Skip to main content

tv   New Day  CNN  July 27, 2017 4:00am-5:00am PDT

4:00 am
their knives out at each other. >> the fact that republicans in the senate won't go and deal with this now is absolutely embarrassing. >> determined to do everything we can to succeed. >> what we have before us now are a series of bad, badder and baddest choices. >> i heard a girl scream "help," and i look over and i see her fly out. >> she was screaming for her mom. her mom wouldn't wake up. >> sick to my stomach. >> this is "new day" with chris cuomo and alisyn camerota. >> all right. good morning. we welcome our viewers in the united states right now. >> happy to have you. >> sometimes we say around the world, but we'll stick to the united states for now. this is "new day." the white house' crackdown on leaks took a bizarre twist. there's a lot of continue very zee going on. it needs to be cleared up. it's centering around the new white house communications director, anthony scaramucci. he took to twitter last night, calling for a federal investigation into the leaks of his financial disclosure form.
4:01 am
he then deleted the tweet which seemed to accuse chief of staff reince priebus of leaking. there's a lot of bad blood there. the situation needs to be cleared up and we're trying to get to the bottom of it. >> meanwhile, president trump continues his attacks on the head of the department of justice, attorney general jeff sessions. all this comes as the senate gets set to vote on its best shot to get a health care plan passed. so what is in the so-called skinny repeal that they're working on today? cnn has it all covered. let's begin with cnn senior washington correspondent joe johns. he is live at the white house. give us the latest, joe. >> reporter: alisyn, you know incoming communications director anthony scaramucci walked in the door making it clear that he was taking on illegal leaks, making them a priority. and then politico reported on the contents of his financial disclosure form. then scaramucci claimed he, too, was the victim of an illegal leak. it's just not clear right now
4:02 am
whether it was illegal, even whether it was a leak because it could have been obtained through official channels. anthony scaramucci ramping up his rhetoric against leakers, tweeting he will be contacting the fbi and the justice department about the alleged leak #swamp before cryptically tweeting white house chief of staff preebs. lizza, a reporter for "the new yorker" tweeting that he can confirm scaramucci went to the fbi to investigate priebus for leaks. >> i can tell you with 100% certainty that anthony scaramucci believes this, that was his intention when he tweeted this. >> reporter: scaramucci deleted the tweet less than two hours later. hours earlier scaramucci told fox news he believes the leaks are coming from the top. >> one of the big problems here that i'm discovering in the coms
4:03 am
team is senior people are the ones doing the leaking and asking junior people to be doing the leaks for him. i'm proud to pre port to the president to hermetically seal off the coms team from this sort of nonsense. >> reporter: the justice department responding with a statement noting, like the attorney general has said, whenever a case can be made, we will seek to put some people in jail, and we will aggressively pursue leak cases wherever they may lead. scaramucci taking a page out of his boss's playbook by taking to twitter to air grievances with his fellow colleagues. while president trump continues to publicly attack attorney general jeff sessions on twitter. despite growing backlash from conservatives and his senior advisers urging him to stand down. >> i don't fully understand why the president has said what he said. but i think jeff deserves better treatment. >> reporter: the turmoil in president trump's inner circle comes as the pentagon was left
4:04 am
scrambling after mr. trump abruptly announced on twitter a ban on transgender people serving in the u.s. military, a stark reversal from the promises the president made to the lgbtq community on the campaign trail. >> i served on active duty in the military, and i can tell you we don't care about gender orientation or identity or who you love. we just care that you can shoot straight and complete the mission. >> reporter: now, that announcement is likely to shore up support for the president among his conservative base, some of whom had been critical of him in his pursuit, if you will, of the attorney general. the announcement also controversial because of the timing that came during the week the administration had originally designated as american heroes week to focus on service member. chris and alisyn. >> joe, thank you very much for all of that. joining us on the phone is cnn political commentator and washington correspondent for "the new yorker" ryan lizza.
4:05 am
ryan reported last night that anthony scaramucci's now deleted tweet was, in fact, aimed at reince priebus. ryan, thank you very much for being here to help us understand what happened with this tweet delete that happened from about 10:40 last night to after midnight. let me read the original anthony scaramucci, now the director of communications for the white house, his original mysterious tweet said this. in light of the leak of my financial disclosure info which is a felly. i will be contacting the fbi and the justice department, #swamp @reince. what's your reporting on this? >> first of all, my apologies for not being with you this morning. a little dad duty this morning. this is quite an unusual set of circumstances. let me back up and try to explain what i know. at 10:28 p.m. last night i was talking to a senior white house official, and the senior white house official was blaming
4:06 am
reince priebus for leaking anthony scaramucci's financial disclosure to politico yesterday. here is a direct quote from that recorded interview. scaramucci has talked to both the fbi and the department of justice about the leak of his financial disclosure, end quote. this person made it very clear that it was reince that needed to be investigated for this. that conversation happened at 10:28 p.m. at 10:41 p.m. anthony scaramucci publicly tweeted what we've just showed saying that he wants the fbi to investigate this and sort of cryptically tagging reince priebus's twitter handle. to me it was very obvious what he was saying there. but just in case there was any ambiguity, i noticed on twitter there was ambiguity. in fact, before that tweet happened, i was preparing to report this myself. i saw the tweet and i saw that people thought there was ambiguity, and i tweeted, just
4:07 am
in case there was any ambiguity, i know scaramucci was blaming reince for this and wanted the fbi to investigate him. those two tweets, mine and scaramucci's blew up, went viral last night to the small population that was up and paying attention to this. subsequently scaramucci deleted his tweet and then said that he was not indeed talking about reince. >> in fact, he said wrong, let me read it. wrong in terms of that speculation. tweet was public notice to leakers that all senior administration officials are helping to end illegal leaks, @reince. >> both can be right in an odd way. anthony could say i wasn't targeting him, i was talking about leakers in general. but he may be talking about reince. why would that be, ryan lizza? isn't it the truth of the situation that there is actually bad blood here and anthony scaramucci isn't necessarily the aggressor here. it has been reince priebus when
quote
4:08 am
scaramucci is involved. there's a lot of reporting that he has been going after him, he didn't want him to have a job, he's not happy about this job. can you confirm that? >> absolutely. scaramucci has not been shy in telling people privately over the last month since he was offered the job of public liaison and then moved to sell his -- divest of all his assets, creating the conflict of interest and he wasn't brought into the white house for that job. he was left in limbo. >> ryan, so sorry to interrupt. we actually have anthony scaramucci on the phone. >> let's get him. white house communications director anthony scaramucci joins us this morning. anthony scaramucci, can you join us? >> yes. when i was speaking to you last night ryan, i said it was unpatriotic that you would president tell me who the leakers were. i was on a plane from new york going to visit my mom. i was teasing you.
