Return to Transcripts main page


Wolff: 100% of People Around Trump Think He's Unfit for Office; Debate Over Immigration Could Lead to Government Shutdown; CNN Sources: Trump Lawyers Anticipate Mueller Interview Request; North Korea & South Korea Agree to Hold Military Talks. Aired 7-7:30a ET

Aired January 9, 2018 - 07:00   ET



CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: He didn't speak to the vice president. Meaningful distinction to you?

[07:00:03] CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN ANCHOR: Look, the way -- I was trying to seek his reportorial methods. Did you go and ask all these people? Do you think, was he a fly on the wall? Did people know, when it was talking about whatever they meant, thought about the president's mental fitness, that they were talking to a reporter who was going to publish it? He told me yes.

He said that when he was asking these questions, they said, "Well, when is this going to come out?" And he said, "Well, when the book comes out, maybe next year." And they said, "OK, next year. So we'll talk."

So I think that, frankly, for me, was the interesting point. How do people who are committed to serving a president actually speak to a reporter about such an explosive issue? But of course, Michael Wolff pointed out that even people like Rex Tillerson, the secretary of state, is quoted as having called him a moron. So it's very -- it's a very touchy issue that's resonating around the world, as well.

CUOMO: So Moron doesn't mean that he has an incapacity issue.


CUOMO: But the point stands, and if they keep pushing him saying that it's not true, if he does have tapes, this story could have a very different chapter.

Christiane Amanpour, thanks for you.

AMANPOUR: Thank you.

CUOMO: All right. To our international viewers, for watching, thank you. CNN "NEWS ROOM" is next for you. For our U.S. our viewers, NEW DAY continues. There's a lot of news. Let's get after it.


DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: What's going to happen when we're not going to have DACA?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If the Democrats want to shut down the government because they can't get amnesty, then they're going to have to defend those actions to the American people.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I), VERMONT: Republican leaders want to shut down the government, and that's bad.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: In anticipation of an interview request, the president's lawyers are discussing how to define the parameters.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Anything they do would be an attempt to get control over the situation.

KEN STARR, FORMER INDEPENDENT COUNSEL: He needs to look the president in the eye and ask the appropriate questions.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Negotiators from North and South Korea are face- to-face for the first time in more than two years.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This would lessen the concerns about the security of the Olympics.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a step in the right direction. It's by no means solving the problem.


ANNOUNCER: This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.

CUOMO: Good morning. Welcome to your NEW DAY.

In just hours, President Trump is going to meet with a group of Republican and Democratic lawmakers to discuss the fate of DREAMers, hundreds of thousands of young, undocumented immigrants who came to the U.S. as minors. But some involved in negotiations say right now, it is a mess. Why? Because the president is insisting on his wall, and it could lead to a shutdown.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: And at the same time, lawyers for President Trump are anticipating a request from Special Counsel Robert Mueller to interview the president. CNN has learned that Mr. Trump's legal team is discussing ways to limit the scope of that questioning.

We have it all covered for you. So let's begin with CNN's Joe Johns. He is live at the White House with our top story.

Joe, I see that you did bring your fog machine to work today as a metaphor for the murky conditions down there.

JOE JOHNS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right. Yes, we wanted it to be more mysterious for you. The hidden White House, if you will.

Look, what's going on here, no matter how you cut it, it couldn't be more dramatic. Members of Congress from both sides of the capital, both parties coming here to sit down with the president to try to get a deal on immigration with the fate of hundreds of thousands of young people who were brought here to the United States through no fault of their own in the balance and a potential government shutdown looming.


DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We want the wall. The wall's going to happen or we're not going to have DACA.

JOHNS (voice-over): President Trump insisting that funding for a border wall will be part of any deal to protect the so-called DREAMers, a demand that threatens to upend negotiations over the must- pass spending bill.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO (D), TEXAS: We can't support a wall. We're not going to support a wall across America.

JOHNS: One source directly involved in talks tells CNN the negotiations are a mess, with Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn accusing Democrats of holding the budget deal hostage.

And Democrats arguing that the long and broad immigration policy wish list, released by the White House last week, has made chances for a deal harder.

Republican Senator Jeff Flake telling CNN he's prepared to tell the president at today's meeting that the DREAMers deal needs to be narrowly focused in order to reach an agreement.

