Return to Transcripts main page

WOLF

Meeting With Russian Lawyer; Trump On Cyber-security; Putin Denies Meddling; Trump Jr. Met Russian; Trump Backs Off Cybersecurity Unit Idea; Meeting with Kremlin-Linked Lawyer. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired July 10, 2017 - 13:00   ET

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


WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer. It's 1:00 p.m. here in Washington, 8:00 p.m. in Moscow and 8:00 p.m. in Erbil as well. Whenever you're watching from around the world, thanks very much for joining us.

Up first, new details raising new questions about a meeting between the Trump campaign and a Russian lawyer. The president's son, Donald Trump Jr., says he was told the lawyer, quote, "might have information helpful to the campaign," close quote.

That differs from an earlier statement where he said the meeting was primarily to discuss the issue of Russian adoptions. Besides Donald Trump Jr., the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and his then campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, also attended that meeting.

The meeting was held over at Trump Tower in New York City on June 9th of last year. It was first reported by "The New York Times." "The Times" also says that Donald Trump Jr. was promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton before agreeing to the meeting.

Let's bring in our Senior White House Correspondent Jeff Zeleny. Jeff, we're learning more about the setup to the meeting. What else can you tell us?

JEFF ZELENY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Wolf, we are learning who set up this meeting, who scheduled this meeting. And it is an entertainment executive by the name of Rob Goldstone who set up this meeting to happen last June, a year ago in June, at Trump Tower in New York City.

Now, Rob Goldstone is someone who was working on the Miss Universe Pageant, so he was familiar with the Trump family and Donald Trump Jr., indeed.

So, he arranged to set up a meeting, he tells in a statement to CNN, this is confirming the report this morning in "The New York Times" as well as "The Washington Post," that he facilitated the meeting between the president's oldest son and this Russian lawyer about, you know, some type of negative information on the Clinton campaign.

So, they accepted the meeting, again, in June of 2016. And, Wolf, if you think back, the timing of this comes about two weeks after the president, then candidate, accepted and clinched the Republican nomination, after he clinched the nomination. So, this was -- everything was coming together then. It was clear he was going to be the nominee. And it was clear the Trump campaign wanted to hear what this Russian operative had to say that was negative about the Clinton campaign.

And the reason this is significant, Wolf, there are many, sort of, incremental developments. This is different in the sense it's the first acknowledgement that there was a meeting during the campaign between a top set of officials from the Trump campaign and a Russian operative, happening during the campaign. We know about meetings that happened after the election, but this came in June of 2016.

BLITZER: What is the Trump administration, Jeff, saying about this meeting?

ZELENY: Wolf, I expect we're going to hear a lot more this afternoon at the White House press meeting that Sarah Huckabee Sanders will be holding off camera again in about an hour or so.

But Kellyanne Conway, the Senior Counselor to the president, she was on CNN's "NEW DAY" this morning, downplaying and dismissing all of this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KELLYANNE CONWAY, SENIOR COUNSELOR, DONALD TRUMP: It's very typical to have principles in the meeting. We had a fraction of the staff and a fraction of the money that they had over there in Clinton Inc. in Brooklyn.

They're trying to have your viewers think, oh, my god, because these three principals in there, it was imbued with some type of seriousness that just simply was not true.

This was standard operating procedure for the campaign. Let's not focus on what did not happen in that meeting. No information provided that was meaningful. No action taken.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZELENY: And, Wolf, the question is, I mean, we do not know exactly what happened in that meeting. She's right about that. But it is different in the sense that this was not just a meeting with three principals. It was with a Russian operative coming to meet them specifically with information on their rival.

But this has already stirred so many questions on Capitol Hill. Senator Susan Collins, a Republican of Maine, said a short time ago, she wants to see the president's oldest son before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

So, Wolf, what this does is this, sort of, re-ignites, re-sparks all of these questions about potential collusion that the White House thought they'd moved beyond.

