Return to Transcripts main page

NEW DAY

CNN Reality Check: Is The Treasury Department Making Sanctioned Russian Oligarch Richer?; Democratic Hopefuls Embark On 2020 Apology Tour; Interview With Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY); Senate To Vote On Dueling Bills To End Government Shutdown; Teen In Viral Staredown Video Speaks Out. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired January 23, 2019 - 07:30   ET

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


(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:30:25] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Here's a blockbuster accusation. The Treasury Department went to great lengths to help one of Vladimir Putin's buddies and they tried to cover their tracks.

Senior political analyst John Avlon has our reality check. Tell us more, John.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Ali, it's a headline that's surreal even by Trump-era standards. The Treasury Department seems to be doing it damndest to help a Russian oligarch by relieving sanctions, hiding the evidence, and duping the Senate in the process.

This is Oleg Deripaska, a Russian billionaire and Kremlin crony who had Paul Manafort on his payroll. Oh, and he just loves the American media and questions about election interference.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OLEG DERIPASKA, RUSSIAN OLIGARCH: Get lost, please.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

AVLON: This is a self-proclaimed sex coach who was telling anyone who would listen that she had dirt on Deripaska, Donald Trump, and the '16 election. Now, after being released and deported to Russia, she's suddenly gone mum and says she's fearing for her safety. But our story's got even more intrigue than a Russian sex coach in a Thai prison.

It begins last April when the Treasury Department decided to sanction Deripaska along with six of Russia's richest men for, quote, " -- a range of malign activity around the globe."

That's when things started to get Trumpy. The personal sanctions against Deripaska went into effect but the ones against his companies, like aluminum giant Rusal, they were slow-rolled.

Treasury Sec. Mnuchin said the goal was to punish Deripaska, not a global aluminum maker, which could punish us all economically. So, Mnuchin offered to lift sanctions against the companies in exchange for Deripaska slashing a stake. At least that's what he said in a public letter to Congress.

Just one problem. That wasn't the real deal. Instead, there was a confidential document uncovered by "The New York Times" that laid bare the generous terms being offered.

Here's what Deripaska actually gets. The ability to wipe out hundreds of millions in debt and much greater control over his companies than advertised. His personal associates can stay in on the action, something Mnuchin's original letter said would be prohibited.

And even the suggestion of lifting sanctions caused Deripaska's company stock to skyrocket, making the Putin pal even richer. So, no wonder Deripaska and his buddies seem to be celebrating.

The Trump administration reducing Russian sanctions, that's enough to raise Republican eyebrows and that's why 136 House Republicans broke ranks to stop it. The fight then moved to the Senate with 11 Republicans standing alongside Democrats.

But in the end, it wasn't enough. Mitch McConnell carried the administration's water with a healthy push from Louisiana senator- turned-lobbyist David Vitter. In response, Russian T.V. hosts literally laughed and applauded the Republicans who voted against sanctions.

And yesterday, the Trump administration announced the renomination of Wendy Vitter, David's wife, for a federal judgeship after her last bit hit the skids because she wouldn't say whether Brown v. Board of Education was rightly decided.

Sketchy enough for you? Well, it is for Sen. Richard Blumenthal who told us this. Quote, "The concealment of relevant information raises the need to revisit our vote," calling the sanctions relief and "illicit agreement, which is simply a gift to Putin's henchmen."

The Treasury Department is standing behind the deal, but why would they concoct it in the first place? Is this just another example of Trump officials being useful idiots for Putin or something a little more sinister? Either way, they got caught lying to the Senate and the American people.

And that's your reality check.

CAMEROTA: John, we are so glad with your reality checks that you bring all this to light.

AVLON: It's really just a stunning, stunning story that they would conceal it -- after all the focus on Russian sanctions that they would think they could get away with a secret deal.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, John. Thanks so much.

CAMEROTA: Thank you. AVLON: Thanks, guys.

BERMAN: New this morning, a new Democrat in the race for 2020 -- the Democratic mayor of South Bend, Indiana, Pete Buttigieg. He announced he is launching an exploratory committee. The 37-year-old is a veteran of the war in Afghanistan and is openly gay.

In the meantime, several other Democratic hopefuls are hitting the road with an interesting message for voters -- I'm sorry.

