Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

Democrats Flip Santos' House Seat, Shrinking GOP Majority; Mayorkas Becomes First Cabinet Secretary Impeached in Almost 150 Years; Ukrainian Military Says, Drone Destroys Large Russian Warship. Aired 7-7:30a ET

Aired February 14, 2024 - 07:00   ET

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

[07:00:00]

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: That's creative.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN ANCHOR: What else you got?

NATHANIEL MEYERSOHN, CNN BUSINESS REPORTER: So, we have an important question for you guys. Phil and Poppy, how did you guys meet your spouses?

HARLOW: Phil is first.

MATTINGLY: The old-fashioned way. A friend said she had a co-worker that was amazing and really out of my league. And I said, challenge accepted.

HARLOW: We have pictures.

MEYERSOHN: So, you're a baby boomer.

MATTINGLY: I'm not a baby boomer. That's (INAUDIBLE). Yes, met at a bar. Like people used to do, the old-fashioned way, at a bar.

HARLOW: Same, at a bar in the middle of February in Minnesota, I was 22 years old, so like a couple of years ago. And I remember he was wearing, you know, those Adidas slide-on flip-flops?

MATTINGLY: Don't act like that.

HARLOW: Like who is this guy? It's February in Minnesota. I think I was dressed up as Britney Spears at the time. That was my jam. So --

MATTINGLY: That's a cool story.

HARLOW: Well, yes, yes. It turned out great.

MATTINGLY: It turned out lovely. Young people meet in-person, dress like Britney Spears, wear slides in the winter. That's a takeaway.

MEYERSOHN: There you go. That's what I'm going to take away.

HARLOW: Happy Valentine's Day. MEYERSOHN: Happy Valentine's Day.

HARLOW: We'll look for your Costco date.

MEYERSOHN: See you soon.

HARLOW: CNN This Morning continues now.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

REP.-ELECT TOM SUOZZI (D-NY): We won.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: A major victory for Democrats, Tom Suozzi winning the special House election in New York.

SUOZZI: Our message is very clear. Either get on board or get out of the way.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Some Republicans turning their anger towards fellow Republicans who voted to expel George Santos.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A new statement that we've just gotten from the Biden campaign. It starts with the words, Donald Trump lost again tonight.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is going to have massive implications for the slim majority and the GOP's ability to govern.

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): The resolution is adopted.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The House voted to impeach Alejandro Marorkas, the Homeland Security secretary.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What has happened to our southern border is a travesty brought to us by the Democrats.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a terrible impeachment. It sets a terrible precedent.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think it's shameful and is purely designed to provide election fodder for Donald Trump and the Republicans.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you really want to secure a border, you better fire Biden and hire Trump.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MATTINGLY: All right. Good morning, everyone. It is the top of the hour. I'm Phil Mattingly with Poppy Harlow in New York.

And Democrats scored another huge victory in flipping a House seat once held by George Santos. Now, Republicans already razor-thin majority in the chamber is getting even slimmer.

Tom Suozzi, the Democratic winner, says his win is a reflection of Americans being sick and tired of Republicans bowing to Donald Trump and refusing to work together on immigration and other urgent problems.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SUOZZI: It's time to move beyond the petty partisan bickering and the finger-pointing. It's time to focus on how to solve the problems. It's time to get to work on immigration.

Let's send a message to our friends running the Congress these days, stop running around for Trump and start running the country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: Losing the seat has big implications for House Republicans and their ability to pass legislation once Suozzi is seated. Speaker Mike Johnson can afford to lose only two Republican votes if he's trying to push through a bill without any Democratic support. Overnight, Trump blasted the Republican candidate who lost, and he

called her a very foolish woman. Notably, Trump did not endorse Mazi Pilip, and for most of her campaign, Pillip wouldn't say whether she voted for Trump in 2020.

MATTINGLY: Now, Nikki Haley was running against Donald Trump in the Republican primary blaming Trump for the loss. Her campaign releasing a statement saying, let's just say the quiet part out loud, Donald Trump continues to be a huge weight against Republican candidates.

