Return to Transcripts main page


Washington Post: CBS Warned About Charlie Rose Sexual Misconduct; Giuliani's Remarks Cause Credibility Crisis for White House. Aired 7-7:30a ET

Aired May 4, 2018 - 07:00   ET


IRIN CARMON, CONTRIBUTOR, "WASHINGTON POST": -- easy. I wouldn't say it's very easy to report on an individual offender who has made women feel uncomfortable or women have specific stories about. What's really difficult is what happens after that person is gone. And this is true of any industry. It's true of the news media; it's true of any of the industries that are having this particular kind of reckoning.

[07:00:24] Because the banal knowledge, the idea that this is an open secret, the fact that somebody gives you information, it gets put aside for the fact that somebody may be very valuable to an organization. And so I think that after the firing comes the soul searching. And I know that there have been some difficult conversations at CBS. And I think these are conversations that could happen across any workplace.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Yes. And in fact, NBC had announced to its staffers in a memo that today it would be be releasing the results of its internal investigation. So we look forward to seeing what happens there.

Irin Carmon, thank you very much for all of your great reporting. Really nice to talk to you.

CARMON: Thanks, Alisyn. Good to be with you.

CAMEROTA: And thanks to our international viewers for watching. For you "CNN TALK" is next. For our U.S. viewers, NEW DAY continues right now.

All right. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to your NEW DAY. The White House facing a major credibility crisis, with so many misleading statements and lies, it is hard to keep track of them. But we'll try this morning.

This week we learned that President Trump paid off a porn star to keep quiet about her alleged affair with him. Rudy Giuliani, his newest lawyer, admitted the president fired James Comey because Comey refused to publicly say the president was not under investigation. Those are two new revelations. And CNN reported exclusively, that Mr. Trump deceived voters before the election with a glowing health report that we now know he dictated to his doctor.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: Sources tell CNN Rudy Giuliani's revelations, or really new theory, blindsided the president's other lawyers and the White House communications team. Giuliani also said that North Korea would be releasing three American prisoners yesterday, which was a blessed distraction and something everybody would want to see, but it didn't happen.

Why is the president's lawyer, who's helping with the Russia investigation, making statements about national security issues? Does he have a security clearance? In a moment, we're going to talk about all that with former White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci.

Let's begin, though, with CNN's Kaitlan Collins, live at the White House with our top story. Good morning, Kaitlan.


The president today is at odds with a lot of his own White House after many of his staffers were left in the dark yesterday after that revelation by Rudy Giuliani, which prompted widespread frustration and disbelief, not only among the president's legal team but also among the people who work inside of the building right behind me.

Now, their responses to these questions yesterday about who knew what and when did very little to clarify the confusion, but it did a whole lot to call their credibility into question.


COLLINS (voice-over): Rudy Giuliani's revelation that President Trump reimbursed Michael Cohen for the hush money given to porn actress Stormy Daniels just days before the election, catching many in the White House off-guard. One aide telling CNN Giuliani's interview stunned and shocked the communications staff, who were unaware he would disclose that bombshell.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: When did you specifically know that the president repaid Mr. Cohen for the $130,000, you personally?

SARAH SANDERS, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The first awareness I had was during the interview last night.

COLLINS: Giuliani conceding that there was no way White House staffers wouldn't be surprised by his remarks, telling CNN, "The president is my client. I don't talk to them."

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did you expect that Rudy Giuliani would talk about this payment tonight?

HOGAN GIDLEY, WHITE HOUSE DEPUTY PRESS SECRETARY: We had no idea the topics of the show, obviously. I'm not an attorney. I just work at the White House.

COLLINS: Two White House officials tell CNN the situation is now out of their control, others noting that Giuliani and Mr. Trump have their own conversations before Giuliani's cable news appearances, reinforcing the idea that the president is increasingly acting as his own communications director.

Press secretary Sarah Sanders struggling to explain the shifting story.

JIM ACOSTA, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: You said on March 7 there was no knowledge of any payments from the president, and he's denied all of these allegations. Were you lying to us at the time, or were you in the dark?

SANDERS: The president has denied and continues to deny the underlying claim. And again, I've given the best information I had at the time.

COLLINS: Sources say Giuliani also blind-sided many of President Trump's other legal advisers, who feared he was winging it and not fully prepared. Some advisors speculating that the comments were playing solely between Giuliani and President Trump, who are long-time friends.

GIULIANI: I have known Donald Trump for almost 30 years, and he has created and accomplished great things.

