tv At This Hour With Kate Bolduan CNN September 25, 2018 8:00am-9:00am PDT
longer. reliance on a single foreign supplier can leave a nation vulnerable to extortion and intimidation. that is why we congratulate the european states such as poland for leading the construction of a baltic pipeline so that nations are not dependent on russia to meet their energy needs. germany will become totally dependent on russian energy if it does not immediately change course. here in the western hemisphere, we're committed to maintaining our independence from the encroachment of expansionist foreign powers. it has been the formal policy of our country since president monroe that we reject the interference of foreign nations
in this hemisphere and in our own affairs. the united states has recently strengthened our laws to better screen foreign investments in our country for national security threats. and we welcome cooperation with countries in this region and around the world that wish to do the same. you need to do it for your own protection. the united states is also working with partners in latin america to confront threats to sovereignty from uncontrolled migration. tolerance for human struggling and human smuggling and trafficking is not humane. it's a horrible thing that's going on at levels that nobody has ever seen before. it's very, very cruel.
illegal immigration funds criminal networks, ruthless gangs, and the flow of deadly drugs. illegal immigration exploits vulnerable populations, hurts hard-working citizens, and has produced a vicious cycle of crime, violence, and poverty. only by upholding national borders, destroying criminal gangs, can we break this cycle and establish a real foundation for prosperity. we recognize the right of every nation in this room to set its own immigration policy in accordance with its national interests. just as we ask other countries to respect our own right to do the same. which we are doing. that is one reason the united states will not participate in the new global compact on
migration. migration should not be governed by an international body unaccountable to our own citizens. ultimately, the only long-term solution to the migration crisis is to help people build more hopeful futures in their home countries. make their countries great again. currently, we are witnessing a human tragedy as an example in venezuela. more than 2 million people have fled the anguish inflicted by the socialist maduro regime and its cuban sponsors. not long ago, venezuela was one of the richest countries on earth. today, socialism has bankrupted
the oil-rich nation and driven its people into abject poverty. virtually everywhere socialism or comuniism has been tried, it has produced suffering, corruption, and decay. socialism's thirst for power leads to expansion, incursion, and oppression. all nations of the world should resist socialism and the misery that it brings to everyone. in that spirit, we ask the nations gathered here to join us in calling for the restoration of democracy in venezuela. today, we're announcing additional sanctions against the repressive regime targeting maduro's inner circle and close advisers. we're grateful for all of the work the united nations does
around the world to help people build better lives for themselves and their families. the united states is the world's largest giver in the world by far of foreign aid. but few give anything to us. that is why we are taking a hard look at u.s. foreign assistance. that will be headed up by secretary of state mike pompeo. we will examine what is working, what is not working, and whether the countries who receive our dollars and our protection also have our interests at heart. moving forward, we are only going to give foreign aid to those who respect us and frankly are our friends. and we expect other countries to
pay their fair share for the cost of their defense. the united states is committed to making the united nations more effective and accountable. i have said many times that the united nations has unlimited potential. as part of our reform effort, i have told our negotiators that the united states will not pay more than 25% of the u.n. peacekeeping budget. this will encourage other countries to step up, get involved, and also share in this very large burden. we are working to shift more of our funding from assist contributions to voluntary so we can target american resources to the programs with the best
record of success. only when each of us does our part and contributes our share can we realize the u.n.'s highest aspirations. we must pursue peace without fear, hope without despair, and security without apology. looking around this hall, where so much history has transpired, we think of the many before us who have come here to address the challenges of their nations and of their times. and our thoughts turn to the same question that ran through all their speeches and resolutions, through every word and every hope. it is the question of what kind of world will we leave for our children and what kind of
nations they will inherit. the dreams that fill this hall today are as diverse as the people who have stood at this podium. and as varied as the countries represented right here in this body are. it really is something. it really is great, great history. there is india, a free society over a billion people. successfully lifting countless millions out of poverty and into the middle class. there is saudi arabia, where king solomon and the crown prince are pursuing bold new reforms. there is israel proudly celebrating its 70th anniversary as a thriving democracy in the holy land. in poland, the great people are
standing up for their independence, their security, and their sovereignty. many countries are pursuing their own unique visions, building their own hopeful futures, and chasing their own wonderful dreams of destiny, of legacy, and of a home. the whole world is richer. humanity is better because of this beautiful constellation of nations, each very special, each very unique, and each shining brightly in its part of the world. in each one, we see awesome promise of a people bound together by a shared past and working toward a common future. as for americans, we know what kind of future we want for ourselves. we know what kind of a nation
