Return to Transcripts main page

WOLF

Surging Economy, Trump's Approval Sinks; Strong Jobs Report; Rise of the Rest Effort; Congressmen Skip Civil Rights Event. Aired 1- 1:30p ET

Aired December 8, 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 HOST: Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer. It's 1:00 p.m. here in Washington, 8:00 p.m. in Jerusalem, 9:00 p.m. in Moscow. Wherever you're watching from around the world, thanks very much for joining us.

On the defense. He's been called a coffee boy dismissed by the president. But just in, the fiance of the former advisor pleaded guilty to lying is now speaking to CNN about why they're wrong.

Also, a CNN exclusive. A newly discovered e-mail shows an effort to give the Trump campaign hacked documents from WikiLeaks. Did the president know?

And a growing list of lawmakers boycotting a civil rights event tomorrow because President Trump will be there. And now, the White House is fighting back.

But let's begin with our one-on-one interview with George Papadopoulos's fiance. First a quick reminder of who Papadopoulos is and the role he plays in this Russia investigation.

Papadopoulos joined the Trump campaign as a foreign policy adviser in early March 2016. Soon after, then candidate Trump first referenced him as an adviser.

On March 31st, Papadopoulos attended a Trump campaign foreign policy meeting. Trump was there as well as then Senator Jeff Sessions.

During the sit down, Papadopoulos said he had connections that could help stop the meeting between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Sources inside the meeting say Trump was open to the idea, but Sessions threw cold water on to the pitch.

Roughly, a month later in April, Papadopoulos met with an overseas' professor who told him that Russia had, quote, "dirt" on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of e-mails.

During this period, Papadopoulos continued e-mailing Trump campaign members, pushing for a meeting between Trump and Russian officials.

Fast forward to this year when Papadopoulos is arrested for lying to FBI agents about his Russian contacts.

His indictment was unsealed in October. It revealed that Papadopoulos was working with Robert Mueller, the special prosecutor.

The White House immediately tried to distance itself and downplay his role.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, could you just explain what George Papadopoulos's role with the campaign was?

SARAH HUCKABEE SANDERS, U.S. WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: It was extremely limited. It was a volunteer position. And, again, no activity was ever done in an official capacity.

He reached out and nothing happened beyond that which I think shows, one, his level of importance in the campaign. And, two, shows what little role he had within coordinating anything officially for the campaign.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Papadopoulos's fiance is pushing back today. Our Justice Correspondent Pamela Brown sat down with her. Pamela is with us right now. So, what did she you, Pamela?

PAMELA BROWN, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, you know, Wolf, this is the first time we're hearing George Papadopoulos's side of the story since the plea deal was released. And it's through his fiance, Simona Mangiante.

She wouldn't be sharing things that Papadopoulos has not been able to discuss because, on the advice of his lawyers, he is not speaking publicly with the media as he awaits sentencing.

His fiance is an Italian national who says she, too, was interviewed by the FBI in relation to the Russia investigation, strongly refutes pushback against claims by White House and campaign officials, that Papadopoulos only acted on his own without campaign approval and he was nothing more than a coffee boy.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: What have you seen, what have you read that doesn't square with the George Papadopoulos you know?

SIMONA MANGIANTE: George Papadopoulos is everything but a coffee boy. He is an outstanding personality, is very educated, articulated and even his contribution to the campaign has been much more real than bringing coffee.

BROWN: Why do you think the White House was so quick to come out and call him a coffee boy or low-level volunteer?

MANGIANTE: I think they wanted to disassociate from the first person and decided to actually incorporate to the government on the right side. And probably the easiest way out is to dismiss his personality and low him to a low-level volunteer. BROWN: You don't believe he was?

MANGIANTE: I know he wasn't.

BROWN: How do you know?

MANGIANTE: He shared with me some details about his contribution to the campaign.

BROWN: You say that he was consistently in touch with these high- level campaign officials.

MANGIANTE: Yes.

BROWN: What was his intersection with Michael Flynn?

