Return to Transcripts main page
New Day
Sen. Kaine Reportedly On Clinton's VP Short List; Libertarian Ticket Makes Case To American Voters; Trump & Clinton Trade Blistering Attacks; Are Changes In Trump Influenced By Paul Manafort?; What Will It Take For Congress To Act On Guns?; Dems Continue Gun Vote Protest After House Adjourns. Aired 7:30-8a ET
Aired June 23, 2016 - 07:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[07:30:00] SEN. TIM KAINE (D), VIRGINA: I'm doing everything I can to help her there. But that's the only role I'm playing with the campaign.
ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: At the moment. Senator Tim Kaine, thanks very much. Great to talk to you.
KAINE: Absolutely, you bet.
CAMEROTA: Let's get to Chris.
CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Libertarian nominee, Gov. Gary Johnson. He faced tough questions on guns and about a dozen other issues at the CNN town hall last night. So, what does he think this standoff in Congress is about? What does he think the answer is to problems like Orlando? That and other issues when the governor joins us, next.
[07:30:35]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[07:34:15] CUOMO: The Democratic protests on the House floor, 20 hours and counting. You see the little ticker there on your screen. Let's talk about why this is happening. (Video playing) The pictures behind the congressman there are of victims of gun violence. Now, it led to chaos on the floor of the House because of what Democrats say is the desperate need for change.
This came up as an issue in the CNN Libertarian town hall last night, of course, because of the wake of the Orlando attack. So you have this contrast now, is this about terror, is this about guns? Let's talk about both.
Let's bring in Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson, former governor of New Mexico. Governor, good to see you again. I feel like I just saw you.
GARY JOHNSON, LIBERTARIAN PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: Alisyn said am I Cuomo'd out? Are you Johnson'd out?
[07:35:00] CUOMO: Not at all, although I am happy to see you back in the traditional garb of running shoes, as the super athlete that you are. So, what's going on on the House floor right now? What's happening there? What happened in Orlando? How do you choose to define what that problem was about? Was it about guns, was it about terror?
JOHNSON: All of the above. I mean, here we're putting into focus ISIS and really, was this individual working on behalf of ISIS? No, clearly not. But this is ISIS. ISIS is regionally contained and yet they reach out -- they say look, do this in the name of ISIS, this will help our cause. It does do that and it adds recruiting. It's like the streaker on the football field. We no longer televise the streaker on the football field. We shouldn't give attention to that.
CUOMO: Understood. We try not to say the shooters' names here anymore than isn't necessary. He did declare allegiance and responsibility for the act to ISIS. Some of your former colleagues, Republicans, are saying that's where the analysis ends. This is about ISIS and our inability to control them.
The Democrats say yes, except for that thing he had in his hands, the AR semi-automatic rifle that allowed him to kill so many people. We see that too often. Let's deal with that issue, as well. Do you see that part?
JOHNSON: Well, so as a result of what happened in Orlando -- look, we do not allow automatic weapons in this country. You can't pull a trigger and have 20 rounds go off.
CUOMO: That's not an automatic weapon.
JOHNSON: Well, it was a semi-automatic rifle that -- there are 25 million semi-automatic rifles so that, in and of itself, presents the fact that there are a lot of law-abiding citizens. I mean, the overwhelming -- I mean, there's not even a minute fraction of those rifles in the hands, really, of criminals, but yet that does exist. So we should be open to a discussion about keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.
I have not seen a proposal that ultimately might not keep guns out of my hands if I wanted to have a gun for self-protection, and that's the problem with these lists is that these lists are subject to error.
CUOMO: Well, you bring up a couple of different topics. Let's just deal with the lists because it's what you said last. You can deal with being on a list, rightfully or wrongfully, with due process. You can build that in. Maybe the bills weren't sufficient in that regard, maybe that should be debated, but you could figure that out.
JOHNSON: You're exactly right. Yes, yes.
CUOMO: If somebody on that list gets a gun, now you're at a very final and dangerous position, so I don't -- are those equivalent concerns?
JOHNSON: No, but these are the concerns and so, as president of the United States, I would certainly weigh all of that. Bottom line, you want to keep guns out of the hands of potential terrorists. You want to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. How do you accomplish that? I would be so curious to know what transpired between the FBI and the shooter in this case and what the FBI is coming up with regarding future action and how they're saying it.
