Return to Transcripts main page
New Day
How Important Is The Russia Probe To 2020 Voters?; White House And GOP Leaders Call For Rep. Adam Schiff To Resign; Rep. Mike Turner (R) Ohio Discusses Release Of Mueller Report And Calls For Schiff's Resignation; CNN Reality Check: Will The Supreme Court Stand Up To Rigged Redistricting?; Racketeering Suspects All Plead Not Guilty In College Scheme. Aired 7:30-8a ET
Aired March 26, 2019 - 07:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[07:32:34] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Robert Mueller's work is done and among the many remaining questions, how will it weigh on voters in the 2020 election?
There's something about Harry. CNN senior politics writer and analyst Harry Enten has our answer. He has so many answers for us. You're really one of our gurus.
HARRY ENTEN, SENIOR WRITER AND ANALYST, CNN POLITICS: Awe, that is so sweet. His work is done but mine has just begun with you two. Isn't that nice?
JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: You're like the William Barr of CNN. Go ahead.
CAMEROTA: Yes, sort of.
ENTEN: Sort of. I'd like to think I'm at least a little younger than William Barr.
So look, this is a recent poll we just asked. We open-ended and said OK, what's the most important issue for your 2020 vote, so voters could say pretty much anything.
But look at this. Look where the Russia investigation -- zero percent said that it was the most important to their vote in 2020. Exactly --
CAMEROTA: That low?
ENTEN: -- zero -- zero -- zero respondents said Russia.
And you know, one of the things we were talking about -- health care, obviously. The Trump administration wants to get rid of the ACA. Look at that. It ranked significantly higher.
So the news that's kind of come out of this week of things that are important to people's vote in 2020, I would honestly argue that the health care news is far more important than the Russia investigation.
BERMAN: Let me just -- there were multiple responses allowed.
ENTEN: Multiple responses.
BERMAN: You could say anything you wanted --
ENTEN: You could say anything. You could say the Boston Red Sox.
BERMAN: -- as many times as you wanted --
ENTEN: Right.
CAMEROTA: That's what John said.
BERMAN: -- and zero people, zero times.
ENTEN: Zero times. So what's the most important issue and you could record multiple responses. Zero people said zero times -- Russia.
CAMEROTA: Well, OK, stop the presses. The most important issue to people's lives -- of course, it's not the most important.
ENTEN: The most important issue to their vote in 2020.
CAMEROTA: OK.
ENTEN: The most important issue.
But here, look at this. This is a "FOX NEWS" poll.
The Mueller report -- will it change -- will it change your view of Donald Trump? Forty-one percent said no chance. Only seven percent said there was a strong chance that whatever he said could change your view. And, you know, that could -- it could be the case they say oh yes, but he didn't exactly exonerate the president so now, I'm still going to be negative on Trump.
So this, again, is another example -- just seven percent said there was a strong chance it would change. When you combine the two of those you really get the idea that voters are not really thinking about this.
And if you speak to the candidates out on the campaign trail -- follow them along -- they really were not talking about the Russia investigation at all -- at all.
And, you know, again, go to 2018. Remember the Democrats kind of ran over the Republicans in the 2018 midterms.
Look at this. We basically -- in this particular poll, we said OK, we gave you eight particular issues and you could say how important it was to your vote. Only 48 percent -- 48 percent said that the Russia investigation was extremely or a very important factor in your vote. Again, the lowest. It was the only one that got less than a majority.
[07:35:03] And look again, health care -- we were talking about it earlier -- 80 percent. That's a far more important factor. That is far more important to how people are making their vote choices, either in 2018 or 2020.
CAMEROTA: Where is the president's approval rating at this point?
ENTEN: Right. So I think that this is another thing to keep in mind, right? You know, can this move the polls and so on and so forth.
Again, I've just got to point out how stable the president is. I mean, look at this. Forty-three today, 44 six months ago, 43 a year ago, 44 percent two years ago. Nothing moves it -- nothing.
