Skip to main content

tv   State of the Union With Jake Tapper  CNN  September 9, 2018 6:00am-7:00am PDT

6:00 am
pg&e wants you to plan ahead by mapping out escape routes and preparing a go kit, in case you need to get out quickly. for more information on how to be prepared and keep your family safe, visit sneinsider attack. >> anonymous editorial meaning a gutless editorials. >> i think it's a disgrace. >> it's not mine. >> i did not write the op-ed. >> how far did trump go to rout out the president? kellyanne conway is here next.
6:01 am
warning signs? ben sasse uses the hearings to slam congress. >> the legislature is impotent and weak. >> reporter: he is about to plit the republican party? >> gloves off. >> these are dangerous times. >> as the stakes for the midterm elections get higher. >> we want to impeach him. they say it's your fault because you didn't get out to vote. >> is the president right? mark warner is here live. hello. i'm jake tapper in washington where the state of our union is full of drama. drama in the white house. the president raging over that rogue anonymous senior administration official and drama on capitol hill and democrats swinging at the fences in a desperate bid to knock off trump's second supreme court nominee and drama on the campaign trail with obama's 2018
6:02 am
debut. fewer than 60 days out. the evidence of dysfunction and chaos inside the white house has never been more convincing. laid out in exhaustive detail in a new book by bob woodward and meticulous and highly respected reporter and in that anonymous op-ed describing the president as ignorant and unhinged. the evidence that president trump and his party are delivering on some of their promises is just as clear. we saw that friday in yet another strong jobs report with rising wages and low employment as the president's second nominee for supreme court, despite the democrats best efforts, appears headed for confirmation. joining us now is counsellor to the president kellyanne conway. president trump is talking a lot this week about the anonymous "the new york times" op-ed and we have new reporting that white house aides have narrowed the search for the down to a few individuals. who is on the list? >> i have no idea. what does concern me, though, jake, apart from everything the
6:03 am
president and others have said, is that for media that is constantly talking about facts, accuracy, transparency, authority, the athorough tativeness was viewed by the writer because of the content. as long as the message is anti-trump the messenger has credibility. i'm with the vice president. he has said the person should resign and if the person truly is an an appointee. the constitution puts lawful authority into the executive branch. >> don't you think that the white house in the way that it has reacted to this op-ed has also inviewed the op-ed with the sense of credibility? for instance, i have no idea who wrote it. it could be an assistant director at the mineral mining agent for all i know. all of a sudden, you have the vice president denying it.
6:04 am
secretary of state pompeo denying in and everybody denying it doesn't that rise to the level of the credibility not to mention the oxygen? >> i said earlier this week hi a fairly different view than others which is why we elevate someone we don't even know. we also don't know what this person has said to try to get that op-ed in "the new york times" or what he or she has said to other people. to the president's point there could be a national security risk at hand he doesn't want this person in a meeting where he is discussing china and russia and north korea. any president of the united states should have the comfort and freedom to speak with his national security team. >> why does the president think it is a member of the national security team? >> he is making the point it f is that raises concerns if someone has access to information. look. you know because you're in the media you know that president obama was investigating journalists. a lot of folks for "the new york times" were criticizing him at the time. james rosen. >> for leaks? i don't support what he was doing. but --
6:05 am
>> he should be reminded of that. >> there were investigation of leaks and not criticisms. it is different. >> i think this one is fairly simple. if this person really thinks that he or she is being patriotic and not pathetic which is the way i view it, then they should come forward because you would have given them a seat today. what really was the motivation? if the motivation is what they state it is in that ridiculous op-ed, they failed miserably. they missed the mark completely. i think the motivation was to show discord and create che os and i refuse to be a part that. >> the central premise of the op-ed is something we haven't heard before. we are hearing from they feel it's their duty to protect the country. we have heard this in previous books and reporting. senator ben sasse said he heard it from people close to the white house.
