Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

TikTok CEO: "Firewalled" From "Any Foreign Government" Interference; Trump Won't Be Discussed At Today's Grand Jury Meeting; Interview With Moore Hall in Atlanta Partner and Former U.S. Attorney Michael Moore; House Panel Threatens Blinken With Subpoena Over Afghanistan Documents. Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired March 23, 2023 - 10:30:00   ET

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


[10:30:00]

REP. FRANK PALLONE (D-NJ) RANKING MEMBER, ENERGEY AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE: And unless the person specifically, says, I want you to collect that data, you wouldn't be able to, location and health data, would you commit to that?

SHOU CHEW, TIKTOK CEO: Congressman, in principle, I support that. Which, by the way, we do not collect precise GPS data at this point. And I do not believe we collect any health data.

PALLONE: All right. So, would you be willing to make that commitment that from now on, you won't collect location and health data without you're saying at all? Is that --

CHEW: Congressman, we -- this is data that's frequently collected by many other companies, you know.

PALLONE: I know other companies do it. I don't think they should without affirmative consent. You said you want to be a good actor. So, why not make that commitment to me today?

CHEW: We are committed to be very transparent of our users about what we collect. I don't think what we collect -- I don't believe what we collect this morning mostly --

PALLONE: You see, my problem here is you're trying to give the impression that you're going to move away from Beijing and the Communist Party. You're trying to give the impression that you're a good actor. But the commitments that we would seek to achieve those goals are not being made today. They're just not being made.

You're going to continue to gather data. You're going to continue to sell data. You're going to continue to do all these things and continue to be under the aegis of the Communist Party through the -- through your, you know, organization that owns you. So, in any case, thank you.

Thank you, madam chair.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Gentleman yields back. Here now recognizes a gentleman from Texas, Mr. Burgess for five minutes. CHEW: Thank you, Chair.

ERICA HILL, CNN ANCHOR AND NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: So, you've been listening there to the CEO of TikTok, testifying on Capitol Hill. This, of course, coming from a push by lawmakers to ban the app. They're talking a lot about national security concerns. A lot of concerns about China having access to that data.

CNN National Security Reporter Natasha Bertrand is covering this for us. We expected a grilling. And I would say, out of the gate, that the lawmakers did not disappoint, Natasha.

NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Out of the gate, Erica. They have been really grilling the CEO about privacy concerns, data protection concerns and, of course, about the concerns about ByteDance, which is the parent company, the Chinese parent company of TikTok.

But look, the CEO made a lot of points there to try to rebut these national security concerns. And chief among them is what he described as a project called Project Texas. Now, that has been TikTok's main apparatus through which they have tried to convince lawmakers and the American public writ large that the user data that TikTok is collecting on U.S. users will not be routed outside the United States. And what he said is that TikTok has built a firewall to shield U.S. user data from unauthorized foreign access. And that that data is now being stored on servers in the United States hosted by Oracle, which is an American company.

And so, basically what he is saying is that U.S. user data is going to be stored by default and currently is on U.S. servers on U.S. soil. And that that data is essentially under lock and key by an American company hosted by American employees. And so, that is his main argument here with regard to the national security concerns the privacy concerns.

However, the Democratic Ranking Member of the committee said, just in response to those comments that he does not believe that that is going to go far enough. Now, he did not explain why he thinks that storing U.S. data on U.S. servers is going to prevent -- is not going to prevent American data from being sold to the Chinese or access to the Chinese, for example. But there seems to be some kind of, you know, in this sense on this committee that TikTok is not going far enough to protect American user data and that it could pose a serious national security threat, given that ownership by the Chinese company ByteDance.

Now, of course, he's still trying to alleviate those concerns, but it does not seem like lawmakers, right now, anyway, are buying it.

HILL: Yes, they don't. They don't seem to be at all.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: The words out of the chair, Cathy McMorris Rodgers' mouth was, basically, we think TikTok should be banned in the United States.

HILL: Uh-huh.

BERMAN: And the Ranking Member of the committee, the Democrat, and there is bipartisan agreement here, largely, basically said to the to the TikTok chair, you know, Shou Chew. I don't believe you. I don't believe you that there is this firewall.

HILL: Yes.

BERMAN: I don't believe the promises you're making. That's a tough place for TikTok to be, Natasha.

BERTRAND: It is because they also didn't explain why, right? And so, the TikTok CEO here is trying to explain that they have taken all of these steps to try to alleviate these concerns about the national security risk posed by TikTok saying, look, we have moved all of this user data to U.S. soil. Essentially, what more do you want? Well, it turns out that federal officials want ByteDance to sell its stake in TikTok. So, there is a complete, kind of, divorce between any Chinese entity and TikTok itself.

Now, it is unclear whether that's going to happen. But look, he was also asked many questions about content, moderation, and regulation on TikTok. And whether the content itself is being regulated to appease the Chinese government. And his answer to that was, no. We are not removing information about, for example, the massacre of -- the genocide of Uyghurs in China. We are not removing information about Tiananmen Square. You can go and look on our platform right now, and you can see it.

