tv State of the Union With Jake Tapper CNN November 12, 2017 6:00am-7:00am PST
russian denial. president trump seeming to backtrack now after appearing to side with vladimir putin over his own intelligence agencies. and calling former intelligence chiefs political hacks. two of the men he called out, james clapper and john brennan, are here to respond, exclusively, next. plus, dueling plans. republicans in the house and senate try to come to an agreement on taxes. >> we're not doing this for
political benefit. we're doing this to help improve people's lives. >> but as new details are released, will some middle class americans take a hit? treasury secretary, steve mnuchin, joins me live in minutes. and senate scramble. alabama candidate roy moore accused of sexual misconduct with a 14-year-old girl. >> these attacks involve a minor, and they're completely false and untrue. >> what will the republican party do if moore wins? ohio governor john kasich weighs in. hello, i'm jake tapper in washington with where the state of our union is totally confused. after a week of discipline on his foreign trip in asia, president trump unloaded overnight in a series of tweets and comments hitting his critics as haters and fools and says he tried to be friends with kim jong-un and essentially calling kim jong-un short and fat. president trump also appeared to
kind of maybe sort of backtrack on earlier statements in which he seemed to take the word of russian president, vladimir putin, over american intelligence agencies asserting unequivocally russian election interference. during a press conference in vietnam, the president was asked to clarify once and for all whether he believes russia interfered in the u.s. election. here's his response. >> i believe that he feels that he and russia did not meddle in the election. as to whether i believe it or not, i'm with our agencies, especially as currently constituted with their leadership. i believe in our intel agencies, our intelligence agencies. i've worked with them very strongly. there weren't 17, as was previously reported. there were actually four. >> just to be perfectly clear here, president trump was given yet another chance to definitively state, quote, i believe russia interfered in the 2016 election, unquote. and, be again, he did not do so. those comments come after president trump took aim at america's intelligence community after his meeting with vladimir
putin. speaking to reporters on air force one in a conversation, the white house will not allow us to play the audio from, president trump says he, quote, really believes putin means it when he says he didn't meddle, saying, quote, he says i didn't do that. i think he is very insulted by it. if you want to know the truth, don't forget, all he said is he never did that. he didn't do that. i think he's very insulted by it, which is not a good thing for our country, be unquote. and then he went on to suggest the assessment of the u.s. intelligence community was politically motivated. i mean, give me a break, they're political hacks. so you look at t i mean, you have brennen, clapper, comey. comey is proven now to be a liar and leaker. so you look at that, and you have president putin, very strongly vehemently says he had nothing to do with that. here to respond directly to the president's comments are two of the former intelligence chiefs, the president called out. former cia director, john brennan and former director of national intelligence, general james clapper. i'll just start. what is your response, mr.
brennen, to what president trump said about vladimir putin and u.s. intelligence agencies? >> well, i think mr. trump knows that the intelligence agencies, specifically cia, nsa and fbi, the ones who have responsibility for counter intelligence and looking at what russia does, it's very clear that the russians interfered in the election. and it's still puzzling as to why mr. trump does not acknowledge that and embrace it, and also push back hard against mr. putin. the russian threat to our democracy and our democratic foundations is real. and i think his continuing to not say very clearly and strongly that this is a national security problem and to say to mr. putin, we know you did it, you would have to stop it, because there are going to be consequences if you don't. >> and he once again said what he said, originally, and giving the impression to a lot of people that he sided with putin, and he started attacking the u.s. intelligence agencies. you two in particular. and then when given an opportunity to clarify, to say what do you believe, he didn't
really clarify. he said -- he didn't say i believe russia interfered in the 2016 election and i think they need to stop and i take it very seriously. he said, putin believes what he believes and i side with our intelligence agencies. but it was vague. why do you think he does that? >> i don't know why the ambiguity about this. because the threat posed by russia, as john just said, is manifest and obvious and has been for a long time. putin is committed to undermining our system, our democracy and our whole process. and to try to paint it in any other way is, i think, astounding and, in fact, poses a peril to this country. >> what threat -- what peril does it pose to the country? >> well, for one, that as we have seen, and the evidence that's come out since the publication of our intelligence community published on the 6th of january, further reinforces the depth and magnitude and
scope and the aggressiveness of the russian interference. to include their very astute use of social media. apart from that, something we don't think about too much, is the fact that the russians are embarked on a very aggressive modernization of their strategic nuclear forces. to include a very capable and scary counter space program. they only had one adversary in mind when they do this. and, oh, by the way, the russians are in abject violation of the inf treaty, the intermediate nuclear forces treaty. so the russians do not harbor good intentions toward the united states and there shouldn't be any illusions about that. and our president fosters that ambiguity. >> the president also called both of and you fbi director comey political hacks. all three of you worked in senior levels in the obama administration. although you also worked during the bush administration. how do you respond to the charge? >> first of all, he was referring to us as political
hacks because he was trying to delegitimize the assessment done. they did not write that assessment. it was written by the professional intelligence officers and law enforcement officers of this great country. secondly, i -- feel very honored to be associated with jim clapper and jim comey in the same category. and considering the source of the criticism, i consider that criticism a badge of honor. and third, i found it particularly reprehensible that on veterans day that donald trump would attack and impugn the integrity and the character of jim clapper, who served in uniform for 35 years. who responded to the call of his country to go to vietnam, flew in over 70 combat support missions over vietnam. and like senator mccain, really did put his life at risk because of this country's national security. and to impugn jim clapper on veterans day, who has dedicated so much of his life to this country, i just find that