america must always be. in america, we believe in the majesty of freedom and the dignity of the individual. we believe in self-government and the rule of law. and we prize the culture that sustains our liberty, a culture built on strong families, deep faith, and fierce independence. we celebrate our heroes. we treasure our traditions. and above all, we love our country. inside everyone in this great chamber together and everyone listening all around the globe, there is the heart of a patriot that feels the same powerful love for your nation, the same intense loyalty to your homeland, the passion that burns
in the hearts of patriots and the souls of nations has inspired reform and revolution, sacrifice and selflessness, scientific breakthroughs and magnificent works of art. our task is not to erase it but to embrace it. to build with it, to draw on its ancient wisdom, and to find within it the will to make our nations greater, our regions safer, and the world better. to unleash this incredible potential in our people, we must defend the foundations that make it all possible. sovereign and independent nations are the only vehicle where freedom has ever survived. democracy has ever endured, or
peace has ever prospered. and so we must protect our sovereignty and our cherished independence above all. when we do, we will find new avenues for cooperation unfolding before us. we will find new passion for peace making rising within us. we will find new purpose, new resolve, and new spirit flourishing all around us, and making this a more beautiful world in which to live. so together, let us choose a future of patriotism, prosperity, and pride. let us choose peace and freedom over domination and defeat. and let us come here to this place to stand for our people and their nations, forever
strong, forever sovereign, forever just, and forever thankful for the grace and the goodness and the glory of god. thank you. god bless you, and god bless the nations of the world. thank you very much. >> on behalf of the general assembly, i wish to thank the president of the united states of america for the statement just made. may i request representatives to remain seated while we -- >> hello, everyone. i'm kate bolduan. thank you for joining us. what we have been watching right there is president trump delivering his second address to world leaders before the united nations general assembly. and quite an address it was. let's get right to it because i have a lot to discuss. let me bring in cnn chief
international anchor christiane amanpour with me. keeping a running list of who was criticized in his speech, and it's long. i heard probably compliments for north korea, that's really where i heard his praise today. what was your reaction? what do umake of this? >> to be fair, compliments to india, saudi arabia, israel, and pola poland, too. countries he's visited. this is about sovereignty. the president appears to associate sovereignty with isolationism. he doesn't believe, at least according to the speech, that all countries can be sovereign and still be part of a multilateral world. he believes it seems from this speech that to reject globalism, as he said, and to adopt patriotism, as he explained and urged everyone else, means just being for yourself. he said make their countries great again. he's trying to pursue his policy to the rest of the world. but it doesn't all add up because he rejects globalism and
then he praises india for raising a billion people out of poverty. only globalization was able to do that. he says he rejects -- >> and it's not exclusive. >> sovereignty and multilateralism are not mutually exclusive. this is the big situation that i think he's somewhat confused about. he rejected foreign aid. he said he's going to only give it to our friends and to people who respect us. that's a total change from what the united states has done before because it's tried to use foreign aid to pursue and embrace their own foreign policy goals. he's very upset and said not good about opec, right? raising oil prices, but it's not opec raising oil prices. as an oil expert said to me, when the president removes s 1. billion barrels of oil today, supply goes down, prices go up. that's what's causing right now the prices to go up.
and on and on, sort of inconsistencies. he also swapped out last year's fiery rhetoric against north korea for against iran this time. >> yeah, and jim sciutto, anchor jim shutdo is here with me as well. jim, whereas last year there was fire and fury and we'll totally destroy you or little rocket man on north korea, along with iran, and we'll get to iran in a second, another country that faced a lot of criticism from the president this time was china. >> no question. the fact is the president is right on china here, right? he calls china out for stealing intellectual property, which china does aggressively. he calls china out for making territorial claims that are not based on the law. they up and built unsinkable aircraft carriers as they're known in the south china sea, outside of u.s. law. what is interesting on this is the world is uncomfortable with the trade war, no questions, tariffs, et cetera, but on challenging china on these activities, the president has support. what's happening from china, and
i have been speaking to chinese diplomats on this. early on, they thought it was a short-term political play. they could wait it out. he's going to make these promises, et cetera. they're adjusting now. you now hear chinese business leaders and others speaking in terms of a decades-long trade war. it's a major adjustment and the president has forced china to change its view on this issue. >> and they have a big meeting coming up in november. so let's see what happens then. let me bring in also chief political correspondent dana bash. dana, what was your kind of what was your takeaway? it's interesting to see the president standing up there addressing world leaders. you know the domestic politics have to be in the back of his mind. he can't get away from it at every turn. what did you think of, i don't know, his change of tone with north korea? not surprising because we know how he's been talking. >> it's hard to believe it was only a year ago that he called kim jong-un rocket man at that very same podium.