COLLINS: One official tells CNN that Giuliani undermined the administration's defense strategy in both the Daniels case and Mueller probe. Giuliani continuing to insist that the payment wasn't a campaign finance violation.

[07:05:12] GIULIANI: It wasn't for the campaign.


GIULIANI: It was to save their marriage -- not their marriage as much as their reputation.

COLLINS: But moments later, the president's lawyer appearing to undermine his own argument.

GIULIANI: Imagine if that came out on October 15, 2016, in the middle of the, you know, last debate.


COLLINS: Now, the question today, Chris, is what political and potentially legal trouble Giuliani opened the president up to with those remarks.

We will see the president. He's heading to Dallas to speak at the NRA convention. But there is a chance we could hear from him before then on this. Because it was just 24 hours ago that he did confirm that he did reimburse his attorney for that money paid to that porn actress. And he's been tweeting this morning, but so far not a peep about Stormy Daniels.

CUOMO: That's true. He's tweeting about other things that are of importance to the American people. That's a good new habit, if it sustains. And I have a feeling if anything happens, we'll hear from you first. Kaitlan, thank you very much.

Joining us now, Anthony Scaramucci, the former White House communications director and a class ally of the president.

Good to see you, sir.


CUOMO: Well, we are. This seems to be a non-sequitur. Have you been authorized to tell us something is going to happen?

SCARAMUCCI: I just think I'll probably throw that in there.

CUOMO: Well, it seemed to work yesterday with Rudy.

SCARAMUCCI: Go ahead, Chris.

CUOMO: Let me play a moment from the press conference yesterday with Sarah Huckabee Sanders, where she was having to deal with the obvious problems of credibility. This is one of the volleys from Jonathan Karl of ABC News. Here you go.


JONATHAN KARL, ABC NEWS: When the president so often says things that turn out not to be true. When the president and the White House show what appears to be a blatant disregard for the truth, how are the American people to trust or believe what is said here or what is said by the president?

SANDERS: We give the very best information that we have at the time. I do that every single day and will continue to do that every day under this position.


CUOMO: She said that almost a dozen times in the presser, that line. Do you think that works?

SCARAMUCCI: Well, listen, I think she's got probably the toughest job in Washington. Could be one of the toughest in the world. And so I think that does work. Because you don't want to put her in a situation where she's saying something that's inaccurate and then the press corps is implying that she's lying. Because she's not a liar. She's a very good person. And she's a very diligent person. She's a very hard worker, and she's very honest. That's been my impression of her. And so I don't like when people say that she's a liar, because she isn't.

CUOMO: All right. So let's talk about it. All right?

I've been around Sarah before the campaign, during the campaign, after the campaign. It's not about a character indictment. But at the end of the day, Anthony, we are our choices, right? That's what we are. Am I a good person or are you a good person? Let's see what you do. Let's see what you say.


CUOMO: If you consistently take information that either you know or should be skeptical of in terms of its truth, and repeat it to the American people, is that a good choice?

SCARAMUCCI: Well, I think, again, Chris, we're going to be debate this probably for two hours. But I think that that's unfair. It's an unfair characterization of her. She -- she starts the day. Some of the information she's probably been left out of. And some of the information she has. And she's doing the best job that she can to relay as much as she can to the American people.

And if you remember, OK, they had the lights turned off in that room. And they were, like, on a phone call, basically, to the American people.

CUOMO: Spicer was, like, hiding in the bushes.

SCARAMUCCI: And she's -- and she's standing up there, OK, with the lights on and the cameras. She's addressing the American people. And she's a very classy person, you know? And I don't --

CUOMO: It's not about a character assassination.

SCARAMUCCI: I don't want to go back to the Correspondents' Dinner. But I mean, come on, she's a very good person. And I'm going to sit here and support her, no matter what.

CUOMO: I'm not asking you not to. In fact, I had you come on, because you are supportive of her. But this is about the choices you make in the job and the net effect.

You brought the cameras back on. You turned the lights back on, metaphorically. Because you said you have to deal with the American media --

SCARAMUCCI: I thought that was important.

CUOMO: The American people deserve the candor.

SCARAMUCCI: A hundred percent. And they also -- the press has to be there to hold people accountable.

CUOMO: That's right.

SCARAMUCCI: So the flipside of it is she also has to be there to protect the president. There's information that's going on in that building that will eventually get out to the American people. But the president has to be protected.

As an example, when now-secretary of state Mark Pompeo or CIA Director Mike Pompeo is going to North Korea to meet with the Korean dictator, it's not necessary for the American people to have that information --

CUOMO: A hundred percent.

