Skip to main content

tv   New Day With Alisyn Camerota and John Berman  CNN  March 26, 2019 4:00am-5:00am PDT

4:00 am
critics is certainly not new. i won't be silent. >> we can never let this happen to another president again. >> the pentagon authorizing $1 billion to begin new border fence construction. >> the law is in effect. >> we have a national security crisis. the president is doing his job in addressing it. >> in a dramatic reversal, the trump administration is trying to get all of obamacare struck down. >> some of the things we have come up with are much less expensive. >> the past two years have been soiled by the trump administration on american's health care. >> this is "new day" with alisyn camerota and john bere men. >> overnight, a stunning reversal calling for the entire affordable care act to be thrown out which could leave millions of americans without health insurance. we have much more on that in a moment. first, to an update on the mueller report. president trump says releasing the full report would not both
4:01 am
bodge ebother him at all. mcconnell says the attorney general has promised to do it and should not be rushed. democratic committee chairman in the house set a deadline to receive the full report by next week. so after being cleared of collusion by the special counsel, the president and his allies are looking to exact political revenge. president trump not naming names, but calling them, quote, treasonous people who are guilty of evil deeds and should be investigated. >> as we just mentioned, the justice department is taking action to completely strike down obamacare. this is is a big deal. it happened overnight. it could affect millions of americans who rely on obamacare for health insurance including coverage for pre-existing conditions, including people getting coverage under medicaid expansion. this is happening, we're paying close attention to it.
4:02 am
the pentagon notified congress it authorized the transfer of $1 billion to build some 57 miles of fencing or other barrier improvements on the border with mexico. the top military brass on capitol hill today, they will no doubt be questioned about that. joining us now, abby phillips, susan hennessey, and sung mung kim. a lot of moonlighting going on here. a lot of people working more than one -- >> i have one job, john. >> you do it so well. because you put your full attention on this, abby, i'll go to you first. the president, tweeting out, i want to read it out loud, clearly on the attack, clearly sees this as an opportunity to take the offensive, my question is how much will he go? how deep will he go here and for how long? >> we really don't know the answer to that. but it is obviously a pivotal
4:03 am
question. i think there was -- there is a thinking that if president trump could sort of move beyond the russia probe, he could really start to capitalize on some of the things that are going well in his administration, like the economy, for example, but instead, as you can see, president trump is fixated on the probe itself. he wants to turn the tables on the people that he thinks have been persecuting him for two years and he wants to go on this political crusade against the investigators. he has a lot of ability to do that. it is interesting to see a lot of his republican allies on the hill, who sometimes are the ones to say, you know, mr. president, let's focus on the economy, let's focus on things voters want to talk about. some of the same people are saying, we need to look at the obama administration, need to go back to see what loretta lynch was doing when she was attorney general under barack obama and so i think there is -- a lot of encouragement for president trump to urge the doj to look into some of the stuff, to declassify documents, that people have been urging him to
4:04 am
declassify related to the russia investigation and if he goes as far as he can go, i think we could be entering yet another period of intense political acrimony that is going to extend the feeling of this russia probe. it is going to be almost as if robert mueller had never finished his conclusions. back to the same political infighting we had for two years, i think. >> part of the rhetoric we're hearing is there was this conference call with the -- some republican leaders, and i guess the rnc or the white house that hatched these talking points, about let's look into the other side, and let's go back in history and look at what some people did. i think that your point that it is maybe premature to move on from the mueller report when we haven't seen the mueller report yet. >> i do think it is pretty premature. if you look carefully at that letter, that summary letter that attorney general bill barr wrote, it is generally or
4:05 am
broadly consistent with an underlying report that more or less clears and vindicates the president. says, look, they looked really hard, they couldn't find evidence of any of this. and so there is not really -- does clear the cloud of suspicion. the attorney general summary letter is also broadly consistent with the report that has lots and lots of really damaging, even devastating information about the president and his associates. they found lots and lots of evidence, it fell below that threshold of criminal prosecution and so, you know, until we actually know what is in the report, certainly we should accept the findings and move on from there. this period of time when all we have is bill barr's very, very high level and in some cases quite vague and confusing summary, there is just no way to reach any conclusion sort of legally and certainly not politically about the meaning or the content of the actual report itself. >> it is interesting, mitch mcconnell, standing in the way of a public statement from the senate, they want to see that whole report.