MANGIANTE: He was in contact with Michael Flynn, and he worked with Michael Flynn during the transition. and he was actively contributing to (INAUDIBLE) the foreign policy strategies for the campaign. And he didn't take any initiative on his own without campaign approval.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: And Mangiante Says Papadopoulos communicated with Flynn, Steve Bannon and former campaign adviser, Rick Dearborn about topics other than Russia.

But she says he interacted with other top campaign officials, including Corey Lewandowski, Paul Manafort and Sam Clovis, earlier in the campaign, about setting up Russia meetings.

They have all denied, downplayed or say they don't recall ever interacting with Papadopoulos.

She also said the campaign's deputy communications director, Brian Lanza, now CNN Contributor, allowed him to do the only interview with the Russian news agency, Inter-Facts. And he declined to comment.

As Papadopoulos awaits his sentencing, she says she hopes President Trump will pardon him. Wolf, the White House has not provided comment.

BLITZER: Good reporting. Thanks for that. Pamela Brown on the scene for us as she always is.

We also have some new CNN exclusive reporting on the Russia investigation. An e-mail reveals an effort to give WikiLeaks documents to the Trump campaign.

It was sent to candidate Donald Trump, his son Donald Trump Jr., and others during the final stretch of the 2016 presidential race.

The e-mail offered a decryption key and a Web site addressed for hacked WikiLeaks documents. The September 4th e-mail was sent on the same day Donald Trump Jr. first tweeted about WikiLeaks and Hillary Clinton. He tweeted, quote, and let me read precisely what he tweeted.

WikiLeaks, "Hillary Clinton sent thousands of classified cables marked C for confidential."

And he shared a story from the gateway pundit, a conservative pro- Trump Web site. The e-mail came from someone who listed his name as Mike Erickson (ph). Congressional investigators are trying to determine whether he's legitimate.

And in a statement, an attorney for Donald Trump Jr. said, and I'm quoting once again right now. "We do not know who Mike Erickson is. We have no idea who he is. We never responded to the e-mail."

Let's get some perspective from our panel. Joining us now, CNN Political Analyst David Gregory. And Carrie Cordero, former counsel to the U.S. and assistant attorney general for national security.

Carrie, you're our legal expert. What concerns does this new revelation raise?

CARRIE CORDERO, FORMER COUNSEL, U.S. AND ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR NATIONAL SECURITY: Well, first off, let's remember what WikiLeaks is and what the United States intelligence community has said WikiLeaks is. According to CIA Director Pompeo, they have assisted or been associated with Russian intelligence. They hacked former CIA Director Brennan's e-mails.

The intelligence community has said that they were involved in the release of the hacked DNC. So, they are not like any other news organization, as some folks are saying.

They do not apply journalistic standards and they have released information that has harmed national security. So, any allegations that the -- or information that's been revealed, indicating that the campaign had been in touch with WikiLeaks is really a concern, from a national security perspective.

BLITZER: How significant, potentially, David, is this in the broader Russia investigation, specifically the allegation of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians?

DAVID GREGORY, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, this really gets to the point. If it's -- if it's accurate, if it's really born out, if that connection is born out.

Because we asked the question that why is it that this administration was so willing, as a campaign, to cozy up to Putin, specifically in Russia, generally? What is it that they were getting in return? And what were those relationships like during the campaign?

This provides the potential to get some answer. That maybe there was something of value. In this case, dirt on Hillary Clinton that was provided in the form of hacked e-mails.

And you had the president, as a candidate, saying, I love WikiLeaks and he was encouraging Russia to hack or find missing e-mails from the server.

So, it gets us closer to that nexus between Russia and the Trump campaign, knowing that what we sense from these meetings with Don Jr. a kind of willingness on the part of the campaign, a kind of open-for- business attitude for this kind of information coming in.

BLITZER: Well, let me play, Carrie, that clip. This is in the final stretch of the campaign. When Donald Trump, then the candidate, the Republican nominee, was very effusive in his praise of WikiLeaks. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE, DONALD TRUMP: This just came out.

WikiLeaks, I love WikiLeaks.

This WikiLeaks is unbelievable. It tells you the inner heart. You got to read it.