Jeff Zeleny is live in Washington. Jeff, you know, the great rock band "Chicago" said it's hard for me to say I'm sorry. Apparently, not for Democratic hopefuls.

JEFF ZELENY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: John, good morning, it's not -- at least they're trying this out.

But some of the biggest Democratic hopefuls are starting with the biggest apologies. You have Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Kirsten Gillibrand, and more. They're eager to show their evolution on some of their previous positions on immigration and criminal justice reform, and even health care.

This is all happening as the party's unmistakenly moving to the left. Some candidates are rushing to follow suit.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ZELENY (voice-over): Before presidential candidates say I'm running, this year they're saying I'm sorry.

JOSEPH BIDEN, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I haven't always been right.

SEN. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND (D-NY), 2020 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I was wrong to feel that way.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I), VERMONT: I apologize.

ZELENY: Democrats eyeing the White House are delivering one mea culpa another, scrambling to align their positions with the party's shift to the left.

[07:35:00] Joe Biden is the latest to join the apology tour, now saying he regrets that the 1994 crime bill led to an era of mass incarceration through vastly tougher sentencing laws for those selling crack cocaine.

BIDEN: It was a big mistake when it was made, but it's trapped an entire generation.

ZELENY: But, 25 years ago, Biden not only voted for the bill, he was right here in the Rose Garden as President Clinton signed the new law. And until recently, Biden has proudly taken ownership.

BIDEN: I wrote the crime -- the Biden crime bill. The thing that put 100,000 cops on the street.

ZELENY: Meanwhile, Kirsten Gillibrand has been trying to explain her dramatic political shift from a moderate Democratic congresswoman from Upstate New York to a liberal senator.

She once described herself as a firm opponent for giving amnesty to illegal aliens. She also said English should be the official language of the United States.

GILLIBRAND: They certainly weren't empathetic and they were not kind. And I did not think about suffering and other people's lives.

ZELENY: While cleanups are common in presidential races --

HILLARY CLINTON (D), FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I'm sorry for the consequences that were unintended and that have had a very unfortunate impact on people's lives.

ZELENY: -- this year's string of confessionals is coming earlier than usual as candidates try to clarify their views before hitting the campaign trail.

Hillary Clinton's often tortured apologies --

CLINTON: I take responsibility. What I did was legally permitted -- number one, first and foremost, OK?

ZELENY: -- offer a case study for 2020 and a lesson an apology must be seen as authentic to be accepted.

Democrats do not have the luxury of holding firm, like President Trump, who famously almost never expresses regret.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I may stand before you in six months and say hey, I was wrong. I don't know that I'll ever admit that but I'll find just -- I'll find some kind of an excuse.

ZELENY: Before Bernie Sanders decides whether to run again, he is apologizing for sexual harassment of female staffers inside his 2016 campaign.

SANDERS: To the women in our campaign who were harassed or mistreated, I apologize.

ZELENY: And, Tulsi Gabbard is expressing regret for what she now calls offensive comments about same-sex marriage.

REP. TULSI GABBARD (D-HI), 2020 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I sincerely repeat my apology today. I'm deeply sorry for having said that.

ZELENY: While Kamala Harris is stopping well-short of apologizing, she's defending her record as a prosecutor that some activists see as being pro-law enforcement at the expense of civil rights.

SEN. KAMALA HARRIS (D-CA), 2020 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The buck stops with me and I take full responsibility for what my office did. ZELENY: But, it's Biden's new apologies that raise questions about how many more times he may have to say I'm sorry --

BIDEN: Do you swear to tell the whole truth --

ZELENY: -- considering his long Senate record, including controversial moments like Anita Hill's testimony at the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings.

BIDEN: I am so sorry that she had to go through what she went through.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ZELENY: Now, we are told that former vice president Biden is still deciding whether he will run. But if he does, his aides acknowledge he will have to show his evolution over a career that spans nearly 40 years in the Senate and even his eight years in the White House.

The question with all of these apologies, of course, is whether voters accept them as authentic or are they simply being politically expedient -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Really interesting Jeffrey to see them all in one place.

ZELENY: Yes.

CAMEROTA: Jeff Zeleny, thank you very much.

ZELENY: Sure.

