Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Democratic Party Poll Numbers May Signal Brokered Convention; Interview with Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX); Senate to Vote on War Powers Resolution. Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired February 13, 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: -- your piece last night --

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SERNIOS POLITICAL WRITER AND ANALYST: Yes.

HARLOW: -- because this sort of all plays into the bigger question about a contested -- potentially contested convention. I guess tell us what that looks like now, after these early states: Bloomberg rising, you know, Sanders not getting this huge share?

ENTEN: Yes. I mean, look, the early states, to me, have almost sort of contributed to the idea that no one may enter Milwaukee -- the Democratic National Convention with a majority.

Take a look here. In Iowa, four candidates finished above 15 percent. That is the first time in the modern era, since '92, since the Democrats set a 15 percent threshold. And, for proportionality, it's the first contest of all of them -- not just in Iowa, anywhere -- in which four candidates finished with above at least 15 percent. That's one ingredient for a contested convention.

Now, look at New Hampshire, right? Bernie Sanders ended up with just 26 percent of the vote in New Hampshire. If you go all the way back, any Democratic primary since '72 in New Hampshire, that is the lowest vote share for the winner in New Hampshire, going all the way back since then.

So when you look at that, you combine that with Iowa, you combine it with the messy (ph) national polls, it seems to me, we may very well be heading to --

(CROSSTALK)

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR, NEWSROOM: And those four that finished in the top four in New Hampshire do not include Michael Bloomberg, right? Who is making a real push for Super Tuesday.

ENTEN: That's exactly right. It doesn't include him, and his addition to the field -- and him doing so well national -- to me suggests that the winners in these future states may be even below where they were in New Hampshire and the fact that we have all these candidates who seem to be doing well, you know, between that 15 percent and that 25 percent threshold, really seems to me that we could in fact have someone who, as the leader, does not have a majority of delegates going into Milwaukee.

HARLOW: I have two thoughts. One is, I wonder if you dream about this stuff at night --

ENTEN: Yes.

HARLOW: OK.

(LAUGHTER)

My actual question here is, '96, right? Because you had Bob Dole not doing well in Iowa and New Hampshire, and then going on to get the nomination. Is that like an outlier here?

ENTEN: Yes. So you know, I was looking at the Democratic side in those graphics, but you bring up a good counterargument, that Republican point. But what I would point out is nationally. Nationally, Dole was running above 40 percent.

If you look right now on the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders, who's ahead nationally, is running in the 20s. And if you look on the Democratic side historically, the leader in the polls at this point, after New Hampshire, tend to be well above the 26 percent that Sanders is at. Look at Bill Clinton, the lowest, he was at 39. But most of them were at 50 or above.

So you combine those early states along with the national picture, and it seems to be a muddled mess. And a muddled mess that perhaps a billionaire can take advantage of.

HARLOW: Yes.

SCIUTTO: And Bill Clinton in '92, there was a third-party candidate, of course --

(CROSSTALK)

ENTEN: Right, at the end of the thing. Right, yes.

HARLOW: Keeps you employed.

ENTEN: It keeps me -- you know what, I like it. I can go and get some Wendy's, some Popeyes, some fast food.

SCIUTTO: OK, we're not going to get into chicken sandwiches with this guy, that'll be the rest of the broadcast. Harry Enten, thanks very much.

ENTEN: Shalom (ph), be well.

[10:32:38]

SCIUTTO: Attorney General Bill Barr says he will appear before Congress next month. But will he answer questions directly about the DOJ's controversial move on Roger Stone's case? I'll be speaking with a lawmaker who will have the opportunity to question Barr, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: Well, right now, Attorney General Bill Barr must be expecting that House Democrats will ask him hard questions when he appears before the House Judiciary Committee next month. Will he answer those questions directly, particularly surrounding Roger Stone's sentencing recommendation?

With me now, Democratic member of the House Judiciary Committee, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas. She will have an opportunity to question him. Congresswoman, we appreciate you joining the broadcast this morning.