It's amazing what's coming out on WikiLeaks.

By the way, did you see another one? Another one came in today. This WikiLeaks is like a treasure trove.

And, you know, as I was getting off the plane, they were just announcing new WikiLeaks. And I wanted to stay there, but I didn't want to keep you waiting.

Boy, I love reading those WikiLeaks.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: I guess he likes WikiLeaks or at least he used to. Does that, potentially, though, cause some legal problems for the president, maybe for others inside the campaign?

CORDERO: Well, it might. I mean, these clips -- these were really astounding to people in the national community when he was praising WikiLeaks like this.

[13:10:00] It might. It gets closer to the heart of what this Russia investigation is, was there advanced knowledge or any type of coordination or cooperation on behalf of individuals in the Trump campaign with WikiLeaks in releasing this investigation or potentially whoever was, according to the intelligence community, Russian intel, behind the actual hacks of the DNC and related people.

And so, as far as legal liability, right now, we haven't quite gotten to that point where it's clear that they knew, in advance, whether or not the hacking was going to take place.

GREGORY: The caveat, to me, in all of this is it -- what may explain all of this could be arrogance. Could be hubris. Could be not knowing what the threat is.

You know, Donald Trump as a candidate, says, oh, well, somehow, I know better. You know, I'm not going to get played by the Russians.

And he's just out there, you know, scooping up stuff that's in the public domain, and saying, this is great and we're going to run with it. And any campaign is going to use dirt on their opponent.

The problem with bad judgement may not be a crime, by any means. It's just incredibly bad judgment. There should have been and, in fact, were people with the experience to say, as a candidate, you are playing with fire here.

This is not just dirt on a campaign. You're dealing with an entity that has ties to Russian intelligence. We've seen two previous administrations who have been played by Putin and by their intelligence agencies. You better take this seriously. They have not and they still do not.

BLITZER: All right. David and Carrie, I want you guys to stay with me.

There's more breaking news we're following. Stay with us.

The president endorsing the controversial Senate candidate, Roy Moore, louder and more clearly than before, as he heads south to campaign tonight for him. You're going to hear what he has just said.

Plus, a war of words erupting over lawmakers boycotting a civil rights event because the president of the United States will be there.

And new today, another strong, very strong, jobs report. So, why is the president's approval rating sinking even as the economy surges?

We'll discuss.

[13:12:53]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:16:32] BLITZER: The American economy is strong. Employers added 228,000 jobs in November. The health care industry, the business sector, manufacturing, all experienced gains.

But here is one number that doesn't add up. President Trump's job performance rating, according to a brand-new poll by Pew Research, only 32 percent of Americans approve of how the president is doing, 63 percent disapprove.

Let's discuss this and more with our next guest, CNN contributor J.D. Vance. He's the author of the important book, a bestseller, "Hillbilly Elegy," and Steve Case, chairman and CEO of Revolution. He's also a co-founder of AOL.

Guys, thanks to both of you for joining us.

So can you explain why, if it's the economy, stupid, Steve, the president's approval numbers only 32 percent. But all of the indicators, the number of jobs, unemployment's only 4.1 percent, stock market, Dow Jones, record numbers almost every day, why is his approval so sad from his perspective at a time when the economy is doing just fine?

STEVE CASE, CHAIRMAN AND CEO, REVOLUTION LLC: Well, I think he made a lot of promises during the campaign and now he has to deliver on them. And some of the things like tax reform now, at least with the -- you know, some part of that. So I think people were expecting things to change. A lot of people who supported him, we spent a lot of time, J.D. and I, traveling around the country trying to understand what's happening in cities in the middle of the country and there's a lot of people there that do fear the future and don't really feel like they have a job that they can -- they can count on. That's why we're backing start-ups in those areas. So we just need to do more focus on, how do you help support these people, particularly outside the coasts in the middle of the country and make sure they feel like there's a reason they should be optimistic about the future, not anxious.

BLITZER: You're surprised -- I'm surprised, you're surprised, only 32 percent approve, at a time when pretty robust job numbers are out there.

