Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Rudy Giuliani Linked to Juan Guaido by Lev Parnas; Interview with Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA); Previewing Sunday's Academy Awards. Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired February 07, 2020 - 10:30   ET

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

[10:30:00]

JOHN HARWOOD, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: -- bulletproof at this moment is that strong jobs report today. The economy is in very solid shape for a president running for re-election. That will certainly boost the confidence of the president to do whatever he wants at this point.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR, NEWSROOM: John Harwood at the White House, thanks very much.

Now, this, this morning: Exclusive reporting from CNN's Vicky Ward. Even with the end of the impeachment trial, former Rudy Giuliani associate Lev Parnas is not done with his efforts to show that he has the information to interest investigators.

CNN has obtained these exclusive photos of a trip Giuliani took to Madrid, Spain as he prepared to help a wealthy Venezuelan seeking to avoid indictment here in the U.S. The photos and what Lev Parnas and other sources tell CNN provide a peek into relationships Giuliani has not been willing to discuss about legal work he undertakes for clients whose interests could intersect with the policies -- of course his most prominent client -- President Trump.

The images and what Parnas knows are already in the hands of federal investigators in New York, where Parnas has been indicted and Giuliani is now also under investigation. Vicky Ward joins us now.

So, Vicky, put this into context for us. Who was with Giuliani in Madrid last summer? And what's the significance of this in the broader investigation?

VICKY WARD, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Right, Jim. So obviously, Lev Parnas, who has talked exclusively to CNN about this trip, wealthy Venezuelan client who was their host at his castle outside of Madrid, a man named Alejandro Betancourt Lopez, who is not named but is potentially facing federal charges here.

And the father of the interim opposition leader in Venezuela, Juan Guaido, a man of great political importance to President Trump. We saw him, on Tuesday, in the gallery at the State of the Union address, Jim. What Lev Parnas has told us about this trip is that Giuliani

interviewed and videoed both Juan Guaido's father and his client, Betancourt Lopez. And that in those videos, Betancourt Lopez claimed to have helped the Guaido regime financially, which would be, obviously, popular to the president --

SCIUTTO: Right.

WARD: -- and that these videos were intended to be seen by the Justice Department and Giuliani's good friend William Barr, the attorney general, and by Donald Trump. That is Lev Parnas' assertion.

Now, Rudy Giuliani has told CNN that he cannot -- he won't say yes or no as to whether or not these videos were made and whether they exist, but he has called Lev Parnas a proven liar. He also said he cannot discuss this trip because he said, "It's a matter of national security."

TEXT: "Your story about the interview[s] is given to you by not just an unreliable source, but a proven liar... I can't discuss any tape recordings or confirm or deny them."

WARD: We've not had a response from either Wilmer Guaido, Juan Guaido's father, or from Betancourt Lopez' lawyers.

SCIUTTO: Parnas, he described similar scenarios with the Ukrainian oligarch. I just want to note what he told Anderson Cooper a few weeks ago. Have a listen, I want to get your response.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LEV PARNAS, INDICTED ASSOCIATE OF RUDY GIULIANI: That was the -- well, the reason why he even hired Victoria and Joe was because of their relationship with Attorney General Bill Barr and because -- like, they said and everybody said nobody could get a meeting that quickly with the attorney general.

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: You're saying that the attorneys -- Victoria Toensing and Joe diGenova -- basically would get -- would use their access -- the offer at least, to Firtash, according to you, is, they use their access to Bill Barr to get help on the charges against him; he gives information to Giuliani about the Bidens.

PARNAS: It wasn't directly to Giuliani, it was to the team. But that's exactly what happened.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: So, Vicky, as you look at this, I mean, is that the central allegation of both these cases here?

WARD: Yes.

SCIUTTO: Is using personal -- letting personal interests get above national interests? WARD: Yes. I mean, Lev Parnas tells CNN that they're mirror images of each other. That in both cases, the whole point for Bill -- for Alejandro Betancourt Lopez and for Firtash, it was the same idea by Giuliani, it was to help Trump politically and then in exchange, get access to Bill Barr.