REP. ADAM KINZINGER (R), ILLINOIS: I think this is really going to be the inflection point where we -- we get some things done or we don't.

JOHNS: Negotiations are under way on Capitol Hill as President Trump's lawyers gear up for a possible request from Special Counsel Robert Mueller to speak directly with the president as part of the Russia investigation. Sources tell CNN the subject has been broached in a previous meeting but has not been officially discussed.

SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D), CONNECTICUT: My view is it will probably happen sometime this year.

JOHNS: The president's legal team has been preparing for this possibility for months, weighing how to define the parameters of a potential interview in a way that would limit the president's exposure. Mr. Trump is eager for the investigation to come to an end, and a source tells CNN that the expectation is that Mueller would not wrap up the probe without speaking to the president.

[07:05:10] KEN STARR, FORMER INDEPENDENT COUNSEL: He needs to -- in order to round out, complete his investigation to come to a decision, he needs to look the president in the eye and ask the appropriate questions.

JOHNS: The Russia probe looming large over this White House as the administration struggles to shake questions about the president's mental fitness.

JOY BEHAR, CO-HOST, ABC'S "THE VIEW": So, do you think he's, like, really smart and a stable genius?

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: I think this. If he doesn't call himself a genius, nobody else will.

In my view, he is my president, and he's doing a really good job on multiple fronts.

JOHNS: The president's allies continuing to call Michael Wolff, the author of the tell-all book "Fire and Fury," a liar.

DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: Do you think that it's OK to question the fitness of a sitting president of the United States?

MICHAEL WOLFF, AUTHOR, "FIRE AND FURY": I think -- I think it would be irresponsible not to. Of course. You cannot listen to this man talk without -- without at least contemplating the possibility that something is grievously amiss.


JOHNS: This morning in the midst of those latest questions about the president's fitness to serve, we have gotten word that the president's physical examination scheduled for later this week will not include a psychiatric examination. We do expect to see the president after his meeting with members of Congress when he is expected to sign an executive order aimed at helping veterans.

Chris and Alisyn, back to you.

CUOMO: All right, Joe, appreciate it. You can slink back into the fog.

Let's bring in CNN political analyst David Gregory and senior Washington correspondent for, Anna Palmer.

So David Gregory, the wall. For all of these competing plans, bipartisan proposals that are going on, at the end of the day is the proposition, if you want something to be done for the DREAMers under DACA, or these El Salvadorans and others, under TPS, if you want anything, you give me that wall. Is it as plain as that for the president of the United States?

DAVID GREGORY, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, we'll find out just what that bottom line is. That's certainly where he is right now. And he has revived this. He has thrown this into these ongoing negotiations as a bottom-line demand. Maybe there's a way to define what extra security at the border looks like that is short of a wall.

What we know are a couple of things. The president wants an accommodation on DACA, on the DREAMers, as children of undocumented immigrants, just as Democrats do. And we also know that Democrats don't want to build a wall, and neither side would want to shut down the government, though we'll hear a lot of posturing about that.

And there's no doubt that Republicans are in a more vulnerable position right now. But you've got to give the president his due. He has negotiated with Democrats on Capitol Hill over the budget pretty deftly so far. They have avoided getting to the brink, and we have to watch and see what moves are made in today's meeting and the days and weeks to come.

CAMEROTA: Anna, let's talk about today's meeting. It's happening in a couple of hours. And here are the people who have been invited. And it's a huge laundry list of them. There are 12 Republican lawmakers, eight Democrats. Is there anything that comes out of this meeting today?

I wouldn't expect a lot of substantive material where you're going to see we have a big deal that's going to happen. This is how it's going to be cut. I think this is much more of a pomp and circumstance, kind of a showy thing to do. You know--

CAMEROTA: Showy thing meaning, "Look at how bipartisan we are, even if we never come up with anything"? What's the point of having a showy meeting?

ANNA PALMER, SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT, POLITICO.COM: I do think one of the things we different about this time around is you've seen both Democrats and Republicans be pretty positive about where they're going. They're trying to find a pathway forward. We're ten days out from a shutdown. So this is an important step in very Washington speak, in a Washington kind of manner for it to happen.