BERMAN: Usually, we talk about this in the context of oh, will this troubling news for the president lower his approval rating? But we're about to see whether the reverse is also the case. Whether positive news might make it go up.
ENTEN: Right. And I think if we're thinking about 2020, these sort of unknown factors and sort of -- if Mueller had come out and said something very bad about the president, then that obviously could have lowered him. So we were able now to say we now know. So this won't really lower the president's rating unless there's something Barr held back, but we don't believe that he has.
CAMEROTA: It could raise it.
BERMAN: That's what I mean.
ENTEN: It could -- it could raise it -- exactly. This is one of the unknown factors, but now we know. We will see if it, in fact, goes up.
But there's still sort of three unknown factors. You know, the state of the economy, the Democratic candidate, foreign war and achievement.
But basically, with Mueller, we now know. His approval rating will not drop because of it and, in fact, may go up a little bit.
And one other thing I'll point out. Look, this pretty much eliminates the chance that there's going to be a GOP challenger that could be significantly affecting his approval rating.
BERMAN: That huge William Weld bubble might be burst all of a sudden.
ENTEN: You know, in Massachusetts, William Weld was a popular guy.
BERMAN: He was the news on the Democratic side.
ENTEN: Yes. This is just since we got a nice 2020 check-in.
There is some Mayor Pete Buttigieg momentum. I, hopefully, pronounced that correctly.
Look at this. We can sort of look at his Google trends -- the Google searches.
He, this week, was tied for the second-highest number -- second- highest number of Google searches. And he had more people search for his name in the last two weeks than the prior 93 weeks. That's a lot of time, people -- 93 weeks combined.
BERMAN: Buttigieg-gentum.
ENTEN: Buttigieg -- yes, I -- that's too difficult for me.
BERMAN: Baseball, please. This one I like.
ENTEN: Yes, OK. You know, everyone -- the Yankee fans always say oh, we've won all these championships -- 27 World Series -- blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I'm a man of the -- of the current era and look at this.
Since 2001, that's this millennium, Red Sox have won four championships. The New York Yankees have won only one. So you know what? The Red Sox are the ones who have the great history this millennium when most people have actually been alive.
CAMEROTA: Wow, you're not the underdog anymore, John Berman.
BERMAN: Four times more impressive.
ENTEN: Four -- four, folks. Yankees just one.
BERMAN: All right. Harry Enten, you are the man.
CAMEROTA: I'm not sure why we included that, but that's a really good one.
ENTEN: You know what? We included it because the Yankees are evil and we like to squash evil on this program.
BERMAN: For instance. Thank you, Harry.
ENTEN: Thank you.
BERMAN: A quick programming note. CNN will host a presidential town hall with Sen. Cory Booker, hosted by Don Lemon tomorrow night at 10:00 p.m. Eastern.
CAMEROTA: OK.
Republicans are calling for House Intelligence chairman Adam Schiff to resign over his claims of Russian collusion. One Republican from that committee is here next with what he wants to see happen.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[07:41:38] CAMEROTA: House Democrats have formally requested that Attorney General Bill Barr hand over special counsel Robert Mueller's full report to Congress by next week. No word on whether that is actually the plan.
But now, some Republicans are calling for the Democratic head of the House Intel Committee to resign his post.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY (R-CA), HOUSE MINORITY LEADER: He owes an apology to the American public. And there is no place in Adam Schiff's world or in Congress that he should be chair of the Intel Committee.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: All right.
Joining us now is Republican Congressman Mike Turner. He is a member of the House Intelligence Committee. Good morning, Congressman.
REP. MIKE TURNER (R-OH), MEMBER, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Good morning. How are you doing?
CAMEROTA: I'm doing well.
Do you agree with our colleague Kevin McCarthy that Chairman Schiff should resign his post?
TURNER: Well, I really do believe that Adam Schiff's leadership of the Intelligence Committee is compromised and really, for three reasons.
