Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Trump Talks about China Trade Deal; Trump on Iran; Trump wants Russia in G-7. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired August 26, 2019 - 12:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:00:22] PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome to INSIDE POLITICS. I'm Phil Mattingly. John King is off today.

And we begin this hour in France, where we just heard from the president of the United States. The president's G-7 summit included a collection of woe if true claims on trade that. right now at least, have the markets feeling pretty good. The president today touted what sounds like progress on the China trade war.

Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: China called last night our top trade people and said, let's get back to the table. So we'll be getting back to the table. And I think they want to do something. They've been hurt very badly, but they understand this is the right thing to do and I have great respect for it. I have great respect for it. This is a very positive development for the world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: So here's the thing with that. The Chinese foreign ministry says that call did not happen, or if it did, they didn't know about it. But at a press conference last hour, the president says he's not making it up.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We've had many calls, not just one. This isn't one. And these are high-level calls. They want to make a deal. And, by the way, I think a deal's going to be made.

Other than President Xi, the vice president, the vice chairman, it's like the vice president, the vice chairman made the statement that he wants to make a deal, that he wants to see a calm atmosphere. He wants it all to happen. That says it there. I don't have to talk about it.

You know, you folks who were reporting before, well, we can't find any phone call. He released a statement. I didn't release it. He released a statement. QUESTION: But there were phone calls, sir, Mr. President, there were

phone calls?

TRUMP: Numerous calls.

And not only with Steve, there were calls with other people too.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: So there was indeed a statement.

But I want to get straight to France and CNN's Pamela Brown.

And, Pamela, you were -- you've been watching this all play out. What's your read on where things actually stand right now?

PAMELA BROWN, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: That's a really good question, because it's really unclear. President Trump, we just heard there, doubling down on this idea that there were these phone calls overnight with China. Steve Mnuchin wouldn't say whether there were calls, would only say there have been discussions over the past week.

And what has really changed remains unclear. The president clearly trying to restore confidence that things are back on track after what he saw with the markets, this roller coaster ride with the markets starting in Asia.

And -- but what really changed is sort of the unknown here, Phil, because China, the vice premier only said that he wanted things to be resolved with the United States and he wants calm. The president turned that into, they want to, you know, have -- strike a deal and they're -- they want to come back to the table.

But here's the thing, Phil, the negotiations were already set to resume in September. So it's really unclear at this point what is going on besides the president sort of putting a positive spin on things after these confusing mixed signals over the weekend here at the G-7 when initially the president suggested he had second thoughts in escalating the trade war. Then the White House seemed to play cleanup, saying the only regrets he had is that he didn't raise the tariffs on China. So you had that aspect of this press conference.

And then you had Iran. And there was some significant news that came out of that, first with French President Macron saying that he's working to set up talks between the Iran president and President Trump over the next few weeks and that Rouhani is actually open to that. And President Trump seemed to suggest that he would be open to that as well if the conditions were right. So that is certainly a new development here, Phil.

MATTINGLY: Yes, Pamela, no question about it. Certainly a head- spinning last 72 hours. We know you'll keep an eye on all the things that are happening right now.

And in the meantime, here with us right now to share their reporting and their insights, CNN's Nia-Malika Henderson, Olivier Knox with Sirius XM, Rachael Bade with "The Washington Post" and Julie Pace with "The Associated Press."

So I want to get -- Pamela made a great point, Iran, I think, is a very, very newsworthy item that we're going to discuss in a little bit. But I want to -- I want to start with China, obviously, because we were all paying attention over the weekend because we have no lives.

But this is also very, very important. And we've seen kind of the topsy-turvy go-around.

I want to play what President Trump said about Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And, frankly, I think that China cannot -- I don't know, maybe they can, maybe they can't. I don't think they can do that. And I think they're very smart. And I think President Xi is a great leader who happens to be a brilliant man and he can't lose 3 million jobs in a very short period of time and that's going to be magnified many times over and it's going to break down the Chinese system of trade and he can't do that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: So there's two -- there's two pieces of that sound that I want to get to and I want to start with how he's referring to President Xi, which on Friday he referred to as an enemy or tagged him with the idea of an enemy. Now he's a brilliant man. And we've -- I think the thing that I'm stuck with is, we go back and forth and this -- this is a cycle we've repeated so many times.

