Skip to main content

tv   Inside Politics  CNN  April 1, 2019 9:00am-10:00am PDT

9:00 am
welcome to "inside politics." i'm john king. thank you for sharing your day with us. new confrontations between democrats and the trump white house. the latest fireworks, a whistleblower says in at least 25 cases the trump administration overruled career officials who had rejected applications for security clearances. plus, the white house says the president is not bluffing and is prepared to close parts of the u.s. border with mexico. even some of his allies worry his immigration obsession will hurt the economy and maybe hurt the president's re-election chances. and a me, too challenge for joe biden. he says he has offered countless expressions of affection over the years, but never did he believe them to be inappropriate. a former nevada politician who
9:01 am
says biden kissed her head disagrees and says democrats have better 2020 choices. >> there are so many more incredible candidates that are just as likely and i believe are competent and amazing and can beat donald trump. my point was never about his intentions, and they shouldn't be about his intentions. it should be about the women on the receiving end of that behavior, and this isn't the first time and it wasn't the only incident where he was acting inappropriately with women. >> back to the vice president's big challenge in a few moments, but we begin the hour with two new big confrontations pitting house democrats against the trump administration. both involve subpoena battles, and both involve issues that get under the president's skin. today the house oversight committee chairman disclosed that a whistleblower told congress at least 25 administration officials were granted security clearances after civil servants rejected their applications.
9:02 am
two of those rejected and then granted clearances by political appointees are current senior white house officials. a memo from oversight chairman elijah cummings says as woman who worked for 18 years at the white house in both democratic and republican administrations detailed to lawmakers how the white house, this white house, overruled the normal process and granted clearances to applicants who had been rejected because of, quote, a wide range of serious disqualifying issues involving foreign interests, conflicts of interest, concerning personal misconduct, financial problems, drug use and criminal conduct. the second fight involves the mueller report and witnesses depths want for their own investigation. the house judiciary committee will meet wednesday to authorize a subpoena for the full report unredacted setting up a confrontation with the white house and justice department. democrats who control the committee will offer subpoenas for five senior staffers, another move to create a political battle over documents
9:03 am
and witnesses. president trump making clear his displeasure tweeting, quote, no matter what information is given to the crazed democrats from the no-could lose mueller tech new england report will never be good enough. behind the president tweets the dems are laughing. julie pace with the associateded, cnn's manu raju, paul cane with "the washington post" and lisalerrer with the "new york post." let's start with the security clearance. the white house has said the president has every right to do this. the president says he didn't get involved in the big ones like his son-in-law. what do the democrats think they have here? >> that's been the question, whether or not the president did get involved and override the concerns that people in the career officials had raised about the security clearance process. "the times" report that had jared kushner for one, there were concerns about his security clearance, whether he should have gotten one. the president said he should. ivanka trump, cnn reported was also a concern raised internally.
9:04 am
the president green loyaltied that as well. what elijah cummings says he has this whistleblower who has come forward. her new is trisha newbold, an adjudications manager in the security office. she talked to the committee and detailed dozens of times where there were concerns raised offer overruled by officials in the white house, and she says since 2018 there have been 25 instances, including those two senior white house officials. now the question is -- that cummings has had is this shows the white house has complete disregard for the protocols, for disregarding concerns over national security. one of the things that she points out, according to this memo, the whistleblower says that there was an unusually high number of intrim security clearances that were given to individuals who were later deemed that they should not have had access to classified information, so this is just going to be one of a number of investigations that this committee and other committees in the house plan to do.
