Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

President Biden to Meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin Virtually on Russian Troop Buildup along Border with Ukraine; Marc Short, Former Chief of Staff to Vice President Mike Pence, Cooperating with House Committee Investigating January 6th Insurrection. Aired 8- 8:30a ET

Aired December 07, 2021 - 08:00   ET

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

[08:00:00]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Good luck with that. The boy band will return in the spring with a kickoff concert in Seoul to mark the beginning of a new chapter in their music. They're like the most famous people on earth. I'm not sure anything they do is just going to be regular.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: They're so famous. I'll be honest, I don't know a lot about K-pop other than I have K-pop socks that Kyung Lah bought me as present in the last few years. But I know a lot about Boyz II Men, and I don't know about you, Berman, but I was right back in seventh grade at my junior high dance, "The End of the Road," that's how they always end the dance.

BERMAN: Mine was "Stairway to Heaven." So just a little bit different.

KEILAR: Not too much.

NEW DAY continues right now.

Good morning to our viewers here in the United States and around the world. I'm Brianna Keilar with John Berman, and it Tuesday, December 7th. President Joe Biden beginning one of most critical meetings of his presidency just a couple of hours from now.

BERMAN: The president comes face to face virtually with Russian President Vladimir Putin at 10:00 a.m. eastern time. The U.S. intelligence community has sent stark warnings that Russia is preparing to invade Ukraine as soon as next month. We want to show you these images from Maxar Technologies. What you're looking at here is recent satellite imagery showing a huge buildup of Russian forces, armored units, tanks and more. And this is all right near the Ukrainian border. About 100,000 troops have already amassed, including medical units and fuel lines that could sustain the drawn-out conflict. And a U.S. intelligence assessment found that Russia could be preparing to invade with as many as 175,000 troops from positions near Ukraine's southern, western, and northeastern borders. They're being surrounded.

So why is Putin doing this? Well, he may actually have designs on invading Ukraine and reuniting the former Soviet Republic, or he could be using the threat of war to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, which would weaken Russia's power in the region. Either way, what happens between Biden and Putin just a couple of hours from now could mean the difference between peace and war.

KEILAR: And joining us now is Bill Taylor, he's the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, and Natasha Bertrand, our CNN White House reporter on this. I do want to get the reporting on this first, Natasha. What are we expecting Biden to say on this call with Vladimir Putin?

NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Well, he's going to try to convey to Putin that the cost of an invasion would be extremely high, that if the Russians actually move to invade Ukraine to attack them with all of the equipment and troops and supplies that they have near the borders now, that the international community would respond, mostly through sanctions, very, very harsh sanctions that the administration has said that they're working on with European and NATO allies, but also by potentially stationing more U.S. troops on NATO's eastern flank, which is something that the Russians do not want. If anything, they want NATO to back off. And that is what Putin will be conveying to Biden during the call.

Now, administration officials are telling us that they're not going to abide by any of these red lines, right. Putin is going to tell Biden that he wants security guarantees, that he wants legally binding guarantees that NATO is not going to expand further east. But the administration is saying, red lines are not helpful here. We can use some of this maybe as a starting point for further negotiations, but there is no way that we're going to allow Russia to dictate what NATO does and doesn't do.

KEILAR: Some things, Ambassador, are predictable about what they're going to discuss. But Putin is not always predictable. And I wonder, if you were in the position, as you have been, of advising the president about how this phone call should go or what pitfalls they would avoid, what you would say to the president?

WILLIAM TAYLOR, FORMER AMBASSADOR TO UKRAINE: So Brianna, the question for President Biden is how to do exactly what Natasha said, that is convince President Putin that it's just not worth a military invasion. The costs would be very high, not just in terms of economics or politics, it will be high in terms of Russian soldiers and Ukrainian soldiers. So this would be a major offensive that would go back to last century, which is where President Putin seems to be in terms of his sphere of influence.

So I think President Biden needs to be very strong. It sounds like he's ready to be very strong, outline the consequences of such an invasion, and offer to sit down and talk. If President Putin is really concerned about an invasion from Ukraine, then they can talk about that. They can talk about that, with Ukrainians, with other Europeans, and with Americans and Russians.

KEILAR: Do you think Putin will accept that? Or do you think an invasion is going to happen?

TAYLOR: I don't know if he will accept it. I'm not sure he's decided if there is going to be an invasion.

[08:05:00]

He may be hoping that all of these military forces that he's arranged on the border there will spook or intimidate President Zelensky from Ukraine, President Biden, NATO. He's -- President Putin would like to have what he wants without the cost, high cost of an invasion.

KEILAR: The Ukrainians are warning of a bloody massacre. They think an invasion, or they're sounding an alarm about an invasion. Does the White House see this as something that is definitely going to happen?

