Return to Transcripts main page

State of the Union

Syria's Government Collapses; Interview With Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-MI); Interview With Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK); Interview With Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL). Aired 9-10a ET

Aired December 08, 2024 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:36]

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST (voice-over): Regime change, as president-elect Trump takes the global stage.

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES (R) AND CURRENT U.S. PRESIDENT-ELECT: The world is going a little crazy right now.

TAPPER: An astounding turnaround in Syria overnight, as rebels overwhelm the al-Assad government and claim the capital. What does it mean for the region and the world?

Former Defense Secretary Mark Esper is next.

And walking the walk. With a fight brewing over some of Trump's key nominees, two more controversial picks head to the Hill this week. Can he get all the Senate Republicans on board? Trump ally and Armed Services Senator Markwayne Mullin is next.

Plus: Pardon me? After a controversial pardon, the White House weighs making more, preemptively, for Trump's potential political targets.

REP. JAMES CLYBURN (D-SC): We have to use the pardon system.

TAPPER: Will Biden's party back him breaking convention again? Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin joins me exclusively ahead.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: Hello. I'm Jake Tapper in Washington, where the state of our union is following the breaking news out of the Middle East, the collapse overnight of the Bashar al-Assad government in Syria after rebel forces seemed to come out of nowhere taking, just days to overwhelm and oust the brutally repressive government that has been in power for several decades.

Across the Middle East, Syrians rejoiced as some hope to soon return to their home country, as Russia's Foreign Ministry confirmed that Bashar al-Assad had -- quote -- "decided to leave the presidential post and left the country, giving instructions to transfer power peacefully" -- unquote.

Syrian state media read a statement from the rebels this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

YOUSSEF AL-YOUSSEF, NEWS ANCHOR FROM SYRIAN REBEL: We announce to you from the Syrian news channel the victory of the great Syrian revolution after 13 years of patience and sacrifice. We won the bet and toppled the criminal Assad regime.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: But what is very unclear this morning is what comes next amid fears about what the rebels might do with their power, as well as concerns about the extremist terrorist elements within their ranks.

Let's go to a reporter who has traveled to Syria more than a dozen times in the past decade, covering the civil war from its start in 2012 to the ISIS rout of 2017.

And CNN's Nick Paton Walsh joins me now with more.

Nick, this seemed to take world leaders by surprise.

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL SECURITY EDITOR: Look, I think it took, frankly, everyone by surprise.

But if you look at the larger dynamics behind this, the fact that Russia is massively overstretched and preoccupied in its war in Ukraine, and they were providing a lot of the airpower that kept Assad in power and also Iran, well, they were propping Assad up through their proxy, Hezbollah.

They have taken a huge hit through the Israeli onslaught we have seen over the past months. And, clearly, the Damascus regime, brutal as it has been for 13 years, was deeply vulnerable. And it's clear that the opposition rebel forces, who are getting a lot of backing from Turkey here, decided to act.

And they may have found greater success than they expected, Jake.

TAPPER: What comes next, do you think?

WALSH: Yes, this is the ultimate question, right?

I mean, obviously, we get 72 hours here of jubilation. This was one of the most horrific regimes on the planet, chemical weapons used against children in 2013. I mean, I saw random airstrikes that flattened a building from which they pulled the bodies of nine children back at the beginning of the civil war.

You can't get much worse than Bashar al-Assad. What comes next? Well, it's, I think, an unknown. But, ultimately, we do know some things about it. And we know that the leader of this movement, militarily very successful as it was, still has a $10 million bounty on its head from the United States because of his earlier al Qaeda affiliations.

Is that something you give up? Is it something you mature from? Well, he's suggesting that's the case, but, also, Jake, remember, leading a military campaign, a very, very different job to governance, particularly the governance of a country that's been so heavily damaged and torn by sectarian violence, as indeed Syria has.

So, a huge job, frankly, for anyone to undertake, let alone somebody who probably has minimal experience of ruling, and many immediate challenges as well, frankly. We have to see how Syria's new neighbors respond to this sudden change in the dynamic, the disappearance of Iranian power, Moscow overnight suddenly being exposed as a paper tiger in this regard.

So much more to play out, but really with the ultimate question of whether the extremist parts of this rebel opposition group, which we have known have been there for some time, really have dissipated, really don't become part of the future of Syria.