9:05 am
he plans to subpoena one individual to come forward to ask for more information. the white house has yet to respond to this though. >> what's the bigger goal here for the democrats? they are saying the administration just can't get good people so they are getting people who don't deserve to be in government or do they believe something nefarious is at play? >> this is where they are moving beyond the criminal side where you had the mueller investigation for two years. now they are moving into the incompetent side. this is where the democrats want to go with their investigations to just sort of explore areas where they are doing things differently. they are not observing protocol, and in some cases they are giving people clearances who shouldn't have them. >> here's what jim jordan, the ranking republican on the committee. democrats were often critical when the republicans were in charge of what they chose to focus on. jim jordan flipping the coin, full. it's an excuse to go fishing through the official files of personal members. the 25 examples of recommendations heralded by the
9:06 am
democrats include non-political officials such as a gsa custodian. so the question is here is it oversight or overreach? >> to paul's points, one of the things the democrats will be doing now that they have the majority back in the house they will poke wherever they can. clearances is one thing. they will be looking at every aspect of the trump administration, trump's personal finances, anything they consider to be fair game. the challenge for the democrats is to make any one of these investigations stick, particularly in light of the -- of the end of the mueller investigation which didn't result in any collusion. there's going to be i think i think some sensitivity within some corners of the democratic party to try to choose more carefully, to not do such a broad brush and to pick the ones where they can actually make an impact. security clearances is one where they feel like they can. to jim jordan's point there is a certain irony any time republicans are talking about brushing aside questions about who saw classified information given how intense their questioning was about hillary clinton and classified information and that was part of
9:07 am
her e-mails, a bit of hypocrisy there. >> a bit. had a bit to be fair. let's quote from trisha newbold who worked 18 years, democrat and republican administration. i came forward today because i just -- i do not see a way forward positively in our office without coming to an external entity because i've raised my concerns through the eop, executive office of the opinion, to career staffers as well as political staffers. this is sit matic. we're not a political office, but these decisions are being continuously overruled. her case is there's a system, a process, a way to do this and when the civiler is advance say, no, they are not always right, but in her case more than 25 of them when the civiler is advance say no and someone else saying yes to her represents a problem. >> right. this is part of the case that democrats are trying to build, that this is an administration that does not accept the norms of government, that does not accept rules, that they didn't drain the swamp. i don't know, they expanded the swamp, and that's something that we'll definitely hear more and more as we move more and more
9:08 am
into this 2020 cycle. as part of case they want to -- they want to build really against the president, but the question will be how well it sticks. if you don't have the bombshell moment. >> the question is who? the question is who? if you're in any level of government, if you have financial issues, people worry about blackmail or misappropriations of funds. if you have foreign conflicts, they are worried about influence of other countries. we know that the democrats sometimes have raised questions. jared kushner was the chief one. why did he get one when most officials recommended against it? listen to the president talking to the "new york times" a bit ago where he says it happened but i had nothing to do with it. >> did you tell anyone in the white house to overrule security officials? >> i don't think i have the authority to do it. >> you do. >> i would never do it. jared was a good -- i was never involved in his security. i know that he just -- just from
9:09 am
reading i know there were issues back and forth about security for numerous people actually, but i don't want to get involved in that stuff. >> i guess my question is this the democrats' casting a broad net because they think there are a lot of issues to be raised here, or is it the issue of the democrats casting a broad net because they want to get it that one big fish? >> yes. that's one big part of it, that big fish being jared kushner and ivanka trump and the president's truthfulness. that's one of the reasons why they are particularly interested in this. the president has said he was not involved. ivanka trump said that the president was not involved in her security clearance situation. now we do know from our colleague alex marquardt who is reporting that jared kushner and ivanka trump are on that list who is tells our colleague that. this is going to be a question for them. how did theyursue is whether th president was telling the truth
9:10 am
to the american public and they clearly say he was not. >> we'll see if they can get the white house counsel and others to cooperate with requests for documents and issue and the other is the wednesday subpoena fight in the judiciary committee. some would say, and the republicans are saying why don't you wait, see what the attorney general sends us. he says he'll send you something. he says he has to redact some of it. we know it's a counterintelligence investigation that has sources and methods about how did they find out about the russian meddling in the election so some would be congress knows and say we want to know. >> there's two points. this is going to be a very long, legal drawn-out battle that could go all the way to the supreme court, and it's getting it started now. and the other is democrats are really angry at attorney general barr over his characterization of the obstruction piece of the mueller report which they -- it has just driven them a bit angry, and their sense of trust
9:11 am
in him right now has fallen because they think -- they think he took a step farther than he was sort of in his original mandate. >> and the redactions have prompted concerns among democrats. one the grand jury information. they believe they are entitled to that. also the part that barr says information that could impugn the integrity of peripheral third parties. the question is who that is. democrats believe there could be significant redactions because of those two category, and they say things like the watergate investigation, the starr investigation, that gives them precedent to get at least the grand jury information. >> some of this is also democrats want to lay down a marker. they don't want to look like they are just abiding bair's time frame on this. they want to say, hey, we have authority here. we're the're going to give you deadline on this, and if you don't make it, that's a problem. they don't want to sit back quietly right now. >> that's certainly what their base wants from them, right? the numbers on impeachment among democrats have shifted. democrats -- there's less of that intense drive to impeach president trump, but that sense of investigation, that need to
9:12 am
push on this is still very strongly there within the party, and i also think democrats want to send a message that the barr memo is not the report. this is a bit confusing to people i think if you're not someone who is living and breathing this sufficient, and this is a way of reinforcing that, that what you -- what you heard, what you read, maybe what you read is not actually the report which is an important distinction for them to make as they think about the re-election. >> good point. we'll stay on top of that. up next, joe biden faces the first big challenge of his campaign even before he officially enters the race. ♪ limu emu and doug.
