Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Clinton: I Didn't Think Illness Was "That Big A Deal"; Transparency Issues Plague Clinton & Trump; Will Trump Release His Tax Returns Before Election?; What Candidates' Medical Records Could Reveal; Washington Post Investigates Trump's Charitable Giving. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired September 13, 2016 - 07:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:33:15] (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, I just didn't think it was going to be that big a deal. You know, compare everything you know about me with my opponent. I think it's time he met the same level of disclosure that I have for years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Questions of transparency plaguing both candidates. Hillary Clinton under fire for not disclosing her pneumonia diagnosis, while Donald Trump has refused to release any medical records or tax returns.

Let's debate this with Tennessee congresswoman Marsha Blackburn. She supports Donald Trump. And Michigan congresswoman Debbie Dingell. She supports Hillary Clinton. Ladies, great to see both of you this morning.

REP. DEBBIE DINGELL (D), MICHIGAN: It's good to see you, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: You're both going to make your case for your candidate. So, Congresswoman Dingell, let me start with you. Should Hillary Clinton have disclosed to the press and the public, on Friday, that she was dealing with pneumonia?

DINGELL: She probably should have. In retrospect, I hope she realizes that. But I'm also going to say to you I think that we're making much ado about a lot right now in terms of her actual health. I'm a woman of her generation, a few years younger, and I am telling you that for my entire career you powered through. If I was sick -- I mean, I had major surgery and was back at work in three or four days because that's just what you do.

And, you know, stepping up into vans -- I tripped getting into the stool here that I'm sitting in because it's high. So, yes, she's got to just understand everybody's micromanaging what her health is. But I also want to know why we're not screaming as loud about Donald Trump. She has made more records available than any candidate in history. We don't know Donald Trump's medical history. We don't have his tax --

CAMEROTA: But hold on a second, Congresswoman. I mean, she hasn't made more medical records. I mean, I'm holding what she's made available, it's two pages. She hasn't made -- every one of the predecessors of presidential candidates has made much more comprehensive medical records available than she has.

[07:35:00] DINGELL: Well, she has over the years and now she gets it. She's going to be releasing more. Donald Trump's was like a nanosecond's worth and we -- and not even a report on what his health really is. So I think both of them need to be held to the same standard. And if she sneezes she needs to tell us it's a sneeze or an allergy or what anything is going forward.

CAMEROTA: OK. Congresswoman Blackburn, let's talk about this letter that Donald Trump released. It's only one page, it's only four paragraphs. How is this transparent?

REP. MARSHA BLACKBURN (R), TENNESSEE: Well, I think one of the things that you are seeing is that in this day and age, Alisyn, people are wanting to know more about the people that are on the ballot and that can be a very good thing.

I understand that Mr. Trump has said he has recently had a medical exam and is going to release that information. But going back to Hillary Clinton, I do think what has happened is through the years there has been this pattern of, if you will, kind of a deceptive attitude of hiding things, whether it's the Clinton Foundation, or the emails and what transpired there, or the Benghazi situation.

So people come to that lens of viewing her with the element of distrust and that she is hiding something or doesn't want to tell nothing but the truth, the whole truth. And, Alisyn, I think that's the filter that kind of gets her in a little bit of trouble right now and people want to know.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

BLACKBURN: Pneumonia? Really? Would you have gone to your daughter's house with babies in the house having pneumonia? No, that would not have happened.

CAMEROTA: She -- well, look, she was already on antibiotics, she says. So are you suggesting, Congresswoman Blackburn, that she didn't have pneumonia or she had something worse?

BLACKBURN: I don't know, I don't know. I just am saying as a grandmother I saw that and I thought you would go to the house with the babies in it if you had pneumonia? If I think I've got a cold I'm very careful about how I interact with my grandbabies.

CAMEROTA: Congresswoman Blackburn, one more question before I get back to Congresswoman Dingell.

BLACKBURN: Sure.

CAMEROTA: About Donald Trump's taxes.

BLACKBURN: Sure.

CAMEROTA: Is it time for him to release his taxes?

