Skip to main content

tv   New Day  CNN  March 21, 2017 4:00am-5:01am PDT

4:00 am
capable of working, and most of them already work. the requirement does almost nothing, except cause confusion, which is going to cost some people who can't work to actually drop off the program, because they don't understand it, and they're afraid of what could happen. so if anything, i think these amendments lower the coverage impact of the law. >> at last count, there were 27 house republicans that were leaning "no" or were an outright "no" on voting for this. but that was before these amendments. so is there anything that you'll see hear that will make it more palatable to holdouts? >> i think the sort of mean-spirited gestures like a work requirement in a program where almost no one can work and those who can already are working, may appeal to some, maybe some of that appeals to those on the right, throwing a small amount of money at a large problem may provide cover for those older constituents. but anyone who's thinking seriously about this who opposed it beforehand from the center or the left should oppose it even
4:01 am
more now. >> professor gruber, thank you very much for walking us through this. >> my pleasure. >> thanks to our international viewers for watching. for you, "cnn newsroom" is next. and for our u.s. viewers, "new day" continues right now. the fbi is investigating any coordination between the campaign and russia's efforts. >> there is no evidence of a trump/russia collusion. >> putin hated secretary clinton so much, they wanted to hurt her, help him. >> president obama could not unilaterally order a wiretap of anyone? >> no president could. >> why is so much information being leaked out now? what are the motives behind it? >> we should evaluate this nomination on the merit, on the records. >> i try to treat all who come before me with respect. >> we need to know what to do to stand up for this president. >> this is our long-awaited chance to finally get rid of obamacare. >> all of these changes that have been added, we're doing to make sure they can't get filibustered. >> the end result is going to be wonderful. >> this is "new day" with chris
4:02 am
cuomocamerota. the president's bogus wiretapping claim was shot down during a stunning day of testimony on capitol hill. the fbi revealing, they are investigating whether trump's campaign colluded with russia to interfere in the 2016 election. the white house also not backing down on trump's unproven hollow claim that he was wiretapped by former president obama. there was no evidence available to the nsa or the fbi about it. >> so all of these developments unfolding as the president tries to sell skeptical lawmakers today on the gop's health care bill. and, the president's supreme court nominee faces a second day of questioning in the senate. the trump administration in some turmoil on day 61 of his
4:03 am
presidency. let's begin our coverage with joe johns, he's live at the white house, joe? >> good morning, alisyn. the headline, under investigation, something no white house can afford to take lightly. and for a while, yesterday, with it appeared the administration was going into self-defense mode in the briefing room. but when the president stepped up in front of the cameras and the microphones last night in kentucky, he didn't have anything to say about it. >> reporter: president donald trump dodging the biggest challenge to rock his administration at a campaign rally monday night. >> the fbi, as part of o you ur counterintelligence mission, is investigating the russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. and that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the trump campaign and the russian government. and whether there was any coordination between the campaign and russia's efforts. >> reporter: fbi director james comey and nsa director mike
4:04 am
rogers facing five hours of questioning before the house intelligence committee. >> president obama could not unilaterally order a wiretap of anyone? >> no president could. >> reporter: comey rejecting president trump's baseless claim that former president obama wiretapped his trump tower campaign headquarters. >> i have no information that supports those tweets. the answer is the same for the department of justice and all of its components. >> reporter: the white house trying to dismiss much of comey's testimony. >> i think there's a lot of areas that still need to be covered. there's a lot of information that still needs to be discussed. >> reporter: continuing to deny any coordination. >> you can continue to look for something, but continuing to look for something that doesn't exist, doesn't matter. >> reporter: and incredibly, refusing to back off the president's bogus wiretapping claims. >> is the president prepared to withdraw that accusation, apologize to the president? >> no, we started a hearing, it's still ongoing, and then as chairman nunez mentioned, this
4:05 am
is one in a series of hearings that will be happening. >> reporter: president trump's official government twitter account firing off defensive tweets in realtime, throughout the hearing. leading one lawmaker to press comey to clarify the record. >> is the tweet, as i read it to you, the nsa and fbi tell congress that russia did not influence the electoral process, is that accurate? >> we've offered no opinion, have no view sw, have no information on potential impact, because it's never something we looked at. >> reporter: comey also revealing the intelligence community has come to at least one clear conclusion. russia's interference in the election was primarily driven by vladimir putin's disdain for hillary clinton. >> putin hated secretary clinton so much that the flip side of that coin was, he had a clear preference to the person running against the person he hated so much. >> reporter: meantime, republicans trying to deflect from the investigation, instead focusing on leaks and who revealed former national security adviser michael flynn's identity. >> one thing you and i agree on
4:06 am
