Return to Transcripts main page
Trump To Announce Decision On Climate Deal Today; What Will Comey Say?; Nunes Issues Subpoenas As Part Of Unmasking Investigation; Tiger Woods Arrest Video; Clinton: Russians "Guided By Americans" In Election Interference. Aired 7:30-8a ET
Aired June 1, 2017 - 07:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[07:30:00] CHRIS CUOMO, CNN HOST: Why?
STEPHEN MOORE, VISITING FELLOW, THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION, FORMER SR. ECONOMIC ADVISER, TRUMP CAMPAIGN: Yes. I think it's a P.R. campaign by these companies that they want to act as if they're good citizens.
RANA FOROOHAR, CNN GLOBAL ECONOMIC ANALYST, AUTHOR, "MAKERS AND TAKERS", GLOBAL BUSINESS COLUMNIST & ASSOCIATE EDITOR, FINANCIAL TIMES: Oh my gosh.
MOORE: But look, let's not forget this is a totally voluntary deal. None of these other -- look, if these countries were going to abide by this agreement --
REAR ADMIRAL JOHN KIRBY (RET.), CNN MILITARY & DIPLOMATIC ANALYST, FORMER STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN, FORMER PENTAGON PRESS SECRETARY: But --
MOORE: -- why is it that none of these European countries abided by the Kyoto treaty?The Kyota treaty was 15 years ago --
KIRBY: Look, you just made --
MOORE: -- that none of them abided by that.
KIRBY: You just made a good point. You just made a good point --
KIRBY: -- and you're actually right about this and I agree with you. It's voluntary --
KIRBY: -- and Chris mentioned this in the intro.
KIRBY: The president doesn't have to just pull out of this thing. We can adjust the targets. He has some flexibility here to continue to meet our agreement and stay a leader in the world and try to satisfy some of the concerns of his base.
KIRBY: He doesn't have to immediately just pull out. The other argument I made is look, he talks about the president, he's going to rebuild infrastructure. Last year, alone, nearly $30 billion of damage to national infrastructure in this country was caused by extreme weather.
KIRBY: Ten billion of that was in Louisiana last summer.
MOORE: Yes, there were never hurricanes --
FOROOHAR: You know --
MOORE: There were never hurricanes and floods before --
ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN HOST: Well, hold on.
KIRBY: Not anywhere near on a scale --
MOORE: We have less damage today from hurricanes and floods and so on than we did 50-60 years ago.
KIRBY: That's just not true.
MOORE: It is. There's fewer --
KIRBY: That is absolutely just now true.
FOROOHAR: Can I --
MOORE: There's fewer property damage. The insurance costs are lower because we have an economy that's capable of dealing with this.
CAMEROTA: But that doesn't mean there's fewer hurricanes and fewer tornadoes and fewer --
CUOMO: Right, we just deal with them better.
CAMEROTA: You know, yes --
MOORE: There are fewer today.
CAMEROTA: -- extreme weather.
CUOMO: And he still --
CAMEROTA: There aren't fewer.
MOORE: No, there are fewer -- well, there are not more hurricanes today than there were 50 years ago.
CAMEROTA: There are bigger superstorms. They've gotten more extreme. MOORE: No, there are not. We haven't had a major hurricane in two or three years.
FOROOHAR: Can I actually make a point on infrastructure because I think that this is very interesting. You know, one of the arguments you hear from Republicans and from the administration is look, you know, there is all this homegrown energy, as Stephen is saying -- that's true. We have the shale gas boom. But one thing I have not heard from the administration is OK, how are you going to connect the dots between all that homegrown energy and the manufacturing sector? I mean, I don't hear about any projects to bring either, you know, more coal, energy, or frankly, more clean --
MOORE: Well, you're right.
FOROOHAR: -- natural gas from the Gulf. I mean --
MOORE: We need -- we need more pipelines.
FOROOHAR: -- you need -- if you're going to -- if you're going to make this argument you've got have a --
FOROOHAR: -- 360 strategy for how it's going to work and we have not heard that.