[12:05:07] What does it all mean?

JULIE PACE, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: A good question. The past couple of days in particular have been so volatile both with Trump's actions and with his rhetoric on trade. It is unclear whether he sees Xi as a great negotiating partner here or whether he sees him as an enemy. He might see him as a little bit of both.

And Trump, you know, when he enters into these types of negotiations, he sees his unpredictability as an asset. That is definitely true. And I think there is some element of this. He's trying to keep the Chinese off balance. He's trying to leave them a little bit confused about his own standing in this.

I do think, though, one thing is clear over the last couple of days, he is hearing from a lot of different corners within his administration, from other leaders, from others within his party, that he does need to have a little bit more clarity publicly about where we're going with this. The markets are not going to withstand weeks more of the instability that we saw last week, in part because there are other factors at play here. It's not just the trade war, it's what we're seeing -- weakness in the German economy, other factors that are contributing to this and he's going to reach a point, if he continues to be this unpredictable, where he's not going to be able to pull it back.

MATTINGLY: Yes, you mentioned the unpredictability and friend of the show Mike Shear asked him a great question, basically asking him flat out, like, the strategy of going back and forth and changing your tone, why is it happening and what does it mean. This was the president's response.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Sorry, it's the way I negotiate.

QUESTION: You know, and it's gone back and forth --

TRUMP: It's the way I negotiate. It's done very well for me over the years. And it's doing even better for the country. I think --

QUESTION: Could you talk a little bit about why you negotiate --

TRUMP: And I do think -- and I do think that, look, here's the story. I have people say, oh, just make a deal, make a deal. They don't have the guts and they don't have the wisdom to know that you can't continue to go on where a country is taking $500 billion, not million, $500 billion with a b.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: So the $500 billion number is still wrong and it always has been wrong when the president has said it, but he's making kind of a broad point here.

And, Rachael, I want to go to you with this because sometimes -- I talk to Republicans on The Hill, who obviously are opposed to what the president's doing on trade generally, although they like that he's standing up to China, who often think, like, well, maybe this will work.

RACHAEL BADE, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: We don't know.

MATTINGLY: And that's the question. Like, this is his strategy. Who knows, maybe it works. Is that -- does it work?

BADE: I mean he was able to renegotiate trade deals with Canada and Mexico. And so that -- a lot of Republicans came out against that when he terminated NAFTA and thought, you know, this was going to wind up on its head, and he was able to sort of renegotiate that. So I guess they're trying to give him a little bit of space, but, I mean, obviously this goes against Republican orthodoxy.

I think when it comes to the negotiating strategy here, I mean perhaps maybe there isn't one. I mean it seems like Trump is really cut between his gut and wanting to be tough on China and having this sort of belief that tariffs can really be good for the United States and what he's hearing from everyone else. Republicans, people here in the U.S. being afraid of the recession around the corner, in part because of the trade war. And then he's also hearing from these world leaders at the same time. I mean, Macron, just a few hours ago was saying something about how the trade tensions are -- this is creating an uncertainty in disturbing markets, creating tensions in their talks. And so he's hearing it from all around right now and it's clear he's feeling that pressure.

MATTINGLY: Yes, there's no question about it. But to the second point, the -- from the initial sound we played in that second one, is there is an economic theory in the case here, which is the United States is in a better position economically right now than China is. And I think that's true invariably when you look the -- at least the last couple months of indicators. And as such, the U.S. can outlast China to some degree if you want to have this fight. And if you want to restructure the trade relationship in its entirety, of which there are very legitimate concerns about how China operates on this front, this is the pain you have to deal with.