is the felonious dissemination of classified material most definitely. is a crime. >> reporter: with the president's government account suggesting that backup may have played a role in the leaks. tweeting, "fbi director comey refuses to deny he briefed president obama on calls made by michael flynn to russia." the administration's defense after learning of this investigation got off to a rocky start yesterday, with white house press secretary sean spicer trying to make the case that one of the figures potentially in the middle of all of this, paul manafort, had a limited role in the campaign. in fact, paul manafort, was a chief strategist and campaign chairman. chris? >> spicer didn't even have the dates right about when manafort had joined the campaign and what happened there. it was an odd cover-up, to be sure. joe, thanks for pointing that out. appreciate it. joining us now, republican congressman will hurd of texas. take a listen to his questioning
4:07 am
of fbi director comey at monday's hearing. here's a sample. >> knowing what we know now, would the fbi have done anything different in trying to notify the dnc of what happened? >> oh, sure. >> what measures would you have had done differently? >> we'd have sent up a much larger flare. we'd have just kept banging and banging on the door. >> one of many intriguing questions asked by the congressman. thank you for joining us. what do you think the major developments were from the hearing yesterday, and do you still believe that the president owes former president obama an apology quali apology? >> well, i think one of the major developments is the public revelation that there is, indeed, an investigation by the fbi ongoing. i think that's a good thing that, that is out in the open. we need to make sure we allow federal law enforcement in the fbi to conclude their
4:08 am
investigation before we make any adjustments on, you know, wrongdoing or any criminal activities. and i think, look, i've quoted my father many times in the last few days, it never hurts to say you're sorry. and i think it's more important to say that to our foreign partners, where there was some intimation that they were involved in potentially tapping the building in new york city. so i think that's something, when we look at the partnership we have with the uk, it's such an important -- it's such an important ally in the global war on the terrorism and understanding russia, and you don't want any static to be, you know, there in that relationship. >> well, accusing a former president of a felony and saying he's bad or sick doesn't exactly help relationships either, though, does it, congressman? >> no, it definitely doesn't. >> now, let me ask you something
4:09 am
that was going on yesterday. you say it's good that word of the investigation into the trump administration, that's a positive, you say. part of the spin coming out of that is, this insistence that there's been no offer of proof of collusion. now, you would explain that by saying, it's an ongoing investigation, comey wouldn't address it yesterday. he never said there was no proof of collusion. he just said, i'm not going to talk about it. what do you make of that tactic, to keep pushing? well, there's been no proof of collusion? it's an ongoing investigation. how would we know? >> well, it is an ongoing investigation. and we wouldn't know until that investigation is complete. and so, trying to make some, you know, we shouldn't read into that statement by director comey as whether that is an indication of some type of criminal activity, or an indication that there was no criminal activity. the investigation needs to happen. and i think it's also a good example, it shows the checks and
4:10 am
balances within our government are working. sometimes it doesn't feel like the government is working properly, but i think this is an example of where it is. and the fact that you had this hearing in a republican-led committee, and that days priority, you had republican leaders from the senate and the house talking about disagreeing with the white house. so you think this is -- this shows the checks and balances that are there. i know people want more answers, they want it quicker, wbut thes types of investigations are going to take some time. and i think we have an opportunity within the house intelligence community to review some of the other areas, like, the cyber tools that were used by the russians to hack into the democratic national committee. we should be looking at, what was the government's responses in these situations and can we improve them in the future. and can we provide some lesson learned to our friends in europe, who are subject to the same kind of activity by the
4:11 am
russian government. >> interesting question. i want your head on this. for the people at home, by the way, will hurt isn't just a congressman, although that would be plenty enough as a pedigree, but he worked in intelligence, worked for the cia, so he has unique insight into these things. the president was tweeting yesterday, trying to create his own narrative, certainly within his rights and he's clever with it, but he brought up that there was no look into potus about connections to russia. and i'm wondering your take on this. do you think that it would have come up at the hearing yesterday, do you think we would have even have learned from comey that there was an ongoing since july if the president wouldn't have kept flagging that there's no connection to him? >> so the question is, would we have learned this? >> do you think trump kind of pointed us to it in terms of directing questioning to comey about whether or not there is an investigation involving the president, because he was really the only one talking about whether or not there's specific questions about trump and russian interference. it's always been about his
4:12 am
