Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Today, Biden Holds Controversial Meeting with Saudi Crown Prince; Officer Corroborates Details of Heated Trump, Secret Service Exchange; Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) Derails Democrats' Economic Package Over Climate, Tax Provisions. Aired 10-10:30a ET

Aired July 15, 2022 - 10:00   ET

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

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: Crowned Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

[10:00:01]

The president hopes to oil flow and try to reset that relationship with the kingdom less than two years after vowing to make Saudi Arabia a pariah for its human rights abuses.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: While the president is away, at home, in the U.S., the Democrats' economic package that had been in negotiations for months in multiple forms again upended by the Democratic senator from West Virginia, Joe Manchin. The Democrat says that he will not support any climate provisions or consider raising taxes on the wealthy or corporations.

It is a massive blow to the administration as they set to meet international climate commitments the U.S. has already made. Not clear how they meet those now.

And new overnight, CNN first reports, January 6 committee is getting new information that corroborates former White House Aide Cassidy Hutchinson's account of what happened between former President Trump and his Secret Service agents after the January 6 rally when he wanted to go up to the Capitol.

HARLOW: But let's begin though this hour in Saudi Arabia where the president is set to land and, really, just before the top of the hour. Our International Diplomatic Editor Nic Robertson joins us there from Jeddah.

Nic, so they are waiting obviously, highly anticipating this arrival. What is the sense there ahead of this meeting, one that clearly the Saudis wanted not only to have but to have images for the world to see, really legitimizing the regime?

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Yes. There is a real sense here that this is a moment for the Saudis to have to get through because they know the focus and international attention that's going to be on President Biden casting them as a pariah for the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, they recognize that. But they really feel that this is a moment to sort of punch through that situation. They are very keen to have face-to-face with President Biden. They believe the very fact that President Biden is coming here kind of resets the relationship so that they can get to the things that they want to get to, which are all the sort of economic development investment opportunities that they really see opening up in Saudi Arabia, the vision 2030 of the crown prince. There is a lot that goes into that, a lot of money potentially to be made, and a lot of change that is happening in this country.

And the Saudis believe that they are beginning to make good on some of those early commitments to the changes that have been promised on human rights, but also on, you know, infrastructure for people in the country, jobs for people in the country. So, they are going to want to communicate a good degree of that.

But I think the real takeaway for the Saudis has to be that they can at least speak directly to President Biden and get an idea of what the strategy is for them and the rest of the region because they feel that he and the White House has really been absent in a meaningful way for too long.

And I think one thing that is going to reset the image here for President Biden when he arrives and lands and goes to the royal palace just behind me there, he will meet first with the king. But then he will meet Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and the government ministers. That is the reset moment in many ways. Because MBS, the crown prince, the ministers report to him, he has them coming in for high-speed, high-detailed meetings, puts a lot of pressure on them to make all the changes in the country.

That environment, the ministers reporting to the crown prince, kind of just tells you who is running the country. President Biden can meet with the king, but it is the crown prince that is running the machine of government here. And that will come home in that meeting, I expect.

SCIUTTO: A big topic of conversation for the president while he was in Israel was the ongoing Iran nuclear negotiations. We saw some daylight between the U.S. and Israel there, Biden saying U.S. believes diplomacy is still the path, Israel perhaps wanting to put a finer point on its interests in a military strike if Iran were to get a nuclear weapon. I'm curious, where does Saudi Arabia stand?

ROBERTSON: Yes, it is very concerned about their development of nuclear weapons by Iran, and it is very concerned about Iran's proxies, the Houthis in Yemen who just a few months ago fired a cruise missile from Yemen all the way in here to Jeddah and hit an electrical substation just before the Formula 1 Race got under way here. They are very concerned about the threat that Iran brings to the region.

But I think what you would find here is a concern in Saudi Arabia going back to 2019 when Iran was behind those very precision, multiple strikes on two different oil facilities here in Saudi Arabia. And the Saudis knew it was the Iranians but they didn't demand a military response. And I think they are in the same position now.

They know that if there is a war here, that if there are strikes against Iran, that war would have a backlash on them, take out their infrastructure that they are building. They have got a lot of big soft oil targets around the country.