outrageous, and i think it's something mr. trump should be ashamed of, but it doesn't seem as though anything he does he feels any shame whatsoever. >> what is the effect of these attacks, not on you two or jim comey, but on other people in the fbi, in the cia and the nsa? people who are still there, who worked under you and are still there working to try to make the country safer? >> first, i have to reciprocate what an honor it has been to serve with the likes of john brennan and jim comey, who are dedicated public servants. and have served this country long and well and with great integrity. i think it can't have a positive -- cannot have a positive impact on the morale or the work force of the intelligence community. but i do believe in my heart that the men and women of the intelligence community will continue to convey truth to power, even if the power ignores the truth. >> at one point, president trump said he thinks vladimir putin is
insulted by the suggestion and the conclusion by the intelligence agencies that russia interfered in the u.s. election. what do you make of his bringing up putin feels insulted? >> i think mr. putin is very clever in terms of playing to mr. trump's interest in being flattered. and also i think mr. trump is, for whatever reason, intimidated by mr. putin, afraid of what he could do or what might come out as a result of these investigations. so it's very worrisome. and i think it sends a worrisome -- very disturbing signal to our allies and partners who are concerned about russian interference in their democratic processes, as well. so it's either naivete, ignorance or fear. in terms of what mr. trump is doing vis-a-vis the russians. >> president trump took to twitter yesterday to try to justify his position, his posture towards russia. he said, quote, when will all the haters and fools out there realize that having a good relationship with russia is a
good thing, not a bad thing. they're always playing politics, misspelled, bad for our country. i want to solve north korea, syria, ukraine terrorism. you can greatly help. that's his argument, russia can be a help on these issues and the posture of being belinda jensen belligerent won't assist in that matter. >> again, the likelihood that the russians are going to pursue like interests with us is slim and none. and i think it's very naive and, again, perilous to this country to make an assumption that russia is going to behave with the best interests of the world or certainly the united states in mind. they're not. >> so mr. brennen, director brennen, you said a couple minutes ago, you talked about the reasons why president trump might be susceptible to what putin tells him. and you talked about flattery.
you also talked about fear. i can't ignore the fact that all of this comes at a time when there's a lot of speculation about whether or not the russians have damaging information about president trump. this comes, of course, within the context of the fact that president trump has been willing to criticize everyone from the cast of "hamilton" to meryl streep, but has yet to say one disparaging word about vladimir putin. do you think this idea that maybe the russians have something on him have, have compromising material, is relevant here? >> well, i don't know if mr. trump is considering that. i just know that he has been very determined to try to de legitimize any effort to come up with the truth in terms of this investigation. his attacks on the intelligence community, on the assessment, the attacks on the media. this is an effort to, again, try to undermine those quarters that
could pose a serious threat to him. also, i think it shows the insecurity that he still feels about the election. and how russian interference may have contributed, in fact, to that election. so i think there's a combination of factors that are motivating the president at this time. >> do you know of any compromising material that the russians might have on him? >> i have shared everything i know with the intelligence committees. >> that's not a no or a yes, because we're not privy to the information that you gave to the intelligence committees. >> that's true. >> okay. let me ask you a question about how in 2016 you were all watching and monitoring and assessing what was going on with the russian interference. in retrospect, was it a mistake of president obama not to make a bigger public deal of this at the time? >> well, this is in the would 've, could 've, should 've department. and i -- bearing in mind, wasn't much of a template or rule back for how to handle a situation like this. i think the arguments -- the
concern that the administration had was, if we did make a big public deal of this, would we first be amplifying what the russians were doing. and i think, frankly, the president was probably sensitive to the accusation that he was putting his hand on the scale and trying to affect the outcome of the election, if he spoke up about it. now, we did. we put out a statement. we at the time then secretary of homeland security, jeh johnson and i put out a statemnt on the 7th of october, which pretty forthright statement about what the russians were doing. and it was issued before the election. unfortunately, it got emasculated, overcome by the "access hollywood" tapes. and so it sort of got lost in all of that. so i think what was done was appropriate. i guess you could go back and say, well, we should have been more aggressive or done
something earlier. i don't know. but there were good reasons why there was caution and discretion here. >> director brennen, so general clapper just said there wasn't the template, but russians have been attempting to interfere in elections before. 2016 was not the first time. it was the most successful time ever, probably, in russian history. but it wasn't the first time. why were the intelligence agencies, and not just the intelligence agencies, law enforcement, communications, every part of the government, why was it not better prepared? >> well, i think we were prepared. it's a question of during campaign season, you want to be able to understand everything that the russians might do. so we had a responsibility to make sure the president and the congress were informed. public statements that were made about russian attempts to interfere. at the same time, we wanted to be able to know what they were doing so we might be able to thwart anything more extensive that they might have done. and i do think that the push back, both publicly and privately against the russians, gave the russians some pause.
