Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Biden and Putin to Speak Virtually; Effect on Ukraine if Russia Invades; Rep. Mike Quigley (D-IL) is Interviewed about Russia and Ukraine; Pence Aide Cooperating. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired December 07, 2021 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:00]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: Berman.

HARRY ENTEN, CNN SENIOR DATA REPORTER: He's a sadistic guy.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: He was here. He was here. I figured I had to.

KEILAR: But, whatever. You know, Harry, you're a Bills fan, you're kind of a bit of a masochist I will say. So what are we going to do here, right?

ENTEN: I don't know. Have a stiff drink, that's what I say.

KEILAR: All right.

And CNN's coverage continues right now.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: A very good and busy Tuesday morning to you. I'm Jim Sciutto.

ERICA HILL, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Erica Hill.

Just one hour from now, President Biden set to hold a secure video call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. And this is a call, of course, that comes as the U.S. intel community warns Russia is preparing to invade Ukraine as soon as next month. Recent satellite imagery reveals a massive buildup of approximately 100,000 Russian forces along the border. And the Kremlin has signaled today's call could be a lengthy discussion, but warns not to expect any breakthroughs.

SCIUTTO: U.S. concern is genuine. It is. This marks at least the third time Biden and Putin have spoken since the summer. The two last took part in a summit in Geneva last June. The last publicly known call was in July.

Today's meeting, however, comes with amplified tensions. In recent days, U.S. officials have weighed whether to issue wide-ranging sanctions on Russia to deter it from launching a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Let's begin with CNN chief national affairs correspondent Jeff Zeleny. He is outside the White House this morning. Jeff, I wonder what the White House hopes to accomplish with this call

and particularly in terms of warning about sanctions.

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Jim, when you boil it down, it is simply to suggest to Vladimir Putin that the cost of invading Ukraine would be tremendously high.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

ZELENY: They are, you know, certainly directly going after financial sanctions, talking directly about financial sanctions, very tough sanctions here. But this is a united front. President Biden spent yesterday on the phone in the afternoon with European leaders presenting a united, coordinated message here that if Vladimir Putin invades Ukraine, which the U.S. does not believe he's made a decision yet to do so, but if he would do that, the cost would be incredibly high.

But, look, the White House is under no illusions here that President Biden can go in and tell Vladimir Putin what to do. They're simply trying to use diplomatic tools here to suggest that he would be isolated if he would do that and they're trying to use diplomacy to step away from the brink of what is a critically dangerous situation here.

But, interestingly, this morning, President Biden starting his morning here in Washington on the 80th anniversary of the Pearl Harbor attack by paying an unusual visit to the World War II Memorial. You can see the images here, saluting the memorial with his wife, First Lady Jill Biden. So some -- you know, a bit of poetry perhaps as he is going to have that meeting in the next hour with Vladimir Putin, certainly trying to hold off what would be essentially another world war, potentially, if there was an invasion there.

So President Biden mindful of the consequences and risks here. But that meeting begins at 10:00 a.m. here in Washington in the Situation Room at least on President Biden's end.

Jim and Erica.

HILL: Jeff Zeleny with the latest for us, laying all that out.

Jeff, appreciate it. Thank you.

CNN's Matthew Chance is in Odessa, Ukraine, right now.

SCIUTTO: He had the chance to sit down with the Ukraine defense minister to discuss their fears of a Russian invasion.

And, Matthew, it strikes me that Ukrainian officials have not been -- have not been shy about expressing their concerns. Here's what Matthew found.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

OLEKSIY REZNIKOV, UKRAINE'S MINISTER OF DEFENSE: You see that this is empty place (ph).

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes.

REZNIKOV: And I hope that they will empty forever. Just only these guys.

CHANCE: These are the guys that have already lost their lives?

REZNIKOV: Yes.

CHANCE: This could soon be filled.

CHANCE (voice over): This is the real threat Ukraine now faces, have more soldiers dying in battles with Russia, something the country's new defense minister, appointed just a month ago, tells me he's struggling with.