I think the question becomes, is the country, is the party, are the voters willing to sustain that pain? (INAUDIBLE) --

OLIVIER KNOX, CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT, SIRIUS XM: That's absolutely right. The answer to your question of can it work is, of course it can work. I mean China's much more dependent on the U.S. economy than the reverse. And so, can it work? Of course.

The question of political pain is a little more complicated because we now have more and more voices in the agricultural sector of the United States coming out and saying, this is not a sustainable course of action. On the other hand it's not -- I -- and I'm not a Chinese politics expert, but I think the Chinese have some pressure as well because some of the big economic stakeholders there, whether it's the People's Liberation Army or some -- or a group of very powerful families are also watching their bottom line and saying, you know, this is not really all that sustainable, guys.

We've come up to the threshold of a deal a couple of times it looks like, but every time they come out and say, oh, they want to do a deal, we're really close to a deal, you always hear something along the lines of, the only thing we have to address is China's -- the relationship between China's government and its economy.

PACE: No big deal.

KNOX: Which is, obviously, it's -- this is the central piece of all of this. And so suggesting that everything's done except for that is always problematic.

MATTINGLY: Yes. Yes.

KNOX: To say the least.

MATTINGLY: Nia, I want to kind of pull it back 30,000 feet.

NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER: Yes.

MATTINGLY: And you've been paying close attention to the summit throughout the course of the weekend. What's kind of your takeaway -- we had a lot of theories on takeaways going into the press conference. We've now had the press conference. What's your takeaway over all on what the president came out of this with?

[12:10:01] HENDERSON: You know, as I was watching, the only word I could think of was nishigas (ph), right, I mean because it was just --

MATTINGLY: The president said unity was his word. That --

HENDERSON: That's different from my word. I mean he was all over the place. I think we went into the press conference specifically thinking that there would be some clarity that would come out of his press conference because of all the lack of clarity leading up to it. I mean, remember, we led up to this press conference or this G Summit with Larry Kudlow essentially saying the G-7 had lost its way, sort of stirring the pot, even before you had President Trump, on foreign soil there, and then him trying to put a good face on it and talking about unity, talking about his meeting with Macron, which apparently went really well. And then with this press conference trying to put a pretty bow on everything. But it's unclear.

Like, what's happening with the China tariffs? I mean, is there a deal or is there not a deal? Does he want to make a deal? Does President Xi want to make a deal? On climate change, where does he stand on climate change? He was all over the place. Is he willing to meet with Rouhani or not? I mean if you flash back even a year ago, he seemed to be willing to meet with Rouhani without any preconditions. And now he says there would be -- there would be some preconditions. So that was my sense, it was -- you -- I had the sense of him sort of dancing on stage, talking a lot, not necessarily coming away with any clarity about the path forward on any number of really, really big issues.

MATTINGLY: Yes, but, look, if you -- if you operate by what the last G-7 Summit was, you know, low bar --

PACE: Yes.

MATTINGLY: Kind words exchanged.

KNOX: We're talking about G-7 Summits, guys. This is --

MATTINGLY: (INAUDIBLE).

HENDERSON: Are you excited.

KNOX: These are the events that George W. Bush used to describe as small talk in big rooms.

HENDERSON: Yes, yes, yes.

KNOX: Like, it's amazing that we are, once again, talking about summits that used to -- I mean it's not -- they're not wrong to say that they've kind of lost their way. This used to be an economic summit, trying to forge some kind of consensus on the economy among the big, rich democracies.

MATTINGLY: Are you -- are you implying that the summits that you and Julie and me flew very long hours on in 2014 and such didn't matter?

KNOX: Oh, man, did you break all those headlines about how like there would not be a final communique. All I could think of was, you know, my colleagues at "Bloomberg" and "Reuters" hardest hit.

MATTINGLY: It's true. But there was a one-pager today.

All right, up next, reality tests the president's various explanations about G-7 snafus.