BLACKBURN: Well, Donald Trump has filed all of his financial paperwork with the Federal Election Commission. That's a requirement. He has met every deadline there. I think it is fair to say give us some general outlines so that we know a little bit more about that and the workings. People are curious about that. I have every confidence that Mr. Trump is going to provide the information and --

CAMEROTA: To release his taxes? You have every confidence that he will release his taxes?

BLACKBURN: No, I'm not sure he'll -- there are audits that are going on but I think the information that people want to know a little bit more about, I think there are ways to do that and that financial disclosure is one of those, and I think there will be otherways to meet that.

CAMEROTA: How do you know -- just because this came up this morning on our show, how do you know, in fact, that he's under an audit? He hasn't even released the letter from the IRS saying that he's under an audit.

BLACKBURN: Yes, I heard you all saying -- talking about that and that is a question that people have. How extensive is the audit, how many years? I don't know the answer to --

CAMEROTA: So what's the answer?

BLACKBURN: I don't know the answer to that. I do know that many times individuals who are self-employed, small businesses, individuals that own privately-held companies -- they do have a tendency to face more audits. And, of course, the IRS commissioner, at this point in time --

CAMEROTA: Sure.

BLACKBURN: -- has been a little less than fair. That's why there's discussion about impeaching the IRS commissioner.

CAMEROTA: But, I mean, I guess the question is are you satisfied with the level of transparency that Donald Trump has provided --

BLACKBURN: I am satisfied.

CAMEROTA: -- for his financials?

BLACKBURN: Sure. I think you can go look at his FEC filings and get a good picture of what is there.

CAMEROTA: Congresswoman Dingell, is Hillary Clinton now going to release a more fulsome picture of her medical records? DINGELL: You know, my understanding is that she's going to be releasing more this week. I hope that Donald Trump is going to release more and let us see those records. I would say, with all due respect to my colleague who I really like working for, I don't think we're seeing anything from the Donald Trump side.

We don't know what his holdings are, we don't know who he's been doing business with. You know, if he'd had completed audits in the past then give us the past return from years past so we can see what it was at some point.

Let's treat both candidates with the same level of transparency. They both need to get it. We care about everything in their life and we need to see everything. But I do think you've seen one candidate be much more forthcoming in releasing records than we've seen on the other side. Let's treat them both equally.

CAMEROTA: Congresswoman Dingell, are you satisfied that Donald Trump has given tens of millions of dollars, as Mike Pence said, to charity because we are not seeing evidence of that?

DINGELL: You know, I think that all of us need to give at the level that we can afford to. I don't know what he's given because he won't make his tax returns public. He won't show us what he's done.

CAMEROTA: Right.

DINGELL: And I just think -- that's why I'm saying -- if Hillary hadn't made hers we'd be screaming the same thing.

[07:40:00] CAMEROTA: Yes.

DINGELL: Let's just treat them both equally.

CAMEROTA: How about that, Congresswoman Blackburn?

BLACKBURN: Well, I will say this. Many times, people like giving money anonymously and we don't know who Mr. Trump has given to. And I think just knowing and being aware that he has given this money, he has participated and supported charities, that is a very good thing. And some of the stories of his generosity --

CAMEROTA: But we don't know if he's given his own money, actually.

BLACKBURN: And some of the stories of his generosity are out and about, Alisyn, and I think that more of those will be coming out over the next 56 days as we approach Election Day. And, of course, people like to know that candidates give back. You know, it's a good thing to give back more than you take and I think the American people want to see leadership that will begin to do that.

Washington is primarily -- and Debbie and I have seen this -- people think of Washington as a greedy town where people are all about themselves and cronyism runs rampant. And so what they want in leadership is to understand a few things. If you do give things back -- you give back more than you take, you leave things in better shape than you found them.

CAMEROTA: Sure.

BLACKBURN: And if you understand that and you lead people --

CAMEROTA: They also seem to want transparency so they can know --

BLACKBURN: Yes, they do.

CAMEROTA: -- how much their leaders have given.

BLACKBURN: You're right.

CAMEROTA: And with Donald Trump's tax returns they could reveal how much he's given to charity because "The Washington Post" says that in the past eight years that they studied in their investigation they can find only $10,000 out of his own pocket. Would that be enough, Congresswoman Blackburn?