REZNIKOV: In Russia, they will have also the same faces. (INAUDIBLE) Russians will die. For what?

CHANCE: Across the border, the Kremlin calls these its regular winter drills. Ukraine says there are now about 95,000 Russian troops within striking distance. U.S. intel indicates that will rise to 175,000. But even that, the defense minister tells me, is an underestimate.

REZNIKOV: One hundred and seventy-five, it's not enough to go to Ukraine.

CHANCE (on camera): You think Russia will need more than 175?

REZNIKOV: Yes. Sure.

CHANCE (voice over): How much more is unclear. But these latest satellite images from Russia suggest Moscow is now engaged in an unprecedented buildup near the Ukrainian frontier.

[09:05:04]

Enough to mount an overwhelming invasion, alarming the U.S. and NATO, although Ukrainian officials seem calm at what looks like an imminent threat.

REZNIKOV: I would say that the different means that we are not in fear more.

CHANCE (on camera): You're not fearful of a Russian invasion. Is that because you don't believe the intelligence?

REZNIKOV: No, no, no, no.

CHANCE: You don't believe Russia is going invade?

REZNIKOV: No, no, we believe through our intel. We believe to all effects that was fixed by the United States intel and et cetera.

CHANCE: But do you believe Russia will invade? REZNIKOV: But this is not the last decision.

CHANCE: Do you believe Russia will invade?

REZNIKOV: I am not believe that -- I will not believe that Russia will have a victory in Ukraine. It's a different because it will be a really bloody massacre and Russian guys also will come back in coffins, yes.

CHANCE (voice over): There's also a belief in Ukraine that Russia, which denies plans to invade, can, with the help of the United States and its allies, still be deterred.

This is the defense minister inducting two new coastal patrol boats from the U.S. into the Ukrainian navy. Part of a much broader military modernization program Ukraine is trying to carry out, with support from the west, angering Moscow.

Ukraine's growing ties with NATO and Kremlin demands for NATO expansion to be curbed is sure to dominate President Biden's video call with Vladimir Putin of Russia, a crucial online meeting that could determine Ukraine's fate.

The U.S. president, the defense minister tells me, should double down on support for Ukraine.

REZNIKOV: If I can advise President Biden at least, I would like to ask him to very understandable articulate to Mr. Putin that no red lines from Kremlin side could be here. Red line is here, in Ukraine. And civilized world will react without any hesitation.

We don't need the American or Canadian soldiers here to fighting for Ukraine. We will fight by ourselves. But we need modernization of weaponry, we have -- we need electronic warfare, and et cetera, et cetera.

CHANCE (on camera): The problem with America and NATO and others stepping up their help, their assistance for Ukraine, is that it could potentially provoke the Kremlin even further, it could be poking the bear and force them to invade. Is that a concern for you? Do you think that's realistic?

REZNIKOV: The idea don't provoke Russia will not work because Georgia, Salisbury, Crimea.

CHANCE: So you think confrontation with Russia is the only way to stop Russia's malign activity around the world?

REZNIKOV: It could be not only confrontation, it could be their -- very -- it should be strong position. We are partners of Ukraine. We will help them in all kind of ways.

CHANCE: And the Kremlin will hear that and it will understand that and it will stop?

REZNIKOV: I am sure. CHANCE (voice over): It is a high stakes gamble with no guarantee.

Such a hardline from the White House, to the Kremlin will do anything to force Russia back.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CHANCE: Well, the Kremlin are saying they do not expect to breakthrough during this video conference call. But they're expected to set out, Vladimir Putin, his demands, namely that NATO, the western military alliance, stops expanding eastwards towards its border. They also want the west and the U.S. in particular to pull back on providing military support to Ukraine, which, of course, right bordered up against Russia.

The response to that by President Biden may decide whether the military tensions in this region ratchet up even further or de- escalate.

Jim, Erica, back to you.

SCIUTTO: Matthew Chance in Ukraine, thanks very much.

Joining me now, Democratic Congressman Mike Quigley of Illinois. He sits on the House Intelligence Committee.