4:09 am
it was one italian to another, wasn't me trying to get you to say, if you could give me some sense of where they are, because i have a responsibility to the president of the united states -- >> anthony -- >> when you said you didn't, i totally respect your integrity and journalism. >> anthony, i don't know if ryan can hear you. but just in case, it did go out over the air. he heard what you meant when you were talking about him being unpatriotic. let's reset us at zero here. >> i want to reset at zero, but i also want you to know i spent about 15 minutes on the phone talking with the president of the united states who has given me his full support and his full blessing, and i'm going to read you something, chris. bear with me. the president also told me, if you're nice to me in this segment, he'll let me come back in the show. so why don't you let me talk a little bit and then you can ask me questions. but this is super, super important to the country. whether you agree with the president or disagree with the president, you have to love the
4:10 am
institution of the presidency. you have to love the office and you have to f lo our country. what is going on right now, i've done a major amount of work over the last five days. i've interviewed most of the assistants to the president. i've interviewed most of the people in the communications team and the white house. what the president and i would like to tell everybody, we have a very, very good idea of who the leakers are, who the senior leakers are in the white house. we'll get to that in a second. what i also want to say is we are working together, the president and myself and other members of his team and law enforcement to undercut and undercover -- out the leakers in the kun tr i. the white house leakers are small potatoes. i'll tell you about a few leaks that happened last night that i find reprehensible. the white house leaks are small potatoes relative with things going on about leaking things
4:11 am
about syria or north korea or iraq. those are the types of leaks that are so treasonous that 150 years ago people would have been hung for those types of leaks. the president bought me in. he knows i'm his friend first, chris. you're from new york, i'm from new york, the president is from new york. we had dinner last night. i sat next to the first lady. i love the president. i said that. i know the press wants to ridicule me for saying it six times from the podium. we started out as friends. i'm not a politician. i'm an american businessman and entrepreneur that built two businesses. i try to play it straight with people. thement is trying to play it straight with people which is why he has 140 or 125 social media followers because they want to hear it straight from the president. i said to the president this morning, i can't afford to be a sicko fan to you, sir. i have to talk to you as a friend so i can help you with this problem.
4:12 am
what i want to say to you is i understand the law. i know tlflshere was a public disclosure mechanism in my financial forms. what i'm upset about is the process and the junk pool, the dirty pool, chris, in terms of the way this stuff is being done, and the leaking won't stop. i can't have a couple of friends up from "fox & friends" and sean hannity who is one of my closest friends to dinner with the president and the first lady without it being leaked in seven minutes. it's absolutely completely and totally reprehensible. as you know from the italian expression, the fish stinks from the head down. i can tell you two fish that don't stink. that's me and the president. i don't like the activity going on in the white house. i don't like what they're doing to my friend. i don't like what they're doing to the president of the united states or their fellow colleagues in the west wing. if you want to talk about the chief of staff, we have had odds. we have had differences.