9:13 am
9:14 am
9:15 am
hmm. exactly. 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... 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 ♪
9:16 am
joe biden already playing defense, even before launching his potential run for the white house. the former vice president facing the first crisis of that still not official campaign. a former democratic lawmaker in nevada alleging biden made her feel, quote, uneasy. it was back in 2014 at a campaign rally where she said he smelled her hair and kissed the back of her head. biden releasing a personal
9:17 am
statement defending himself yesterday saying in part, quote, i've offered countless handshakes, hugs, expresses of affection, support and comfort and not once, never, did i believe i acted inappropriately. if it is suggested i did so, i will listen respectfully, but it was never my attention. we have arrived, the vice president says, at an important time when women feel that they can and should relate their experiences and men should pay attention and i will, he said. if biden is indeed paying attention, he might note a few headlines from the weekend as this story was covered, none of which would bode well for him especially in this me, too era. in politico biden blind-sided by a dose of reality. joe biden defends his behavior with women after accusations of unwanted touching and the associated press saying biden faces new scrutiny from dems over behavior with women and the "new york times" joe biden scrambles after comments from lucy flores. first it was the campaign
9:18 am
spokesman and the vice president decide he needed to put a statement out in his hone name. do they think they put the volume down, or do they need to do more? >> the fact they came out so quickly and you had the statement a day and a half a day before flores went on state of the union shows how seriously they are taking this. you noted all of those headlines, and these are things that biden is going to have to grapple with going forward. there's questions about how much democratic voters are actually going to be influenced and think about this. will his behavior change going forward? is there may be more that he does need to do to try to stem some of these concerns? but one thing with joe biden as we've all spent a lot of time out on the campaign trail with him, this is part of who he is. he's described himself as a tactile politicians, and he's acknowledged that perhaps he's made people -- he doesn't think he's acting inappropriately but has acknowledged that people may have certain feelings about this, maybe it's surprising to him, but it's interesting to see if he's going to change any of
9:19 am
the way that he interacts with folks going forward. >> the statement was interesting. he says never does he believe that he's acted inappropriately and he does note the times we live in now and says he'll listen. he says everyone should listen, all men should listen and he will listen, so let's listen to lucy flores. >> very unexpectedly and out of nowhere i feel joe biden put his hands on my shoulders, get up very close to me from behind, lean in, smell my hair and then plant a slow kiss on the top of my head. you donuts expect that kind of intimacy from someone so powerful and someone who you just have no relationship whatsoever to touch you and to feel you. >> those close to the vice president say that something like that is what he would do when he thought somebody was nervous or somebody was about to give a speech in a big moment, kind of as a hey, i've got your back, boom. that's how he sees it. does he understand now that
9:20 am
that's not his call? >> i think that's what interesting is flores did, flipped the frame. biden's actions are so well known they have played out on camera for decades, so it's not surprising that he -- that he behaves in this way, that he's quite affectionate. what she did is focus on how someone on the receiving end might feel. that's where biden clearly in this statement is perhaps grappling with this. it's unclear if he ever really thought about that. that's where a lot of the focus is going to be on now, not necessarily his actions but how the -- how the recipients of those actions have interpreted them. >> please. >> he really should have been very prepared for this. i mean, this was not -- a lot of times we talk about -- this is not a me, too situation, but the past two years we've talked about these secret, open, closed. it was called bidening i believe sometimes on capitol hill. people referred to it at bidening during the swearing-in