SCIUTTO: Understood, good reporting. Vicky Ward, thanks very much.

WARD: Thank you.

[10:34:56]

SCIUTTO: Well, despite President Trump's acquittal in the Senate, House Democrats could still call his former national security advisor, John Bolton, to testify. Is it possible? Will it happen? Is it a good move for the party? We'll discuss, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: President Donald Trump, very quickly shifting his focus to re-election after emerging from impeachment, in his view, politically strengthened. This morning, the president picked up another win, new reporting showing that the U.S. added some 225,000 new jobs in the first month of 2020, that exceeding expectations.

[10:40:00]

On Thursday, President Trump took what you might call a victory lap at the White House, one day after the Senate acquitted him -- that's him holding up the newspaper headlines -- and he wasted no time there, targeting those -- very personally, those who weren't in his corner.

Joining me now, Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell of California. He serves on the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees. So you were involved in this from the very beginning, the investigation. Of course, you voted to impeach the president on both articles. I should mention you have a book there, "Endgame," on the whole process coming out in two months' time. We'll get more to that.

But was this a loss for the Democrats?

REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D-CA): No. A loss would have been doing nothing. And I thought through, you know, we know the Senate outcome's probably going to be rigged. But if we do nothing, you certainly don't use the check that you have. Two, future presidents will look at this as the standard is lower.

But what we learned in the process -- and this kind of clicked for me when Yovanovitch and Dr. Hill were testifying -- when you check him, you actually stop the corruption. So even if he's not removed from office, once we started the investigation, Ukraine got the aid.

SCIUTTO: Right.

SWALWELL: I'm convinced if we had not started the investigation, they would still not have the aid today and there'd be a bogus investigation into Biden.

SCIUTTO: How about now, though? I mean, we've noted a number of times, the day after Robert Mueller testified, last July -- and in the view of some, didn't deliver any sort of punch against the president -- that was the day of the Ukraine call. And President Trump looked emboldened, I think, to say the least, at the White House.

Do you believe he took this or will take this as license that I could do whatever I want to get re-elected?

SWALWELL: Yes, yes. Yesterday was Zelensky Day, the day after, you know, kind of being acquitted in his mind. Because, you know, yesterday was the day after the Senate acquittal; Zelensky call was the day after the Mueller --

SCIUTTO: Yes.

SWALWELL: -- essentially I can't prosecute you.

If what Bolton has kind of intimated in the leaks that have come out, that there are other shady dealings with other foreign leaders, I think we have a responsibility to understand if the president is trying to work with others to cheat this upcoming election. And we're going to do that.

SCIUTTO: OK. One way that House Democrats say they're going to keep the president under the microscope here is by subpoenaing John Bolton, the president's former national security advisor. Of course, senators rejected that during the Senate trial. Do you support that and do you think it's a good idea for Democrats at this stage?

SWALWELL: Not to go back and relitigate Ukraine; if he has new information, I think we should. And, you know, first and foremost, you know, Chairman Schiff sought, you know, an affidavit from him and he has backed off of that.

I think he needs to get serious and ask himself, does he want to assist the country as we're, you know, seeing a president ask foreign leaders for help? Or does he, you know, just want to wait for, you know, his book to come out and tell us? Then I think that might be too late.

SCIUTTO: At this point, do you think by remaining silent to this point -- except for a book, which hasn't come out yet, though some leaks from it -- that he has shirked his responsibility?

SWALWELL: Yes. I do think that there is no executive privilege here. The courts are -- have settled on what it means, and if he were to, you know, go to a microphone -- to use the language of Trump -- that would have been, you know, quite helpful. It would have been helpful during the trial, and it'd still be helpful today if there are other leaders that, you know, the president has talked to and has asked for help.

SCIUTTO: Ambassador Bolton, if you're listening, microphone is open here. Any day. Let's talk about 2020 because the attention turning very much to that

race there. The president had good economic numbers again today, and that's been a consistent story -- economic growth -- and I know it began during the Obama administration, but he's been president for nearly four years now. What's the Democrats' message in response?