[09:05:12]

That's what U.S. officials are reminding people constantly about their fear of a resurgence of ISIS. They're already there. They're already around in the desert looking for an opportunity. But remember too there is certainly time here for Syrians to have hope, to have ambitions for a better society, and to try and realize that just when the rubber hits the road, Jake.

We simply don't know what's going to happen in a deeply troubled region.

TAPPER: All right, Nick Paton Walsh, thank you so much.

Joining us now, the man who presided over President Trump's withdrawal of U.S. forces from Northern Syria in 2019, former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper.

Mr. Secretary, what's your initial reaction to the news coming out of Syria, and how worried are you about the stability of the region at large, including Iran and Lebanon and Israel?

MARK ESPER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, good morning, Jake.

This is historic, to say the least. This is the regime, the Assad regime, that's ruled that country brutally for 50-plus years. And now they're coming to an end.

From a historical perspective, stepping back a little bit, it's not unlike what's happened over the past 20 years across the Arab world, as you look at strongmen, from Moammar Gadhafi in Libya, who was toppled, all the way to Saddam Hussein, who was toppled. And in both cases, those regimes fell apart and the brutality ended.

So this is significant. I think importantly for us right now, at a strategic perspective, what you see is Russia no longer, we hope, has a foothold in the Middle East. It's unclear to me how much control the rebels have over the coastal regions, which is where the Alawite sect, that is Assad's sect, dominates. But that is where Russia has a naval base in Tartus and an airfield

right outside Latakia. So we could see the -- Russia lose its foothold in the Middle East. And, of course, Iran, I think, is most severely impacted by this. They will now lose their air and ground routes through Syria that used to supply the Hezbollah in Lebanon, so very significant for those countries on a major basis.

And for other countries in the region, Jordan, Turkey, others, they will now see the return of millions of refugees who have been housed in their countries for years, hopefully for them returning to Syria.

TAPPER: I was texting with retired general this morning, who is very concerned about what's going to happen to Assad's massive arsenal of chemical weapons, to say nothing of the huge cache of surface-to-air missiles in Syria.

How worried are you about those weapons getting into the hands of the rebels, specifically the part of the rebels that is the Islamist militant group HTS, Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham, whose leader has or had ties to al Qaeda?

ESPER: Yes, I think there are a number of immediate concerns we have to address. There's going to be the humanitarian aid concern, which I think we and other countries in the U.N. will have to address.

I think secondly, as you mentioned, is the chemical weapons and other military capabilities. We do not want those to get into the wrong hands. So there needs to be an effort to secure them or get some assurance from a responsible player that those will be secured and ultimately destroyed.

Then I think the bigger question today, Jake, that we were talking about yesterday was, who is going to govern Syria and what will it look like, right? We do not want a return of -- we don't want it to look like the ISIS caliphate. So that'd be another immediate concern. We don't want it to look like the Taliban rule. We don't want it to look like a theocracy in Iran.

So the question is, what will it look like under HTS and this really diverse group of rebel factions, everything from Christians to Druze, Sunnis and Shias, Kurds, secular, nonsecular? What will look like?

And it was interesting. This morning, CNN had an interview with Mohammed al-Jolani, the leader, and he sounded moderate, despite a pedigree that goes back to al Qaeda and ISIS, where he was talking about being very inclusive and respecting the voices of all these different groups.

And we have seen -- on the streets of Damascus, we don't see what we might have thought, which would be terror, executions, mistreatment of the populace. So this will be the key question over the next coming days and weeks is, what will look like, Jake?

TAPPER: So president-elect Trump, your former boss, said last night the U.S. should not get involved in any way. Obviously, he pulled troops out of Syria during his first administration, when you were secretary of defense.

Do you think that that is the right approach, that the U.S. should not be involved in any way?

ESPER: Well, first of all, we do still have troops in Southeast Syria at Al-Tanf. And it's about 900 troops there principally to continue the counter-ISIS operations to make sure that caliphate doesn't rise up, but, secondly, to watch Iran's movement through the region. So I think that's important. That will stay.

[09:10:03]

But, stepping back, both he and President Biden have said there's no role for U.S. troops. I agree. I don't see that role right now to do that. Donald Trump is always consistent, if there's one thing, that he did not want to get involved in wars. So I think we should take him at his word on that.

But, that said, we do have a lot of interest in the region, in Syria. I mentioned earlier, what will this mean for Russia and its foothold in the Middle East? What about Iran? We, of course, have our NATO ally Turkey in the north. We have our partners the Kurds, who will be -- continued friction with the Turks.