BERTRAND: They don't. They have been telling us that they do not know whether Vladimir Putin has actually made up his mind, and that is why they feel like there is still room for diplomacy here. That is why they're having this phone call. It's why they're trying to engage with the Russians and why they have been trying to engage with them for the last several weeks.

You'll recall, the president sent CIA Director Bill Burns to Moscow to warn them that the U.S. is watching what they're doing on the border and deter them, if possible, from doing anything reckless. So the administration does believe that diplomacy is still a root here. The question, though, is whether if Putin does not get what he wants out of this phone call, if things that the president tells him are not to his satisfaction, whether he can then use that as an excuse to justify an invasion.

KEILAR: I think for many Americans, Ambassador, Ukraine is very far away. And they don't necessarily see how it affects their day-to-day life. So I want to give you the chance to explain why people should be paying so much attention to what is happening on that border and what is happening today in this phone call.

TAYLOR: We should all be paying attention because Ukraine is just on the front line of a broader war, a broader aggression that affects Americans, affects Europeans. We know that the Russians, that Mr. Putin, has interfered in elections in Ukraine, interfered in elections in Europe, interfered in elections in the United States. We know that President Putin and the Kremlin and the Russians have hacked into systems, into infrastructure in Ukraine. And they have -- we know that they have hacked into systems in the United States as well.

We saw this in the hack of oil pipeline. We saw this in the hack of food distribution. We're feeling the effects of this aggression, and the Ukrainians are on the front line. We should be supporting the Ukrainians because they're defending the rest of Europe and, really, us.

KEILAR: A very big day, we're going to see what happens on this phone call. Natasha and Ambassador, thank you to you both.

BERMAN: Sources tell CNN that Marc Short is now cooperating with the House committee investigating the Capitol insurrection. The former chief of staff to Mike Pence was with the former vice president for most of January 6th and has firsthand knowledge of the events that unfolded. Secret Service agents had to rush the former vice president from the Senate chamber to a safe location after rioters stormed the building, some of them chanting this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CROWD: Hang Mike Pence! Hang Mike Pence! Hang Mike Pence!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: They are chanting "hang Mike Pence!" Just days earlier on January 4th, Short was with Pence in the Oval Office when Trump and conservative attorney John Eastman tried to pressure Pence tried to delay the counting of the Electoral College votes.

So joining us now is Olivia Troye, former adviser to Vice President Mike Pence and director of the Republican Accountability Project. Olivia, thanks so much for being with us. Just so people understand the context here, broadly speaking, where does Marc Short fit into Pence world?

OLIVIA TROYE, FORMER ADVISER TO VICE PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE: He is a critical player. He is the former vice president's righthand person. He still is very much in the inner circle of Mike Pence. I worked very closely with Marc Short during my tenure in the White House, and he is definitely Mike Pence's confidant.

BERMAN: And from what you saw, was he more squarely ensconced with the former vice president? He's more part of Pence world than Trump world?

TROYE: I think it is a mix of both. I think he certainly became more of the Mike Pence world the longer he was in his tenure in his role. I certainly saw him struggle at times balancing the relationship between the vice president's office and the Oval at the time, which was a very difficult and challenging environment. So certainly, in the days leading up to January 6th, I think Marc Short had some very critical insight, and I'm very glad to hear that he's cooperating with the committee and the investigation.

BERMAN: Critical insight, just so people are clear about this, you were long gone from the vice president's office by the time the January 6th insurrection, but from the role of an outside observer and from whatever contacts you might have with people inside that world, what are the questions that you would like to see answered by Marc Short to the committee?

TROYE: Well, I think I would be asking him, what were the conversations between the Oval and the vice president's office in the days leading up to January 6th?

[08:10:01]

What was the dynamic? What was the tremendous pressure being placed on Mike Pence to not certify the election results on January 6th? What was the plan in terms of the vice president's office to figure out how to navigate in this space? And I think also when it comes down to January 6th, they lived this

firsthand. Did anyone brief the vice president on the threat level of that day? Because certainly the intelligence was there. I had been warning publicly about the potential for violence that day. Did national security adviser, like General Kellogg, did a Homeland Security adviser that came in after me, I'm not sure if the role was filled, did somebody sit down Mike Pence and say there could be potential for violence today, any of that, was that level set also as well? I think that would be an interesting thing to answer.

And also, what did they live that day? What happened that day that led to what I would say is a systemic failure to respond when they were under attack in that Capitol? There is accountability at all levels here of the various steps.

BERMAN: Just one final question, quickly, you overlap with Mark Meadows when he became chief of staff for Trump. What was the relationship between Meadows and Marc Short?

TROYE: I did. And I think that that will be the most interesting part of this coming week, is will Mark Meadows cooperate now, especially knowing that Marc Short is cooperating? There is no love lost between these two individuals. There was a lot of tension there and they were not -- they were not friends. And so I think that if I'm Mark Meadows, I would think the walls are closing in and I think it is time to start telling the truth.