one of the things that strikes me in covering congress where the money is suproved and appropriated to give to countries around the world is the very clear change in tone, maybe not for his tone, but in terms of america's view on foreign aid and foreign assistance. he made it clear that it should be transactional. america will only spend money in places that does good for america. now, it's one thing to say, you know, that america will donate money, will give money for friends. but it made it sound like it goes further. we want something in return. and historically, at least in the last, you know, many decades, the last generation plus, maybe since world war ii, there has been more to foreign aid than that. it has been altruistic, it has been to help the patriots that the president talked about in countries who feel like they
can't get a leg up. and a whole host of other reasons. that was a really clear shift in the way america approaches that. the other thing that i just want to mention is russia. because the president didn't. the only -- >> yeah, the only mention, that's right. >> the only time that the word russia crossed his lips was as a little bit of a back handed slight to germany for getting its energy from russia, which is a whole different question. the fact that he's upset about the pipeline that's being built there. nothing about what russia is doing in syria, what russia is doing and the threat that the neighbors of russia think that it poses there. never mind in this country, in the united states, the fact that his own intelligence agencies have said very clearly that they are seeing evidence that russia is once again trying to meddle in america's election. that was completely absent from the speech.
>> especially when the major theme is sovereignty and threats to sovereignty and the fact that is not part of it is pretty glaring. susan glasser is here, cnn global affairs analyst and staff writer for "the new yorker." on north korea, really quickly, what difference did this year make, do you think, from last year's speech to this? we know obviously summits have happened. the president today saying -- thanking kim for his courage and the steps they have taken. do you see the progress though? >> well, you know, it's very interesting. i think in the speech today, you see clearly that president trump has a highly personalized view of diplomacy, and that's why as christiane put it, he praised the countries which he's visited and leaders he's interacted with. and you know, he's announced repeatedly in the last couple weeks that he's planning and wants to have a second man-to-man summit meeting with kim jong-un, the leader of north korea, and it seems that for
trump, it's the great relationship, as he calls it himself, that really overrides any substantive questions about what kind of progress has been made. my reporting among administration officials suggest they're much more skeptical privately about whether north korea really has the desire to denuclearize, as trump has already proclaimed. in many ways, secretary of state mike pompeo has a very difficult job, as one expert put it to me recently, of trying to negotiate the things trump already claims have been negotiated. i thought the speech started with this remarkable moment, right? for decades, president trump, before he was president, claimed the whole world is laughing at us. then he gets up there and he begins his u.n. speech only a second time in this audience, as if it's a campaign rally, and he seemed genuinely surprised when after bragging that his administration in less than two years had done more than any administration in the history of the united states, that people actually laughed at him.
i have never seen that. >> absolutely not. and let me play that moment, because it absolutely was a startling one. as susan says, the is right off the top of his speech. the president saying something that he says often here. you know, in political rallies. from the rose garden. but just listen how it played at the u.n. >> my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country. america's -- so true. [ laughter ] >> didn't expect that reaction, but that's okay. >> it was pretty extraordinary. >> well, again, you know, i think president trump is really in recent months taken to addressing only extremely friendly venues. he's traveling around the country, as you know right now, in advance of the midterm elections given a series of
campaign style rallies. he seemed really unused to an audience that would be more skeptical. if you go to the united nations general assembly and you say that you're against globalism, you know, you're not necessarily in the most friendly of audiences, first of all. second of all, you know, throughout the speech, he made a little joke there after they laughed at him, but throughout the speech, it's really striking, the extent to which the president brings a sense of grievance to the world stage, the idea that the united states is being ripped off by opec, the idea that trade deals are not necessarily favorable to us and have to be renegotiated, that foreign aid, as dana put it, needs to be much more transactional and only conditioned on whether you're our friend or not. those are not words that this audience is used to hearing from a president of the united states. it's really a stark shift in tone, and arguably, it's actually a more hard-line speech this year than it was last year, even though the rhetoric toward north korea is much more
friendly in general, i would say this reflects the fact that you have a more hard-line series of advisers now around the president, such as john bolton as his national security adviser. >> that's a fascinating point. christiane, i want to drill down on iran. he laid into iran. i mean, eviscerating essentially the leadership, chaos, destruction, death. in talking about in the speech, you sat down with the president of iran. and asked him about this -- well, asked him about a lot, but the clip i want to play is about this back and forth meeting, no meeting, a lovely man. let's listen. >> the president of the united states has tweeted this morning saying that despite repeated requests, i think he means your requests, he has no plans to meet you. maybe some time in the future. and he thinks maybe you're a lovely man. that's what he says in the tweet. what do you make of that?
