Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Interview with Richard Haass; Interview with Terry Shumaker; Manhattan District Attorney's Office to Reopen Malcolm X Case. Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired February 11, 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] POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR, NEWSROOM: -- here and a lot more is Ambassador Richard Haass, of course now president of the Council on Foreign Relations, he's also a former State Department official under former President George W. Bush.

Good to have you, sir.

RICHARD HAASS, PRESIDENT, COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Good morning.

HARLOW: I'm not going to ask you to get into the nitty-gritty of what Bill Barr is going to do or what Jerry Nadler's going to say, but I do want to talk big-picture about a Justice Department so linked to the president and how emboldened the president feels post-acquittal, with the highest approval rating he has enjoyed of his presidency.

HAASS: There's two angles here. One is, there's already been a breakdown in the normal relations between the executive branch and Congress.

So one can imagine, if the president were to be re-elected, refusals to testify and so forth. The -- a real breakdown in the constitutional assumption of working together. And then what you suggest as well, is the use of executive power for what you might call unintended or political purposes.

And, you know, any president has enormous power, enormous capacity whether it's the IRS, the Justice Department, who you decide to anti- trust against and so forth. So I think there's potentially a real concern about the degree to which political factors enter into what ought not to be politicized.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR, NEWSROOM: Yes. Squeezing enemies with political power of the presidency, we're seeing it and you can imagine more of it.

I want to ask you this, because you look at the Trump budget now, just revealed yesterday, and taking real aim at foreign aid. And I just wonder, for folks at home -- because foreign aid seems like this kind of ethereal thing and yes, why do we give all this money -- but you served as senior diplomat in the Bush administration at the height of the Iraq War here. Tell us where and how the aid that's being cut now makes a difference.

HAASS: That's a great question. First of all, it's only 1 percent of the entire federal budget --

SCIUTTO: Right.

HAASS: -- so we need to keep some perspective here. And of that 1 percent, a big chunk of that goes to countries like Israel and Egypt. It's security aid, it's political aid for allies. A much smaller percentage, probably half a penny on the dollar, goes to what we would call development assistance.

But those kinds of things, they sound soft and squishy but think about it, they're not. They promote stability, they promote democracy, they help us deal with what could be, say, outbreaks of infectious disease.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

HAASS: So these are things we do for others. But there's enlightened self-interest in it. So this is not philanthropy, this is actually a hard-headed tool of national security and it's not surprising that virtually every former secretary of defense and every former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff says, hey, do this, continue it because if you don't, you're then going to come to rely much more on the men and women in uniform, and we don't want that.

SCIUTTO: Think of Bush and PEPFAR, right? I mean, saved millions of lives --

HARLOW: Great point.

SCIUTTO: -- when it comes to AIDS/HIV.

HARLOW: And sort of --

HAASS: Or --

HARLOW: Go ahead, go ahead, Ambassador.

HAASS: No, the coronavirus right now. What you want to make sure is, around the world, you have health care systems that have some resilience. You don't want countries to get overwhelmed --

HARLOW: Right.

HAASS: -- because if they get overwhelmed, we will lose export markets, tourism will break down and these diseases, one way or another, what we've learned is nothing stays local for long. What began in Wuhan, China doesn't stay in Wuhan, China.

HARLOW: And exactly to your point is this, you know, proposed 50 percent reduction in the budget for WHO, for the World Health Organization. They are saying, let's slash that by $65 million, half of what it is now in Fiscal 2020.

But they're including a proposed $115 million for what they're calling global health security, Steve Biegun defending that yesterday. What do Americans need to know at home, if that actually were to become a reality? HAASS: Again, this just seems to me penny-wise and pound-foolish. I've got two major problems with this budget on top of the general assumptions, which I think are awfully optimistic about the economy, interest rates and the rest, as our debt continues to pile up.

One is what we've been talking about. We're not providing capacity around the rest of the world, and we're vulnerable to what happens there.

The other is, the massive cuts in research and development. Places like the Center for Disease Control, the National Institutes of Health, the Energy Department. This weakens our ability to be safe and strong here at home, it weakens our ability to compete in the global economy.

SCIUTTO: You --

HAASS: So, again, this seems really short-sighted to me.

SCIUTTO: You wrote a piece for the Council just on the broader effects of coronavirus, talking about, you know, economic danger to China. You say, you know, eliminate much if not all of China's projected growth for the first quarter. And then that has, of course, global consequences, but also politically for China, huge test for Chinese leadership here. Just in short form, tell us the significance.

HAASS: Yes, it's in "The Washington Post." What it is -- not just economically but for this leadership, I think they are now really under pressure there in the microscope, in terms of their ability to deliver.

And there's a real tension in China. If you don't provide information, how are people to know what to do not to become sick, or what to do if they become sick? This government in China is afraid to allow its people to have access to information.

[10:35:09]

SCIUTTO: Yes. And they shut down and sadly, he passed away from the virus. They shut down the doctor who first sounded the alarm. Ambassador Richard Haass, always a pleasure to have you on.

HAASS: Thank you.