[10:05:01]

And then they wouldn't be able to deliver on this vision of driving the change that this country needs to get away from the petro dollar and get in towards new technologies, greener technologies, sustainable energy, all of the economic drivers that they think are going to sustain coming generations. They don't want to sacrifice that for a war in the region.

So, they tread a fine line between being extremely concerned about Iran, wanting to know what goes on in the U.S. negotiations, feeling they were blindsided by that nuclear deal that President Obama struck back in 2015. So, there is scope here for everyone to talk and come to a unified position.

SCIUTTO: And Iran a lot closer to a weapon since the end of that deal given all the uranium they have since enriched.

Nic Robertson in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, thanks so much.

Back here in the U.S., and a first on CNN, a D.C. police officer who was in the motorcade with former President Trump on January 6 is now corroborating details of a heated exchange between Trump and his Secret Service detail over Trump's insistence and their refusal that he go to Capitol Hill after that rally.

HARLOW: Right. And so, of course, we, the world, first heard those details from former White House Aide Cassidy Hutchinson during her testimony before the January 6 committee last month. Let's remind you of this part.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CASSIDY HUTCHINSON, FORMER AIDE TO WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF MARK MEADOWS: The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel. Mr. Engel grabbed his arm, said, sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel, we're going back to the west wing. We're not going to the Capitol.

Mr. Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel. And when Mr. Ornato had recounted the story to me, he had motioned towards his clavicles.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: Our Katelyn Polantz joins us. So, what is the committee hearing from this officer, because that was the big question afterward when the Secret Service refuted it?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: That's right. So, what the House select committee heard from Cassidy Hutchinson about that scene in the SUV, it's now being verified by this officer. My colleagues Jamie Gangel and Annie Grayer confirmed that a D.C. police officer who was in the motorcade talked to the House committee about this incident and he or she is essentially corroborating details, some of the details, at least, from Hutchinson's testimony, and that is according to a source that's familiar with it.

So, we don't have more yet on exactly what this witness told the committee, but one thing that has played out since Hutchinson's testimony is this debate over the accuracy of the story that she heard. The House is still trying to work to nail that down, what actually happened there. But the takeaway here today is that the most significant point of Hutchinson's testimony is still not being undermined, it is not being disputed.

Donald Trump was demanding to go to the Capitol with his supporters on January 6th, including when he was inside that SUV driving him back to the White House as the crowd was getting out of control and the House select committee is nailing that down.

SCIUTTO: And while knowing that many of those attending that rally were armed, he was told that at the time.

Okay. Another story involving the Secret Service and that is its attempt to defend our reporting and others that DHS watchdog requested the Secret Service save text messages from January 5 and January 6, 2021, but it deleted those text messages. Secret Service is saying that was not malicious. What is the truth? What do we know?

POLANTZ: Right. So, this is a separate developing story, a separate investigation really into the Secret Service in January 6. So, Capitol Hill got notification yesterday from that internal watchdog at the Department of Homeland Security that there are missing Secret Service text messages from January 5 and 6, 2021, crucial days.

CNN reporters were able to confirm a story that was broken by The Intercept that the DHS inspector general was trying to get access to those messages but believed the texts were erased after they made that request. So, the official explanations that they received at the watchdog so far is that there was nothing nefarious about that.

DHS told the I.G. that the erasing happened in a device replacement program, and then the Secret Service since has added to my colleague, Whitney Wild, that it wasn't maliciously at all, that they were turning over lots of documents to the I.G. related to January 6 and that this tech update, a planned system migration that led to the loss of the data was already taking place when the data was asked for originally.

But there are a lot of questions here still and this situation arises when there is a lot of scrutiny on the Secret Service. Clearly, the DHS inspector general in this letter we've seen expresses frustration and how difficult it has been to get records from the Secret Service. They want to make Congress aware of that. And the House select committee is doing its own work trying to get information about January 6.

[10:10:00]

So, they are trying to get to the bottom of what happened here now. Jim and Poppy?

HARLOW: Katelyn, thanks very much for the reporting.

Well, the entire January 6 committee met behind closed doors last night on Capitol Hill, but they say they still have not reached a decision on whether they will seek interviews of the former president or former vice president.

SCIUTTO: Donald Trump was set to be deposed behind closed doors today in a separate case, the New York attorney general's investigation into his business practices. But, and this is just into CNN, that sworn testimony has now been delayed due to the death of his former wife, Ivana Trump.