9:21 am
ceremonies so you think this thinking would have happened already, the reflecting would have happened already and i think it's a big question of whether it has happened and how prepared they were for it. does tell you about how prepared if he does decide to enter the race how presumed they will be for a lot of issues that could come up with the changing times. this is a man who has been in government for more than four decades. there's a lot of votes and things he did in the '70s and '80s that don't so well in today's democratic party. >> you could see if this was five or ten years ago and it came up. other candidates in a ration, even rivals of joe biden, even rivals who see him at 30% in the polls saying i would like that space, those numbers, saying i'm not going to comment on that and leave it to the vice president. the other candidates though are talking. >> i have no reason not to believe her. look, we know from campaigns and from politics that people raise issues, and they have to address them. >> i believe lucy run as a
9:22 am
result? >> well, that's joe biden to decide. >> i'm not sure that one incident alone disqualifies anybody, but her point is absolutely right. >> women have to be heard, and we should real -- we should start by believing them. i don't know all the details, but i think that's why we have an election. >> you listen to that and a piece julie wrote over the weekend about this she quotes an iowa activist saying i can see what's coming at him, and it's going to come at him from the democrats. seeing how highly competitive the it was. >> absolutely. you're right. five years ago this might have just been laughed off as bidening. he -- he is just of this generation. people like bill clinton, ed rendell, governor of pennsylvania, they just sort of grew up thinking that's how you demonstrate your rapport with people, and like, this was supposedly one of joe biden's strengths is that he's able to go into a room and work a room
9:23 am
and everyone loves uncle joe, but in this image, the image-driven culture, the one snap of a picture from a phone reveal what's really happening. >> you brought out at broader point that the big question from joe biden isn't just how he's handles these moments, isn't just his handling of the anita hill hearing or the vote on the '94 crime bill. is he simply of a different era, an era that the bulk of the democratic primary electorate believes has passed right now and how he makes that case to the candidates will be an issue of his success. >> and how he makes the reasoning to the women because you have a democratic party electorate that's 60% female, plus or mine us. >> at least. >> that's the last one. the numbers in some of those states, it will be 60% plus. >> how women interpret this record in the modern lens, it
9:24 am
matters a lot for him. >> well, we will see if he decides the statement is enough or whether he needs to come out more about this. some eye-catching 2020 fund-raising numbers beginning to roll in and abigail klobuchar helping more. >> when you donate $1 to my mom's campaign you get a bumper sticker and for people like me who don't have a car i have a list of things you can do with it. s the easiest decision ever. ♪ ved hundreds. that's a win. but it's not the only reason i switched. geico's a company i can trust, with over 75 years of great savings and service. ♪ now that's a win-win. switch to geico. it's a win-win.
9:25 am
9:26 am
9:27 am
-it's our confident forever plan. -welcome to our complete freedom plan. -it's all possible with a cfp professional. ♪ -find your certified financial planner™ professional at
9:28 am
-fthe latestertified finainisn't just a store.tyonal it's a save more with a new kind of wireless network store. it's a look what your wifi can do now store. a get your questions answered by awesome experts store. it's a now there's one store that connects your life like never before store. the xfinity store is here. and it's simple, easy, awesome.