6:06 am
from july of last year then white house director anthony scaramucci calling in in. >> people inside the administration think it's their job to save america from this president. okay, that is not their job. their job is to inject this president into america. >> how do you explain the fact that there are senior administration officials who think it's your job to protect the country from president trump? >> to the extent that is true, they sheouldn't be there. their job is execute and not blind loyalty but understand there are issues that prevailed and others that failed. in the last election. what i appreciate about president trump, jake, and why i'm there, as opposed to the million other places i can be, is because he is somebody who is always welcomed, accepted, if not expected, dissenting viewpoints and disagreements. he has said it publicly months ago. i like watching them duke it out. he has people who disagree
6:07 am
significantliy on abortion and trade and economic policies and he has them in there in front of him but ultimately the president trump knows he is the decision maker. >> doesn't it bother you their -- >> of course, it does. >> to protect the -- >> just as it bothers me the same handful of sources feel like they need to sit down with every author and get their side of the story out. i guess they are too lazy to go write their own book and who would believe them? >> doesn't it say something about president trump? people around him think this way? >> i think it says something about them. this is what i ultimately want to say to you too. i was really struck this week in denying the statement attributed to him in the woodward book. secretary mattis, if you read his denial remarkable what he denied and what he affirmed. he said not only would he never disparage the elected commander. he wouldn't do it in military of defense but confirmed what is
6:08 am
happening through secretary mattis and general k-- and president trump agenda. he said the fcaliphate is disappearing. >> they have been going on. >> for a long time. >> jake -- >> they have been going on -- >> i would like to ask you on behalf of the white house. would you and cnn feel comfortable grant being anonymity to somebody who is a mid level staffer? >> it's a totally good question. i don't know who -- >> i see people in the media upset with this. saying if it's not somebody in the cabinet, if it's not a senior staffer. >> i don't know who it is. if it's somebody significant then i think that then printing it is responsible. if it's somebody completely irrelevant and perilous. >> this person is motivated -- >> i can tell you as an anchor that i gave the story more attention after vice president pence and secretary of state pompeo and the entire cabinet came out and gave the op-ed
6:09 am
credibility. it never even crossed my mind. i told this to you privately. it never crossed my mind it was vice president pence until pence was out there saying it wasn't him. he and the administration gave this op-ed credibility. >> i want to say something else. this person, obviously, is motivated by skeet and deceit and i don't think should be viewed with credibility. but also that -- the opinion being expressed is not widely held. it's widely held around tables like this and not around kitchen tables. thank you for covering economic boom. the boom in wages and labor and manufacturing and construction is discussed around kitchen table not cable news. >> president trump has said jeff sessions the attorney general should be investigating who the author of the piece is because of national security reasons inspect that a directive to doj to investigate? >> from what i understand, there can be an investigation if there
6:10 am
is criminal activity perhaps. >> there doesn't appear to be in any. >> i don't know that and i don't think you do. >> what is the criminal activity? >> it depends on what else is divulged by an individual. >> we read the op-ed. no national secrets. >> anybody who would do this you don't know what else they are saying. there is a difference between administrative action i understand it and criminal action. the president is also just -- the president -- >> you think the person broke the law? >> i don't know. i have no idea. >> do you think perhaps he or she wrote the op-ed he or she might have also broken the law is that the idea? >> i have really no idea. nor do you. what else this person has divulged, i think somebody so cowardly and so conceited would probably -- >> that's not how investigations are done. you don't look at somebody's behavior and say if somebody about dthis which is not illegal maybe they would have done this -- >> don't look at the op-ed and say this is everything we know. the entire point. >> it is everything we know. it's everything we know. the op-ed is everything we know
6:11 am
about it. we don't know if this person has done anything else. >> right. because we are not -- you're not the government sitting here. but the president is making the point -- all right. i think this person is going to shush himself or herself out. they are like criminals and it was me but don't tell anyone! the person will tell someone so they will probably suss themselves out. i hope whoever it is doesn't get a hero's welcome or red carpet unfurled and kill the fat cat because what is gained being so cowardly? come forward and say i disagree with this president's policy and plenty republicans have done that and he has turned this city upside down! certainly the media and lobby class. >> one of the reasons why you and the president want to know who it is so you can undermine that person's credibility. you can't attack him or her without knowing who it is in the same way you have attacked other critics, james comey and omarosa, whomever. send that one of the reasons you
6:12 am
want this person to come forward? >> not me. this person has undermined the credibility. i don't know they were viewed with the credibility everybody gave them other than peddling an anti-trump message. i don't thi i think that person has undermined their credibility. if you're somebody who would do this are you somebody also who has access to information? >> right. >> and not national security. >> -- >> a relevant question. >> the president wished he had been interviewed for bob woodward's book that comes out this week. you had a phone conversation with the president on the phone and listen to this excerpt. >> remember two and a half months ago? you came over and i laid out? i wanted to talk to the president. and you said you would get back to me. >> i do and i put in the request but, you know, it was rejected. i can only take it so far. i guess i could bring it right to the president next time. >> early in the call, president trump was voicing concern he had