But certainly a deal is going to be cut between the big four, you know, leaders of Congress with the White House. They've been negotiating behind the scene as a lot. I will say, these people seem a little bit more pessimistic last night on the House floor that they're going to be able to find a deal in the next ten days.

CAMEROTA: Why? What's the sticking point? Why are they more pessimistic today?

PALMER: I think, you know, this is where the rubber meets the road. They're going to have to find a deal. They have spending caps. They have to kind of be able to corral the right and the Republican base who don't want to, you know, spend a lot of money, and they're going to have a big problem there.

The Democrats that are pushing very hard on DACA, they don't want to do any kind of a deal without that. So you have these two entrenched sides. You know, who's going to budge on this? It's very unclear right now.

CUOMO: But also, you have this big "X" factor. I mean, the line between, to Alisyn's point, whether this meeting is comity -- C-O-M-I- T-Y -- or comedy, you know, being a joke, or farce, is going to be on this singular proposal. A change, to Anna's point, is the president is putting his foot down about this wall, David. That is why he wants these people there today. He wants to make the sale. He wants to look at those Republicans and remind them, "The people you voted for me and whom you fear want this wall."

[07:10:14] I mean, isn't it as simple as that? GREGORY: Right. And there will be a counter saying that, well, not

everybody does want that wall. And now you're going to draw us into a debate about whether the wall is actually a good thing. And there's lots of evidence to say that it's not. That it doesn't actually help you solve the problem of immigration.

CUOMO: Does he care about that?

GREGORY: I don't think.

CUOMO: He promised it. He knew when he promised it that it wasn't cost-effective to physical borders that make it almost impossible to do. You have all types of different coverings and extensions of security already. They put money into it. Democrats have offered money for those barriers, as well, in the past. This is about owning his political promise more than anything else, it seems.

GREGORY: Yes. No question. Let's not forget the most important thing, was that America was not supposed to pay for it.

CUOMO: Right.

GREGORY: That the president through his powers of persuasion was going to get Mexico to actually fund this wall. And what -- what's happened with that? It's gone nowhere.

So I do think he's injected this in a way that is absolutely not helpful. And if you go back and you say, look, bottom-line promise was we were going to scrap Obamacare and get tax reform through. He's gotten the second one. He's dismantled a key element of Obamacare. So yes, I think in an election year, this president wants to say to Republicans, "Don't cross me." This is a major promise. And your voters are going to come out if they think we've delivered on -- on key promises.

PALMER: And I would also say this is really a clear sign of him throwing red meat to the base right now. This is what Republicans are going to need for 2018. They are so fearful that they're going to lose both their majority in the house and potentially in the Senate.

CAMEROTA: All of this. Sorry, David. We have to move on to Mueller. Because we have to talk about this. All of this is set against Robert Mueller's investigation. Of course, no surprise that at some point Bob Mueller would interview President Trump, of course.

But it does sound like their negotiations are already under way. And there's a lot to negotiate in terms of the scope, where it will happen, and is it under oath. What are people on the Hill saying about this?

PALMER: This is the next step. Everybody expected this to happen. I think that what you have is a lot of Republicans who are fearful in the Capitol of letting Trump be unleashed in this kind of an interview. He has a very hard time when there's contentious -- people are questioning his integrity, his family's integrity. That he could kind of go off the reservation there. And so I think Republicans are hoping that they can limit the scope of

this however they can. But certainly, Democrats are -- you know, this is going to be -- they're going to want this to play out in the midterm election. Look, you have a president who is saying all this crazy stuff and, look, he's also still under investigation.

GREGORY: Right. That cuts the other way, too, though. I think Democrats are at risk of overreaching on all of this, and that could hurt them in the way that Democrats got hurt -- pardon me, the Republicans got hurt overreaching against Bill Clinton.

But this is going to be a Is he going to be fielding questions that are beyond the scope of what we heard about thus far? Could it be into financial negotiations or financial life of the president and his dealings in Russia? This is an area that they've got to be very worried about.

CUOMO: And it's also -- look, it's an area where the unknown looms very large. And so much of the reporting and the discussions go on and somewhat ignore the fact that Mueller -- that's been a tight ship. We don't know what they have. But it's so relevant to this -- this concept. Because the lawyers for the president are there to protect he president.

