Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Insurrection Investigation; Interview With Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX); Infrastructure Negotiations. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired November 04, 2021 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:02]

JOHN KING, CNN HOST: The duchess of Sussex calling Senator Susan Collins and Shelley Moore Capito to pitch them on supporting paid family and medical leave.

Appreciate your time today on INSIDE POLITICS. We will see you back here this time tomorrow.

Ana Cabrera picks up our coverage right now.

Have a good day.

ANA CABRERA, CNN HOST: Hello, and thanks for being with me. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York.

On Capitol Hill, a major shift in strategy and timing, as the Democrats tried to break the deadlock on President Biden's agenda after Tuesday's jarring wakeup call from frustrated voters. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wants a vote tonight on the Build Back Better bill. That's that big social safety net package, and then a vote tomorrow on the smaller bipartisan infrastructure bill.

And that's after she announced that bold move to reinsert four weeks of paid family and medical leave. You may remember that was dropped from the package to win support from Senator Joe Manchin, a moderate holdout.

This morning on CNN, the West Virginia Democrat dug in his heels on this move.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOE MANCHIN (D-WV): I don't think it belongs in the bill. And I will tell you why.

That's a piece of legislation that really is needed from the standpoint, if we do it and do it right, when there's participation between the employer and employee, from the small -- small companies, small businesses that I represent all over West Virginia and all over the country.

But, basically, it should be participation. We can do that in a bipartisan way. We can make sure it's lasting. (END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: CNN chief congressional correspondent Manu Raju joins us now.

Manu, both votes by tomorrow morning is what we're hearing. Are the votes there?

MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It's unclear.

And Nancy Pelosi simply would not commit to a timeline for a vote when asked at her press conference earlier today, only saying that she will let us know. But she did say behind closed doors that she wants to have the vote as soon as tonight. It's $1.75 trillion. It is sweeping in nature. It would expand the social safety. The deal would pump more than $500 billion in efforts to combat climate change.

But it simply does not have the votes to get out of the House and the Senate. And the question still is if it does have the votes to get out of the House. A number of the members want to see more details. This -- there were changes that were made at the last minute to this proposal, which is more than 2,000 pages.

And that was put together last night. The latest version of the bill was released yesterday. And a number of members want to see a full cost analysis provided by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and see that analysis before they vote on it.

It's uncertain if that will actually happen. But that is a dynamic that Pelosi is running into as she's trying to get this out of the House tonight, then move on to that bipartisan infrastructure bill as soon as tomorrow, and then set up a Senate vote on that larger proposal sometime by the middle of November.

We will see what happens. But Pelosi too is facing a lot of questions and criticism of her handling of these matters so far, particularly from Virginia Democrats in the aftermath of what happened on Tuesday, where they saw a slate of candidates wiped out in some part because of what the Democrats say is a failure of Congress to act, including on that infrastructure bill that House Democrats have not acted upon, as they have called for this to essentially be tied to that larger expansion of the social safety net plan.

So, moments earlier, earlier today, I asked the speaker directly whether or not they deserve any blame, as some Democrats say, for holding up that infrastructure bill.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): What I said was any sign of progress is always good for the public when they understand what it is, and I think they understand infrastructure pretty well.

So it would have been better if we had. I don't know, because I haven't seen the data. Perhaps you have. I think there are other issues at work in that election. And it remains not for me to make an observation unsubstantiated by data and science, but it was not a good night.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: So the question is, now what? If they do get this bill out of the House, this $1.75 trillion bill, then it will go on to the Senate, but remember the House first. She can't lose more than three votes in the House, so very little margin for error.

Then the Senate will have no margin for error. And Joe Manchin, in particular, has said that he will not support adding paid leave back into this proposal, as Pelosi has indicated, which means they will go on for more negotiations in the Senate to try to get a bill that can get Joe Manchin's support and the rest of the Democratic Caucus, then send that back to the House for final action.

And, Ana, final action might not happen until Thanksgiving, after Thanksgiving, potentially up to Christmas. So this process is not over, despite the speaker's push for that key vote tonight. We will see if she can get there -- Ana.

CABRERA: And we know there are Democrats who don't want to have to take this vote twice, which would happen if the Senate sends them back a new bill after they pass this one originally.

Manu Raju on Capitol Hill, thank you for that play by play.

Let's bring in Democratic lawmaker now Congressman Henry Cuellar of Texas.

[13:05:02]

Thank you, sir, for being here.