MOORE: We need more -- we need more pipelines and we need more LNG terminals. By the way, the left is against building pipelines. You see them blocking it everywhere.
CAMEROTA: All right. Panel, thank you. This has been a very, very lively discussion and great to have all of your different --
MOORE: Thank you.
CAMEROTA: -- perspectives. Thank you.
CUOMO: Good stuff. All right, so big headline. Former FBI director James Comey is going to testify as early as next week before a Senate panel. What is he going to say, what do members of Congress want to know, and can he be blocked from testifying by the president? We're going to talk to a lawmaker, next.
[07:36:40] CUOMO: All right, big headline. Fired FBI director James Comey is expected to testify before the Senate Intel Committee as early as next week. A source tells CNN Comey is expected to confirm his account that President Trump did pressure him to end his investigation into Michael Flynn. What would that mean?Joining us now is Democratic Congressman Jerry Nadler of New York. He's a member of the House Judiciary Committee. How big is this? REP. JERRY NADLER, (D) NEW YORK, MEMBER, HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: Well, it's very big. If the president -- remember, the president fired Comey as head of the FBI. They first put out -- they had the vice president go out and say untruths about why relating to Comey's conduct with respect to the Hillary Clinton investigation last year. Then the president, himself, came out and say that wasn't -- that wasn't the reason.
If the president fired Comey because he had asked for loyalty and hadn't gotten it, because he had asked him to lay off on the -- to ease off on the investigation of Flynn, because in effect he was asking him to lay off -- to ease of the investigation of possible collusion by the Trump campaign with the Russians in subverting the election, that would be obstruction of justice which is an impeachable offense.
CUOMO: Would it be, though, because you would argue that you didn't have an official process going on at that time because you didn't have the grand jury and panel. Then, you got a bad fact here which is James Comey, by his own reckoning, was not affected by whatever the president did or did not say to him.
NADLER: Obstruction of justice does not have to be effective to be --
CUOMO: True. It's an intent-based crime.
NADLER: It's an intent-based crime and we're not talking about a criminal thing here. We're talking about obstruction of -- the process of obstruction of justice and that would be a very serious thing to attribute to the president.
CUOMO: Even if Comey said -- see, I -- my point is this. I think this winds up being political, not legal. That --
NADLER: Well --
CUOMO: That if Comey says yes, he asked me to do that but, you know, I thought I could handle it. I wrote it in the memo at the time. I didn't reach out to the DOJ, I didn't reach out to any of the operative congressional committees, which we know Comey would do under certain circumstances, right? We all remember that from the campaign. Where does this really go?
NADLER: Well, it depends -- first of all, it depends on what else we find out. There's an investigation going on -- there's a criminal investigation going on and one of the problems you have is that that criminal investigation may or may not result in reports. It may result in indictments --
NADLER: -- it may not. We need, and that's why we've been calling for a special commission like the 9/11 commission,to find out exactly what happened about the Russian attempted subversion of our election. Who cooperated -- which Americans cooperated with that and what we can do to prevent that. That's why we need a 9/11 commission-type for the future. But again, if the president fired Comey in order to try to subvert the investigation that would be, effectively if not criminally, an obstruction of justice and that would -- that would figure into any subsequent procedure -- proceedings.
CUOMO: Maybe, maybe. What happens if the president exerts immunity here and says you can't talk about this stuff? This was a private conversation in the furtherance of my office as president. I'm going to exercise my immunity here.
NADLER: Well, as some people have said on this show a little while ago, he's in a very weak position to do that since he's talked about it so much already, number one. And, number two, Comey would have to judge that. Comey's going to be the one who's testifying in front of Congress. He'll decide what questions he can answer and what questions he can't answer.
[07:40:00] CUOMO: And then Mueller would have the ability to supersede that immunity authority for his own purposes.
NADLER: For his own purposes --
CUOMO: So --
NADLER: -- not for Congressional testimony.
CUOMO: Right. So him testifying before Congress, Comey helps Mueller because he could avoid that legal fight, so we'll see what happens there.