staffers, and then comey wound up being asked about it yesterday in the hearing and wound up divulging there is, in fact, an investigation. it's been going on since july. we never heard about it until yesterday. >> i think these issues would have come to light, because the house intelligence committee, at a minimum, is looking at four areas. tools that we're using, and any american that was potentially colluding or corroborating with russian intelligence. so that was -- that is, that was one of the major planks of the house permanent select committee on intelligence's investigation. so i think these areas would have, would have come out. it's always hard to predict what would have happened and things would have been differently. the reality is, we have -- we know where we stand now. we know there's an investigation. let's let that play out and let's not presume guilty or innocent, until this review is done. >> fair and sober point. let me ask you about leaks. that was the obvious insistence
4:13 am
of many in your party yesterday. they didn't want this to be about russian interference. they didn't want this to be about wiretapping. they wanted this to be about leaks of information. does that ring a little disingenuous to you, when there have been leaks, as long as i've been in this business and you were in the cia, you know how often we're dealing with leaks. does it seem to be selective outrage? they weren't upset about all the leaks on hillary clinton and into her during the campaign? >> i think the ranking democrat on the committee said it best. he said that just because one individual may be asking a surgeon question doesn't mean the other questions aren't important. and i think there have been, the volume of leaks over the last couple of months seems to be higher. it's a problem that we've had under every investigation. it's a problem that existed when i spent 9 1/2 years as an undercover officer in the cia, something that was frustrating. just because it has gone on for a long time, doesn't mean it's still not a major problem, and
4:14 am
try to understand who's doing - this, and also, it's important when this comes around, programs that deal with american citizens, that are sensitive programs, and create a lot of privacy concerns. not only here in the u.s., but with our allies across the world. so, this is, i think, a heightened issue. because this is not just political strategy. this is, this is tactics, techniques, and procedures when it comes to the intelligence community and it deals with american citizens. so i think that's something that is a big issue. >> people keep talking about comparisons to watergate. carl bernstein, obviously, a formative of what happened during that period. he tweeted yesterday, the same people who are asking about, you know, these leaks, his tweet said, i can state with confidence that many intel members now decrying leaks of classified information have,
4:15 am
themselves, leaked classified info knowingly. which, of course, goes to the selective outrage. let me ask you about that. deep throat, a leaker. do you think he should have gone to jail? >> well, i would -- i'm not completely familiar with the -- i'm not an expert on what happened at the watergate. i think that would be considered a whistle-blower under our current laws, having strong protections for whistle-blowers is important. so we've been able to be aware of malpractice and wrongdoing throughout the federal government, because of the whistle-blower program. and that's different than going to the press on some piece of information, when you have other vehicles out there to, to get that information to the right people. so it's a fine line, but -- because i think deep throat now would be considered a whistle-blower. >> interesting.
4:16 am
congressman hurd, always appreciate your perspective. you're always welcome here on "new day." be well, sir. >> you too, have a good day. we are following some breaking news now. large electronic devices being banned from some international flights coming to the u.s. from parts of the middle east and africa. aviation officials are citing, quote, a security concern. let's see what that's about. cnn's barbara starr is live at the pentagon with all of the breaking details. what have you learned, barbara? >> reporter: good morning, allisa alis alisyn. these are direct flights, some countries, some airlines, from the middle east and africa directly into the united states banning electronic devices in the cabin, anything larger than your cell phone. if you have a laptop, if you have a tablet, it's got to go now inside your checked luggage. let's put up a list of the countries and airlines impacted by this ruling, by the united states government. it will go into effect in the coming hours. they were given 96 hours to comply with it. why is this happening?
4:17 am
as you look at the list, it is because there is concern in these places about the screening procedures and the vulnerability that a terrorist could get an explosive device hidden in one of these consumer electronic devices and get it onboard an airplane. they are not saying their specific plot, but suspect number one likely, al qaeda in yemen. this is a group that has already demonstrated its ability to get devices onboard planes. the underwear bomber, on christmas day, 2009, the printer cartridge plot that was foiled. al qaeda in yemen is a big concern about trying to attack aircraft coming into the united states. chris? >> barbara star, very interesting. thank you for keeping us ahead on that story. appreciate it. all right, so you just heard the director of the fbi and the head of the nsa say, there is nothing to trump's wiretapping claims. and yet, the white house continues. they persist on this issue. why? we're going to talk to a
4:18 am
democratic lawmaker who was part of the house intel hearing. what is their take on what is left to discuss on this issue, next. bp engineered a fleet of 32 brand new ships with advanced technology, so we can make sure oil and gas get where they need to go safely. because safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better. ♪ heigh ho ♪ heigh ho ♪ heigh ho heigh ho it's off to work we go here's to all of you early risers, what's up man? go-getters, and should-be sleepers.