They don't work for the government. They're working for him personally. Right. And they don't believe that this is a foregone conclusion that he needs to talk to Mueller. I'm not a target of the investigation. If I'm not part of your investigation, I'm the chief executive. I want to come in and talk to you. So I'm sure there was a lot of discussion with them about why this was necessary.

CAMEROTA: Can they just say no? Can they just shut it down?

CUOMO: Yes. Yes, if you want. You know, you've got legal and you've got practical. Legally, could they say no? Yes, unless subpoenaed. Right? And then it's under penalty. That's what that word means.

But practically, do you really want to say that to the big dog, you know, when he holds the reins of the investigation? So then it becomes, "Well, how am I speaking to you? About what?"

And it brings us to the point that Ken Starr made. We brought Ken Starr on, because if anybody knows what it's like to be accused of overreaching in a special investigation, it's Ken Starr, right? He started with a land deal. He wound up with Monica Lewinsky in a blue dress. So he says, "Yes, you must have Mueller sit with the president and look him in the eye."

Listen to this.


CUOMO: Senator Blumenthal this morning said, "I think Mueller is going to have a face-to-face with the president of the United States." Possible, probable, what do you think? STARR: Probable. He needs to, to round out, complete his

investigation, to come to a decision. He needs to look the president in the eye and ask the appropriate questions.


CUOMO: So, David Gregory, what are the stakes?

[07:15:05] GREGORY: Well, the obvious danger is that the president doesn't perform well, that he fields questions and says things that aren't true, that can be proven to be untrue, that are inconsistent, and that it goes into the realm of the unknown. That they're, you know -- that's why they're trying to limit what the scope of the discussion is.

The upside for the president is that he feels confident that he can put a lot of this to rest, either because he didn't know certain things that were going on, but what he knows about was entirely proper.

And I would venture to say that he has some desire to do that, to look Mueller in the eye and tell him, you know, what's what and try to put some of this to rest. But it's obviously a risky proposition to sit down with him, despite whatever, you know, parameters they put on this.

CAMEROTA: David Gregory, Anna Palmer, thank you both very much for being here. We do want to get to some breaking news.

Breaking news right now just in to our newsroom. North and South Korea announcing moments ago that they have agreed to hold military talks after meeting for the first time face-to-face in two years.

Our Will Ripley is on the ground there. He joins us live near the DMZ with all the breaking details. What have you learned, Will?

WILL RIPLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It's really been a remarkable day here on the Korean Peninsula, Alisyn. Because when previous talks like this have taken place, it's taken weeks to hammer out the kind of agreements that they agreed to today. As you mentioned, upcoming military talks on easing tensions.

North Korea has agreed to send a high-level delegation to the Olympics, including athletes, a press corps, a Tae Kwon Do, a performing arts group, cheering section, and they also reactivated a long dormant military hotline. They announced that today, even though it happened almost a week ago, and they said that they're considering the possibility of reunions of divided families on the Korean Peninsula.

So in the short term it's a win for both sides. South Korea hopefully gets the peaceful Olympics they've been hoping for, uninterrupted by a North Korean missile launch, a nuclear test that could scare away spectators and disrupt the event.

North Korea gets an all-expense-paid trip to the Olympics. They got the U.S. and South Korea to postpone joint military drills, but this is key. North Korea's chief negotiator also expressed very strong discontent just minutes ago with even the mention of denuclearization. Because South Korea had indicated that they hoped that talks would involve North Korea potentially giving up their nuclear weapons. North Korea has said repeatedly that is not going to happen, and they said that yet again at the meetings, which are happening just a few minutes from where I'm standing right now.

The bridge behind me actually leads over to North Korea. We're just right along the Demilitarized Zone. So the key here, if the Olympics go peacefully and there are further discussions, what will happen next?

Obviously, the U.S. and their allies are hoping that North Korea would be able to denuclearize in exchange for the lifting of sanctions, but again, North Korea's chief negotiator saying denuclearization not on the table -- Chris.

CUOMO: Will, an important update. Thank you so much my friend.

There are two major questions on Capitol Hill today. Can a deal to protect DREAMers from deportation get done? And, will it mean the president gets money for his border wall? Those now have been joined into one proposition. Wall or no DREAMers. Who gets affected? What are the stakes? It's important you know. We have the facts next.