Nunes -- he said he was stepping away. Maybe the media used it but not him, the word "recusing" himself. But really, in this context, there's no difference. And his staffer comes out and says recusal is something very different, that's a real process. He just said he was stepping away. This was temporary. He comes out, signs subpoenas. Once again, apparently, didn't work with his own committee in doing so and seems to be targeting Obama administration officials about unmasking. What is -- what do you make of that?
NADLER: Well, Nunes, number one, is violating the rules of his own committee. He's not supposed to issue subpoenas without consultationwith his ranking Democrat, which apparently didn't happen. But this is entirely a diversion. The president tweeted out based on no evidence whatsoever that President Obama had bugged his -- had bugged him and bugged his campaign. Nunes collaborated with the administration in trying to bring out information which they had. That's why he had to recuse himself in the first place.
And now, he's subpoenaing information which is going to come up blank because everybody involved says it didn't happen about whether, in fact, they unmasked agents or they, in effect, tried to wiretap the president. Now, that apparently didn't happen. There's no evidence it happened except for the president's tweet and this has nothing to do with the investigation into what really has to be investigated, which is the Russian subversion of the American electoral process.
CUOMO: Does it make the point, though, that you guys can't do this? You are too inherently partisan and that you've got to leave it to the FBI and now, to Mueller, and let them do it. You can't get the politics out of this.
NADLER: Well, it makes -- it makes the -- I don't know that Congress can't inherently do it, maybe not. But certainly, this Republican Congress cannot do it and you see how partisan they have been. But that doesn't mean you have to leave it to Mueller because Mueller's conducting a criminal investigation.
NADLER: That we have to get to the bottom of what happened. Who colluded with the Russians, if anybody? Whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians, whether the president colluded with the Russians, and we have to make sure that nothing like that happens again. And that's why we need an independent commission because, again, Mueller, who everybody thinks is a very good guy and Ibelieve that, too, but he's conducting a criminal investigation.
NADLER: He will -- that will result in indictments or maybe not indictments. It's not intended to result in a report to say what happened.
NADLER: The country desperately needs that.
CUOMO: Jerry Nadler, thank you very much. Appreciate having you here.
NADLER: Thank you.
CUOMO: Alisyn --
CAMEROTA: All right. Tiger Woods unlike you have ever seen him before. His DUI arrest was captured on this startling dashcam video, so we're going to show it to you and break down all of the images, next.
[07:46:50] CAMEROTA: All right. (Video playing) We do have some breaking news right now to show you and this is brand new video just into CNN -- brand new aerials that we're bringing you because at least one person is dead, 11 injured after this explosion at an ethanol plant in Cambria, Wisconsin. Two people are still unaccounted for as we speak, and you can just see the extent of the damage here. Parts of this plant have been blown to shreds.
At this point it is not clear what caused this explosion. Authorities are, of course, investigating it. It's just remarkable that there isn't a higher death toll but, obviously, we will keep on top of those two people who are unaccounted for at the moment. You can imagine what chaos it is trying to put out this explosion. CUOMO: Wow. All right. (Video playing) So, police in Florida releasing dashcam video of Tiger Woods' arrest on suspicion of DUI. Now, there's some good key facts that are coming out of here, especially if you're a fan of Tiger. They say they found him asleep at the wheel in the road early Monday. Tiger was not operating the vehicle at the time. Woods had slurring speech. He was obviously disoriented, not knowing was happening around him. Here's a little sample.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OFFICER: Have you had anything to drink tonight?
TIGER WOODS, PROFESSIONAL GOLFER: No.
OFFICER: Are you sure?
OFFICER: Hundred percent?
WOODS: Hundred percent.
OFFICER: OK. Have you taken any illegal drugs?
OFFICER: OK. Have you taken any medication?
OFFICER: What have you taken?
OFFICER: OK. Do you remember what happened when my partner came up behind you? Do you remember being asleep in the car?
OFFICER: You don't? OK.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CUOMO: So, there are two big things here. One, there's a lot of misinformation going on that Tiger Woods was drunk, and he was driving, and he was dangerous, and he smashed his car. That is not what the video or what we've heard from any of the incident reports reveals. And then there's another reason, OK? Prescription medications. This is something that is going on in this society. We wait to see if Tiger Woods wants to own it as an issue and become somewhat of the face of this problem, but it is real and it has affected one of our heroes in sport now so it is worthy of news mention, that's for sure.
