Return to Transcripts main page

NEW DAY

War of Words with China; Senators Get FBI Report on Kavanaugh; FaceBook Reveals Breach; Yale Roommate on Kavanaugh's Lies. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired October 4, 2018 - 08:30   ET

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


[08:30:00] JOHN AVLON, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Still have leverage.

Now economists point out that trade wars are not, in fact, good and easy to win, as the president once said. And the American people agreed. But a growing number of surveys suggest that tide is turning, particularly among Republicans.

So while the U.S. Navy is in a game of chicken on the South China Sea, President Trump is playing a game of fiscal chicken as well. And with trade winds under his belt, and an increasingly supportive public, he's got no reason to back down. Neither does China's President Xi Jinping, who's country recently removed term limits and made him president for life.

Another front is the Chinese treatment of the Weigers. China says they're just fighting extremism by keeping this Muslim minority group in check. But human rights groups say that check looks more like massive internment camps containing some 1 million people, with re- education at best and torture at worst.

And then there's Taiwan. Now, this summer, China successfully pressured U.S. airlines to remove references to Taiwan from their websites or risk losing access to Chinese markets. Now, America has recognized the One Chinese Policy since Nixon, but today Pence is expected to say that, quote, China's embrace of democracy shows a better path for all the Chinese people.

Back here in America, constant concerns about Chinese spying, with President Trump accusing China of attempting to interfere in U.S. politics. Now, we already know that the Chinese army spies hacked the government and more than 115 U.S. companies, according to a 2013 report by cyber security firm Mandia (ph). And just watch what happened when a CNN crew approached this hacking group's alleged headquarters.

Rising tensions between the U.S. and China may seem like a distant concern to many Americans, but a trade war is already on and there are signs of military and cyber escalation as well. There's still time to reset this relationship, but the result will determine what kind of world we live in for decades to come.

And that's your "Reality Check." ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: John, we are always smarter after your

"Reality Check," and more realistic.

BERMAN: And pay attention to the Mike Pence speech today. That is a big, big deal.

AVLON: A big deal.

BERMAN: All right, John, thanks very much.

Joining us now, Senator Dick Durbin, the number two Democrat in the Senate. Democrats will get a chance to look at the FBI investigation into Brett Kavanaugh in 29 minutes.

Senator, thank you very much for being with us.

You have not seen the report yet, but you said of this report, the future and the representation of the agency, the FBI, is at stake.

Based on what you know went into it, interviews with nine witnesses, not Professor Ford, has the FBI compromised, in your mind, its reputation?

SEN. DICK DURBIN (D), ILLINOIS: Well, of course I owe it to the FBI, the process, to read the report before I make a generalized comment on it. But I find it unacceptable if there were only a handful of witnesses actually interviewed. The capacity of the FBI is far beyond a handful of witnesses over four or five days. This issue, because of its gravity and because of its publicity, deserves the professional attention of the FBI. So I'm going to wait and see.

I will tell you, I'm troubled, too, by the notion that there's one copy of this report to be handed from one senator to the next. You know, if it's a long report, hundreds of pages, I'm not saying 100 copies need to be made, but let's make it easy enough so that members of the Senate have an opportunity to personally review it, to take a close look at it and make their own evaluations.

BERMAN: The limitations, is that on the FBI, or on the administration, or both?

DURBIN: I can't tell. I don't know where this came from. But the notion of one copy and that you have to hand it off to the next senator, I've never quite run into that in the time I've been in the Senate.

BERMAN: One copy. You'll each have an hour. The Democrats will -- well, the Republicans have the first hour, then the Democrats have an hour, and it will go back and forth and back and forth presumably until tomorrow when there will be a cloture vote.