6:13 am
not been consulted about it. i have to ask, you are the senior counselor to the president and no one between you and president trump other than perhaps the chief of sta. who did you put in the request it was rejected? >> i won't say that and won't divulge internal conversations. i also in that tape earlier before or after that said the president said she has direct access and could have brought it to me. >> right. >> what i said to mr. woodward is did you ask anybody else and he said seven or eight people. i said i'm going to give the phone back to the president now, bob. please tell him the seven or eight people. i don't think he did that. >> shaw was one and lindsey graham. you were one. >> i'm the board person in the white house on my official email and official car service went over to find out what the book was about and how i might be able to he help. >> right but you didn't want to give woodward access to president trump? >> no not true. >> you do? >> i don't make decisions exclusively or ultimately. i want to say one thing the president later said. the president said two things about woodward you may not have
6:14 am
time to play but i want to tell your viewers is important and they can play the tape. bob, doesn't matter what you're writing in the book the economy is doing well and we are doing great in bringing peace, not war around the globe and regulations are down. >> talk to -- >> the president say that is the real story and greatest story not told. >> he could have told that to woodward if he wanted to. >> the president said this week that didn't make any difference. >> then he saw the book and realized. the second thing he did say to. >> that is chicken or the egg. >> how could you not get in touch with me just call my secretary, call my assistant next time or call the switchboard. that apart i think that concerns us in the white house is that first-person accounts by people who sarah sanders this week are disgruntled ex-employees giving their side of the story. i had ivanka trump in my office and allowed to say publicly she can't believe two-party
6:15 am
conversations. . she is the second party and nobody called her so say it that true? it's not about woodward, respected journalist and i like him personally. this is about fact checking. >> how is woodward supposed to get the other side of the story if you guys won't koorpcooperat? >> you can't say jake and -- jake said i discussed this and not ask me. is it have to be bob woodward. it has been to fact checker this is the fourth or fifth consecutive book in a row two-party conversations, jake, only one of the parties kucurat it. >> i know you're happy about the eagles victory. >> yes! go eagles! >> you won't find people
6:16 am
disputing the op-ed or woodward book. ben sasse says he has heard it all before and regularly considers resigning from the republican party? why? the senator will join me in a matter of minutes. stay with us.
6:17 am
6:18 am
♪ ♪ ♪ touch shows how we really feel. but does psoriasis ever get in the way? embrace the chance of 100% clear skin with taltz. up to 90% of those with moderate to severe psoriasis had a significant improvement of their psoriasis plaques. most people were still clearer after one year.
6:19 am
with taltz, 4 out of 10 even achieved completely clear skin. don't use if you're allergic to taltz. before starting, you should be checked for tuberculosis. taltz may increase risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. tell your doctor if you have an infection, symptoms, or received a vaccine or plan to. inflammatory bowel disease can happen with taltz, including worsening of symptoms. serious allergic reactions can occur. ready for a chance at 100% clear skin? ask your doctor about taltz. but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost. unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands?
6:20 am
the legislature is impotent and weak and most people want their jobs and they punt the work to the next ranch. >> that is nebraska republican senator ben sasse at the kavanaugh hearings this week and ripping into his fellow members of the senate for ducking their responsibility for making laws. his opinion of the president is not much better. in 2016 he called trump, quote, creepy. he refused to vote for him. since then he is a frequent critic of the president and he has voted with the president more than 80% of the time. senator ben sasse, republican of
6:21 am
nebraska, he is joining us from his beautiful home state. thanks for joining us, senator. i have to start, yesterday, you retweeted someone who switched their party and you replied by saying you, quote, regularly consider switching from the republican party to becoming an independent as well. why and what is stopping you from doing so? >> yes. so i'm one of about eight people in the u.s. senate who has never been a politician before and i think i've been saying for three years that i conceive of myself as an independent conservative who caucus with the republicans but frankly neither of parties have a long-term vision for the future of the country. ten years where are with we in the future of the work and young jobs are disrupted out of jobs three times a decade and future war and cyber. there is stuff happening in america and these parties are content to do 24-hour news cycle screaming at each other. the main thing democrats is
6:22 am
anti-truch and main thing republicans is anti-democrat and anti-cnn. neither of these things are worth getting out of bed in the morning for. i think we should be talking about where the country is going to be ten years. i've been saying a long time the parties need to reform and have a focus and future vision and we are not there yet. >> why stay a republican and when is the last time you thought about becoming an independent? >> i probably think about it efficient morning when i wake up and figure out why am i flying away from nebraska to go to d.c. this week? are we going to get real stuff done? i'm committed to the party of lincoln and reagan as long as a chance to reform it but this party used to be for pretty definable stuff and frankly neither parties are very much more than being ante and ante or ante, ante, it's boring stuff. we should be focused on the long-term and i'd loved to see the party of lincoln and reagan get back to its roots. >> it's also the party of trump. does that have anything to do with your ambivalence about the party? >> you know, the president has done some good things.