We have Arab partners Jordan and Saudi Arabia that border Syria. There's a lot of U.S. interest here. And it's in our strategic interest to make sure that whatever comes to power, whoever comes to power is going to be not a caliphate, not a theocracy, but something that's more in tune with what we and I should importantly say what Israel can live with going forward.

TAPPER: All right, Secretary Esper, thanks so much for your time. Appreciate it.

Coming up next, more on our breaking news coverage of the collapse of the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad. We're going to talk to a Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee to talk about that and much more.

Plus, should President Biden offer preemptive pardons to Trump's potential political targets? The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Dick Durbin, will join us ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:15:46]

TAPPER: We're following this breaking news out of Syria, where the sudden collapse of the al-Assad regime is raising all sorts of questions for the United States.

Joining us now to discuss, Senator Markwayne Mullin. He is a member of the Armed Services Committee and represents the great state of Oklahoma in the U.S. Senate.

Senator, thanks for joining us. So as the Assad regime collapsed, president-elect Trump posted on

TRUTH Social -- quote -- "This is not our fight" and arguing the U.S. should not get involved.

I certainly understand the sentiment and the desire to not have U.S. troops involved, but what happens if extremists who are part of the rebel groups get their hands on Assad's chemical weapons and plan to use them against the 900 American troops in Southern Syria or against Israel?

What happens if we see a resurgence of ISIS or al Qaeda in the region because of this? Is there no role at all ever for the U.S. here?

SEN. MARKWAYNE MULLIN (R-OK): Well, when it becomes a national security interest and a threat to the United States, then we would get involved.

But I agree with the president that we shouldn't be involved in this. This isn't our fight. But make no mistake about this. This wasn't an accident. The rebels didn't just suddenly find an opportunity to move forward. What had happened here is, Israel had completely taken out the ability for Hezbollah, which is a direct arm of Iran that was controlling a lot of Syria, that a lot of people didn't understand.

When Israel completely decimated Hezbollah, this left the door wide open. And I don't think it was a mistake that the rebels moved. I believe there was probably some coordination that took place. I would be real surprised if there isn't some interaction that the rebel forces had with the IDF on the timing of this.

The timing is always important. And it wasn't an accident the timing took place the way that it did in this point too. So the person who's wounded the most here is Iran. Some stability will take place, I believe, in Syria now that Assad is gone.

When you had Iran, which is an extreme terrorist -- I don't -- terrorist government, and you have Russia, who's controlling the airspace, and you have had Assad, who's been willing to use chemical weapons on their own -- on his own citizens, then that is destabilization.

I don't know what the rebels are going to bring in, but I don't know how you get much worse than what you already had underneath the current regime.

TAPPER: So all this happens at the same time that former Democratic Congresswoman, now Republican Tulsi Gabbard, who is president-elect Trump's nominee for director of national intelligence, is preparing to go onto Capitol Hill this week to meet with senators.

Gabbard met with Assad in Syria in 2017. We interviewed her right afterwards. She dismissed U.S. intelligence findings that Assad used chemical weapons on civilians, as you just noted. And she said that Assad was -- quote -- "not the enemy of the United States."

What do you say to Republican senators who are expressing misgivings about whether or not she's the right person to be in charge of intelligence at this moment in history?

MULLIN: Well, a lot of things have taken place since 2017. Her position, obviously, because of the actions of Assad and what has happened in Syria, has changed.

Keep in mind that, when she went over there, she was still -- now, she wasn't over there in uniform, but she was a captain in the National Guard. Since then, she's moved her -- has moved to Reserve in the Army. She has been promoted from major to lieutenant colonel since then. She's currently over the Reserve unit in all of Oklahoma and Missouri.

She has clearances. She's able to do her job. And I think she's 100 percent qualified to be the next director of national intelligence. And so I'm excited about her opportunity, because she is perfect for the position.

TAPPER: Another key Trump pick is defense secretary Pete -- defense secretary nominee Pete Hegseth, who seems to be facing an uphill battle.

My understanding from Trump transition officials is that there are probably enough Republican senators with concerns about Hegseth right now to block his nomination were the vote to be today. But it is not today.

One of the most prominent skeptics, shall we say, is Iowa Senator Joni Ernst. And now a pro-Trump group is running a TV ad targeting Ernst in Iowa.

[09:20:00]

Here's a clip of from it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NARRATOR: Pete Hegseth is a patriot, a decorated combat veteran, and a warrior who will stop at nothing to keep America safe. The deep state is trying to stop his nomination, but Pete isn't backing down.