I want to ask you about something else you've been directly involved in. The Republicans on the committee put out a tweet of the six previous background checks on Brett Kavanaugh. And this is what the tweet said. Nowhere in any of these six FBI reports, which the committee has reviewed on a bipartisan basis, was there ever a whiff of any issue at all related in any way to inappropriate sexual behavior or alcohol abuse. You and seven other Democratic members of your committee wrote a letter saying you don't believe this to be accurate. What exactly is inaccurate?

DURBIN: There are two issues here. And the first one, I think, is one that we ought to discuss as a committee. If these background investigations are to be truly confidential, we cannot have people representing what is in it or not in it. In this case, the Republican staffers made a generalized tweet on what they believe was contained in previous background investigations. What was not contained in them (ph). I think we ought to discuss that. Is that the ground rule now? Can I can come out of reading this background report currently being made and say, well, let me tell you what wasn't in there. That really is the standard we ought to discuss publically.

And, secondly, I will tell you, on its face, that statement was inaccurate. And not a whiff statement. I know it based on having reviewed personally the background investigation of Judge Kavanaugh even before this controversy.

BERMAN: So let's just be crystal clear on that. You're saying there is a whiff -- that's the word you just used -- of inappropriate sexual behavior or alcohol abuse?

[08:35:08] DURBIN: Well, I'm not going to get into specifics because I'm trying to, of course, protect confidentiality. But the not a whiff statement came from Republican staffers. They volunteered it, put it out on tweets. And when I read it, I thought, that is just plain inaccurate and wrong.

BERMAN: So saying there's not a whiff of accusations of alcohol abuse or sexual impropriety, you're saying that is inaccurate?

DURBIN: That is inaccurate.

BERMAN: All right, we'll have to find out more about that statement because you're suggesting that there is something in those reports that does point to some direction of Brett Kavanaugh being involved in something inappropriate before. Is that a correct inference that I'm making?

DURBIN: Well, of course, that's the inference and it's one that we ought to discuss at a committee level. If we are allowed, on confidential reports, to be dismissive and say, well, let me tell you the following ten things were not included by process of elimination. You can reach conclusions about what may have been included. I think there -- Republican staffers went too far and I wish we would establish a standard -- a bipartisan standard of confidentiality.

BERMAN: Last night on "Anderson Cooper 360," Jamie Roche, who was a college roommate of Brett Kavanaugh, he spoke exclusively to "AC 360," and is going to speak to us in just minutes, he said that he is 100 percent sure that Brett Kavanaugh lied in his testimony to the Senate about not remembering things when he was drinking and also about some of the terminology he used.

Do you feel that the FBI should have investigated whether or not he lied about those cases?

DURBIN: I do. It's a question of credibility. We have a he said/she said and I don't want to diminish in any way the courage it took for Dr. Ford to come forward, but we have a direct contradiction on sworn testimony between two witnesses appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. And it comes down to basic issues involving alcohol and, of course, the allegations of Dr. Ford. To say that the FBI could ignore those is to ignore the heart of the issue as far as I'm concerned.

BERMAN: The argument we heard from former Senator Rick Santorum before is, this is not the central issue. This isn't about whether or not he committed sexual assault. This is about your terminology of how much drinking is too much and also whether he used certain words. What does that matter?

DURBIN: Well, it's a question of credibility, character. And in the case of presentation by Judge Kavanaugh, temperament. Honestly, if you watched the judge and listened to his testimony, the broadsides, which he fired in terms of political partisanship behind this whole investigation, it really raises a serious, serious question about his judicial temperament if he goes to the highest court in the land for a lifetime appointment.

BERMAN: Two very quick questions.

Number one, we just heard from a Democratic strategist who is concerned that this fight has hurt Democrats in the polls. That there has been an uptick in Republican enthusiasm. Have you seen that?

DURBIN: I can tell you, there's been an uptick in public interest. I can tell that when I went home last week from the taxicab driver to the doorman at the hotel holding an umbrella in the rain. They were all talking about that hearing.