[07:22:16] CUOMO: All right. A big, big proposition on the table. Can President Trump strike a deal today with a bipartisan group of lawmakers on protecting DREAMers and funding his border wall? Those two thoughts are more linked than ever before.

Let's discuss, with CNN political commentator Ana Navarro and Matt Schlapp, former George W. Bush political director and chairman of the American Conservative Union. Good to see you both.

Brother Schlapp, I begin with you. Make the case, why it is good that the wall be the line in the sand -- sorry to mix metaphors -- but in terms of getting done anything for the DREAMers?

MATT SCHLAPP, CHAIRMAN, AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION: Well, I'd like to correct that a little bit. I don't actually think it's the wall that is the -- to use your tortured metaphor, the line in the sand. I think the president wants to see funding for the wall and for border security on the southern border generally but also, he wants to end family chain migration, this diversity lottery.

CUOMO: So you don't think the wall is a red line? That if you don't give me the wall, I'm not doing any deal? Because that's what's coming out of the White House. You're saying, what, that's puffery?

SCHLAPP: No, I'm just saying it's more than the wall. I think they're asking more than that. And I think the wall is such a symbol to people that it's easy for them to sort of jump to the wall. But what the president is really looking for is, you know, a more comprehensive view at what we need to do to change our immigration system.

CUOMO: So, here's the catch on this. The wall was a big promise during the campaign. Everybody gets it. Now, he said Mexico was going to pay for it so that this conversation should have never been necessary. But, whatever. People seem to have forgotten that or it's no longer important.

There are so many lives on the line here. How do you see the politics of this, Ana, in terms of what they're holding out for, these changes to the immigration system, versus what is at risk?

ANA NAVARRO, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: What's at risk are human lives. What's at risk is the future of 800,000, a million, 3 million young people who know this country as their own, who are American in every way but one, who play with your children, who go to school with your children, who are in universities. Who really -- you know, they're some of the best and brightest that this country has. Some of them are serving in the military. They are what makes America great already.

And I would say that this is a chance for Donald Trump to show that he is the man, the art of the deal. He -- you know, I think he's got to be very crafty in the negotiation. To me, this wall thing is more symbolic than it is literal. Well, I don't think, you know, you have to get hung up on the idea of 2,000 miles of 50-foot wall.

This is not the wall of the kingdom of the north. It could be drones in some places. It could be enhanced border security in others. It could be, you know, more agents at the border. It's about border security. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans nor the White House should get hung up on the semantics and on what it means.

[07:25:12] I think they're going to reach a deal. And let's remember, there is a deadline. And not only is there a deadline. Every day that goes by over 1,000 of these young people are losing their status and their ability to go to school, their ability to work.

So, you know, this is -- this is not theoretical. This is affecting real lives. So they've got to stop playing games. They've got to stop the posturing, and they've got to get to a deal.

CUOMO: Well, part of the shame here, Matt, is that everybody says they care about the people. We're not even talking about the El Salvadorans. You know, that was canceled by the White House, as well, kicked to Congress as if it was some kind of, you know, Democrat albatross. As you, as everybody knows, it was started by President Bush. It was done by John Ashcroft because of the earthquake, and both sides--

SCHLAPP: But the president--

CUOMO: Both sides extended it, because they saw the exigency involved, the cost to humanity.

SCHLAPP: No, look, I think that's right, that there's been previous presidents that have given them temporary protective service-- CUOMO: Right.

SCHLAPP: .. because that is what the president's authority -- it becomes a mockery of the law if temporary just becomes constantly renewed and really becomes permanent. What you do with that, you have a separation of powers argument at that point.

The Congress needs to legislate. What we forgot under eight years of Obama, with him being overturned, by the way, by the federal courts more than any other modern president, because he overstepped the boundaries of what the Constitution says are presidential powers.

And it would be good for this country, Chris -- and I think Ana would agree with me -- it would be good for this country if Congress would do its job and legislate on these areas. If they kick the can over to the president to handle all these thorny issues, we don't get long- term resolution, which is no good for these people, either, who have to live in this constant state of this temporary status.