4:13 am
when i said we were brothers from the podium, that's because we're -- some brothers are like cain and ab el. i don't know if this is rep rabble or not, that will be up to the president. he's the chief of staff. he's responsible for understanding and uncovering and helping me do that in the white house which is why i purt the tweet out last night. when the journalists who know who the leakers are like ryan lizza, these guys know who the leakers are. i respect him for not telling me because i understand journalistic integrity. however, when i put out a tweet, i put reince's name in a tweet, they make the assumption it's him because journalists know who the leakers are. if reince wants to explain he's not a leaker, let him do that. let me tell you about myself. i'm a straight shooter and i'll go required to the heart of the
4:14 am
matter. i'm done talking. you can ask me questions. be nice on this segment, chris. this is a very serious matter of interest to all of america. >> i know when you say be nice, you're in part joking. let's be fair and try to get a sense of what's going on. >> i'm talking about nuance. >> ryan heard it. accepts what you said. >> be fair, chris. the truth of the matter is, i'm used to all different types of questions. i'm used to meanness. it doesn't matter to me. i'm here to play it straight for the american people and to protect my friend who is the president of the united states. go ahead. >> understood. alisyn and i have felt the bite of personal comments from power as well, but we still do the job and do it the right way because that's what matters more. let's do that right now. >> go ahead. >> these tweets seem to indicate a problem that didn't start today. i'm not talking about the leaking. it is well known, anthony
4:15 am
scaramucci, that reince priebus was against you getting a job in the administration. you've talked about it privately with reporters. he has denied it, but there are tons of reports that that denial is hollow. when you named him in the tweet, it seems to call that. where is your head on that situation, what do you believe the reality to be? it seems much more like cain and abel. >> after running two reasonably successful companies and one which the entire world knows, $180 million. here is what i know, when you're running a successful company or organization, you can take this human equation to the bank. underconfidence plus insecurity always equals paranoia and backst backstabbing. what you have to do as a manager, you have to go through the process and assist them and figure out where the backstabbing is coming from. that will lead you to the people that are insecure or
4:16 am
underconfident. if you can't bolster them and make them better, then you have to remove them from the process because then it becomes addition by subtraction. that's what i know. >> understood. >> i don't want to talk about anybody specifically because we're on a live television wire, but the people know. the journalists know. the young kids in the coms team are taking a lot of heat from me right now. they know, chris. the people know. you know who knows? the president of the united states. the president of the united states, again, whether you like the guy, dislike the guy, he's the smartest person i've ever worked for. so let ""vanity fair"" write about that. i honestly don't care. he has intuition and judgment and temperament in a way i've never seen. last night we were having din r dinner, i told his wife, i looked over to the first lady and i said, i forgot how much funny used to have when i hung out with him on the campaign trail. he's a very interesting and unique guy. there are people inside the administration that think it is
4:17 am
their job to save america from this president. that is not their job. their job is to inject this president into america so he can explain his views properly and his policies so that we can transform america and drain the swamp and make the system fairer for the middle and lower income people. >> i understand that, anthony. >> it's not their job from the establishment through calcification to sit there and try to withhold the president, to rein him in or slow down his agenda. that's not their job. >> let's talk about what we know a little bit. one is, yes, the president should be focused on making the lives of americans better. it's what he promised. it's what the country needs. understood. two, leaks happen, especially in political situations. there are different types of leaks. some are about national security. they can be dangerous. they have to be policed. understood. most are not that.
4:18 am
most are people surrounding a person in power who want to explain policy, who want to feed journalism, who have a lot of positive and benevolent intentions when they do so. three, this white house leaks more than any i have ever been in contact with. >> it's ridiculous. >> but i don't know if i'd use the word ridiculous because i think a lot of -- >> how is this, chris? unprofessional? you became a verbal proofreader overnight. how is unprofessional? >> i'm careful about my words because they matter. anthony, here is what i'm saying. i got your point. i just want to clarify because i have a question. >> i'm focused on the bad leaks. i know there's going to be -- >> you seem to be focused on both. >> focused on what hurts the institution of the president and the president himself. i understand we have to leak things to reporters to help shape policy or try to balloon things or do tests on ideas or people for different jobs. i'm talking about nefarious,
4:19 am
unnecessary, backstabbing, palace intrigue-like leaks. that's what i'm talking about. >> i understand why personally and politically that would be a problem, but the other concern with this -- i understand why that would be a personal incentive for you. i get it. but what i'm saying is, it does seem as though the president has used leaks as a distraction from the substance and content of the investigation with russia and that probe specifically, that he wants people to focus on where the information comes from let alone the information itself. >> here we go again. here we go again. i'll say to the american people today. i'll say it tomorrow and i'll say it until the investigation ends. i said it to you a couple weeks ago. i'll sit with you when the investigation is over and all these people are exonerated, i'll come and sit on the couch or chair by you and we'll talk about that. i believe, as does the president, that there's nothing
4:20 am
to the investigation. we want to go back to the russian investigation on the segment, we can do that, but it's just not true. >> i'm bringing it up because it's relevant, anthony. >> -- russian investigation and all this nonsense -- >> that's why the president brought them up in the first place. >> i think it's a bigger problem, chris. >> it mait be to you. >> let's try on cnn for maybe five minutes not to focus on the russia investigation. >> unfair, anthony. anthony, i brought you on this show to give you a chance to clarify something people beat you over the head with. >> why don't we go to russia at the end of the segment. let's get the gun on the bird and talk about what's going on. >> you said you want to do the job the right way. >> what's going on inside the white house, inside the departments and the intergovernmental agencies, that we need to stop because we're american citizens and the people working in those jobs have to honor those jobs and honor the position they have.
4:21 am
>> fine. >> like i said about the west wing, if there's 300 people working there and 300 million peopin the country, they're one in a million. acted like you've been there before. act with honor and dignity and respect and hold the confidence of the presidency and his office. if you want to leak something, you can have a new director of communications. if it's a leak that's going to help the presidency, why don't we do that. >> understood. that's something you have to police politically. >> a couple more minutes about russia and then go to russia at the end of the segment. >> we both know i'm going to ask what i think is important and we both know i have trouble taking direction. >> we know that. we know that from our hometown. >> the reason i brought up russia because contextually that's when the president started banging on leaks. he didn't like the implications of it politically. he wanted to focus on the leaks
4:22 am
instead of the substance. i'm saying journalistically that's concern. >> let me push back on that. i didn't study that like quincy. remember the jack klugman show? >> he was a medical examiner, not korcoroner. >> i'll push back on the false narrative? he doesn't like the leaks on russia, he's pushing back. >> 100% true. >> that isn't true. >> you just said he doesn't like the leaks. >> scanned lgs incorporated, another scandal we'll manufacture -- >> there's nothing fake about the russia investigation, nothing fake about the e-mails that don junior put out about russians trying to get him over. >> forget about the hacking, we'll get into that later. talking about the collusion with the campaign and russia, the russian government.