But shame on us if we shirk our duty under the Constitution to advise and consent for fear of the political reaction that might occur across this country. We're supposed to do our job. And the political reaction will handle itself as far as I'm concerned.

BERMAN: I want to ask you one question about a subject that doesn't have to do with the Supreme Court, at least not yet, which is the family reunifications having to do with the administration's zero tolerance policy of separating kids from their parents at the border. An internal report from the Department of Homeland Security inspector general says that DHS was, quote, not fully prepared to implement the administration's zero tolerance policy or to deal with its after effects. You're calling on Secretary Neilson to resign over this. Why?

DURBIN: Someone needs to be held accountable. And it's not going to be the president. He'll be held accountable if he runs for re-election. It's not going to be the attorney general. He may not survive the end of the year. But this head of the Department of Homeland Security, Secretary Neilson, was the one who engineered this awful, disgraceful policy of zero tolerance, which the president abandoned after a few weeks. Now we know from the inspector general, they literally separated 2,700

children from their parents without any way to keep track of where those children were going and how they could reconnect them with their parents. We still have 136 kids under government custody because of this policy and difficulty to reunite them. Ninety-six percent of them have their parents out -- 96 of them have their parents outside the country. This is disgraceful. It's shameful.

And I know one of these cases personally. I saw this four-year-old boy in an immigration court in Chicago. The poor little kid was playing with a match boxcar while they were trying to decide his fate in an immigration court. Now we've read through "The New Yorker," his mother has not seen him for seven months. He refuses to speak to her on the telephone at this point. They are urging the mom to beg him to eat. A four-year-old being begged to eat? You know, this shows you what's happening psychologically to these kids because of this failed policy. Someone, particularly the secretary of DHS, needs to be held responsible.

[08:40:10] BERMAN: Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, thank you for being with us. We know you've got a big day of reading, speed reading, in fact, ahead of you, so we appreciate it.

DURBIN: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: All right, John, Brett Kavanaugh's college roommate calls him out for lying to the Senate. He's here, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: Fancy new graphic there.

Time for "CNN Business Now."

FaceBook is on Capitol Hill this week after its largest data breach ever.

Chief business correspondent Christine Romans is here with more.

Hi, Christine.

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Good morning.

FaceBook is confirming to CNN it sent representatives to D.C. to fill lawmakers in on the largest security breach in FaceBook history.

[08:45:06] Six days ago, FaceBook revealed an attack on the data of 50 million users. FaceBook says it fixed the flaw, but still has not revealed who did it, what they were targeting or how long this lasted. It is notable that FaceBook is keeping U.S. lawmakers in the loop. FaceBook has been trying to work more with Washington. It sent CEO Mark Zuckerberg to testify in April.

FaceBook's likely trying to get ahead of new regulation. It's already under intense scrutiny for privacy concerns and allowing election meddling. In fact, FaceBook faces billions in fines in Europe where regulations are more strict.

So, what should you do? Log off, reset your password, close out all the other apps that you access through FaceBook.

For the latest on tech, media and finance, go to the new CNN Business. It's your gateway to the future, featuring exclusive interviews with newsmakers, in depth coverage into companies and innovates driving business forward. Find it all at cnn.com/business. It launches, you guys, later today.

BERMAN: All right, a big day.

ROMANS: Yes.

BERMAN: Christine Romans, thanks so much for being with us. Really, really appreciate it.

The breaking news, the first senators getting a look at the few FBI report on Brett Kavanaugh. "The Washington Post" reports that FBI agents were prevented from looking at Kavanaugh's past alcohol use and whether he lied to Congress.

So, Jaime Roche, who's one of Brett Kavanaugh's college roommates, says that the president's Supreme Court nominee lied under oath to the U.S. Senate. Roche also says he believes his friend Debbie Ramirez, who has accused Kavanaugh of exposing himself to her at a college party.

Joining us now is Kavanaugh's former roommate at Yale, Jaime Roche.

Jamie, thank you very much for being with us.