And on the El Salvadorans, I think it's actually the right thing to do to follow the law, and to turn it over to Congress. And these folks have 18 months to file for legal status. It's going to be done in a humanitarian way. But after people come from a--

CUOMO: How do you know?

SCHLAPP: Well, because--

CUOMO: How do you know? Imagine if it was your family.

SCHLAPP: I'll tell you how I know.

CUOMO: You've got plenty of ethnicity in your family.

SCHLAPP: I'll tell you how I know.

CUOMO: Imagine if it was like, "Oh, you've got 18 months. Don't worry about it, Matt."

SCHLAPP: I'll tell you how I know.

CUOMO: Don't worry about everything coming out of the White House saying--

SCHLAPP: Let me answer--

CUOMO: -- that "we don't want people coming into the country anymore."

SCHLAPP: Chris, let me answer that in two ways. We've already sent over 39,000 of these El Salvadorans. back under President Trump and president Obama and you can't give me one example of how it wasn't done in a humanitarian way. No. 2--

CUOMO: How do I know that any of it was humanitarian? How do I know any of it was humanitarian? SCHLAPP: Because you're a good journalist, and you would know the story.

CUOMO: How do you know? Matt, what do you know about those 39,000? How many of you know wanted to go back or shouldn't have been here? Do you know?

SCHLAPP: They don't want to go -- they don't want to go back. The point is, is they're not here under permanent status. And because of that, if it's temporary, Chris, we both know what the word means. If it's temporary, it has to come to an end.

CUOMO: I get what the law is but we also know the law--

SCHLAPP: And second of all, all of my people--

CUOMO: Bo ahead. Finish your point, because you're not going to let me say anything. Go ahead.

SCHLAPP: No, no, but on the point of my family, we did come here legally. I agree. I'm a pro-immigration Republican. I have no problem with legal immigration. I'd like to see it be big and vigorous and have a positive impact on our society and the economy, but it has done done through legal means.

CUOMO: Look, but here's the -- here's the catch. Ana, you speak to this. Law enforcement is subjective. Clinging to the idea of, well, if we don't enforce the law specifically and strictly, then we disrespect the law, that is B.S. We do it all the time. There's a subjectivity to it.

The reason that Bush and then Obama went and said TPS needs to be extended was because of the humanity. They knew what they were doing.

And of course, Congress should find out a permanent solution. But it's about how you incentivize it. By saying, "I'm canceling it, I'm putting it on you," now all those families are in the lurch. That's not the humane way to do this. It's "Find a solution or I will cancel this." You know, that's the way you would have done it, if you cared about the people.

NAVARRO: Look, I think -- I think both things can be true. But let's remember that temporary protective status is a status that is given in, you know, extraordinary moments; and it's really an act of compassion by this country.

CUOMO: Right. Mostly El Salvadorans because of the earthquake. But you have Haitians and different African countries.

NAVARRO: Salvadorans, the earthquake. Haitians because of the earthquake.

CUOMO: Haitians, Nicaraguans, right. But the majority El Salvadoran.

NAVARRO: Nicaraguans because of Mitch, Hurricane Mitch. Now, the problem is these acts happened two decades ago. And so for

two decades now, these people have become part of our society. They work. They have jobs. They own homes. They've married, you know, people here.

CUOMO: They have kids.

NAVARRO: They've had children, children who are in schools. So we have got to think large picture. What are the problems that are the consequences of now telling these people "You've got to get out"?

CUOMO: Right.

NAVARRO: Are there going to be homes in foreclosure?

CUOMO: Right.

NAVARRO: Are those going to be businesses closed? Are there going to be--

CUOMO: Separation of families.

NAVARRO: -- children left here under, you know, look--

CUOMO: Ana is making all these points. You've heard them before, Matt. And only reason I jumped on you before is because the casualness. You know, you're married to a Cuban woman, Mercedes.


CUOMO: We all know her and love her. You know what this is like for families like that.


CUOMO: Obviously, Ana has lived it. I'm only second generation in this.

The idea of casually saying, "Well, you've got 18 months, brother. You'll be good." Come on. SCHLAPP: Let me try -- let me try to explain. Look, my heart breaks for people. I think a lot of people around the globe want to be in America, and many of them want to be Americans. And I think it's because we have a great country.