Congressman, thanks for taking the time this morning.

REP. MIKE QUIGLEY (D-IL): Good morning, Jim.

SCIUTTO: As you know, the president, other U.S. officials have already publicly warned Russia not to invade Ukraine, as have U.S. allies. What different does Biden need to communicate on this call to Putin to deter an invasion?

QUIGLEY: Look, I think he needs to be clear that there's a unified front, that this will be extraordinarily costly if they invade. You know, I think they need to say, look, if you want Russian banks to be involved in the international system, if you don't want crippling sanctions against your oligarchs, and other financial harm to the -- to Russia, you can't move forward on this.

[09:10:06]

And I think what you're going to see is a give and take because Putin has intentions of either invading or getting massive concessions to what he sees as threats to Russia.

SCIUTTO: As you know, since Russia invaded Ukraine already in 2014, and, by the way, still controls territory there, Crimea, parts of eastern Ukraine, it's been under economic sanctions.

Now, the administration is talking about stepping up those sanctions. For instance, denying access to the bond markets for U.S. energy -- for Russian energy companies or taking them out of what's known as the swift international banking system. Are those -- would those new sanctions impose costs in your view

sufficient enough to deter Russia or do you believe Russia has said or decided those are costs we can bear?

QUIGLEY: You know, I don't think they -- that they have. I think the fact that they haven't invaded so far at least tells us something that they're concerned about.

What concerns me on the other side is, you know, how unified is NATO? How unified particularly is western Europe? The Russians have always been opportunistic since, what, the Suez crisis, and they see leadership changes in western Europe. They know that winter is coming, literally, even from a political sense, and they know that Europe depends so much on their energy source. They're not afraid to use that.

And the whole Pentagon-Kremlin playbook is in play right now. Disinformation, cyberattacks, use of energy as a coercive force, those are all in play. And I think they recognize that if there's opportunity for weakness, it comes because of the need for energy.

SCIUTTO: Does Putin judge the U.S. in particular to be weak now? Biden to be weak? And do you think it was a mistake for the Biden administration not to sanction the Nord Stream 2 energy pipeline perhaps as a signal to Russia of that weakness?

QUIGLEY: Look, I mean, there's a fine balance the Biden administration is trying to strike. And I think they've done very well so far. You don't want to be the appeaser. You don't want to be that which provokes Putin to further action, including the invasion here. So, I think you keep all those cards in play.

And, look, Congress plays a role too. In the coming days, we will vote on the National Defense Authorization Act. And included in that are amendments dealing with this pipeline, so important to Russia.

So, you know, as I mentioned before, Germany, for example, has said, don't sanction that pipeline because they need it. At the same time, their foreign minister has said that Russia will face extreme sanctions if they act. So, they have to be unified. This has to all be in place. Congress and Biden have to -- the president have to work together with our allies. It's a very difficult balance at this point.

SCIUTTO: As your position on the intelligence committee, you are briefed regularly on U.S. intelligence regarding Russia's preparations and plans. I don't want you to get into classified intelligence here.

But based on what you have seen, do you believe it is likely that Russia will invade Ukraine? And if it does, crucially, will it be a swift invasion?

QUIGLEY: You know, I think they're prepared for an extraordinarily swift invasion. If the spring bringing up of troops to the borders was a dress rehearsal, they're prepared for the, you know, the final event here. They put everything they possibly can in place. It is an extremely dangerous situation. You know, they're surrounding Ukraine on three borders. Again, the Kremlin playbook is in full play. They've done everything they possibly can, in my mind, to prepare as if they're going to invade. Giving themselves that option, if, again, the massive concessions I think they're going to want those that will be wildly unrealistic are not agreed to.

SCIUTTO: There is, of course, another military buildup around a sovereign country, and that is China's around Taiwan. Do you fear a possible double shot here, right, that Russia chooses to invade Ukraine and China, perhaps at the same time or soon after, makes a similar judgment and invades Taiwan? Is that something that concerns you?