REP. SHEILA JACKSON LEE (D-TX): Thank you for having me. Good morning.

SCIUTTO: Let me begin with the attorney general because you're going to have the chance to question him. When he appeared at his Senate confirmation hearing in January 2019, he said, quote, "I feel I'm in a position in life where I can do the right thing and not really care about the consequences. I can be truly independent."

Based on his moves since then -- including what appears to be intervention in the Roger Stone sentencing -- did he misled the Senate?

JACKSON LEE: Well, Jim, let me start with these hollow words, said right after the impeachment failed against the president of the United States in the United States Senate, where a senator offered the words, the president now will learn his lesson, I believe he's learned his lesson.

Attorney General Barr has really usurped and overridden the real responsibilities of the attorney general of the United States that I've seen during my tenure, here in the United States Congress. And that is the People's Lawyer, the best People's Lawyer that the American people could ever have. And I've seen them in Republican and Democratic administrations, even if I disagreed with the policy positions.

What we've seen in General Barr -- and as you well know -- he refused to come in months past to the House Judiciary Committee for us to do our oversight duties. He left an empty chair when we wanted to ask questions about his responsibilities. But what we've seen since that is strictly a member of the president's law firm, the president's law firm, an individual man's law firm.

And so we've not been able to do the oversight needed to find out why policies that we've passed are failing at the department of -- Federal Bureau of Prisons, or what is happening to the --

SCIUTTO: OK.

JACKSON LEE: -- lost number of people in the Civil Rights Division. We want to be able to ask some hard questions. SCIUTTO: Let me ask you this, because you talk about the president

being emboldened now. His former chief of staff, John Kelly, of course a retired Marine general, he said that the pressure that the president put on Ukraine to investigate the Bidens was, in his view, an illegal order. Do you agree with that and should more serving U.S. military officials -- not former ones, but serving ones -- be willing to stand in the president's way?

[10:40:04]

JACKSON LEE: Well, you know, we have a unique system of government, and it's a separation between civilian and military. And the military has always tried to stay out of politics. I really wish General Kelly had come forward in the midst of the impeachment proceedings and presented himself to the House impeachment inquiry committees.

But certainly, I agree with what he said and I agree with him saying that Lieutenant Colonel Vindman absolutely had to do his duty by reporting what had happened.

This is -- I think this is the sadness of what we're in right now, where a president that should have been removed was not because of politics and fear. But the idea of men and women in the United States military speaking up, I hope they can do so in the context of their job. Because as you well know --

SCIUTTO: Right.

JACKSON LEE: -- they are very attuned to the separation of civilian and military government.

If I might say something, Jim, I wanted to add to the fact that General Barr needs to respond to the actions of the last 48 hours with Jessie Liu being turned away from her position, and the whole thing with Rudy Giuliani and of course Roger Stone. All of that --

SCIUTTO: OK.

JACKSON LEE: -- should be on the table.

SCIUTTO: Well, we are, as you well know, well into the contest to unseat President Trump. Bernie Sanders won New Hampshire just now. In 2016, you endorsed Hillary Clinton. Are you prepared to endorse a candidate in 2020?

JACKSON LEE: Absolutely, but I'm also prepared to work with my constituents to look at the outstanding candidates we have. I think we have a bounty of riches, if you will. We have candidates who are winning the first two states, we have candidates who surprised everyone and came in at a very high level, we have candidates that still are going to work very hard in South Carolina, a very diverse state, and Nevada. All those states, I've been in.

And so I would expect, if you will, that we will begin to see who the American people, who Democrats will select as their nominee. And I'm not pained by the number of individuals or the place where we are today. It will shake out, if you will, and we will get the Democratic nominee that will beat -- defeat this president so that America can get a fresh new start and start adhering to the Constitution.

SCIUTTO: OK. A new entrance to the race -- relatively new -- is Michael Bloomberg. Of course, former mayor of New York, he's in your district, campaigning today in Houston.

