Return to Transcripts main page
New Day
House Panel Grills Zuckerberg; Pompeo Confirmation Hearings; Ryan Not Seeking Re-election; Northeast to Warm Up; Judicial Nominee Hearing. Aired 6:30-7a ET
Aired April 12, 2018 - 06:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[06:30:23] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: FaceBook's CEO facing more tough questions on Capitol Hill. Mark Zuckerberg admitted that his own data was improperly shared with Cambridge Analytica.
CNN's Laurie Segall joins us with more.
Laurie, you've been covering this. What a day yesterday.
LAURIE SEGALL, CNN SENIOR TECHNOLOGY CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely. Mark Zuckerberg spent a total of ten hours testifying before Congress. Day two, though, struck a very different tone than day one. Lawmakers from the House, Energy and Commerce Committee asked pointed questions. And they were impatient with some of his answers. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: While, FaceBook has certainly grown. I worry it may not have matured.
SEGALL (voice over): Mark Zuckerberg facing a second round of questioning before Congress.
REP. MARSHA BLACKBURN (R), TENNESSEE: Who do you think owns an individuals' presence online? Who owns their virtue you? Is it you or is it them?
REP. BILLY LONG (R), MISSOURI: You're the guy to fix this. We're not. You need to save your ship.
SEGALL: A contrite Zuckerberg reading the same apology from his testimony Tuesday.
MARK ZUCKERBERG, CEO, FACEBOOK: It's going to take some time to work through all the changes we need to make. But I'm committed to getting this right.
SEGALL: But unable to convince the 55 committee members he was doing enough to combat privacy breaches.
REP. FRANK PALLONE (D), NEW JERSEY: You talk about how positive and optimistic you are. And I'm -- I guess I'm sorry because I'm not.
SEGALL: FaceBook under fire after the scandal involving Cambridge Analytica, a Trump-linked data firm improperly accessing the private information of millions of FaceBook users. Zuckerberg admitting he too was a victim.
REP. ANNA ESHOO (D), CALIFORNIA: Was your data included in the data sold to the malicious third parties? Your personal data?
ZUCKERBERG: Yes.
SEGALL: The 33-year-old CEO signaling he's open to government oversight after lawmakers questioned the trust and transparency of his company.
ZUCKERBERG: My position is not that there should be no regulation. But I also think that you have to be careful about what regulation you put in place.
REP. KATHY CASTOR (D), FLORIDA: It's practically impossible these days to remain untracked in America. For all the benefits FaceBook has brought and the Internet. And that's not part of the bargain.
SEGALL: Some, not satisfied, clearly frustrated with Zuckerberg's lack of answers about how to protect data.
PALLONE: Yes or no, is FaceBook changing any user default settings to be more privacy protective?
ZUCKERBERG: Congressman, this is a complex issue that I think is -- deserves more than a one word answer.
PALLONE: Well, again, that's disappointing to me because I think you should make that commitment.
ZUCKERBERG: While others accusing the FaceBook founder of caring about his bottom line more than the security of his users.
REP. DEBBIE DANGEL (D), MICHIGAN: I worry that when I hear company's value our privacy, it's meant in monetary terms, not in the moral obligation to protect it.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SEGALL: You know, the next phase of this is regulation. And there wasn't much clarity about what the right type of regulation will be. Over the next month there's European regulation with stricter data privacy concerns rolling out. A lot of folks wondering, will FaceBook adhere to those standards all around the world. Mark Zuckerberg says they would. So we'll see about that.
And also, you know, you had Chairman Walden (ph) saying we want more tech CEOs to come up here and testify. Users will also see a tool at the top of their newsfeed that has privacy and sharing controls.
One interesting thing Mark Zuckerberg said is he did not -- there was the question of, will users be able to opt in to sharing their data? He definitely did not say that would be an option. So it will be interesting to see how this all plays out in the next month.
CAMEROTA: Absolutely. There didn't seem to be many answers, concrete answers as to exactly what the prescription was.
SEGALL: Yes. (INAUDIBLE).
CAMEROTA: All right, Laurie, thank you very much.
CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: Right. Well, you've got the lawmakers who don't know.
CAMEROTA: Right.
CUOMO: And you have Zuckerberg, who didn't want to offer up any solutions. He wouldn't talk about how they might change their contract even after Senator John Kennedy from Louisiana said to him, gently, as he put it, your contract sucks, he said to him.
But, you know, at the end of the day, we're left in the same place. So the question is the same, what's going to be done about this? We still don't know.