SCARAMUCCI: -- immediately.

CUOMO: A hundred percent.

SCARAMUCCI: You have to wait. And so you understand the difference --

CUOMO: A hundred percent.

SCARAMUCCI: -- between those to.

CUOMO: But that example --

SCARAMUCCI: We have to make sure that we are protecting the president and his information.

CUOMO: A hundred percent. A hundred percent.

SCARAMUCCI: And we're also giving -- it's like what Larry Speakes said. Don't tell us how to stage the news. We won't tell you how to report the news. Do you remember that conversation?

CUOMO: Yes. I understand that. However, this is not about national security interests and keeping an agenda sensitive that is time sensitive and disclosure sensitive. That's understandable.

This falls into the category of 3,001 -- actually now more, because of what President Trump just tweeted, that is demonstrably false about the people being held in North Korea. Three thousand and two, at least, misstatements of fact and lies in 466 days. That is the biggest number we have ever heard of.

[07:10:24] So again, it goes back to choices. Is Sarah Sanders a good person? Yes, she's a good person. Fine. But she's also the choices that she makes. And if she knows that the president of the United States is giving her information that is either wrong or arguably deceptive, her duty is to the American people. That's a job that you should then leave if you can't do it with full honesty.

SCARAMUCCI: Let's use one of the president's expressions: let's see what happens. OK? At the end of the day, I think she's -- like I said, I'm not going to keep repeating myself. She's doing the best she can, given the information that she has.

When we talk about the president lying and not lying and all this other stuff, I think there's another component to this that people are missing. OK? The president is not like the -- the other presidents. He's got a very unique operating style. He's had a very unique career. And he has a certain directional focus that he's focused on. And the details and the things that are going on underneath that, OK, the press probably doesn't like, necessarily. But the macro things are actually going quite well for the president, including the polling data. You know, he's up a couple of points this week, because you've got the economy humming along. You've got the North Korean situation that's about to be tamed. He's about to tackle the Iranian situation. And so the average American who doesn't focus on this stuff as much as

you and I do, where we're reading everything, is stepping back and saying, "Wait. In general, things are going quite well." Are they micro-analyzing every presidential tweet? They probably are not. Are they micro-analyzing everything that happens in the news cycle? They probably are not. But you can see it in the polling data. He's rising in the polling data. Because when you step back from the situation, he's got pretty good judgment, and he's got pretty instincts directionally in terms of where to go.

CUOMO: The argument becomes --

SCARAMUCCI: Let me rephrase that. He has very good instincts, not pretty good. Very good.

CUOMO: Is it happening from him or despite what he says in tweets? He is obsessed with Russia interference. He's obsessed with the Stormy Daniels.

SCARAMUCCI: OK. Well, that's now where I think there's a level of unfairness. Because you can't say things like a peace treaty, where this has been an intractable problem for six and a half decades, and he's in there now, mixing it up with those two leaders and putting some pressure on the president of China. You can't say that it's happening in -- despite of him or in spite of him. You can't say that. I don't think that's fair to him. You have to look at the proportion of credit, and you also have to look at what the South Korean leader said about the president. He said he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize. So -- so he's -- he's, in general, doing a very, very good job. And now we can micro-analyze --

CUOMO: No. But hold on.

SCARAMUCCI: We can micro-analyze everything.

CUOMO: But hold on. You've got to -- Anthony, just to be clear about something, just to be clear, I get your point. But here's the thing. It can't be unfair.

Because I was getting attacked by people saying you can never normalize anything that the president does, because they believe he is inherently a malefactor. But hold on a second. I'm saying there's two sides to this fight. This is what the frustration is. Nobody likes the guy calling balls and strikes.

We were talking about him deserving credit about what's going on in Korea as early as or earlier than anybody else. And it comes with criticism, but you have to say what's good. But hold on a second.

SCARAMUCCI: I remember that, and I give you credit.

CUOMO: But this is why I bring it up. I'm not looking to be popular with people who like the president or people who don't like the president. Credibility counts. We're seeing it with this Stormy Daniels situation. It is such a nightmare revisited for me of the Clinton situation.

Monica Lewinsky was not something that was of national import to the American people. Stormy Daniels is not something of national import to the American people.

SCARAMUCCI: That's our wide-angle Saxon Protestant

CUOMO: Credibility. Credibility, Anthony. You know this. You and I talk about this all the time. All you have is your word.