BLITZER: And Jeff Zeleny over at the White House, thanks very much. We'll stand by for that White House briefing, hear what the deputy press secretary has to say. Meanwhile, the president appears to be backing off an earlier tweet about forming an election cyber-security unit together with Russia.

Following his meeting with the Russian president, President Trump tweeted this, quote, "Putin and I discussed forming an impenetrable cyber-security unit so that election hacking and many other negative things will be guarded," close quote.

But Democrats and Republicans, they quickly, immediately, scoffed at that idea.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: It's not the dumbest idea I've ever heard but it's pretty close. But when it comes to Russia, I am dumbfounded. I am disappointed. And at the end of the day, he's hurting his presidency.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D), CALIFORNIA: I don't think we can expect the Russians to be any kind of a credible partner in some cyber-security unit. I think that would be dangerously naive for this country. If that's our best election defense, we might as well just mail our ballot boxes to Moscow.

[13:05:10] ASH CARTER, FORMER U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: This is like the guy who robbed your house proposing a working group on burglary. It's they who did this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Let's bring in our Senior Diplomatic Correspondent Michelle Kosinski who's joining us from the State Department. Michelle, what is the president now say now about working with Russia on election security, specifically in the area of cyber-security?

MICHELLE KOSINSKI, CNN SENIOR DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Well, after that tweet touting this impenetrable cyber-security unit that could be formed with Putin, seeming to say how great that would be, his other tweet later, after he got all of this criticism, including from those Republicans that you heard, said that just because he said something like that doesn't mean that it can happen. And he said it won't happen. It can't happen.

So, he's doing a complete turnaround on something that he seemed to be big on initially. I mean, the criticism on this has been pretty severe, including from some Republicans. And the analogies that are being made, you know, that forming some kind -- some kind of working group like this with Vladimir Putin would be like, you know, trying to work on chemical weapons with Syrian President Bashar Al Assad.

And he's apparently feeling that, turning around completely on this idea. What exactly was discussed and said in that meeting? Of course, only those in attendance know for certain -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Yes, as many have pointed out, he went from supporting that kind of cooperation in cyber-security with the Russians, at one point, and 13 hours later, he reversed himself in that second tweet.

And, Michelle, there are still some areas of disagreement over President Trump's meeting with President Putin. Russia says President Trump accepted Putin's denial that he meddled in the U.S. presidential election. But the president tweeted that he strongly pressed the Russian leader on the issue. Is there any way that we can figure out who's right?

KOSINSKI: There are -- there are a lot of problems here. I mean, whenever you're dealing with Russia and their statements, even their descriptions of phone calls or meetings, it always differs from the U.S. account. And because it's Russia, you have to take whatever they're saying with a pile of salt.

I mean, Russia still denies that they had anything to do with cyber meddling in the United States. Then again, you know, Donald Trump and his campaign and the people around him have always played fast and loose with the truth and with facts as well. There's will the difficulty is.

I mean, as soon as the U.S. description of what happened came out, all over social media, there were doubts as to its voracity. There are reasons for that. But you're dealing with Russia.

However, you know, we should point out that -- whenever somebody like secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, describes what is said, when he's asked directly, did the president accept that? Tillerson denies that the president accepted Putin's claims. But he keeps saying that he talked about concerns that the American people have. He never says that those concerns are shared by Trump himself. And, remember, it was only one day before this meeting with Putin that he was there in Poland, casting enormous doubt on whether Russia did play a role as well as, you know, as some describe it, throwing the U.S. intelligence community under the bus -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Interesting. All right, Michelle, thank you. Michelle Kosinski over at the State Department.

Let's talk about all of these developments with my next guest, Democratic Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island. He's the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, also a member of the Senate Committee on Intelligence, ex officio I think.

SEN. JACK REED (D), RHODE ISLAND, INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Ex officio.

BLITZER: Is that the official title?

REED: That's the official title.

BLITZER: You are on the Intelligence Committee as well.