Mike Pompeo facing an uphill battle in his bid to become secretary of state. Why he needs to win over Democrats to get confirmed, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[06:38:28] CAMEROTA: All right, in a matter of hours, Mike Pompeo, President Trump's pick to replace Rex Tillerson as secretary of state, will be in the hot seat as his Senate confirmation hearing begins. Pompeo needs to win over one Democrat to become America's next top diplomat.
We're back with John Avlon. Let's also bring in associate editor of RealClearPolitics, A.B. Stoddard.
So, A.B., he was making the rounds on Capitol Hill to sort of talk to people individually, try to assuage whatever fears they may have. What do we think's going to happen with Mike Pompeo?
A.B. STODDARD, ASSOCIATE EDITOR, REALCLEARPOLITICS: Well, Mike Pompeo is very able and very impressive and I think has made a big push to show his interest in the job, which to State Department employees where that whole agency was really eviscerated under Rex Tillerson with cuts of 30 percent, tons of vacancies and low morale, that is actually very encouraging to them. So he's taking it very seriously and I think that gets you pretty far.
There's a new group of 30 bipartisan national security experts releasing a letter today, making a push for his confirmation. And, you know, that said, I think it's important for people to realize that diplomacy is not -- there's not a premium placed on it by this administration and there won't be. And is he a perfect fit for the State Department? No. But I think that in the Trump administration, which is pretty -- it's -- we grade it on a curve in terms of who he's going to pick, who's in his favor at the moment. And if they're competent and they're qualified, I think, people are willing to take what they get. And given the chaos in his national security apparatus, the comings, the goings, McMaster out last week, Bolton in this week, people getting fired by Bolton this week, Syria and North Korea on the table, I just think that in the end they're going to take someone impeccably credentialed, like Mike Pompeo, and he's going to make it over the line in confirmation.
[06:40:24] CUOMO: Right. I mean, look, I know that, you know, you have to be open on it. Wolf Blitzer's going to do our special coverage of the confirmation hearing. It starts at 9:00 a.m. And, you know, there's a little bit of hype in the suggestion. But what is the chance that Mike Pompeo doesn't get confirmed?
JOHN AVLON, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Very slim. I mean Republicans still --
CUOMO: What are you saying? Are you south -- south of 10 percent?
AVLON: Probably about right. I mean he needs one Democratic vote.
CUOMO: Right.
AVLON: He's trying to --
CUOMO: And you had Kaine and Shaheen have both said --
AVLON: Yes.
CUOMO: Both liked him for CIA.
AVLON: Yes. And the administration is trying to say, you voted for him before. Why not now? He's definitely trying to put on his best face.
CUOMO: Different job.
AVLON: All previous secretaries of state, including Hillary Clinton, of whom he was a vociferous critic back in the -- in the Benghazi fever dream days. But now he's also saying, look, I'd love to fill these vacancies, but I need your help. He's trying really to school up and present a responsible face. And I think the fact that the administration needs a secretary of state badly at this particular juncture, that he's already been confirmed and served in the Senate and is a former member of Congress, all of those things carry weight.
CAMEROTA: He's also trying to redefine himself.
AVLON: Yes.
CAMEROTA: So here are a bit of his prepared statements that we'll be hearing. When journalists, most of whom have never met me, label me, or any of you, as hawks, war hardliners or worse, I shake my head. War is always the last resort. I would prefer achieving the president's foreign policy goals with unrelenting diplomacy rather than by sending young men and women to war. That will make people, A.B., feel better, I would imagine.
But, you know, the thinking is that he shares the president's world view. That's why the president is comfortable with him. That's why the president picked him. They're like minded. And so that has given, obviously, many Democrats pause.
STODDARD: Right. But Democrats have learned that there isn't always a consistent world view or policy regarding any hot spot in the Middle East or anywhere in this administration. I mean the -- look at Syria. The -- you know, there are Trump supporters who are absolutely horrified at the fact that he's, you know, considering some new, robust policy in Syria that thus far has been tolerance. He's going to punish them for a chemical weapons attack. What else is he going to do? Is there going to be a no-fly zone? Is he -- is he flirting with regime change? What is he talking about when he's talking about taking on the Russians, and the Iranians in Syria?
So Trump is so often inconsistent that I think people are actually just banking on the fact that Mike Pompeo is able, he's well versed in the issues --
AVLON: Yes.
STODDARD: And that he actually has Trump's ear and can talk him off a ledge.
AVLON: Yes.
CUOMO: So let's shift to another big political implication here. So we -- you know, got to let the hearing happen and then we'll know what happens with Pompeo.