HARLOW: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: Well, Bill Clinton got a huge boost from New Hampshire, you might remember, during his first presidential bid in 1992, The Comeback Kid. Will anyone in the 2020 Democratic field do the same today?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:40:06]

SCIUTTO: Today could prove to be a make-or-break moment for several presidential hopefuls. In 1992, then-Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton was at the lowest point of his presidential campaign, dealing with a drubbing in Iowa and numerous controversies.

Then, New Hampshire happened.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL CLINTON (D), THEN-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I think we know enough to say with some certainty that New Hampshire tonight has made Bill Clinton The Comeback Kid.

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Joining us now, the former co-chair of President Clinton's New Hampshire campaign's Terry Shumaker. He was also in leadership for Hillary Clinton's New Hampshire campaign as well, supporter this time around of former Vice President Joe Biden.

Terry, good to have you on the program this morning. Thanks very much.

TERRY SHUMAKER, CO-CHAIRED BILL CLINTON'S NEW HAMPSHIRE CAMPAIGNS: Good morning, Jim and happy first-in-the-nation primary day.

SCIUTTO: There you go. Well, as you know, Bill Clinton likely would not have been the nominee in '92 without that strong finish -- against the odds, really -- in the New Hampshire primary.

Joe Biden, who you support this time around, the polls do not indicate for him a strong finish here, possibly a very disappointing one after Iowa. What does Biden need today and after today, to keep the campaign going?

SHUMAKER: Let me -- well, let me point out, first of all, that the polls are not always right here.

SCIUTTO: True.

SHUMAKER: In fact, in '92, on Sunday night, Bill Clinton was in fifth place in the polls that I saw, and in 2008, Hillary Clinton was 10 points behind, the night before the primary, and actually won by three points. So that's why we actually hold the elections and --

SCIUTTO: No question, that's why you play the games.

SHUMAKER: -- and have the first secret ballot. That's right, first secret ballot choice of voters. And, yes, the polls are showing that Vice President Biden probably won't win here, and that's not too surprising. Four years ago, Senator Sanders, who lives next door, won by 22 points. We have two candidates from Massachusetts.

And so I'm hopeful that he will have a very strong finish, better than the polls, and be ready to move on to the next -- to the next states.

SCIUTTO: Fair point. And, listen, let the voters decide today before we get ahead. But let's be fair here, it was a disappointing result in Iowa. Even Biden himself is managing expectations, as you are, on New Hampshire. And it's hard, perhaps impossible, to find someone who's gone on to win the nomination with poor performances in those two early states.

So what is the message, going forward, from Biden, particularly as he goes to a state such a South Carolina where he does have strength, particularly among African-American voters there?

SHUMAKER: Well, Jim, I was on that commission, the Democratic Commission in 2005, when the two other states were added to the first four, of South Carolina and Nevada. And I think we really have to think about the early states now as the first four in the aggregate, and look at how the field does.

I think there may be four or may be five candidates that move on from New Hampshire, depending on their own personal preference. And Nevada and South Carolina will have a big say about who gets to go on from there. So I don't think -- I don't think the old way of thinking, that there are only two tickets out of New Hampshire, really is valid any more.

SCIUTTO: Let's talk about the split within the party. Of course, Joe Biden has aligned himself as a moderate. You know, a lot of his record supports that but you have a big pull (ph) to progressive candidates here.

I just wonder, given that so many Democratic voters are focused on the candidate that they see as -- with the best chance to beat Donald Trump, how is that resolved in the coming months and weeks? Because the divide seems to be getting wider, not closer together because, heck, you know, candidates are fighting for their lives now.

SHUMAKER: Well, that split's been here for a long, long time. Jimmy Carter won the New Hampshire primary because there were numerous liberal or progressive candidates in that primary, and he was really the only moderate or conservative Democrat running. Bill Clinton had the same situation in '92

And there are really two primaries going on right now, the progressive primary between Bernie and Elizabeth Warren; and then there are more candidates in the moderate lane with Biden, Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg, Mayor Pete.

So the number of candidates in your lane or your band of the spectrum really matters in the New Hampshire primary because you're -- the votes are getting divided up between more people.

SCIUTTO: One thing that is new this cycle is just money. I mean, money's always been there, but the amount of money, the limits are off. Michael Bloomberg hasn't even contested these first two primaries here; he's spent a third of a billion dollars. And we're in February here.

[10:45:01] What potential does that have to upend the process and perhaps inject a new contender into this race later in the season, what does that -- what does that do? Do we head towards a contested convention?

SHUMAKER: Well, this is something we've never seen before, somebody skipping the first two or four states and -- with the kind of money that Mayor Bloomberg has. I'm not sure the country wants to see two New York billionaires running against each other for the presidency of the United States.

And, frankly, I think that's why states like New Hampshire and the other early states are very important to American democracy. Because New Hampshire, you don't have to be a billionaire to run for president. And in fact, we have a billionaire running in the New Hampshire primary, and he's probably not going to do all that well.