You know, one is he wasn't being straight with the American public or with you.
When we would have hearings in the Intel Committee on the Trump campaign and coordination, we would hear witness after witness, as you now know, come in and say I have no evidence of collusion. I have -- I don't know anyone else who has evidence of collusion. And he would walk out to the cameras and say we're getting close.
And then, the next step, which is the second issue why we're -- I think we're concerned about his leadership is he would then say "and the Republicans are obstructing my ability to do this" which, of course, the Republican members of the committee were not.
So it's very divisive. He's been dishonest with the American public as to what was actually happening in the Intel Committee. He was blaming the Republicans. I think this --
CAMEROTA: So, just to be clear. Just -- this is helpful. Just to be clear, you actually heard him misrepresenting things that would happen behind closed doors and then he would come out and you heard him lying about it?
TURNER: Well, and so have you. I mean, you can play the tape of him saying I have more than circumstantial evidence.
And, in fact, if you go to Comey's hearing before the Intelligence Committee, I tried to signal the media.
You know, it's not illegal for a member of Congress to sit in a classified briefing and come out and misrepresent what happened in that room.
CAMEROTA: Yes.
TURNER: It's illegal for them to come out and say what did happen. And time after time we would leave the hearings and the Republicans would file by and Adam Schiff would run in front of the cameras and say outrageous and inflammatory things that just did not represent what happened in that room.
But then, the second thing is the divisiveness. He would blame the Republicans that he was somehow being constrained in finding collusion, in which we now know from the Mueller report there is no collusion to find.
And the third thing is he's transformed the Intelligence Committee. His staff -- and you even reported -- has been transformed into an investigative team instead of an intelligence team. Remember, our committee is about national security --
CAMEROTA: Yes.
TURNER: -- and trying to ensure that our Intelligence Community has tools that they need.
CAMEROTA: But don't you do some investigating? Isn't that part of what you're tasked with?
TURNER: Not the type of investigation that he has been directed toward.
Remember, he had Felix Sater coming in just tomorrow to ask him more questions about collusion and collaboration with the Trump campaign and who had already been interviewed by the Mueller campaign -- Mueller investigation, and we know that they found no collusion.
CAMEROTA: Well, I mean, I think it's because he wanted to know more about the Moscow Trump Tower where there are still some questions about why we didn't know the right timeline of that and why Donald Trump, as candidate and then president, didn't own up to that business deal.
TURNER: The Mueller investigation interviewed Felix Sater. There is no more work for the Intelligence Committee to do with respect to any aspect of Trump and collusion. If found -- they found no collusion.
CAMEROTA: But hold on one second, Congressman. Let's me just -- you have a -- you have a duty separate and apart from the Mueller investigation. You all have oversight and investigative powers even if Robert Mueller didn't exist.
[07:45:05] TURNER: Right, but there are other committees to pursue other issues. We're supposed to be focusing on your national security. What's China doing, what's Russia doing, what's Iran, what's North Korea doing? What are our Intelligence Community doing? What resources do they need?
CAMEROTA: Yes.
TURNER: What information are we having that needs to be processed? Are there silos in between the Intelligence Community that we --
CAMEROTA: Of course.
TURNER: -- could help them in legislation and regulation?
CAMEROTA: So you need to ask questions and interview people.
TURNER: This is a personal vendetta from Adam Schiff at this point, and it's -- you know, he will continue to come on your show and say there's collusion -- even though we all know there's no collusion -- as long as you let him.
CAMEROTA: So, I mean, back to my question. Are you calling for him to step down?
TURNER: I do believe he needs to step aside. I think that his -- that his leadership is compromised and it's compromised, as I was saying, for three reasons. One --
CAMEROTA: Yes.
TURNER: -- he has stood in front of the American people and said things that were not true.
CAMEROTA: Yes, got it.
TURNER: Two, he's attacked his fellow Republicans on the committee and been divisive and saying things about the Republicans --
CAMEROTA: Yes.