QUIGLEY: Yes. Obviously, it -- I think it should concern all Americans. It certainly concerns me. The second and third largest militaries in the world acting at the same time. They both have the advantage of what we'd call the home court advantage. They're there. Our -- you know, our armies and our allies aren't near there, would take some time.

So when I reference to what Putin would do is something of a modern day blitzkrieg, it's concerning that China would do the same sort of thing.

[09:15:08]

And, again, opportunistically act as a duo because what would we be able to do? What would our allies be able to do? It is the nightmare scenario.

SCIUTTO: A modern day blitzkrieg on today's anniversary, World War II, notable -- a notable description.

Congressman Mike Quigley --

QUIGLEY: And the 30th anniversary of Ukraine's independence from the Soviet Union.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Exactly. Which is something that, as you know, the former Soviet Union signed on to at the time.

Congressman Mike Quigley, thanks so much for joining us.

QUIGLEY: Thank you.

HILL: Next, Mike Pence's former chief of staff agrees to cooperate with the January 6th investigation. What he knows about the former vice president's communications on that day.

Plus, a California Republican, in line to take over a powerful leadership position, decides instead he's leaving. Done with Congress. Details on Devin Nunes' new role with team Trump.

SCIUTTO: And, later, the Justice Department is suing Texas over its new congressional maps. We're going to break down why critics say they were drawn to take voting power away from the state's growing Latino population. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:20:48]

HILL: Major developments in the January 6th investigation into the January 6th insurrection. CNN has learned exclusively that Marc Short, the former chief of staff to Vice President Mike Pence, is cooperating with investigators.

SCIUTTO: CNN political correspondent Sara Murray here with more.

And, Sara, cooperating, not engaging, right? Because you have some of t hese witnesses engaging, it seems, to avoid criminal contempt charges. But is it our understanding he's actually exchanging information and testimony?

SARA MURRAY, CNN POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: You know, I think only time is going to tell the extent of the cooperation. But that certainly is the indication that my colleagues are getting so far.

He did receive a subpoena. He is not fighting that subpoena, as we've seen from others, and he does appear to be cooperating. This is, of course, important because he was Mike Pence's former chief of staff. He's very close to the former vice president. He could provide potentially insights about what was going on with Pence in the Capitol on January 6th. He could provide more insight on all of the pressure that Donald Trump brought on Mike Pence not to certify the results of the election.

And, you know, it does signify sort of where the Pence world is differing from the Donald Trump world on this. You know, a source told my colleagues that the committee is getting significant cooperation from team Pence. And that's so important because of the role that the vice president played on January 6th and the events leading up to it.

SCIUTTO: No question. And, Erica, the threat that he faced during that time on January 6th.

HILL: Yes, absolutely.

And, Sara, we know too that former Trump associate Steve Bannon, in the other camp, not in the cooperation camp, but set to take part in a conference, that could actually set a trial date for his contempt of Congress charge.

What are we expecting to hear from him out of all that?

MURRAY: Yes, Steve Bannon is very much in the digging his heels in and not cooperating camp, which is why he's facing this contempt issue. And, look, he really wants to slow walk these proceedings. His lawyers have made that very clear in court. They made it clear in a filing last night. They're suggesting, you know, perhaps we should go to trial in October of next year. The government is saying, wait, wait, we think we can go to trial much sooner than that, potentially before April of next year. Obviously, the timing on this is going to be really important if the

committee wants to make any headway with these reluctant witnesses like Steve Bannon.

But, you know, they're also sort of holding him out as an example. This is what happens to you if you decide to defy us entirely. We will see if that inspires more people to cooperate. It certainly has inspired a number of people to plead the Fifth rather than just snubbing the subpoenas they've been getting.

HILL: Yes.

SCIUTTO: I like the word "inspired" there rather than pressured. Sort of out of their goodness of their heart, you know.

Sara Murray, thanks so much.

MURRAY: Thanks.

HILL: Joining us now to discuss, CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams. He's a former federal prosecutor, former deputy assistant attorney general.

Great to have you with us.

