Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

Iran Launches Largest Ever Attack Against Israel; Vance And Walz Take Debate Stage. Aired 5:30-6a ET

Aired October 02, 2024 - 05:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL)

[05:33:38]

KASIE HUNT, CNN ANCHOR: All right, 5:33 a.m. on the East Coast in the U.S. This is a live look at Beirut, Lebanon where it is shortly -- it's about 12:30 p.m. -- just after noon there. Overnight, Israel launched more airstrikes there after initiating a ground operation in the country's south targeting Hezbollah. That's what it looks like at this hour.

Good morning, everyone. I'm Kasie Hunt. It's wonderful to have you with us.

The world now waiting anxiously to see how Israel will respond to Iran's deadly missile attack.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Whoa!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: The IDF says 180 missiles were fired from Iran into Israeli territory on Tuesday killing at least one person.

And here in the U.S. the two presidential candidates taking very different approaches in their response to the crisis.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAMALA HARRIS, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We will never hesitate to take whatever action is necessary to defend U.S. forces and interests against Iran and Iran- backed terrorists.

DONALD TRUMP, (R) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The whole world is laughing at us. That's why Israel was under attack just a little while ago because they don't respect our country anymore. The so-called enemy doesn't respect our country any longer.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: All right, let's go live to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia where we find former U.S. Defense secretary Mark Esper. Mr. Secretary, very grateful to have you on this critical morning as we all wait to see --

[05:35:08]

MARK ESPER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST, FORMER U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY, TRUMP ADMINISTRATION (via Webex by Cisco): Good morning, Kasie.

HUNT: -- how Israel is going to respond to this.

Can you give me a sense of what your view is about the best way for them to move forward? Because we've seen some rhetoric from Israeli -- former Israeli officials. Like, Naftali Bennett told my colleague Wolf Blitzer yesterday that Israel should seize this opportunity to strike Iranian nuclear facilities.

Do you think that's a good idea? And is there any way to walk back from the brink?

ESPER: Well, clearly, yesterday's strike by Iran was significant but also feckless. They shot over 180 missiles and none of them hit their mark in terms of killing anybody, thank goodness, or causing a lot of damage. And so it was a very significant attack once again proven feckless.

The issue now, of course, is what does Israel do in response, and I feel that they will respond. They're not going to do what they did the last time in April because Iran had crossed that threshold.

I think also the strategic environment with regard to the region has changed significantly as well. Back in April, of course, Ismail Haniyeh was still in charge of Hamas and the war in Gaza was still ongoing in southern Lebanon. But Hezbollah -- you had Nasrallah still in charge and his leadership. But now those two entities -- that leadership structure -- those leaders are completely gone. And the concern that Israel might have had in the past that responding boldly back to Iran might cause Hezbollah to strike from the northern plank. That seems to be not the case anymore.

So I expect Israel will respond. The question is what type of targets will they strike? Will they go inside Iran after nuclear sites, after ballistic missile production sites, or will they go outside Iran in the Persian Gulf, for example, and attack oil infrastructure, attack oil rigs? That remains to be seen.

HUNT: Mr. Secretary, do you think there's any possibility for a negotiated ceasefire deal in the region at that point? We seemed close to it not that long ago.

ESPER: Well, we've had a couple of different proposals, right? We had the one in Gaza, which has been rejected multiple times by Hamas. And, of course, Gaza is not the focus right now.

You had one proposed by the Biden administration a few days ago -- a week ago -- a 21-day ceasefire -- but Israel had different plans.

At this point they've been successful again in decimating Hamas' leadership and knocking out their command and control, and now we're on the cusp of an incursion to go after a lot of the infrastructure on the border.

So I don't know that, frankly, it's in Israel's interest at this point to have a ceasefire, and maybe not for the United States' interest as well. When you've got terrorist organizations across the region on their back foot and decimated maybe now's the time to press that advantage and make sure you take out more of that infrastructure so you remove these threats.