So, what's your level of concern about this meeting that the president's oldest son had, together with the then campaign chairman and the senior adviser, the son-in-law, Jared Kushner, with this Russian lawyer?

REED: It's very serious.

BLITZER: Why?

REED: Well, first, the whole pretense of the meeting, and the son has indicated, was to get information from the Russian government deleterious to Hillary Clinton. That's, essentially, going to a foreign power and asking for help in the election. That was the pretense. And that's already been admitted.

BLITZER: He tweeted this morning, Donald Trump Jr., the oldest son. He's tweeted, obviously, I'm -- he was being sarcastic in this tweet. Obviously, I'm the first person on a campaign to ever take a meeting to hear about -- hear info about an opponent. Went nowhere but had to listen.

So, he's saying, and some supporters, Trump supporters, are saying it was opposition research. That's what all campaigns do.

REED: Not operations research based on Soviet -- excuse me, Russian intelligence. That's the difference. This was an individual who had clear and close ties to the Russian government, to their intelligence services perhaps. We don't know. We have to probe that.

But this was not a meeting with an American political activist, someone who was a part of the campaign.

[13:10:06] And it was a very, very particular meeting. It involved the three principals, Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort and Donald Trump Jr. This was not a casual sort of meeting. This was very deliberate, when you have the three most significant people on the campaign at that juncture.

BLITZER: Well, you've done some research. What do we know about this lawyer, this Russian lawyer, who came to this meeting? Her last name Zelenitsky (ph).

REED: Very little, at this point, quite frankly. That's going to be one of those issues that we will take up. I'm sure the Intelligence Committee will start taking it up.

Apparently, from what I read in the press, she was very active in the trying to reverse the legislation that caused the Russians to stop their adoption program.

BLITZER: The Magnitsky Act.

REED: The Magnitsky Act. But she seems to be someone who's been described publicly as having very close ties to the kremlin and very active on behalf of the kremlin. And that was, I'm sure, a part of the -- of her attraction to the campaign.

BLITZER: So, are you going to call, as a part of your Intelligence Committee investigation, Donald Trump Jr. to come before the committee and testify?

REED: I hope so. Senator Collins, my colleague, and other members of the Intelligence Committee has already made that claim. I think I t's appropriate that he does that to clear this up.

BLITZER: What about Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner?

REED: I think we have been trying to pursue both Mr. Manafort and Mr. Kushner to come and testify. That's being led by the chairman, Chairman Burr, and Ranking Member Mark Warner of Virginia. But we are doing that.

And, in addition, I'm sure this is falling under the embed of the special prosecutor. He has to be interested in this, too, because of his mandate to go and see if there are connections between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

BLITZER: Do you know if there are any follow-up meetings? This meeting, apparently, if you listen to what Donald Trump Jr. was saying, it maybe lasted 20 minutes or half an hour. Do you know of there were any follow-up meetings to this, similar to this or going even further?

REED: I don't. But this is also part of a troubling pattern of not acknowledging a meeting, then acknowledging a meeting, and discover that there were other meetings that were acknowledged. That took place with General Flynn. It took place with Attorney General Sessions who initially didn't indicate he met with the Russian ambassador.

So, this is a troubling pattern of behavior where more and more comes out about more extensive meetings on these with other people on the same subject.

BLITZER: Yes, there were also some additional meetings that initially didn't come up involving Jared Kushner, --

REED: Exactly.

BLITZER: -- the son-in-law as well.

You issued a statement, following the president's meeting with the Russian president, Vladimir Putin. And you wrote this. President Trump may have accepted Putin's assurances that Russia did not meddle in the U.S. presidential election, but I can assure you that the American people do not share his confidence in Mr. Putin's claims.

The crucial work of U.S. intelligence agencies, law enforcement, the special counsel and bipartisan congressional panels will continue until we get to the bottom of what happened and can help prevent continued Russian interference in future Democratic elections.