4:06 am
some interference there. >> it was really interesting because the house had made such a bold statement that we all agree this report should be released and available to the public. i imagine mitch mcconnell was trying to buy time here for the attorney general a little bit. the attorney general bill barr indicated to lindsey graham yesterday in a phone conversation that he will release it as much as possible. he just have to talk to mueller first and take care of the grand jury redactions. but definitely the next immediate fight on capitol hill is over how much of this report is released. you mentioned the deadline earlier. april 2nd, a week from today, that house democrats have set to get the entire mueller report, now the timeline that lindsey graham laid out to me yesterday when i was talking with him was maybe a few weeks. he doesn't want this to go months, he wants it as fast as possible, but democrats, that -- because so much of the impeachment question and other questions surrounding their investigation is in doubt now because of the findings of --
4:07 am
from the special counsel, that is the next immediate fight they'll be focusing on in the coming days. >> it does seem as though attorney general bill barr is moving with alacrity. maybe they'll meet the april 2nd deadline. let's move on to the news, stunning news this morning that the administration -- the trump administration seems to be changing its position, it never liked obamacare, of course, donald trump is a candidate, promised to repeal it, but then had second thoughts about people with pre-existing conditions because there are so many millions and millions and millions of people who have coverage and have pre-existing conditions. but now, it seems that they're siding with this judge who wants to get rid of the whole thing, wholesale. so what is going on in the white house? >> yeah. it is really interesting this is happening. remember a few months ago, before the 2018 elections, when this first came up, republicans and the administration were, like, wait a second, we don't
4:08 am
actually want to get rid of pre-existing conditions. we really don't actually want to throw everything out. and now they do. and i think that that is actually the republican position, like, this is what they have been trying to do since obamacare has -- came into existence. so it shouldn't really be a surprise that this is the position that the trump administration is taking because ultimately repeal and replace has been -- it sort of requires obamacare to go out the window. the problem for republicans will become if this actually happens, what are they going to do? how are they going to address the american people about this? it could be really a huge gift for the democrats going into 2020. this is a really pivotal issue for democrats and republicans who don't have a good answer about what they want to replace the affordable care act with. they don't have any legislative path to replace it anyway. so it could be a case where the
4:09 am
justice department is going by what the administration's ideological position is, but from a political perspective, they don't really have a plan and they don't really have a way out when it comes to dealing with the american people on what this means for them. >> not just pre-existing conditions, it is medicaid expansion, affects millions of people, all kinds of fda regulations, school regulations, a lot in here, susan. so counselor, i come to you, the justice department has taken this new position before an appeals court in new orleans. what if the judges agree with the administration, what happens the next morning? >> i think the more significant thing is actually the fact that the doj has decided to reverse its position. that's because the department of justice has an obligation to enforce and defend the laws as long as there is a reasonable constitutional basis to do so. and so whenever the department decides to do a 180 about face and say, we're not going to defend that line anymore, it
4:10 am
really raises the appearance of what they're attempting to do is repeal a law passed by congress and another branch by using the federal courts to do so. across lots of different administrations including on very, very contentious issues, the department has worked really, really hard to maintain this consistent position, consistent legal positions of defending in cases in which there is a constitutional basis to do so. so this obviously is hugely significant for the future of the affordable care act. that's going to be an incredibly significant political issue. but there is also a much larger sort of basic rule of law concern here. that's one of the reasons why you're seeing so many, especially former department of justice officials, expressing a lot of shock and outrage that bill barr would come in and allow this kind of sort of departure from core department values. >> big week. >> busy. really not wasting time. but i don't understand politically how it makes sense. there are -- i think 52 million
4:11 am
people with pre-existing conditions, some of them are part of president trump's base obviously. how does this make sense? >> on its face politically doesn't seem to mickake a lot o sense. rewind back to the midterms and what republicans were saying on the campaign trail, not just what the president said at his multiple campaign rallies about wanting to protect pre-existing conditions, but what republicans running last year said. first of all, health care was the big winner and the key part of how democrats were able to win back control of the house, and in the senate, where republicans did pick up several seats, a lot of republican candidates were put on the defensive about the positions on the affordable care act. you had josh holly of missouri and martha mcsally in arizona both now senators saying, no, we want to protect pre-existing conditions. and we're kind of tied up in knots when the democratic candidates went after them and hammering them for the party's position on repealing the