Last night, you expressed concerns with the speaker adding back paid leave back into this Build Back Better bill because of Manchin's position on it, but it looks like the speaker is still moving forward. The vote expected as soon as tonight. So, how are you going to vote?

REP. HENRY CUELLAR (D-TX): Well I certainly want to go ahead and move the ball forward. But there was a promise that was made to us that we would not move a bill without the 50 votes in the Senate.

That was an agreement that was made. And it's unfortunately that this is happening right now. But I still want to move the ball forward. There's still concerns that some of us have, for example, on the methane fee. There are some EPA regulations that I think can handle that. And there are some of us in South Texas, members of Congress, and, of course, I believe a couple of senators that might have a concern about that.

So I wish we wouldn't do this ping-pong where we pass something, Senate is going to make changes, send it back over here. We have been trying to moderate this bill. We support Build Back Better, but we want to make sure that we moderate it and not have people take some votes that they don't have to take. CABRERA: I understand that. And so I'm curious how you feel about

Senator Joe Manchin, another moderate, or Senator Kyrsten Sinema, because your fellow Democrat in the House Raul Grijalva of Arizona called it offensive that Senators Manchin and Sinema have had so much power over this legislation.

Do you find it offensive?

CUELLAR: I do not find it offensive.

I call Joe Manchin a friend of mine. I call Kyrsten Sinema a friend of mine. They are members of the Senate. They have one vote. What's -- what we have to see here is that it is a 50-vote Democrat that we have there, and every vote becomes important.

So, again, with all due respect to my good friend Raul, I don't call that offensive. It's just the nature of legislative. And when -- in the House, we only have a three-vote difference. In the Senate, we don't have a difference. Every vote counts. Again, my friend Joe Manchin, my friend Kyrsten Sinema, which I do communicate with them, they are going to do what they think is best.

And that's part of the legislative process.

CABRERA: I know the original goal was to move legislation that everybody in both chambers agrees to. Some progressives, though, have said it's important to pass the Build Back Better bill in the House, even if it is unsuccessful in the Senate, because then you can go to your constituents, and you can say: I did my part. I voted for universal pre-K, I voted for expanded health care benefits, I voted for these climate initiatives.

Do you agree with that approach?

CUELLAR: Look, we agreed that we would not pass this bill without 50 votes on the Senate. That was an agreement.

Unfortunately, it's been changed. But, unfortunately, we have to score some points on the scoreboard. I mean, you can ask what happened in Virginia. I mean, I know there were other factors involved. But, again, I want to see some points scored that are important to the American public.

The Build Back Better is very important to me. But the infrastructure, the bipartisan bill that's been held hostage, that should have passed a long time ago. We should have passed it a long time ago. We should have been building our roads, broadband, get rid of the lead pipes. That was an easy win that I think Terry McAuliffe and other folks would have wished they would have seen before.

But, again, this is what we're facing right now. And, hopefully, we can pass both of them. But, again, part of my job as a member of Congress is, there were some things there that I think should have been moderated. I think what both senators are doing over there is doing something also which is moderate what we're looking at.

The final product is going to be moderated. And this is something that myself and other folks have worked very hard to do.

CABRERA: OK.

So, yes or no, if the vote happens tonight, you will vote yes; is that right?

CUELLAR: Still continuing. I'm trying to get some things changed.

And anything that affects the energy industry. I do have a problem with. But, again, looking at the possibility that we are going to change some things in the Senate, I will vote to move the ball forward.

CABRERA: Congressman Henry Cuellar, thank you so much for joining us. I appreciate it.

CUELLAR: Thank you.

CABRERA: Food prices up, gas prices up. You know it. All of us are feeling the pinch of inflation right now.

The Federal Reserve chairman, Jerome Powell, says relief may still be a year away. So now the Fed is winding down its pandemic era stimulus measures, which include reducing asset purchases like bonds.

Here to discuss what that really means to you, Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Analytics.

Mark, good to see you.

I don't want to get wonky here. So, bottom line, will the Fed's latest move help or hurt short-term?

MARK ZANDI, CHIEF ECONOMIST, MOODY'S ANALYTICS: Well, neither, Ana.

I think this was well-telegraphed. The Fed's been telling investors for a long time that they would begin this process of taking their foot off the accelerator, the monetary accelerator. And they did it.

[13:10:09]

And so, as you can see, markets took it in stride. The stock market is still at a record high. Long-term interest rates didn't move. So I don't think this is a big deal for the typical American. I mean, it's the beginning. It's a start of a process. It's the beginning of a normalization of monetary policy as the economy finds its way to the other side of the pandemic.