Kara Scannell has been following this. Kara, this not the first delay as we -- obviously, understandable given the circumstances. What happens now?

KARA SCANNELL, CNN REPORTER: Well, Jim, The New York Attorney General's Office issued a statement this morning saying that they have been contacted by the Trump family, they had asked for a delay and they said that given the circumstances, of course, they granted it.

They said that these depositions, and these are depositions of the former president, Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump, were set to begin officially today, but, really, they were scheduled for next week. And they were going to be asked questions under oath about their financial statements, about the Trump Organization. That is the heart of the New York attorney general's investigation are whether these financial statements were accurate.

And she has wanted to ask them questions about there for months. She initially subpoenaed them for this testimony at the end of last year. They have been in a court fight about it. They have lost at both the local level and then at the appellate level. The judge is saying that they have to answer these questions.

The Trumps didn't want to sit for these depositions because of the parallel criminal investigation by the Manhattan District Attorney's Office that is covering the exact same ground. That investigation has really slowed down, they are not presenting any evidence to the grand jury, but still technically open. So, there is a risk here for when they do answer questions, what they say could potentially be used in this criminal case.

Now, Trumps had argued that they shouldn't have to do that. The judges said you can always take the Fifth Amendment. That is exactly what Eric Trump did when he was deposed by the New York attorney general in 2020, he refused to answer questions more than 500 times.

So now from here, the New York Attorney General's Office saying that this is a temporary delay, that it will be rescheduled shortly. And they said that they offer their condolences to the Trump family. Poppy, Jim?

SCIUTTO: You refuse enough time makes you question whether the testimony matters, right? Kara Scannell, thanks so much.

As President Biden works to smooth relations overseas, his legislative agenda here at home took another major, major political blow.

HARLOW: That's right, from Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, effectively shutting down an economic package Democrats have worked on for months, citing inflation as one of the reasons he won't support the climate measure or the tax provisions in this package.

Let's bring in Catherine Rampell, CNN Economics and Policy Commentator, and Ashley Allison, CNN Political Commentator.

Let's get a fact check from you on the economics of it all, Catherine. So, inflation wasn't everything but it has been a big driver of Joe Manchin saying no over the past many months to Build Back Better, et cetera, now this. How much of a diver of inflation would this climate issue but mainly the tax proposal have been by pushing more money into the economy?

CATHERINE RAMPELL, CNN ECONOMICS AND POLICY COMMENTATOR: So, I think probably overall, it would have been a wash. So, when Republicans claim that this kind of spending bill would increase inflation or Manchin says that for that matter, when Democrats claim that it decrease inflation, probably, it's going to have a negligible effect.

HARLOW: At this size?

RAMPELL: Well, even the previous version, I think, there were pieces of it that would drive prices up and pieces that would drive pieces down. Maybe you can like sort through each individual line item and say, well, this one comes before that one, so, whatever. I think mostly, it was going to be a wash.

The concerns about the tax pieces are especially puzzling, because if you look at those in isolation, those are likely to be disinflationary, at least over some period of time. So, the fact that Manchin has struck those out is especially confusing. I get that he doesn't want to do more spending. Maybe you could argue that would drive some prices up. I don't know that it would. But the tax increases would do the opposite. So, it's very hard to understand what his thinking is here and what his objectives are.

SCIUTTO: Well, because one of his hesitations throughout has been everything needs to be paid for, right, and the taxes were the way to pay for it.

Ashley, I don't think that we can underestimate the blow here, not just to Biden's political agenda but to the U.S. climate commitments here. I remember being at the G20, one of the previous iterations of delay of this plan, and they wanted the president there to travel with these climate commitments. Oh, it will happen eventually. It hasn't happened. It's done. The U.S. is the world's second biggest emitter. Where does this leave the climate agenda not just for the Biden administration but for the country?

ASHLEY ALLISON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I mean, it is unfortunate when you have someone like Joe Manchin who -- yes. Can you hear me?

SCIUTTO: I can hear you, go ahead. A glitch in the Matrix there, go ahead

[10:15:00]

ALLISON: Okay. Well, it is unfortunate when you have a Democrat like Joe Manchin who has really blocked so many things in the Biden agenda. The president ran making these commitments. And you see voters actually want this to happen. And it is not just good for the voters but it is good for the environment globally.