I want to play comments he made in 2015 and get your reaction. Have a listen.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

MICHAEL BLOOMBERG (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We put all the cops in the minority neighborhoods. Yes, that's true. Why do we do it? Because that's where all the crime is. And the way you get the guns out of the kids' hands is to throw them up against the wall and frisk them.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: In case that was difficult to hear -- given where you are, there -- justifying stop and frisk. I wonder, when you hear those comments, are those comments racist in your view?

JACKSON LEE: Well, I certainly condemn those comments. And I think at the time they were said, they were. And as I understand it, Mr. Bloomberg, in a whole new setting, has apologized for those.

But by your work, shall you be judged. That means what is he going to put forward, going forward? And I'd make the argument that his work, life's worn on climate change and gun control and empowering people is juxtaposed against the presidential nominee that the Republicans will put forward, who is absolutely racist in terms of his longstanding not only language but actions as president of the United States.

We have a wealth of candidates who believe in diversity. I think Mr. Bloomberg is one of those who believes in diversity, along with all the other ones that we have from Biden, who has a long, storied record of being engaged; with from Elizabeth (ph) Warren (ph), engaged with diversity; from Amy Klobuchar and from Pete, Mayor Pete; Bernie Sanders and --

SCIUTTO: OK.

JACKSON LEE: -- all of those that are in.

We have by far the most storied group of individuals who know the business of government and who, alongside a President Trump, wins every time.

And so I say to the American people, the Democrats will nominate a candidate that will welcome all of you and be sensitive to all of you and we will be united and we will defeat Donald J. Trump in November.

SCIUTTO: Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, thanks for joining us.

JACKSON LEE: Thank you, it's a pleasure to be with you.

[10:44:22]

HARLOW: All right, well, something important is happening today. Soon, the Senate is expected to approve a resolution that would limit the president's ability to take military action against Iran. It is a bipartisan message to the White House, but will it be vetoed by the president?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: Soon, the Senate will vote on a resolution restricting the president's ability to use military action against Iran without congressional approval.

HARLOW: The measure was expected to pass with bipartisan support. But now, if a Republican-sponsored amendment passes, the bill could lose support from Democrats. CNN national correspondent Suzanne Malveaux is on Capitol Hill.

It was a rare showing -- or expected to be a rare showing of bipartisan support in the Senate for something that actually constrains the power of the presidency. What's going on with it now, though?

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: So, Poppy, this is really a chance to see how the sausage is made here on Capitol Hill because this is the process of introducing these amendments, and some of them are call poison pills because they are just so bad that this is not something that Democrats can swallow.

So you have Senator Tom Cotton who's introducing an amendment that essentially says, yes, OK, you could limit the president's power, war powers in Iran, but you have to make some exceptions for foreign terrorist organizations.

[10:50:01]

Well, there are at least 30 designated foreign terrorist organizations, so essentially it would make it null and void and this resolution would be blown up. And so we're -- Democrats would not support it.

Let's say -- let's put that aside and say it's not an issue here, that perhaps they do go to that vote that was expected this afternoon. If they do that, then it is expected that you will have at least eight Republicans joining 43 Democrats for this particular resolution.

And these are very similar, familiar names that we've heard: Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Rand Paul. You've got people who are veterans, and you also have constitutional conservatives. How are they signing onto this in light of the environment of retribution from this president?

Well, I had a chance to talk to Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, a Democrat who's the author of the resolution. And he says one thing that they are doing is they are not assigning the president's name to this War Powers Act -- Poppy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TIM KAINE (D-VA): They don't see it as crossing the president. If it was crossing the president, they might not get on board. But my resolution doesn't say anything about the -- doesn't mention President Trump, it just says we're engaged in hostilities with Iran that are not subject to a statutory authorization. Congress needs to authorize them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: And so, Poppy, Jim, we'll see how this all plays out this morning, whether or not we get to that vote for the resolution. Right now, it's still up in flux here, whether or not these poison pills will kill this from the very beginning.

HARLOW: OK.