CAMEROTA: I mean, we just don't know the extent of it. We just don't know if he has a problem with it or if this is an isolated incident where he had a bad combination or took too much and feel asleep at the wheel.
CAMEROTA: We just don't know that.
CUOMO: But all -- and all of them are relevant considerations that feed a very popular ignorance. You know, you think well, the doctor gave it to me, what could it really do to me. These are powerful meds that are really making a negative mark on society.
CAMEROTA: That's just really dramatic to see that video, obviously, of him looking so groggy.
Meanwhile, another top story. Hillary Clinton and President Trump are feuding again. What are they fighting about now? We debate this, next.
[07:53:10] CAMEROTA: Hillary Clinton offering new insight into the 2016 election. At a conference in California, she discussed why she believes she lost the race.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HILLARY CLINTON, (D) FORMER PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I take responsibility for every decision I made but that's not why I lost. If you look at Facebook, the vast majority of the news items posted were fake. They were connected to, as we now know, the 1,000 Russian agents who were involved in delivering those messages. I inherit nothing from the Democratic Party.
WALT MOSSBERG, CO-PRODUCER, CODE CONFERENCES: What do you mean nothing?
CLINTON: I mean it was bankrupt, it was on the verge of insolvency. Its data was mediocre to poor, non-existent, wrong. I had to inject money into it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: Well, her comments fired up President Trump, which we'll get to in a moment. So let's discuss all of this with CNN senior political commentators former Michigan governor Jennifer Granholm, and former senator from Pennsylvania, Rick Santorum. Great to see both of you.
Governor, that is interesting to hear her talk about why she thinks she lost. We're all entitled to write our own histories, obviously, and she, as we know, mostly blames James Comey's letter in October and now, the Russian trolls putting out fake news. And, I hadn't heard her say before that the DNC was so anemic that it didn't help her at all. What do you think of her explanation of her history? JENNIFER GRANHOLM, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, (D) FORMER GOVERNOR OF MICHIGAN: I think she's doing a deep autopsy into what happened and she has access to a lot of information and she takes responsibility, she says, for whatever she did. But honestly, as more of this information keeps coming out every single day, the notion that the election was impacted significantly is not really a surprise. You guys have been covering it --
[07:55:03] CAMEROTA: Sure.
GRANHOLM: -- ad nauseam (ph).
CAMEROTA: And, I mean, you've heard her critics. They don't think that she's taking full responsibility. She's not saying I didn't connect enough, I didn't go to the right places, I didn't hear people's pain.
GRANHOLM: She says she takes full responsibility and she's writing a book about it. Let me just say I am so tired of people saying she doesn't take responsibility. Not you, but a bunch of people saying --
GRANHOLM: What Rick Santorum is about to say. There were 26 people who ran for president. Nobody but her is getting the grief about saying that she doesn't -- she's not falling on the sword, she's not stabbing herself with how terrible she was. There were huge circumstances surrounding that election that impacted it and no one can deny it. Seventeen intelligence agents -- you know, members of the Intelligence Community said it.
CAMEROTA: About Russian meddling.
CAMEROTA: Rick, do you want to hear or see a pound of flesh from Hillary Clinton?
RICK SANTORUM, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, (R) FORMER U.S. SENATOR FROM PENNSYLVANIA: Look, I mean, she says I take responsibility and then she says but that's not why I lost. Well then, OK, so she's not taking responsibility. She's saying she lost for some other reason.
CAMEROTA: But maybe it isn't why she lost.
CAMEROTA: I mean, maybe it is the Russian trolls and maybe it was the anemic DNC --
SANTORUM: Well, I would --
CAMEROTA: -- and maybe it as James Comey's letter.