CUOMO: Whether it's hearing it from the director or sources at the FBI, they tried to make a case, they couldn't. He became connected to another case but not in a material way -- that's it. In terms of how due process works now they couldn't make the case. Couldn't put him on a list.
But, they did have suspicions about him so what the FBI wants is the authority to keep guys like the Orlando murderer on a list because they know he wants to get in, even if he's not in yet. And if he tries to buy a gun they should be able to talk to him first. People say it's a violation of due process.
JOHNSON: Well, no -- well, I think what you're saying, though, is totally logical. How do you write that into public --
CUOMO: Your Republican brothers and sisters will not agree with that. They just had a bill that came up that would have covered that and they said no, no, no, no, no, too many people could get caught up in that. How long are you on the list? And the criticism becomes oh, so you're going to protect the rights of terrorists to get guns so that other people can still keep their rights, as well? Where do you come down on it?
JOHNSON: Well, if that was actually written into the bill -- if that was actually written into the bill that the FBI --
CUOMO: It was. It is in the current bill voted down.
JOHNSON: Well, then you'd have to believe that I'd be in support of that.
CUOMO: Because -- you know, you're a Libertarian --
JOHNSON: Right.
CUOMO: -- but your position -- you were once asked do you think we'd be better off -- the world would be better off if all guns were legal. You said yes.
JOHNSON: All guns were legal?
CUOMO: Oh, yes.
JOHNSON: All guns? No, no, I've not come down on the side of automatic weapons. I mean, those have been --
CUOMO: So, other than automatic weapons do you believe they should all be legal?
JOHNSON: Well, not a missile launcher -- a hand-held missile launcher. Not a hand-held nuclear device, no. We are restricted to semi-automatic weapons -- semi-automatic weapons -- 25 million semi- automatic rifles in circulation right now.
CUOMO: And mental health -- that's very sticky also, especially for a Libertarian --
JOHNSON: It's very sticky, very sticky.
CUOMO: -- because unless you have an adjudication of mental illness, how do you say what counts and what doesn't for a restriction?
[07:40:00] JOHNSON: You know, you start it off the top. Look, what's going on? Well, there's an open debate and discussion happening. I think you and I, as Americans, we're coming to a better understanding of these issues and nothing is as cut and dry as it sounds. It's just not as cut and dry.
CUOMO: But how do you get the progress, though?
JOHNSON: Well --
CUOMO: You've got these people sitting in on the floor of Congress right now. Other people are shutting off the cameras and saying we're going on vacation. You know, it's not a great discussion.
JOHNSON: Well, and as president of the United States I want to make the pitch, look, I'm looking to make things better. I suppose nothing is perfect but if it makes things better just count on me to support that.
Based on what you were saying about the lists and the FBI being able to retain this guy from -- or put this guy on a list that would not have allowed him to buy guns because of a suspicious track record, if you will, I would be open to just how that reads and how that would actually be implemented.
CUOMO: Governor Johnson, it will be nice to see what happens because of the exposure in the town hall last night to see if gives traction to the campaign.
JOHNSON: Yes, and thanks to CNN and thanks to you. I think you were a --
CUOMO: CNN sees it as part of their responsibility and you're always welcome on the show to talk about what matters.
JOHNSON: Thank you.
CUOMO: All right, Gov. Johnson, everybody. So, Vermont senator Bernie Sanders also very relevant in the race for president. He's going to join us tomorrow on NEW DAY. What is his current status? Does he still see himself as in the race? What is he doing to advance his agenda at the convention, and who is he going to endorse, if anyone? Answers tomorrow on NEW DAY -- Alisyn.
CAMEROTA: OK, Chris, Donald Trump taking direct aim at Hillary Clinton in his first big speech of the general election. Will his blistering attack be effective? Up next, we talk to a now-former Trump adviser who resigned after his own public attack.
[07:41:45]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[07:43:50]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESUMPTIVE REPUBLICAN NOMINEE: She believes she's entitled to the office. Her campaign slogan is "I'm With Her". You know what my response is to that? I'm with you, the American people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: That was Donald Trump slamming Hillary Clinton in a speech that many Republicans are hailing as his best. Was Trump able to regain his footing after a shaky few weeks?
Let's bring in Michael Caputo. He's a former Trump campaign adviser who resigned this week after taking a public jab at a former -- at the former campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski. Michael, thanks so much for being here.