6:23 am
this week, we did the supreme court confirmation hearings for brett kavanaugh. brett kavanaugh is a strong person and they would nominate for decades so i applaud the president for that pick. it's pretty obvious when you are engaging the white house as i do many, many times a week, there is a lot of chaos and a lot of reality tv circus and that is different than a long-term view. i think yesterday when i'm at the nebraska football stadium during the game when people from nebraska talked to me about politics and a distant second to talking about football. what they spt a washington that does a small number of things with a lot of urgency and not a lot of drama. right now, we do a whole bunch of things in a frenzied circus and should do better than that. >> i want to ask you about the anonymous op-ed quote from an anonymous official in the white
6:24 am
house. here is what that person had to say. you told hugh hewitt a couple of days ago you've heard similar comments from people close to the white house or in the white house. let's be precise. have you heard from senior administration officials that the president makes reckless decisions and that cabinet secretaries have talked about the 25th amendment? >> no, i've not heard anything about the 25th amendment but, obviously, it's an impulsive white house. really good people around the president and he has done a good job in a lot of the people he has hired but i think they would like to focus on a long-term agenda. i think donald trump in the campaign of 2015 and 2016 was right that washington, d.c. doesn't work and does need to be disrupted. but then the question is the disruption toward what end?
6:25 am
truly, cyberis the center of war fare what are we doing about it? really good people that the president has put in place. but is the white house using its power and convening power and its focus to help the american people understand the future of war fare or the drama of omarosa today and cohen the next day. >> i get what you're saying and you're talking about a he have serious and if i can inject an editorial opinion here, a very appropriate concern that you have about cyberattacks on this country, but i guess the question that some people might have is what are you doing about it? other than coming on the show right now and talking about it and going to the senate floor and talking about it, what more could or should someone like you who is concerned that the president, you know, of all the chaos going on there and the fact there is this lack of focus on serious national security issues, what more could you be doing? >> yeah.
6:26 am
first of all, i'm proud that last month we got past the cyber solarium commission. a piece of lechs thgislation th lead authored. it is a piece of legislation that reauthorizes what the department of defense priorities soo should be the in exunique and eywe didn't have a long-ter human capital strategy. we are in the worst place in cyber26 years and no definable doctrine. i got a piece of legislation passed now set up a commission that takes the right people in the executive branch plus experts outside of government and reports back in a year. that is one example. i want to say one more thing about the frayphrase "just talk" one of the most important things we do in a democracy is talk together who we are as a people. basic civil norms and deliberation and dialogue and reflection on human dignity and why it is the beating part of
6:27 am
our life so we talk so we don't have violence as the way to figure out how to use the levers of government power so if we are not talking together about who we are as a people we are going to lose a republic and right now a lot of our kids wonder if there is anything you can trust in the future. >> your fellow republican senator flake said the republican party made a deal with the devil by supporting president trump for tax cuts and deregulation. flake says it wasn't worth it. you are arguing that it has been worth it? >> no. i'm arguing that the 2016 election was a dumpster fire and that both of these candidates went into the election mostly being against the other one and the american people basically said -- on your houses and decided who to vote for who was the less bad in their view and we shouldn't have elections like that in the future. we should have two good parties have a long-term vision for the country competing to be better than the other one and note competing to be less bad or better at the quick put down on twitter. and so i think that, again, president trump has done a bunch
6:28 am
of good things deregulation packages he put through and judicial nominees have been really good but as far as focusing the country on a long-term agenda around the future of work and the future of war and helping kids understand the first amendment again which is something clearly in crisis on campus we are not focused on any of those things and they are more important than the day-to-day legislating we argue. >> let's talk about calf a my. senator dianne feinstein who isn't known to make the charges lightly but she is involved in a re-election fight she said that brett kavanaugh, quote, misled the senate and is, quote his answers were not true. she is not the only one suggesting that kavanaugh has committed perjury. an example they cite is his 2006 testimony saying he wasn't involved in policy wagger warrantless wiretapping. what do you make of this criticism from the democrats that brett kavanaugh did not give honest answers before the committee? >> yeah. it's not true. so two distinctions that we need. first of all, this week was good for some things in american
6:29 am
civics in that brett kavanaugh did a good job of showing judicial temperament and judicial restraint and explained what the job of a judge is. he a judge is not a republican or a democrat. he is somebody who rules based on the written law on the facts before them in the particular case. and so i think that was useful. what wasn't useful was the chaos of that confirmation hearing which was mostly grandstanding for people, some of them running for re-election right now but a whole bunch of them looking at 2020 and how they energize a primary electorate on the democratic side and charges thrown around that aren't based in reality. more paper was submitted for brett kavanaugh's nomination than the last five supreme court nominees combined. never paper work handed over like this. it is true that not every piece of paper that ever had brett kavanaugh cc'd on it because he was the staff secretary to george w. bush.