BLACKBURN: I don't know anything about "The Washington Post" story or their investigation. Let's leave this to the campaign. That's a question for them. And I do know Mr. Trump has been very generous with his time and with his abilities, as have his children been very generous with their abilities.

And I know the Clinton Foundation has had a history of not reporting foreign contributions, of not filing 990s, of spending only 13 percent of what they bring in.

CAMEROTA: Yes, sure. We're talking about their own personal donations.

BLACKBURN: Well, but that is their foundation. That is their foundation and bears their name.

CAMEROTA: And Trump bears questions about the Trump Foundation and what they've given to, as well, as we know from the Pam Bondi investigation. Congresswomen, thank you very much for making the case.

BLACKBURN: It's good to be with you.

CAMEROTA: You, too. Thank you for making the case for your candidates. We appreciate it -- Chris.

DINGELL: Thank you.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: All right, up next a dose of reality. These two candidates are two of the oldest that we've had. So what should be the standard -- not the law because you can't get any laws passed right now -- but what should be the standard? What should you know about candidates and their health? We have an expert, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:45:15] CUOMO: All right, the good news is that the pressure is on both candidates to release more information, financial and, certainly, medical after what we just went through with Hillary Clinton, who we now know is being treated for pneumonia, she says.

Candidates are not required by law to release their full medical records. Some do to prevent speculation, like what we're going through right now, but what could we see in medical records? What should we see if we want to make a straight evaluation?

Let's discuss with Dr. Devi Nampiaparampil. She is an assistant professor of anesthesiology and rehabilitation at the NYU School of Medicine. Dr. Devi, it is good to have you here.

DR. DEVI NAMPIAPARAMPIL, ASST. PROFESSOR, NYU SCHOOL OF MEDICINE: Good to see you.

CUOMO: Let's start with the specific. What you saw with the video of Hillary Clinton and what you've heard about it being pneumonia and then the list of other things that she's on for thyroid and allergies and such, what would be your concern right now in terms of her, specifically?

NAMPIAPARAMPIL:Well, right now, with the pneumonia they just want to make sure that she stays hydrated, especially since she had that episode, and that she's responding, in terms of the pneumonia, to the antibiotic. So if it's bacterial, are these the right antibiotics? If it's viral, is she recovering well?

CUOMO: Not all pneumonia requires bacteria -- antibiotics.

NAMPIAPARAMPIL: Exactly. If it's viral --

CUOMO: And what you saw of the video, that is something that can happen when you're dehydrated?

NAMPIAPARAMPIL: Definitely, definitely. Your blood pressure can get low, your oxygen level can get low if you have pneumonia, and you can have an episode like that.

CUOMO: All right, so now that's the specific. Now we get to this macro issue of transparency. As a doctor, what do you think that voters would want to know about two older candidates in terms of fitness for office?

NAMPIAPARAMPIL: Well, I think it has to do with their risk of death and disability, right? So if you apply for any job you usually have to go through some kind of pre-employment testing, whether it's through employee health or through your own doctor.

Now, I actually think an objective person might be a little bit better than your own doctor because your own doctor is your advocate and you control, also, how much they can actually say.

CUOMO: Is that true because I got some stink from doctors yesterday? Really, Sanjay should have gotten it because he said it first, but everybody loves Sanjay. But the suggestion was whoa, whoa, doctors are objective. That's not always the case. If this is your doctor it would not be unusual.

NAMPIAPARAMPIL: They're you advocate.

CUOMO: So they are your advocate. So you believe it should be independent review -- someone like you, Sanjay to look at it -- and then what would be the 'it'? What would you want to see?

NAMPIAPARAMPIL: Well first, though, I think it has to be a combination of the patient's own doctor who's followed them for a long time, but then an independent review of what they've done, as well. But the things I would be looking for, let's say, if we're talking about risk of death --

I mean, in the age group of 65 and above the things you worry about most statistically, based on the CDC findings, are heart disease, if someone has some type of neurologic illness, if they have a respiratory illness, or if they're at risk for cancer -- if they have cancer. Those are the things that are the highest probability that someone might potentially die from.

CUOMO: So we're putting up on the screen now for the audience -- stress tests, that's for possible heart disease. Imaging studies -- MRIs, CAT scans, things were you get a sense of how the systems are working. Lab work, blood work.

NAMPIAPARAMPIL: Sure.