4:19 am
from all of us at delta, because the ones who truly change the world, are the ones who can't wait to get out in it. because the ones who truly chz2a1fz zx9z ld, y2a1fy yx9y then you're a couple. think of all you'll share... like snoring. does your bed do that? the dual adjustability of a sleep number bed allows you each to choose the firmness and comfort you want. so every couple can get the best sleep ever. does your bed do that? only at a sleep number store, where queen mattresses start at just $899. and right now save $400 on our most popular mattresses. go to for a store near you. the markets change... at t. rowe price... our disciplined approach remains. global markets may be uncertain...
4:20 am
but you can feel confident in our investment experience around the world. call us or your advisor... t. rowe price. invest with confidence.
4:21 am
4:22 am
the fbi, as part of our counterintelligence mission, is investigating the russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, and that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated with the trump campaign and if russian government. >> okay. so there were some bombshells yesterday during that testimony. fbi director james comey confirming an investigation into whether the trump campaign colluded with russia to interfere in the presidential election. a probe, he said, has been going on since last july. comey also saying that there is no evidence, whatsoever, to support mr. trump's wiretapping claims. joining us now is democratic congresswoman from california, jackie spear. she is a member of the house intelligence committee. good morning, congresswoman. >> good morning, alisyn. >> so you were there yesterday,
4:23 am
let's talk about some of these bombshells. in terms to have the wiretapping, mr. trump's claims that president obama had his headquarters, mr. trump's headquarters, wiretapped. james comey seemed to put that to rest yesterday. he said that neither he nor the department of justice can see any evidence. is that it? is that now over? was that the end yesterday, when james comey said that, or whether congress continue to investigate these claims? >> you know, i don't think congress was ever interested in investigating these claims, because there was no "there" there. we had republicans and democrats, chairs and ranking members on both sides of the house and the senate coming forward and saying, there is no evidence. the only problem is, is you have a white house that is in denial. and the president never, ever steps back. he never apologizes. and i think the result is, is that this denial is going to continue to fester. >> well, his press spokesperson
4:24 am
did not seem to think that it was over. and in fact, sean spicer seemed to suggest that investigations into this will continue. let me play this for you. >> is the president prepared to withdraw that accusation, apologize to the president? >> no, we started a hearing, it's still ongoing. >> what does that mean, congresswoman? we've started a hearing and it's still ongoing. >> i think he was just flummoxed. i don't think he knew where to go with it. he's oftentimes put in a very difficult position. but the truth of the matter is, there's no way any president, not even president trump, can order a wiretap. that comes from the department of justice. there has to be an establishment of probable cause. you have to take it to a judge to show that there's probable cause, a crime has been committed. and none of those things have taken place. this was, you know, a saturday morning tweet when he was, you know, unaccounted for, and the result is is that we're living with it.
4:25 am
meanwhile, there's all these important issues going on in the country and around the world that we're not addressing because we're so focused on this crazy tweet. >> skpand that's the large issu right there, congresswoman, you have just hit it on the head. what are you in congress, or we in the media, supposed to do when a president or this president makes a false accusation like this? what now? do we just walk away from these wiretapping accusations, though he accused the former president of a felony. is that -- that's it? we just take that in stride and move on now? >> i think spending more time on it gives him, frankly, more credibility over something that is false from its very essence. and you're absolutely right, it is outrageous that president trump would charge former president obama with committing a felony. so the only way to deal with someone who is unwilling to deal with reality, i think, is to
4:26 am
begin to ignore it. and i think the media should do that. and i think those of us on the hill have already said, this is done, it's over, it's cooked. >> okay. so let's talk about the other bombshell from yesterday, from director comey's testimony and that is that, in fact, there is an investigation ongoing into whether or not there was some sort of collusion between the trump campaign and russia. did you get all of your questions answered? >> i got a number of my questions answered, certainly, and a number that were not answered, in part because there is an ongoing investigation and director comey was very clear that he wasn't going to answer those. and i understood that. but i thought it was very important for the american public to understand why this is so important. the fact that there were so many people in the trump organization that had ties to russia, that guccifer was, in fact, someone that was seen as an operative of the russian government, and was doing much of the hacking, and
4:27 am