Call your senator today and urge them to confirm Pete Hegseth for secretary of defense.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: So that ad seems to suggest that Joni Ernst is part of the deep state.

She's a combat veteran, a survivor of sexual assault. She has legitimate concerns, as do many of your Republican colleagues, about Hegseth's nomination. Are you comfortable with this pressure campaign targeting Ernst?

MULLIN: Well, I -- that didn't come from the Trump team themselves. People have their own ideas, their own directions. I think Joni has the right to be able to question this. And I think

Pete's doing exactly what he needs to do. He's on Capitol Hill. He's speaking with senators. There's been absolutely no no's from Republican senators at this point. He continues to make his case, and his case is something that I -- when he sits down with you, he's able to articulate very well.

I think Pete will make an outstanding secretary of defense, and I believe that he's going through the process. Now, he has an uphill battle, but he's taking the fight straight to Capitol Hill, like he should. He's going to have a hearing in Senate Armed Services. He will have to answer tough questions, and I believe he will be able to answer every one of them.

At the end of the day, I believe Pete will be our next secretary of defense, and he will be perfect for the role. I mean, right now, we have had Secretary Austin. Secretary Austin is a general in the Army. He has been a disaster. We have low morale.

The only reason why we are even kind of close to having some type of recruiting numbers is because he's lowered the threshold, but we're nowhere near where we should be for where the previous threshold for recruitment should be, because people aren't wanting to fight for Secretary Austin.

You have Pete, who is a combat veteran, two Bronze Stars. He was a major in the Army. He's been in the public sector. He will go there and make the changes in the Defense Department that needs to take place, and I think he's exactly the one we need, which is why I believe he will get confirmed at the end of the day.

TAPPER: A number of your fellow Republican senators have publicly expressed concern about Hegseth's -- pardon me -- reputation for excessive alcohol drinking.

Here is what Hegseth said a few days ago on "The Megyn Kelly Show."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY NOMINEE: First of all, I have never had a drinking problem. I don't -- no one's ever approached me and said, oh, you -- you should really look at getting help for drinking, never.

I have never sought counseling, never sought help. I respect and appreciate people who do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Just a few years ago, however, on "The Will Cain Show," this is how Hegseth described his experience with alcohol after returning from Iraq.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

HEGSETH: I'd look around at 10:00 and say, what am I going to do today? How about I drink some beers? How about I go have lunch and have some beers? How about I meet my one or two buddies and have some beers? And one beer leads to many, leads to self-medication, leads to, I have earned this. Like, what do you -- don't tell me I can't.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

TAPPER: It seems to be in that Will Cain clip that he's describing having a drinking problem.

How do you reconcile that with him now claiming that he's never had an issue with alcohol?

MULLIN: Jake, that wasn't him saying he had an alcohol problem. That was him being honest.

Unfortunately, a lot of our combat vets have come back and faced the same thing. They're sitting there and they were -- they had their identity in the service. They had a job to do. They were responsible for certain things and they get out of the service and they're back and they're sitting there twiddling their thumbs.

They have had a lot of experiences that the regular -- regular population doesn't. They have these memories, these thoughts, these sounds, the smells that are still coming back to them, and they turn to drinking with their buddies.

That doesn't mean that they had a drinking problem. That means that every combat veteran has had the same issues. That's why they have VFWs set up. That's why they have American Legions set up. What he was describing is what most combat veterans have faced.

And for the media to go after him and start describing that as a drinking problem is individuals that don't understand combat veterans because they have never been there. They have never been in combat. They have never seen the horrific stuff that comes by that. They have never tasted the dirt in their mouth. They have never heard the horrible sounds in their ears.

They have never had the sights that they can't get rid of. They have never had the dreams in the middle of the night. And I think it's hypocritical for them to even question that.

Now, if he did have a drinking problem, that would be obvious. But to make something out of it that isn't there just because he's going through secretary of defense, the media should be ashamed of themselves. They should put themselves in their shoes and every other combat veteran's shoes before they go out there and criticize him.

TAPPER: So I have done a lot of coverage of veterans and a lot of coverage of combat. And while I have never worn the uniform, I think I do have an understanding of the need of our valiant troops when they come home to self-medicate.

What I'm saying is, when you're talking about drinking at 10:00 in the morning, that's a drinking problem. Now, it doesn't mean that there should be a stigma. (CROSSTALK)

MULLIN: Well, then there's a lot of politicians that have a drinking problem, Jake.