CUOMO: Medications -- past, present conditions. And all of this -- you would want the records, right?

NAMPIAPARAMPIL: The records, usually, so you'd like to see what they've had one. Now, sometimes people avoid the doctor, right, or they don't necessarily report symptoms. So if you haven't seen the doctor in 20 years you may not have a lot of medical conditions diagnosed.

CUOMO: That's a fair point. You can get around this by saying sure, you can see it, but I don't go. So do you believe that the time has come that we should have candidates, especially when they're in this upper age category, reviewed? You know, the way you do for everything else.

You know, you want insurance, they're going to come and they're going to look at you themselves. You want to be a pro athlete and they're going to pay you all this money, certainly that exposure is a lot less than someone being the leader of the free world.

Do you think the time has come to have a Dr. Devi or somebody -- maybe it's the surgeon general -- whoever it is -- look at these people?

NAMPIAPARAMPIL: I think so. I mean, not just based on age. I think we should have a set criteria for what are the job tasks -- the essential job functions. And then based on that look at what tests would be most appropriate to see if the person can perform those functions, right? So some of that may not even involve your risk of death. I mean, some

of that may have to do with, let's say, vision or hearing if you're thinking about somebody's ability to communicate in high-pressure settings or kind of read the room. Their ability to observe what's going on.

CUOMO: And to be clear, that list that we put on the screen has not been satisfied by either. Clinton has come closer -- not as close as those in the past and certainly a lot closer than Donald Trump. Dr. Devi, thank you so much. Do me a favor. When we get the information in from them we'll have you back so you can say --

NAMPIAPARAMPIL: Sounds great.

CUOMO: -- here's what they gave us, here's what we still need, here's what it means.

NAMPIAPARAMPIL: Thank you.

CUOMO: Thank you very much -- Alisyn

CAMEROTA: How much money has Donald Trump given to charity? Up next, "The Washington Post" reporter who spent months investigating Trump's foundation gives us the answer.

[07:50:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CUOMO: All right, "The Washington Post" has new reporting out. You have to read it for yourself. This is not simple, it's complicated. Read it, take the time. This particular story is about Donald Trump's charitable giving. That's been a big source of controversy in this election. The report claims Trump has not donated to his own foundation since 2008, and it also says there is nothing to prove claims that the mogul has given away tens of millions of dollars.

Joining us now to shed light on the reporting is David Fahrenthold. He's from "The Washington Post". He's doing the reporting. David, thank you for joining us.

Let's start with checking one of the headlines we have this morning. Mike Pence says there is no question that Donald Trump has given away tens of millions of dollars of his own money. Can you prove that?

DAVID FAHRENTHOLD, REPORTER, "THE WASHINGTON POST": No, I can't. And, in fact, I've asked the Trump campaign to prove that for me. To tell me the evidence that proves what Mike Pence was talking about and they refused. Yesterday, they sent a statement calling our previous reporting inaccurate but not actually offering any details about what was wrong or offering any new details about Trump's giving.

CUOMO: How did you figure out what goes on in the Trump Foundation?

FAHRENTHOLD: Well, what we did, we started with the tax filings. Unlike Donald Trump, the Trump Foundation is required to publicly disclose its tax filings, so we looked through those. Took the donations that it said it gave, took the donations it said came in, and then called those people to figure out whether they really did give the money or got the money and what the story was behind those donations. So we started with that. We talked to over 200 groups that either gave or got money from the Trump Foundation.

[07:55:00] CUOMO: So let me see if I have this right. That the suggestion would be -- it says that Trump -- the Donald J. Trump Foundation, but it's not his money. Usually your name is on the foundation. It's your money. If you're dead it was your money before you died. Here, you're saying that you found the reporting that the money that the Foundation gives is not necessarily Trump's money. And, in fact, he has not put any money into the Foundation since when?

FAHRENTHOLD: Since 2008. If you look back in the tax records you can look back and see that. He hasn't actually given any money to his own foundation since 2008. Instead, he's been giving away other people's money since then. And as you said, the expectation is that if you have your name on a foundation it's your money. That's the way that most other people do it.

I talked to a lot of tax experts who said they couldn't think of another example of somebody who kept their name on the foundation, stopped giving their money, and instead gave other people's money away with their own name attached.