[10:35:00]

But the concern remains that as long as this Chinese company has this stake in TikTok and is with parent company that it is going to pose a risk to Americans. John, Erica.

HILL: And I think we know -- to John's point, we know exactly where these lawmakers stand because they were very clear from the get go and saying -- I mean, also we heard from the chair too, saying that she's zero confident that the company is not beholden by ByteDance, by the Chinese Communist for -- going through a list of the executives there and their ties to the government in China. Frank Pallone saying, it's simply unacceptable on the Project Texas, it just doesn't go far enough.

It would be interesting to see, to your point, Natasha, if there are some more pointed questions in terms of specifics but also, I think we know pretty clearly where the lawmakers stand going in. And I don't think that's the end of the fireworks today.

BERMAN: No, and Natasha, I know you're going to be watching it very closely. Please let us know if there are any new twists and turns.

All right. We have some important developments here in Manhattan. We've learned that the grand jury investigating Former President Donald Trump is meeting today, but they are not going to discuss Donald Trump. What this means ahead. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:40:00]

BERMAN: We are following breaking news out of New York. The grand jury investigating the Former President Donald Trump is meeting today, but we just learned they are not planning to discuss Trump.

HILL: CNN's Kara Scannell is outside of the court. Joining us live now with more. We knew the grand jury would meet today and I think this was not the expectation of what would be happening. So, what more do we know about, specifically, what's not happening today, Kara?

KARA SCANELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Erica and John. So, we know that the grand jury that has been hearing the evidence involving the investigation to Trump's alleged role in hush money payments is meeting today. But as you said, they will not be hearing any testimony related to the Trump related probe.

Now, that is not uncommon for a grand jury to hear multiple cases at once. But it does mean that the next time that this grand jury sits is Monday, and that is when they -- it's possible they will hear more testimony. Sources have told us that the D.A.'s office is considering bringing in another witness. And it's also the first time this grand jury, if the Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, decides to move forward with an indictment would be able to vote on that indictment.

So, it's going to be quiet down here the next couple of days. But then back on Monday, we'll be back on grand jury watch and looking to see if there is another witness. And if the jury -- if the decision is made to move forward, decides to vote that day. So, a lot to watch and wait for and -- but all is quite right here right now.

BERMAN: So as long as there is that weight -- and we should note that Alvin Bragg and the grand jury may not think of it as a weight. They may just think of this as business as usual. The expectation that something would happen, maybe that was misplaced. But while there is this time period, the D.A., he is firing back at these Republican Members of Congress who have threatened to call him before them to testify about this. What's he now saying?

SCANNELL: Yes, so the D.A.'s Office, they sent a letter to the House Republicans that had asked him to come and testify. In this letter, I mean, he's really pushing back saying that this is state territory. This is a local investigation. He says that this letter treads into territory very clearly reserved to the states. He says, this is an unprecedented inquiry into a pending local prosecution. He also says that the proper place for this to be challenged, if Donald Trump is charged, is in the courts. Not through Trump's allies in Congress.

So, a pretty starkly worded letter pushing back. But he does say, look, we will meet and confer with you and get to the bottom of what it is the committee wants to look at. And he's saying he wants to, you know, offer the opportunity if they have a real legislative purpose and asking for information. But very strongly pushing back on this request from the House for him to come testify. Saying, we're the state office. We're prosecuting this. Step away. John, Erica.

HILL: Kara Scannell, with the very latest for us. Appreciate it. Thank you.

BERMAN: So, former U.S. Attorney Michael Moore joins us now.

OK. Michael, what can be read into the timing of this? There were those that Donald Trump may have been the one who fanned the flames here. Who said that there could be an indictment earlier this week, that doesn't look like it's going to happen. They won't meet again. The grand jury on Trump until Monday. How do you read this?

MICHAEL MOORE, PARTNER, MOORE HALL IN ATLANTA AND FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY: Well, I'm glad to be with both of you. It looks to me like this just gives Trump an extra few days to operate the cash register. He's using this to make money. He's using these threats to reach out to donors. He's already, you know, cloaking himself in the -- as the martyr in the case. And so, it's just more time.

You know, there's nothing particularly unusual about a grand jury taking some period of time. And this may simply be a scheduling matter. This could be a witness that couldn't be available or a lawyer representing a witness that had another court appearance and didn't come today but could come next week. Nothing particularly odd in that, you know.

I'm more concerned, more interested in, sort of, the leaks of when it may happen and how it may happen and what they're considering. I think that plays into Trump's hand a little bit, and I'd like to see it just sort of everything on the on the quiet and then suddenly that they're going to pop up with an indictment. Let them do it.

But again, nothing particularly odd about needing to reschedule, except that it does give more time for Trump and his representatives and his team to continue to make this out as if somehow, you know, he's being victimized, and so he would -- he needs to be supported. He's just talking on the megaphone that he's been handed.

HILL: And again, to be clear, we have no idea despite what the former president has said, there is no indication either way about whether charges will be fired, which is also -- filed rather --

[10:45:00]

MOORE: Correct.

HILL: -- which is an important reminder.