CAMEROTA: All right. Up next, we're going to ask the head of the House Democratic Caucus about these apologies and if he now regrets saying this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY), CHAIRMAN, DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS, MEMBER, JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: We have a hater in the White House. A birther in chief. The grand wizard of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Congressman Hakeem Jeffries will join us to talk about this and so much more, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:42:20] CAMEROTA: On Martin Luther King Day, Congressman Hakeem Jeffries made controversial comments about President Trump.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEFFRIES: We have a hater in the White House. A birther in chief. The grand wizard of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. One of the things that we've learned is that while Jim Crow may be dead, he's still got some nieces and nephews that are alive and well.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Joining us now is the House Democratic Caucus chair, Congressman Hakeem Jeffries of New York, to talk about this and so much more. Congressman, thank you very much for being here this morning.

Do you regret going that far in your comments on Monday?

JEFFRIES: Not at all.

Let me say three things. First of all, our top priority has to continue to be to reopen the government and end this reckless Trump shutdown, put Americans back to work, and then have a mature conversation about border security.

Second, we, as House Democrats, are going to continue to focus on lowering health care costs, infrastructure, cleaning up corruption, and kitchen table pocketbook issues.

Third, with respect to the comments of a few days ago, we've got to have an opportunity for at least one day a year to have a candid, if sometimes uncomfortable, conversation about race.

It seems to me that we can't have that conversation on Valentine's Day, we can't have that conversation on St. Patrick's Day. It's, perhaps, appropriate for us to be able to have that difficult discussion on MLK Day when we're celebrating the life and legacy of a champion for racial and social justice.

CAMEROTA: Yes, but you called -- but, I mean, you called the president the grand wizard, meaning of the KKK. That's language of the KKK.

You think the President of the United States is connected to the KKK? He's a Klansman?

JEFFRIES: Absolutely, not. And as you know, Alisyn, I did not use the words racist in any of my comments. In fact, Wolf Blitzer, in the past, has asked me whether I believe the president is a racist and I've consistently said no.

I did use a colorful phrase but, of course, I don't believe that the president is a card-carrying member of the KKK. But it did capture a troubling pattern of racially insensitive and outrageous, at times, behavior that spans not months, not years, but decades.

In the 1970s, it was The Trump Organization sued by the Nixon Justice Department for racial discrimination against black and Latino housing applicants.

In the 1980s, it was Donald Trump that led the lynch mob that went after the Central Park Five -- black and Latino teenagers who were wrongfully accused, wrongfully convicted, wrongfully imprisoned for a crime they did not commit. CAMEROTA: Yes.

JEFFRIES: For five years it was Donald Trump that perpetrated the racist lie that Barack Obama was not born in the United States of America --

[07:45:05] CAMEROTA: Yes.

JEFFRIES: -- which was designed to delegitimize our nation's first black president.

CAMEROTA: Yes. I mean --

JEFFRIES: We haven't even gotten into the behavior that took place in the aftermath of Charlottesville, for the s-hole comment countries about African nations, or the fact that he's hired Steve Bannon, Sebastian Gorka, Stephen Miller, and a parade of other individuals --

CAMEROTA: Yes.

JEFFRIES: -- connected to xenophobia and the alt-right.

CAMEROTA: Look, you make good points and I think that after Charlottesville it was you who said that the president was a racial arsonist, meaning, I assume, that he inflames racial tensions. And I think that all of that is demonstrably true, as you've just pointed out.

But, you know, the grand wizard? I mean, the reason that I ask you about it is because you call it colorful language, but isn't that inflaming the situation? Is that helpful, likening someone to the head of the KKK?

JEFFRIES: Well I think as I just pointed out, I do not believe that the president is a card-carrying member of the KKK, but he has presided over and engaged in directly a series of racially insensitive remarks. We cannot whitewash that, we cannot hide it. And on King Day, we should be able to have that candid discussion.

Now, I also understand why Americans of good will on the left and on the right, Democrats and Republicans, progressives and conservatives, want to give this president or any president the benefit of the doubt. I do, as well.

And I also believe in the power of redemption. And hopefully, we'll see better behavior moving forward as it relates to trying to bring this country together and not peddling xenophobia out of the Oval Office at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. I think that's what would make America a stronger country.