SWALWELL: Addition versus subtraction. When it comes to health care, this president has taken away health care. Our nominee is going to seek to expand health care. I think we should stay laser-focused on that. I've not endorsed a candidate yet. When I do, that's going to be my suggestion.

Because that's what Speaker Pelosi focused on during the midterms, was don't fall for the, you know, caravan trap that he tried to, you know, get us to go down. Don't fall for the -- you know, voting for the Democrats means it leads to impeachment. We focused on health care, health care, health care and it won. I think that's no different this November.

SCIUTTO: Look at the frontrunning candidates right now, though. And, again, it's early so I don't want to say that these are going to be the final frontrunners. But you've got Bernie Sanders, a self- described Democratic socialist who's proposing national health care, the end of private insurance.

You've got Pete Buttigieg, who has energized a lot of folks on the ground in a state like Iowa and New Hampshire but, you know, does not have a long political resume, to say the least. And you have Joe Biden, with real challenges right now, underperforming. Do Democrats have the goods to unseat Donald Trump based on that field, as you see it?

SWALWELL: Yes. And also, you know, Senator Warren and Mike Bloomberg. And, you know, Mike Bloomberg managed, you know, a city that is larger than 39 states, a large economy. No one can say that Bloomberg would crash the economy if he was elected.

I think we still have a number of, you know, solid candidates in those five, and even some of the others. So it's early, but addition versus subtraction, that's the message.

SCIUTTO: Let me ask you, if you're comfortable with this -- because the way that Michael Bloomberg, in addition to his resume, that he's pushed himself into this race is, he's been writing checks, $300 million. I mean, it's almost 10 times as much as Bernie Sanders has raised and spent. Tom Steyer, of course, spending in those terms. Is that the path to a presidential candidate for Democrats in 2020?]

[10:45:13]

SWALWELL: Well, I think about who he's written the checks to, before running for president. And I think about all the town halls I've done and the Moms Demand Action volunteers who are there.

And he funded, you know, a lot of those efforts and helped flip state legislatures so that we were able to beat, you know, 19 NRA-endorsed members of Congress, to take the majority and pass background checks. That Virginia now is able to pass, you know, gun safety laws in their states. And I think, you know, he is known for that. And that is being rewarded as his numbers start to go up.

But it's still early but, you know, I think he would be a viable candidate to beat Donald Trump, and that's why Trump is, you know, responding the way he is.

SCIUTTO: Could you see yourself supporting a former Republican as the Democratic nominee?

SWALWELL: I'm the son of two Republicans, and my wife grew up in Pence country in Indiana, so yes.

SCIUTTO: All right, fair enough. Eric Swalwell, congressman --

SWALWELL; Yes, of course. Thanks, Jim (ph).

SCIUTTO: -- thanks very much for joining us this morning.

For the first time, we are hearing from all seven impeachment managers. They sat down with my colleague Anderson Cooper and the lead manager, Adam Schiff, also California, explains how he tried to get John Bolton to give the Democrats information they could use. This, after senators voted against hearing from witnesses.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA), LEAD IMPEACHMENT MANAGER: We reached out to John Bolton through his counsel after the senators voted down his testimony, to see whether he would be willing to submit an affidavit under oath that would still be valuable during the trial.

COOPER: Even if he wasn't coming to testify --

SCHIFF: Even if he wasn't going to come to testify.

COOPER: -- a sworn affidavit?

SCHIFF: A sworn affidavit, and he refused. Now, he will have to explain, at some point, why he is willing to put this in a book but not in an affidavit under oath --

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: He's making paid speeches as well, in which he drops sort of comments as well.

SCHIFF: Yes. You know, it is fairly inexplicable. But, you know, frankly it's more inexplicable that when he was willing to come forward before the Senate, that the senators did not want to hear what he had to say.

And for those senators -- and there have been a few -- to say, we didn't need to hear from John Bolton because basically the House proved the president guilty, even without him, and we should let the voters decide? They could not explain why they don't want the voters to know the full facts.