because it was made very clear to them we were on to their game and it was going to have very serious consequences. so i think the intelligence community, law enforcement, have their counter intelligence antenna up all of the time. and i think we did a pretty admiral job. >> since you two left the office in january 2017, we've learned more about attempts by the russians to reach out to the trump campaign. we've learned about donald trump jr., eagerly accepting a meeting to get dirt on hillary clinton from somebody he was told was a russian lawyer. we've learned with the comey plea agreement with george papadopoulos, former foreign adviser for the trump campaign, we've learned that he was told by a professor with ties to the kremlin in april 2016. long before i knew anything about the hacking or the public knew anything about the hacking. that the russians were claiming they had damaging information. now, you said in january, 2017, this year, that you knew of no
collusion. did you know of those two events? >> no, i did not. and the statement i made at the time was true. i had no direct evidence of collusion. now, we had lots of concerns, because we were aware of multiple meetings that were going on while -- at least my part, was not directly of the content of these meetings. but we were certainly concerned, and the metaphor i've used before is i think our dashboard warning lights were clearly on about what was going on. but to say specifically that we had evidence of -- smoking gun evidence of collusion, no. but, of course, a lot more has come out that's, you know -- raises i think circumstantial questions, if nothing else. >> what message do you think president trump is sending to vladimir putin right now in terms of russia's continued attempts to interfere in
elections in europe and potentially in the united states again? >> well, i think what he's doing is saying to vladimir putin, we need to put this behind us, because there is important work to be done. and i agree. we need to be able to find a way to improve relations between moscow and washington. but i think what by not confronting the issue directly, and not acknowledging to putin, that we know that you're responsible for this, i think he's giving putin a pass. and i think it demonstrates to mr. putin that donald trump can be played by foreign leaders who are going to appeal to his ego and to try to play upon his insecurities. which is very, very worrisome from a national security standpoint. >> do you agree that donald trump can be played by foreign leaders like putin, and if so, does that make you concerned about the security of the united states? >> i do. i think -- you know, he seems very -- susceptible to rolling out the red carpet and honor guards and all the trappings and pomp and circumstance that come
with the office. and i think that that appeals to him, and i think it plays to his insecurities. and, yes, i do think both the chinese and russians think they can play him. >> and then lastly, do you know -- maybe you can't answer this question. but do you know, director brennen, of any laws broken by the trump campaign, anybody affiliated with the trump campaign, when it comes to working with the russians on election interference? >> i'm just a former intelligence officer. i never had the responsibility for determining whether or not criminal actions were taken. but since leaving office on the 20th of january, i think more and more of this iceberg is emerging above the surface of the water. some of the things that i knew about, some of the things i didn't know about in terms of some of the social media efforts that russia employed. so i think what bob mueller, who, again, is another quintessential public servant, is doing is trying to get to the bottom of this. and i think we're going to find out how large this iceberg really is.
>> and if i could add, i just think it's absolutely critical for the country that there be closure on this. and there be some finality to what did happen. >> all right. general clapper and director brennan, thank you so much for being here. we appreciate it. it sounded good at the time, but now republicans are backing away from their promise that every american will see a tax cut. treasure secretary, steve mnuchin, will weigh in. and a senate scramble after republican candidate roy moore is accused of sexual misconduct with a 14-year-old. governor kasich is furious over it all. he's here too. stay with us. a heart transplant... that's a whole different ballgame. i was in shock. i am very proud of the development of drugs that can prevent the rejection and prevent the recurrence of the original disease. i never felt i was going to die. we know so much about transplantation. and we're living longer. you cannot help but be inspired by the opportunities that a transplant would offer. my donor's mom says "you were meant to carry his story".
listen up, heart disease. you too, unnecessary er visits. and hey, unmanaged depression, don't get too comfortable. we're talking to you, cost inefficiencies, and data without insights. and fragmented care, stop getting in the way of patient recovery and pay attention. every single one of you is on our list. at optum, we're partnering across the health system to tackle its biggest challenges. at optum, we're partnering across the health system t-mobile's unlimited now includes netflix on us. that's right. netflix on us. get 4 unlimited lines for just $40 bucks each. taxes and fees included. and now netflix included. aleve direct therapy. has met its match. the only remote controlled tens device that's drug free, and wire free for deep penetrating lower back pain relief. and now get aleve direct therapy with $20 off at your local rite aid.