TURNER: -- that aren't true.
And the third thing is he's transformed the committee from its focus --
CAMEROTA: Yes.
TURNER: -- which is protecting our national security and the Intelligence Community to being a vendetta against the Trump --
CAMEROTA: So who should be the chair?
TURNER: -- family and even the Trump campaign.
CAMEROTA: Who would you like to see be the chair?
TURNER: That's not my decision to make. I mean, obviously, that's Nancy Pelosi's decision to make. But I think when she makes that decision she needs to say what would be best for our national security --
CAMEROTA: So, Congressman --
TURNER: -- not would be best for appearances on CNN by Adam Schiff. CAMEROTA: Congressman, just help me understand this. You know, none of us have seen the Mueller report, of course, so we've just seen the 4-page summary. We've not seen the --
TURNER: But the summary, though, does include direct quotes. I mean, that's the aspect --
CAMEROTA: Two.
TURNER: -- that I think that's made the most news --
CAMEROTA: Two of them.
TURNER: -- is that we have exact quotes.
CAMEROTA: I mean, sure. But for my taste, I guess I'll just say that's not enough after two years. I'd sure like to see the full Mueller report.
TURNER: I agree and I've -- I have supported this whole report needs to be made public. But with respect to collusion, I mean, there are direct quotes in here that there's no tacit or express. There's absolute conclusive statements.
CAMEROTA: It said it could not establish -- did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated.
TURNER: Well, that would be that there's no evidence of collusion.
CAMEROTA: Yes, it didn't rise to a level that Robert Mueller felt that they could establish. I agree with -- I mean, we're in agreement.
TURNER: Which is different, by the way, than what Swalwell has said on your show. Swalwell has come on CNN and said well, it didn't rise to the level of criminal conspiracy or collaboration or cooperation.
CAMEROTA: Yes.
TURNER: That's not what Mueller said. He said there was none. And so --
CAMEROTA: So, this is the part that --
TURNER: -- you're going to continue to have these people say that there's evidence of things that there is no evidence of.
CAMEROTA: Yes. This is the part that's confusing until we see the Mueller report. Why then, all the lying and subterfuge?
TURNER: With what?
CAMEROTA: From the Trump orbit.
Why did so many people -- if there was no conspiracy, and that's what Robert Mueller -- I agree with you -- concluded, why all the lying? Why did they not admit -- why was the Air Force One statement
misleading and false that they crafted? Why did so many people lie that they're now going to prison about it? Why all the subterfuge? I mean, I think that that's --
TURNER: Well, you'll have to ask the --
CAMEROTA: -- the lingering question.
TURNER: Right, which I get to answer now, which is you'll have to ask them that.
But the one thing that's important about your question is no one was lying about collusion. I mean, the people who are going to jail are lying about financial transactions they were doing.
CAMEROTA: Meetings.
TURNER: Business practices that did not --
CAMEROTA: Meetings that they had with Russians.
TURNER: No one is going to jail because they lied about collusion or cooperation before Congress or in any aspect of this investigation. So that is -- that is a misrepresentation --
CAMEROTA: Yes --
TURNER: -- of what's happened. That's why Mueller was able to say there's no evidence of it and no one was prosecuted for it.
CAMEROTA: Well, they lied to investigators.
TURNER: And they've recommended no indictments with respect to it.
CAMEROTA: They lied to investigators and that's not allowed. And they've gotten --
TURNER: I don't know who you're talking about when you say they. I mean, it's just so broad.
CAMEROTA: Michael Flynn lied to investigators. There were all -- they've lied about the meeting --
TURNER: But not about collusion or cooperation because he's actually said he had no evidence with respect to collusion or collaboration or cooperation. He -- it's not about Trump-Russia, which is what Adam Schiff and your question was about, which is Trump-Russia.
All of these other aspects that came out of the Mueller campaign -- no American has been charged with respect to collusion, collaboration or cooperation with Russia and the Trump campaign. And, the Mueller campaign -- Mueller investigation has put to bed the issues of the campaign.
CAMEROTA: I understood that that's the top line. I hear you that that's the headline. But I guess --
TURNER: Well, that's the actual quotes that are in the Barr memo from the Mueller report.
CAMEROTA: Yes -- no, the -- I understood. But my question is there was a lot of lying to investigators. That's why Paul Manafort, George Papadopoulos -- all of these people got in trouble because they lied.
As you know, there was the misleading statement on Air Force One. Why?
TURNER: I think you'll have to ask them. I mean, obviously, I'm not going to defend a statement that someone else has made.
I can tell you this, though. That when you look at the statements that were made by members of the Intelligence Community, including Adam Schiff, when they would come out of hearings and testimony that we received --
CAMEROTA: Yes.
TURNER: -- it did not bear resemblance to what was happening in the back room.
And quite frankly, Alisyn, you have to know this yourself. I mean, if CNN looks not just at the statements that were made on CNN, but you had to have off-the-record conversations, background discussions, phone calls with these individuals. And you now know having had the Mueller report that they bear no resemblance to what you were being told.
CAMEROTA: Well --
TURNER: So I'm assuming that CNN was being guided and told that it's breaking -- we have this information. This is going to happen -- and in fact, it wasn't ever.
[07:50:03] CAMEROTA: Yes. We don't have the Mueller report.
TURNER: Ever.
CAMEROTA: I mean, we don't have the Mueller report. We look forward to having the Mueller report.
TURNER: You have the direct quotes in the Barr letter --
CAMEROTA: Listen --
TURNER: -- that state the conclusions.
CAMEROTA: I --
TURNER: And I look forward to the Mueller report. I'm for the whole thing being opened. In fact, I voted for everything in the Intelligence Committee to be open with respect to this investigation. I think the American public and you need to read all of this. And you ought to take a look at what happened in hearings and then
what your press conferences were right after those hearings and see --
CAMEROTA: We would love to.
TURNER: -- what those statements are that were not in contrast --
CAMEROTA: We'd love to, Congressman. I mean, if we could get access to closed-door meetings we'd love to know that. But we certainly --
TURNER: No, they're coming out -- we already voted. On the Intelligence Committee, we voted. They're in the process. They're coming out.
You will get an opportunity to see Adam Schiff ask questions and you will get an opportunity to hear witness after witness say I have no evidence of coordination or collaboration. I have no evidence of anyone else who has that evidence.
CAMEROTA: OK.
TURNER: And then you can match them up yourself to the members on Adam Schiff's team --
CAMEROTA: Yes.
TURNER: -- and Adam Schiff running in front of the cameras and saying we're close, we're close. We have more than circumstantial evidence --
CAMEROTA: Got it.
TURNER: -- of collusion when, in fact, there was none.
CAMEROTA: We look forward to being able to connect all those dots and to having you back to --
TURNER: I hope you hold them accountable.
CAMEROTA: -- have more questions. Thank you -- thank you very much, Congressman Turner.
TURNER: Thank you. I appreciate it.
BERMAN: George Papadopoulos convicted of lying about conversations he had about Russia. Michael Flynn convicted of lying about conversations that he had with the Russians. Michael Cohen convicted about lying about testimony he gave about a Russian deal.
CAMEROTA: I knew that those rang a bell.
BERMAN: Yes, there were lies about Russia. People were convicted. The jail time thing that he was hanging that on was a very narrow, narrow read. All right.
How pervasive is gerrymandering today? So much so that the salamander shape it was originally named after not even ridiculous enough to describe it anymore. So will the Supreme Court take action? A reality check is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[07:55:53] BERMAN: Coming today, the Supreme Court will take up the issue of gerrymandering. That's the partisan congressional redistricting. They will take it up again. This is the process of redrawing maps into shapes so ridiculous that they've run out living animals.
CAMEROTA: Which dead animals do they reflect?
BERMAN: That's a very good question. There's actually an answer coming up.
CNN senior political analyst John Avlon has your reality check -- John.
CAMEROTA: Oh, good.
JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Hey, guys.
So, it's not a stretch to say that the future direction of our democracy may be decided in cases argued before the Supreme Court today.
Now, at stake are two possible paths. One, increasing the poisonous polarization that's paralyzing Congress and enabling hyperpartisanship or rein in the political party's extreme self-interest, create more representative results, and help ensure that voters choose their politicians rather than politicians choosing their voters.
At issue is the rigged system of redistricting. The good news is that justices will be hearing a balanced docket today. One case involving a Republican act of rigged redistricting in North Carolina; the other a Democratic case in Maryland.
North Carolina's quintessential purple swing state, hotly contested in presidential elections, with a Democratic governor and a Republican state legislature. Democrats have a nearly half million more registered voters there but Republicans in the state intentionally drew congressional lines to preserve extreme partisan advantage regardless of election results.
Don't believe me? Well, here's what the Republican who redrew the map said.
Quote, "I think electing Republicans is better than electing Democrats, so I drew this map to help foster what I think is better for the country. I propose that we draw the maps to give a partisan advantage to 10 Republicans and three Democrats because I do not believe it's possible to draw a map with 11 Republicans and two Democrats."
Guess what happened? In 2016, Republicans won 53 percent of the vote, but 77 percent of the congressional seats -- 10 Republicans to three Democrats, just as it was designed.
How about 2018? Well, North Carolina Democrats and Republicans were about evenly split in their votes but Republicans still got 77 percent of the seats. Again, 10 to three.
But look, no monopoly -- no party's got a monopoly on virtue over vice and the fact is that Democrats do this as well when they can.
Case in point, Maryland's Sixth District. Politicians pulled 66,000 Republicans out of the district and replaced them with 24,000 Democrats. The result was a misshapen absurdity, one that one federal judge described it as, quote, "A broken-winged pterodactyl, lying prostrate across the center of our state."
Maryland's then-Gov. Martin O'Malley testified that his aim was to, quote, "Create a district where the people would be more likely to elect a Democrat than a Republican. Yes, this was clearly my intent."
Three federal judges unanimously declared it unconstitutional just a day after the 2018 election.
Look, George Washington warned against extreme partisanship. Gerrymandering even frustrated the founders. Ronald Reagan took up the cause and Barack Obama campaigned against it as well.
There's a reason why Michael Tomasky says in his new book that, "If you asked 1,000 close political observers to name one concrete fix that could alleviate polarization, I'd guess that less partisan gerrymandering would top the poll."
Today, the Supreme Court has the rare opportunity to restore some needed sanity to our political system. Redistricting reform is an issue that should be beyond right and left. It's about right and wrong.
And that's your reality check.
BERMAN: The pterodactyl not just dead, but extinct.
CAMEROTA: A prostrate pterodactyl.
BERMAN: Broken-winged prostrate.
AVLON: That's how far we had to go back.
CAMEROTA: Wow.
BERMAN: Exactly. That's how far.
CAMEROTA: All right, that answered our question. John, thank you very much.
So, Yale University has rescinded the admission of a female student whose parents allegedly paid more than $1 million to get her in.
Brynn Gingras is live in Boston with more. Tell us this story, Brynn. BRYNN GINGRAS, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes. We had 12 defendants go in front of a judge for the very time, Alisyn. These people were primarily college coaches, school administrators, test administrators. And while we're not seeing any parents on that list that pleaded not guilty yesterday, we'll see them later in the week.
This list was primarily, according to U.S. prosecutors, the people that helped Rick Singer. Remember, he's the mastermind behind this whole scheme of college admissions. They helped him actually executive this scheme.
For example, one of the women who appeared in front of the judge was the woman who allegedly made fake profiles at USC to help Rick Singer get students in through athletic routes. Another was an accountant tied to that sham nonprofit that Singer created in order to allegedly bribe people.
END