SCARAMUCCI: People -- people in France are arguing over what's going on with the private lives of --

CUOMO: Credibility matters. If you will lie about little things, you will lie about big things.

SCARAMUCCI: I find it amazing that we're 20 years out from the Monica Lewinsky situation, and we're still micro-analyzing the personal lives of the people that we're electing.

CUOMO: I don't think it's a morality judgment.

SCARAMUCCI: What is it?

CUOMO: I don't think it's a morality judgment, should he do this in his personal life or not. That is none of my business in my estimation. But whether he tells the truth.

SCARAMUCCI: I'm not the president's -- I'm not the president's comms director any more, but my attitude would have been on the whole thing is, "Hey, excuse me. This is my personal life."

CUOMO: Fine.

SCARAMUCCI: "It's between me and my wife and my family. You guys want to talk about it, that's fine. But let's move. Let's move the operating standards."

CUOMO: And then the campaign finance thing came up.

SCARAMUCCI: Legalized in 2008 -- Barack Obama said that he was for non-same-sex marriage or some kind of union.

CUOMO: It's nothing like this.

SCARAMUCCI: It is, it is.

CUOMO: Make your case.

SCARAMUCCI: Making the case. We have a cultural movement where we accept people and marriage equality. And I've been for that for 15 years.

[07:15:05] We should have a cultural movement again where public officials should be left alone to do in their personal lives what they do. And so what happens is they get tangled up, and then they start to, you know, position themselves in a certain way. President Clinton did that. Perhaps President Trump has had to do that. And I think it's unfair to both of those people. And I think we should knock it off.

CUOMO: Anthony, the Obama example about marriage equality, OK, that has nothing to do with paying off a porn star to keep quiet about an alleged affair.

SCARAMUCCI: It actually does.

CUOMO: They -- connect those two dots.

SCARAMUCCI: Let me explain it.

CUOMO: Please. Go ahead.

SCARAMUCCI: OK. We are in a cultural situation today where I don't care what people are doing in their bedroom. And I don't care what people are doing in their bedroom if they're public officials or nonpublic officials. And we should move the curve in that direction, and we should focus on the things that the president is doing for the country, not his personal life. North Korea, economy is booming, wages are up.

CUOMO: All right.

SCARAMUCCI: We're going to -- I predict that the president will figure out a way to cut a deal with the Iranians, OK, that will be a way better deal than the prior administration. So if we would just relax on some of these stories, OK, and let him execute his strategy.

CUOMO: Well, you can't --

SCARAMUCCI: By the way -- by the way --

CUOMO: You can't because of the credibility issue. The same thing came up at the -- at the convention.

SCARAMUCCI: Do it to each other, Chris.

CUOMO: Whether Paul Manafort and the rest of the team were lying about the plagiarism of first lady Michelle Obama's speech that was lifted into Melania's speech. It was demonstrable. It was true. Did it matter? No. Not as a speech. Melania did a good job delivering the speech. She was better than expected. It was a plus. But they lied about it. And the credibility matters.


CUOMO: The Obama example is a distraction. This is not a morality argument. Nobody cares about the Stormy Daniels affair. It's whether he lied about it and whether he broke the law.

SCARAMUCCI: Nobody cares. The president did not break the law.

CUOMO: We do not know that. SCARAMUCCI: OK, but I think we do know that. And that's why --

CUOMO: How? How do you know that?


CUOMO: They've changed the story three times. Which do you believe?

SCARAMUCCI: OK, well, let's see what the -- let's see how the facts unfold. But it's my opinion, analyzing the facts, that they didn't break the law.

CUOMO: But you didn't know what the story was until yesterday.

SCARAMUCCI: At worst -- at worst it's the John Edwards offense.

CUOMO: No. John Edwards happened a year before an election. Rudy Giuliani said yesterday on the couch at "FOX & Friends," "Imagine if this happened October 15, 2016." That's basically saying --


CUOMO: -- it was done to avoid the disclosure during the election.

SCARAMUCCI: He was saying "2018." That's what he was saying. He was basically saying.

CUOMO: He said, "2016."

SCARAMUCCI: OK. But he was basically saying it happened -- they don't want --

CUOMO: During the last debate, he said.

SCARAMUCCI: But they also didn't want to -- they wanted to get this information out before the midterm elections, as well. OK. So --

CUOMO: No, no, no. Anthony, Anthony --

SCARAMUCCI: So listen --

CUOMO: -- he said, "Imagine if this happened during the last debate."