But, for the typical American, the move that they made yesterday, I don't think means much.

CABRERA: Which probably isn't good news for a lot of Americans who feel like these price hikes are a big deal. And the supply demand issues are real. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said inflation is high, but it's not as bad as the 1970s. That is cold comfort to Americans who see their dollar shrinking. So

when could they see relief from measures taken by the feds or otherwise?

ZANDI: Well, I think it goes to the pandemic.

I mean, the pandemic has really scrambled global supply chains, in part because this is a global problem. It's not only people getting sick here, but it's people all over the world, particularly in Asia, Southeast Asia, where a lot of these supply chains began.

It's scrambled the labor market. A lot of people got sick because of the Delta variant, couldn't go to work, or had to stay home to take care of sick people or fearful of getting sick. So to get inflation back down to something we're more comfortable with, I think, requires that we get to the other side of the pandemic, that the infections don't do the same kind of damage that Delta did.

Now, it feels like we're moving in that direction. More people are getting vaccinated, and it feels like the Delta wave is now starting to wind down, and, hopefully, the pandemic will continue to move in the right direction here. And if it does, I think inflation -- the problems in the supply chains, in the labor market will iron themselves out, inflation will start to moderate.

But as Fed Chair Powell said yesterday, that's not going to happen next month or next quarter. This is going to be a bit of a process. It probably won't be until this time next year.

CABRERA: What about gas prices? Is that still going to be a huge issue? Is that in the same boat as these other issues?

ZANDI: It's very much related.

But I think we're seeing the worst of the higher oil and gasoline prices right now. What's happened is, demand has picked up. The economy's reopened. We're getting back to work. And so we have seen a significant pickup in demand for oil. But the supply of oil has not kept pace, particularly oil produced by countries overseas, OPEC, so- called OPEC producers.

So you have this increase in demand, not enough supply, and prices have jumped. But, at these higher prices, producers can make a lot of money. So they're starting to ramp things up. And I would expect to see more supply come on. And so I think we're at the worst of the oil prices and gasoline prices.

And I do think, by early next year, certainly by the spring, they will begin to moderate. So it feels really uncomfortable.

CABRERA: Yes.

ZANDI: I know I saw I was looking at gasoline at $3.50. That's pretty high. I expect it to be back closer to $3.00 by the spring and back closer to $2.50 a year from now. CABRERA: Well, that sounds good, because last year it was $2.12 at

this time, and here we're approaching $3.50 a gallon. It's real, that pain.

Thank you so much, Mark Zandi.

ZANDI: Sure.

CABRERA: I always appreciate your expertise.

Breaking just moments ago, a federal judge throwing serious cold water on former President Trump's attempts to shield documents from the January 6 investigation, but she also-called the committee's request for Trump documents overly broad. Details ahead.

Also breaking right now, federal authorities arresting an analyst who contributed to the infamous Steele dossier that contained unproven, salacious claims about Trump's ties to Moscow. We will have more on this.

And the White House unveiling a new deadline for millions of American workers to get vaccinated.

You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM. Stay right there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:18:23]

CABRERA: Right now, a critical hearing involving the investigation into the January 6 Capitol attack is under way.

This pertains to documents that former President Trump wants to keep secret from the House select committee. The judge set to make this decision is expressing skepticism about claims being made by both sides.

CNN's Evan Perez is following the high-stakes hearing.

Evan, what exactly are we hearing from this judge?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Ana, from this judge right now, we're hearing a lot of skepticism about these claims that the former president and his legal team are making.

They're saying that the type of documents that we're talking about, 700 pages, these are call logs, these are notes that were taken by his former chief of staff, Mark Meadows, by a White House lawyer during those key days around the time of the Capitol attack, that those are the exactly the types of things that are meant to be protected by executive privilege.

Judge Tanya Chutkan in this hearing that just wrapped up just a little while ago, she took this -- took issue with this. She said that these are government records, and she seemed to have a lot of skepticism that this is the kind of thing that should be protected by any kind of privilege whatsoever, especially because the Biden White House, President Biden, who's the current president, has already waived privilege on this.

She did say, however, Ana, that she thought that some of the requests by the members of Congress was alarmingly broad. She did not rule today, but we're expecting that whatever she rules is going to be appealed by either side.

[13:20:00]

CABRERA: When will she rule? Do we know?

PEREZ: We don't know exactly when she will rule. She did seem to already have her mind made up, though. So I expect that will come very soon.

