Return to Transcripts main page


House Votes on Short Term Government Funding Bill; Chief of Staff John Kelly Makes Controversial Comment on Immigrants; Interview with Congressman Steny Hoyer; President Trump Calls for Military Parade in Washington D.C.; Interview with Republican Congressman Jim Jordan of Ohio. Aired 8-8:30a ET

Aired February 7, 2018 - 8:00   ET


CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: The tone is bad, the timing worse. Why? Well, right now you have bipartisan negotiations going on on Capitol Hill. The deadline is tomorrow, and both sides say they are making headway.

In the House, a short-term spending bill passed last night. Senate leaders seem less enthusiastic about that. They want to see if they can get a two-year budget deal done that would have a big boost to military spending.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: So as Congress wrestles with funding the government, the president wants the Pentagon to stage a grand military parade in Washington with soldiers marching and tanks rolling. The show of military might could of course cost millions of dollars to pull off. Also we have more of Chris' exclusive interview with former vice president Joe Biden. He opens up about his late son Beau, and gives his thoughts on what 2020 could hold.

So we have it all covered for you. Let's begin with CNN's Abby Phillip. She's live at the White House. What's the latest there, Abby?

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Alisyn. It appears the deal is near over in the Senate on a two-year budget agreement and also perhaps on immigration, but it's the White House that's causing some troubles for negotiators. President Trump and chief of staff John Kelly making some controversial comments yesterday that have put a wrench in negotiations.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: If we don't change it, let's have a shutdown. We'll do a shutdown. And it's worth it for our country. I'd love to see a shutdown if we don't get this stuff taken care of.

PHILLIP: President Trump calling for another shutdown if Democrats don't agree to his immigration demands despite the fact that at the same time Senate negotiators were touting bipartisan progress on a budget deal.

MITCH MCCONNELL, (R) SENATE MAJORITY LEADER: I'm optimistic that very soon we'll be able to reach an agreement.

CHUCK SCHUMER, (D) SENATE MINORITY LEADER: We are closer to an agreement than we have ever been.

PHILLIP: Senate negotiators have separated the budget from immigration entirely, a long-time Republican goal. And the current deal includes an increase in defense spending alongside additional domestic spending the Democrats have been calling for. Press secretary Sarah Sanders left to clean up the president's remarks.

SARAH SANDERS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I don't think that we expect the budget deal to include specifics on the immigration reform, but we want to get a deal on that. As we've said, we don't want to hold the government hostage over these items.

PHILLIP: Late Tuesday, Senator Lindsey Graham also indicating the Senate may be making progress on immigration.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, (R) SOUTH CAROLINA: I felt bad yesterday. I feel better today. I think we've got a way forward that seems to be fair to everybody. We're back in the ballgame now.

PHILLIP: This effort coming amid backlash over these remarks from the president's chief of staff about undocumented immigrants who did not sign up for President Obama's Dreamer program but would be given a potential path to citizen ship over the administration's proposal.

JOHN KELLY, WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: The difference between 690 and 1.8 million were the people that, some would say were too afraid to sign up, others that were too lazy to get off their asses but they didn't sign up.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It is just an offensive comment isn't it, just on its surface?

SANDERS: I think that's something you would have to decide that yourself.

PHILLIP: Kelly later doubling down after Democrat Steny Hoyer reportedly pushed back against his remarks in a closed-door meeting. Kelly also telling reporters that the president is not leaning one way or another about releasing the Democratic rebuttal to the GOP memo alleging FBI surveillance abuses.

KELLY: This is a different memo than the first one. It's lengthier. It's different. It will be done in a responsible way. But again, where the first one was very clean relative to sources and methods, my initial cut is this one is a lot less clean.

PHILLIP: Kelly adding that ultimately the president is waiting for a recommendation from the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI head Christopher Wray even though he ignored their concerns about the Republican memo last week. The back and forth coming as CNN learns that President Trump remains eager to speak with Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team despite concerns from his lawyers. The president is also eager to hold a grand military parade in Washington after praising France's Bastille Day celebration last year.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It was one of the greatest parades I've ever seen.

PHILLIP: The Pentagon confirms the president's request but stresses that the planning process is in its infancy.