I do think the one thing that is out there that's pending here -- some in the region talking about it -- that is a reintroduction of U.N. resolution 1701, which you may recall was passed after the last conflict between Hezbollah and Israel in 2006. That called for Israel, after the conflict, to move south of the -- of the Lebanese border and then for Hezbollah to move north of the -- of the Lebanese border about 18 miles. Hezbollah never lived up to its end of the bargain.

And so now the question is if Israel goes in and removes infrastructure can you get a more concrete agreement about Hezbollah staying back from the border, maybe up to the Litani River 18 miles away, and thus prevent what has been going on now for 11 months with Hezbollah nearly daily striking targets in Israel.

HUNT: Mr. Secretary, I was just speaking with David Sanger, a longtime New York Times correspondent who I'm sure you know. And he wrote in his piece today that these five weeks of the presidential campaign may represent a unique opportunity, frankly, for Benjamin Netanyahu.

Do you see it that way? And also, do you see a material difference between how a Trump administration versus how a Harris administration would handle this?

ESPER: You know, first, on the last question. It's hard to predict how each administration will handle this.

You know, I presume Vice President Kamala Harris will follow more in Biden's stream in terms of his policy approach, but we don't know. She may be -- she can tell us at some point.

And President Trump, at times, has been unpredictable. I saw him, at moments, pull back from striking Iran if you think more along the summer of 2019 when they shot down one of our drones. And then in the past he's taken other action which is far more bold in terms of the killing of Qasem Soleimani.

So it's hard to say with regard to each.

With regard to the broader question, what's interesting now is -- and look, at this point there's not going to be anything in terms of a ceasefire that's going to turn the American election one way or the other. But interestingly, you've seen Bibi Netanyahu's political capital improve greatly in the last couple of weeks, I think in terms of is action he's taken against Hezbollah. And that's been, to me, a stark change over the past 11 months.

[05:40:18] HUNT: All right, former Defense secretary Mark Esper. So grateful for your time this morning. Thank you very much for being with us.

ESPER: Thanks, Kasie.

HUNT: All right, let's turn now to this. Tim Walz and J.D. Vance, of course, faced off in the final debate that's currently scheduled for this election cycle. The two vice presidential candidates met on stage here in New York City last night where they battled it out but really remained fairly civil, something that has been increasingly uncommon in today's volatile political landscape.

The country's often charged and fraught divisions were most notably on display at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. As a reminder, on that day almost four years ago rioters stormed the Capitol building. The event ultimately left multiple people dead.

But Walz and Vance had two different -- very different takeaways from that notorious day in Washington, D.C.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. TIM WALZ, (D) VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Donald Trump refused to acknowledge this. He lost this election, and he said he didn't. One hundred forty police officers were beaten at the Capitol that day, some with the American flag, and several later died.

SEN. J.D. VANCE (R-OH), U.S. VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: It's really rich for Democratic leaders to say that Donald Trump is unique threat to democracy when he peacefully gave over power on January 20 as we have done for 250 years in this country.

WALZ: Did he lose the 2020 election?

VANCE: Tim, I'm focused on the future.

WALZ: That is a damning --

VANCE: She tried to --

WALZ: That is a damning non-answer.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: All right, the panel -- the panel is back.

Errol Louis, let me -- let me start with you here. First of all, you know, the idea that this is just our political divisions on display is one that I reject as someone who was there that day. There was a lot more to it.

Why is this question so relevant in a vice presidential debate? It just speaks to what we saw from our then-Vice President Mike Pence who stood in the way of Donald Trump when Donald Trump tried to get him to overturn the election. And that's why it's an issue that J.D. Vance doesn't seem to be answering this question. What do you see here, and why do you think Vance is doing what he's doing?

ERROL LOUIS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, POLITICAL ANCHOR, SPECTRUM NEWS, HOST, "THE BIG DEAL WITH ERROL LOUIS": It's a -- it's a real question. We're going to have an election in 34 days, and then after that we have to ensure that the results of that election are respected. And, you know, next January 6 we'll have the same issue all over again. And on January 20, hopefully, we'll have a peaceful transition of power.