TAPPER: Yes, of course.

But I guess my question is...;

MULLIN: Yes, and then there's probably a lot of media that has a drinking problem too. And, now, I don't drink. I have never -- I haven't tasted alcohol in many, many, many years. And I never had a drink at all in my life, really.

[09:25:11]

And so I really don't understand that. But there's a lot of alcohol that flows through Washington, D.C., on a regular basis. And I wouldn't say that people are alcoholics or they have a drinking problem because of that. I don't see it at all.

I don't see that being a problem. And I really wish that the media would move on and start focusing on what he can bring to the secretary -- as secretary of defense, because he has a lot of good attributes too, but we only focus on the negative.

And we get so caught up on running at negatives. And just because he's on this side of the confirmation process, it seems like everybody wants to point out everybody's faults. Yes, he has a past. Jake, you and I both have a past, and our listeners have a past too. And we get that. He's not hiding from his past.

He's answering the questions of his past. That doesn't disqualify him from being secretary of defense, though.

TAPPER: Part of the process is Republican senators and people in the media and Democratic senators and anyone asking questions about the person's qualifications and about the appropriateness of an individual.

And a drunk reporter who's drinking at 10:00 a.m., for whatever reason, is not in charge of the three-million-person Defense Department. And so there is a difference.

Let me ask you -- let me change the subject, though, because we're running out of time. Sources tell CNN that senior Biden administration officials are currently discussing issuing blanket pardons to protect certain individuals from potential retribution once president-elect Trump becomes President Trump.

Just this morning, Mr. Trump said -- quote -- "Maybe he should." Maybe Biden should issue those blanket pardons. And he said about the House January 6 Committee -- quote -- "For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail" -- unquote.

What do you think about Trump saying that they should go to jail? What do you think about the idea of blanket pardons?

MULLIN: Well, first of all, when you start talking about the pardons, I -- President Biden can use them however they want to. When he decided to pardon Hunter, I don't think that came as a shock.

It was the shock that he came out and said he wasn't ever going to do it. But as a father of six kids, kind of understand that.

As far as weaponizing the DOJ and going after political opponents, the only party that's ever done that is the Democrat Party. When President Trump was in office the first time as the 45th president, he didn't go after the Clintons. He didn't do this.

As soon as Pelosi became speaker of the House, though, she did go after Trump. Who did weaponize the DOJ was the FBI, or was the FBI with the DOJ going after President Trump. When they went after classified documents, they obviously treated President Trump much different than they did President Biden.

And so who weaponizes them? Now, if they are afraid of that because they're afraid the same tool they used against President Trump could be used against them, then, hey, President Biden has the right to do that. But I don't think they have a reason to be afraid.

Now, I think that investigations should be looked into if there was criminal activity that took place with the January 6 Committee. There was a lot of questions that didn't get answered. There was a lot of information that was destroyed. Why did they destroy it? Why didn't they -- why did they refuse to allow a lot of people to testify or their testimony had actually become public?

If the American people want to know that, then maybe we do, do another hearing. But the first thing we need to do is hold people accountable from the Afghanistan withdrawal. That's where they should be looking at, because I think there was real criminal activity that took place there, like, for instance, Ambassador Pommersheim telling me personally, when we were over there trying to get Americans out and my group trying to get Americans out, that he was told not to assist us in any way, not to assist us in any way from Washington, D.C.

Who gave him that order that he wasn't supposed to help me as a member of Congress at the time trying to get Americans out? We're there on the ground pulling people across the Panjshir bridge into Tajikistan. He's the ambassador of Tajikistan. And he was told by the State Department not to assist us in any way.

That's a criminal charge that should be investigated. Those things should be looked at.

TAPPER: Thank you so much, Senator Markwayne Mullin of the great state of Oklahoma. Good to see you, sir. Thanks for joining us this morning.

MULLIN: Jake, thanks for having me on.

TAPPER: President Biden and Trump debating whether to get some more use out of the pardoning pens.

I'm going to ask the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee what he makes of all that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:34:00]

TAPPER: Welcome back to STATE OF THE UNION.

Tomorrow, Senate Democrats are on track to officially confirm more judges under Biden than Senate Republicans did under Trump. It would be a significant victory for the Democratic Party, even as President Biden makes waves among his fellow Democrats over pardons.

Joining us now, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Democratic whip, Senator Dick Durbin from Illinois.