And, get this, if you have a question on any of today's political stories for anyone here at the table, including Olivier, you can tweet us the #insidepolitics. We may just answer your question at the end of the show.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:17:03] MATTINGLY: Big confusion in France over what the president knew and when he knew it about the French president's surprise guest. Today Emmanuel Macron says he wants to arrange a meeting between President Trump and Iran's president, Hassan Rouhani. That wish comes after the French president invited the Iranian foreign minister, Javad Zarif, to drop in on the summit. Now Zarif did not meet with the American president and in real time U.S. officials called Zarif's presence a curveball and complained France kept the American side in the dark. The president, asked by reporters about Zarif's drop-in a day later, told a different story.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: No, no, that was -- he spoke to me. He asked me. I said if you want to do that, that's OK. I don't consider that disrespectful at all, especially when he asked me for approval.

And as far as Iran is concerned, that was with great respect. And I spoke to President Macron yesterday and I knew everything he was doing and I approved whatever he was doing and I thought it was fine.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MACRON: Now, Macron asked specifically about the timeline and when he looped in President Trump said this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRES. EMMANUEL MACRON, FRANCE: So the day after I decided to invite at France Minister Zarif. So I informed -- before making it, I informed President Trump that it was my idea. Not to involve the United States.

I did it on my own. I'm informed before making it President Trump. He was informed at each minute about the solution.

Each time I informed President Trump.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: It's all very helpful stuff for the tick tocks. I'm sure all the journalists are working on it.

But, look, I actually think -- obviously a lot of focus on China and with very good reason, but the Iran piece of this was fascinating to me for a number of different reasons. And I guess what's -- what's kind of your big picture takeaway, Julie?

PACE: One of my big takeaways from this live -- one, on Macron himself. I mean Macron was the head of this summit and he was really trying to establish himself as a little bit of a showman in the mold of Trump with some surprises, surprising Trump at his hotel for lunch, surprising him, he says informed, which does not sound the same as asking permission, but surprising him with this -- with the Zarif visit. I think Macron was trying to say, hey, we're players here too.

I think on Iran it goes to show the difficulty of having the U.S. and its European allies on different sides of this issue. Macron was accurate when he said, we are France, we are a party still to the JCPOA. We are still dealing with Iran on this treaty here and on this deal. And so it does put the U.S. at a little bit of a disadvantage because you have its allies that are having conversations with the Iranians, that are having -- that are -- that are trying to try to figure out a way to bring the U.S. essentially back to the table. But the U.S. isn't going to be at the table in all of those discussions. It does put Trump at a bit of a disadvantage.

MATTINGLY: Yes, it was an interesting play. But on the details, Olivier, you picked up something that I thought was really smart, and I'm going to claim credit for finding it on my own --

KNOX: Go for it (ph).

[12:20:07] MATTINGLY: Both on something that Macron said related to who's running point for Iran and also something that President Trump said.

Take a listen to this and then Olivier will explain exactly what it means afterwards.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They are out of money. And they me -- may need a short-term letter of credit or a loan. No, we're not paying. We don't pay. But they may need some money to get them over a very rough patch. And if they do need money, certainly -- and it would be secured by oil, which to me is great security. And they have a lot of oil. But it's secured by oil. So we're really talking about a letter of credit type facility.

QUESTION: From the U.S. or from -- all the other countries? TRUMP: It would be from numerous countries, numerous countries. And it

comes back. It would be -- it would expire. It would be paid back immediately.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: So at this point in the press conference people's eyes may have glazed over and letters of credit don't exactly get people excited, but it got you excited, Olivier.

KNOX: It did. It did.

MATTINGLY: Which excites me.

KNOX: Remember your -- earlier in the show you alluded to our poor professional and personal decision-making.

MATTINGLY: Explain to me -- explain to me I thought why that's important and why what Macron said about Iran (INAUDIBLE).

KNOX: The precise mechanism is not that important. The letter of credit is not that important. We know that the contours of any final -- any agreement with Iran is going to involve limits on their nuclear ambitions in return for some kind of easing of the economic pain. Don't get hung up on the letter of credit.

What is so striking is that the conversations behind the scenes have gone so far so fast that the president of the United States is talking about this precise mechanism that would be part of a deal, a preliminary deal, final deal, I'm not sure yet.