J.D. VANCE, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, well, it's definitely, you know, you see jobs numbers like this and you'd expect the approval rating to be higher. I think that part of that is obviously the fact that the president likes to mix it up with the media and he mixes it up enough and people start to get exhausted and that probably drives down the approval rating a little bit.

But I also think what Steve said is really important, which is that part of what's driving people's sense of how well they're doing is not the top line job numbers, but whether there are jobs in their communities and real growth in their communities. And we saw this during the Obama administration. I think we've seen this during the first year of the Trump administration, that though we're seeing some job growth and the economy's starting to pick back up, that that doesn't necessarily mean it's broadly distributed across all geographies of the country. And that's, in fact, one of the things that we're trying to work on is make sure that if you're living in southwestern Ohio, if you're living in Indianapolis, you have access to that high growth economy that we're seeing reflected in some of those good job numbers.

BLITZER: Is it your sense that the good jobs numbers and, as President Trump points out in almost every speech, two million jobs created since he won the election, which is very impressive, and the Dow Jones, all of those numbers very impressive. But do you see a discrepancy between what's happening on the coasts and what's happening in mid-America?

CASE: No question, the coasts are booming. Silicon Valley is rocking and rolling. And there are a lot of innovation happening there and job growth happening there. But many parts of the country, it's not happening.

The reason for that, in part, is that venture capital fuels these start-ups, fuels the jobs creation and last year 75 percent of venture capital in the United States went to just three states. So the other 47 states, Ohio and Michigan and Pennsylvania, all these different states, got collectively 25 percent. So you're only backing enterprises in a few places, not everywhere. We shouldn't be surprised that most of the job growth, economic growth, is in a few places and we really need to level the playing field so everybody everywhere feels like they really have a shot at the American dream. That's what we're trying to do with this Rise of the Rest.

[13:20:02] BLITZER: I want to get to Rise of the Rest in a moment, but you're an expert on that Trump base, where they're coming from, who they are. Are they not feeling the benefits of this economic growth?

VANCE: Well, in some cases and in some ways they are, right? They're certainly -- when the economy creates two million jobs, that definitely starts to trickle down to a lot of folks. But I think in large measure what you're seeing is that the areas that benefit the most from the recent economic growth that we've seen have typically been in the coast. They've been in San Francisco. It's been in New York City. It's been in Cambridge and Boston, Massachusetts. So I wouldn't say they haven't seen any of it, but they certainly haven't seen the same amount as the folks on the coast have.

BLITZER: Tell us about what you guys -- and you've assembled a very impressive group of business leaders. What you're trying to do it's called Rise of the Rest, this fly over, as you're calling it.

Steve, tell us what this is all about.

CASE: Well, it's how do you get more venture capital to more entrepreneurs in more places. I mentioned that -- you know, the data that's we think very troubling. So we've assembled a group, three dozen, I think, of the most prominent, respected people in the business world, entrepreneurs like Jeff Bezos and Howard Schultz, Tory Burch, investors like Henry Kravis, David Rubenstein, Ray Dalio. On the venture side, people like Jim Breyer (ph), you know, John Doerr. Executives like Eric Schmidt and Meg Whitman have all joined us as part of this Rise of the Rest fund to invest in the early companies, these start-up companies, all across the country, not just on the coast. That will -- as we get success, create a lot of jobs in those communities that do feel kind of left behind by technology and innovation. And so it's an important effort and we're glad that so many people that we respect so much have agreed to join us in this effort.

BLITZER: Yes, this is the best of the best. These are the most elite. And you're a part of this team, right, J.D.?

VANCE: Yes, that's right. So I joined the team about six or seven months ago and we've been focusing, like Steve said, on bring more entrepreneurship, more venture capital investing into parts of the country that don't see it.

The most important point to me is that if you look at all of the positive jobs number in the country, the thing that we really lag behind in is dynamism. We don't see as much new, firm creation outside of the coast. That means there isn't as much economic mobility, much economic and job growth outside of the coast. And that's really what we're trying to work on and trying to solve. If you get more high- growth companies into these areas, you get more job growth, and hopefully that starts to address some of the concerns who did vote for the president.