CAMEROTA: OK.

On the note of bringing America together, let's talk about the strategy to ending the shutdown. As you know, it has been Democrats' position that you don't negotiate during the shutdown. That doesn't seem to be working as we are in day 33. What is the strategy today to end it?

JEFFRIES: Well, today, we're going to be bringing to the floor a series of bills that have been negotiated on a bipartisan basis by Democrats and Republicans connected to conference committee discussions -- or conference level discussions between the House and the Senate that will reopen every other aspect of government that has been recklessly shut down, with the exception of the Department of Homeland Security which we'll deal with tomorrow.

However, in these bills that we're bringing to the House floor today, we have $1.5 billion in border security measures. Five hundred billion dollars for immigration judges that Trump and his administration have said are necessary to process migrants and others at the border.

Five hundred billion dollars in additional infrastructure to help at legal ports of entry, as well as another $500 billion in humanitarian and other forms of assistance to the Central American Northern Triangle countries of Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras, which are the places --

CAMEROTA: But no money for a barrier?

JEFFRIES: Well, we're going to deal with the Homeland Security funding on Thursday. This is additional funding that we, as Democrats, are saying we support as part of the effort to increase border security.

But the initial premise is that we have to reopen the government before we can have a mature, and thoughtful, and bipartisan conversation about border security. We can't be in the midst of a hostage crisis where you have 800,000-plus --

CAMEROTA: Yes.

JEFFRIES: -- public employees being hurt, families being hurt, farmers being hurt --

CAMEROTA: Yes.

JEFFRIES: -- small businessmen being hurt, and others being hurt --

CAMEROTA: I mean, I think that --

JEFFRIES: -- because of this reckless shutdown.

CAMEROTA: -- everyone understands that logic. That makes sense that you wouldn't want to do it during the shutdown, but it's just not working. The president isn't budging.

And so, you know, there's this -- there's this letter that's being -- a draft letter that has been circulated be centrist Democrats who believe that one way out of the impasse, since the president's not budging on the government shutdown, is to promise -- make a promise to the president that if he were to open government today that you all would agree to debate the border wall and border security funding by a date certain in early February, and that that might be one way to break the impasse.

Do you agree with that draft letter that we've seen?

JEFFRIES: Well, I actually haven't seen that draft letter. But I agree with the first part of the letter, which is reopen the government and then let's have a mature conversation about border security, our broken immigration system, comprehensive immigration reform, and debate it in a full and robust fashion.

In fact, the continuing resolution that will go to the floor on Thursday will allow for just that. It will extend funding at least year's levels through, I believe, February 28th --

CAMEROTA: Yes.

JEFFRIES: -- reopen the government and allow for us to have a conversation.

And, Alisyn, I would also suggest that we have seen some movement. Finally, Mitch McConnell has decided to emerge from the witness protection program and at least put some pieces of legislation on the floor of the United States Senate.

[07:50:02] CAMEROTA: But they're not going to pass. I mean, understood, but those aren't expected to pass.

JEFFRIES: Well, I don't think that the president's proposal is going to pass, but I still think that there's opportunity for the Democratic-backed proposal that has some bipartisan support to perhaps get over the finish line. We'll have to see what occurs on Thursday.

CAMEROTA: But would you be willing to have a date certain to by the end of the month vote on something. That's what I think the letter is saying, that in order to break the impasse you have to give the president something. Open government and we will have a vote on this by the end of the week -- the month.

JEFFRIES: Well, I think that those are decisions that are made at a different level with the speaker and the chairperson of the Rules Committee, and the chairs that are relevant committees.

I do think that we are suggesting a date certain, which is a continuing resolution. Rather than just reopen the Department of Homeland Security through the end of the fiscal year, which would be September 30th, we're willing to say let's put in a date certain of February 28th and the legislation that we're putting forward on Thursday so we have an opportunity to negotiate.

And if the president feels like he needs a deadline to threaten to shut down the government again, we believe that's a reckless approach. But we're willing to say we'll move forward so that within a tight time frame we can have a window of opportunity to have a discussion.

CAMEROTA: Yes. Very quickly, Congressman, I'm out of time -- yes or no. Is the State

of the Union going to happen in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday night?