BERMAN: Olivia Troye, we appreciate your insight. Thanks so much for being with us.

So a sexual relationship between the defendant and a witness, explosive new claims from the Jussie Smollett trial coming up.

KEILAR: Plus, is America's democracy in trouble? Why younger Americans aren't hopeful about it. John Avlon has our "Reality Check" on that.

And the Biden administration's diplomatic boycott of the Beijing Winter Games, we're going to get reaction from an all time Olympic great.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:15:47]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: A brand-new poll of young American adults has important lessons for Americans of all ages.

John Avlon breaking it down in our "Reality Check".

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Eighty years ago today, Pearl Harbor was attacked, dragging America into the Second World War. It remains a date which lives in infamy, as FDR said, but it followed a decade of depression which democracy seemed to be in retreat against authoritarian regimes.

By comparison, we have it easy. But democracies are against suffering from self-doubt as authoritarians seem on the march.

Over the past six years, America has endured sustained assaults on the truth, democracy and science, didn't (ph) introduce trust in our institutions and each other. Those breaches don't heal overnight. It has a downstream effecting, tainting a rising generation with a sense of pessimism.

And perhaps the most stark snapshot from a new poll of young people age 18 to 29 conducted by the Harvard Institute of Politics. It shows a majority believe our democracy is at risk. And who could blame them? After seeing a president lie about election results, incite an insurrection, and then see one party follow them him into la-la land.

By the very nature of the big lie, there is a partisan divide. While 44 percent of Democrats say our democracy is healthy or at least somewhat functioning, only 23 percent of Republicans feel that way. But there are other partisan divides that speak to the trust deficits facing both parties.

For example, Democrats have a problem when it comes to patriotism or at least perceptions of American exceptionalism. Just 21 percent of Democrats surveyed agreed with the statement that America is greatest country in the world. While 64 percent believe there are other nations as great or greater than America. Among Republicans, those ratios are nearly reversed, with 62 percent saying America is the greatest.

But when it comes to the science of confronting the climate crisis, Republicans are clearly on the back foot when it comes to young Americans. 55 percent say they want the federal government to say the federal government isn't doing enough to combat climate change, which includes 68 percent of folks with a college degree, and 50 percent without, just a small slice, 14 percent think the feds are doing too much. Which lines up with the do nothing climate change denial of Donald Trump.

While President Joe Biden's popularity dipped from 59 percent in 2020 to 46 percent today, he is still far more popular among young people than Trump ever was. And the ex-president's approval is double under water, with 63 percent unfavorable and just 30 percent favorable ratings.

Interestingly, for all our dysfunctional partisan divides, there is a glimmer of hope here, or at least a demand for something different. Get this, by a 2-1 margin, 43 to 21 percent, young Americans say they would rather have elected officials compromised and meet in the middle, even at the expense of their preferred policy positions.

They sound more mature than most members of congress. But their idealism is tempered by a deep pessimism as they look at our divides. The poll asks young Americans to put a percentage on the chance that the U.S. would see a second civil war in their lifetimes.

Look, while these sorts of dramatic what-if questions should be taken with a grain, not a pound of salt, it is not reassuring to see that 35 percent of all respondents put the likelihood of a second civil war at 50 percent or higher in their lifetime. Behind all these hard numbers is an even harder psychological impact. The survey found 51 percent said they felt down, hopeless or depressed over the past two weeks, while 25 percent thought they would be better off dead or hurting themselves in some way, with young women feeling more that way. If you're feeling depressed, don't be afraid to ask for help, you were not alone.

But also remember that we are made of sturdy stuff. The so-called greatest generation suffered through the great depression and the World War were great because they overcame great obstacles, and found they did not have to be perfect to be heroes.

But for all our very real challenges, the 80th anniversary of Pearl Harbor is a reminder we have been through far worse before, that attack caught America by surprise, but within a few years the world found out that a diverse democracy has strengths that authoritarian regimes just can't match, when we work together with urgency for the common goal.

And that's your reality check.

KEILAR: I wonder, you know, that leads me to think, you're pretty optimistic here.

[08:20:01]

I mean, are you optimistic about the new generation because as you put it, we have been through worse, but they're the ones that have to rise to the occasion here?

AVLON: They are and they will and I am.

You know, Abraham Lincoln said I'm an optimist because I don't see the point in being anything else. That's how I feel.

KEILAR: All right. Me too. Count me in, John Avlon.

Thank you. Great reality check.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Whitney Houston said children are the future.

KEILAR: Children are the future, Berman.

BERMAN: You bring Abraham Lincoln, I can bring Whitney Houston.

(LAUGHTER)

KEILAR: Don't make me sing.