As Sara laid out, right, the potential knowledge that Marc Short has here is extensive based on not only how close he was to the vice president, but just how long he was in that orbit there. How do you read this cooperation? How forthcoming do you anticipate Marc Short will actually be?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, look, big picture, Erica, whenever you're doing an investigation, you're never going to get the big fish or every single witness you want. And there is very little that Mike Pence could provide in testimony that Marc Short cannot. As the chief of staff, he would have been either in the room or heard about who was in the room for virtually every conversation frankly that Mike Pence had over the entire four years. And so he can go back all the way to June 2020 when the president first started talking about election irregularities, all the way on through January 6th. So it's an invaluably valuable bit of testimony, subject to all the privileged conversations we've been having, like, you know, what he thinks he can't provide.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

To your point, they're not going to get everyone. A lot of folks are stonewalling, straight out refusing. But as someone at Short's level, and proximity here, right, to Pence throughout these conversations, but particularly on the day, January 6th, is that enough, right? I mean could that kind of testimony be enough given his role?

WILLIAMS: Yes. Probably. Enough is a weird way to frame it. Not to put -- not to criticize, Jim, but -- but it will be --

SCIUTTO: Well, I hear you. I guess I'm saying enough to compensate for the others who are not cooperating.

WILLIAMS: Sure, I got you. Maybe necessary but not sufficient is a good way to put it.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

WILLIAMS: You know, he can -- in a criminal trial -- let's put it this way, in a criminal trial you can't testify as to things you didn't see yourself or hear about. Congressional rules are looser than that. And someone like Marc Short can testify to things he even heard about.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

[09:25:01]

WILLIAMS: What did Mike Pence tell you he saw? What do you know about a conversation Steve Bannon had? What do you know about what went on, on January 5th at the Willard Hotel? What did you hear about the January 4th meeting in the Oval Office in which the president leaned on the vice president to not certify the election results?

So there's a tremendous amount that he can put in, even if nothing else, for the narrative that will go into the report that the committee will write about what happened on that day. And it will be valuable, evocative, powerful testimony. So it will be quite a lot, yes.

HILL: Real quickly, before we let you go, on Steve Bannon, which we were just talking about with Sara as well, in terms of -- you know, there could be this conference to set a trial date. The reality is, he is still enjoying this, I would say, a fair amount and running with this as long as he can. That's concerning, I know, for prosecutors. They don't want him talking about this much out there in the public as he's doing. Still has his show.

WILLIAMS: Right.

HILL: How much can they control that?

WILLIAMS: They can and what the filing that we saw yesterday was called a joint status report, both parties came together and laid out for the court how long they think the whole thing will take and so on. At the end of the day, the court will hear arguments from the parties and decide when the trial should come.

This is a really short sort of almost rinky-dink misdemeanor trial that will be argued on the basis of documents. Whatever Steve Bannon wants to make of it is fine. But, at the end of the day, you've got to prove two things. Number one, that there was a subpoena, and, number two, that a guy chose to flout it. And you can do that with one or two witnesses. It's not a long, drawn out event no matter what either Steve Bannon or his allies might want to do.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

WILLIAMS: And so I would think that the court would recognize that, put this on a relatively short timeline just because even setting aside whatever anybody might think about who's right or who's wrong, just look at the things he's been charged with. And it's really quite straightforward. It's not a complex financial crime or lobbying crime or something like that.

HILL: Elliot Williams, always great to have you with us. Thank you.

WILLIAMS: Thanks, Erica. Take care, Jim.

HILL: Still ahead, he was poised for a leadership role if Republicans took back the House in the next election. So why then would Congressman Devin Nunes instead choose to leave Congress? What his resignation tells us about the power struggle in the GOP.

SCIUTTO: And we're moments away from the opening bell on Wall Street. Dow futures surging this morning after a strong rebound in the markets on Monday. Investors seem to be recovering from a downturn after the omicron variant of Covid-19 was identified. Worries have tempered since then. Inflation, though, still a worry. Wall Street will get a fresh read on consumer price inflation data on Friday.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)