9:29 am
pete buttigieg saying he's passed the first fund-raising test and while official reports aren't due for two weeks he was the first of the democrats to share his totals. the south bend indiana mayor says he took in at least $7 million. that's impressive, but others are certain to beat it. we know that because in their first 24 hours in the race beto o'rouke passed $6 million and bernie sanders nearly that amount and senator kamala harris and amy klobuchar and john hickenlooper will tell you a quick million. how important is this? you called it the buttigieg boomlet. he's getting a lot of attention, an interesting candidate. moved up from 1% to 4%. you're headed in the right
9:30 am
direction. in a crowded democratic field it's important. >> in every cycle you have a boomlet, some candidates, multiple candidates who pop up get alive the tension and a lot of times their challenge is they don't have enough infrastructure around them to sustain that. they can't wide the wave and build it out into actual success in the primaries and iowa caucuses so the fact that buttigieg seems to have a pre-y formidable first quarter with 7 million will give him the infrastructure going forward. he needs a lot more. needs to sustain this, but it's a really good first step. >> a lot more important in some ways than poll numbers because at this point poll numbers are a lot about name recognition. that's why biden and bernie sanders are doing very well in the polls, not necessarily because of what they are arguing on the campaign trail but the level of fund-raising shows there's a level enthusiasm for a candidate like buttigieg and shows others really struggling elizabeth warren if she does in fact post weak numbers it shows
9:31 am
she needs to do a lot more to change the narrative of her campaign and turn things around, so it is an early marker, an important marker, not definitive but shows the direction these campaigns are headed. >> the big problem for candidates like elizabeth warren we'll interpret as a very significant early marker because frankly it's the only real metric that we have. she has $10 million in the bank from the senate run, enough to get her going a little bit and there will be these bounces up and down. kind of reminds me of 2012 with the republicans, herman cai anyaan n and pawlenty. >> the only one who didn't have a boomlet, michele bachmann and the only person who didn't get at boomlet was rick santorum who worked his tail off. that's why i said the 1% to 4%. he went from 1% to 2% to 4%. buttigieg has the fund-raising numbers in, a conversation right now about whether he insulted the 2016 nominee hillary
9:32 am
clinton. it's from this back in january. "the washington post" magazine tweeted out donald trump got elected, quotes from people, donald trump got elected because in a twisted way he pointed out the huge troubles in our country and democracy and at least he didn't go around saying america was already great like hillary clinton did. a senior adviser took offense with that. this is pete buttigieg over the weekend somewhat trying to clean it up. >> america would be a much better place if she were president. that's why i voted for her and that's why i campaigned for her and i have enormous respect for secretary clinton. i do think she was ill served by a strategy and a media environment which made things much more about the individuals, much more about all the problems with donald trump and much less about the concerns of voters. it's not a knock on any individual. it's a concern about how we can take the lessons of the last election and apply them to get a better outcome in the next election. >> another former clinton adviser on with kate balduan last hour saying she worries
9:33 am
about pete buttigieg. likes him and worries about him. is the clinton hold that strong? is it taboo for a democratic candidate to say she didn't talk to people about the economy. she didn't convince the people of pennsylvania, wisconsin and michigan that she understood the troubles in blue collar america. is that taboo. why is that taboo if it is? >> he's running into the beto problem. you know, there's sort of this, you know, white male privilege thing that keeps popping up, and he is running in a primary where 60% of the voters will be women, and so he needs to be careful how he treads on that issue, and he really looks young, so he's going to look to some degree like some older women are probably going to look at him and say who are you? >> but he's also one of a very, very few candidates that does not have a relationship, a pre-existing relationship with bill clinton and did n hillary clinton. she's the connective tissue of
9:34 am
this primary field. she vetted half of them to be her vp and served in obama's cabinet with them and worked in the senate with them and has been a mentor. it is a careful dance there because there's a lot of concern in the party about repeating those mistakes but she does have a strong following and also has these personal relationships. there will be a number of candidates who feel indebted to her on a personal level for their careers. >> and then plenty of others who just want to move on, right, they really do. >> who will actually show up with her on the campaign trail. >> it's complicated. up next a new candidate jumps into a key 2020 senate race. live pictures, chicago, the fraternal order of police protesting the state attorney kim foxx because of her role in the jussie smollett case. big protest there. we'll be right back. popular s. but no matter what park you live on, one of 10,000 local allstate agents knows yours. now that you know the truth, are you in good hands?
9:35 am
9:36 am
9:37 am
let's see, aleve is than tylenol extra strength. and last longer with fewer pills. so why am i still thinking about this? i'll take aleve. aleve. proven better on pain. ♪ hey! uh, what did i come in here for again? diapers. diapers. okay. yep. oh, sorry. yep. no, the cart... yeah, i almost hit a woman.