6:30 am
and not every george w. bush paper was handed over. but because brett kavanaugh was the president's secretary for three years, doesn't mean he was a policy maker on most of those matters. >> you mentioned 2020. i would remiss if i did not ask what are the odds you will launch a primary challenge to president trump or run as an independent and run for president yourself in 2020? >> i think the odds are a lot higher that i run for the noxious weed control board of dodge county, nebraska than that. i lived on a campaign bus a year, about 16 months, five years ago. in my mind i still have flashbacks a lot of kid puke on the floor of a bus. for me i don't really think a lot about what job i have. i think a lot about the country's challenges and what we should be focused on. i'm pretty happy living in nebraska and going to d.c. five days a week trying to serve the best i can but to me what d.c. needs is -- >> to me the odds are zero percent the odds i'm running for
6:31 am
president is zero percent and i is kay that. that's not what you said. >> jake, we spend way too much time talking about campaigning in this country and too little time talking about governing. in the exweek and a half i'll be introducing a piece of legislation for ethics reform in d.c. and i think that is a better place to spend our time and energy. >> love to have you on the show this week to talk about that ethics reform bill that i know is important to you and in the memory of senator john mccain. thanks for with being us. >> thank you. the first trump campaign aide sentenced to prison for lying to the feds. my interview with george papadopoulos is next and senator mark warner is also standing by. stay with us.
6:32 am
what does help for heart fait looks like this. entresto is a heart failure pill that helped keep people alive and out of the hospital. don't take entresto if pregnant; it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren, or if you've had angioedema with an ace or arb. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high blood potassium. ask your doctor about entresto. ♪ the beat goes on. yeah! we really pride ourselves on >> temaking it easy for youass, to get your windshield fixed. >> teacher: let's turn in your science papers. >> tech vo: this teacher always puts her students first. >> student: i did mine on volcanoes. >> teacher: you did?! oh, i can't wait to read it. >> tech vo: so when she had auto glass damage... she chose safelite. with safelite, she could see exactly when we'd be there.
6:33 am
>> teacher: you must be pascal. >> tech: yes ma'am. >> tech vo: saving her time... [honk, honk] >> kids: bye! >> tech vo: she can save the science project. >> kids: whoa! >> kids vo: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace ♪ to take care of yourself. but nature's bounty has innovative ways to help you maintain balance and help keep you active and well-rested. because hey, tomorrow's coming up fast. nature's bounty. because you're better off healthy. discover.o. nature's bounty. i like your card, but i'm absolutely not paying an annual fee. discover has no annual fees. really? yeah. we just don't believe in them. oh nice. you would not believe how long i've been rehearsing that. no annual fee on any card. only from discover. there's nothing small about your business. with dell small business technology advisors, you get the one-on-one partnership to grow your business. the dell vostro 14 laptop. get up to 40% off on select pcs. call 877-buy-dell today. ( ♪ ) a hotel can make or break a trip.
6:34 am
and at expedia, we don't think you should be rushed into booking one. that's why we created expedia's add-on advantage. now after booking your flight, you unlock discounts on select hotels right until the day you leave. ♪ add-on advantage. discounted hotel rates when you add on to your trip. only when you book with expedia. you want things done right. that's why we test all of our paints and stains for months. or even years. we dedicate 175,000 square feet to getting it wrong... ...because you deserve paint that's done right. that's proudly particular. benjamin moore. the standard for paint professionals. only at local paint and hardware stores.