MICHAEL CAPUTO, FORMER TRUMP CAMPAIGN ADVISER: Thanks for having me.
CAMEROTA: Did you hear a different tone and different substance from Mr. Trump yesterday in that speech?
CAPUTO: I did. You know, I've been hearing that tone and that substance from Mr. Trump for some years now and I was very glad to see it break through the clutter that's been flying around for quite some time. And I think it has a lot to do with the tremendous decision he made on Monday.
CAMEROTA: Explain that. How could getting rid of Corey Lewandowski change Mr. Trump's substance and tone?
CAPUTO: Well, actually, it's a lot more of -- it's not about Corey Lewandowski. It's about -- it's about the United States of America. I mean, Donald Trump has a great campaign plan, he's got some good ideas, he's a pretty solid communicator, and it was just getting cluttered and things weren't happening, things weren't' moving.
[07:45:00] And sometimes when your campaign grows to a point where things need to change, you have to change the leadership and bringing in Paul Manafort, he's got a campaign now that's ready for Hillary all the way to November.
CAMEROTA: But doesn't that suggest that Corey Lewandowski had undue influence on him? If Donald Trump couldn't see his way out of the weeds when Corey Lewandowski was there that means that Corey Lewandowski was pretty influential.
CAPUTO: Well, of course, Corey was influential. He took Donald Trump from zero to 60 miles an hour in a month, and then he took him all the way to victory in the primaries and caucuses. Nobody can take away what Corey actually accomplished. It just became a campaign that needed to go in a different direction.
And it's not uncommon for a presidential candidate to change leadership from primary to general election. I think that this isn't about Corey and I think that this has already kind of -- it's only three, four days later and it's already old news.
The speech yesterday shows a real pivot for Donald Trump. I think the people who were skeptical of his campaign in the Republican Party and others, those who were doing this dump Trump nonsense -- they've all got to start paying attention to a candidate that is now raising money at a good clip and out there communicating very solidly.
CAMEROTA: So it sounds like the way you would characterize it is that he has become more focused.
CAPUTO: Well, absolutely, and I think the campaign is more focused. Tuesday, after both Corey and I left the campaign, they were already into the rapid reaction stuff during Hillary's speech. There were things going on that could have been going on for weeks, and more and more people are being hired.
They've got a surrogate operation with a strong leader now. All of these things were in the works and it's going to be like a dam breaking. All of the great hires -- the people being hired at the convention are a great example.
CAMEROTA: You speak awfully positively for a man who resigned from the campaign this week.
CAPUTO: Well, I made a mistake on Monday, Mr. Trump didn't. And I absolutely support him 150 percent. I tried to recruit him for governor of New York State. I ran the New York State primary campaign and we had a very big win. Just because I made a quick mistake --
CAMEROTA: And when you say quick mistake, should we put that up on the screen and show what I believe you're referring to?
CAPUTO: Why not, one last time.
CAMEROTA: Let's do it. You tweeted out, "Ding dong the witch is dead!" What did you mean by that, Michael?
CAPUTO: I'm a very big fan of the Wizard of Oz and I was just thinking about it that way. Actually, you know, I was driving from Buffalo where I come from, the best city in the world, to Cleveland, where I was director of communications for Mr. Trump on caucus operations. And I was about 80 miles an hour and somebody called me and said he's been fired and I reacted. I put my phone down and by the time I got to Cleveland the world had changed for me.
CAMEROTA: I hear a lot in that statement. You were driving at 80 miles per hour while talking on the phone and tweeting.
CAPUTO: I didn't tell you what state I was in. CAMEROTA: There was a huge infraction happening.
CAPUTO: I didn't say what state I was in.
CAMEROTA: Right. So, yes, that was a reference to Corey Lewandowski and you resigned once that blew up.
CAPUTO: Well, you know, it -- these are unforced errors. In a presidential election where you're running against a juggernaut like Hillary Clinton, you can't have senior aides making stupid mistakes. It was supposed to be funny. It wasn't funny.
You know, I didn't treat my candidate with the respect that he deserved. And most importantly, now that Mr. Trump has made these decisions on Monday, he's going to pivot and he's going to get the campaign that he's always deserved. I really believe that.
CAMEROTA: Before Monday and Corey Lewandowski being let go, was there chaos inside the campaign?