COOPER: Did Bolton's attorneys explain to you why he would not even submit an affidavit?

SCHIFF: Not that I'm aware of, no. Nor why he would distinguish between testimony in the House versus the Senate.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTO: Be sure to watch tonight as Anderson Cooper sits down with those seven House impeachment managers to talk about what's next after Trump's acquittal. It all begins, 8:00 Eastern time, only on CNN. And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:52:20]

SCIUTTO: The 92nd Academy Awards are this Sunday, and Hollywood is bracing for a cliffhanger in the race for Best Picture. "Joker" leads with 11 nominations. But, really, only Joaquin Phoenix considered a lock for Best Actor there. "1917" and "Parasite," they both have come on strong, this awards season -- I've seen both of them, they're pretty darn good.

CNN's Stephanie Elam is live from the red carpet in Hollywood. So, Stephanie, should we look for any upsets this season?

STEPHANIE ELAM, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You know, Jim, there's always a chance. Last year, we thought for sure Glenn Close was going to win for "The Wife," but Olivia Colman took it for "The Favourite." So it could happen. We think we know who's going to win in the acting categories. But as for Best Picture, there are some questions.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And the winner is --

GLENN CLOSE, ACTRESS: And the Oscar goes to --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Come get your bright, shiny thing so I can go home to bed.

ELAM (voice-over): The Oscars showdown is set --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: "Parasite."

ELAM (voice-over): All signs point to a Best Picture face-off between "Parasite" and "1917." Why these two?

REESE WITHERSPOON, ACTRESS: "1917."

ELAM (voice-over): "1917" won the Producer's Guild Award, which has predicted 21 of the last 30 Oscar winners. And the film's unique style -- as if shot in one long take -- has impressed Hollywood. SAM MENDES, DIRECTOR, "1917": We didn't have that nice, relaxed

period where you have a -- you sit around with a cup of coffee and discuss whether you want to keep the scene in or put it out or take a line in -- everything that we shot was in the movie.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is it OK with you?

ELAM (voice-over): "Parasite" has momentum, after the Screen Actors Guild made it the first foreign film to win a SAG award for Best Ensemble. It could do the same at the Oscars, where actors make up the largest voting bloc.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It would be blurring the lines between East and West, and providing hope that everyone on this earth can coexist. And that is why we must win Best Picture.

ELAM (voice-over): But Oscar can surprise, thanks in part to a Best Picture voting method that's similar to a caucus. Voters rank nominees from one to nine. Films with few number-one votes are disqualified, and those ballots instead count for the number-two choice until one film has over 50 percent of all ballots.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We didn't expect it, honestly --

ELAM (voice-over): Some think "Green Book" benefited from that weighted ballot last year.

At the Oscars, there's always a chance for a plot twist.

UNNIDENTIFIED MALE: In this town, it (ph) can all change (INAUDIBLE).

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ELAM: And we are out here, live on the red carpet. You can see the preparations are under way.

And if you're one of those people who tries to watch all the Best Picture nominees before the awards show, you feel like you had less time this year? You did. The Academy Awards are actually two weeks earlier, so that's interesting to know, whether or not people actually had a chance to watch everything before they cast their ballot. And that, Jim, could lead to one of those upsets.

SCIUTTO: All right. That voting process confused the heck out of me. I mean, that makes Iowa seem like a walk in the park. Has it always been that way?

[10:55:06]

ELAM: Yes, that's the way it's been. And so that is why people are saying that you could have this upset, if something is just moving around, to find out who's going to get that 50 percent.

So that is why someone is saying, maybe, you know, Quentin Tarantino's movie might come in there and win and actually beat out -- or "Irishman" could come in and split that vote. But, yes, that's why we have to watch and see what happens.

SCIUTTO: All right, sounds like a fun night. Stephanie Elam, you're right there. Enjoy it.

ELAM: Yes.

SCIUTTO: Of course, other story we've been following -- serious one -- new fears of coronavirus here in the U.S. A family aboard a cruise ship, docked right now in New Jersey, they're being tested for the disease. We're going to be live with the latest.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:00:00]