And so people get frustrated sometimes when we say go vote, but the reality is the margins in the Senate are so slim, when you have someone like a Joe Manchin, you can just block an entire agenda. That is why states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, and making sure that we secure those states like in Nevada and Georgia, we need to get candidates in office and in the Senate after this midterms that will actually pass an agenda that the majority of Americans support, that will move this country forward and then actually help the American people because we know times are hard.

So, it is frustrating, but I think in a, you know, voters realize that and realize what they all need to do this November.

HARLOW: Well, speaking about voters, Ashley, I want your take on not just one poll number, not just two, but a bunch of poll numbers out in the last few weeks that look really tough for the administration. 85 percent of adults in this A.P. poll aid the U.S. is headed in the wrong direction. Then this New York Times/Siena College poll, 64 percent of Democrats say they would prefer new standard bearer in 2024, not Biden. And 1 percent of 18 to 29-year-olds in that poll, just 1 percent said that they approve of how Biden is handling his job.

You cannot make those numbers look pretty. What does this White House need to do?

ALLISON: It is not great. And I will set 2024 aside because it is a long time away. And if we are able to actually expand the margins in this November, I think that he can get some of this agenda moving forward. Right now, Democrats, particularly this administration, and I think that they have a plan to do this, they have to get out of Washington and go talk to the people in the states.

I'm from Ohio. I just was just back a month ago seeing the struggles, the everyday struggles that people are going through. We need to go out, talk to people, explain why things are the way they are. It is not just Joe Biden and the reason why inflation. There is a war going on. We have people who are obstructing the legislation. But it is not just Democrats also. Democrats need to explain that there are also 50 Republicans in the Senate that aren't doing anything to help them either and they are being obstructionist, and that many of their governors are also being obstructionists and not taking money from the American rescue plan that would have helped the American people. So, get out of the belt way, go talk to voters. And I think those numbers will improve. But I don't want to (INAUDIBLE) we have to work to really get them.

SCIUTTO: So, Catherine, Poppy spoke to Muhammed el-Erian last hour, and he said he expects inflation to soften in the coming months but said the chances of a soft landing are low in his view of the Fed getting it right. I mean, in your view, what are the -- so they underdid this clearly. They didn't see this coming, they didn't act quickly enough. What are the chances now that they overdo the medicine?

RAMPELL: That is really the risk here, right, that the goal of interest rate hikes is to cool demand but not kill the economy. And it is very hard to get that dosage of medicine exactly right. The fact that we have gotten month after month after month of inflation numbers much hotter than had been expected, much hotter than anybody is comfortable with, suggests that they are going to have to use more medicine, which means the risk of the medicine killing the patient goes up.

And so I think for a number o reasons, including the stakes in policy, including a bunch of unlucky shocks, like a war, like an avian flu, like the COVID lockdowns in China, the risks that we will have a recession has gone way up because the Fed is just going to have to act much more aggressively than it really wants to in order to get inflation down. SCIUTTO: Goodness. All right, well, I guess we'll have you back to

talk about it. Catherine Rampell, Ashley Allison, thanks so much to both of you.

Still to come this hour, we are following President Biden's expected arrival it's coming soon in Saudi Arabia. We'll have more on that and the buildup to a highly anticipated meeting with the Saudi king, but also the guy probably running the country, his son, the crown prince.

HARLOW: First though, we'll go to the White House after Texas filed a lawsuit against the administration overnight accusing it of overstepping its administrative authority on abortion. I'll speak with the co-chair of the White House Gender Policy Council.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:20:00]

HARLOW: Texas is now suing the Biden administration for executive actions it took on abortion after the Supreme Court overturned Roe versus Wade. The Department of Health and Human Services has issued guidance for medical providers across the country saying that federal law overrides state abortion restrictions when emergency care is needed. It also claims the federal government has the authority to penalize facilities that refuse abortion services in a medical emergency. Well, Texas disputes that and they argue that their state law overrides.

Jennifer Klein is the co-chair and executive director at the White House Gender Policy Council. Yesterday, she met with dozens of mayors to strategize on how to protect reproductive rights. She joins me from the White House.