But Paul Ryan has said he's stepping away. This had been rumored. Now he says it, I'm not going to run after November. This is going to create some tumult. Now, I get that there are good --
AVLON: Some tumult, yes.
CUOMO: Well, but, you know, look, you never know. But they -- he probably would have had trouble holding on to his speakership. He was having a hard time controlling himself there. He's having a hard time getting done what matters to him, especially entitlement reform because Trump says he doesn't want to go near it. So we get his movement. Who knows. He's got a long life. Maybe he wants to run and be clear of all this.
AVLON: Right.
CUOMO: But what does it mean for the party in terms of who comes next? Is Kevin Brady, the majority leader now, is he an easy sell?
McCarthy. McCarthy, sorry.
AVLON: Kevin McCarthy.
McCarthy and Steve Scalise are the two who are most likely to compete for it. McCarthy had been in line before and really Ryan was necessary to unite the caucus.
CUOMO: But tell them what happened with McCarthy the last time.
AVLON: It didn't happen.
CUOMO: Because?
AVLON: Because -- well, for a lot of different reason.
CUOMO: The big one?
AVLON: I --
CUOMO: The Benghazi hearing was all about destabilizing Hillary Clinton.
AVLON: That was not arguably the biggest one.
CUOMO: Oh, that -- it was large at the time.
AVLON: And there were a lot of -- a lot of rumors at -- on The Hill about why that wasn't necessarily the right thing for the party. But Paul Ryan had unique moral authority as an intellectual and political leader of the party. And that's why this is such a bombshell.
Look, there's no way to spin this as good news for Republicans in a tough midterm re-election year. This has all the appearance of a captain getting off a sinking ship. And he also is the opposite ballast to Donald Trump in the party. And he can say he's proud of tax reform, but his signature issue has been deficit and debt reduction. And he's leaving on the same week the trillion dollar deficits kick in as far as the eye can see. So this is really -- this is a major problem for Republicans going forward, whether it's Steve Scalise or Kevin McCarthy, I don't think you can spin your way out of this. It sends a terrible message to the party now.
CAMEROTA: A.B. Stoddard, John Avlon, thank you both very much.
So, a Trump judicial nominee refuses to say whether she agrees with the Supreme Court ruling to desegregate schools. And that's not the only controversial moment from this hearing. Details ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[06:49:05] CAMEROTA: All right, is spring finally coming to the Northeast? CNN meteorologist Chad Myers has our forecast.
It sounds like summer is actually coming to the Northeast.
CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: It does. Yes, it is. Seventy-seven degrees on Saturday. Sounds like the middle of summer. But that doesn't happen without something going on in the Plains. Many big stories today. Let's get right to them.
Today will be somewhere in the upper 50s for New York City, but certainly in the 70s for today and for tomorrow for D.C. All the way to 81.
How does that happen? There is a major low pressure center in the Plains that will bring up warm air on one side but make significant severe weather across the southwest in the form of high winds. In fact, Norman, Oklahoma, tomorrow, calling the fire threat, the wildfire threat, historic. So there will be wildfires out there today and tomorrow through parts of New Mexico, Colorado, even into parts of Oklahoma, and severe weather as well. Along the front, there will certainly be tornados on the ground especially for tomorrow afternoon.
There's the critical fire weather for today. It moves slightly farther east for tomorrow. But that's where the severe weather will happen for tomorrow. Tornados certainly on the ground tomorrow in the Plains in that orange area.
[06:50:11] We'll watch it for you here, Chris.
CUOMO: Boy, you know, you have to. So much devastation can happen so quickly.
MYERS: Right. Big stuff tomorrow.
CUOMO: Thank you for the information, my friend.
Another controversial hearing for one of the president's judicial picks. How the Trump administration is trying to reshape the courts, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CUOMO: Another rough confirmation hearing for one of President Trump's judicial nominees. Wendy Vitter is a nominee for a federal judgeship in the eastern district of Louisiana. She refused to say if she supports the landmark Supreme Court ruling to desegregate America's schools. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D), CONNECTICUT: Ms. Vitter, do you believe that Brown versus Board of Education was correctly decided?
WENDY VITTER, NOMINEE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE: Senator, I don't mean to be coy, but I think I get into a difficult -- a different -- a difficult area when I start commenting on Supreme Court decisions, which are correctly decided and which I may disagree with. Again, my personal, political or religious views, I would set aside. That is Supreme Court precedent. It is binding. If I were honored to be confirmed, I would be bound by it and, of course, I would uphold it.