that there were persons within the trump organization, roger stone, for one, who was tweeting two months before the actual wikileaks dump, that there was going to be more data about john podesta and hillary clinton. that, to me, smacks of collusion, aiding and abetting, and certainly is worthy of an investigation. >> but beyond roger stone, beyond paul manafort, it sounded as if yesterday, you had some big concerns about secretary of state, rex tillerson, and his relationship with russia. what do you want to see answered there? >> i actually think that rex tillerson was a very poor choice for secretary of state. husband relationship with vladimir putin goes back 17 years. he crowed about it at a speech he gave at the university of texas in 2016. he received the order of friendship, the highest regarded order within russia, sat next to putin at a dinner, toasted him. in addition to that, igor
4:28 am
session, who was the ceo, is the ceo of one of the largest oil companies, he had done a deal with him. they were friends. i don't want our secretary of state to be so cozy with our biggest adversary. >> congresswoman spear, thank you very much for joining us on "new day". >> thank you. >> let's get to chris. talking about the hearing yesterday, the big question was why. why did russia want to ber serene in the 2016 election. we have tom pickering coming on. how does that filter into his take about how russia interacted the this election and what they might do in the next one. see me. see me. don't stare at me. see me. see me. see me to know that psoriasis is just something that i have. i'm not contagious. see me to know that... ...i won't stop
4:29 am
until i find what works. discover cosentyx, a different kind of medicine for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. proven to help the majority of people find clear or almost clear skin. 8 out of 10 people saw 75% skin clearance at 3 months. while the majority saw 90% clearance. do not use if you are allergic to cosentyx. before starting, you should be tested for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur... ...tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms... ...such as fever, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough. or if you have received a vaccine or plan to. if you have inflammatory bowel disease, tell your doctor if symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. see me. see me. see me. on my way. find clear skin... and a clearer path forward. for a different kind of medicine, ask your dermatologist about cosentyx. if you have moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis like me, and you're talking to your rheumatologist about a medication... ...this is humira. this is humira helping to relieve my pain... ...and protect my joints from further damage.
4:30 am
humira has been clinically studied for over 18 years. humira works by targeting and helping to... ...block a specific source... ...of inflammation that contributes to ra symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain and... ...stop further joint damage in many adults. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas... ...where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flulike symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. talk to your doctor and visit this is humira at work. won't replace the full value of your totaled new car. the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car
4:31 am
because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. and if you have more than one liberty mutual policy, you qualify for a multi-policy discount, saving you money on your car and home coverage. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.
4:32 am
two of the nation's top intel officials making the case that russia interfered in the 2016 election and made no bones about it. >>unequivocal. >> had no concerns about even being detected. that's what our intel experts
4:33 am
said about russia. and they then started to get pushed about what the motivation was. why did russia do this? take a listen. >> they wanted to hurt our democracy, hurt her, help him. putin hated secretary clinton so much that the flip side of that coin was, he had a clear preference to the person running against the person he hated so much. as the summer went on, and the polls appear to show that secretary clinton was going to win, the russians sort of gave up and simply focused on trying to undermine her. >> joining us now is thomas pickering. he's a former u.s. ambassador to russia. currently a fellow at the brookings institution and vice chairman of the hills and company. ambassador, so unequifl icvocaua discussion that's all about parsing, weapons comespecially he was loud and proud about this. russia hates clinton, and that was their motivation, at least early on. your take on that? >> i think it's not too difficult to conclude that. she was seen as someone who
4:34 am
supported color revolutions, and someone who told mr. putin, i think, pretty much, the unvarnished truth about the situation. russia was pursuing its own interests, but mr. putin's views about russia's interests are, that they certainly are going to be confected in a way that supports his continued leadership and his continued popularity, through the exaltation of russian nationalism, and wherever it can, and particularly in the obama administration, where he can step on u.s. feet. finally, i think as you remember, mr. putin was prime minister for a few years, while mr. medvedev took over the presidency. i think there was a certain amount, put it this way, of concern on mr. putin's part, whether justified or not, that the united states was kind of configuring things that mr. medvedev would stay around for a while longer, and be an easier person to deal with. all of those kinds of things are the kinds of things that obviously set off alarm bells in the head of a russian leader,