4:12 am
affordable care act. abby is correct. you can't -- you know, if you support repealing the affordable care act, you support repealing the pre-existing conditions as well. i can't imagine some of the senators up for re-election in 2020, like susan collins of maine, who is -- who has been a very avid proponent of keeping the pre-existing conditions protections, i can't imagine they're too happy right now with the doj's decision. >> it is a gift to nancy pelosi. if nancy pelosi wanted to turn the focus away from russia, she woke up this morning with a gift outside her door, provided by william barr, the justice department. abby, sun ming, susan, thank you very much. michael avenatti free on bond after being charged for trying to extort $20 million from nike. also facing wire and bank fraud charges in a separate case in california. kara scannell live in washington with the very latest here. a lot going on for michael
4:13 am
avenatti. >> it is a stunning turn of events for michael avenatti. he's facing criminal charges on both coasts with new york prosecutors yesterday announcing a criminal case against him, alleging he attempted to extort nike of more than $20 million on the west coast in los angeles prosecutors there unveiled lengthy control charges against avenatti alleging bank fraud and wire fraud, saying he embezzled more than $1 million of his client's money and provided phony tax returns to get $4 million in loans. now, the case in new york unveiled very quickly, it started last week when avenatti approached nike's lawyers, alleging to them that he had some incriminating information about the company's wrongdoing. he said he would go public with that information on the eve of nike's quarterly earnings and as they -- the ncaa march madness tournament was taking off, saying that would knock billions of dollars from nike's market cap unless they agreed to pay him in an unnamed co-conspirator
4:14 am
more than $20 million. avenatti was arrested in new york yesterday afternoon as he was heading to another meeting at nike's lawyers offices. he was then presented in court and released on $300,000 bond. and avenatti told reporters after the court hearing he expects to be fully exonerated. >> i have fought against the powerful, powerful people, and powerful corporations. i will never stop fighting that good fight. >> the unnamed co-conspirator in the case is mark geragos, he's a well known celebrity lawyer. geragos was the cnn contributor until yesterday. he has not been charged with any wrongdoing and he's not returned cnn's calls for comment. alisyn? >> all right, we'll continue to follow this one. kara, thank you very much. so reuters is reporting that a preliminary report on this month's crash from an ethiopian airlines jet will likely be
4:15 am
released this week. a source tells cnn that ethiopian authorities have handed over portions of the flight voice and data recordings from the black boxes to u.s. embassy officials. the boeing 737 max 8 jet crashed two weeks ago, just minutes after takeoff killing all 157 people on board. and there is a new report in the new york times that says that these two unnamed pilots conducted tests in a flight simulator to re-create what they suspect went wrong with a lion air jet found -- they found these pilots they had less than 40 seconds to override the automated system to avoid a disaster. all 189 people on board died in that boeing jet when it crashed in indonesia five months ago. >> not much time to save a lot of lives. >> those simulations are so important to see if this actually will work. even if you know what is happening. several democratic lawmakers claimed that they had seen clear evidence of collusion between
4:16 am
the trump campaign and russia. so what do they have to say now that the mueller report seems to say there is not enough evidence to make a criminal case here? we're going to ask that man you see on the screen next. leave no man behind. or child. or other child. or their new friend. or your giant nephews and their giant dad. or a horse. or a horse's brother, for that matter. the room for eight, 9,000 lb towing ford expedition.
4:17 am
♪ ♪ our new, hot, fresh breakfast will get you the readiest. (buzzer sound) holiday inn express. be the readiest. woman: this is your wake-up call. if you have moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis, month after month, the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage. ongoing pain and stiffness are signs of joint erosion. humira can help stop the clock. prescribed for 15 years,
4:18 am
humira targets and blocks a source of inflammation that contributes to joint pain and irreversible damage. vo: humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. 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. woman: help stop the clock on further irreversible joint damage. talk to your rheumatologist. right here. right now. humira.
4:19 am
4:20 am
in his report, in his summary of the mueller investigation, attorney general bill barr quotes the special counsel as saying the investigation did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the russian government in its election interference activities. so that is causing some democratic lawmakers to have to explain what they have previously said about allegations of collusion. >> the evidence is pretty clear that there was collusion between the trump campaign and the russians. the evidence is there, whether they have enough of it to bring criminal charges is another issue entirely. >> joining me now is democratic senator richard blumenthal from connecticut. thank you for being with us. we just played sound of you and we played it in its entirety, which i think is important.