Jennifer, good morning, and I'd like to begin with that lawsuit. Here is how Texas objects. Quote, these hospitals are now threatened with having to choose between violating state law under the threat of criminal penalty or jeopardizing their ability to participate in Medicaid. And then they go on to say, you have got a Hyde Amendment violation by conditioning the receipt of Medicare funds on proving abortions.

[10:25:00]

What is your response?

JEN KLEIN, CO-CHAIR AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WHITE HOUSE GENDER POLICY COUNCIL: Hi, Poppy, thanks so much for having me. Actually, neither of those things are true. And this action by the Texas attorney general is sort of the latest in a line of extreme Republican actions across the country.

So, what this long standing piece of federal legislation, people know it as EMTALA, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, requires and has long required it, is for doctors and other medical professionals in a medical emergency to provide the care that they believe their patient needs. And that has to and can require abortion.

So, it really just makes clear that when the health care provider believes that this is an emergency that requires that particular medical service, not only are they allowed but they are required to provide it in this emergency situation. HARLOW: So, Jennifer, there has been a lot of talk from not only the

White House but many Democrats in Congress calling repeatedly to codify Roe. You're an attorney. So, I thought I'd try to get your legal take on this argument made by another well respected legal expert like yourself, Victoria Nourse at Georgetown, who writes this, drafters of any federal Roe protection must not be starry eyed. People should stop using the term, codify Roe. It is misleading. Codifying in this case means enacting a statutory right, which is possible, but the term Roe refers to a Supreme Court ruling, and Congress has no power to reverse a particular Supreme Court ruling and reinstate a precedent that has t been overturned. Legally isn't she right?

KLEIN: Professor Nourse is exactly right that the right word is not codify. The right word is that Congress needs to and can act to restore the protections that were provided under Roe versus Wade. She is exactly right. Roe versus Wade was the law of the land for nearly 50 years and the Supreme Court has just acted to take away that fundamental constitutional right. But what Congress can do and must do is pass a piece of legislation which makes clear that, across the country, federally, that there is a right to have an abortion and that is the thing that Congress can do.

HARLOW: I hear you, Jennifer. I just wonder, though, under this court, wouldn't that be very easily challenged under City of Warren versus Flores? Because the court in that decision said that Congress does not enforce the right by changing what the right is.

KLEIN: It is not enforcing a federal -- a Supreme Court precedent that no longer exists. What it is is affirmatively passing the protection in federal law that people have a right to seek this medical service.

HARLOW: Let me asking following up on the president's action on Friday, executive action on abortion rights. This morning on NPR, you said, look, all of us at the White House assume that the May 2nd draft opinion by Justice Alito that was leaked was going to be the final opinion, and there you have it, it was.

Given that you assumed that, what do you say to so many Democrats that are very frustrated that it took this White House two weeks to come out with any executive action and that this White House at this point has not proposed further unilateral action, that you could have had this thing drafted ready to go right away given 13 states have trigger laws that took effect right away? Why didn't you act sooner?

KLEIN: We have acted. We've acted quickly. The president himself spoke immediately when the decision was issued and outlined two immediate steps that the administration was taking. One was to protect access to medication abortion and contraception and other critical reproductive health services and the second was to protect the basic fundamental right to travel, which by the way is now being challenged by some Republicans across the country.

And so, A, he acted, and, B, we have since that day released a number of different things, including the guidance on emergency medical treatment that you just mentioned, and as well the president issued an executive order.

I sort of take issue with the notion that why did it takes two week. Two weeks is a short period of time to make sure that what we're doing is actually protecting the women and the people who provide the medical care across the country without putting them at legal risks.

HARLOW: I think their frustration -- and I got to let you go, but their frustration is you knew this decision essentially was going to be what it was going to be on May 2nd. 13 states had laws that kicked in right away. They wanted action then.

We have got more questions for you, so come back soon. Jennifer Klein, thanks a lot.

KLEIN: Happy to do that. Thank you.

HARLOW: Thanks.

SCIUTTO: Still ahead, American truck drivers have a front row seat to supply chain issues and also skyrocketing fuel costs. Now they have a message for Congress. Next, we're live in Iowa where the country's largest meeting of truck drivers is now under way.

[10:30:01]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)