4:23 am
that's the specific thing i'm talking about which you and i both know they can't find evidence of anywhere. you want to talk about the fact that russians can possibly hack into the system. >> not possibly, they did. >> we can debate that later. >> i'm saying that's where the leaks started with the president. >> i'll stay on the side with the president. i said this to jake tapper over the weekend. if the russians really hacked that thing, they could possibly be clever enough not to leave any footprints. so the president is skeptical. while we talked last night at dinner -- i hope he's not mad at me for relaying this on tv, but i'll relay it. he said he thought for sure after reading all this stuff as an outsider that there were actually weapons of mass destruction in iraq. he said that last night. then he said there obviously weren't weapons of mass destruction in iraq, so he has his guard up as relates to some of the things that people say definitively and declaratively. the cia director at the time
4:24 am
said it was a slam dunk. i'm not going to bring his name up. he's a terrific guy and made a mistake. big deal. the point is when you say we know definitively or jake tapper says he knows definitively, thank god we have president trump in the room who will have a little skepticism and a cautious eye on this stuff, protecting the american people and particularly american servicemen. >> you're leaving part of it out, that the reason jake tapper or any journalist talks about this is because there was national intelligence, the head of cias, the guys the president put in say it. >> before you say all that, i'm trying to give your viewers insight into the president's personality. the president says all the time, there is one country in the world that can take out country out in 35 minutes. i don't know if they have 8,700 nukes, whatever the numbers are, it's a big number. it's incumbent upon us and incumbent upon them, whatever you think of them, that we try
4:25 am
to get along with each other. go to the next question. go ahead. >> it's just that contextually that's why i brought it up. it's not that we have some untoward fascination with an investigation. we do it because it threatens the foundation of the democracy. you know that. you know it matters. >> i know it matters. >> the president should know -- >> kellyanne conway has said it. i'll say it. the president has said it. >> it's an odd strategy for the president. >> if there's smoking gun proof, he'll take action. he's looking at the sanctions right now. he may decide to veto the sanctions and be tougher on the russians than congress. >> you think if he vo toes it, it's because he wants something tougher than what they want in the sanctioning bill? >> he may sign the sanctions exactly the way they are, or he may veto the sanctions and negotiate an even tougher deal against the russians. it is a counterintuitive, counterpunching personality.
4:26 am
i was in youngstown, ohio, with him. out can't believe the fan base there. the american people get it. the american people like what he's doing. the establishment does not like what he's doing. he's going to disrupt the establishment. >> why do you call the majority of america the establishment? it's a disparaging thing. it's meant to be an insult. why insult the majority of the country? >> i didn't hear the question. say it again. >> why insult the majority of the country by calling them them the establishment, like they're some type of other? >> i'm not insulting the majority of the country. >> the majority of the country -- >> you're good with the verbal proofreading this morning. >> i'm saying it because polls make it clear that the majority of america doesn't approve of the president right now. when you say his critics, you're talking about the majority of the country. i know he has his fan base we saw it in the general election. we saw it in the popular vote.
4:27 am
we've seen it, your own internal numbers. >> let's talk about the approval ratings right now. when you micro analyze the approval ratings, there's aspects, and the questions come in, i love the president but i dislike x, y, z or i like the president but dislike x, y, z. once we start executing the president's agenda and once we start talking clearly to the american people and we get the american people to light up congress's switchboard, to help us execute the president's agenda, that's the only way we'll drain the swamp. >> isn't the leak investigation a distraction from the agenda? isn't the big part of this leak investigation a distraction from this agenda? >> how is it a distraction? we have to clamp down the leaks. the president and i are working together with a large group of people to clamp down on the nefarious nature of these leaks. i'm talking about the stuff going on with leaking on syria,
4:28 am
north korea. like i said, the president views the white house leaks, a lot of this stuff as small potatoes. i can't have dinner with the guy, five minutes later, journalists know i'm having dinner. is that how we should be running the white house? is that how we should be running the white house? >> i know you want integrity of purpose with the white house. i think your desire to be straight about it is important. i think that's why these leaks last night got you in a little trouble and that's why i wanted to give you a chance to clarify them. >> let me tell you something. i work for one person. i report to the president of the united states. i spoke with him for 15 minutes. i'm far from in trouble. >> i'm not saying you're in trouble. i'm saying the tweets and deleting the tweets. >> he said if you're going on the chris cuomo show, he better be nice. you have any other questions? >> it's just not the job to be nice. it's to be fair.
4:29 am
you know that, anthony. >> okay. i'm using his words and they're very playful. let me make sure i'm getting the nuance to you. these are playful jocular words. when i say to ryan lizza you're being unpatriotic, i understand and completely totally respect journalistic integrity. i wasn't a journalist, but i did play one on tv. the journalists are figuring out whether they're on the left or on the right. i'm going to treat them with respect, dignity and kindness because they're a member of the fourth estate, we believe in the first amendment. we're given opportunity to review what we're doing. >> i don't know any journalist trying to figure out if they're on the left or the right. journalists know exactly where they're supposed to be when it comes to politics. let me ask you something. i want to give you a chance to clarify something. >> i don't understand what that meant. >> you said as journalists are trying to figure out when they're on the left or the
4:30 am
right. >> let me rephrase it. it want to be very clear this morning. as the journalists are trying to figure out the administration, whether they are on the left or the right, i want to offer them dignity. >> okay. >> dignity and class and kindness in their pursuit. i get the fourth estate and i understand why the first amendment is embedded in the constitution. i'm not -- i'm talking about the spectrum of journalists who come into the white house compound. we're going to treat them with respect and dignity and kindness. we're going to hope they do the same to us. they have to be fair and tough like you are, no question about that. i'm making a different point. i'm a crystal clear, transparent person. i'm far from in trouble. i don't like what's going on. i know the financial form. it came available 13 seconds ago, and i understand the sausage factory and the process of the way it was leaked. it's dishonest. it's shady. >> i get you. >> it's dirty pool.