4:21 am
however, i do want to ask, you say you saw clear evidence of collusion. was that statement wrong? >> that statement was absolutely right and we need to see the mueller report, not just the barr summary of it. full transparency. and disclosure are critical. the american people deserve it. they paid for that investigation. they need to know all of the evidence and facts that led robert mueller to his conclusion and his reasoning because what he concluded was that there was, in fact, insufficient evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt and charge a crime, which as i said in the sound that you played was an open question. but, very importantly, john, he did not, and i repeat not exonerate the president on obstruction of justice and the two are closely related because obviously criminal intent, which is essential to committing and
4:22 am
charging a crime, may have been lacking because of that obstruction of justice. and that's why the american people need to know all of the facts. >> specifically, specifically though on collusion, and, again, do you trust robert mueller that there was not enough evidence to make a criminal case on conspiracy or coordination? do you take him at his word? >> i respect deeply robert mueller judgment as a very experienced and erudite attorney imwa i want to see how close the evident came to meeting the high standard of beyond a reasonable doubt. and so should the american people because even if there are no criminal chargecharges, reme this attack on our democracy is what prompted the investigation at the outset, the russians attacking our democracy. and the americans who were
4:23 am
potentially complicit in it. top trump campaign officials who shared poling data with the russians. >> according to the footnote in this report, you said americans who were complicit in a coordination according to robert mueller, the definition we were given here, does include a tacit agreement, which would be cooperation in this case. or complicity in this case. so there is some indication that did not take place here, robert mueller believes that did not take place. >> that's summary. we need to see the report. >> the special counsel defined coordination, a quote, as agreement, tacit or expressed, between the trump campaign and the russian government on election interference. it is a direct quote. i don't know if barr made up the quote. but it is a direct quote and it is in the mueller report. >> with all due respect, you can assume it is a direct quote and wasn't to see the report itself and so should the american
4:24 am
people. the issue here, john, is not just whether there was complicity that rose to a criminal level, it is about obstruction of justice, no exoneration there, and the judgment by william barr may have been completely improper. he indicated at the outset that he felt the president of the united states could never commit the crime of obstruction of justice. he was asked to recuse himself from the entire investigation, in light of the memo and the fact he was a trump appointee. but the point is there was evidence of collusion in the trump tower meeting, where top campaign officials -- >> understood. you said you do respect the finding, there is not enough evidence to make a criminal case in this instance. you talked about the barr letter as being, what, elegant and brazenly devious the barr summary is how you describe it. my question to you, is robert mueller now, the investigation is over, he's out there, former
4:25 am
marine, we know -- no one doubted his courage or his intentions, don't you trust him to say something publicly or let the world know if he believes that barr is somehow misrepresenting what his report says? >> i do trust him to comment on the barr summary, that conclusionary four-page letter. that's why i think he should come before the united states congress and comment publicly to the american people and to us. i deeply respect and trust his judgment. i do not deeply respect and trust the barr summary, which was designed to frame the message before the information was available and he succeeded in creating headlines. >> i have a couple of more questions and not much time left. health care, you're on the judiciary committee, this was a decision by the department of justice to say basically that they want all of obamacare
4:26 am
struck down in its entirety. your reaction. my reaction is we need to come together on a bipartisan basis and improve health care, meet the challenges to rebuilding our roads and bridges, serving our veterans, building our national defense. and making pharmaceutical drugs more affordable. all of those are undermined by this position, which would take away health insurance for millions of americans who suffer from pre-existing conditions, hundreds of thousands in connecticut and it is a highly destructive betrayal of trust. the department of justice has a responsibility to defend the laws of the united states. the affordable care act is one of those laws. it is shirking its responsibility. >> i have to ask you about horrible, horrible news we learned overnight, jeremy richman, the father of one of the victims of the sandy hook shooting, he was a friend of yours, he took his own life.
4:27 am
i want you to tell us about your friend that we all lost and tell us now what we need to know to fight this scourge of suicide and deal with so many mental health issues. >> jeremy richman was a wonderful human being and he suffered so grievously when he lost his daughter in sandy hook massacre. i'm going to be recalling him today at the hearing that we have on a statute proposal that i made in the past to take guns away from people when they're deemed to be dangerous. so-called red flag statute. that's the kind of progress we need to make in his memory and his daughter's precious memory as well. jeremy richman championed the
4:28 am
science of trying to know what triggers human violence, what in the brain causes people to want to kill others in the way that it happened at sandy hook. and he was a deeply caring, committed, profoundly insightful and intelligent man, and a dear friend to so many in the newtown community and my heart and prayers are with his family. >> we're sorry for your loss and we are sorry for the loss of the people in that town that suffered so much already. later in the broadcast, we're going to be talking about issues surrounding mental health and suicide prevention. thanks so much for being with us this morning. >> thank you. >> so sad. just so sad to hear about it from a friend and a colleague and somebody who was trying to work to better the humanity. >> they know him so well. i heard people like richard blumenthal speak and others speak because he was so active in the community, so active in so many of these issues.