CUOMO: Now, the pushback they have for you is everything is not at all accurate. Everybody will tell you that Trump has given millions. The Foundation has given $102 million over the last five years. This is a good thing. What's your response?

FAHRENTHOLD: Well, they are sort of playing some games with the words here. So, there -- it was a list the Trump campaign put out last year. They said it was $102 million of Donald Trump's charitable donations and we dug into that. Now, this was a story that happened a few months ago.

It turns out that that list of what they call the $102 million contained not one dollar out of Donald Trump's own pocket. Instead, most of the gifts were gifts of free rounds of golf given away by Trump's golf courses to local charities which is charity, but it's not Donald Trump's -- money out of Donald Trump's pocket, which is what they sort of implied that it was.

So we asked them for other evidence. Is there anything else -- anything else that would prove Donald Trump gives money out of his own pocket to charity, and we've heard nothing.

CUOMO: Now, you guys were early on the story that the Foundation got caught by the IRS for making a political donation, which this type of foundation is not allowed to do. What else did you find in there that approaches, let alone crosses, a legal line?

FAHRENTHOLD: Well, there's a couple of things. One is this number of incorrect listing in its tax filings. It described gifts that don't appear to exist and one of those actually relates to that illegal campaign contribution. When Trump's foundation filed its taxes with the IRS it didn't list

that illegal campaign contribution as it was supposed to and, instead, listed a non-existent donation in the same amount to another group. Basically, they added a fake donation, they say, inadvertently. But it served the purpose or served the effect of covering up the illegal contribution in their IRS filings.

There's another thing, though, which you guys referred to earlier. IRS rules prohibit non-profits managers, for obvious reasons, from using the charity's money to buy things for them self. And so Trump has done that twice it appears. He bought a $12,000 football helmet in 2012 and he also bought a $20,000 portrait -- a six-foot-tall portrait of himself with charity money back in 2007.

CUOMO: He bought a portrait of himself that was being sold for charity and Trump bought it. Now, the pushback on that is yes, but it was money that was going to the Komen Foundation for breast cancer. Isn't that a good thing? Why do you think this matters?

FAHRENTHOLD: Well, it mattered to the IRS. I mean, it certainly was money in both cases. These were auctions held by a charity and so the check was written to a charity, but that's not enough. The IRS says that if you want to do that -- if you want to buy an item at a charity auction for yourself, you give it out of your own pocket if the item you're buying is going to go toyou.

But if you're going to buy something with the charity's money then the thing you buy has to be something that has a charitable purpose. It has to go to a charity. It has to help a charity in some way. And so you can't just say well, the money went to the charity in the end and it's incidental that I go the helmet or I got the painting. If you got the thing, you bought something for yourself.

So Trump sort of needs to come forward and say well, look, I gave this painting of myself to another charity. I gave this Tim Tebow football helmet to another charity and he hasn't, so far.

CUOMO: Now, when people read this story, and I hope they do. I hope they read it for themselves. This kind of vetting matters in this election. There will be a question of well, the so-what factor. How does this size up to what we were hearing about the Clinton Foundation and what were allegations of pay-for-play on the highest levels with foreign governments and people who could be bad actors? Do you see a false equivalence being applied here in the campaign?

FAHRENTHOLD: Well, the distinction here is that the Trump Foundation and the Clinton Foundation are really different animals.

The Clinton Foundation is really big. It has over 2,000 employees. It does work all overthe world and has lots of money. And the questions about what Hillary Clinton did there are very different than the ones that Trump is facing. In her case, as you said, it's about did she give special access or special favors to people who donated to the Clinton Foundation?

The Trump Foundation is a question of sort of not whether Donald Trump did anything wrong as a government official. Obviously, he's not. It's about his sort of own personal approach to charity and his own sort of -- you know, what moral responsibility does he feel to help in the world. He's obviously a very rich man. At least he says he's a very, very rich man. So what responsibility does he feel to use that money for good?

What we've found is that he actually doesn't seem to have spent any of his own money on charity. And, in fact, went to great lengths to get other people's money that he could give away. So he could appear to be charitable without actually having the sacrifice of really giving anything of himself. So that's the reflection here on Trump.