6:35 am
6:36 am
george pop p. george papadopoulos is getting 14 days for lying to the fbi. he was pitching candidate trump on a meeting with vladimir putin suggesting it directly to trump and then senator now attorney general jeff sessions. sessions has since testified under oath that he pushed back against that idea, but in his first interview before being sentenced, papadopoulos told me
6:37 am
sessions was enthusiastic about it. >> and the collective energy in the room, of course, there were some dissenters but the collective energy in the room seemed to be interested. >> collective energy, was donald trump interested? >> the candidate, you know, he gave me sort of a nod. he wasn't committed either way. but i took it as he was thinking. >> reporter: senator jeff sessions was there too. >> yes. >> reporter: at the table. what was his response? >> my recollection was that the senator was actually enthusiastic about a meeting between the candidate and president putin. >> a strong charge that would contradict what sessions said, testified before the senate, the attorney for sessions released a statement saying, quote, jeff sessions has testified under about his recollection of this meeting and stands by his testimony. joining us to discuss this and more is the top democrat on the
6:38 am
senate intelligence committee senator mark warner who joins us from charlottesville, virginia. you just heard what papadopoulos said. do you have reason to believe that jeff sessions perjured himself? >> jake, let's take a step back and look at where we are at this point. the mueller investigation now with the papadopoulos jail sentence, we are now at five or six guilty pleas, over 30 indictments. the key that comes out of -- from what i read about papadopoulos is there was absolute evidence that the russians had dirt and emails on hillary clinton, they offered it to papadopoulos as a trump campaign official, and this guy papadopoulos, i've never met him but he clearly is aspiring to be a player and my understanding is he can't remember whether he turned that information over to other senior people in the trump campaign. that is not very believable. in terms of the questions about attorney general sessions, i'm sure the mueller team will look
6:39 am
into that but if you look at this and this, i think, is maybe one of the reasons why this white house is in such chaos and the president is becoming more and more untethered over the last few weeks we have had the president's campaign manager plead guilty and president' personal attorney general mike cohen take a guilty plea and i think we are going to start to get a lot of these answers coming out and i think that is why the mueller investigation, for matter, senate intelligence investigation has to run its course. >> i asked papadopoulos specifically whether he told anyone on the campaign about the russians claiming that they had dirt on hillary clinton emails belonging to hillary clinton. papadopoulos told me he doesn't remember telling anyone on the campaign, but he also said this. >> i might have, but i have no recollection of doing so. i can't guarantee it. all i can say is my memory is telling me that i never shared it with anyone on the campaign. >> now you have said just now
6:40 am
that you find that hard to believe. who do you think he told? there is an individual named john mashburn who worked on the campaign, now works at the department of energy, he testified before the senate judiciary committee a few months ago, according to "the new york times," that he remembers an email from papadopoulos claiming that the russians had hillary's emails. is john mashburn somebody you think he told? >> we have gotten some documents from mr. papadopoulos and we would love to talk to him on the is in the intelligence side. but one thing is fairly clear, this is an ambitious guy who wants to be a player in the trump campaign. trump had chosen him as part of his foreign policy team. it just stretches, i think, most people's credibility that if papadopoulos had this knowledge and he wanted to try to further be involved with the campaign he wouldn't share that with somebody on the campaign. >> you don't know of any evidence proving that he did share it with anybody on the campaign? i will -- i believe and i will leave that to the mueller
6:41 am
investigation. with all of the people who are now flipping on this president and i think starting to come clean, my hope, again, is mueller will move expeditiously on these matters. >> a trump administration official, sent a person spinning and kellyanne conway said the person upended washington and they are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda. the president is calling for this person's name to be revealed for the sake of national security. do you see this a national security threat? >> no, i don't, jake. but, again, i don't want to -- i think we have to be willing, again, to step back. the last three months, we have had the president with a disastrous policy with the president separating kids from the border and embarrassment of the president -- with the president in russia. we have had, as i indicated
6:42 am
already guilty pleas of some of his senior campaign and personal lawyers. we have had horrible treatment of john mccain, after he passed. and now we have had the woodward book and this op-ed come out. clearly you've got a president who is lashing out. he is lashing out in terms of whoever wrote the op-ed and i wish the person would have revealed their identity but you've also got the president attacking his justice department and also attacking the justice department for indicting republican congressmen on graph. does this president not understand that the justice department is not a tool of his own personal power? and that is one of the reasons i think you're seeing not only republican members but what appears to be a lot of folks in the white house have concern about this president's stability. >> let's turn to president's nominee for the supreme court brett half a gnaw. some democrats are saying he misled the senate and giving