♪ ♪ you nervous? ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ let's get the lady of the house back on her feet. and help her feel more strength and energy in just two weeks. yaaay! the complete balanced nutrition of ensure with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. ensure. always be you. like new savory grilled with mediterranean shrimp, topped with a blend of green onions, tomatoes, and herbs. and your favorites, like garlic shrimp scampi. now's the only time to try as much as you want, however you want 'em.
so hurry in today. . welcome back to "state of the union." i'm jake tapper. days after the senate republicans outlined their tax reform, they are acknowledging some might pay more. mcconnell told the "new york times" he misspoke when he said nobody in the middle class would get a tax increase. house speaker paul ryan is also modifying his words. a spokesman for ryan told the "washington post" he misspoke when he called the house plan a, quote, tax cut for everybody, unquote. joining us, steve mnuchin. good to see you. thanks for joining
us. i want to get to taxes in a moment. first i want to ask you about russia. after president trump made his initial comments about vladimir putin and u.s. intelligence
agencies, republican senator john mccain tweeted this. quote, there's nothing america first about taking the word of kgb colonel over u.s. intelligence agency to prop up murderous assad regime is my avenue and places national security at risk. you heard general clapper and director brennan saying that they think that president trump is being played by putin. what's your response? >> well, in all due respect to your previous guests, i think those were the most ridiculous statements. president trump is not getting played by anybody. president trump was focused on some very important issues, which are north korea and syria. and those are areas we need to work together with russia and get them on board with our strategy. >> but why not definitely come out and say, i think that russia -- i believe the u.s. intelligence agency, russia interfered in the 2016 election and they must not do it again? impose the sanctions that congress passed months ago. why not take this more aggressive and assertive position? >> we are imposing the
sanctions. we are moving forward with that. i think the president has had private conversations. again, i think the country is ready to move on off of this and focus on important issues. >> let's talk about tax reform, because that's why you're here, as you heard, both majority leader and mcconnell and house speaker paul ryan have walked back assertions everyone in the middle class would get a tax cut. it's true, most people in the middle class, according to this plan, will get a tax cut. but you'll acknowledge that some, according to this plan, will see a tax increase? >> one of the things that's so complicated about our tax system today is that everybody has a different situation, takes advantage of different parts of the code. it's very complicated. so by simplifying the code, we're putting everybody on a level playing field. we've literally run hundreds, if not thousands of examples within treasury. and for most people -- and again, may not be 100%, but by far the majority, both the house and senate version provide
middle income tax relief ask. that's what we want to do. and over $1,000 of tax relief, which is quite significant. and we actually ran the numbers for you. even a family of $300,000, which is a lot of money in new york, they're also getting a several thousand dollar tax cut. so i think both plans accomplish what we're looking to do. >> but certainly there are middle class voters who voted for president trump who are going to get a tax increase in this plan, if it becomes law. and that's not what they were told by candidate trump that would happen. >> well, it's not what he wants. and as we go through both plans, the house, i expect, will pass their bill this week. the senate will move on it after thanksgiving. we'll end up in conference, and we'll fine-tune this. so, again, the problem is the tax code is so complicated that literally everybody may take advantage of a different piece. and we want to make this thing simple and fair and provide middle income tax relief. and i'm comfortable we'll end up
doing that. >> are you committing to saying that you want this to be fine-tuned. you want this to be changed so any middle class americans who would have their taxes increased, which is a minority, but it's still a chunk of middle class americans, that you want that fixed before president trump signs it to law? >> what i'm saying is, there are slight differences between both bills. the good news s both the house and the senate and the administration have the same objectives. and that's about middle income tax relief. that's about fixing the business tax system so that we're competitive. and the slight changes between both bills i'm comfortable will iron out in conference so we can get something to the president to sign in december. >> now you have been saying that the republican tax plan, which will reduce the corporate tax significantly, will unleash so much growth that it will pay for itself. you've been criticized for that. i want to read you something from your predecessor, former treasury secretary, larry summers. he said, quote, i'm not aware of so irresponsible an estimate coming from a treasury secretary
in the last 50 years. what he is saying is, by relying on a projection that the stock market will rise because of this, it's irresponsible to suggest that it's going to pay for itself. your response. >> again, i think it's unfortunate that secretary summer has come out and said some of the things. there are lots and lots of economists that come out and support our claims. and by the way, we've been completely transparent. different models will show different things. and our models, we believe, there will be $2.5 trillion of growth. and we're happy to go through the numbers. we're happy to give the details. we want full transparency to the american public. but the important issue is, if we increase gdp by 30 or 40 basis points, this plan is break-even. >> i want to point to the fact that president trump keeps saying this is the biggest tax cut in history. take a listen. >> i'm giving the largest tax cuts in the history of this country. it will be the biggest cuts ever
in the history of this country. this will be the biggest tax cut in history. in the history of our country. >> so we've tried to find a way that this is true. but it's not. if you look at the tax cut bill -- tax bill as percentage of the gross domestic project, eighth largest. if you look at it just dollar for dollar, it would be a third largest. isn't it important just to, like, have factual debates when discussing these things? >> well, as you just commented, there's lots of different ways of looking at it. this will be the largest change since president reagan. >> largest change? >> largest change and largest cuts since reagan to the tax system. >> but that's not the biggest tax cut in history. >> biggest tax cut going from 35% to 20%? in corporate taxes? if that's not the biggest tax it cut to make our businesses competitive, what is. the pass-through rate is going to be the lowest since the 1930s. >> but you're making -- it