have you requested a meeting with president trump? >> translator: not this year. nor last year. we have never made such a request for a meeting with the president of the united states. of course, last year, from american officials we received eight requests for a meeting. and i did not see that as being an appropriate meeting, as i do not see it as being appropriate now. and a meeting must take place at a time when that meeting can serve a purpose, can be beneficial. can serve the benefits of both countries, but under the current conditions, when it comes to a meeting and dialogue, i do not see it as beneficial nor appropriate. but you should ask him who made
such requests. >> well, apart from who made such requests, we have got the very serious issue of a deal that was designed to reduce dramatically the threat of nuclear proliferation. the united states has pulled out of it. and the president said that most in the middle east supported his decision to pull out of that deal. it's not quite true. it is true that the alliance of anti-iranians do support it, whether it's bibi netanyahu's government, whether it's crown prince of saudi arabia, the uae, that coalition support that because they think that they can achieve regime change in iran. but the rest of the world, including russia and china and the europeans and everybody else, are desperately trying to figure out some, as i have been told, new mechanism to keep the deal somehow alive despite american sanctions, secondary sanctions on european and other countries that do business with iran. so the iranians have yet again
been certified as complying with it, and yes, of course, there are issues about ballistic missiles, about interference in syria, about hezbollah, about all of those things, terrorism, but those will never be addressed in this deal, according to the iranian president. he said that we are not going to reopen or renegotiate these are issues that should be talked about but this deal is a separate deal. where as he explained yesterday that this deal was a win-win when it was signed and it's been in effect for three years, now he believes and he says the u.s. has done -- is now into a lose/lose situation. the world will lose, the u.s. will lose, the iranians will lose by not having this deal and imposing these sanctions, and that, you know, they hope that somehow they can keep this deal alive. because it's not sure how long they're going to stick with it if sanctions are imposed on it. >> very important, what she's slaying out, these huge issues with worldwide impact. why is it, then, that this
morning on twitter, over the weekend, something that, i don't know, it seems so small, something like the obsession of who requested the meeting or not coming from the president. why do you think that matters to him? >> listen, i think he likes to keep us in the world on edge with this. the contradiction in his rhetoric, even before he gave this speech there, as he entered the united nations an hour after sending a tweet saying that the iranian president is a lovely man, he said no way, you know, a meeting is off the table. then the change in rhetoric from the podium there before the u.n., calling them in effect a despicable dictatorship, that's quite a contradiction. and donald trump has been comfortable with those contradictions before, right? it was not long after his fiery rhetoric last year at the u.n. general assembly that he sat down just a few months later with the leader of north korea. the other point i would make is this. sovereignty, that world is a very powerful word. he used the same word and made
the same argument last year before the uniga. that's a word typically used by countries such as china to push back against any interference, they call it in their internal affairs, any criticism of their human rights record, for instance. their basic argument is, listen, let us do what we want to do abroad. you do us. which the president has allowed space for, right? he does not, for instance, bring up north korea's despicable human rights record at home. he does not tweet about russia attacking and imprisoning protesters, et cetera, as he reaches out for a friendlier relationship. that word sovereignty, it has a lot of meaning in this context and will frankly be welcomed on those terms by those countrychise is an enormous departure from u.s. foreign policy in the past. >> also, eu and those countries have sovereignty, the right to deal with who they want to trade with. they believe president trump is violating their sovereignty by putting secondary sanctions
on -- >> doesn't show principled consistency, right? >> this is not just an agreement between the united states and iran and others. this is a u.n.-enshrined legal treaty -- not a treaty of the u.s., but a u.n.-enshrined security council resolution binding deal. >> the president handled the laughter well, i would say, in that moment in the hall, i wonder what it means maybe when it sets in a little later. watch your twitter feeds. thank you. i really appreciate it. coming up for us, take the fight to primetime. supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh defending himself against accusations of sexual assault and inappropriate sexual conduct in an unprecedented interview on fox news. details ahead bloorb. >> plus, can the deputy attorney general survive? rod rosenstein's future is still in limbo. yes, it started yesterday and we're still there today ahead of a high-stakes meeting with the president on thursday. if he is out, what happens to the russia investigation?