4:31 am
pick another neighborhood expression from queens. you know it's not right. >> i understand. >> but what it's done to do is done to weaken me and undermine me with the president and my teammates. but my teammates know me. my teammates know i'm there to support them and help them, and all of us have got to ban together to support the president. i speak with the right pronouns. it's we and our. it's never me or i. >> it's important. when you're in government, you have to surrender the me to the we. >> he's our leader and one of the smartest people i've ever met, if not the smartest, smart in a different way than maybe some of the people in the jury roomist community don't like. i'm super happy he's our president, and so will the american people -- whatever that approval rating is now, it's going up. we're going to execute the agenda and he's going to get re-elected. i told tapper, i'll send him a box of kleenex. >> i don't know why you said that, by the way. jake tapper is one of the most straight down-the-middle guys.
4:32 am
it's insulting when you say that. >> what's that? >> it's unsurlting when you say something like that to jake tapper. >> i'm teasing him. >> that's not a nice thing to tease a journalist about. >> you're allowed to hit me with a battle axe. >> when you say to a journalist i'll bring you a kleenex, you're suggesting they're biassed. >> i'm making a joke. you hit me three times hard. i say something teasing, you guys get upset. >> you think this is hard? i'm giving you pats on the head like you're a puppy. these are just regular questions. >> finally we're having a real straight-up conversation. >> let me ask you something straight up. one of the reasons that people from politico wanted the disclosure form, another journalist did, is there's a question about what happens with your relationship with skybridge and whether or not you'll still benefit or profit from skybridge while working with the white house. what is your response? >> i'm not benefiting from
4:33 am
skybridge. i don't understand how i could be benefiting from skybridge. i'm entitled, because of my ownership, i'm entitled to some residual profit. i'm happy to fully disclose that. because they're releasing all this information, trying to hit me -- tried to foul me from coming into the west wing. now that i'm there, they're trying to figure out how to eject me from the west wing. my official start date got changed. i was supposed to start august 15th. they got any effective yesterday to try to protect me. i appreciate those guys very much. people know what's going on. now they're going to say how is he making money? i sold skybridge. i don't work there anymore. there's residual profits that once the sale occurs i'll receive. i'm not on salary. what do you want me to tell you? >> just the truth. that's what the disclosure form was full. >> that's what i'm telling you. by the way, i went through that
4:34 am
disclosure form with a fine-tooth comb. guess what? there could be a typo or error there. someone will maybe find that. i'm sure there's 400 journalists pouring over it. i didn't make a mistake out of dishonesty. i'm a very transparent guy. >> i understand. look, it's unusual we've been dealing with a lack of transparency when it comes to finances in the administration. it's good to get information on a disclosure form that we can discuss. we should know about the financial integrity -- >> in the neighborhood i grew up in, i'm never going to dishonor my parents by doing something wrong. these guys have op o'd me for months. not one trading violation, not one u-4 violation. they can't find anything because i would never dishonor my dad by hurting my last name by doing something stupid for money or
4:35 am
for power. i'm not doing it. it's not my personality. so 29 years on wall street, you guys can't find anything. keep looking. go ahead. >> last question here. you suggested in the tweet -- or it was suggested in the reporting by ryan lizza that you had gone to the fbi. if this is about dirty politics, should the fbi be involved in that? >> i talked to attorney general sessions. he's on his way to el salvador to talk about ms-13. it's a little early. >> that's interesting timing, at the same time the president is beating up sessions he's out of the country to el salvador. >> he's out of the country doing his job, doing his job let him do his job. >> so should the fbi or doj be investigating who leaked your disclosure form? >> i don't know. i don't know. >> you talked to them about it, right? >> you know what i like bringing
4:36 am
up to the department of justice or the fbi, people who have done things that are wrong, it makes them nervous. i have not done anything wrong. i am not 234er vows at all. you mentioned the fbi and department of justice -- i told the president this morning, when the iceberg hits the boat, the rats start flying up from steerage. the water comes in in steerage. when you mention the fbi and department of justice, you watch how the rats -- >> i understand. the boat geltz put into the iceberg. the iceberg does not hit the boat. my point of the analogy correction is -- >> that's cute. you're doing a good job this morning. that's a cute way to spin my metaphor. you get the point i'm making. >> i'm making a point as well which is, if you have the fbi chasing down stuff like dirty politics, is that the best use of their time? >> no, no, no. remember what i said, i'm trying to be careful this morning.