Miguel Marquez starts things off for us live in Glen Cove, New York. Miguel, we were talking about it earlier. It's not that Suozzi won, it's the margin that I think was so surprising here. How do you get this far?

MIGUEL MARQUEZ, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, the margin was just incredible. And as you spoke to voters, because they had, what, nine days of early voting, and as you spoke to voters that had already voted, because they were saying one thing before early voting started. And then as early voting started, people were actually going to the polls. It was both anger over Santos and direction of the country were the biggest concerns.

And that direction of the country was on both sides. Republicans saying they didn't like where the Democratic Party was going and they didn't like Biden very much, but lots and lots of independents and Democrats coming out and saying they don't like the politics of Donald Trump, they don't like the idea of him coming back, and that's what drove them to the polls.

The turnout numbers were also big. It looks to be about 30, 32 percent or so, which, for a special election in the middle of February, is pretty darn big. Tom Suozzi is a well-known centrist. When he spoke to his supporters last night, he reinforced that point.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SUOZZI: We addressed the issues and we found a way to bind our divisions.

So, now we have to carry the message of this campaign to the United States Congress and across our entire country.

[07:05:06]

Either get on board or get out of the way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MARQUEZ: And even though we had this massive snowstorm, and that may have played some part in the number of Republican voters that came out on Election Day, those numbers were up for both Democrats and Republicans.

So, I think a lot of folks are going to look at this race and draw a lot of lessons from both the way Tom Suozzi ran and the way Republicans tried to run somebody in this district as well. Back to you guys.

HARLOW: Do you have a sense of when he's going to be sworn in?

MARQUEZ: Well, he would like to be sworn in today. I don't know that that's going to happen. He thought it was a possibility that could happen. But the state, there are some technical things that have to happen before he can do that. If he's not sworn in by Friday, Congress apparently goes on break and then he wouldn't be able to be sworn in on the House floor until Congress comes back in.

And yesterday, we asked him about that and he said the first thing he's going to say is wake up and realize that this is the way the country has to go toward the political center. Back to you guys.

HARLOW: Miguel, thank you. You've been covering this from the jump. We appreciate it.

For the first time in almost 150 years, a cabinet secretary has been impeached. House lawmakers impeached Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas yesterday by an extremely thin margin of one, 214 to 213, three Republicans voted with Democrats against the measure.

House Republicans accused Mayorkas of high crimes and misdemeanors for failing to enforce border laws during a crisis of high illegal immigration. Several constitutional experts say evidence does not reach that high bar.

MATTINGLY: Now, it comes after the House Republicans tried and failed to impeach Mayorkas last week on the same accusations. Now, it's highly unlikely Mayorkas will be removed by the Senate Democratic majority.

CNN's Eva McKend is live on Capitol Hill with more.

Eva, how significant is the impeachment and do we have any idea what the Senate is going to do here?

EVA MCKEND, CNN NATIONAL POLITICS CORRESPONDENT: Well, it's non- binding. It has no material impact. It is symbolically significant, Phil. As you mentioned, the first time a cabinet secretary has been impeached in 150 years, Mayorkas is also the first Latino to lead the department, so heavy with symbolism here.

But if the goal was to actually remove him from office, Republicans cannot achieve that, because Senate is still led by Democrats, and they have indicated that they have no appetite to do much with this.

Listen, Steve Scalise returned from cancer treatment, and that is what allowed House Republicans to essentially eek this out by just one vote. But there were some Republicans who opposed this. You had Congressman Gallagher, Congressman Buck, Congressman McClintock, all Republicans arguing that this amounted to a policy dispute, that Mayorkas didn't engage in public corruption or abusing power, and that this measure was not all that appropriate.

Take a listen to how members described why they didn't, they did or did not support this impeachment.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MARK GREEN (R-TN): This guy essentially subverted the laws passed by this body and that can't stand it. A cabinet secretary doesn't get to pick and choose which laws they're going to force.

REP. KEN BUCK (R-CO): This is a policy difference. You can try to put lipstick on this pig. It is still a pig. And this is a terrible impeachment. It sets a terrible precedent.