CABRERA: Another big development that we're following here, Evan, involves the Russia investigation dating way back to the 2016 election.

PEREZ: Right.

CABRERA: And a federal grand jury just handed down a new indictment. What was that?

PEREZ: That's right.

There were five charges of false statements to the FBI. And these were filed against Igor Danchenko. Now, he was a prime subsource to Christopher Steele for his now infamous dossier that alleged there were these -- that Donald Trump was compromised by the Russians.

And among the salacious things that Danchenko passed on to Christopher Steele and that became part of this dossier was this claim now known as the as the pee tape. You can Google more details about that if you want. But this is the kind of thing that has been at the center of the skepticism about the Russia investigation, at least former President Trump.

He's viewed that the dossier was full of lies. And he has always said that none of these things were true. So, now John Durham, who is the special counsel appointed by Bill Barr to look into the Russia investigation, he's now brought these charges. This is now the third person he has charged as part of this investigation.

CABRERA: Evan Perez, thank you very much.

With us now is Norm Eisen, former counsel to House Democrats during the impeachment and trial of President Trump, the first impeachment, that is. He's also a former White House ethics czar.

Norm, it's good to have you here.

Circling back to the documents in the hearing under way right now involving former President Trump trying to shield certain documents from the January 6 committee, how do you read the judge's comments? She seemed to have criticism for both sides here.

NORM EISEN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Ana, thanks for having me back.

I thought that she was far more skeptical and critical of President Trump's claims of executive privilege. She did have some tough questions for the House of Representatives, but they had good answers, Ana.

On the challenge to President Trump, she made the point, look, you're no longer -- to his lawyers, President Trump is no longer the president. The current president says these documents should be released. Isn't that the end of the matter?

And that's correct, I believe, as a matter of law. That's the likely basis of her decision. She pointed out that she is going to move very quickly. That's important. She said she would be expeditious. And she brushed aside claims that there was the kind of injury that would justify the preliminary relief that the president wants.

He's not suffering any injury. On the side of the House of Representatives, she said, hey, how can things like polling data from April 2020 be relevant?

But, Ana, the House lawyer, the very capable Doug Letter, had a good answer for that. He said that goes to what the president was thinking, doing and planning that led to his incitement of insurrection.

So, we will see. She might trim it back a little bit, but it seems like she's going to order the vast majority, if not all of these documents to be produced.

CABRERA: Well, and this judge seemed critical of the process as well, criticizing or questioning Trump's request for the court to look at every single document one by one. We're talking over 700 pages here, the judge saying that could take years.

EISEN: Yes, it's part of -- she gets Trump's game.

I mean, at this point, after four years in office, and now running this play again out of office, it's delay. He wants to run out the clock. It doesn't matter to him if he loses. He almost always loses in the end. She gets that. And she seems like she's not having it.

And her last words, "I will rule expeditiously," that must have sent a chill down the spine of the president and his former lawyers. Now, if it turns out as we expect and they lose, it will go on appeal. And the appellate court must be equally fast and refuse to stay the matter.

Don't fall for Trump's delay game.

CABRERA: So, speaking of that part of all of this, one of the things that we have learned has come out of these documents or would be turned over to the House should it go in favor of this committee is that there are three handwritten notes.

This is involving Mark Meadows, then-chief of staff, three handwritten notes about the events of January 6, then two pages listing briefings and telephone calls about the Electoral College certification. It seems like that is so crucial for investigators here. So if the judge rejects Trump's argument today to keep these documents secret, where does it go from here?

How quickly, if we're on the fastest time timetable, could this move?

EISEN: Well, the government is going to turn over -- NARA, the Records Administration, is going to turn over these documents at the end of the week next week unless there's a stay.

[13:25:08]

So, I think we're going to get something very fast from the judge. Then Trump -- the judge will need to decide if she will give a stay pending appeal. She probably won't because the claims are lousy, and she made clear that she thinks they're lousy.

Then it'll be up to the D.C. Circuit. That's where meritorious cases can go to die. We struggled with that in the first impeachment. They were so slow. It's incumbent, for the sake of our democracy, because this inquiry is so important, that the public does not allow and Congress demands that the D.C. Circuit not drag its heels.

They must not be allowed to do that here. So that's where the battle will go next.

CABRERA: Norm Eisen, thank you very much for your perspective and expertise.

EISEN: Thanks, Ana.

CABRERA: Time is running out for private companies across the country to comply with a new White House vaccine requirement.

When workers are required to get their shots -- next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)