4:37 am
if there is illegality or impropriety in the process -- >> that's something different. >> i'm not asking them to do dirty politics. here are the laws. are any laws been broken? no laws have been broken. no fbi, no department of justice. i like mentioning them because i know knee-knockers when i see them and their knees will start knocking. >> you don't want to call people out, but obviously reince priebus is out there. do you have concerns about him? >> say that again. >> reince priebus' name is connected to this every time it comes out in the last 24 hours. do you have concerns about him. >> reince priebus can speak to you about that and he can address that himself. >> all right, we will ask him. >> people know my history between me and reince. i can speak for my own actions. he's going to need to speak for his own actions. i think we're going to go on too long. i'm going to take one last question and i'm going to hang up. >> that's it. >> i'm committed, as is the president, to building as clean of a shop as possible. no more dirty pool, no more
4:38 am
dishonesty, no more ha, ha, ha to your face and stab you in the back. we're new yorkers. we don't want to run the place like that. we want to run an honest and clean shop so we can effect the president's agenda. with that i'll say good-bye. i appreciate the opportunity of being on. some day you will let alisyn interview me, at least once. >> alisyn has interviewed you. >> that's actually a joke. >> i hope it's not a joke. i look forward to interviewing you anthony. >> i'm throwing that in here alisyn because he dominates all these segments. >> thank you, anthony. i know you had your own agreement and i honored that, you had an agreement that you worked out. i look forward to the next time you come on. >> that's a deal. >> thank you for honoring it. anybody can measure this conversation, you did most of the talking as you should because this is about you making your case. i'm tell you what, i respect the intentions that you state, anthony, which is you're going to treat people with civility and decency.
4:39 am
it will be a welcome change in the dynamic. >> i think you can ask your journalists there from your shop, that's exactly what we're trying to do. >> it will be a welcome change. >> i appreciate it, sir. you guys have a good day. >> you, too. >> you, too, anthony. fascinating stuff to dive into. on the phone with us still is ryan lizza who is the reporter we were talking to when we got the call from anthony scaramucci. ryan, he started talking to you directly first, when we first went to him on the phone call. i want your impression of that. my impression, he seemed to confirm that he spoke to you last night and it was his impression that you somehow took something seriously that he meant in jest. how did you interpret those first words that he was saying to you? >> that was a little surreal this morning. like the movie "annie hall" when they're talking about marshal mcclune. >> and there he is in line. >> a couple things about the interview and then i'll answer
4:40 am
the question. he's very clearly trying to straddle this line between not publicly going after reince but at the same time saying things like, quote, they weakened me and undermined me with the president. they tried to stop me and now they're trying to eject me. these guys have opinion o'd me for six months. he's clearly still at war with folks in the west wing who have been trying to make sure he didn't come into the west wing originally and now he believes trying to get him out. i want to be careful about what i say. you're right, at the top of the interview he did say that we talked last night. i want to be careful what i say about that. but that is true. we did talk last night. what he was referring to is a little complicated. >> ryan, i appreciate what
4:41 am
you're doing. there are rules, obviously that we follow. i appreciate you're following those rules. >> he publicly confirmed that we talked last night. i'll speak specifically to what he was referring to, just the part of our conversation that he talked about on your air. what happened was, as we mentioned, last night i reported that anthony and sean hannity of fox news and bill shine, a former fox news executive were all having dinner with president trump. in scaramucci's attempts to battle leaks, he called me after the dinner when he realized i reported that, and that's what he was referring to at the top of the show there. he was referring to the conversation we had when he called me, when he was essentially trying to figure out how i knew that he and hannity and bill shine were all having dinner. he was very worked up and wanted to know who leaked that. the call was sort of in the context of his war against
4:42 am
leaks. >> we get phone calls like that all the time. we're getting more of them these days because, ryan, i'm sure it's true in your experience as well, never had a white house leak as much as this one does. why they do it is worthy of discussion. ryan, thank you for the reporting. always good to have you on. get back to the kids. joining us is our panel, david chalian, cnn political director, a.b. stoddard of realclearpolitics and josh green senior correspondent and author of "devil's bargain, steve bannon, donald trump and the storming of the presidency." i know you've been listening along. david chalian, what jumps out at you? >> a few things. first, it want to make clear for everyone, this is breaking the cardinal rule of what being the white house communications director is about in many ways. this was just a half hour about anthony scaramucci. i know he couched it all in
4:43 am
protecting the president and the presidency from these leaks, but about him and a battle he's having internally in the west wing for a half an hour, not really about the president's agenda at all, which is usually what a white house communications director comes on television to talk about. we should take note of how different that is. >> he would say one of the president's top agendas is stopping the leaks. he seemed very fixated on that and that's what the president wants him to talk about. that is their agenda. >> he also categorized some of the leaks, especially the ones from last night that ryan was talking about, as small potatoes. the idea that they get so worked up over what they characterize as small potatoes is noteworthy as well. while he refused to name names -- as he said, we know the relationship between him and reince. he did go on and say that, if reince wants to come on and say he's not the leaker, he should do that. i know he deleted the tweet.