sounds like you're making factual arguments that are different from what president trump says when he says the biggest tax cut in history. >> it is the biggest tax cut in history on mostly every single part of the plan. so, again, going from 35% to 20, we're going down to discounted rates on pass-throughs. this is about bringing trillions of dollars back on shore. >> i want to ask you about roy moore. i know this is not your bailiwick, but you're the only administration representative we have right now. he's accused of sexual misconduct with a 14-year-old girl in 1979. should judge moore step aside? >> i only know what i see on tv and what i read in the paper. if the allegations prove to be true, he should step down. >> but i guess the question is, when you say if the allegations prove to be true, i don't know that we're going to get any more proof. we have four women on the record saying he came on to them and in one case had sexual contact with them when they were teenagers, the sexual contact with a
14-year-old. he denies it. i don't know we're going to get any more information one way or another. no judge is going to weigh in on this. based on what we know now, should he step aside? >> again, i'm not an expert, but what i would say is people should investigate this issue and get the facts. and if these allegations are true, absolutely, this is incredibly inappropriate behavior. >> do you believe the allegations? >> again, i just watch what i see on tv. >> i know, but you have an opinion. do you believe them? >> it appears that there is a significant issue here that needs to be
addressed. >> secretary mnuchin, thank you so much. really appreciate it. thanks for coming in today. >> thank you. let's go now to the number two democrat, senator dick durbin. let's start with russia. what do you make of president trump's comments about vladimir putin and u.s. intelligence agencies? >> incredible to me. we had a hearing in the senate judiciary committee. we produced a facebook ad that had a phony committee. it was blasting hillary clinton. and it was paid for with rubles, from russia. what is the president waiting to
see before he acknowledges what our intelligence agencies and most people in both political parties acknowledge? there was a definite attempt by russia to influence this election. >> according to the nonpartisan tax policy center, 76% of americans would get a tax cut next year under the republican plan. with middle class families receiving on average a cut of about $800. democrats, however, keep pushing the notion that the average middle class family is going to to see a tax increase. the "washington post" fact checker gave that claim four pinocchios. i'll say to you what i said to secretary mnuchin. shouldn't people be honest when discussing this issue? >> absolutely. and let's be honest about this. we know the wealthiest americans are going to get a definite long-term tax cut. under both plans, house and senate, the state tax, alternative minimum tax, will be permanently reduced. when it comes to working families, it's a mixed bag. in my state of illinois, it's going to be devastating that they cannot deduct their state and local and property taxes
that they pay. they'll be paying a tax on a tax. this is not a tax break for them. and it violates a basic. and let me tell you, there is a reason why this plan has been prepared in secret. why it's not being scored by the congressional budget office as it is traditionally. it's because it doesn't add up. the only way the republicans can make it add up is by cutting medicare by $473 billion and medicaid by $1 trillion. that to me is not the way to deal with this economy and to build real growth. >> you're the senate democratic whip. your job is to count the votes. do you have commitments from everyone who caucuses with the democratic party that they will oppose the republican plan, and have you heard from any republicans who might join you? >> jake, we just saw this plan on friday. they just unveiled this plan in the senate. so members of the senate have heard some rumors, have seen the house bill. but i can tell you, each one of them comes to it and says why would we want to risk our economy, raising the taxes on many working families, to give a
permanent tax cut to the wealthiest people in america and to run up the national debt? that is not a sound policy to build america's economy. >> there's been a lot of talk about judge roy moore. if he does get elected, should the u.s. senate refuse to seat him? >> well, i'll tell you. that's several steps removed from where we are today. president trump is the leader of the republican party in america. it's his responsibility to step forward and say more and do more when it comes to the situation in alabama. many of my republican colleagues whom i respect, they have strong family ties and feel very passionately about this, have spoken out on it. and i respect them for doing it. it's time for the president to do the same. >> if your colleague, senator bob menendez, new jersey democrat, is convicted on the corruption charges, he's on trial right now, the jury still deliberating, will you vote to expel him? >> i'm not going to get into the hypotheticals on either of these situations. as i said, several steps removed. i'm hopeful that when all is said and done that bob menendez
will be returning to the senate representing the state of new jersey. >> senator dick durbin of the great state of illinois, thank you for joining us. we appreciate it. >> thank you. republicans are scrambling to distance themselves from roy moore as the alabama judge is doubling down on his denials he engaged in sexual misconduct with a 14 year-old girl when he was 32. one calling for the party to pull their support is governor john kasich. he joins me from his home state of ohio. good to see you. the white house is saying judge moore should step aside if the allegations prove to be true. is that good enough? >> well, i don't think so, jake. look, i was informed in the beginning. he's too divisive a person to go over there to the senate. but, look, there's a growing list of people that think he ought to step aside. not be the standard bearer. this is not a criminal case or anything like that. it's -- if you're going to be the candidate for the party and these kinds of things come out and there's so many people now in alabama saying, yeah, we believe her. and you have growing numbers of republicans like john mccain,
mitt romney, john kasich, saying he should step aside. of course he should. >> roy moore is not going to step aside, though. he cannot be removed from the ballot. given these circumstances, do you think republicans in alabama should vote for do you go doug jones, the democratic candidate? >> jake, i think he should step aside. if not, maybe you could get a write-in candidate. lisa murkowski did it in alaska. i think she's urging somebody down there to do that. and, you know, i'm -- people of alabama have to figure it out. and i would hope that they would say, no, this is not acceptable. and maybe the party will do it. you know, pressure is mounting. we'll see what happens, jake. >> if he is elected, despite these allegations, do you think that the u.s. -- >> i can't tell you about the senate. i can't tell you about the senate, jake. that's up to them. there's growing numbers of senators that are deeply disturbed about this. the senate campaign committee has apparently cut off funding. let's not get out there. let's see if something can be resolved in the next few days. >> let's turn it russia.