If there's a Republican president in next Congress, you better expect an impeachment of a cabinet official.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCKEND: So, again, Senate sources telling us that they aren't expected to take much time on this impeachment trial, Mayorkas himself in the weeks leading up to this dismissing this effort. Phil, Poppy?

MATTINGLY: A remarkable split screen yesterday, Republicans in the House doing this as they ran on immigration and special election, they lost. You know the Hill and politics better than anybody. Great reporting, thank you.

Well also do this morning. Ukraine's military says it sank a prominent Russian warship in the Black Sea. Video footage, looking at it here, appears to follow the drone as it approaches the warship and then you see that fiery explosion. This is the latest string of drone attacks hitting strategic targets in Russia in recent weeks.

CNN's Melissa Bell joins us now. Melissa, do we know the significance? How big of a blow this could be for the Black Sea fleet?

MELISSA BELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, what the Ukrainians are saying is that essentially they've done a disable, Phil, a third of that fleet. Now, this is, of course, significant because of the asymmetry there was. The Ukrainians simply didn't have a functioning navy in the Black Sea, and they were faced with this very substantial Russian fleet that they've managed now to disable a third of. So, that is significant. Also the way by which they carried out at this attack, I think, is interesting. What you're talking about are these highly mobile jet ski-propelled drones that are actually Ukrainian made, have a very long range, have a very long range, 800 kilometers, and really allow the Ukrainians, and this has been an important shift in their strategy, not only to use homemade weapons, but to target these substantial Russian installations, whether they are on sea or on land, in a much more agile and effective way and in a way that the Russians have a lot of great deal of difficulty countering.

So, a number of different takeaways here, including the fact that what we've seen is a shift in the Ukrainian strategy as a result of those very static front lines that we've seen over the course of the last few months to really moving their efforts to the Black Sea. That's important symbolically because you're talking about the Crimean Peninsula, where all this began, of course, back in 2014, but also strategically. Because they believe that if they can undermine Russia's strength in that area, then they might be able to cut off some of their supply lines to those front lines in Ukraine itself.

It is extremely strategically important, extremely symbolically important, has been the focus of their efforts over the last few months. What's interesting here is that they've managed to combine all of that to take out what they say is an important target.

Now, for the time being, the Kremlin is not commenting on this, but we have seen on the Russian side, some of their military bloggers, speaking to the blow that this represents. And, of course, remember that this is also psychologically an important win for Ukraine again at a time when it needs wins after so many months of very little progress on the frontlines themselves.

MATTINGLY: Yes, a really important point. Melissa Bell, thank you.

Well, President Biden is pressuring the House to maintain their support for Ukraine by voting on that $95 billion national security funding bill which cleared the Senate this time yesterday.

HARLOW: Biden saying it's critical to advancing America's national security interests, using some of his most forceful words yet, warning Republicans who oppose funding for Ukraine that history is watching. The president also said, quote, failure to support Ukraine at this critical moment will never be forgotten.

Arlette Saenz joins us from the White House this morning. I'm interested in what behind the scenes they are trying to do to push the House to even get this on the floor and move with urgency.

ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Poppy, for now, President Biden appears to be embracing the bully pulpit to urge lawmakers to pass this legislation quickly. The president really spoke in stark terms yesterday, saying it's not just about helping Ukraine on the battlefield, but also about protecting America's national security interests. He warned that not acting is playing into the hands of Vladimir Putin, which could have repercussions far beyond Ukraine. And he said that Republicans need to take notice now. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, U.S. PRESIDENT: For Republicans in Congress who think they can oppose funding for Ukraine and not be held accountable, history is watching. History is watching. History is watching. Failure to support Ukraine at this critical moment will never be forgotten.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SAENZ: But despite his warnings, President Biden is running up against the political reality in the House, where the speaker, Mike Johnson, has shown no willingness to bring up this aid package for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. Johnson is still saying that there needs to be border policy changes, even though he opposed those bipartisan efforts to do so in the Senate.

Now, the White House has not outlined exactly what they consider plan B to be. We know that House Democrats will be huddling to see if there's a way forward, but it's entirely unclear whether this will ever actually come up for a vote.