CAPUTO: I don't think you would call it chaos. Both Corey and Paul Manafort were trying to work closely together. It's just that Paul Manafort and Corey had different agendas. And Paul Manafort's campaign plan, which is now -- you know, was a plan to win in November -- wasn't being executed on. By making these decisions on Monday, Donald Trump widened his path to the presidency by five, 10 feet on both sides.
CAMEROTA: So, what is that plan? What is Paul Manafort's plan?
CAPUTO: It's about communicating. I mean, I think if you listened to the speech yesterday, Donald Trump distilled it down to the most important message of this campaign, and that's are you for change or are you for more of the same? Hillary Clinton is eight more years of Barack Obama. And the more he stays on that message and communicates the positive things that he wants to do to bring that change, which he did in the speech yesterday, the closer he's going to be to victory every single day.
CAMEROTA: Michael Caputo, thanks so much for coming on NEW DAY and peeling back the curtain a little bit for us.
CAPUTO: Thank you very much.
CAMEROTA: Great to talk to you. All right, at this hour the House Democrats are still pushing forward with their sit-in demanding a vote on gun control. Is there a tipping point that will force Congress to act? We have more of our breaking news next.
[07:49:35]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[07:53:10] CUOMO: You're looking at live pictures of the action, or inaction, on the floor of the House. Twenty hours into a sit-in by Democrats demanding a vote on gun control. Yes, the Senate had votes on the same bills. Yes, they were all shot down, but the call is for something more.
Let's discuss the issues on hand with Ben Ferguson, CNN political commentator and, of course, host of "The Ben Ferguson Show". And Marc Lamont Hill, CNN political commentator and a professor at Morehouse College.
Marc, you're sitting next to me, you go first. They say we need something to happen -- the Democrats in the House. Something did happen in the Senate. These same bills were voted on -- voted down.
MARC LAMONT HILL, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes.
CUOMO: What do you make of this tactic and this effort?
HILL: I think it's an extraordinary tactic and a wonderful effort, you know. Obviously, the bills were shot down in the Senate but you have to go a step further. Those people in the House didn't have the luxury of a filibuster. This is the kind of dramatic gesture that we often see in the Congress, just coming from the House side.
There's a long history of this in civil rights activism. This won't get a bill passed or a bill changed, but what it will do is draw public attention to the issue. It will create a spectacle, which then can lead to a different kind of conversation. Hopefully, a different outcome.
CUOMO: There's an odd disconnect, Ben, when we talk about guns.
BEN FERGUSON, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes.
CUOMO: I could show you a thousand polls right now that have numbers from fifties to the nineties of people saying they want change. But, there is no will to do it on the Republican side of the aisle and, frankly, Democrats have their shots and not taken them, as well. What's the disconnect?
FERGUSON: Well, I think the disconnect is that you have a lot of people that say, in general, that they want things to get better and they want there to be some sort of reform of gun control. But then you have Democrats that are coming out and pushing extreme measures that will not curb the gun violence. If you look at specifically what started this sit-in, as they call it, this is a bill they're pushing and that somehow it would have stopped Orlando. It would have not stopped Orlando.
[07:55:00] The second thing that really bothers me about this is the fact that you have Democrats that are somehow equating this to the Civil Rights Movement. The Civil Rights Movement was about fighting for your rights. This law would take away people's rights.
And what it does is it says basically you don't have the right to go and buy a gun if we put you on a secret list. We will not notify you if you're put on that secret list. And if you're on that secret list inappropriately or by accident then you've got to go get a lawyer, pay it out of your own pocket, which would certainly disproportionately hurt minorities and those that are poor, and you've got to fight the United States government to get off that list.
Now, that is not freedom and for people that are claiming this is somehow about civil rights, look at the difference. When they had sit-ins they were fighting for civil rights, fighting for their rights, fighting for freedom. This is taking away freedom and rights and they're doing it in the name of gun control, which is not anything to stop terrorists.
HILL: Well, Ben, just a historical correction. This is exactly what happened in the 60's and the argument that you're making that it's different is exactly the argument that people who oppose civil rights made in the 1960's. People who sat in in '64 --
FERGUSON: Not true, Marc.
HILL: Well, I -- let me give you a historical fact so that we don't have to dispute, right? I can just tell you. In 1964, people disputed public accommodations. People said we're fighting for the right to be able to sit at a lunch counter. Other people said no, you're fighting to take away my right to say who can sit at my lunch counter. You're taking away my freedom to decide who comes into my restaurant.