If I can, I want to start with the specifics. You say you are 100 percent sure that Judge Kavanaugh lied under oath to the U.S. Senate in two separate areas. I want to go after them one at a time, if I can.

JAMIE ROCHE, BRETT KAVANAUGH'S FRESHMAN YALE ROOMMATE: Sure.

BERMAN: You say you are 100 percent sure that he lied under oath about not blacking out after drinking. Explain.

ROCHE: I was Brett's college roommate. We shared a room. We had beds 12 feet apart. And I would see him leaving to go to parties, having had beers in our -- in our suit. I saw him coming home from parties, unable to speak coherently. I saw him when he was vomiting in the bedroom and in the bathroom in the suit. And I saw him the next morning when he couldn't get himself out of bed.

I'm not a doctor. I don't know how you define blacking out. But, you know, like a lot of people, I had -- I had some beer in college as well, and I would say that those things are consistent with blacking out.

BERMAN: Do you have specific memories of Judge Brett, or Brett when he was your college roommate, not remembering things after drinking? ROCHE: I do.

BERMAN: Can you tell us any of those stories?

ROCHE: Yes, it was a long time ago and it's hard to -- to come up with a specific story. But I can tell you, we had, as all college roommates do, you know, we had times where we were sitting together in the morning and we had both, some of these times, been out. And we were talking about, well, I can't really remember whether I did this or I did that. So I wish that I could give you a specific example, but I can tell you that this was a common occurrence.

BERMAN: But you do have specific memories of Brett Kavanaugh, in your words, not being able to remember things when he was drinking in college, which is different than what he testified to under oath to the U.S. Senate.

The second area is the terms that were brought up. And I'm not going to share who wrote this. He was talking about devil's triangle and the word boofing (ph). He said that they weren't sexual in reference. What's your memory?

ROCHE: Yes, that was very surprising. I think I, like a lot of people, chuckled when he said that. It's just unbelievable. If you were in college at that time, those words were not uncommon. You know, they were -- they're impolite and they're rude, but they were used and they were used in a context that -- that was not consistent with what Brett said under oath and a lot of us knew it.

BERMAN: Do you have specific memories of Brett Kavanaugh using the word either boof or the phrase devil's triangle and haven't it not relate to a drinking game, for instance?

ROCHE: Yes, I do.

BERMAN: So -- and he says that just wasn't the case. He said devil's triangle was a drinking game. He says boofing was flatulence. That is what he testified to under oath to the U.S. Senate. You're saying he was lying?

ROCHE: Yes, I think it's absolutely stunning. You know, the thing that bothered me about it, obviously it's not -- it's not that he was drinking. It's not that he was talking impolitely about women. I think those things are rude, but I don't think they were uncommon and I don't think they disqualify you. I think what was shocking to me was getting up under oath and with a straight face saying that these things were true when he knew and when a lot of people knew that that was not the case and it was a suggestion that if I just say this, nobody will challenge me, that nobody will was getting up and take the risk of saying what we all knew to be true.

[08:50:13] And I think what really got under my skin with this was that really we weren't talking about Brett's drinking, and we weren't talking about his saying bad things about women. We were talking about what I believed to be the credible claims of women who had gone through a lot of pain. And by getting up there and saying these and other things, what he was saying is, these women's pain doesn't matter. That either they're lying or they're crazy or they're just going after me. And I don't think that's OK.

BERMAN: Just square the circle, because we've heard people say, devil's triangle, who cares whether or not he's being straight about what that meant. Why does that matter to the central claim of sexual assault?

ROCHE: Because he wasn't being quizzed on drinking. You know, I don't know very many people who didn't drink in college. And I know a lot of people who drank in college to the point of blacking out or throwing up. You know, it's not a proud thing, but it's very common. And it particularly was common then. That wasn't the problem.