PHILLIP: Alisyn, about that parade, it wouldn't exactly be the first time something like that has happened in Washington. The last time was in 1991 after the Gulf War. But it's worth noting that these parades are not cheap. They cost about $8 million, and that's something that comes at an awkward time for President Trump. They're in the middle of these budget negotiations. And this poses a new political and perhaps economic challenge for his plans to get his wish for a military parade down Pennsylvania Avenue.

CAMEROTA: For sure, Abby. The last one cost $8 million and that was I think 1991. So who knows what the budget would be. But thank you very much for all that reporting.

So joining us now is House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer. Good morning, congressman.

REP. STENY HOYER, (D) HOUSE MINORITY WHIP: Good morning, Alisyn. How are you?

CAMEROTA: I'm doing well. Let's talk about how you are and what's happening there on Capitol Hill. Obviously the House passed a short- term budget deal to keep the government running past tomorrow at midnight. But the Senate seems to have other ideas. They don't want to just fund the government through March. They have a two-year plan. Let me put it up for people on the screen. Here's what they're focused on, $80 billion of military spending they're looking for, $63 billion of non-defense spending. Can you get on board with the Senate plan?

HOYER: I think that the Senate plan certainly is better than the House plan which was a partisan defense only and left all the domestic agencies without any opportunity to plan for the long term. So I think the Senate effort is better. We'll have to see what the Senate ultimately adopts to see whether I can be on board. But I certainly think it's a worthwhile effort and hopefully they come to an agreement.

CAMEROTA: Do you fear that the government is going to shut down at midnight tomorrow?

HOYER: I don't think the government will shut down. I think nobody wants the government to shut down. We don't want to shut down the government. But there are a lot of things that have not been done. One of the things, of course, that needs to be done is what you just referred to. We need to agree on funding levels for agencies. The Republicans who control all the organs of government have not sent a single appropriation bill to the president for signature. Therefore no agency knows how much money they're going to have to spend and how they can plan and how they can make contracts, hire people, achieve objectives. So in addition to that, we have not dealt with DACA which the president said Congress ought to do and ought to do by March 5th. We haven't done that.

CAMEROTA: Right, so what about that? Sorry to interrupt you. What about DACA since people are so focused on that? How is that going to get done?

HOYER: I have been working very hard, as a lot of people have been working very, very hard to get a deal on the Dreamers. We think it's a simple thing to do. You may have seen the meeting with the president of the United States, with Dick Durbin and I and 23 other members of the Congress sat around the cabinet table and the president said we need to solve DACA now. We need to do that as the first phase of more immigration reform. We agree with that. So we're trying to work towards that end. I had a meeting yesterday, as you probably know, with the majority leader, Mr. McCarthy and John Cornyn and Dick Durbin.

CAMEROTA: I do want to ask you about that because I think that this plays into what the chief of staff, John Kelly, said about DACA recipients. It was quite eyebrow raising. So listen to this moment.


JOHN KELLY, WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF: The difference between 690 and 1.8 million were the people that, some would say were too afraid to sign up, others would say they were too lazy to get off their asses, but they didn't sign up.


CAMEROTA: What did you think of those comments?

HOYER: Well, I was not happy with that, but he said people would say. He didn't say he said it.

CAMEROTA: But what's the difference, really, congressman? To insert that into the conversation that some of the recipients would be too lazy to get off their asses, what's the point of putting that in?

HOYER: You'd have to ask General Kelly. But what I want to focus on is the effort to come to an agreement on this asap because I think we have a lot of young people who are extraordinary young people, not lazy at all, very motivated, college students, high school students, people who are working, people who have served in the military, people who are making a difference in our communities. We want to make sure that they have the certainty that they're going to be able to be here in the country that they grew up in, that they pledge allegiance to, and that they love. So I want to focus on that. General Kelly I think has made some positive efforts towards trying to reach agreement, and I think that's good. And we'll continue to work.

CAMEROTA: Did you share your thoughts with general Kelly?

HOYER: I did.

CAMEROTA: And can you tell us what's you said to him?

HOYER: No, I'm not going to go beyond that. Again, what I want to do is reach an agreement. General Kelly is an important part of our discussions along with the four of us who are called, I guess, the number two leaders in each party in the House and the Senate. And we're really working towards trying to get to an agreement. It's tough. We haven't made much progress, but I think we can.