4:44 am
i know he said it was a reference that they were all working together. it seems to me, if you say -- that's a challenge. if reince wants to come on and say he's not the leaker, he can do that. it seems to me he's throwing down a challenge to reince priebus. >> of course he is. >> and not one of working together which is the excuse he gave this morning. >> there's so many different layers to this, a.b. stoddard -- we thank anthony scaramucci for coming on. access is critical to covering the white house, and it's one of the things that gives the show an advantage. what did we learn there? there's stuff learned about transparency of finances. that's why it's good to have brother joshua here this morning to talk about how scaramucci is putting stuff out on his disclosure form that we're still waiting to get from the president in some respects. this is a tale of two cities going on here. you have palace intrigue, and that's what it is. when reince priebus is jealous, slash, doesn't like, slash,
4:45 am
doesn't want anthony scaramucci in the shop, that's palace intrigue. you then have something else which is what i was trying to get to with anthony, do you want the fbi and doj chasing after bad political behavior? do you want leaks, the source of information to dominate the discussion of the substance of that information with the russia probe? let's be honest, a.b., that's where this started for president trump, was to use the leaks as a distraction from the substance of what was coming out about the russian context. >> i think this whole discussion about the leaks and having scaramucci come on for half an hour talking about it is a way to distract away from the disarray that was caused yesterday by the president's tweet about the transgender ban in the middle of a firestorm over his abuse of his attorney general which brought out a huge cavalry of republican senators rushing to the television cameras, some of whom have not been on in years to say, not only was the recusal the right thing to do, but sessions should
4:46 am
stay in the job and be left alone by the president. he should stop insulting him. so sometime during the day, in order to sort of quell this conservative revolt, something you were referring to earlier, chris, he decided to sort of please the people that were angry about separations by announcing what people -- went beyond what people were expecting in the military which was, let's stop paying for these transgender treatments and medications and surgeries, but let them serve. so he went further. he shocked everybody. now he wants anthony to come on and do a scaramucci show for half an hour? a direct attack of reince priebus. he admitted he wants to intimidate him by raising the specter of an fbi director, even though this is purportedly a public document. it was all about anthony scaramucci which is interesting. it was part trump infomercial as well as how great the president is and how much support he has,
4:47 am
especially from anthony. normally aides get in trouble when they come onto the spotlight and make it about them. so far in the last few days we've heard a lot about how anthony scaramucci is going to run this, what he's mad about, he doesn't like to have a private dinner leaked out to the public with the president. it's not about the president's agenda. it's a total distraction designed to get us to stop talking about the disarray and disruption of that transgender ban and what he's doing to sessions and the fact that several cabinet secretaries are really tempted to leave this administration. >> josh, you've been taking notes along with us? >> i've been taking notes and doing reporting. it's been very interesting to have a front row seat to that episode. it's important to step back and let viewers know how bizarre and unusual what just transpired is. the white house communications director live on cnn revealing conversations with reporters, calling reporters unpatriotic -- >> which he said was a joke. >> well, even as a joke, it's
4:48 am
weird. the whole jocular towel snapping live thing on air, i think it shows scaramucci's inexperience in politics. i think it also does a couple other things. i was texting and e-mailing with white house officials saying what does it look like on the inside. one adviser messaged back to me saying this is a car crash. so the idea that stunts like this are going to lock down the leaks, shut them off, i think is probably wrong. >> as evidenced by the communication you had during it. >> during the interview, and i think we'll see a lot more of that. >> why is this white house leaking more and others? i challenge any journalist who can come out and say, no, this one is not bad, the obama one. i'm saying i've been around several and never seen anything like this. it seems to me they're doing it because they're insecure about the leadership from the top. they either don't like the tone,
4:49 am
worried about being embarrassed. >> the chaos in the white house. some are leaking out of frustration. some are leaking to take out a rival which seemed to be the point of scaramucci's tweet last night, although he tells us live on air it wasn't. >> cain and abel. >> one of whom ended up being murdered. it becomes a cable news story and they know the president watchs cable news. there's some advisers who believe the best way to get their message in front of trump is to go through cable news. >> that certainly seemed to be, david, what scaramucci was doing for part of that interview. he was praising the president saying that he's not sick oh fan, he feels strongly about this man and his style. he does seem to be telegraphing
4:50 am
directly into the >> he also indicated again in a bit of a role reversal, that it seemed that president trump was his briefer in advance of this interview. that president trump was prepping him for this interview. he said he had a 15-minute conversation with him before he got on here. so not only is he talking directly to him and allowing president trump to watch on cable news theagelation coming his way from his staffer, but it's what he cooked up just before he got on. >> david, you're 100% right. so balance it to ab on this. i don't know that that's a problem. i don't know that the president is involved in the messaging and anthony scaramucci is very differential to him and has a strong affection. i grew up in a political shop. those are things people want. they like people around them who love them and are dedicated. that's fine. the question is how does it reflect the work? a.b., the one thing i wanted to come back to you on is i would be surprised if this were clever
4:51 am
enough to be a distraction from the lgbtq and what happened with sessions. i would be surprised if that's the process. i think they care about this leak dynamic and how it's perceived. and they wanted to jump on top of this because anthony scaramucci does not want to be seen as the bad guy when he is -- he believes and maybe objectively, the victim of what's going on inside that house. and i don't think it gets the president around from that lgbtq. we were hammering it this morning because it is way out of step with what he said and almost indefensible from a fact perspective. >> i just think if you look at the conflict he's created on capitol hill with senate republicans and house republicans over the transgender -- >> right. >> -- in the military issue, combined with his abuse and bullying of senator sessions. >> yes, the timing is curious. i think you're dead on. >> it is coming to blows, but i also think that's even a sadder statement. if he wants anthony scaramucci
4:52 am
to talk about himself on tv for half an hour, and directly, you know, pretending he's not attacking reince priebus is laughable. it was a direct attack at reince priebus. he's saying you can ask reince to say he's not the leaker. >> anthony would say it's a counterattack. >> they don't need to worry about leaks of palace intrigue if they don't have palace intrigue. so what you do is get rid of the piegt who are fighting with each other. but that's not what happens. he keeps people fighting with each other. >> can i say a fixation on leaks is a real fixation of the president. i was asking about sessions why he was getting hazed, what he could do to get back in trump's good graces, the answer was go after leakers. i think scaramucci is being entirely earnest in coming on the air and stomping all over white house leakers. the problem is his performance is creating more leaks live in realtime. my phone is blowing up. i have trump advisor saying, dude, how bad was that? how is this thing playing live on the air?