SCARAMUCCI: I heard what he said, but --

CUOMO: Own that.

SCARAMUCCI: I do own it. But just let me finish.

CUOMO: All right. But you can't say that's not what he meant. That's what he said.

SCARAMUCCI: Let me finish. Let me finish.

CUOMO: Go ahead. SCARAMUCCI: The nonsense that's going on with these talking heads

saying that this was an impulsive thing, and not intentional, that's ridiculous. This was a strategy that was being deployed.

CUOMO: By Giuliani?

SCARAMUCCI: Yes, 100 percent. This was being deployed by him, because if the information is there, he would rather prick that bubble now and get it out in the marketplace, as opposed to let it come out in a bombshell drop. OK? And if you study the stock market if you've got bad news on your earnings, let's get the earnings out ASAP, and so that you can explain it to people so it will level off the stock, if I can use that example.

CUOMO: OK. So here's some key questions. Because I need to take a break right now. The key questions are do you believe that what came out of Rudy Giuliani was calculated to help or will now --


CUOMO: Well, don't answer. We've got -- that's what a tease is all about, Anthony.

SCARAMUCCI: Oh, we're going to break? One of those breaks.

CUOMO: We're going to take a break. But the question is whether or not this helps or hurt.

SCARAMUCCI: Cut me, Mick. We're going to the break.

CUOMO: Did the president know about this? And what do you see as different policy moves that are upcoming? Let's talk about those. You have unique insight. I appreciate you being here for it. All right. We're going to take those questions on with Anthony Scaramucci. We'll be right back.


[07:23:04] CUOMO: Former White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci is back with us right now.

And you've just given us some good insight. Because there is this vein of thought running through Rudy Giuliani's recent reemergence that, whew, he must have been flying off the handle. This must have been something that he just cooked up in his head and just blurted it out on FOX News. Seemed to surprise even Sean Hannity. You say you know that's not true?

SCARAMUCCI: Well, I know for a fact that's not true. I know that was a discreet, strategic deployment of the information. It caught everybody off-guard. And then, of course, the fire started with a lot of media pundits saying that it was impulsive. But it wasn't impulsive at all. It was actually quite strategic.

Because the information, the great thing about our society and some of the trouble in our society now is all the information gets out there, Chris. And so if that information is available, and the mayor just got on the job and he's looking at all the different data that's out there, it was a very good move to go first on that. And it was -- it was not impulsive.

CUOMO: What does it mean to you that the members of the legal team sources around them are saying they didn't know? What does that tell us?

SCARAMUCCI: You know, I don't know. I mean, what it might tell you is that the president feels very close to the mayor. They've known each other for 30 of 40 years. And, you know, the president is really trying to get this distraction behind him. That's why he tapped the mayor for this job. And they're probably talking in a way that they used to talk when they were up here in New York.

And so, you know, maybe they made a decision to do that. It came out. And they probably didn't do as great of a job of explaining it to the other people. Frankly, I have been guilty of that at Skybridge, where I've done something, and then the people are like, "Well, what are you doing?" And I should be more communicative.

CUOMO: Skybridge is Anthony's company.

SCARAMUCCI: But that does happen in a situation like this where both the president and the mayor like calling plays from the line of scrimmage. Meaning they have a strategy, and then they see what's going on on the field and they say, "OK, let's change the strategy right here before the ball gets snapped."

[07:25:04] CUOMO: Now, ordinarily, the point of criticism would be, well, but that's why he has a team, a cabinet, et cetera, is to refer. But this is a personal legal matter. Rudy Giuliani is representing him personally. So that is OK if they decide to make their own call about it.

And my assertion is if the president hadn't known, and/or didn't like this, we would have known that by now. Rudy Giuliani would no longer be out in the media talking about it. And somebody would have put the mouth on him. So the silence of resistance --

SCARAMUCCI: I guess -- I guess my message is to your viewers, please don't understatement these two guys. OK? These are two of the most successful guys in the United States at what they've been capable of doing. And the president wants to put this behind him. He wants to put this legal matter behind him. The whole issue of the investigation, they'd like to put behind him. He's got an amazing agenda for the American people that he would like to execute, and he's in the process.

What I find fascinating about this, and some presidential historian will say this, during a whole milieu of distractions, he was executing a game plan for the American people that's going quite well.

CUOMO: He brought it on himself. He talks about it. He dissembles about it. And that is going to spur scrutiny.

Now, in terms of how he gets rid of this, Rudy Giuliani spoke to that on FOX, as well. I want to play what he said and get your take on it.