I think what's also striking about the president's speech yesterday is the way that he went out against former President Donald Trump. President Biden was particularly irked by Trump's recent comments suggesting he would encourage Russia to do whatever it wants to NATO countries who have not met their obligations. President Biden spoke very bluntly about those comments yesterday, calling them dumb, shameful and un-American.

And it comes as President Biden has really ramped up his attacks on the former president. And twice in the last month, Biden has stood here at the White House to portray the Republican Party as simply beholden to Trump. In his remarks yesterday, he said that the Republicans are facing a question of whether they will stand with America or with Trump. This is something the president and his campaign plan to really lean into in the coming months, hoping that voters will take notice in November.

HARLOW: Arlette Saenz at the White House, thank you. President Biden really slamming Trump's comments as dangerous, he also called them un- American after Trump encouraged Russia to go after NATO allies who don't pay up. More on that ahead.

MATTINGLY: Plus, a crucial legal week ahead for Donald Trump. A ruling in a civil case could come as soon as Friday. What a verdict means for Trump's business in New York and beyond, that's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:15:00]

MATTINGLY: Well, this Friday, a major decision is expected in Donald Trump's $370 million civil fraud case. The judge is expected to issue a ruling on Trump's penalties for fraudulently inflating his financial statements for a decade and on whether he'll be banned from doing business in New York State.

Joining us now is CNN's Senior Legal Analyst Elie Honig. Elie, there's a lot to get to about the legal landscape of the former president, but on this one specifically, what are we expecting from the judge when this actually comes down?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: So Phil, we've already gotten a really good preview of what this verdict is going to contain because let's remember the judge already ruled against Donald Trump on one of the seven counts before this trial began.

So, what we're looking for is a couple things. First of all, what will the judge decide on the other six counts? That's important. Second of all, as you just said, what's the bottom line dollar amount going to be? The attorney general is seeking $370 million in penalties against Donald Trump and his businesses here, obviously, if she gets anything close to that, it will be the biggest civil verdict that we've ever seen against Donald Trump, surpassing the $80-plus million that we saw a couple weeks ago in the E. Jean Carroll case.

And, finally, will the judge suspend Donald Trump's business certificates, which, of course, would impair or eliminate his ability to continue doing business in New York moving forward?

Also important to keep in mind, whatever happens, Donald Trump will have his appeal rights and a lot of this won't go into effect until after his appeals are done.

[07:20:04]

HARLOW: Can we turn to what the Supreme Court is doing with this call from Trump's team to reverse the D.C. Circuit, saying, no, he doesn't have immunity when it comes to the January 6th case? Jack Smith has now got to put a brief forward responding. Do you think the Supreme Court takes this up, Elie?

HONIG: Boy, this is going to be a close call. So, the next thing that we're going to see really within the next few days, is Jack Smith's position on this.

Now, Jack Smith, again, I will make the least bold prediction in legal history and say, Jack Smith will urge the Supreme Court, A, not to take the case, and, B, to unfreeze the district court. But the problem for Jack Smith is, two months ago, you may remember, he made an emergency motion to the Supreme Court. And he begged them to take this very case. In fact, he said, it is imperative that you when only you, Supreme Court, can decide this case.

So he's going to do a 180, watch for this. And the way he's going to justify that, he's going to say, well, now, unlike two months ago, now we have this really compelling decision from the D.C. Court of Appeals, so we're good.

But that's a little bit disingenuous, because two months ago, he said, forget about the D.C. Court of Appeals. In fact, skip them, because only you, Supreme Court, can take this case. Ultimately, you need four of them to take the case. You need five of them to pause the proceedings down in the district court, and this one is going to be a really close call.

MATTINGLY: Do you think the judges -- the Supreme Court justices does care about being disingenuous? And I'm not trying to be snarky when I say that. Does that matter in their calculation? You said this originally. Now you're saying this. We know why, but we're going to go back to what you said originally.

HONIG: It's actually a very good question, Phil. I tend to look at these things pragmatically. I think the Supreme Court justices may roll their eyes and go, boy, quite a change of heart you've had, Mr. Smith. But I don't think they're going to say, you're automatically bound to what you said two months ago. I think Smith is a good enough lawyer that he'll say, look, circumstances have changed, and so I do view it sort of pragmatically.