CAMEROTA: Would you like to see a military parade down the streets of the capital?

HOYER: I have great respect for the military. We ought to honor our military, men and women who we send in to harm's way and who are willing to serve and defend and protect America and our people. They deserve great respect.

But I don't think a show of military might -- it reminds you of what the Soviets do and what the Chinese do. We are the strongest country in the world. We have the greatest military in the world. The world knows that, and we need to honor our men and women in uniform. But I think we ought to do so in a way that does not necessarily appear bellicose or threatening to the rest of the world. We want to be peacemakers, not war makers.

CAMEROTA: Look, we did the military parade after the first Gulf War with President George H. W. Bush.

HOYER: I think that's a little different. We celebrated that victory. We celebrated the efforts of our men and women in uniform to have an extraordinary -- the first Gulf War was extraordinary in terms of how swift it was, how well it was executed, and how little loss of life we had.

Again, a military parade is fine. I don't think anybody has to be against a military parade. But again, I think what we ought to focus on is our military and its strength, its training, its readiness, and its patriotism. Parade is one way of doing that. I don't think we ought to get deeply involved in that. But it also can be perceived as jingoist in some respects, sabre rattling in some respects. So I think we ought to measure that and compare that to what we want to project to the world.

CAMEROTA: Congressman Steny Hoyer, thanks so much, great to talk to you.

HOYER: Thank you.


CUOMO: Jingoism, you don't hear that too often, especially in the morning.

So Joe Biden, we talked to him exclusively. He didn't run in 2016 of course, but what does Biden think about a run for the White House in 2020?


CUOMO: How do you not run for president? How do you not when it's in your heart, it's in your head, you don't think anybody out there is better than you, and you've never had a moment in history that calls for leadership more? How do you not run?


CUOMO: Sometimes when you ask politicians if they're going to do something, you know which way it goes, noncommittal answers. So what happens when you flip it? You'll hear the response ahead.

CAMEROTA: Looking forward to that. Also President Trump considering whether to release the Democratic rebuttal of that GOP memo that alleges FBI surveillance abuses, so we'll speak to a Republican congressman who has been very critical of FBI investigators. What are his thoughts, next.


[08:16:09] CUOMO: Do you think this is an odd twist? President Trump is saying he wants to rely on the advice of the FBI and intelligence community on whether or not to declassify the Democrat rebuttal to the Nunes memo. So, he wants to rely on the same law enforcement leaders that he dismissed only a week ago when they strongly expressed grave concerns over the accuracy and content of that memo. Odd.

Let's discuss this and a lot more with Republican Congressman Jim Jordan of Ohio.

Good to see you, sir.

REP. JIM JORDAN (R), OHIO: You, too, Chris. Good to be with you.

CUOMO: Let's go easiest to hardest this morning. Let's get some momentum going.

The parade, they're expensive. But that's not about money. It's about what image America wants to project. Do you want to see the military parade?

JORDAN: That's the president's call. What I know about this president, I've had an opportunity to be around him. I wish every American could spend sometime with him.

And you would see how much he loves our men and women in uniform, how much he loves this great country, how much he loves our military. So, I think that's what he's pointing to. How that's expressed, how that's shown, I'll leave that up to the commander-in-chief.

But if it's a parade, it's a parade.

CUOMO: So, you would authorize the money for it? JORDAN: Well, I mean, we'll have that debate. Our focus is making

sure our military gets what it needs to defend this great country. Whether we need a parade or not, I'll leave up to the commander-in- chief.

CUOMO: So the money for the military, next step.


CUOMO: The Senate says it's good you passed the short-term resolution, but we want to focus long-term. We have a two-year deal we're working on, bipartisan, $80 billion for the military. Democrats said they want a dollar-to-dollar match. They're not getting it now. It's $63 billion, but that's not chump change.

How do you feel about that deal?

JORDAN: I'm against the $63 billion. We had an election. The American people elected Republicans to control the House, the Senate and White House. We campaigned on doing what our military needs to secure the nation. We didn't campaign on growing government.

So, this is not consistent with what we told the voters and I would argue, not even close to being consistent with what they said in the 2016 election. So, I'm opposed to growing government, just growing all these social programs and everything else in government. I am for doing what the Constitution tells us what you're supposed to spend your tax dollars on which is the United States military.