6:43 am
untruthful system. will you vote for kavanaugh? if you agree that he perjured himself, will you support impeaching brett kavanaugh? >> listen. if judge kavanaugh perjured himself, that is clearly disqualifying. i'm going to go over the record. i wanted to go through the hearings first, but i'm strongly inclined to vote against judge kavanaugh. not only because of his views on issues like women's reproductive health and workers rights an gay rights but i'm very concerned that this judge's outside the mainstream views on executive power with a president that is this dangerous in many ways, disqualifies him but i'll go over the hearings from last week and make an announcement in a few days. >> senator mark warner of virginia, thank you. you can watch more of my interview with george papadopoulos tonight at 10:00 p.m. eastern only on cnn. former president barack obama hit the campaign trail and could his support backfire by rallying
6:44 am
republicans? that is next. first, she is known as the notorious rbg. a closer look at the rise of justice ruth bader ginsburg. >> i am proud to nominate this path breaking attorney and advocate and judge to be the 107th justice to the united states supreme court. >> we may be in trying times, but think how it was in those days. the judges didn't think sex discrimination existed. >> ruth knew what she was doing in laying the foundation. >> to put women on the same plane as men. >> the goal was equality and civil rights. >> ruth bader ginsburg quite literally changed the way the world is for women. >> what has become of me could happen only in america. ♪ >> she has become such a rock star. ♪ >> she is really closest thing to a super hero i know. ♪
6:45 am
>> she is known to the world over as the notorious rbg. >> all i ask of our brethren is that they take their feet off her necks! (burke) that's what we call a huge drag.
6:46 am
seriously, that's what we call it. officially. and we covered it. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ takes more than just investment advice. from insurance to savings to retirement, it takes someone with experience and knowledge who can help me build a complete plan. brian, my certified financial planner™ professional, is committed to working in my best interest. i call it my "comfortable future plan," and it's all possible with a cfp® professional. find your certified financial planner™ professional at find your certified financial planner™ professional join t-mobile, and get netflix included. so your family can watch what they love in more places. get an unlimited family plan with netflix on us. and right now, buy one samsung galaxy s9 and get one free.
6:47 am
facial wipes may be convenient for removing makeup, but they don't always leave your skin completely clean. try olay daily facials. simply add water to activate the dry cloth and release a unique 5-in-1 cleansing formula, which works deeply to exfoliate, tone, and soften the skin's surface, while restoring hydration. plus, each wipe provides a more complete clean, than the #1 makeup remover wipe without leaving behind residue. for a more complete clean, try olay daily facials. brand power. helping you buy better.
6:48 am
today, life-changing technology from abbott is helping hunt them down at their source. because the faster we can identify new viruses, the faster we can get to stopping them. the most personal technology, is technology with the power to change your life. life. to the fullest.
6:49 am
everything will turn out okay because there are people in the white house who secretly aren't following the president's orders. i'm being serious here. that's not how our democracy is supposed to work. >> former president barack obama at the university of illinois, our panel is here. what's interesting about that is that the speech is not pro trump. but he's almost defending trump from that anonymous author,
6:50 am
we'this is something of a backhanded defense of mr. trump. >> the first time i read the op-ed, i said this person could come, they could speak out, they're so concerned, why don't you start a process to invoke the 25th amendment. but we haven't managed and don't vote for a democrat and everything is good on a policy. this is not how democracy is supposed to work and this person really shouldn't be applauded. >> i worked for an administration before, if you really don't like what the executive is doing, then you leave, you don't stay in the background and undermine, you come out and say what you have to say and leave that job and be bold about it. >> but you feel differently?
6:51 am
>> i think some people who are in there are doing a public service by staying and appropriately trying to check the president without going entirely -- they may be stealing a memo -- >> i think that's arrogant to think that you can do that, invoke the 25th amendment. >> the 25th amendment is not going to happen. but if you're h.r. mcmaster, if you're a serious person in there, and the country's future is at stake, you don't just quit because -- >> i'm only saying that the weight of what they said, if it's that dire, that there are many, not just the person who wrote the op-ed, not just the persthe -- there are other people in the white house. >> he wrote the op-ed and he's also there to prevent bad things from happening.
