. And I think Kim is reasserting himself now. And it's a really tough position for President Trump to be in, and kind of remains to be seen how he's going to explain away the fact that he invested political capital in this, praised this really horrible, brutal dictator, and now seems to be getting nothing out of it.

MARQUARDT: Yes, lots of political capital. And, no doubt, both these issues, North Korea and Iran, will feature prominently, as you say, in the 2020 campaign.

Guys, we have got to leave it there. Michael Crowley, Dan Lamothe, thanks very much. LAMOTHE: OK.

CROWLEY: Thank you.

MARQUARDT: Now, next: Mayor Pete Buttigieg is the first 2020 Democrat to release his fourth-quarter fund-raising results, and he hauled in nearly $25 million.

Plus, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts is warning that Americans may be taking democracy for granted. We will be reading between the lines of his annual report.

And then, later, New York police beefing up security ahead of a major Jewish celebration, in the wake of a number of anti-Semitic attacks. We will have details on how the victims of a recent stabbing at a rabbi's home are doing today.

All that coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:19:18]

MARQUARDT: Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg has just given up one of his titles. He's officially no longer the mayor of South Bend, Indiana.

His successor took over today. But he's gained something else, and that is a ton of money for his 2020 campaign. Buttigieg is the first releases fourth-quarter fund-raising haul for 2019, which ended, of course, at the end of the year.

This is a month before the Iowa caucuses. And Buttigieg raised nearly $25 million over those last three months. And that's a huge jump from the last quarter. In total, he's pulled in more than $76 million for all of 2019.

We're going to dive into this with CNN political analyst Jackie Kucinich. She's the Washington bureau chief for chief for The Daily Beast.

[15:20:01]

Jackie, thanks so much for joining me on this New Year's Day. Happy New Year's to you.

JACKIE KUCINICH, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Happy new year.

MARQUARDT: Now, the polls tell us that Democratic voters seem to be responding to former Mayor Pete's message.

What do you think the other campaigns, the other front-runners, Biden, Sanders, Warren, what should they make of this huge fund-raising quarter that he just had?

KUCINICH: Well, particularly -- so let's look back at that graphic, that first quarter, where he raised something like $7.9 million, and now he is steadily raising -- outraising some of the marquee names of this race.

I think you can see -- you can see how much they care is how much they're they talk about him and that they're threatened by him, particularly someone like Elizabeth Warren, who's been throwing elbows at Mayor Pete for several months.

But he built this fund-raising apparatus from nothing. He started out this race as someone who had to have T-shirts with his name spelled out phonetically, and had no national fund-raising base, no national name recognition.

And it really is -- say what you will about the other candidates and any of his policies. What he's done here from nothing is impressive.

MARQUARDT: And, as you mentioned, Senator Warren has been one of the major critics of the way that Mayor Pete has been raising his money.

She, of course, took a jab at him in the last debate, calling -- talking about his wine cave fund-raiser. And then she said this in a speech in Boston yesterday. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: One year into this campaign, and you have never found me behind closed doors with corporate executives, or spending hours on the phone sucking up to donors to fund my campaign.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MARQUARDT: Now, in addition to Buttigieg, Joe Biden has also gone to large donors to raise money.

KUCINICH: Right.

MARQUARDT: Of course, Senators Warren and Sanders have not.

How much, broadly speaking, do Democratic Party voters care about where the money comes from?

KUCINICH: So, the progressive base of the Democratic Party has been railing against dark money, money where they don't have to -- these groups that don't have to disclose donors -- for years.

So, to them, this is very important. But it matters to the campaigns. I mean, Elizabeth Warren did force former Mayor Pete Buttigieg -- that's going to take a little bit to get used to -- to disclose his bundlers and some of the things that perhaps he wasn't going to make public because of that criticism.

Now, it should be mentioned that Elizabeth Warren did transfer a sizable chunk of money from her Senate campaign fund, where she did do fund-raisers and some of the things that she criticizes now. That said, this is that -- while it's been called -- I think Mayor Pete Buttigieg called it a purity test. For some of those progressive voters that they are competing for right now, particularly Buttigieg and Warren, this does matter.

MARQUARDT: And in those millions dollars, Buttigieg had over 700,000 individual donations.

The Sanders campaign hasn't put out their fund-raising total yet, but they did say today that they had gotten over five million individual donations.

KUCINICH: Right.

MARQUARDT: So, if we just have that one figure, what can that tell us about the strength of the Bernie Sanders campaign?

KUCINICH: Bernie Sanders' campaign has loyalty, which a lot of these candidates in the Democratic primary can't say.

His last campaign, a lot of those people stuck with him. And Bernie Sanders is here to stay as long as he wants to. Whether or not he wins the nomination, he's going to have the financial power and the popularity among the people that love him best to sustain him throughout a lot of this contest.

And that's got Democrats on the more establishment side pretty nervous, because they don't want to have to see a slugfest, like they saw in 2016.

MARQUARDT: All right, well, for so many of us, including the two of us, I imagine 2020 is synonymous with only one thing, and that is this election.

KUCINICH: Indeed.

MARQUARDT: And, 2020, here we are.

KUCINICH: Here we are.

MARQUARDT: Jackie Kucinich, thanks very much.

KUCINICH: Thanks, Alex.

MARQUARDT: Now, just a short time before he is set to preside over President Trump's impeachment trial, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, is sending a message about the dangers of social media and the need for Americans to learn more about how their government works.

That's coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:29:03]

MARQUARDT: In the just last few hours, Israel's prime minister has requested immunity in three corruption cases against him.

Benjamin Netanyahu is facing indictment on charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust. And this comes as the country faces a third round of elections in March.

CNN's Oren Liebermann is live with us in Jerusalem.

Oren, what do the elections have to do with the timing of this move by the prime minister?

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had only four hours to go to submit his request for parliamentary immunity, which is a right that every parliamentarian has had since the law was made the change to that back in 2005, although it's a request that's never been granted under Israeli law.

What do the elections have to do with this? Well, in Israel at this stage, everything is a political consideration. And this was too, Netanyahu weighing whether this would damage him in March's elections or simply bring his base closer to him.

We will, of course, take a very close look at election polls to see what they reflect in terms of how the public has reacted to Netanyahu's request.

Netanyahu said he's making this request so he can carry out the will of the people. And that is how he played this when he made his statement a short time ago.

[15:30:00]