4:35 am
wl who has come through some difficult times himself at home. >> there was another moment, mr. ambassador, yesterday, where director comey talked about how russia was unusually loud, i believe was his word, in terms of their interference, meaning, particularly flagrant. so, will be to this. >> they were unusually loud in their intervention. it's almost as if they didn't care that we knew what they were doing or that they wanted us to see what they were doing. it was very noisy. their number one mission is to undermine the credibility of our entire democracy enterprise of this nation. and so it might be that they wanted us to help them by telling people what they were doing, their loudness, in a way, would be counting on us to amplify it, by telling the american people what we saw, and freaking people out. >> what do you think about that theory, ambassador? you know the russian officials
4:36 am
well. did they want to be particularly loud? >> well, i know that russian officials have a penchant for, obviously, doing things very quietly and covertly, when they want to, and try to do that. and then try to put in the way, put it this way, of absolute detection, false flag people, and perhaps guccifer was a false flag, or at least an operation covered under that name, that was a false flag. so, some of that was there. but i agree with director comey, it was unusual. and it clearly was unusual, because i think there putin wanted to deal, if i can put it this way, a lesson. and that lesson had important significance for him at home, in terms of his own popularity, kicking ankles for the u.s. has long been a russian practice, particularly when things are difficult. and mr. putin followed that as a pretty constant practice. and so, while he thought he had legitimate reasons in his own mind to do that, that also played a role. i don't think that the russians
4:37 am
really believe that they can undermine american democracy, but they clearly would like to do everything they can to influence things in america and have it their own way. it's part of their direction for promotion of their own national interests, and mr. putin was a promoter, if i can put it this way, of uncertainty in russia about the united states want its goals and objectives and tried to portray that in a way that helped to promote its own national popularity and his own leadership position. >> i don't know how they could see it as having been anymore successful. >> right, they did undermine. >> they undermined the process, had everybody at each other's throats, they had both sides of our political discourse right now, using it to opposite modes. and as a result, you heard both of the people testifying yesterday, suggest, hey, this wasn't the last time. this probably emboldened what will happen in the next cycle. which, of course, reflects why we should try to learn what they did and try to fix it going forward. how real do you think the threat is, that it can only get worse? >> well, i think, chris, we have
4:38 am
to wait until that unfolds. this is not the first time a foreign government has attempted to influence american elections, beginning in the 19th century, but we saw the iranians, for example, hold off release of the hostages, until president reagan was inaugurated, obviously, trying to send their own message. so, if we sit back and presume, in a naive way, that foreign countries don't want to influence the united states, don't want to influence events in their favor, and don't want to pursue their national interests is, even if they see that as a way of opposing the united states, then shame on us. but if we see it very clearly, for the kind of threat it is, and how it is playing out, then we need, obviously, to do everything we can to counter that threat, but also to take advantage of it, if i could put it that way. and this will be hard to take advantage of, but my own view is that, this is going to, in one way or another, end up, as much of a mistake for president putin
4:39 am
as i think people now see it, as a mistake for the u.s. and u.s. democracy and u.s. efforts in the future. >> all right. well, we like your optimistic view, ambassador pickering, thank you. >> thanks, alisyn. >> thanks so much for being with us. >> unusual, that thing you called it. >> optimism. >> it's rare, but he has it. supreme court nominee neil gorsuch set for a marathon second day of questioning at his confirmation hearings. the democrat on the senate judiciary committee tells us what he needs to hear from gorsuch, next.
4:40 am
or how high the pollen count, flonase allergy relief keeps your eyes and nose clear. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances that cause nasal congestion and itchy, watery eyes. for relief beyond the nose. flonase. ♪sweet, sweet st. thomas nice. ♪ so nice, so nice. ♪st. croix full of pure vibes. ♪ so nice, so nice. ♪ st. john a real paradise. ♪ so nice, so nice. ♪ proud to be from the virgin islands. ♪ ♪ and the whole place nice. to experience your virgin islands nice, go to
4:41 am
at bp's cooper river plant, employees take safety personally - down to each piece of equipment, so they can protect their teammates and the surrounding wetlands, too. because safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better. may not always be clear. but at t. rowe price, we can help guide your retirement savings. so wherever your retirement journey takes you, we can help you reach your goals. call us or your advisor t. rowe price. invest with confidence.