CUOMO: Right. But you're growing the government either way. I mean, it's not like a real guns and butter argument anymore. You're putting $80 billion into the military, the government grows.

JORDAN: Yes, and the Constitution is pretty clear. National defense is the number one priority of the federal government. So, we're supposed to spend your tax -- and now, we should do it in the efficient and best way we can. That's why I'm for auditing the Pentagon and make sure if there's waste and inefficiencies there we find those and deal with those.

But let's do what needs to be done for our men and women in uniform and let's stop growing the rest of government. I think that's consistent with what we told the voters we were going to do and what they elected us to do.

CUOMO: I thought you were going to be deficit hawks. I mean, you seem to be wanting to spend a lot of money, seeing how you just cut the amount of money coming in with that legendary tax cut. What happened to fiscal austerity?

JORDAN: I'm in the Freedom Caucus. We are deficit hawks. We're for cutting spending. We're for offsetting increases in spending. We've been for all that.

But what I'm telling you is the situation in front of us right now is you've got many members, both Republicans and Democrats, who are saying we're going to grow government at $140 billion in discretionary spending. We're opposed to that in the Freedom Caucus.

We understand we need to do the right thing for our military, but we're for cutting spending in other places. Again, we think that's what the election was about.

CUOMO: The criticism would be you like to spend what you like to spend on. Not that you want to cut money overall. That's why you let the tax bill go through when it's going to crush the deficit.

JORDAN: No, the fact is, there was an election, Chris. They elected Republicans. Not me speaking, that's the American people.

CUOMO: Right.

JORDAN: And we campaign on doing what we need to do for national defense --

CUOMO: Fiscal austerity.

JORDAN: Cutting spending elsewhere which I'm for and for cutting taxes and letting families keep more of their hard-earned money. That's what we campaigned on. Lots of others as well.

[08:20:00] But those were certainly central issues in the campaign. Why shouldn't we, now that we're in office, actually make those things happen in public policy? After all, I think that's what you're supposed to do, keep your word with the voters who elected you.

CUOMO: Keep your word but you want to do things the right way, right? I mean, if you want to cut the deficit, how are you going to do that with the tax cut?

JORDAN: We're going to cut spending. I'm for cutting spending. But I'm not for cutting our military. I'm cutting spending elsewhere in the budget and frankly, I'm for doing things in the entitlement area as well. I'm all for welfare reform. I'm all for welfare reform --

CUOMO: Now, President Trump said he wouldn't touch entitlements.

JORDAN: Well, we've talked to the president actually about welfare reform, and he supports the idea of reforming our food stamp program, reforming some of our welfare programs.

CUOMO: What does that mean reforming? How is reform different than cut?

JORDAN: Reform is this, incentivize work. If you're an able-bodied adult, you should have to do something to get taxpayer money. That is 80 -- that's an issue that Democrats support, Republicans support, independents support.

Let's get that done. That will save money in the long run. More importantly, it will help people trapped in the welfare system get to a better position in life, which is what we all should be for. I think we're all for that. That's why it's an 80 percent issue across the country. CUOMO: Are you extending the Kelly understanding of humanity a little

bit in this country? Do you believe people who are on welfare are lazy?

JORDAN: No. I believe we should incentivize work. I believe people make choices. When it pays more to not go to work --

CUOMO: You think people would rather be on welfare than work? You know this situation --

JORDAN: I think sometimes we incentivize --


CUOMO: You know it's been inaccurate in the past. Do you believe most people on welfare would rather be there than work?

JORDAN: No. I think most people would rather be working. But when the incentives are wrong, when you fall off the cliff, when you go get a job -- we need to incentivize people so they want to get out of welfare, off this dependency cycle, out of this dependency cycle and to a better position in life.

I think that is good for taxpayers. I think it's good for our budget. Most importantly, I think it's good for human beings stuck in the system. That's what I'm for.

CUOMO: Now, fair criticism. One of the reasons they are stuck, to use your word, in the cycle is that for all the success that the Republicans are trumpeting right now with the economy, the reality is that the jobs are not there, that the pay is not there. Wall Street is great.