All right. Still ahead, New York City's bold new vaccine mandates. We'll have Mayor de Blasio joining us live on that.

BERMAN: First, accusations of sex and lies. Dramatic testimony in the Jussie Smollett trial, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: Dramatic moments in court as former "Empire" actor Jussie Smollett took the stand trying to trying to defend himself against charges he staged to fake hate crime and lied about it to police.

The actor's testimony focused on his relationship with two brothers who prosecutors say Smollett paid to attack him. Smollett says he did not hire them to carry out a fake attack for publicity, but says he did have a sexual relationship with one of the men.

[08:25:08]

The prosecution also grilled Smollett on this video of him in his apartment with a noose around his neck. They say he tampered with that noose to make it look more convincing to police.

The prosecution is expected to wrap up its cross examination this morning.

Joining me now, CNN legal analyst and former New York City prosecutor Paul Callan, and Bernarda Villalona, a criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor.

Bernardo, talk to me about what the jury is looking at now because, first of all, you don't always get a defendant on the stand testifying in his own defense. Secondly, you've got these two brothers who say this guy hired us to do this, you have corroborating evidence to that, and now what you have is Jussie Smollett, who is an actor, saying, no, no, no, it didn't happen.

BERNARDA VILLALONA, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY AND FORMER PROSECUTOR: Exactly. Exactly. Here you have the makings of a great show, money, drugs, sex, and empire.

So the jury is left with a tough task, how do they evaluate the credibility they heard from two sides, why normally they hear from one side, the prosecutor, who has to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt? So, what is the jury going to have to do? When I heard his testimony, I heard his testimony, they're pointing the fingers.

The prosecutor is going to have to drive that jury to focus on the facts, they were selected to determine whether Jussie Smollett committed these six counts of disorderly conduct. Now, with this witness testimony, now you have to look at the corroborating evidence. When you look at the corroborating evidence, then you can bring back the jury and show you can believe these brothers because of the corroboration and that will lead you to a finding of guilty.

BERMAN: Paul, how is Jussie Smollett doing on the stand? There hasn't been a few good men moment where he basically cracks and says, you know, you're damn right I did!

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, it's hard to say, but obviously, he's a trained actor for starters, OK? So he's -- you would expect him to be very good on the stand.

And, of course, the jury is going to have high expectations of him also because they know he's an actor as well.

But I think the biggest problem that Smollett has is in his story, because, remember, when this incident was first reported, it was reported as a hate crime, directed against him, and that he wasn't able to identify who had attacked him. Okay?

Then suddenly after the charges are dropped and a new investigation starts, we find out that the attackers were in fact two individuals that he paid $3,500 to and we have a check showing that. Ola and Bola, who were two friends of his and one he's sexually involved with.

So, how could it be he would not have recognized them, even though they had hoods over their heads, I'm sure he knows what they're eyes look like, especially the guy he's having a romantic relationship with, and he tells the cops, I don't know who they are, they're M MAGA people, it is a hate crime.

So I think that the implausibility of his story now that, oh, suddenly it was his two friends, who were the attackers, I think the jury is going to have a real problem with that.

BERMAN: What about the revelation in his testimony, his claim that he did have a relationship that was sexual in nature, with one of these men?

VILLALONA: Exactly. It kind of plays more to the narrative of what actually happened on that day, January 29th, 2019, in terms of you played upon the fears of America, talking about homophobic slurs, talking about racial slurs and now he wants to put forth in front of the jury because the brother did not say he was in a romantic relationship with Jussie Smollett, he wants to be the one, you know what? We were in a romantic relationship, he doesn't want to say it, I'm saying it, and you should judge his credibility based on him not coming out. This is why he came up with this story and it was not a hoax.

BERMAN: What about the cross, Paul. That will continue this morning. Prosecution gets another chance with Jussie Smollett today. Have they done enough so far? What more do they need to do? It has been clinical the cross, more than high impact emotion.

CALLAN: Yeah, it has. It would be very interesting to see what happens today because there are little nuggets that come out constantly with each new question. There are things probably we don't even know about that we may hear today. I think when I step back and look at this, I think the thing that is going to do him in more than anything else is likely to be the noose around the neck.

Because, remember, when the crime was first reported, he reported that he was assaulted, and when he came to, he had been knocked to the ground, he had a noose around his neck. He went home, and the interesting thing is that after he called the police, he put the noose back around his neck again.

Now, for most people you would think a noose around your neck would be a traumatic very fearful thing. But for Jussie Smollett, he's an actor, he's putting it back on before the cops arrive. I think that is a real hole in his credibility that the jury is going to look at carefully. Regardless of what happens today in cross examination.

BERMAN: He said he took it off and someone said don't tamper with evidence, so he put it back on.

CALLAN: He put it back on.