The problem is, does he tell the truth. And does he tell the truth when it matters and does he tell the truth about little things and does he lie easily and does he lie for good reasons or does he lie just to protect embarrassment? And it's in the context of the claims of Debbie, who, I've got to tell you, I knew Debbie at that time very, very well. I spent lots of time with her. And she was a notably honest person. And so we're being asked to believe the story of a person who I, not uniquely, but specifically knew to be very honest, versus a person who is standing up in front of us saying things that we all know not to be true.

BERMAN: And I wanted to get to your relationship with Debbie Ramirez, your friend, in just a moment. But you just made the claim, you made it last night, that Judge Brett Kavanaugh lied under oath to the U.S. Senate, which would be perjury, that would be a federal crime. That is a serious charge. Has the FBI contacted you and asked anything about this?

ROCHE: No. No, the FBI didn't contact me in their earlier background checks and the FBI has not contacted me regarding this.

BERMAN: You say that you believe Debbie Ramirez when she says that she was sexually assaulted or she says that Brett Kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a dorm party and caused her to touch his penis at that dorm party. Has the FBI contacted you on that?

ROCHE: No.

BERMAN: What would you tell the FBI if they did contact you?

ROCHE: I would tell the FBI that I knew Debbie. That I knew her to be an honest person. That I have no memory of any kind of her ever misleading or lying. I would say that I saw Brett Kavanaugh drink to excess with frequency and that beyond that it would be conjecture.

My only point in this is not to say that this happened, that he's wrong and she's wrong. I don't and I can't know that. I wasn't there. And the people that were there seem to be too afraid to come out or seem to be aligned with him in some way. So I can't say that to the FBI, honestly.

What I can say is that he drank and he drank a lot and that is inconsistent with what he's saying now.

BERMAN: Just to with clear, the one thing you did say there was, I wasn't there. And supporters of Brett Kavanaugh will say, then, why do we care what Jaime Roche is saying? He was not a witness to this. What's your response?

ROCHE: My response is, if we're going to have a trial, then we should have a proper investigation, right? I would not stand up and say that I'm an eyewitness to this particular crime. I would say that I'm a character witness for Debbie and that some of the things that Brett is claiming that are in defense are not true.

BERMAN: What kind of person was Debbie Ramirez in college?

ROCHE: You know, Debbie Ramirez was a -- was really striking to me in college. You know, Yale was full of people who were very well educated, sharp and sophisticated and smart but from a very often a common background. You know, there were a lot of people who were like Brett. There were a lot of people who were like me. We had a lot in common, Brett and I. You know, East Coast people from wealthy backgrounds who went to boarding school and who knew the language and the social codes of the place and Debbie was really smart, funny, but she was from a different background. She was bright-eyed and a little bit naive. And I just found her to be -- to be just a terrific person to be around. And I enjoyed my time with her very much.

BERMAN: What --

ROCHE: What struck me about Debbie -- oh, I'm sorry.

BERMAN: Oh, I was going to ask you -- OK, finish. What struck you about Debbie was what?

ROCHE: She just was very -- you know, I use the word guileless. She just was not the kind of person -- it wouldn't -- it wouldn't occur to her to make things up or to lie. You know, she was an open and honest person.

[08:55:03] BERMAN: But she never told you when you were in college that this happened, correct?

ROCHE: You know, I've been thinking about this a lot, and my response to Ronan Farrow when he first called me was, I have a vague memory of something happening. I have a vague memory of Debbie coming into my room, of being very upset, but I don't have a specific enough memory to testify to this. And so I can say I know her. I can say I know him. I can't say for sure that I remember this incident.

BERMAN: So you talked to Ronan Farrow, which, I guess, was two weeks ago, it feels like 100 years ago, but it was two weeks ago, which was after this story -- it was when this story came to light after the Professor Ford story came to light. You didn't speak on camera until you talked to Anderson last night and now you're talking to us now. The morning that the Senate actually has the FBI report. Do you wish you'd come one sooner? ROCHE: Boy, that's -- I guess the answer is, I do. I think that she's

being treated unfairly. I don't know the other women, but I know Debbie. And I think that this should have been really thoroughly investigated. If there's something that I could have done earlier to make this happen, I guess I wish I had done it.