4:29 am
all right, we'll be talking about that later in the program, meanwhile, does the russia investigation matter to voters in 2020? harry anton is here with telling poll numbers for us next. - [woman] with my shark, i deep clean messes like this.
4:30 am
this and even this. but i don't have to clean this, because the self-cleaning brush roll removes hair, while i clean. - [announcer] shark, the vacuum that deep cleans, now cleans itself. hmm. exactly. and doug. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner? oh. well, we just spend all day telling everyone how we customize car insurance, because no two people are alike, so...
4:31 am
limu gets a little confused when he sees another bird that looks exactly like him. [ loud crash ] yeah. he'll figure it out. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪
4:32 am
robert mueller's work is done and among the many remaining questions, how will it weigh on voters in a 2020 election? there is something about harry. cnn's senior politics writer harry anton has the answer. >> his work is done, but mine has just begun. isn't that nice?
4:33 am
>> you're like the william barr of cnn. >> yeah, sort of. i'd like to think i'm a little younger than william barr. so, look, this is a recent poll we just did, we open ended it, what is the most important issue for your 2020 vote? voters could say pretty much anything. but look at this. look at the russia investigation. 0% said it was the most important to their voting in 2020. 0, 0, 0 respondents said russia. one thing we were talking about health care obviously, the trump administration wants to get rid of the aca, look at that, it ranked significantly higher. so the news that has kind of come out this week of things that are important to people's vote in 2020, i would argue the health care news is far more important than the russia investigation. >> there were multiple responses allowed. >> multiple responses. >> you could say anything you wanted. >> anything. you could say the boston red sox. >> as many times as you wanted. and zero people, zero times. >> zero times. what is the most important issue, you can report multiple
4:34 am
responses, zero people said zero times russia. >> stop the presses. most important people to people's lives is -- >> most important to their vote in 2020. most important issue. but, look at this. this is a fox news poll. the mueller report, will it change, will it change your view of donald trump? 41% said no chance. only 7% said there was a strong chance that whatever he said could change a view, and that could -- it could be the case. he said, oh, yes, he didn't exonerate the president. this is another example, just 7% said there was a strong chance it would change. you combine the two of those, you get the idea that voters are not really thinking about this. if you think to the candidates on the campaign trail, follow them along, they were not talking about the russia investigation at all. at all. and, you know, again, go to 2018, the democrats kind of ran over the republicans in the 2018 midterm. look at this. we basically in this particular poll we said, okay, we gave you a particular issue and you could say how important it was to the
4:35 am
vote. only 48%, 48% said the russia investigation was extremely or very important factor in your vote. the lowest. the only one that got less than majority and look again, health care, we were talking about it earlier, 80%. that's a far more important factor, that's far more important to how people are making themake ing vote choices. >> where is the president's approval rating at this point? >> i think this is another thing to keep in mind. can this move the polls? i just got to point out how stable the president is. look at this. 43 today. 44 six months ago. 43 a year ago. 44% two years ago. nothing moves. nothing. >> usually we talk about this in the context of will this troubling news for the president lower his approval rating? but we're about to see whether the reverse is also the case, whether positive news might make it go up. >> right. i think if we're thinking about 2020, the sort of unknown factors, and sort of if mueller had come out and said something very bad about the president, then that could have lowered
4:36 am
him. we were able to say, we now know. this won't lower the president's approval rating unless there is something barr held back. >> could raise it. >> could raise it. exactly. this is one of the unknown factors. now we know we will see it if it goes up. there is still three unknown factors, state of the economy, the democratic candidate, but basically with mueller, we now know, his approval rating will not drop because of it and may go up a little bit. and one other thing i'll point out, look, this pretty much eliminates the chance that there will be a gop challenger that could be significantly affecting his approval. >> that huge william weld bubble may be burst. >> he was a popular guy. >> on the democratic side. this is since we get a nice 2020 check. there is a lot of pete buttigieg momentum. we can look at his google trends, the searches. he was tied for the second highest number, second highest number of google searches and had more people search for his name in the last two weeks than the prior 93 weeks, a lot of
4:37 am