4:53 am
call me when you get off -- this is amplifying precisely the problem that scaramucci is trying to shut down. i don't think this is going to be a very effective strategy. >> let's call that person live on the air. >> no, let's not. unlike the white house comms director, i don't like to reveal -- >> panel, thank you very much for all of your perspectives on this highly unusual morning. we have a new one to bring in now. joining us democratic senator chris coons of delaware. i know you were also listening along with that anthony scaramucci interview whachlt do you hear from the white house director of communications? >> i thought that was a striking exchange. and i -- i almost don't know what to say in response. i mean, embedded in that very long exchange with chris cuomo were a couple of pretty striking suggestions. to me, the one that jumped out was that president trump might veto a very strong bipartisan
4:54 am
russia sanctions bill. it came out of the senate 98-2. if that's not a veto-proof majority, i don't know what is. it came out of the house with an even greater margin. and it would impose new sanctions on russia and iran and on north korea. i think there's no doubt that all three of those countries are adversaries of the united states, pose a threat to the united states, and the idea that the president wouldn't embrace that leadership from the congress is pretty striking. of all the things that anthony scaramucci had to say, that one sort of jumped off the page at me. >> okay. so there's the sanctions bill. there's also what the president is going to do about his own attorney general jeff sessions whom he has publicly dressed down for three days in a row. if he -- i mean, look, it has been speculated what he may be angling for is a recess appointment. that he would fire the attorney general jeff sessions and while you all are off on recess he would make a recess appointment
4:55 am
to avoid what would be predicted to be a very tough confirmation process. if that happens, what do you in congress do? >> well, first, i think before we go out on recess, we're going to take steps to make sure that the president doesn't have the ability to make a recess appointment. this was an issue that was litigated when president obama was in office. the supreme courts made it clear only if we recess for ten days or more does the president have the ability to make a recess appointment. and one of the few powers the minority has is to set the terms of adjournment in negotiation with the majority. i think that we're very strong statements by conservative republican senators that they would be upset by the abrupt firing of the attorney general. the chairman of the judiciary committee, chuck grassley of iowa, we're not likely to be taking up a new attorney general confirmation. so i think there's strong pushback both in defense of attorney general and his friends
4:56 am
and former colleagues here, and i think you will see some tough work by democrats to make sure that the president doesn't have a window to make a recess appointment. and i think that's a good thing that we're working in a bipartisan way to make sure we're following the regular order and that the senate isn't cut out of its constitutional role of advice and consent. >> meanwhile, you have your own issues with attorney general jeff sessions. >> yes. >> in fact, i believe you have drafted a letter to the department of justice because you believe that attorney general sessions has somehow violated his recusal by being involved in the firing and giving advice about the firing of fbi director james comey. here is what your letter, a piece of it says, that we've gotten, i'm concerned that attorney general jeff sessions has not honored the scope of these recusal. his involvement in the dismissal of fbi director james comey is especially troubling. what do you want out of the doj? >> what i would like the attorney general to do is honor his recusal. he did the right thing in his confirmation hearing and in the
4:57 am
days afterwards in saying that he would step back from any ongoing investigation involving the presidential campaign. he was one of president trump's earliest advisors and supporters. he campaigned with him across the country. when some concerns were raised in his confirmation hearing about how independent he might if there were an investigation ongoing into either the trump campaign and possible collusion with russia or the e-mail situation. i want him to respect that. if he has stepped back from matters involved in the presidential campaign, then why was he directly involved in firing fbi director jim comey were the publicly given reasons for why he was fired. for what rod rosenstein said or get it, quote/unquote, off my
4:58 am
back, which i believe is what president trump said. so i just want to make sure he's doing his job, in compliance with recusal and continuing to direct the department of justice in a way that keeps faith with the commitments he made to those of us in the senate who had some real concerns about his unreported meetings with the russian ambassador. >> okay. senator, next big topic. i mean, there's so much news -- >> there's a lot. >> -- coming out of capitol hill and the white house, health care. what is the plan today for senate with health care? >> well, the first big question, alisyn, is what's the bill? remember, 50 republican senators voted to go into debate on a bill without having a bill. so minority leader chuck schumer last night said we're going to stop moving forward on democratic amendments until we see the actual bill. they are calling it a skinny repeal. what we think the republicans are ultimately going to go to is a so-called skinny repeal.
4:59 am
but from what we understand about it, it will be a big fat problem for about 16 million americans who will get thrown off of health care if they repeal the individual mandate, the employer mandate, the medical device tax and the public health improvement fund of the aca, which is what we are guessing will be in the final sort of thinned down repeal approach. it will actually have a huge and negative impact on millions of americans. to do this with no substantive hearings on this bill, with no bill right now and with no opportunity for the folks who care for us, for nurses and doctors, health care providers, hospital leaders, to testify about it is just malpractice in public health. >> senator chris coons, thank you. you have a very busy day ahead. obviously we will be watching on all of these fronts. thanks so much for taking time for us. >> thank you. >> we're following a lot of news as we've said. let's get right to it.
5:00 am
good morning everyone. welcome to your "new day." it is thursday july 27th, 8:00 in the east and we begin with breaking news. a growing rift inside the white house over leaks exposed in a series of late-night tweets and a delete. moments ago we spoke with the white house communications director anthony scaramucci to explain his tweets that seem to implicate white house chief of staff reince priebus as a leaker. it said, quote, in light of the leak of my financial disclosure info, which is a felony, i will be contacting the fbi and the justice department, #swamp@reince45. >> a lot of back and forth. tweet was deleted. all this speculation about whether or not this was so and this was setting up to being a morning complete with spin and pundits coming onto give their take. and who needs any more of that? so "new day" decided to go to the source to get some clarity on what really matters. we reached out to scaramucci to answer for the situation and he took the opportunity and called

65 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on