6:52 am
>> listen, i think if you feel this strongly, as expressed by my esteemed colleagues here, if you feel that strongly, you should cowboy up, you should say, mr. president, this is wrong, you should say it publicly, loudly. >> let me put up this lindsay graham tweet about barack obama. the more president barack obama speaks about the good old days of his presidency, the more likely president trump will be re-elected. >> in politics, we know both can happen. but he's definitely going to fire up the democratic base and that is what is needed to win back the house and the senate. but there's a ying to the yang, we have to take the bitter with the sweet, there will be an
6:53 am
opposite reaction. >> the gallop for his approval was under the average, it was 49.9%, he's fdr compared to trump, there were a lot of people who did more. >> in the last two years, it's gone up, and it's gone up since then. of course his objective here is to of course do no harm. but if we think this is just an anti-trump speech, it shows the smallness of trump, and the smallness of people defending him, because it was a pro democracy, a proi civi ivcivic engagement. you compare that to what trump did all week, he did that himself, his quote of the week, it's sad actually. >> historically, without precedent. a president criticizing a sitting president, right?
6:54 am
and then, i would simply say to former president obama, if you're wondering how we got here, look in the mirror, buddy, look in the mirror. my point being this -- just listen to me for a second, stop, listen, what i'm saying is, people are wondering, why all these trump voters? where did they come from? they came from eight years of -- >> president obama inherited from president bush one of the worst economies. >> so you're blaming bush? >> no, because you're blaming president obama. you're saying that -- >> i'm saying about politics. >> it's a political matter right now what the democrats are going to do, and what michael bloomberg's $80 million is going to do is put republicans on in each district, citizens who are
6:55 am
saying i'm a republican, but i can't vote republican this year. >> they're going to put a check on president trump? >> so obama doesn't help that much or hurt that much, it don't think it ends up mattering that much. they need to vote republican. >> they need good candidates. >> the president's budget director mick mulvaney was talking to republican donors in new york city about the election and about ted cruz in texas. here's what he said, there's a very real possibility that we will win a race for senate in florida but lose a race in texas for senate. if you figure out a way to subtract, the numbers go up dramatically. that's mick mulvany acknowledging that trump is a
6:56 am
drag on some, not all, but some candidates. >> in suburban areas outside of large major cities, that's probably true, but it's not true in a great vast majority of these states and these districts. what the difference is it's all about candidates. it proves it's unlikable in that quote. when urban becomes chief of staff, mulvaney is not going to go often like that. >> it always matters that you have good candidates that you want one that covered doors open, and what's on the other side. but ultimately this is about trump, there is a energized democratic party because people hate trump. democrats are uning on things like health care, on corruption, on the economy, they're doing it effectively.
6:57 am
>> the good news for your party is you're kind of figuring out a little bit for you guys. the democrats clearly don't have a coherent narrative on a national strategy. >> what about coherent? especially democrats like ayana presley who had a big upset. we're talking about the issues that matter the most to the american people. 70% of americans believe that we should have medicaid for all, we just had president obama talk about medicare for all. this is important to the american people. so the proaggressigressives are out for what the people need. >> what do you thi >> mitch landrieu just destroyed his chances, is he progressive
6:58 am
enough for the democratic base? >> not for progressives. just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not after you. fitting for a week that sent the president down a wabbit hole. >> bob woodward's new book about trump hit the world like meet yors and now the presidential hunt for the sources behind him begins. >> be really, really quiet i'm hunting rabbits. >> every white house has had leakers. >> that was leaked out of the pentagon. >> but this is something else entirely, after all when it comes to attacks on the president, it seems the classic thriller "when a stranger calls" had it right. >> the call came from inside the house. >> it will be a comprehensive task to figure out who's leaking trump.
6:59 am
when you put a snake and a rat and a falcon and a rabbit and a shark and a seal in a zoo without walls, things start getting nasty and bloody. denials have been issued, but even those are telling. chief of staff john kelly has been quoted saying he's an idiot, he's gone off the rails, we're in crazytown, but the worst job i have ever had. but his denial of having called trump an idiot is not true. the president is determined to find out who betrayed him. >> i didn't know until this day that it was him all along. >> thanks for spending your sunday with us. former secretary of state john
7:00 am
kerry is on fareed zakaria which starts right now. thanks for watching. today up the show, former secretary of state, former candidate for the presidency, former senator, john kerry, how duds he feel about his biggest achievement in office being trashed by president trump. >> i'm not going to be senator kerry who makes that horrible iran deal. >


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on