time, people, 93 weeks combined. >> buttigieg momentum. this one i like. >> the yankee fans, we won all the championships, 27 world series, blah, blah, blah. since 2001, this millennium, red sox won four championships. the new york yankees have won only one. the red sox are the ones who have the great history this millennium when most people have been alive. >> you're not the underdog anymore. >> four. yankees, just one. >> harry, you're the man. >> not sure why we include that, that's a good one. >> we include it because the yankees are evil and we like to squash evil on this program. >> for instance. thank you, harry. cnn will host a presidential town hall with senator cory booker hosted by don lemon tomorrow night at 10:00 p.m. eastern. republicans are calling for house intelligence chairman adam schiff to resign over his claims of russian collusion. one republican from that
4:38 am
committee is here next with what he wants to see happen. how do you gauge the greatness of an suv? is it to carry cargo... or to carry on a legacy? its show of strength... or its sign of intelligence? in crossing harsh terrain... or breaking new ground? this is the mercedes-benz suv family. greatness comes in many forms. lease the glc 300 for just $479 a month at the mercedes-benz spring event. going on now. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing. ♪ cal: we saved our money and now, we get to spend it - our way. valerie: but we worry if we have enough to last. ♪ cal: ellen, our certified financial planner™ professional, helps us manage our cash flow and plan for the unexpected.
4:39 am
valerie: her experience and training gave us the courage to go for it. it's our "confident forever plan"... cal: ...and it's all possible with a cfp® professional. find your certified financial planner™ professional at you get the price match guarantee. so if you find your room at a lower rate, hilton is like... we're gonna match that rate and give you an extra 25% off. what would travel sites do if you found a different price? that's not my problem, it's your problem. book at and get the hilton price match guarantee. this and even this.hark, i deep clean messes like this. but i don't have to clean this, because the self-cleaning brush roll removes hair, while i clean. - [announcer] shark, the vacuum that deep cleans, now cleans itself.
4:40 am
4:41 am
house democrats have formally requested that bill barr hand over special counsel robert mueller's full report to congress by next week. no word on whether that is actually the plan. but now some republicans are calling for the democratic head
4:42 am
of the house intel committee to resign his post. >> he owes an apology to the american public and there is no place in adam schiff's world or in congress that he should be chair of the intel committee. >> joining us now is republican congressman mike turner, a member of the house intelligence committee. good morning, congressman. >> good morning. how are you doing? >> doing well. do you agree with your colleague that chairman schiff should resign his post? >> well, i really do believe adam schiff's leadership is compromised for three reasons. one is, he wasn't being straight with the american public or with you when we would have hearings in the intel committee, on the trump campaign and coordination, we would hear witness after witness as you now know come in and say i have no evidence of collusion, i don't know anyone else who has evidence of collusion, and he would walk out to the cameras and say, we're getting close, and then the next step, which is the second issue why we're -- i think we're concerned about his leadership he is would then say the republicans are obstructing my
4:43 am
ability to do this, which the republicans on the committee were not. it is very divisive, he's been dishonest with the american public on what was happening, blaming the republicans. >> this is helpful. just to be clear, you heard him misrepresenting things that would happen behind closed doors and then come out and you heard him lying about it? >> well, and so have you. i mean, you can play the tape of him saying i have more than circumstantial evidence. if you go to comey's hearing, before the intelligence committee, i tried to signal the media. it is not illegal for a member of congress to sit in a classified briefing and come out and misrepresent what happened in the room. it is illegal to say what did happen. we would leave the hearings and the republicans would file by, adam schiff would run in front of the cameras and say outrageous and inflammatory things that did not represent what happened in the room. second thing is the divisiveness, he would blame the republicans he was being constrained in finding collusion
4:44 am
and we know from the mueller report there is no collusion to find. the third thing is he's transformed the intelligence committee, the staff, you even reported, has been transformed into an investigative team and instead of intelligence team. our committee is about national security, trying to ensure our intelligence community has the tools they need. >> isn't that part of what you're tasked with? >> not the type of investigation that he has been directed toward. remember, he had felix seder coming in tomorrow to ask him more questions about collusion and collaboration with the trump campaign who had already been interviewed by the mueller investigation as we know that -- >> there are still some questions about why we didn't know the right timeline and why donald trump as candidate and president didn't own up to that business. >> the mueller investigation interviewed felix seder. there is no more work for the intelligence community to do with respect to any aspect of trump and collusion.