4:42 am
4:43 am
my decisions have never reflected a judgment about the people before me. only a judgment about the law and the facts at issue in each particular case. a good judge can promise no more than that and a good judge should guarantee no less. >> all right, that was judge neil gorsuch in his opening statement yesterday, pledging judicial independence. but gorsuch faced democrats who are still upset over the obstruction of president obama's nominee, judge merrick garland. >> republican senators denied any semblance of due legislative process to our last nominee, one, i would say, even more qualified than you, and that's saying something. >> joining us now is that member of the senate judiciary committee, democratic senator welcome sheldon wlohitehousewhis also investigating russia's interference with the 2016 election. good morning, senator. >> good morning. >> so you didn't pull any punches there in addressing
4:44 am
gorsuch. what is your beef with him? is it about him, personally, or is it that turnabout is fair play and you don't like how the republicans treated garland? >> neither of those things. our problem is that when the republicans have five appointees on the supreme court, they develop a really appalling track record of incredibly partisan decisions. as i brought out in my questioning yesterday, there were five to four decisions on elections law, and all six of them, six to zero, go in favor of republican interests at the polls, in ways that would be very predictable to the court. and when you look at the cases that pit a corporation against a human being, the 5-4 decisions go 16-0 against the human being and for the corporation, and we're now at stage where a majority of americans don't think a human being can get a fair shake in front of that
4:45 am
court, if their opponent is a corporation. >> okay, but in that case -- >> the real question for that hearing is he going to saddle up with him and recreate the gang of five and keep going on with this highly partisan bayeehavio. >> in that case, if it's all about the math, you're not going to ever approve any of president trump's nominees? >> nope, it means it puts the burden on him to convince us that he's not going to ride along with that posse and that he will actually stand as an independent judge and make the kind of decisions that he said he would make in his testimony yesterday. but we have to pay attention to a 16-0 record from the court in 5-4 decisions, pitting corporations against humans. and he has to be evaluated in that light. >> okay, so what did you think of yesterday? were you convinced by his claims of independence? >> there's a lot of, what i would call, nomination etiquette, that needs to take place. and all these candidates are
4:46 am
very, very carefully groomed. a lot of this stuff is kind of highly polish eed preparation. so a lot more will show when he has to actually answer questions. a, is he willing to give meaningful answers to questions? and b, how does he do? that, i think, will be the stronger test. but i've got nothing against a judge who is a judicial conservative. i just don't think that the supreme court should be politically controlled by big corporations in the republican party, and they shouldn't run up 6-0 and 16-0 records, when their interests are at stake. it's just not right. that's just not being a court. >> okay, let's talk about james com comey's testimony yesterday, in which he publicly confirmed that, yes, there is an ongoing investigation into russia's meddling, into the u.s. election, and whether or not there was any collusion with anyone on the trump campaign. were you satisfied with his answers? i know you had previously said publicly that you weren't getting enough out of the fbi or director comey.
4:47 am
what did you think about yesterday? >> yeah, we've been asking that question for a long time, and for the life of me, i can't understand why that was a hard question to answer. for as long as there have been bank robberies, the fbi has been showing up after the bank robbery, to say, we're on the case. and here, you have the equivalent of an election robbery, and it would be easy for them to say, hey, we're on the case. finally, he did so, which i think is the right thing to do, and now we'll just go forward with our hearings, under chairman graham, and woe'll continue to try to get to the bottom of what took place. >> senator, you heard director comey. he says there's actually a long-standing tradition of not confirming when there's an active investigation, what the fbi is doing. >> that's in the -- that's only in the context of international investigations and undercover investigations, but when there's a crime that everybody knows about, or an act that could be a crime, that everybody knows about, for the police chief to come in and say, hey, we're
4:48 am
looking into this, we're on the case, here are the people i've got to sign. don't worry, we'll try hard to get to the bottom of this, that's standard law enforcement procedure. >> but isn't this an international investigation with russia's meddling? >> it's also a very open investigation into a potential crime. and the intelligence folks are the ones who actually told the american people that this had taken place. so to say that this has taken place and then to say, and we're looking into it, is no big deal. >> senator sheldon whitehouse, thank you very much for being on "new day". >> thanks, alisyn. >> chris? >> all right. so the fbi director revealing russia's election meddling was, quote, unusually loud and obvious. former intel officials from the cia and kgb with their take on james comey's testimony, next. there's nothing more than my so when i need to book a hotel room, i want someone that makes it easy to find what i want. gets it. they offer free cancellation if my plans change. visit booking.yeah.
4:49 am
isjust wanna see ifa again? my score changed... you wanna check yours? scores don't change that much. i haven't changed. oh, really? ♪ it's girls' night they said business casual. i love summer weddings! oh no. yeah, maybe it is time. maybe i should check my credit score. try credit karma. it's free. oh woah. that's different. check out credit karma today. credit karma. give yourself some credit. with sleep number, there's an adjustment for that. tilt your tormentor and put those snores to sleep. does your bed do that? come into a sleep number store where mattresses start at $899. it's a no brainer. i did active duty 11 in july of '98. and two in the reserves. our 18 year old was in an accident. when i call usaa it was that voice asking me, "is your daughter ok?" that's where i felt relief.