SCIUTTO: Suzanne Malveaux, thanks very much.

We have some breaking news now, just in to CNN. This from the Treasury Department, Jessie Liu submitting her resignation to the Treasury Department yesterday, CNN is learning. Our Evan Perez here.

Liu, of course, caught up in the prosecution of the Roger Stone case, which is -- was her prior position, correct? So now she's stepping down.

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Jim. She was supposed to be -- today, actually -- was supposed to be before the Senate for this new position at the Treasury Department. And obviously, now, the fact that the president has pulled her nomination, this is the second nomination that she's had to withdraw from.

She has now officially submitted her resignation. She did so yesterday, to the Treasury Department, and that was -- that resignation was accepted, according to an administration official who talked to Kaitlan Collins over at the White House.

Look, I think it's very clear that she needed to do this, given the fact that it is now twice that she has -- she has failed to win these two nominations.

HARLOW: Yes. Evan, thank you very much. Obviously, this just crossed. We'll try to get some more info when we can. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:57:20]

HARLOW: All right. Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, shocking the world with their decision to leave their senior roles in the royal family last month -- Jim's just getting over it -- but it's not the first time a member of the royal family chose to leave the monarchy. SCIUTTO: No. And if you follow these things -- as I do -- you'll know. CNN is set to take you inside the royal dynasty with a new series, "THE WINDSORS." This week's episode focuses on King Edward. He abdicated the throne in 1936 to marry his American mistress, Wallis Simpson.

CNN royal historian Kate Williams joins us now to discuss. So interesting comparisons between these two figures. Is it a fair one?

KATE WILLIAMS, CNN ROYAL HISTORIAN: There are interesting comparisons. It's a fascinating comparison between Edward VIII, who abdicated to marry Mrs. Simpson, and Prince Harry, who, as we know, has decided to really sort of exit from the formality of the royal family, and have his own life.

But obviously, the main difference is that Harry is not king, and that Edward VIII really did nearly bring down the government here and the royal family in Britain. But our government is completely fine, they're not at all concerned with what's happening with the royal family. They're very strong in their own way. So it's a different scenario.

But you know, it's really fascinating because this series, "THE WINDSORS: INSIDE THE ROYAL DYNASTY," about what -- we go from everyone, it's the queen, it's Edward VIII, it's Princess Diana. It really shows, I think, how it's getting increasingly hard to live in the royal goldfish bowl, to be under this pressure, under this stress.

Which is exactly what we know Harry was suffering. I think he really felt that he couldn't take the pressure and the stress. And indeed, how he and his wife had been treated in this country, particularly by the tabloid press. He no longer wished to have to cope with it. And I think this is the question that "THE WINDSORS" is asking, what do we want of our royals, going into the 21st century, and is it too much?

HARLOW: I am so looking forward to this series, truly. I can't wait for it to premiere. Just quickly, what -- a little hint at some specific moment that will stand out to people?

WILLIAMS: Well, I think that what we -- the big moment that people will really enjoy is looking into the abdication, the real story behind it. Because it's much more complicated and it's much more -- I think we remember it as a romantic story, but really it could have brought down the nation and the whole royal family. It was quite terrifying .

And of course, something else we're going to look into really afresh is the death of Diana, the entire crisis about Diana, which, you know, now, we're looking at in a different eyes because we're seeing her son going through something very similar --

HARLOW: Yes.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

WILLIAMS: -- being hounded by the press and suffering. So and -- and the final episode is all about the future of the royal

family, and there are great changes (ph) --

(CROSSTALK)

SCIUTTO: Fascinating.

WILLIAMS: -- ahead, I think.

HARLOW: Yes.

SCIUTTO: For sure.

HARLOW: Kate, thank you so much. We're all looking forward to it very much.

WILLIAMS: Thank you.

[11:00:04]

HARLOW: Be sure to watch "THE WINDSORS: INSIDE THE ROYAL DYNASTY." It premieres this Sunday, 10:00 p.m. Eastern, only --