4:45 am
>> hold on a second. you have a duty separate and apart from the mueller investigation. you have oversight and investigative powers even if robert mueller didn't exist. >> right. but there are other committees to pursue other issues. we're supposed to be focusing on your national security. what is china doing? what is russia doing? what is iran, north korea doing? what resources do they need? what information are we having that needs to be processed? are there silos? this is a personal vendetta from adam schiff at this point and it is -- he will continue to come on your show and say there is collusion, even though there is no collusion as long as you let him. >> so, i mean, back to my question, are you calling for him to step down? >> i do believe he needs to step aside. i think his leader happen is compromised and it is compromised as i was saying for three reasons. one, he's stood in front of the american people and said things that were not true. >> got it. >> attacked his fellow republicans on the committee. and then divisive in saying
4:46 am
things about the republicans on the committee that are not true. he transformed the committee from its focus, protecting our national security and the intelligence community to being a vendetta against the -- >> who should be the chair? who would you like to be the chair? >> that's something -- that's not my decision to make. that's nancy pelosi's decision to make. when she makes that decision, she needs to say what would be best for national security. not what is the best for appearances on cnn. >> none of us have seen the mueller report, of course. so we just have seen the four page summary. >> the summary does include direct quotes. that's made the most news, we have -- >> sure, but for my taste, i guess i'll say that's not enough after two years. >> i agree. and i have supported this whole report needs to be made public. but with respect to collusion, there are direct quotes in here there is no tacit or express -- >> could not establish, did not establish that members of the trump campaign conspired or
4:47 am
coordinated. it didn't rise to a level that robert mueller they could establish. i agree with -- >> which is different by the way than what swalwell said on your show. he's come on and said, it doesn't rise to the level of criminal conspiracy or collaboration or cooperation. that's not what mueller said. he said there was none. and so you're going to continue to have these people say there is evidence of things that there is not evidence of. >> this is the part that is confuse, until we see the mueller report. why then all the lying and subterfuge? >> with what? >> from the trump orbit, why did so many people -- if there was no conspiracy, and that's what robert mueller, i agree with you, concluded, why all the lying, why did they not admit, why was the air force one statement misleading and false, that they crafted, why did so many people lie that they're now going to prison about it? why all the subterfuge? >> you have to ask -- you have to ask them that, but the one
4:48 am
thing that is important about your question is no one was lying about collusion. the people who are going to jail are lying about financial transactions they were doing, business meetings -- >> meetings they had with russians. >> no one is going to jail because they lied about collusion or cooperation before congress or in any aspect of this investigation. so that is a misrepresentation of what has happened. that's why mueller is able to say there is no evidence of it and no one was prosecuted for it. >> well, they lied to investigators. >> and no indictments with respect to it. >> they lied to investigators and that's not allowed. >> i don't know who you're talking about when they say they. >> michael flynn lied to investigators. there were also -- >> he's actually said he had no evidence with respect to collusion or collaboration or cooperation. it is not about trump/russia, which is what adam schiff and your question was about, which is trump/russia. all of these other aspects that came out in the mueller campaign, no american has been charged with respect to
4:49 am
collusion, collaboration or cooperation with russia and the trump campaign and the mueller campaign. mueller investigation put to bed the issue of the campaign. >> i understood that's the top line. i hear you that that's the headline. but i -- >> that's the actual quote in the barr memo from the mueller report. >> there was a lot of lying to investigators. that's why paul manafort, george papadopoulos, all these people got in trouble because they lied. as you know there was the misleading statement on air force one. why? >> you have to ask them. i'm not going to deviate statement that someone else has made. i can tell you this, though, that when you look at the statements that were made, by members of the intelligence committee including adam schiff, they would come out of hearings and testimony we received that did not bear resemblance to what was happening in the back room, and you have to know this yourself, if cnn looks at the statements not just made on cnn, but you had to have off the record conversations, background discussions, phone calls with individuals and you now know having the mueller report, they
4:50 am
bear no resemblance to what you're being told. it wasn't ever. >> we don't have the mueller report. we don't have the mueller report. we look forward to having the mueller report. >> you have direct quotes in the barr letter that state the conclusion and i look for the mueller report. i'm for the whole thing i voted for everything to be open. i think the american public and you need to read this. you want to look at what happened in rehearings and your press conferences after the hearings. >> we would love to. >> and see what they were in contrast -- >> if we could get access to closed door meetings we would love that. >> on the intelligence committee we voted. they are in the process, coming out. you can see adam schiff ask questions. you will get an opportunity to hear witness after witness say i have no evidence of coordination or collaboration. i have no evidence of anyone else who has that evidence. >> okay. >> then you can match them up
4:51 am
yourself to the members on adam schiff's team and running in front of the cameras saying we are close, we have more than circumstantial evidence of collusion when, in fact, there was none. >> we look forward to connecting the dots and having you back. >> i hope you hold them accountable. >> thank you very much, congressman. >> thank you. >> george papadopoulos convicted of lying about conversations he had about russia. michael flynn convicted. mike flynn convicted on lying. >> i knew those rang a bell. >> people were convicted. the jail time thing was a narrow, narrow read. all right. how pervasive is jerry magerrym thing? will the supreme court take action? reality check is next.