SANTORUM: I would say it's because that she didn't connect with the American public and she missed what Donald Trump seized upon, which is a lot of working people -- a lot of folks who voted Democrat in my state, in Jennifer's state, in Wisconsin, and other -- and other of these Midwestern states who felt like neither political party was connecting with them, was understanding their plight. And Donald Trump talked to them and actually put forth an agenda that was neither Democrat nor Republican, it was a little of both. And that connected --
SANTORUM: -- and that's why she lost and that's --
GRANHOLM: No, I --
SANTORUM: -- the bottom line.
GRANHOLM: She -- I am convinced she's writing a book and will talk about the mistakes she made in that realm. You know, that there wasn't enough emphasis on jobs, jobs, jobs because people are feeling pain. I totally agree with you on that piece of things, Rick, but you cannot deny that this, of all presidential elections, had this extraordinary intervention in the election by a foreign government who wanted to sway the election and as we continue to learn, that had an impact.
CAMEROTA: I mean, Rick, look, the problem is it's unknowable. You can't put a numerical percentage on this. How much was the James Comey letter, how much was her not connecting in Michigan?
SANTORUM: There were all sorts of factors that contributed to this election. I think the overarching one is the one that I talked about and that's the one -- look, James Comey did not have an impact disproportionally in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, in the states that she won.
GRANHOLM: Oh, yes, yes, yes, yes. Got a letter.
CAMEROTA: She says that it did. She says that --
SANTORUM: That issue -- that issue -- that issue --
CAMEROTA: -- her poll numbers dipped after the October Comey letter.
GRANHOLM: There was a 10-point drop in her poll numbers when that letter was released --
SANTORUM: You're missing --
GRANHOLM: -- which you cannot deny it. Just look at the data.
SANTORUM: You're missing -- with all due respect ladies, you're missing my point that that issue didn't bite more in those three states than it did anywhere else in the country. The bottom line is if it did bite in those three states more it's because she didn't connect on these other things. And so, the fundamental flaw is what I describe. There were a lot of things positive and negative that happened during the campaign --
CAMEROTA: Yes, OK.
SANTORUM: -- but that was the foundational problem.
CAMEROTA: Yes. Well, Donald Trump also has a different opinion about all this.
CAMEROTA: He tweeted about this when he heard this. "Crooked Hillary now blames everybody but herself, refuses to say she was a terrible candidate. Hits Facebook and even Dems and DNC." She then retorted on Twitter, "People in covfefe houses should not throw covfefe." So that's clever and that's funny, but there is a serious note to this, Rick, that I want to get to about the covfefe kerfuffle, and I do want to ask you about it because just this weekend you said on "STATE OF THE UNION" that you think the president should stop tweeting. That it's a distraction and gets him in trouble. Do you feel that covfefe is the tipping point where other Republicans or those in the White House will demand the same?
SANTORUM: I didn't say the president should stop tweeting. I said the president should stop tweeting about the media, you know, being mean to him and on things that are a distraction from his agenda. He's got a very big announcement coming out today that's going to be very important to my state, to West Virginia, to Ohio, to Michigan.
SANTORUM: It has to do with climate. If he wants -- if he wants to get on message then he needs to pull out of the climate -- the Paris Climate Accord or maybe even a halfway measure.
GRANHOLM: No, no, no, no, no. That is the worst thing.
SANTORUM: Submit it to the United States Senates which should have been done in the first place. And, by the way, Democrats, many of them, won't vote for it. They'll talk a good game but they know it's devastating to working men and women in the United States. Those are the kinds of things he needs to focus on.
GRANHOLM: OK, let me ask this.
CAMEROTA: Rick, hold on. Go ahead.
GRANHOLM: There are 3.3 million people in America who are working in the clean energy industry. If you look at my state, there are almost 90,000 jobs in clean energy right now. In Michigan, in Ohio, almost 90,000. It is insane for you to say that this is going to devastate the economy if he pulls out --
SANTORUM: It is.
GRANHOLM: -- when it's going to devastate the economy -- excuse me, it is going to devastate the economy if he pulls out. Our states, our country not leading. These -- the number one job in America right now -- the number one job according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics is a wind turbine technician. In Ohio, they're building wind turbines.