I thought it was fascinating that he got into -- they got into the weeds to that point. So we have two elements here. We have one is Macron saying, OK, I want to arrange a meeting in the coming weeks with -- between the president of the United States and the president of Iran. That suggests to me the U.N. Generally Assembly, although don't hold me to that.

But on the letters of credit, it's amazing that they've gotten this far. They've gotten so far that the president can say it would be backed -- it would be backed by oil. It would be from multiple countries, not just the United States. That's -- that suggests more progress behind the scenes than I honestly had expected on this -- on this dossier at this summit.

MATTINGLY: Yes. And, look, take everything with a grain of salt, you don't always hold the president to everything he says immediately. But the good thing about the president is, sometimes he says the things that we told him in private, and he says then publicly as well.

I want to shift over to another -- what turned into kind of a minor issue, but still is a major one, and that's Russia and the idea of the president inviting Vladimir Putin to the G-7 plus one maybe, perhaps in Florida next year.

Take a listen to what he said when he was asked about this. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think it would be better to have Russia inside the tent than outside the tent. Do we live either way? Yes, we live either way. Is it politically popular for me to say that? Possibly not.

I do nothing for politics. I know a lot of you aren't -- you're going to smile at that. I do nothing for politics. I do what's right.

President Obama was pure and simply outsmarted. They took Crimea during his term.

Would I invite him? I would certainly invite him. Whether or not he could come psychologically, I think that's a tough thing for him to do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: I can confirm Rachael Bade was smiling when the president said I do nothing for politics.

But kind of big picture here, Rachael, what's -- what's your sense of the president's thinking or strategy related to President Putin and the G-7?

BADE: I mean I -- I just think it's hilarious that he's blaming Obama for Crimea. And when he -- he's the one who has the bully pulpit right now. He could be pressing on this issue, right?

I mean this is not surprising. Trump has had friendly overtures to Russia since the 2016 election. And now that he has the Mueller report behind him, Mueller has already come up to The Hill, Democrats were not really able to land any major blows on him when it came to that hearing with Mueller and Russia and the president and so clearly he's feeling more emboldened.

And you saw with Macron inviting Iranian leaders to this meeting, I mean clearly Trump feels like, if we're going to have this in my country, I'm going to, you know, do my own inviting and -- even if this is going to causes some heartburn with the European leaders.

HENDERSON: Yes, and not only do his own inviting, picking the place, right? I mean he went on and on about the bungalows at Doral and the acreage there and every country could have their own bungalow in, you know, in detail. This idea that they have been vetting all of these other sites, 12 sites and the military involved, all of which, I think, was probably news to a lot of people. And it seems like he's settled on having this at his golf course that he says is very close to the airport.

There are other places that were four hours from the airport. Why would you want to have them there? And, of course, Florida would be a very -- is going to be a very important swing state in 2020 and this would happen right before the election.

BADE: Can I just jump in on that for a quick Congress note?

HENDERSON: Yes.

BADE: I mean Democrats are going to have a heyday with this.

MATTINGLY: Yes.

BADE: They have lawsuits --

HENDERSON: Yes.

BADE: Trying to keep the president from having foreign leaders stay at his Trump hotels. And this would be a huge boon to his business, which he says wouldn't -

HENDERSON: Oh --

[12:25:05] BADE: He claims I've lost --

HENDERSON: He said he's --

(CROSS TALK)

BADE: $3 billion to $5 billion, one of those numbers.

HENDERSON: Yes.

MATTINGLY: Yes.

BADE: And this is going to be a huge problem on The Hill. And if he does this, you can expect knives out on Capitol Hill.

MATTINGLY: Yes. I believe the word you're going to hear from Democrats is emoluments. Also the $3 billion to $5 billion number is a complete hypothetical that absolutely nobody knows where it came from and nobody can pin down.

PACE: No way to grade (ph) that right now.

MATTINGLY: But I digress.

All right, up next, a one-time congressman asks his fellow Republicans to, quote, be brave and join him in challenging President Trump in 2020.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:30:00]