So the New Hampshire primary's not for sale, and that's one of the reasons why I hope we keep it. We've had it for a hundred years, we do it well, we've never had issues like Iowa had this time. And I think it's extremely important to our democracy. But it will be very interesting to see how Mayor Bloomberg plays with all those ads.

SCIUTTO: Yes. He's got a lot more where that came from.

Final question, if I can. Just in short form, what is the Democrats' message to beat Donald Trump? Beyond "We're not Donald Trump." What is the message, what's the economic message? Give us the bumper sticker, give us the banner here. Because you have a lot of conflicting messages coming out of the primaries.

SHUMAKER: Well, I think Joe Biden's saying it well on the trail. Restore decency and integrity to the White House, rebuild our alliances with our friends and allies around the world, keep NATO strong and have the economy benefit the middle class, not just the very wealthy.

SCIUTTO: Right. We'll see how that's tested out in the coming days and weeks. Terry Shumaker, pleasure having you on the broadcast.

SHUMAKER: Thank you, Jim.

HARLOW: Yes. Really interesting voice.

All right. So there are new questions this morning about the assassination of Malcolm X: why the Manhattan District Attorney's Office is taking another look at this case.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:51:39]

SCIUTTO: The assassination of Malcolm X is now being reinvestigated, more than five decades after his death.

HARLOW: That's right. He was murdered -- you'll remember -- in New York City, February 21st, 1965. A year later, three men were convicted and sentenced to life in prison.

There is, though, this new Netflix docuseries called, "Who Killed Malcolm X?" And it's raising a number of questions about the case. Here is a clip.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Malcolm's death never sat right with me.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The investigation wasn't fair (ph)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Asking who's guilty is a dangerous question to ask.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: Our Alexandra Field is here with us. I mean, wow, the fact that this sparked the D.A.'s office to reopen this thing?

ALEXANDRA FIELD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes. This isn't history yet, which is just an amazing thing to say, more than five decades after the assassination of Malcolm X. But this is the power of these docuseries, to generate this kind of interest and perhaps even this kind of pressure, that they can really effect change.

That might be exactly what we're seeing right now. The D.A.'s office here in Manhattan says they are going to conduct a preliminary review, see if that leads to further investigation.

But if we step back and look at what happened, we know that three men, of course, were arrested, charged, convicted at the time. They were sentenced to life in prison, later paroled.

Of the three of them, just one -- Mujahid Abdul Halim -- confessed to playing a part in the assassination. He always maintained that the other two men who were charged alongside him were innocent. Those were Muhammad Abdul Aziz and Khalil Islam, who also maintained their innocence. Now, Islam died back in 2009; Aziz is 81 years old, he is still fighting to clear his name.

The Innocence Project, which of course works to set free those who are wrongfully convicted say there has never been any physical evidence that tied him to the crime. They say that he had an alibi.

They've now put out this statement, saying, "Given the historical importance of this case and the fact that our client is 81 years old, we are especially encouraged that Mr. Vance has assigned two highly respected prosecutors, Peter Casolaro and Charles King, to work on this reinvestigation."

Those names are important, of course, because Peter Casolaro -- you might recognize the name -- he was the prosecutor who led the reinvestigation into the Central Park Five. Ultimately, that led to those men's freedom. So this --

HARLOW: Yes. FIELD: Yes. (INAUDIBLE).

(CROSSTALK)

SCIUTTO: And the Innocence Project has a remarkable record, getting people freed who were wrongly convicted. I mean, is there any theory -- right? -- as to who then, if it's not those who were convicted of killing him?

FIELD: Right. What's so remarkable about this is, sometimes we watch these docuseries and you learn things that perhaps you never knew. This isn't entirely the case here because you actually had Halim saying, back in the '70s, that there were four other men who acted alongside him; they weren't the men who were charged and convicted. So these were red flags that he raised decades ago.

HARLOW: Back then.

FIELD: They're just now being really taken up again and looked are more closely, documentary delving into all of that. I know I'll be watching.

SCIUTTO: Thank you.

HARLOW: (INAUDIBLE).

Alex, thanks so much.

The Pentagon is adding to the official number of troops suffering brain injuries after Iran's strike on that Iraqi military base last month. Military officials now say 109 service members have been treated for mild traumatic brain injury.

SCIUTTO: You'll remember, the Pentagon and President Donald Trump initially said there were no casualties following the missile attack on Al-Asad Air Base -- casualties means both those killed or wounded. Then, they said 45 had reported injuries. Now, that number has nearly doubled in a matter of weeks.

[10:55:06]

The remains of two soldiers killed Saturday in Afghanistan are now back in the U.S. Both President Trump and Vice President Pence were at Dover Air Force Base when, as you're seeing there, with those flags draping the coffin, their bodies arrived last night.

HARLOW: Their names, Sergeant Javier Gutierrez and Sergeant Antonio Rodriguez, were killed when someone wearing an Afghan uniform began firing a machine gun on a joint military base in eastern Afghanistan.

SCIUTTO: Voters are in the bowl. Stay with CNN, we're going to cover New Hampshire all day. Thanks for joining us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:00:00]