4:52 am
♪ ♪ our new, hot, fresh breakfast will get you the readiest. (buzzer sound) holiday inn express. be the readiest.
4:53 am
4:54 am
4:55 am
4:56 am
coming today, the supreme court will take up the issue of gerrymandering again. this is the process of redrawing maps into shapes so ridiculous they run out of living animals. >> which dead animals do they reflect? >> there is an answer coming up. cnn senior political analyst john avlon has the reality check. >> it's not a stretch to say the future of our democracy may be decided in cases argued before the supreme court today. at stake are two paths. one, increase the polerization enabling hyper partisanship or create more representative results and ensure voters choose politicians rather than politicians choosing voters. at issue is redistricting. justice will be hearing a balanced docket today. a case involving a republican act of redistricting in north carolina and a democratic case in maryland. north carolina's purple swing
4:57 am
state, hotly contested in presidential elections. democrats have a nearly half million more registered voters but republicans intentionally drew lines to preserve extreme partisan advantage regardless of election results. don't believe me? here's what the republican who redrew the map said. quote, i think electing republicans is better than electing democrats. so i draw this map to help foster what i think is better for the country. i propose we give partisan advantage to ten republicans and three democrats because i don't think it is possible to draw a map with 11 republicans and two democrats. guess what happened? in 2016 punl republicans won 5 the vote. ten republicans to let's see democrats just as designed. 2018, north carolina democrats and republicans were about evenly split in votes but republicans got 77% of the seats. again, 10-3. look, no party has a monopoly on
4:58 am
virtue over vice and democrats do it when they can. case in point, maryland's sixth. politicians pulled 66,000 republicans out of the district and replaced them with 24,000 democrats. the result was a misshapen absurdi absurdity. one judge called it a broken wing bird flying across the state. they wanted to be more likely to elect a democrat than a republican. yes, this was my intent. federal judges declared it uncontroversial just a day later. gerrymandering even frustrated the founders. reagan took up the cause. barack obama campaigned against it as well. there is a reason michael tomaski says if you ask a thousand close political observes to name one concrete fix, less partisan gerrymandering would top the poll. today the supreme court has the rare opportunity to restore
4:59 am
needed sanity to our political system. redistricting is an issue that should be beyond right and left. it is about right and wrong. that's your reality check. >> not just dead but extinct. >> a prostrate one. that answered our question. thank you very much. yale has rescinded the admission of a female student whose parents allegedly paid more than $1 million to get her in. brynn? >> reporter: we had 12 defendants go in front of a judge for the first time. they were primarily college coaches, school administrators, test administrators. while we are not seeing parents on the list that pleaded not guilty yesterday, we'll see them later in the week. this list was primarily, according to u.s. prosecutors, the people that helped rick singer, the moaster mind behind the college admissions scheme. they helped him execute the
5:00 am
skeske scheme. one of the women allegedly made fake profiles at usc to help rick singer get students in through athletic routes. another was an accountant tied to the sham nonprofit singer created in order to allegedly bribe coaches and others to help make this scam operate. that's the people we are talking about here. we are also learning it is possible we could get five or ten more arrests within the next month. we think parents and possibly students could be coming down the pipe as the scheme continues to be investigated. alisyn and john? >> thanks. good morning. >> here we go. i knew it was coming. there it is. >> i didn't know. >> we're back. good morning. welcome to your "new day." it is tuesday, march 26. 8:00 in the east. breaking overnight the justice department moving to strike down obamacare. the move would elect millions of americans who rely on the afford


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on