Senator, thanks for joining us.

So, in an interview on NBC, Trump said this about members of the House January 6 Committee -- quote -- "For what they did, honestly, they should go to jail" - unquote. Trump also said maybe Biden should pardon them preemptively.

What do you think?

SEN. RICHARD DURBIN (D-IL): Let me say at the outset, you mentioned the judges filling the vacancies. I want to make it clear we hope to establish a dramatic number of those filling the vacancies; 86 percent of our nominees have bipartisan support. So these are good, competent people who will serve our country.

[09:35:02]

In terms of what the president has said and others, of course you take it seriously. But the bottom line is when we talk about a preemptive pardon, where does it start and where does it stop?

When my friend Adam Schiff, who will become senator from California tomorrow, be sworn in, says that he doesn't believe it's necessary, I stand by him.

TAPPER: So President Biden, speaking of pardons, told the American people again and again, especially while he was running against Trump and trying to contrast himself against Trump, he said again and again, he would not pardon his son Hunter.

And then a week ago he turned around and gave Hunter not just a pardon, but a blanket pardon for any crimes he may or may not have committed in the last 11 years, covering not just the gun and tax charges and convictions, but also anything he did while on the throes of addiction, involving Burisma, his alleged influence peddling, dealing with the Chinese government, Chinese companies.

Your colleague Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado said that the Hunter Biden pardon -- quote -- "further erodes Americans' faith that the justice system is fair and equal for all" -- unquote.

Do you agree? Do you have any concerns about this pardon?

DURBIN: Listen, Joe Biden is my friend. I have known him for over 20 years.

And I will tell you, most conversations I have with him is about his family. This is a man who loves his children and has gone through quite an ordeal, having lost a former wife and child in an automobile accident, and seeing the two boys, Beau and Hunter, go through serious hospital stays and try to rebuild their lives.

If I have to have a bias in this area, it's a loving parent who wants to protect his child. I understand that situation. And I understand Michael Bennet's observation. He promised he wouldn't do it and now he's doing it. But it's a labor of love, as far as I'm concerned, from a loving father.

TAPPER: I want to read something that soon-to-be-Senator Adam Schiff said in 2019 -- quote -- "The president has a right to confer pardons, but not when they are designed to insulate himself, his family and his associates from criminal investigation. Such an abuse of the pardon power would amount to obstruction of justice and is not countenanced by the Constitution."

Now, obviously, at that time, Schiff was talking about Donald Trump and Trump's family. Democrats' argument over the last eight years was that Trump was trampling all over the rule of law. And there are more commentators out there, including some on the left, who say, based on what Joe Biden did, Democrats don't seem to be any different.

DURBIN: Well, let's be very honest about this. Joe Biden said at the outset of his administration that he was going to keep a U.S. attorney in Delaware on the job to investigate his son, and he went forward with the case.

Whether that case should have ended up the way it did with the sentence that's likely is one story. But the bottom line is, he did leave it open for objective investigation by a U.S. attorney appointed by his political opponent. That's the reality.

TAPPER: Trump's attorney general nominee, Pam Bondi, made the rounds on Capitol Hill this week. Trump's pick for FBI director, Kash Patel, will be there in the coming days.

Have you received any assurances on whether those two nominees will undergo background checks by the FBI? And, if not, what, if anything, can you do in the month you have left as the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the majority to get background checks on those two individuals or any other nominees?

DURBIN: Jake, let me tell you something. For 70 years, we have counted on the FBI's investigation to make sure we really understood the backgrounds of individuals seeking authority in the United States for very important decision-making. That has to continue. There's no replacement for it. And ignoring that leaves us in a

strange situation where a line attorney in the U.S. attorney's office has to go through the FBI background check, but Kash Patel would not. I hope that the Trump administration will abide by the standard, the 70-year standard of FBI investigations.

We want to make sure we know the stability, the competence, the dedication to our country and the background of every individual serving at the highest level of our government.

TAPPER: Are you open to voting for Bondi or Patel?

DURBIN: Of course I'm open, until I see the investigation and draw my conclusions from that and the hearing.

I think I need to keep an open mind. I want to say that I think that president-elect Trump has made a good choice in Marco Rubio. I have served with him for years. And I think he will be an excellent secretary of state.

TAPPER: You're currently in your fifth term in the U.S. Senate. You're up for reelection in two years. Have you decided if you're going to run for reelection?

[09:40:07]

DURBIN: I will be making an announcement after the 1st of the year.