My 401(k) is killing it. I'm going to pay for my kid's college. Good for millionaire me. But for those people who are out there, the jobs aren't there. That's why they're caught.

This economy that you're trumpeting is not --

JORDAN: It's not accurate.

CUOMO: -- blowing beautiful music for everybody.

JORDAN: Chris, that's not just -- that's just not accurate.

CUOMO: Show me the jobs numbers that shows these people can get off welfare and they're choosing not to.

JORDAN: Two weeks ago, I spent the week traveling around our district and talking to employers all over our district. They all have job opportunities waiting. Now, the key is matching the job with the skill set that's there.

So, we do need some of these folks --

CUOMO: And the pay. And the pay, Jim. JORDAN: Pay is going to go up. Wages are beginning to increase right

now. That's all good.

CUOMO: But very little right now.

JORDAN: They've been stagnant for the last ten years.

CUOMO: And they're very little right now.

JORDAN: Now they're starting to increase. You'll see more of that with this good economy we're starting to see.

CUOMO: Well, that's the hope. But, you know, it does take me back to something that President Trump put very much into the mainstream dialogue many years ago before he was running for president. He used to say -- he said it to me personally when I was at ABC News more than once, stop talking about that unemployment number. It is irresponsible. How about the people who are temporary workers who aren't getting paid what they used to get anymore, who aren't getting as many hours anymore, you don't want to talk about them.

They are just as real and more so today than they were when he was talking about them many years ago.

JORDAN: Chris, I agree. I want to grow an economy for everyone. I want higher wages. I think that's better for families. I think that's better for the moms and dads out there.

CUOMO: How about when you didn't mandate that the companies have to do anything for workers with their tax savings?

JORDAN: This is the fundamental difference we have, Chris. Letting people keep more of their hard-earned money is a good thing. Letting corporations, letting families, letting individuals, letting them keep more of their hard-earned money so they can spend it on their goals, their dreams, their kids, their future, that is a good inning this.

That's what the tax cut was all about. Growing our economy and letting families to keep more money to chase down their goals and dreams. I think that's a good thing.

CUOMO: All right. The memo real quickly. Just help me understand this seeming confusion, OK?

When it was your memo, DOJ bad, intel community bad, avoid them. Now with the Democrat memo, DOJ good, Intelligence Committee, good. Rely on them. How?

JORDAN: It's the same process. The memo still has to go -- whatever memo, Republican memo, Democrat memo, it still has to go through the same process. The people at the FBI and the DOJ have to look at it for sources, methods, classified information, what may or may not be redacted.

CUOMO: You didn't do that with the Nunes memo.

JORDAN: Yes, we did.

CUOMO: You just sent it over to Christopher Wray for the weekend. You didn't put it through the normal channel, Jim. You know that.

JORDAN: It went to the White House and the same people looked at it before it went public.


CUOMO: But that is a circumventing. That's a circumventing of the process.

JORDAN: No, it's not.

CUOMO: You were supposed to go through the intelligence community, not around it.

JORDAN: This is the process that was laid out. House sees it. We call for it to be released. It then gets voted out of the committee, goes to the White House, they look at it.

[08:25:03] and then making sure no classified information is going to go public or what may be classified they're OK with. Then it goes public. It's the same process. So, in five days --

CUOMO: But, Jim, you're using a process --

JORDAN: I believe it will go public, which I think is a good thing.

CUOMO: You're using the word process as if it were a universal truth. I mean, come on. The process you put together gave them only one day to review it, and now he's bringing Rosenstein up -- hold on a second, Jim. He asked the American people to figure out where his head was on Rosenstein when the other memo came out. Now he's calling him to the White House and saying help me figure out how to protect the American people. It seems really inconsistent.

JORDAN: Here is what I want to figure out and here is the process that concerns me. We had the FBI go to a secret court to get a secret document to spy on a fellow American citizen. And they used a campaign --

CUOMO: Not a secret court.

JORDAN: They used a campaign document, oppo research -

CUOMO: It was made by legislation.

JORDAN: The first thing they mentioned in the application was the dossier and they didn't tell the court.

CUOMO: How do you know it's the first thing in the application? You read it.

JORDAN: No. But people who have read it told me. CUOMO: Trey Gowdy who says the Russia probe is as realistic now

despite what's in the memo as it was before? Adam Schiff who said you got it wrong?