4:50 am
it actually helped to know that somebody else cared and wanted make sure that i was okay. that was really great. we're the rivera family, and we will be with usaa for life. usaa. we know what it means to serve. call today to talk about your insurance needs. with e*trade's powerful trading tools, right at your fingertips, you have access to in-depth analysis, level 2 data, and a team of experienced traders ready to help you if you need it. ♪ ♪ it's like having the power of a trading floor, wherever you are. it's your trade. ♪ ♪ e*trade. ♪ ♪ start trading today at
4:51 am
z2a1gz zx9z y2a1gy yx9y
4:52 am
so i use excedrin.ments from my life. it starts to relieve migraine pain in just 30 minutes. and it works on my symptoms, too. now moments lost to migraines are moments gained with excedrin. [heartbeat] didn't care we knew what they were doing, and it was very noisy. their intrusions in different institutions. >> stunning from fbi director
4:53 am
comey. let's discuss the testimony, what it means for us going forward. we have cia counterterrorism official and cia counterterrorism analyst, phil mudd, and author of "deep undercover," good to have you both on the show. the suggestion by the fbi director that putin/russia's motivation was they hated clinton, and it was all about hating clinton, and do you believe that? >> he said that and i heard him say that and he didn't have a proof. this -- if there is proof it has not come out.
4:54 am
>> i very much agree with the ambassador you had on, mr. pickering, and it's all about destabilizing and creating noise and it's all about, you know, doing as much as possible to upset our democratic process, however you do it, and wherever that leads. i don't think it was so much an attempt to influence the election one way or another because the ambassador also said it could easily back fire, and as we look at this right now it could be backfiring if -- our president might not be inclined to be with the russians as he might be before. >> he certainly seems to be trying to be friendly, and he is laying the background for that, and what do you think, hey, they are going to do this again and it could be worse in the next
4:55 am
cycle? >> we have to separate out the two. if we look at what happen in the american election, and how aggressive the russians were, and if we cannot secure american candidates, that would be ludicrous. i think we ought to be careful, and in my 30 years in the intel business, i can tell you trying to figure out what somebody is doing, interfering in an election by stealing data, it's easier to figure out why. maybe they wanted us to see it? maybe they didn't care. but to try and understand why in the case of hussein, and motivation analysis is difficult and i would be careful in this case. >> and let's flip to the other issue we had, staying with you, phil mudd, you heard comey and
4:56 am
admiral rogers, and we have nothing on the wiretapping and there's no basis for president trump fingering the white house or obama, and the white house still insists there's still plenty to know? >> excuse me, you have the nsa and fbi tkrbgter saying no, and you have the white house live tweeting, and congress coming back and saying they just said you said something, and they said what the white house is saying is correct. this case is closed and sean spicer has his head in the sand, and the question i have going forward nobody is asking, chris, and periodically the president of the united states sits down every couple of weeks with the fbi and asks what threats do you see?
4:57 am
how many times are they having conversations that the president should be aware of about what is happening with regard to terrorism and the united states, and my guess is those conversations are not happening. >> speculation, but if that's even close to accurate, what does that mean about how our white house is playing into russia's hands in terms of the advantage of wanting to create what you called as, you know, destabilization, that being the goal of interference. what is playing out right now, could it be any better for russia? >> absolutely not. i think mr. putin is sitting back there and enjoying the show. it's a shame. and i don't believe there's blame just on one side of the aisle, it on both sides. we are throwing bombs at each other and inwardly focused and very political when we should be focused on national security and the threat is bigger coming from
4:58 am
the outside than a threat from a republican to a democrat, and vice versa. >> they call the tactics and techniques and procedures go into this hacking, and do you think it's likely that russia would have coordinated with the trump campaign, there will be any proof that comes out like that that the russian's needed trump's staff's help to do what they needed to do? >> it's highly unlikely, and as director comey said there's no evidence -- >> he didn't say that yesterday, he said it's an ongoing investigation and can't talk about it. >> but it's ongoing at this point. when we are talking about intelligence there are layers and layers of deseptions, and to get to the truth could take years or decades. >> the point of the investigation might be did they know about russian interference and if so who knew and should
4:59 am
they have said something? quickly, phil mudd, the blow to credibility and to have sean spicer say manafort, he was not a big deal, and what does that do in terms of the ability to do what you were talking about earlier, to go as the white house to the intelligence community and have that conversation? >> one thing that concerns me going forward. last year you and i were in florida dealing with the pulse nightclub shooting, and san bernardino happens after that, and if people like me inside and outside intel would say, i would trust bush and obama and i don't trust this guy, i need evidence, and i think he is destroying his credibility. >> all right.
5:00 am
appreciate you being here. there's a lot of news, and what do you say? let's get after it. >> the president's tweets about alleged wiretapping, and i have no information that supports those tweets. >> incapable of admitting error. >> investigating it and having proof of it are two different things. >> and putin had a clear preference. >> and the committee will extend the courtesy denied to judge garland. >> we feel really good where we are. >> thursday is our chance to end the obamacare catastrophe. >> announcer: this is "new day" with chris cuomo and alisyn camerota. >> it's tuesday, march 21st, 8:00 in the east. we begin with two bombshell


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on