Let's move, if we could, to another legal issue involving the former president. So, when we're looking at the classified documents probe here, the fact that a judge has now ordered -- has said, yes. In fact, Evan Corcoran, you do -- the president's attorney. You do have to, former presidents attorney, you have to testify tomorrow now that attorney-client privilege is waived here.

This is, by my understanding, from every attorney that I have spoken to in the last 24-36 hours. This -- rare is an understatement, in terms of how often this would happen. Help us understand what would be -- what would he be asked about at this point. Does this mean all attorney-client privilege is waived here or are there very specific parameters as to what can be discussed with that testimony will be about?

MOORE: Well, it's -- it is extraordinary and it's -- it places Corcoran in a very odd place. I mean, on the one hand, he's either got to come forward and say, I knew the -- this letter of representations that were made was false when I made it, that's bad on him, or he's got to come forward and say, I didn't really know. I just did what I was told, that also was bad on him.

And so, that's a -- he's in an odd spot. My guess is that the judges got to keep the testimony fairly limited around those things that may affect obstruction. You know, he won't be allowed to give testimony about things that happened years ago or advice he may have given to the former president at some point unrelated to the documents case. But it will be limited in that way because really, attorney-client privilege is so sacrosanct. And there's great care by the courts to protect that. A great care by lawyers to do it.

I do think the documents case and the federal case, to me, is such a stronger case, especially, we're looking at what the special counsel is doing than this case in New York. And so, I would hope and I sure do wish that the delay in New York was actually going to allow the special counsel to move forward first. I hate to see a case that might not be the strongest case pending with a case that makes the law and sets the tone for the rest of the cases around the country. You know, weak cases can make bad law, yes, for the for the remaining cases, ever stronger cases.

And so, you know, we're kind of running a horse race to see which ones coming. And I would suggest that the Jack Smiths (ph) might be the horse to ride in the race.

BERMAN: We've been polling our fence (ph) for prosecutors and former prosecutors. In your career, how often was this attorney-client privilege did the judge say it could be pierced?

MOORE: Almost never. Almost never. I mean, I've tried to think back over cases I was involved in and it's a rarity. I mean, there's a crime product section that allows this type of testimony to come in. But you just don't see it. And I think one of the problems is -- and you can tell from the statements that have come out just for the last few months, Trump is a difficult client to control.

These are different -- difficult clients to be able to say, this is how we need to do it. Let me run the legal strategy. Of course, on nature input weight. Well, you need your client to be 100 percent honest with you all the time. Tell you even the stuff that's bad to allow you to give them good legal advice on how to move forward. Trump seems to want to, sort of, play all parts of this. As if he's somehow the puppet master. Not just of, you know, the peace political underlings, but also the lawyers involved in this case and the representative. That just -- that's a recipe for failure. HILL: Michael Moore, always great to have you with us. Appreciate your insight this morning. Thank you.

This hour, Secretary of State Antony Blinken testifying on Capitol Hill. All this while facing a possible subpoena for documents related to the withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021, those details ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:50:00]

HILL: Happening now, Secretary of State Antony Blinken testifying, you see him here. He sits right before the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The focus challenges facing American diplomacy, at the moment.

BERMAN: But a committee aide says, they may subpoena the State Department for documents related to the Biden ministrations withdrawal from Afghanistan. CNN National Security Correspondent Kylie Atwood is with us now. The deadline for these documents was supposed to be 5:00 p.m. last night. So, where do things stand?

KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: That's right. And as far as we know, yesterday, according to a source familiar with the matter, there were about 3,000 pages of documents that the State Department shared with Congress, with Chairman McCall and his committee regarding the Afghanistan withdrawal. But when it comes to the specific documents that McCall actually wants, only one of those sets of documents was actually shared.

So, essentially, what that means is that we're teed up right now for subpoenas to come from the committee to the secretary of state because essentially the documents that they have been specifically requesting over the period of the last few months just haven't all been provided to the committee.

So, the three things that they're looking for are, number one, emergency evacuation plans from the embassy. That has been provided to them. The other thing is the actual after-action report that the State Department did that looked at what they didn't do well or lessons that they could have learned from the withdrawal. The secretary of state said they're going to be putting out that report next month, in the coming weeks, but they still haven't provided to the committee. And then the third thing was this dissent cable that diplomats actually wrote to State Department leadership before the evacuation. Pleading with them to do more to prepare for the evacuation. That is also not a document that the committee has received.

[10:55:00]

So, we're in a situation here where it's going to be a legal battle between this committee and the State Department. I think it's also important to note that as we're watching this testimony this morning, Chairman McCall actually introduced the mother-in-law of one of the service members who died during the withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. He talked about the fact that this woman is someone who still has questions, and so does the committee, about how these U.S. service members died. And he said that he and the rest of the committee are not going to rest until they get those answers and until there is accountability for those who, you know, were in charge of this withdrawal, which was obviously incredibly chaotic and deadly. Guys.

HILL: Yes, absolutely. Kylie, really appreciate it. Thank you.

Thanks to all of you for joining us this morning. I'm Erica Hill.

BERMAN: It was great to be with you today. I'm John Berman. "At This Hour with Kate Bolduan" starts after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:00:00]