TAPPER: Do you intend to stay on as the top Democrat in the Senate Judiciary Committee?

DURBIN: Well, my colleagues in the Democratic Caucus made that decision last week, and I'm honored that they still asked me to serve as whip.

TAPPER: All right, thank you, Senator. Good to see you. I appreciate your time.

DURBIN: Thanks, Jake.

TAPPER: Coming up, more on the stunning events out of Syria and what we're learning about president-elect's Trump plans when he takes office.

My panel's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:45:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: And Cheney was behind it.

KRISTEN WELKER, MODERATOR, "MEET THE PRESS": Well...

TRUMP: And so was Bennie Thompson and everybody on that committee.

For what they did...

WELKER: Yes.

TRUMP: ... honestly, they should go to jail.

WELKER: So you think Liz Cheney should go to jail?

TRUMP: For what they did..;

WELKER: Everyone on the committee, you think should go to jail?

TRUMP: I think everybody on the -- anybody that voted in favor.

WELKER: Are you going to...

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: OK.

Welcome back to STATE OF THE UNION.

President-elect Trump's latest interview just moments saying that members of the January 6 Committee should go to jail.

My panel joins us now.

Congresswoman Dingell, that's several of your colleagues, although the two Republicans on that committee are no longer in Congress, Congresswoman Cheney and Congressman Adam Kinzinger. A lot of -- everyone -- I think everyone else is one of your colleagues.

And the president of the United States, incoming president, says they should go to jail.

REP. DEBBIE DINGELL (D-MI): Well, I obviously think that oversight and investigations is one of the most important functions of the United States Congress, a system of checks and balances, and would respectfully disagree with what President Trump has said, that they should go to jail.

It'll be interesting to watch this play out. And I also will say to you -- I know people are talking about, well, should Biden give them a blanket...

TAPPER: Pardon.

DINGELL: ... pardon.

But a lot of people don't want that to happen.

TAPPER: Schiff doesn't want it to happen.

DINGELL: More than that, I have talked to many members of the committee, because it implies that what they did was wrong. And what they were doing was their job.

TAPPER: Before the election, I interviewed now vice president-elect J.D. Vance and I brought up the idea of President Trump seeking retribution against Liz Cheney. And he said he didn't believe me.

And, I mean, there it is right there.

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I watched most of the Trump interview back before we came out here. It's quite clear he's not interested in going back into the past, because that's exactly what he said this morning.

He said he was not going to direct anyone to have any special counsel into Joe Biden or go seek retribution against his enemies. He clearly hates these people and he clearly doesn't like what they did to him. But it was obvious to me. He got asked numerous different ways this morning about going back and having retribution. And he's clearly not interested in doing it.

He said, my retribution will be having a successful country, which is something he said during the campaign. So is he ever going to love these people? No. Do I have any anticipation this is going to be a focus of him? No. He said energy, prices and immigration were his focus.

ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I tend to take Trump at his word, and this was something he ran on.

But I do think that, knowing him, he is -- I mean, we saw the events in Syria overnight. The world is on fire. He was elected to secure the border, to deal with trade issues, to bring down the cost of living. My instinct is that Trump himself may not target these people.

But the question I think that the Senate is going to have to grapple with is, OK, will his incoming attorney general or will his FBI director? And that was a less clear answer from him.

So, I mean, if I were advising him, which I certainly am not anymore, he should focus on the things Trump does well that are actually good for the country and why people voted for him, not going after people who are engaging in their congressional oversight role.

TAPPER: So when you look at Pam Bondi and Kash Patel, do you think that these are individuals who are there to do their jobs to their utmost as attorney general and FBI director or people that are more focused, that will be more focused on pleasing the boss, who just conveyed that he would like the members of the January 6 Committee to go to jail?

JAMAL SIMMONS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, the question lies in the question you asked, right? Is their job actually to please the boss, right, versus is their job to take care of the American public?

And what it seems like is, he's picking people, Donald Trump is picking people who will please him. And so maybe he's not going to direct Pam Bondi and Kash Patel to go after them. But maybe they already know, because they have said it themselves, they think these people ought to be investigated.

Here's what I'm more concerned about. We pardoned Hunter Biden. We're talking about pardoning the members of Congress and other important people. There are thousands of people who are waiting for the president right now to issue pardons for things that they did that may not be serious crimes or they were serious crimes from a long time ago, but ought to also now be taken care of.