J.D. Vance has to do what every true Trump follower has to do, which is buy his claim that somehow, he won the election. And it's absurd, and it's infuriating, and in some ways it's immoral given what happened on January 6 -- the lives that were lost, and property that was damaged, and the breaching of the Capitol, and so forth. All of the violence. But that is the price of being on Donald Trump's team.

And I think Gov. Walz did a good job of making J.D. Vance pay the full price for that. When you buy that lie and you swallow that claim you end up looking ridiculous.

HUNT: Margaret Talev, we were talking to voters last night in focus groups and across the country, and one in Michigan said that this January 6 answer actually impacted their vote. That they were undecided. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHIGAN VOTER: I'm going to be voting for Kamala Harris. One of the stark, sort of, aspects of that debate that really stuck with me was when they were talking about January 6. J.D. Vance didn't really give us a definitive answer and I'm disappointed in that fact. And I don't think that I can trust someone with my vote if they're not going to respect it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: It's a really interesting way to put it, Margaret -- "I don't think I can trust someone with my vote if they're not going to respect it."

MARGARET TALEV, SENIOR CONTRIBUTOR, AXIOS, DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE FOR DEMOCRACY, JOURNALISM AND CITIZENSHIP, SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY: Yeah. I think that moment was probably Tim Walz's strongest moment in the debate last night. J.D. Vance is a more gifted debater. He had more command throughout most of the night.

And I think Tim Walz had three really strong moments relatively. One was talking about the problem -- bipartisan problem with teenagers and guns. One was talking about women's reproductive rights. And it was that moment on January 6 where he was really able without a lot of judgment or facial memes or any of the -- any of that stuff to just say to Vance, sort of, really?

[05:45:00] I do think there are Americans for whom they're basically weighing economic and pocketbook issues, like can they get more money in their pocket again if they re-elect Donald Trump, or border security issues against these sort of ideas of chaos, governance, respect for democracy, following the rules. Kind of a return to those sort of normalcy issues. We hear this again and again in focus groups.

And that moment last night -- although it's sort of ridiculous to think that any vice president could really tell Donald Trump what to do were he re-elected -- like, Trump has shown again and again he's the executive and he would make the decisions. But even so, I think for some voters who were still weighing that money in my pocket versus are we conducting ourselves -- you know, how we conduct ourselves. For those voters that moment last night may have been clarifying.

HUNT: Very interesting.

All right. Still ahead here on CNN THIS MORNING the world waits for Israel's response after the massive missile attack from Iran. And now, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowing to make Iran pay a price for the assault.

Plus, we break down how both candidates handled questions about immigration at the vice presidential debate. That is an issue that many polls show Trump leads Harris on.

(COMMERCIAL)

[05:50:25]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WALZ: Donald Trump had four years -- he had four years to do this. And he promised you, America, how easy it would be. I'll build you a big, beautiful wall, and Mexico will pay for it. Less than two percent of that wall got built and Mexico didn't pay a dime.

VANCE: Look, I think what Tim said just doesn't pass the smell test. For three years, Kamala Harris went out bragging that she was going to undo Donald Trump's border policy. She did exactly that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: All right, Gov. Tim Walz and Sen. J.D. Vance trading blame over the border. During one of the debate's more heated moments Gov. Walz brought up the recent controversy swirling around Springfield, Ohio as Vance and his running mate Donald Trump have pushed false claims about Haitian migrants there eating pets.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WALZ: That vilified a large number of people who were here legally in the community of Springfield. The Republican governor said it's not true -- don't do it.

VANCE: The people that I'm most worried about in Springfield, Ohio are the American citizens who have had their lives destroyed by Kamala Harris' open border. It is a disgrace, Tim. And I actually think -- I agree with you. I think you want to solve this problem, but I don't think that Kamala Harris does.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HUNT: Matt Gorman, how do you evaluate how this issue played out on stage last night? Because this is, again, an issue that Republicans -- you know, voters tell us they trust Republicans more on it than they trust Democrats.