GIULIANI: I believe that Attorney General Sessions, my good friend, and Rosenstein, who I don't know, I believe they should, in the interest of justice, end this investigation. There's been too much government misconduct. The crimes now have all been committed by the government and their agents.


CUOMO: Now, look, I get it as a constructive legal theory representing somebody who may be prosecuted. I get that. But coming from Rudy Giuliani, who ran the Southern District, who saw those people as family, who made so many statements about how they must be above reproach.

SCARAMUCCI: Yes. So this is a tough one for me, because I don't have all of the information that the mayor has. So I don't know why he's saying that. There could be some evidence related to why he's saying that.

But here are the things that I do know. Rod Rosenstein, he was in my section in law school. I think Rod Rosenstein is a very honorable guy. And I think Rod Rosenstein has a very strong backbone. And I think he calls balls and strikes as he sees them. And I've recommended in public and in private, leave Rod Rosenstein alone, do not fire Rod Rosenstein.

Moreover, you asked me about Robert Mueller. He's got an impeccable reputation. Do not fire Robert Mueller.

As it relates Attorney General Sessions, we sort of joined the campaign together roughly on the same day. I have a lot of respect to him. And I think he said as recently as last week that we've got to sort of nudge this thing along and get it over with, one way or the other. We're 15, 16 months into the investigation. I don't know. Is it going to go another six months? Chris, I don't really think that's fair to the president.

CUOMO: Let me give the analogy.

SCARAMUCCI: You have the information. Write the report.

CUOMO: Let me give you an analogy.

SCARAMUCCI: The president's going to be exonerated, by the way. That's another prediction I'll make, because --

CUOMO: It is a prediction. It also is kind of a safe one to make, because the idea of indicting a sitting president is a very removed legal possibility. But this is about much more than that.

SCARAMUCCI: But it's not even the indict. He didn't do anything wrong, Chris.

CUOMO: Well, we don't know.

SCARAMUCCI: The president -- but we sort of do know that.

CUOMO: You have to let the investigators do their job.

SCARAMUCCI: I was on the campaign. I mean, and I've been part of --

CUOMO: You didn't see everything. You don't know everything they're talking about. A lot of it is news to you, Anthony.

SCARAMUCCI: I -- I accept that I didn't see everything. But stuff like that, OK, those are pretty big bombshells. Let me tell you something. You know, we both know that the lie gets around the earth four times before the truth puts its shoes on. We know that.

But that sort of stuff is so big in a society right now with these smartphones, that would have been out in a very heavy way, Chris?

CUOMO: What would have been, if this actually happened?

SCARAMUCCI: The president colluded -- the president colluded with Russia. That stuff, after 15, 16 months, that stuff would already be out there. OK?

CUOMO: But that's -- look, that is an assumption.


CUOMO: What I'm saying is, look, you can spin it any way you want and give it your opinion.

SCARAMUCCI: It's grounded -- it's grounded in observational fact.

CUOMO: No, what it -- but what you're taking advantage of is the unknown and you are deciding to make a prediction based on something that is not knowable at this time.

All I'm saying is this. You have a situation going on right now where your transaction of the sale of your company is being held up by an investigation with in CFIUS. Right?

SCARAMUCCI: It's over.

CUOMO: They held it in there for a very long time, right?


CUOMO: You weren't jumping up and down and saying, "This has got to end. This is wrong. Somebody is out to get me. This is politically calculated." You said, "Let them do their vetting. There's nothing wrong with this deal. And either it will go through or not, and I'll be find."

SCARAMUCCI: Absolutely. And I'm a big boy on it. OK? So if the government doesn't want the deal to go through, I go back to work.

CUOMO: But you didn't attack the prosecutor, even though you had reason to want to attack the prosecutor.

SCARAMUCCI: But listen, I mean, who wouldn't be frustrated by a process like that?

CUOMO: I understand. But you let it play out, because you said you had nothing to hide.


CUOMO: The same thing applies here. If you did nothing wrong, don't say shut down the investigation.

SCARAMUCCI: Hold on a second.

CUOMO: That doesn't show you did nothing wrong.

SCARAMUCCI: Hold on a second. This is why he's president of the United States. OK? This is the force of his personality. He likes to wear things --

CUOMO: To obstruct justice?

SCARAMUCCI: No, you're listening. He like to wear things on his sleeve. He knows he didn't do anything wrong. OK? And he sometimes can be a little bit of a bull in a china shop, where he's running through the china shop, saying --