What do you know actually emerged from the extensive conversation that these two presidents, Putin and Trump, had on Russian meddling?

REED: Well, it's hard to know definitively because there were only four people, principals, in the room and two translators. And there's various stories. What I think was a huge missed opportunity and I think it was before

the meeting. The president would have been better served and we would have been better served if instead of trying to make an arrangement with the Russians who penetrated our election he had stood with our traditional allies, Democratic countries, France, Germany and others, called out the Russians.

And then, went into that meeting with a solid assurance that the international community was rejecting Russian involvement in Democratic elections and we wouldn't tolerate it and make that demand.

He avoided that. He didn't do that. He went in. Listened to Putin. And, apparently, one side thinks everything's OK and the other side wants to get on. His comments, let's get on with business with the Russians, rather with let's stop them from interfering in our elections.

BLITZER: Yes, he did tweet, at one point, in that -- on that cyber- security issue.

REED: Yes.

BLITZER: This is the president. The fact that President Putin and I discussed a cyber-security unit doesn't mean I think I can -- it doesn't mean I think it can happen. It can't. But a cease-fire can and did. You welcome the achievement of the cease-fire.

REED: The cease-fire is very important. Any step in Syria to lower the level of violence. It's also to take pressure off the Jordanians because it's right along the Jordanian border.

The more difficult issues will be the area not there along the Jordanian border but in the Euphrates valley along Syria, Iraqi border. That's where ISIS is retreating to. That's where our surrogate forces are headed. That's where the Assad regime is headed, the Iranians and the Russians. That's really going to be the test case.

BLITZER: Senator Jack Reed, thanks so much for joining us.

REED: Thanks so much, Wolf.

BLITZER: Always good to have you here on the program.

Let's get some Republican perspective on all of this. Senator Roger Wicker is a Republican from Mississippi. He's a senior member of the Armed Services Committee as well. He's joining us from Capitol Hill. Senator, thanks for joining us.

[13:15:00] SEN. ROGER WICKER (R), MISSISSIPPI, ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE: Thank you. Glad to be with you.

BLITZER: So what kinds of concerns, if any, does this meeting that Donald Trump Jr. had with this Russian lawyer raise for you?

WICKER: I do not think the American people are going to be horrified by this. And I agree with Donald Trump Jr. He was told that there was some information unfavorable to their general election opponent. He went to a meeting and it turns out there wasn't much there. And, instead, the Russian attorney wanted to talk about the Magnitsky Act and Russian adoptions. It was a pretty quick meeting and he concluded that it didn't amount to much.

I just think that's pretty much of a great big nothing when it comes to whether there was some sort of collusion between Russia and - and general election campaign organizations.

BLITZER: But, senator, let me ask you, because you're a United States senator, a senior senator. Would you go to a meeting with a Russian lawyer, not even knowing who this person was, someone simply saying, you know, we have some damaging information about your political opponent and you would bring your campaign chairman, a senior adviser to a meeting like this? Would you simply go in blindly into a meeting like this?

WICKER: Well, Donald Trump didn't go. And as far as we can tell, he did - he didn't know about it.

BLITZER: No, no, no, I'm not saying Donald Trump. I'm saying - I'm not saying Donald Trump. I'm saying that Donald Trump's eldest son went into a meeting. He accepted a meeting like this and he brought the campaign chairman at the time, Paul Manafort, and the president's son- in-law, Jared Kushner, who was a senior adviser to the campaign. Would you simply go into a meeting like this not even knowing who this person you were going to be having a meeting with and what the agenda was?

WICKER: Well - well I as a public official or a candidate would not do that. If somebody on behalf of a campaign was told there was some information that might be of interest to the public, I just don't think the American people are going to be up in arms that that meeting took place.

BLITZER: Well, do you think he should testify, if there's nothing wrong, Donald Trump Jr.? You just heard your colleague, Senator Reed, Senator Collins, others are saying he should come up to Capitol Hill and answer questions about this meeting. Would you welcome that?