MATT GORMAN, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER, TIM SCOTT'S PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: I mean, look, this was a way -- and I expected J.D. to press it to his advantage on this and he certainly did.

And you're also -- he was careful. Talking to a lot of the Vance team going into this they viewed this in a couple of ways. One of the things they really wanted to do was J.D. was very aware of his vulnerabilities, very aware of the challenges with his image and some of the rockier rollouts, so he wanted to kind of disarm the critiques. And I think that's why you saw his answer on Springfield there was the way it was.

And so I think he was really able to press that case on immigration and didn't really let up. And I think it was really one of the stronger moments.

Look, you obviously need to be ready for the difficult and expected questions. J.D. was -- say, on abortion or 2020 -- but you also need to make sure you run up the score on what ones are advantageous to you. This was that for J.D.

HUNT: Meghan Hayes, how did you read this? Because obviously, they had previously really dug in on these Haitian migrants eating pets, insisting the evidence was there, et cetera, et cetera. A different tone last night.

MEGHAN HAYS, FORMER WHITE HOUSE DIRECTOR OF MESSAGE PLANNING, DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION CONSULTANT: Well, let's not forget that he admitted that he made it up -- that he made up the entire thing to get attention -- to get the media to pay attention to something that's not even true. So, I mean, I don't want people to forget that point here.

But I do think -- look, this is -- this is a tough issue for Democrats. I think that Kamala Harris and Gov. Walz are closing the gap here in people who can see that she could handle this issue. I think she was down last week at the border, and she gave a really great speech. She's showing some leadership.

I think that the governor is also putting forth some more meat on this and drawing attention that the Congress is the one who did not pass the border bill at the direction of Donald Trump.

So I think it is not the top issue for Democrats. I think that the governor did what he could do here to make American people see the difference and the contrast, but it -- but again, this is not their top issue. But I think that he did a great job in defending their stances here.

HUNT: Margaret Talev, you spend a lot of time talking to voters. How do they see how this has cut since the last debate in terms of -- you know, there have been inflammatory false claims made. The city of Springfield, Ohio has really suffered. And yet, we also see people continue to say that they trust Republicans more on immigration.

TALEV: Yeah. I think you actually expressed it perfectly. We just see it again and again and again, not just in polling but in the focus groups where you really draw out these sort of qualitative gut feelings. The two strongest areas for Trump and the two weakest areas for Harris are the idea not just of the economy but inflation -- the price of goods, the price of housing, and border security.

And I think what we saw Tim Walz try to do last night was to argue that you can do two things at once. You can be compassionate towards immigrants and mindful of the actual positive impact that immigrants have on the U.S. economy while still needing to beef up border controls. But because he's not the world's greatest debater I think he pulled on threads of that case, but he didn't make it particularly forcefully.

And I think it's really going to be up to Kamala Harris to change people's minds. People are not going to change their minds about which presidential candidate they're going to vote for because a running mate does or doesn't make the sharpest arguments in the debate.

[05:55:00]

This is -- border security remains a real deficit for Harris. And in these battleground states where the race is too close to call right now is one of the areas where if she wants to move the needle, she needs to change the way people think about her command of this issue.

HUNT: All right. Our panel, Matt Gorman, Meghan Hays, Margaret Talev. Errol Louis, I'm sorry we didn't get a last word in from you. I hope you'll come back one-on-one soon so we can talk some more. Thank you very much.

In our next hour here on CNN THIS MORNING a largescale missile attack. The U.S. vowing Iran will face severe consequences for its attack against Israel.

Plus, a civil debate with some niceties, but J.D. Vance and Tim Walz did clash on issues like abortion.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VANCE: We have a big country and it's diverse. And California has a different viewpoint on this than Georgia. Georgia has a different viewpoint from Arizona.

WALZ: How can we as a nation say that your life and your rights, as basic as the right to control your own body, is determined on geography?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL)