Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Officer Allegedly Told Units To Only Monitor For Anti-Trump Protesters; Arizona GOP Falsely Cite "Hanky Panky" Ballots For Bill; Transportation Sec. Buttigieg On Biden's Commitment To Reduce Emissions By As Much As 52 Percent. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired April 22, 2021 - 07:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:32:55]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: This morning, we are learning that on the day that pro-Trump mobs stormed the U.S. Capitol, police were told over their radios to only look out for anti-Trump protesters -- that's it. This detail revealed as part of a congressional review into the deadly insurrection and response.

CNN's Whitney Wild live in Washington with more. You know, it's been some time since this happened, Whitney. This is a huge revelation coming this much later.

WHITNEY WILD, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, and it underscores what, again, perception of the threat was going to be that day from people who were tasked with protecting the Capitol.

This description of the radio transmission came up in a hearing with the Capitol Police's inspector general. This was Rep. Zoe Lofgren, who chairs one of the committees that oversees Capitol Police, describing a radio transmission that she's apparently been able to review through the course of her investigation into what happened on January sixth.

So here's the actual quote that she read aloud during the hearing. "Attention all units on the field. We're not looking for any pro-Trump in the crowd. We're only looking for any anti-pro-Trump who want to start a fight."

And the reason that Rep. Lofgren thinks this is such an important moment is because she maintains that Capitol Police had ample evidence that there could be violence from people in the crowd who were supportive of President Trump.

This is something that they've admitted to, Brianna, in hearings. They knew there was a chance for white supremacists, who were armed, intending to cause violence would be there that day. And yet, they were still focused on what they perceived the threat could possibly be, which was between clashes of anti-Trump people and pro-Trump people.

However, Capitol Police says this radio transmission and the person who made this radio transmission is not under investigation. And they maintain that this was made very early in the day around 8:00 a.m. And that again, it underscored at the time what they thought was a logical reasoning behind where they thought the threat was coming from, Brianna.

KEILAR: Which makes you wonder if it really was logical, though, for all of us in D.C. who were looking at what was happening. This does not seem like the logical conclusion to take away.

[07:35:04]

Whitney, great report. Thank you.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: So, Lindsey Graham doesn't like grabbing or at least certain kinds of grabbing. He says he opposes the idea of statehood for Washington, D.C. because of grabbing.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): It's not about the city. It's not about the people in the city. It's about a power grab.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: So the kind of grabbing that would allow D.C. residents to elect senators is bad, but not as bad by his grab standards as the House bill Democrats say would expand voting access. Now, that is --

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAHAM: The biggest power grab in the history of the country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: The biggest, but not the first. Because for Lindsey Graham, it's raining power grabs -- hallelujah. He's seen them in all kinds of things from Obama executive orders on guns, Democrat efforts on healthcare, a hate crimes provision in 2009, Democrats ending the judicial filibuster in 2013.

Now, that last one on judges is interesting because even if you disagree with Graham on any or all of these issues, most are traditional small-government conservative hallmarks. What's interesting with Sen. Graham is not where he sees grabs but where he doesn't.

He didn't stand up to Mitch McConnell for blocking the Supreme Court nomination of Merrick Garland, though for a second after he was slightly grab-hesitant.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAHAM: I want you to use my words against me. If there's a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let's let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination. (END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Never mind. He got over the grab phobia last fall to help push through the confirmation of Justice Amy Coney Barrett. So judicial grab for me but not for thee.

But more than anything, when it comes to grabs, he has one giant orange blind spot -- and I'm not even talking about the vile, caught- on-tape "ACCESS HOLLYWOOD" admission. Graham's obsession with grabs took a four-year hiatus for Donald Trump, a literal grabber.

Yes, he opposed a few of Trump's actions on policy grounds, but not on power plays. And on some, like the wall, he said, it is time for President Trump to use emergency powers to fund the construction of a border wall/barrier. It's time to grab power.

And then there's the matter of the election lie -- the explicit effort by the former president to throw out the election. That seems big. But remember, in Graham's world, not the biggest. That would be the Democratic effort to voting reform.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAHAM: The biggest power grab in the history of the country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: This is from the guy who actually called the Secretary of State of Georgia, himself, while they were still recounting. "The Washington Post" reports that Brad Raffensperger said he was stunned that Graham appeared to suggest that he find a way to toss legally cast ballots.

Tossing ballots to overturn an election, that is grabby. Now, Graham denies that's what he was after but he doesn't deny the call.

Now, there was a minute after the insurrection where he had some doubts.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAHAM: Trump and I, we've had a hell of a journey. I hate it to end this way. Oh my God, I hate it. All I can say is count me out. Enough is enough.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: Except it's not. It's not enough for him. He's actually hosting a golf tournament with Trump -- the Trump-Graham Golf Classic -- and it is classic. Side-by-side with the guy who is still lying about the election after he tried to overturn it, insurrection be damned. It's almost as if Lindsey Graham is telling Trump thank you, sir -- may you grab another.

KEILAR: That was grab-tastic.

BERMAN: Grab-tastic.

KEILAR: Grab-tastic. But in all seriousness --

BERMAN: Grab-a-palooza.

KEILAR: Grab-a-palooza. Quite a grab 'em by the power.

That -- but in all seriousness, I mean, Lindsey Graham -- he used to be seen as someone who was a -- one of these last remaining kind of elder statesmen in Congress, and I just wonder how history is going to remember him.

BERMAN: Maybe as slightly inconsistent. I think the word may be inconsistent or there may be some others --

KEILAR: Yes --

BERMAN: -- as well.

KEILAR: -- some grabby words.

All right, John Berman. Thank you.

Up next, a Republican state official taking aim at fellow GOP lawmakers, setting the record straight on election fraud.

BERMAN: Plus, police in Ohio, after the shooting of a 16-year-old girl who appeared to be stabbing another, are asked why can't you shoot suspects in the leg? Hear their answer.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:43:46]

KEILAR: In Arizona today, the State Senate could take up a controversial election reform bill. This aims to stop some voters from automatically receiving mail-in ballots.

The bill is known as SB 1485 and it would remove voters from the state's permanent early-voting list who have not voted in the last two election cycles, and then who do not respond to a final mailed notice to them within 90 days.

This passed on a party-line vote in the state's House on Tuesday and the state's Republican governor has yet to indicate whether he will sign it into law. But critics are already lined up in opposition, arguing that this amounts to voter disenfranchisement disguised as election reform.

Let's talk about this now with Arizona State Rep. Raquel Teran, who is the chair of the Arizona Democratic Party. Thank you so much for being with us.

And just tell us off the bat here -- obviously, this is concerning to you. You're opposed to it. Who does this affect? How many people do you expect this affects? RAQUEL TERAN (D), ARIZONA STATE REPRESENTATIVE, CHAIR, ARIZONA DEMOCRATIC PARTY: (via Skype): Good morning, and thank you for having us.

Yes, absolutely, I -- we are very much concerned with this bill that purges the permanent early-voting list here in the state of Arizona. We estimate that upwards of 200,000 people would be impacted by this bill.

[07:45:00]

But we like to talk about the numbers of what would have happened if this bill would have been in effect in 2020 and upwards of 126,000 Arizona could have been removed from the permanent early-voting list.

And we all know that Joe Biden won Arizona by a very slim margin. It was about 10,000 votes. So we know that this would have impacted the election.

And we also know that when we move these voter restriction bills, the people who are most affected are the people of color, people who live in rural areas, people in indigenous communities, seniors, people with disabilities.

This is a mechanism that has worked for Arizona and that is safe. And yet, the Republicans are working so hard to curtail this system. And we know that it's because of the power grab, just as it was talked about last segment.

KEILAR: Do you think that the governor, Gov. Ducey, will sign this into law? He hasn't indicated right now which was he's going to go.

TERAN: He has not indicated what way he's going to go but he is getting a lot of pressure not only from community organizations who have been working diligently to ensure that our communities are part of the decision-making process but also from business leaders. Arizona is going to get another black eye if we continue to move legislation that's not good for democracy, that's not good for Arizona. So he is getting a lot of pressure.

We are hoping that if this gets to his desk that he will veto this bill. And remember that he, himself, said that the elections were secure, that our systems worked, and that we need to make sure that people are voting.

KEILAR: And let's be very clear about what is in this bill. Initially, it would take people off this permanent early-voting list, which is something Arizona has, if they had voted -- if they had not voted in the last four election cycles, including in partisan primaries, and if they didn't respond to this final mailed notice. In the end, the House amendment says if they didn't vote in any of the previous two election cycles.

You know what proponents of this bill say this is about accuracy and this is about preventing voter fraud. What do you say to that? TERAN: You know, we don't know what people's circumstances are -- why they didn't vote, live survival. Like many, we saw people affected by the pandemic or simply chose not to vote. But we as a legislature should not punish people for not voting, and the reality is that this is a punishment for not voting.

But like I stated the numbers at the beginning that people -- if they're -- if they are invited to vote -- if they are interested in voting they will do so. And a lot of these people have gone through the process, have chosen this mechanism of voting, and we don't want them to be off the permanent early voting list.

Well now, it's -- if this goes into effect, they will not be permanent anymore because that's what they are also taking off -- is making this list -- the active voting list versus permanent. But we don't know that if they decide to vote they should -- they should be receiving their ballot and cast their vote.

KEILAR: Raquel Teran, thank you so much. We'll be watching to see what happens there in Arizona with this bill

TERAN: Thank you for having me.

KEILAR: And just to note that we will be speaking with an Arizona Republican tomorrow on NEW DAY.

BERMAN: It was almost like ventriloquism.

KEILAR: Right.

BERMAN: I was -- I was thinking that out loud as you were saying it.

KEILAR: Did you move your lips? You could have --

BERMAN: Moments from now, President Biden making a huge commitment to address the climate crisis. Will it work? Is it even possible?

Treasury Sec. Pete Buttigieg joins us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:53:14]

BERMAN: CNN has learned that this morning, President Biden will commit the United States to reducing its greenhouse gas emissions in half over the next decade. The president will announce this new target as he convenes world leaders for a virtual climate summit moments from now, with leaders including China's Xi Jinping and Russia's Vladimir Putin.

Joining me is Transportation Sec. Pete Buttigieg. He testified in a Senate hearing this week that every infrastructure decision is already inevitably a climate decision as well. Mr. Secretary, very nice to see you. Thank you for being here.

This is a bold goal. The president is announcing he wants to reduce greenhouse emissions by 50 percent by 2030 based on 2005 numbers. So, 50 percent in nine years. The EPA tells us we were at 12 percent two years ago.

So to get to that huge number, what do you think the hardest sacrifice is that Americans will have to make?

PETE BUTTIGIEG, TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY (via Cisco Webex): Well, it's going to take a national effort, but this is not a matter of something that can be done just by asking individual Americans to make individual choices. This is a matter of policy.

I'll give you an example, electric vehicles. Now, it doesn't feel like a sacrifice if you've been behind the wheel of one of these things. They're remarkable vehicles that perform well.

But we've got a lot of work to do as a country to make sure that they're affordable, to make sure we have enough charging stations around the country. To make sure that the electric vehicles of tomorrow are made in America on American soil by American workers -- preferably, American union workers. That's not just going to happen on its own and frankly, that's not going to happen without policy choices.

So whether we're talking about things like that, whether we're talking about making sure that there are other low-carbon or zero-emission options to get around with trains and transit zero-emission busses, or whether we look outside of the transportation sector to the other things that need to be done, like retrofitting buildings, this is a huge lift.

[07:55:07]

It is a major national project but the United States is up to the task and it's great to see the United States leading again, convening the nations of the world to discuss this, as the president is doing today.

BERMAN: I do wonder, though, what you think the biggest, hardest change that people will have to make. And I know it's not just individuals, but it's a society.

But to get to that number the president is talking about -- and again, just to stress, it's a huge jump from where we are. In 2019, we were at a 12 percent drop in emissions from 2005. He's suggesting 50 percent in nine years.

It's going to cost us something. We're going to have to give up something and I'm just wondering what you think will be the most difficult thing for us to do.

BUTTIGIEG: Well, we have to make the investments. But again, I think this is being characterized as if it's about our personal habits. I mean, certainly, we ought to be paying attention to our personal carbon footprints but this is a lot bigger than this.

It's not in the context of your daily routine that you're going to modernize the U.S. energy grid. But it is the case that we have to make that choice as a country and we have to make those policies that are going to make it possible.

And critically, we've got to lead the world in doing this. You know, the United States is a big emitter but we represent about 15 percent of world emissions.

That's why it was so disastrous when the last administration basically left the U.S. seat at the table empty. And that's why it's so important today that we are convening virtually, but still convening in the U.S., a summit of leaders around the world who don't agree on much --

BERMAN: Yes.

BUTTIGIEG: -- but who recognize just how important this is.

BERMAN: So, Bill Weir, who is our chief climate correspondent and my guru on these things, pointed out that China, in 2030, will still be -- will peak in 2030 in terms of its greenhouse emissions. So, President Biden wants us to be down 50 percent by 2030. China won't be down at all by then. So how do you sell that to the American people?

BUTTIGIEG: Well look, it's natural for America to be leading the way. That's what Americans are used to be doing -- you know, the posture we're used to having -- and then challenging the other countries of the world to catch up. We're looking for other countries to make big commitments as well. But we can't do that with a straight face if America isn't leading the way. If we're not walking the talk.

That's what this big, bold, but achievable commitment from the president today is going to help us do. Resume that position of U.S. leadership and then challenge the other nations of the world to be part of the solution as well.

BERMAN: So, Mr. Secretary, you're one of the administration officials running point on the infrastructure bill -- the American Jobs Plan.

Republicans in the Senate, we understand, are going to come up and present a $600 billion proposal. From what you know of it, is this a good place to start to working with them?

BUTTIGIEG: Well, I want to see more of the details. I've been on the phone with Republicans and Democrats in both Houses just about every day talking about the key areas where we have to work -- the red lines, where the negotiations might fall.

I guess the question I would put to those putting together this proposal or any proposal is if this is a once in a lifetime chance to make a transformational investment in the U.S. infrastructure -- one that will be remembered by our grandchildren the way we remember the interstate system or the transcontinental railroad -- is this up to that task? And we'll just have to wait and see the details on whether this can meet the moment.

BERMAN: What's your willingness to do this in parts rather than a big whole? Because look, if they have $600 billion worth of things that you like, one could look at it and say hey, why don't you pass that and then work on the other stuff separately?

BUTTIGIEG: Well, we believe these things belong together and that's not just because of an understanding of infrastructure that we think is getting broader for the American people. You know, things like fiber-optic cable are as important as highway connections these days.

But also, I would point out that the American people believe in this plan, both in its pieces and taken together. That being said, legislation is complicated. Lots of different ways can emerge in terms of the vehicles to get it done. The most important thing is we have to get this done and the American people are demanding it.

BERMAN: I'm going to -- this is a complicated question but I only have 30 seconds for an answer, Mr. Secretary.

Usage tax. In other words, taxing people for as much as they use resources, like electric cars. You could tax the mileage that they drive on roads.

Is this something the administration would consider?

BUTTIGIEG: You know, the problem with that is that the president is absolutely committed to a promise that he made on the campaign trail, which is that taxes will not go up in a plan from this administration on anybody making less than $400,000 a year.

And by the way, the plan we put forward is fully paid for, but the way we do it is by adjusting corporate tax rates that we know need to be adjusted because a lot of corporations aren't paying their fair share.

Now, there are a lot of different ways to do this that keep the president's promise -- we have an open mind -- but that is a very important line for this White House.

BERMAN: Mr. Secretary, Pete Buttigieg, we appreciate you coming on NEW DAY.