president trump quick to denounce everyone under the sun, including you, but for some reason continues to have faith in what vladimir putin says to him, including apparently over the assessment of the u.s. intelligence community. what, in your opinion, is going on here? >> i don't know, jake. when i read that he was calling these intelligence guys -- and let me just tell you, it's not just the guys that you interviewed. but, you know, there's people like bob gates, he spent a lifetime serving the public. leon panetta. you have just don't call these people names. i read this thing, and i just -- i couldn't believe it. i was sort of incredulous at what the president sas waking. apparently, he's walked back his comments to some degree. russia meddled in our election, supported a butcher in syria, invaded ukraine. the whole thing is just crazy. and, look, i just don't understand it. and i don't know why he's saying those things. i would just tell you that putin is a former kgb agent. this is not a guy you can trust
or a guy you can really have any confidence in. it's ridiculous. so hopefully -- i'm glad he walked it back, jake. that was a good thing that he did that. but i was actually flabbergasted when i read the earlier accounts. >> he walked it back a little bit but still refuses to say definitively, i believe the u.s. intelligence agencies, and i believe russia tried to interfere in the election and i have made it very clear they need to stop. he won't do that, at least not publicly. >> well, i think -- look, you're trying to get me to tell you what's happening in his head. i don't know what's happening in your head half the time. you know? i don't know. it's just that the evidence is there, whether it's facebook, twitter. of course they meddled in our election. and, look, there are activities in the ukraine where they have misled, lied, you know, attacked people in ukraine. people have lost their lives over there. what's happening in syria, the vicious bombardments that happened over there. it's just ridiculous. i mean, i just -- look, you want to just be cool, but you want to
be firm. you want to be clear. that's the way you have to be with putin or any of these other autocrats. and one of the things i'm concerned about as i look at this asia trip, you now have 11 countries agreeing that they're going to get together and be involved in trade. you have china rising with their economic program, trying to influence the world, and we're coming home. we're staying home. and it doesn't make any sense. both from a economic point of view, but also from a geopolitical point of view. the united states matters. we need to have influence in the world, and we get it, not just with trade, but with our military activity and our relationship with our allies. and to have walked away from this is just really a very, very big mistake. >> governor, speaking of elections, i want to ask you about last tuesday's election results. democrats won key races in new jersey and in virginia. you, of course, remember -- >> won all over the country. went all over the country. in places no one ever had seen democrats win. i was talking to some folks in pennsylvania, and some of the
people -- some of the democrats won over there in areas that have always been republican. the republican party has just gotten smaller here. anti trade, anti immigrant, trying to take health care away from folks. this is not going to work. these are things i've been talking about for a long time. we have problems in this country, and you have two paths. you can either double down, be negative, and look for scapegoats or you can say yes, we have problems, but we can fix them. that's what we do here in the state of ohio. but if a party is going to be anti environment and anti trade, and one other thing. for both parties. first of all, the democrats didn't win anything. they just kind of lucked into it, because people are fed up with both parties. and the millennials and the gen-xors are going to equal the baby boomers of the they are pro environment, pro trade, comfortable with america's place in the world. and if either of these parties, the democrats moving farther and farther to the left, the republicans worried about everything on the extreme right, playing to their base, if this
continues, these millennials and gen-xors are totally up for grabs and will reshape the landscape of american politics. and thank goodness. >> is it possible you'll be there running as a third-party candidate in 2020 to take advantage of that, sir? >> no. jake, is there any -- jake, you know that i don't know what's going to be happening. i want to finish my term as governor. but who knows what is going to happen in terms of people who might look for another way. it's very hard to be an independent. but i'm just suggesting to you that the country is getting fed up with the kind of fighting and partisan politics, and it was reflected on tuesday. against the republicans, not for the democrats. i mean, i don't believe that democrats had any great victory. they just were the benefit of a lot of negativity and small thinking on the part of republicans. can the republicans turn it around? absolutely! take care of these -- of the daca, the d.r.e.a.m.ers here in the country. get a tax cut that's balanced. begin to be more positive about
the environment. welcome immigrants while protecting the border. this is what the republican party is. it's what it's always been. and it's what i fight for a long with a number of my colleagues. so, you know, i'm optimistic. but they're going to have to change, because getting smaller, getting more inward, taking america backward, it's not going to work. >> governor kasich coming to us from a toasty-looking room. appreciate it. >> very nice here, jake. >> looks it. president trump trying to koez cozy up to vladimir putin. philippine president duterte, stay with us. how much money do you think you'll need in retirement? then we found out how many years that money would last them. how long do you think we'll keep -- oooooohhh! you stopped! you're gonna leave me back here at year 9? how did this happen? it turned out, a lot of people fell short, of even the average length of retirement. we have to think about not when we expect to live to,
but when we could live to. let's plan for income that lasts all our years in retirement. prudential. bring your challenges. remember that accident i got in with the pole, and i had to make a claim and all that? is that whole thing still dragging on? no, i took some pics with the app and... filed a claim, but... you know how they send you money to cover repairs and... they took forever to pay you, right? no, i got paid right away, but... at the very end of it all, my agent... wouldn't even call you back, right? no, she called to see if i was happy. but if i wasn't happy with my claim experience for any reason, they'd give me my money back, no questions asked. can you believe that? no. the claim satisfaction guarantee, only from allstate. switching to allstate is worth it. only from allstate. the unpredictability of a flaree may weigh on your mind.