BLITZER: All right, you guys are doing important work. Good luck. Thanks so much for doing what you're doing. And thanks so much for joining us.

CASE: Thanks, Wolf.

VANCE: Thanks, Wolf.

BLITZER: Steve Case and J.D. Vance.

He's the Senate candidate accused of sexual assault and harassment, but today the president fully, fully endorsed Roy Moore as he heads south to campaign for him later tonight. We'll discuss.

Plus, a debate is erupting over the boycott by some lawmakers of a civil rights event because President Trump is attending. Are they doing the right thing? The White House now responding.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:27:05] BLITZER: Two black congressmen are boycotting the opening of the Mississippi Civil Rights Museum because President Trump will be there. Congressman Bennie Thompson and Congressman John Lewis, they say President Trump's policies are an insult to those portrayed in the new museum. And they note the remarks he's made in the past about women, the disabled, immigrants and NFL players.

The White House said it's, quote, unfortunate that the congressman won't join the president in honoring civil rights leaders.

Let's discuss this and more with the author of the book "Tears We Cannot Stop: A Sermon to White American," Michael Eric Dyson. He's a professor at Georgetown University here in Washington.

Michael, thanks very much for coming in.

MICHAEL ERIC DYSON, AUTHOR, "TEARS WE CANNOT STOP": Thanks for having me.

BLITZER: So are they doing the right thing? If the president wants to reach out to the civil rights community, the African-American community, and have this gesture, go to the opening of what clearly is a very important museum in Mississippi, why not embrace that, welcome the president and begin a dialogue?

DYSON: Well, you can't take the blessings without bearing the burden. He wants to celebrate showboat in the golden moment where he can be seen as somehow supporting the ideas that they know every day he undercuts with his policies, with his ridiculous speech, with his vitriolic bigotry that is expressed. So they would rather celebrate their own valiant history than the vicious histrionics of this president.

BLITZER: But if he wants to, let's say, open up a new page, begin a dialogue, learn.

DYSON: Yes.

BLITZER: Presumably he's going to do a tour of this new museum in Mississippi. Maybe that will have an impact on him. Isn't that worth it?

DYSON: Well, when you and your lover are beefing, you don't want to do it on public. You don't want to do it on a reality show. Go home. Work the details out. And then, in public, display your reconciliation. He has not yet done the work of meeting with the Congressional Black Caucus, of talking about the issues that concern them, and about doing the nuts and bolts policy recommendations that would make true what he claims ostensibly to be the case, that is he's committed to civil rights. So don't just show up and get all the glory and be known as the president now who's changed his mind, when you really haven't changed your mind.

BLITZER: Is that -- is it the president who hasn't invited the leaders of the Congressional Black Caucus to the White House, or the Congressional Black Caucus has made it clear they're not interested in going to the White House?

DYSON: Well -- well, it's both and. They have both been invited and then they've both turned it down, just like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer turned it down because they knew it was more -- much ado about nothing. It's a Shakespearian moment. So they refused to capitulate to the symbolic manipulation of a president who says out of his mouth that he's committed to it, but with his own words and deeds and his own body of thought and behavior, he has nullified everything they stand for.

BLITZER: Because some African-American lawmakers, Elijah Cummings, for example --

DYSON: Sure.

BLITZER: Democrat, Maryland, a very important guys, ranking member of the Oversight Committee --

DYSON: Sure.

BLITZER: He has had a little bit of a dialogue with the president --

DYSON: Right.

BLITZER: And maybe he can have an impact.

DYSON: It would be great if he could do it one-on-one. If he could go there and talk to him, if he could speak to him. But for the president merely to show up in public, in spaces where the Congressional Black Caucus can't get to him, can't sit down and talk to him and have a, you know, a face-to-face, a tete-a-tete and say, look, this is our honest consideration of what you're doing. It's reprehensible and it's repulse. We want to repudiate it. And if you can accept our criticism without calling us names and being mean spirited, as he does.