And the things that Jack Smith asked for before are not necessarily binding on him now, so long as he can explain why it's substantially different.

HARLOW: When do you think this is all going to play out, Elie? Like so the Trump's brief went in and now Smith is going to respond with a brief. How long, because time is of the essence here, in different ways, right? Trump wants it to take a lot of time and Smith wants this thing to get moving.

HONIG: Yes, one is pushing one way, one's pushing the other way. The Supreme Court has given Jack Smith until early next week to put in his paper. It wouldn't surprise me at all if he responds in less time than that, maybe even today or tomorrow. I think he wants to make a point here that time is of the essence. And I think we'll hear from the Supreme Court within a week or so of that. I think everyone understands that whatever is going to happen with this case, whether the Supreme Court's going to take it up fully or not, time does matter.

And the Supreme Court, generally speaking, has really three options. On one extreme, they can just say, no, we're not taking it, we're out, everything goes back to the trial court, you're unfrozen, have at it. The other extreme is the Supreme Court could say, everything remains frozen, we're going to take this case, we're going to set out a briefing schedule, it's going to be deliberate, it's going to take months. And then there's a middle ground where they could say, okay, trial court, you can resume, but we're going to hear things on an expedited basis. They have a lot of flexibility here. And it's really -- I think anyone who tries to predict what the Supreme Court does next is in for a surprise.

MATTINGLY: Yes, a lot to watch. We'll wait and see. Elie Honig, thank you.

Well, this morning, a U.S. official says hostage talks between Israel and Hamas are, quote, productive and serious, Hamas calling the last 24 hours of negotiations critical. HARLOW: And Donald Trump encouraging Russia to invade countries that do not meet their NATO obligations. Former Defense secretary under Trump, Mark Esper, is with us next to talk about that and a lot more.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:25:00]

HARLOW: Welcome back. President Biden assuring NATO allies he will not, quote, walk away from the alliance. This is after his predecessor, Donald Trump, said this over the weekend.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, well, sir, if we don't pay and we're attacked by Russia, will you protect us? I said, you didn't pay, you're delinquent? He said, yes, let's say that happened. No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You got to pay.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: President Biden responded yesterday. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: No other president in our history has ever bowed down to a Russian dictator. Well, let me say this as clearly as I can. I never will. For God's sake, it's dumb. It's shameful. It's dangerous. It's un-American. When America gives its word, it means something. When we make a commitment, we keep it. And NATO is a sacred commitment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: Joining us now, CNN Global Affairs Analyst, former Defense Secretary under President Trump, Mark Esper. Secretary, it's great to have you. I appreciate it.

DR. MARK ESPER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Good morning, Poppy.

HARLOW: Welcome to CNN as well. Glad to have you.

Do you agree with Biden's comments that what Trump said there is un- American?

ESPER: Certainly irresponsible, dangerous, and no American president that I'm aware of has ever said anything like that before.

HARLOW: But is it un-American?

ESPER: Probably, yes.

HARLOW: Yes. So, Chris Murphy, Senator Chris Murphy was on with us just a couple of days ago, and I was struck by his response to what Trump said over the weekend. Let's play that. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. CHRIS MURPHY (D-CT): What Donald Trump is doing is giving a green light to Russia, but also a green light to China as well. I mean, it's effectively an invitation for World War III.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: That part, effectively an invitation for World War III, hyperbole or something you also agree with?

ESPER: I think there's some hyperbole. We too often people are throwing around the term World War III for this or that. But, look, clearly it's an invitation. It's a green light, if not a flashing green light. And what presidents and even former presidents say matters. So, I get concerned not just about what Vladimir Putin hears, but what the ayatollah in Iran hears, and most importantly, what Xi Jinping in Beijing hears.

HARLOW: And what do they hear?

ESPER: I think they hear that America is retreating, or at least America under Donald Trump would be retreating from the world stage, would be leaving our allies exposed unless they do certain things, in this case, meet a certain spending target, which, by the way, I agree.