thinking about what to avoid, where to go, and how to work around your uc. that's how i thought it had to be. but then i talked to my doctor about humira, and learned humira can help get and keep uc under control... when certain medications haven't worked well enough. 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 flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. raise your expectations and ask your gastroenterologist if humira may be right for you. with humira, control is possible. i am totally blind. and non-24 can make me show up too early... or too late.
former director of national intelligence, james clapper, expressing concerns about president trump's reluctance to take on putin directly and also saying -- brennan said he thinks putin is able to play him. what do you think? >> i think, frankly, i agree with secretary mnuchin. i think it's ridiculous. the fact of the matter is that, you know, donald trump is trying to conduct foreign policy. trying to work with world leaders. he repeated what vladimir putin said. he said, in an interview, that he agrees, he sides with our intelligence community. he says that -- all he said was that putin said it. he means what he says. he didn't say he agrees with him. and i think his point that, you know, we need to work with world leaders -- it used to be democrats encouraging us to work with the soviet union and find common ground. now we see, because of this c scandal, the russians are the worst people in the world. when eight years ago, hillary clinton and barack obama wanted to do a reset with them. so it's just -- for the average trump voter, they're looking at
this as just purely politics. as really nothing to do with the substance of the matter. it's just about getting donald trump. >> i see it differently, surprisingly. i think that trump is very well aware of the sentiment out there that was expressed in the cnn poll that was issued earlier this past week, which says that two-thirds of americans, including a lot of republicans, are really concerned about russia and russia interference. i think that he's so utterly freaked out by -- and insecure about his position as president, knowing that russia did intervene, that he yesterday committed three very unpatriotic acts in one day. criticizing our u.s. intel agencies on foreign soil. standing up with putin, saying he believes putin over the u.s. intel agencies. and -- >> he didn't say that. >> and third, criticizing james clapper, three-star general, on
veterans day. honestly, no wonder he quickly, in the same news cycle -- did a backspin on it, because he knew how horrible that looks for himself, his administration and for the country. no wonder john mccain said, this is not america first. really, this is putting russia first. >> what do you think? >> look, i think -- he's -- putin is a kgb guy. so you should view him with a jaundiced eye. i do think it's a slight manipulation of his statement that he said he agreed with him. he said he believed that he believed what he was saying. but this is sort of trump's thing. he dances around things and says 14 different things when he should just say, i agree with -- wait for it, he doesn't even have to agree with clapper, he can agree with mike pompeo, his own guy, and say i agree with the assessment that russia was involved. i'm actually with trump on some of the idea that i'm worried about overplaying the effect that $150,000 of facebook ads might have had an
i'm with him that there might be political concerns about the intelligence agencies. clapper himself has been unreliable narrator at times tell congress back in 2013 the least untruthful thing he could say about nchbsa. there are concerns. don't talk about them overseas. admit russia got involved and we want to stop them in the future. >> he didn't say that he believed putin. he did say putin believes it. but he did give a lot of people the impression that he was sympathetic to putin. >> he did. and this quest for legitimacy on trump's part isn't just about this issue. it seems to be a lot of his life has been this quest to be legitimate, to be accepted in new york, never accepted there by the high class people there. and at a certain point on, it's painful to watch some be who can't get his mouth around what everybody else is saying. you can say two things when
you're president. you can say this thing that russia did is twronk, itwrong, unacceptable, at the same time we have other issues to work together. that's what a leader does. he can't get his mouth around the first part of that sentence because it undermines his sense of accomplishment in this big thing that he got. and it's putting the country at risk. >> ironically it would undermine him less if he would just say it. >> i want to turn to the other huge story in politics which is roy moore, alabama republican senate candidate. quote, a republican close to mcconnell said he is willing to lose the seat to prevent someone who is guilty of these things from taking it. what is your take, senator santorum? >> my take is i just saw a news report out of birmingham television station where they went in toe a suburban neighborhood that roy moore lost and they couldn't find anybody
who believed any of these allegations. and these are not moore supporters. this was the "washington post" that dug this up and obviously spent a lot of time and energy and it plays in to the narrative that donald trump has created in this country and that roy moore has fed into that the folks here in washington are after folks like them. and there is a backlash. >> except that the women are also alabamians. they are part of that group as well. look, i think when you want and you elect an elmer gantry, you get an elmer gantry. i think he will continue to do this. he will probably stay on the ballot even if trump decided to tell them to get off. so i think they are in a real tricky situation here except that he may just win despite the fact that i think the media has been unreliable on sexual harassment issues in the past.