JORDAN: They relied on the dossier and they didn't tell the court that it was paid for by the Democrat National Committee and the Clinton campaign. They didn't tell the court that they'd already terminated their relationship with Chris Steele --

CUOMO: We're being told that that's not true. There was disclosure and it was authorized three times after that initial application. Why didn't they keep authorizing it?

JORDAN: And those three times they reauthorized it, guess what? They didn't tell the court they terminated their relationship with Chris Steele and yet kept using his work product. And you know why they terminated their Christopher Steele?

CUOMO: Because he said he was working with the FBI, not because his work product was bad.

JORDAN: Because he told you guys, he told the press he was working with the FBI.

CUOMO: That doesn't make his material bad. If he didn't rely on leaks, we would allow so much B.S. to get directly to the American people. We need the leaks, Jim. We can't trust you guys to tell us the truth all the time.

JORDAN: You think it's OK to go to a secret court.

CUOMO: It's not a secret court. It's made by legislation, it's called FISA, the foreign --

JORDAN: I know what it's called. Yes. But you think it's OK to go to that court and not fully disclose to the court the source of the main thing you used to get that warrant, who paid for it, how it was financed and not to tell them that the guy who wrote that document has been terminated by the FBI because he went out and broke a cardinal rule. He talked to the press and said he was working with the FBI. You're gone, still going to use your work product to spy on an American.

CUOMO: The second part is completely irrelevant. The way the guy conducted himself with respect to his relationship with the FBI -- by the way, a British agent, not an American one, that's irrelevant to the sustainability and the worth of his information. Now, as to the first point.

JORDAN: You can't trust him to keep a basic rule in a contractual relationship, if you can't trust him for that, but you can still trust his work product? Come on, Chris. That's ridiculous.

CUOMO: Totally separate. You're arguing the old meme the argument of correlation, and it's not the same thing. Maybe he didn't know what their guidelines were. There could be a thousand reasons. JORDAN: Oh my goodness.

CUOMO: They vetted the individual material themselves and built on it. I'll tell you what's shocking to me, Jim.

JORDAN: You don't know that. You don't know it.


CUOMO: You don't know it. You don't know any of this, Jim. You didn't even read the application. You trusted Trey Gowdy who wants to resign rather than stay a part of this.

JORDAN: No one has read the application because they won't let us. I asked Christopher Wray, let us see the application. I asked him in committee two months ago, show the whole world the application we can clear this all up. They won't show it to us.

CUOMO: Jim, why would you call it the secret court? All you're trying to do was undermine confidence in it. It was made by legislators. It's a law, the FISA court. It's not a secret court.

JORDAN: Chris, you know, what do you mean it's not secret? We don't know what goes on there. It's not public. We don't see the transcript.


CUOMO: It's made by legislation, it was created for oversight of the intelligence community.

JORDAN: You know what? We may need to make changes in how this court is run.

CUOMO: But you should do it on the facts, Jim.

JORDAN: I agree.

CUOMO: Now you snuck your facts through, but now you want all this vetting on the Democratic side. It just stinks.

JORDAN: I want the Democratic memo to come out, too. I'm all for it. I said that transparency is a good thing. That's why I asked for the transcripts of the application, show us the FISA court application. I want to see it all. I want to see it all.

I think it will definitely prove what was in the Republican memo. That's what took place.

CUOMO: How do you know? How do you know? You keep saying all these things without any substance to them.

JORDAN: I have trust in my colleagues that read the application and given us the brief. I trust that.

CUOMO: One colleague, Trey Gowdy. JORDAN: Plus, I know the same people who ran the Clinton campaign

were the folks that started the Russia investigation, the same people who had the fix in for Clinton, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Andrew McCabe, those same people started to run the Russia investigation, I know all that context.

CUOMO: Jim, we talked about this before. Your party has always represented rule of law as one of its pillars. You have to be careful about trying to undermine confidence of the administration of justice in this country because it suits you politically.

JORDAN: I agree completely. I agree completely. That's why I'm very concerned if top people at the FBI took a campaign document into a court to get a warrant to spy on an American associated with the other campaign. You're exactly right. I think that undermines the rule of law and that's what I'm concerned about.

CUOMO: All right. And it just has to match the facts.