So there are often moments where one person's saying my rights are being taken away while the other is saying that my rights are being given. But the key here is that we come --
FERGUSON: But, Marc --
HILL: Just let me finish -- let me just finish the point, as I allowed you to finish. But the key here is that we want people to be able to have the right to walk down the street and not be killed. We want people who are on terror watch lists not to be -- not to have access to guns. We want very simple legislation. I'm not against guns, I'm against people having ridiculous levels of access when they clearly are a threat to society.
FERGUSON: And this is what I would say. If I came to you and told you that I was going to take away your right and your way to fight back is to go hire a lawyer and then fight the United States government, which the last I checked -- the United States government is pretty tough to fight and they don't actually care about many individuals who are coming after them. This is taking away your right to protection and freedom, and it's taking away your right that the constitution gives you.
I also have to say this about decorum on the floor. This is not some heroic event that the Democrats are doing here. This is a publicity stunt.
HILL: Yes, it is.
FERGUSON: And if you remember when there was a Republican who yelled out "you lie", I actually said that he shouldn't have done that when the president was speaking. For any Democrat who criticized him for yelling out "you lie" at the president, don't ever criticize anyone ever again because you're acting like a bunch of children on the floor of the House and it's an embarrassment to this government and our history.
HILL: That's apples and oranges. But first of all, you say this is a publicity stunt.
FERGUSON: No, it's not. It's the same thing. It's the decorum on the floor of the House.
HILL: Well, no, streaming you live was not only a lack of decorum, it was actually disrespectful.
FERGUSON: Sure, it was, and you think that being respectful of this country and the United States constitution by sitting in on the floor --
HILL: I think that they're being --
FERGUSON: -- acting like they're heroes when they --
HILL: Well, let me answer. I think they're being incredibly respectful of the tradition. This is a tradition of dissent, of being a loyal -- of being engaged in loyal dissent. And you say oh, this is a publicity stunt. Of course, it's a publicity stunt. It's a sit-in.
FERGUSON: Well, at least we agree on that.
HILL: Ben, sitting on the Pettis Bridge in 1965 was a publicity stunt. Having a march was a publicity stunt. Standing in front of Lincoln in 1963 on August 28th at the march on Washington as a publicity stunt. Yes, it's a publicity stunt. A protest, by definition, is a publicity stunt. You don't say? The question is what does a publicity stunt yield --
FERGUSON: But there's certain --
HILL: -- and in this case it should yield a conversation about guns.
FERGUSON: And there should be a certain sense of decorum when you're talking about the House. If Republicans would have done this when Nancy Pelosi was the speaker, you would have all been losing your minds saying arrest them, take them out, calling the sergeant at arms. It's exactly what they said about Wilson in '75.
CUOMO: Well, hold on a second, Ben, it actually -- it happened in 2008 when then it was about energy bills and you had the House do this, and really, the Democrats were in power then. Pretty much responded the same way. I actually thought it was notable that Speaker Ryan actually waived the rules of decorum on the House floor to allow this current sit-in to continue the way it has been going.
Last point here, as we have to end up the segment. First of all, gentlemen, thank you for having this debate the way it should have as opposed to a sit-in and no reaction from the other side --
HILL: Oh, that was next. Wait until the commercial. CUOMO: -- what's going on in Congress. No, not on my set. But, I do want to ask you, though, Ben, to consider due process rights which you can negotiate and figure out a path toward. And remember, we're dealing with a very small number of people who get wrongly put on that list and fit into the Ben Ferguson category. Or, once someone who is on the list gets a weapon you have no ability to stop what road that goes down. Do you think that should get a little bit more debate?
FERGUSON: I think it should certainly have a lot of debate and there's one key point here. If you want to have a way for me as a citizen -- because it shouldn't be a numbers game. When you take away someone's rights that the constitution allows them, you're ripping at the constitution. So I don't care if it's 10 people or 150 people, you should not be able to have -- come in and take away my right to own a gun without even notifying me.
CUOMO: And I'll just remind everybody --
FERGUSON: Having notification because it's fine.
CUOMO: That's fine, but it's --
FERGUSON: If you notify me and --
CUOMO: That's a pretty easy fix.