nbc passing on the weinstein story because somebody was buddies with somebody. so reasons to be skechts cptica. but you can go through and see contemporaneous reports, four women who don't know each other, those are markers to use to say is this credible or not. this is not anything in the court of law, so you have to decide here what is this credible. >> this disturbs me, this whole thing about -- i mean not just the media, but this whole utter hribalism that we have entered into. i retweeted and said oh, my god, is this what we're come to, a former aide to rand paul, but it was really honestly indicative of what we're hearing out of alabama, which is i'd be fine with a child predator in the senate so long as it would keep the democrats from stealing this seat. child molesters are evil, democrats are even worse. i mean, are we really at the point where people in alabama because they don't want to be perceived as bowing to the
national media are going to choose somebody who has been a child molester of a 14-year-old girl over somebody who has been a career prosecutor who happens to be a democrat? i hope to god we are not in that place. but there was a recent pew poll that says that over 40% of each party view the other party as an active threat to democracy. so that is dangerous. >> there are republicans who have come out and withdrawn their endorsement. senator mike lee of utah, senator cassidy of louisiana. the national republican senatorial committee has ended its fund raising agreement with the moore campaign. but let's be frank. honestly, roy moore could absolutely still win. >> yeah, he could. and you know, this is -- we haven't mentioned steve bannon in this, but this is bannonism on trial. bannon is trying to create this sense of egrieved identity group
that is undersieged by anyone. and this is that in its worse form. so you are not supposed to vote as a father, you are not supposed to vote at a brother, you're not supposed to vote at a woman, you are supposed to vote as a member of this identity group against the world. and if that works, that is very, very bad for on the republican party and very bad for the country. at some point there is -- i have not seen any reason not to believe these women. and so at some point other things have to matter than this politics growing in america at the expense of every other value. >> it's on the democratic side, too. look at bob menendez. he's been accused of horrific things and they are standing by their man until chris christie leaves so they can appoint somebody else if they happens to survive this. it is tribalism on both sides. this could be solved if roy
moore would do what i recommended to many senate candidates who have run into this problem in the past where they do or said or been accused of something that makes them unelectable or less laekelectab and that is to put the country above his personal gain and step back. >> you think he should do that? >> if i was a ditcandidate and cared most about my country and the policies that i wanted to get accomplished, of course i would step back. but that is not the way people -- i haven't seen anybody -- i mean i can go down a long laundry list of senate candidates that i've had this discussion with and they all stick it out saying i'm right and i'm going to show them and they end up losing. and the things they say they care about are actually diminished. a great congressman who can step in immediately, gary palmer and others. glenn murdoch. there is a bunch of them out there who are sitting here in the wings who could easily be
put in roy moore's place. >> part of bannon's pitch is also that a guy like moore is good because he is specifically buck the paing the party. so the idea that the party at rap tuesday would have power over him runs verse to what they want. and i think this part is true. he basically says they have been playing by these rules for years and not getting called on it, so you have to arm up, you can't unilaterally disarm. like predator equity in the senate is what we're going for in american politics now. but it's super unhealthy. speaking of kennedy, bill clinton, all these people who had very bad allegations in the past and approach onproven ones. it may be that in alabama roy moore ends up winning. the thing about bannonism, when it's tested in the rust belt where it really did make the
difference in the presidential election, does that work. it didn't work in virginia. and every single republican will have to stand for do you believe for example as roy moore says in a homosexuality should be a crime. do you believe that 9/11 was god's revenge for sadomy. >> thank you all. president trump says vladimir putin believes it when he says he didn't meddle. and everything is just one big conspiracy and that is the subject of this week's state of the cartoon. it shouldn't come as a surprise that president trump recently dispatched his cia chief to meet with a conspiracy theorist when it comes to what happened with the dnc hacks and whether the russians were involved. he's never shied away from tackling the toughest conspiracy theories. >> he wasn't born in this country. which is real possibility. then he has pulled one of the great cons in the history of politics. >> getting for the bottom of the crazy conspiracy theory about
where obama was born took five long years. >> we can finally get back to focussing on the issues that matter. like did we fake the moon landing. what really happened in roswell? and where swhere. >> and now he no longer has do the fact fund finding on his own.where. >> and now he no longer has do the fact fund finding on his own. >> there are over 2 politicbill i will len in the country. >> there were alien beings that came down. >> and speaking of national mysteries -- >> i see elvis back there. this is the last chance we got. >> could rick perry say no to that one? with his golf course in scotland, president trump himself might be the best person to invest gate the loch ness monster. >> the bad news is this is some big monster. >> of course there is one area the president is not soed interest in examining further,
the actual facts of foreign interference in the 2016 reaction. >> i call it the russian hoax. one of the great hoaxes. >> thanks for spending your sunday morning with us. you can catch me here every sunday and weekdays on "the lead" at 4:00 p.m. eastern. fareed zakaria gps starts right now. this is gps, global public square fp welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria coming to you live from new york. tod today, xi, putin, abe. president trump's big meetings on the world stage. has this big asia trip changed america's position in the world? >> we are not going to let the united states be taken advantage of anymore. >> for