JEFFRIES: If the government is reopened, the State of the Union will happen.

CAMEROTA: Congressman Hakeem Jeffries, thank you very much for talking with us on NEW DAY this morning.

JEFFRIES: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: John --

BERMAN: All right. His face was all over social media after this viral confrontation with a Native American elder. Now, he is talking about this moment and the backlash that came after it.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:55:59] BERMAN: It's time for "CNN Business Now" and time is running out for the U.S. and China to reach a deal to end the trade war. Just how much talking are trade officials doing before next week's crucial high-level meeting in Washington?

Our chief business correspondent and star of "EARLY START" Christine Romans in the Business Center -- Romans.

CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT, ANCHOR, "EARLY START": Good morning, John.

Well, President Trump's top economic adviser Larry Kudlow is denying reports that the U.S. canceled a meeting this week with the Chinese government as the two countries rush to strike a trade deal.

Now, stock markets rattled by those reports that the United States turned down an offer by Chinese negotiators for deputies to talk this week ahead of higher-level talks next week.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LARRY KUDLOW, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL: There were no other intermediate meetings scheduled. The story is unchanged. We are moving towards negotiations.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROMANS: Chinese Vice Premier Liu is expected to meet with U.S. trade representative Robert Lighthizer and the Treasury Sec. Steven Mnuchin for two days of talks January 30th. Now, a White House spokeswoman said preparation for those talks is ongoing.

The two countries must reach a deal by March first. If there is no deal, the U.S. jacks up tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese goods to 25 percent from 10 percent. The stakes are so high. Any whiff of progress or setback moves swiftly through international markets, guys.

CAMEROTA: All right, Christine. Thank you very much for the update.

So, we are hearing more this morning from the student at the center of that viral staredown video with the Native American elder.

CNN's Sara Sidner is live in Los Angeles with what he's saying. This just is fascinating, the twists and turns in this standoff stare.

SARA SIDNER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, it really is and he, in some ways, said some of the things that he said in this statement that was sent out the day after all of this happened -- or two days after all this happened.

I do want to mention that he says he wished that we would've just walked away. That is one of the headlines of what he said. But that he is not sorry.

I'll let you hear in his own words what he said about this scenario between him standing there and Nathan Phillips, the Native American elder standing there beating his drum.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NICK SANDMANN, STUDENT, COVINGTON CATHOLIC HIGH SCHOOL, PARK HILLS, KENTUCKY: As far as standing there, I had every right to do so. I don't -- I -- my position is that I was not disrespectful to Mr. Phillips. I respect him. I'd like to talk to him.

I mean, in hindsight, I wish we could have walked away and avoided the whole thing, but I can't say that I'm sorry for listening to him and standing there.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SIDNER: So, you heard him say I wish I could have avoided the whole thing, but he isn't sorry for what happened there.

He was asked about his smirk by NBC and he says I thought it was just a smile.

And he was also asked about whether wearing the "Make America Great Again" hat, obviously in support of the president, might have changed things if he wasn't wearing that hat.

He said perhaps, but I would like to let Nathaniel Phillips talk about that. That's something that's in his heart. He's like, I can't really answer that. I would like to let Mr. Phillips talk about that.

And he said he wasn't disrespecting Mr. Phillips at all in his mind.

Nathan Phillips has a completely different view of what happened that day. He has talked about that.

Said he felt like he was being mocked. At one point, the teenagers started doing the Tomahawk chop while the Native Americans were singing their prayer song. And, Nathan Phillips has said look, I don't think that everything in

his statement -- only responding to the statement -- not yet responding to the words that have come out of Nick Sandmann's mouth. But saying in the statement that was sent out that he didn't think it was all -- you know, that some of it seemed disingenuous.

However, he said that he, too, would not mind having a meet-up with him. That he was willing to do that because he wants this country to come together.

BERMAN: All right, Sara Sidner. Thanks for bringing us up to speed there. Really appreciate it.

New developments in the longest shutdown in U.S. history, now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY), SENATE MAJORITY LEADER: The opportunity to end all of this is staring us right in the face. That's why we'll vote on this legislation.

SEN. TIM KAINE (D), VIRGINIA: The second vote is just reopen government while we work to see if we can find a compromise.