your insurance rates skyrocket you could fix it with a pen. how about using that pen to sign up for new insurance instead? for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
bloating? pain? you may have ibs. ask your doctor about nonprescription ibgard for the daily dietary management of ibs. ibgard - daily gut-health gard now that president trump has addressed the united nations, he can turn his attention back to the double dose of drama waiting are him in washington. the total confusion of rod rosenstein's employment status, let's just say, fired, resigning, not yet, neither? your guess is as good as mine. and also the allegations against his supreme court pick brett kavanaugh who took to fox news last night in an extraordinary interview for a supreme court nominee to do. he went there to say he's not going anywhere. denying the allegations from two female accusers of sexual assault and inappropriate sexual behavior. listen. >> the truth is i have never sexually assaulted anyone, in high school or otherwise. i'm not questioning and have not
questioned that perhaps dr. ford at some point in her life was sexually assaulted by someone in some place, but what i know is i have never sexually assaulted anyone. >> cnn's abby phillip is live at the united nations here in new york with the latest on this. so, abby, what's going to happen here? >> well, kate, your guess is as good as mine. i think the white house right now is trying to do the best they can to really push back against these allegations. that's because president trump himself has really directed his staff to take a more offensive role in this whole thing. that's one of the reasons why you saw brett kavanaugh talking in that interview last night. the president views this as something that is incredibly unfair to his nominee, a character assassination. but even these new allegations, there were dr. ford's allegations and now a new one from deborah ramirez. the white house is saying they're still willing to hear from her, too. listen to sarah sanders talk
about this this morning. >> so does the president want ms. ramirez to appear before the senate judiciary committee as well? >> certainly, we would be open to that, and that process could take place on thursday. again, the president's been clear. let them speak, but let's also let brett kavanaugh speak. and let's let him tell his side of the story before we allow allegations to determine his entire future. >> our sources say that a lot of people in the white house view these second allegations as being thinner than the first. so they think they're in a better position to handle it. but of course, they don't have much room for error here. there are three moderate republican senators who are on the line, and they're trying to make sure that they don't have any defections going into a final vote on kavanaugh's nomination. >> abby, also about kavanaugh. "the new york times" is also reporting that a former classmate of kavanaughs had been one of the 65 women who put together -- signed on to a
letter in support of kavanaugh. she's now taking her name off the list because of kavanaugh's yearbook posts. what are you hearing about that? >> that's right. well, she signed that letter last week, and then it turned out kavanaugh's yearbook became scrutinized, and in the yearbook, there was an inscription on his page that said renat aluminous. it appears multiple times on various boys' pages. turns out it was a reference to her. she was a girl who went to school at a catholic girls school nearby, and people who went to school with them say that that inscription was a reference to unsubstantiated claims of romantic or sexual conquest with her. now, she later learned about that, and she called it hurtful. she was offended by it. she told "the new york times" she had no idea that was the case. and has since kind of pulled back on her endorsement of kavanaugh's character.