[06:55:32] BLUMENTHAL: Do you believe it was correctly decided?
VITTER: And, again, I will respectfully not comment on what could be my boss' ruling, the Supreme Court. I would be bound by it. And if I start commenting on, I agree with this case or don't agree with this case, I think we get into a slippery slope. I would be -- if -- if I'm honored to be confirmed, I would be bound by Supreme Court precedent, and that's what I would follow, a Fifth Circuit precedent.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: Does that answer bother you? Let's discuss.
CNN chief legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.
What is your answer, sir?
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: It's ridiculous. You know, Brown v. Board of Education is not just an ordinary Supreme Court case. Of course all district judges, which she wants to be, are bound by Supreme Court precedent. But Brown v. Board of Education, 1954, is a landmark, is part of the fabric of our country, not just an ordinary Supreme Court decision. And her failure to acknowledge that, which most high school students know, much less, you know, would be judges, I think is really scandalous.
CUOMO: What should she have said?
TOOBIN: Yes. Do you agree with Brown v. Board of Education? Yes. What's your next question, senator.
CUOMO: So you want judicial nominees giving their opinion on whether they like rulings or not?
TOOBIN: I think when the cases are like Brown v. Board of Education, or Marbury v. Madison, you bet I do. I think it is important to acknowledge that that is part of the fabric of our law. And you have to acknowledge that it's the right thing to do. Should they go through one case at a time, Citizens United, Bush v. Gore, you know --
CUOMO: Why did Blumenthal name that case and not Citizens v. United or Bush v. Gore?
TOOBIN: Because he wanted to see whether she's part of the mainstream. You know, it's a mainstream position to support Brown v. Board of Education. Well --
CUOMO: Well, she didn't say she supports it. She said I would be bound by it like every other Supreme Court precedent.
TOOBIN: Yes, that's true, But it's not like every other Supreme Court precedent. And I think most people who are sophisticated enough to be considered for a federal judgeship understand that Brown is in a separate category. And that's what Blumenthal was doing. He was trying to see, is she part of the mainstream. And I think one of the things we have learned is that President Trump has been enormously successful, mostly below the radar, in placing on the federal courts very conservative people.
Wendy Vitter works for the archdiocese of New Orleans. Very outspokenly against abortion rights. That's why she's being considered for a judgeship.
CUOMO: Understood. Why didn't he ask her about Roe v. Wade? TOOBIN: He may well have. She -- I think he may have. And I think she
answered the same way.
CUOMO: Right. So that's the -- the point. Look, I -- you -- we were talking before this.
TOOBIN: Yes.
CUOMO: You know I don't agree.
TOOBIN: OK.
CUOMO: I don't want to hear judicial nominees tell me what they think of cases. They should be bound by them. But a lot of these confirmation hearings are subterfuge. They say one thing and then they get on there and they do something very different when they get on the bench. So her politics do become relevant.
TOOBIN: Highly.
CUOMO: And when it comes to her positions on Planned Parenthood, what is your concern for her being an arbiter of the law?
TOOBIN: Well, I mean, you know, she has dedicated her career to defunding Planned Parenthood, to denying women the rights that at least currently are guaranteed to them under the Constitution. The question is, in Louisiana, where she would be a district judge, how would she rule on cases that implicate abortion rights? Would she honor Roe v. Wade and all the subsequent decisions reaffirming a woman's right to choose abortion, or would she go out of her way to try to limit those rights?
You're right, once you're on the -- once they're on the court, they're going to do what they're going to do. I mean there's no -- there's no process for, you know, holding them to account.
CUOMO: We haven't seen a better example of that than the most recent Supreme Court nominee they got confirmed. The way he was in the hearing versus what happened when he got on the court.
TOOBIN: Absolutely. But this is -- but Neil Gorsuch has been a total success story for the conservative moment.
CUOMO: For -- for the conservative movement, absolutely.
TOOBIN: And this has been, you know, through -- true -- not -- I mean people remember Gorsuch, but circuit courts of appeal, district court, it's been --
CUOMO: And do you think Vitter gets through?
TOOBIN: That's a tough call at this point.
CUOMO: All right.
TOOBIN: You know, I mean, every single one who's come up for a vote, except for one or two who went through --
CUOMO: Have.
[07:00:02] TOOBIN: Have gotten confirmed.
CUOMO: Right.
TOOBIN: But I'm thinking Susan Collins, you know --
CUOMO: We'll see.
TOOBIN: With only 51 Republicans, no John McCain, I mean it's -- it's going to be close.
CUOMO: This is one to watch.
You look so good this morning.