If you go back and you look at -- The Marshall Project has a great piece about this right now. And there are people out there...

TAPPER: I think Biden has, by the way -- just sorry to interrupt, but I think he's pardoned fewer people along those lines than any president in modern history.

SIMMONS: Absolutely.

And so there are all these people -- some people who were released because of COVID under compassionate release. He can go ahead and give them clemency right now and commute their sentences. There are people who are elderly. They can be commuted. There's a woman from Detroit named Michelle West. She's been in jail since 1993 for a crime where the perpetrator of the crime has now -- never even went to jail.

And she's still sitting in jail and the daughter of the victim has asked that she be released. So there are all these people who are out there who can be taken care of if the president can get at it. And from a political perspective, if I were in the White House, I would have said, the day after you pardoned Hunter Biden, they should have pardoned everyone else they could, dropped a big load of pardons out there, so it's not just a privilege. It's also the people out there who need to be taken care of.

TAPPER: Obviously, every parent would do whatever they could for their children. We all know that.

But were you displeased at all with the Hunter Biden pardon, the fact that he said he wasn't going to do it, the fact that he attacked his own Justice Department while doing so?

DINGELL: I was surprised because he had said that he would not do it. We all understand that this is a father who loves his son.

[09:50:02]

And I believe it's contributed greatly to what we have watched President Biden go through. But I agree with Jamal. This is the issue now. We cannot just pardon people that have access to privilege. We need to be looking at this in a far broader way.

JENNINGS: It was a total disgrace. He's leaving office in disgrace because of this pardon.

And it's not just the pardon. It's the lying, lied to the American people. According to NBC News, he and his top aides hatched a plan to lie to the American people. And then, this week, he didn't even have the guts to go out to the White House podium and take questions about it.

He sent Karine Jean-Pierre out there, who was also a part of the lying. And then she continued to gaslight the American people and the media. The American people ought to be pissed. But the media, the people who cover this White House ought to be absolutely livid at the gaslighting and then the continued gaslighting and the hostility towards the idea of transparency.

This is a monumental disgrace. You think 38, 39 percent job approval is what -- wait until we test him as he leaves office. He's going out of office as one of the least liked and most divisive presidents we have ever had.

FARAH GRIFFIN: And, candidly, many of us who are institutionalists criticized Trump for coming after the Department of Justice and saying it's politicized. You can't trust it.

And the language in the statement pardoning Biden could have been written by Donald Trump. This was his own attorney general that he handpicked. These were career officials within the Department of Justice who did their job without fear or favor.

And it felt like Biden is leaving kind of just echoing the same sentiment that too much of this country believes, which is that you can't trust our institutions and our chief law enforcement officer.

JENNINGS: Yes. He was elected to cure Trump and he leaves office sounding like what Trump's enemies say he sounds like.

SIMMONS: Well, let me just say this. Let's not get too righteous, self-righteous about this, right?

If you walk into a boxing match and you find out the person you're fighting is an MMA fighter, sooner or later, you have got to take the gloves off and get into the fight. I think what they have discovered in the White House is that everyone else is playing by these very pristine rules, while Trump is doing whatever he wants to do, whatever the heck he wants to do.

(CROSSTALK)

FARAH GRIFFIN: But the statement wasn't...

SIMMONS: And they have got to -- yes, but he's saying it.

FARAH GRIFFIN: The statement wasn't, I fear that Kash Patel will come after my son. It was, this was a essentially politicized Department of Justice.

(CROSSTALK)

JENNINGS: He said his own Department of Justice is corrupt. He said the Department of Justice is corrupt.

(CROSSTALK)

SIMMONS: You can talk about the past if you want. I'm talking about the future.

And the question is, are you going to leave all of your people, your family and your staff up to the place where Donald Trump and his henchmen can go after them in a political way at the Justice Department? You shouldn't do it.

TAPPER: Yes, one just last note.

I just want to acknowledge, Alyssa, you have -- you come from Syrian heritage. And we're all praying for a better day and a better future for the people of Syria, who deserve so much better than what Assad gave them.

FARAH GRIFFIN: Thank you.

TAPPER: So let's hope.

We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:56:24]

TAPPER: How about some good news? Tune in tonight to hear about people making a positive difference in the world. "CNN Heroes: An All- Star Tribute," hosted by Anderson Cooper and Laura Coates," it airs tonight at 8:00 p.m. only here on CNN.

Thanks for spending your Sunday morning with us,

"FAREED ZAKARIA GPS" starts next.