this is just one of those examples of how much information is coming out about this phase of kavanaugh's life that has caused some people who even went to school with him and knew him then to question the person that they knew. of course, kavanaugh through his lawyers has said that the inscription meant nothing harmful, that he claimed that he had had one kiss, but she denied that. so this is all very tangled. you know, 17-year-olds in high school, but it's just all being brought to the forefront right now as a result of this nomination. >> can't even agree on a kiss. abby, thank you so much. i really appreciate it. >> how is all this playing out or impacting the people who have the final say here? which is to have the vote, yea or nay. mitch mcconnell is signaling that in no uncertain terms he will move forward with an up or down vote on the senate floor, but all eyes are on these three possible republican holdouts, these three republican senators
that are really in question, have been from beginning but especially today. sunlen serfaty has that on capitol hill. what's the latest there? >> well, kate, certainly as mitch mcconnell pushes ahead and says he is pushing ahead with an up or down vote some time soon, he said some time in the near future on the senate floor, as he says that, though, it certainly is significant that these key swing vote senators, of course, we talked about them a lot in recent days, like like lisa murkowski, she made a significant statement this morning to my colleague manu raju which is not in line with the rest of her party says, indicating she believes an fbi investigation over all of these allegations would do a lot to clear the air. here's what she said earlier this morning. >> senator, do you think there should be a full fbi investigation into these allegations from kavanaugh's past? >> well -- it would sure clear
up all the questions, wouldn't it? >> meantime, just moments ago, i spoke with senator bob corker, who is a key republican voice. he is not on the judiciary committee. but he asked about these latest rounds of allegations, he called the new yorker allegations from ramirez thin, and he said it's starting to feel like a circus. i asked him if he agreed with republicans' calls that fresh call for potentially an fbi investigation. here's how he responded. >> do you think debbie ramirez should be testifying? >> i don't know. whatever the committee decides, i think -- whatever the committee decides. i think that's up to them. i read the "new yorker" article. it was pretty thin. no one else remembered any of it. this is really kind of getting carried away, feeling more like a circus.
but again, i did feel like this first accuser should be heard, and y'all already know that. >> senator corker went on to say that the longer this all plays out, the worse this potentially gets. kate, can know that's a feeling many republicans up here on capitol hill privately will tell you, the longer this takes, the more potential for other accusations and the more to use senator corker's words, this turns into a circus. that's in large part why we have seen mitch mcconnell take to the floor and say, look, we want this to go on. >> thank you. >> coming up for us still, 24 hours later and still an open question. will rod rosenstein keep his job? the meeting between the deputy attorney general and the president of the united states now set for thursday. but is this whole dramatic showdown now something of a distraction on purpose? from the white house's other troubles. details ahead. >> tech: don't wait for a chip like this to crack your whole windshield.
and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two-hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving... simple. easy. awesome. stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today. as far as we know, rod rosenstein is still the deputy attorney general of the united states today. but now, he's facing new demands from critics on capitol hill. they want him to testify about that bombshell report in "the new york times" that came out late last week. "new york times" citing sources saying rosenstein suggested secretly recording president trump and invoking the 25th amendment to oust him from office in the days after trump
fired james comey last year. one of the president's top allies on capitol hill, republican congressman mark meadows, tweeting this. you can have the note -- you can't have the number two official at the department of justice making comments about wiring the president and not address it. rod rosenstein must come before congress this week under oath and tell the truth about his alleged statements. no word on if that's going to happen yet, but before then, probably, rosenstein has a date with the president, meeting thursday about his future, and so far, president trump isn't giving any hints. >> will you fire rod rosenstein based on this? >> i don't want to comment on it until i get all the facts. i haven't gotten all the facts, but certainly, it's being looked at in terms of what took place, if anything took place. and i'll make a determination some time later. but i don't have the facts. >> joining me right now, cnn justice reporter laura jarrett and kaitlan collins.
guys, we're back together. do we have any more clarity today? we're hearing white house officials are cautioning against presuming that rosenstein will be fired. what do you have? >> that's not because the dynamic between president trump and the deputy attorney general have changed at all but we know when they sit down on thursday, president trump does not like one-on-one conflict. he's not good at confronting people he's got problems with, he's not good at firing people. instead, usually giving that task to somebody else. that's exactly what we could see on thursday and what white house officials are cautioning against. this is the president's nature, we know how he is, we know he doesn't like to fire people one-on-one, but of course, they aren't ruling out that he could be fired either. as you heard from sarah sanders this morning, she was asked, does the president want to keep rod rosenstein? does she want to fire him? and she couldn't say either way. she said they're going to sit down on thursday. we'll see what happens then. she did say one thing that could give an indication of what exactly
she said they had a good long conversation yesterday. of course that conversation came amid awkward circumstances where rod rosenstein thought he was about to be fired. he spoke with president trump on the speaker phone call in the west wing that didn't clear any of this up. it only postponed it for another few days until president trump gets back from the united nations meeting in new york. something he is trying to tamp down the speculation on. today i'm worried about the meetings i have going on in new york. >> so stay tuned as donald trump would love everyone to do. laura, rod rosenstein is the deputy attorney general of the united states. he is tasked with overseeing the russia investigation. there is more chatter about what happens to the russia investigation if rosenstein is out. >> if he is shown the door, there is a contingency plan over
here at the justice department and the mueller investigation doesn't just go away. the man who is the solicitor general, noel francisco would be the acting attorney general for purposes of overseeing the mueller investigation. he still argues cases before the supreme court and that was the plan as we understood it justice. justice officials were ready to go with francisco to lead the investigation. so we will have to wait and see whether that plan comes to pass on thursday, kate. >> absolutely. great to see you. thanks so much. joining me right now is editor at large, cnn legal analyst and former prosecutor. chris, after all that was confusion yesterday, he still has his job and officials say don't assume he will be out after there is's meeting. why?