WICKER: Well, you know, I like Senator Jack Reed and he and I have worked together on many issues in the armed services area, and certainly Senator Collins is my colleague and - and if they want to ask questions, then I would listen to them, and - and look at the propriety of that. I really don't have any - any knowledge of the subpoena power there. But as far as asking a few questions, I don't see the harm in it. But I just don't think it's a very big issue (ph).

BLITZER: Yes. I mean I don't think - I don't think they necessarily - I don't think they're necessarily ready to start subpoenaing Donald Trump Jr., but inviting him, a volunteer -

WICKER: I would think not.

BLITZER: A volunteer way to come in and answer questions about this, I think that's what they would like to do.

Let me - let me move on to this other sensitive issue, because you've been involved in this - this area as well, national security. The president, President Trump, seems to be backing away from his original support for some sort of are joint cyber security unit with the Russians. Should that have been part of the dialogue in the first place?

WICKER: Well, if it's a part of a dialogue between the United States and Russia on cyber security, it should be in the context of a - of a -- working towards an agreement with our Russian counterparts that they'll quit doing this. When it comes to cyberattacks and - and bad actions in terms of - of cyber, Russia is - is the problem. And not only with the United States, but with many of our allies. Our - the smaller countries in the Baltic area have - have had portions of their economy shut down by Russian cyberattacks. So any talks should be in the form of what sort of agreement can we come to with the Russians to make them agree not to do this in the future.

In terms of a task force, suggesting that we're sort of on the same side of this issue and there's some force out there that we - that we both abhor that's doing all this, I don't think the American people buy that. And, frankly, I don't think the Trump administration ever thought that would be a good idea.

BLITZER: One final question, senator, before I let you go. Would you like to see the president more outspoken in condemning the Russians for this interference in the U.S. presidential election? His - many of his top advisers, his cabinet members, have been outspoken. He has been, as you well know, very, very tame in this area.

WICKER: Well, as - as far as I understand it, I did not attend the meeting, of course, but it was the first thing the president brought up when he met with President Putin and he brought it up very forcefully and received an answer. You know, the problem with meeting with the Russians, and you've got to do it, is then they get to - they get their spin on what was said in these private off the record meetings, and I expect they put the sort of spin that was most favorable to them on their notes from the meeting.

[13:20:28] BLITZER: I'm not suggesting what he said privately in this meeting with Putin was tame. I don't know what he said in that private meeting. But in his public statements, he has been tame. He hasn't really gone out and said what you just said now, there's no doubt the Russians did this, it was inappropriate and they should cut it out. We haven't heard strong - you know, strong - many strong statements like that from the president.

WICKER: Well, OK, I thought I heard - had heard it quite a bit over time from people speaking for the president.

BLITZER: Right. That's true.

WICKER: But I'll go back and look at his statements, and it might be that he could be even more forceful. I, again, go back to what I've said to you before, Wolf. Really, the American people are more interested in the substantive issues that we need to get about the business of doing, such as an infrastructure plan and health care and a better tax system that makes us more competitive to create jobs. But it might be that your point is well taken and that the president needs, once again, to - to answer this issue in a very, very forceful way.

BLITZER: Yes. OK. Well, senator, thanks, as usual, for joining us.

WICKER: Why, thank you.

BLITZER: Roger Wicker of Mississippi, always good to have you on our program as well.

Coming up, we're going to have a lot more on Donald Trump Jr.'s meeting with that Russian lawyer who reportedly promised to provide dirt on Hillary Clinton's campaign. Our panel is standing by.

And former FBI Director James Comey's memos now back in the spotlight after a new report claims some of those memos contain classified information. We'll have new details.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: The Trump administration is downplaying a meeting between the president's eldest son and the president's son-in-law, his then campaign chairman and a Russian lawyer with Kremlin ties.