But I'll also tell you that, you know, there were -- there were five or six other people in the room with her and there were countless people at Yale who saw Brett in his very social context who know the same thing that I do. And certainly some of them have information that they could bring forward and shed some light on this. And if it turns out that that information exonerates him, then that's the truth. But I think people are scared to come forward because when people come forward they get attacked.

BERMAN: Are you a Democrat?

ROCHE: Am I Democrat? I'm registered a Democrat now, yes. I was raised in a Republican family. My mother was a state representative in Connecticut, who was a Republican. My father is very conservative. But I am currently a Democrat. But I'm -- I'm not -- I'm not a politically active Democrat. I have opinions about things, but I don't -- I don't go to Democratic events. I don't contribute to Democratic causes. I really am -- I'm a not particularly politically active.

BERMAN: Would -- would you -- well, let me ask you a specific, did you oppose, at least in your own mind, the nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court?

ROCHE: I wasn't really involved in it. I don't know Neil Gorsuch and his background. I've read a little bit about him, but not -- I didn't have an opinion on it.

BERMAN: What I'm trying to get to is if there's a political motivation to your coming out because you don't want a conservative judge on the Supreme Court. Any political motivation in coming out?

ROCHE: No. No, I -- I think it's pretty clear that there's going to be a conservative justice and I don't think there's a lot that can be done about that. I think the question is not political or moderate, I think it's, do we want somebody on the court like Brett?

BERMAN: So it's personal in a way because you knew Brett Kavanaugh and Brett Kavanaugh said to the Senate you have some axe to grind with him.

ROCHE: Yes.

BERMAN: What's your response?

ROCHE: You know, I knew Brett for a year. We didn't really travel in social circles together after that. When I heard from people that Brett was in consideration, I thought it was interesting. And, actually, it was kind of fun to tell people that I knew a guy who was being nominated to the court. Now, I don't -- I don't -- I didn't dislike Brett intensely back then. I had really no thoughts about him in the intervening period. This is not personal for me.

BERMAN: He brought up a story of when you moved out -- there was a third roommate -- you moved all your roommates furniture out of the room. I think Brett Kavanaugh was suggesting that you had -- I don't know whether it was anger issues or you were on different sides of an argument back then, which may influence your decision to speak out against him now.

ROCHE: Sure. Yes, I have a -- I have a 16-year-old son and this is one of the stories that I was hoping he wasn't going to hear until he was older. But, no, this was a -- this is a prank. I took our -- this -- he wasn't in our room, but he was a suite mate. I took his furniture out of his suite and I arranged it in the quad on the grass, just like it was in the suite. And the intent was to wait in his room out on the grass until he -- until he showed up. It was a prank. He responded angrily and it escalated. But it was between this third person and I. Brett was not involved. And, in fact, I had no particular feelings for this other person either. I didn't socialize with him. But I just didn't think much about them at all.

BERMAN: So the Senate has the FBI report as we speak. They're going through it. There will be votes as soon as tomorrow. Brett Kavanaugh could be confirmed as soon as Saturday.

If that happens, if it turns out that in a week or two weeks Brett Kavanaugh is sitting on the bench at the Supreme Court, will this have been worth it to you? Will it have been worth it to you to come out and tell this story?

ROCHE: You know, I think this has gone beyond Brett. If the FBI has the report, they haven't talked to me, they're not talking to me. And if they're not talking to me, they're not talking to other people. And that means that they're -- that they're being limited in my -- in my perception. So I think this is not really about Brett. I'm hopeful that there are some senators who will think about this and decide that a different conservative justice would be a better idea.

[09:00:10] But I think what's happened is, this has become about -- about women and about