>> everything we know, there are two contradictory donald trump things we know that will run into one another. one is he doesn't like it when people who work for him do things that undermine him, much less invoking the 25th amendment or wearing a wire. that's on this side. on the other side, he likes to subvert expectations. he likes to be the guy who grants the clemency, whether it's reality tv, you can stay around even though you were fired or whether it's in real life. you have those two things running into one another. he is being urged by lots of republicans not to fire rosenstein because of how it looks and how it would unsettle things amid kavanaugh and the election 42 days from today. i don't know how it turns out. kaitlan is right. the possibility exists that he
does the unexpected, at least in part because it's unexpected. >> on a general premises, how does rosenstein operate under this level of uncertainty? all he has to do is ask jeff sessions, but what real impact? >> clearly this shook rosenstein and plenty of press reports that he at one point sought a meeting with the president and he was concerned about his job. he has been trying to improve his relationship with president trump over the last several months. i can't imagine that he doesn't know he will be coming to work again at the end of the week or next week. that said, i think he is probably putting his head down and getting the job done. frankly this is very consequential. while i have my doubts as to
whether or not rosenstein will be fired on thursday, if it did happen, it would be significant. >> a lot of folks think that when it comes to -- let's say rosenstein and sessions, quite frankly. it's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when they get pushed out and everyone said it's the mid-terms. after the mid-terms, what does that change? >> okay, first of all, i would say i agree with the idea that sessions is gone after the mid-terms and rosenstein as well unless he is gone sooner. i will return to my previous point which is predicting what donald trump is going to be to do, if you learned nothing else from the last three plus years of donald trump the politician, i would say that. what does it change? to the extent you buy into this, you ask a republican like mitch mcconnell, it takes the
immediate impact and the sting of more chaos on the investigation. voters have rendered their judgment and i don't think it will be a good judgment on republicans, but he can do it and there is 22 months before the next election. there is plenty of time for other things to happen. voters are voting in six weeks. >> the control room is telling me that in the president's bilateral meeting, he was talking about brett kavanaugh. let's listen to this together. >> charges come up from 36 years ago that are totally unsubstantiated? i mean i was watching this as the president of a great country. you must say, how is this possible? 36 years ago and nobody ever heard about it? it may not be him and she said
she was inebriated and all messed up and she doesn't know it was him, but it might have been him. let's not make him a supreme court judge over that. this is a game by the democrats. >> a congame being played by the democrats. that was the president at his most dismissive of what we have been seeing playing out. >> i will add, we covered this, but i think it remains remarkable, donald trump saying that christine blasey ford if it's as bad as she alleged, she would have reported it 36 years ago. that overlooked so much of what we know about how sexual assault and assault generally is processed. that plus this, remember a week ago we were talking about how donald trump has been restrained and his aides have been restrained as it relates to the
charges by christine blasey ford. if you don't like what donald trump is doing one minute, just wait because he will do something different. >> it's not just the president. i noticed it yesterday. the real evolution of how the white house and republicans have talked about and addressed the allegations and accusations from she should be heard when it comes to dr. ford to vast left wing experience to smear campaign to now congame. there is a real evolution here. and obviously this is coordinated. there is a decision they want to go harder. >> correct. look at yesterday alone. you have what you said about kellyanne conway saying it feels like a left wing experience and mitch mcconnell angry, calling it a smear saying this is lower than they have ever gone. orrin hatch who sits on the
committee dismissing these latest charges as sort of garbage. then you have brett kavanaugh going on fox news and giving an interview to sell all of that. >> yeah. much more to come on this as we always say. i really appreciate chris. thank you so much and thank you so much for joining us. we will have much more on inside politics with john king after a quick break.
. welcome to inside politics. i'm john king and thank you for sharing your day with us. president trump takes on many global critics trying tos ailate iran and warning allies the united states will not apologize for its global trade war. six weeks to the mid-terms and brand-new rankings shift more in favor of the democrats. is there time for a gop