[13:25:03] Let's discuss this and more with our panel. Joining us now, CNN national security analyst Juliette Kayyem. She's joining us from Cambridge, Massachusetts. Here with me in Washington, we have our CNN political director David Chalian, our chief political analyst Gloria Borger, and our chief political correspondent Dana Bash.

So, Gloria, what do you make of the different explanations we've heard so far from Donald Trump Jr.?

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, first of all, Donald Trump Jr. says these are not two different explanations. That he is just, in his second version, elaborating on the first. And what he neglected to include in his first version, his first statement, which I believe came on Saturday, was that he gave no indication that the meeting was called because they were looking for some dirt on Hillary Clinton and that this person apparently had some. In his second explanation, he does explain that this person said that they had some information on Hillary Clinton, and that the explanation seemed so vague and ridiculous, made no sense to him. Then after that, it turned to the Russian adoption and the human rights issues, at which point he cut it off. And the question I think we all have is that, people close to Trump have been asked, were there other meetings? This came as a result of Jared Kushner re-filing his FS-86 form in which he included this meeting. And so the question is, we didn't know about this meeting and were there - were there other meetings that perhaps we should have known about? At this point, all we know is what Donald Trump Jr. said occurred.

BLITZER: You, David, believe this is very significant new development that we're - that we're reporting on over the past couple days. Tell us why.

DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Well, because I think we have sat here for months and watched Donald Trump tweet and speak publicly saying, no collusion, no collusion, no collusion and we have not had any real data point that was - and, again, this is no smoking gun, but that was evidence that there was conversation between the campaign - high echelons of the campaign, upper echelons of the campaign, and somebody who had a relationship with the Kremlin about damaging information for Hillary Clinton and helpful information for Donald Trump.

That - I'm not a lawyer. I have no idea if that's like a legal collusion or criminal - if there's criminality in there or not. I'm not suggesting that. But to me it suggests, you can no longer just dismiss that collusion or potential collusion is not part of this. Now - now we have, for the first time, Donald Trump Jr. - this goes to the heart. He was at the very highest levels of the campaign, campaigning as a surrogate around the country for his dad, in strategy meetings. This goes to the heart of the Trump campaign. And he is there not just having some innocent meeting that can explained elsewhere, but it was a meeting that he himself admits in a statement he went into with the understanding he was going in with this person with Kremlin ties to get negative information about Hillary Clinton that could help the Trump campaign. That, to me, feels like we're in a new ballpark than we were before.

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Definitely. And the campaign or the former campaign, now the White House, people who were - who worked for the campaign say, oh, come on, this is how campaigns work. Somebody calls and says, oh, I have op-o (ph) on your opponent, I'm going to come give it to you, and that's true, except it's not true when it is a foreign national, particularly when that fortune national is Russian. It just - it doesn't happen in that situation.

And talk to Republican after Republican who are not in the Trump orbit and they admit that to you. They're saying - some are saying it publicly, some are not. And so that's why, as you were saying, this is - is so significant because, you know, whether or not they actually delivered, this woman actually delivered anything in the meeting is not as relevant at the idea that - that the Trump campaign, or his son, was receptive to the notion of getting that kind of information from somebody who was a Russian national.

BLITZER: You know, let me - let me get Juliette to weigh in on this as well.

Juliette, how do you see it?

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Just - Dana's word, the word "receptive" is the right word to think about. The Russians understood the Trump campaign, the Trump son, to be receptive to information that would hurt Hillary Clinton. And that is where the action matters, right? In other words, that is something that the Russians certainly would have exploited and they would have continued on doing, as we saw over the course of the summer after this meeting is when the DNC gets hacked, is when other things happen, that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that the Trumps receptivity to what the Russians wanted to do was at least made tactically or passively clear by accepting this meeting.

[13:29:54] I also want to make something clear. The only reason why we know that - or we believe that the information was useless was Donald Trump Jr.'s words. This is a - Donald Trump Jr. has changed his story twice within 48 hours. So we do not know whether the information was actually useless or whether it was --