9:38 am
9:39 am
purchase. topping our political radar today, congressman from new mexico announcing a short time ago he'll run for the senate seat being vacated by senator udall. what's happening on the other side of the capital, he says, is a more urgent priority. >> to move forward we've got to fix the senate where mitch mcconnell stands in the way of progress. >> two women who have accused lieutena the lieutenant governor of sexually assaulting them -- of
9:40 am
virginia being accused of sexually assaulting two women. >> why didn't you tell anybody? >> i was so say shamed and humiliated on so many devils. why do you feel guilt? >> it happened to her after it happened to me. and had i had the strength or the courage to say something in 2000, maybe it never would have happened to her. >> lieutenant governor fairfax issued a statement denying the allegations of both women and said he underwent two polygraph tests. those tests are not admissible in virginia courts. back here in washington, republican senator susan collins imploring the attorney general to reverse the justice department's new strategy to kill obamacare. in a letter to bill barr senator collins says if the trump administration wants to eliminate the affordable care act, it should try to do that through congress. her plea comes a week after the justice department says it now will not defend obamacare in a
9:41 am
lawsuit pending before an appeals court. how important is this, a moderate republican senator on the ballot in 2020 who has been a defender, says he need to make some changes, but a defender bi? >> the big significance was the last time susan collins was in spotlight it was hurt her numbers with independents and democrats back in maine, and a lot of people up there have probably forgotten that she voted with john mccain, lisa murkowski and all the democrats to save the affordable care act back in 2017. she needs to remind those voters this is what she is. she is a moderate. try not to look over here on the kavanaugh vote. look over here on her defending healthcare. >> what if this gets kicked up to the supreme court and kavanaugh ends up voting to strike down obamacare, so clearly she needs to cover
9:42 am
herself because healthcare was such a potent issue for democrats in the 2018 mid terms, and it's clear the strategy going after people like susan collins, one of the most vulnerable republicans. >> kavanaugh told her in a way he would vote with roberts in defense. aca. >> we may get to put that one to the test. >> up next, the president continues to raise the border bat. has his defense secretary weighed in? >> mr. secretary, has the pentagon been asked to cloche the southern border? >> i won't answer that this morning but the tracking is a very dynamic and fluid situation, all having conversations with the secretary of state of state today and most likely secretary nielsen. you're turning onto the street
9:43 am
when you barely clip a passing car. minor accident -no big deal, right? wrong. your insurance company is gonna raise your rate after the other car got a scratch so small you coulda fixed it with a pen. maybe you should take that pen and use it to sign up
9:44 am
with a different insurance company. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ we really pride ourselves >> ton making it easyautoglass, 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...
9:45 am
she chose safelite. with safelite, she could see exactly when we'd be there. >> 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 ♪
9:46 am
the president this week picking a new immigration fight
9:47 am
despite loud warnings, very loud warnings, that could have a damaging economic impact. the administration says it is pulling aid to el salvador, guatemala and hand dras on grounds those countries are not doing enough to stem the flow of migrants heading towards the united states. the president is also poised to close parts of the u.s. border with mexico so he can redirect resources to stop illegal crossings. it's the latest sign he likes immigration as his lead re-election calling card, even though many republican strategists worry closing the border could hurt what they see as the best white house political asset, the strong economy. cnn's chelsey romaristine romanh the dollars and cents. >> reporter: john, an economic calamity is what the chamber of commerce says would happen if president trump shuts the border with mexico. the chamber says it is would tank the marks and hurt the u.s. economy even if that were just a short closure. here's what is at stake. truck and rail routes carry $1.7 billion in goods every single
9:48 am
day back and forth across that border supporting 5 million american jobs. u.s. manufacturers have supply chains that chris cross canada, the united states and mexico. shut down the mexico border, you hurt american factories, and american workers, but this president has a very simplistic view of trade. imports are bad and the trade deficit means the u.s. is losing money. the u.s. ran a trade deficit last year of $81 billion with mexico. here's the president friday. >> with the deficit like we've had with mexico for many years, closing the border would be a profit-making operation. >> reporter: john, think of that for a moment. the president advocating shutting the border to balance the trade deficit. it just doesn't work that way. the chamber of commerce points out that the u.s. exports more to mexico than it does to china. think corn, soybeans, beef, dairy, pork, it's a longling, and those imports from mexico
9:49 am
are parts and tools that feed america's factories. now, american manufacturers and farmers are already reeling from higher costs because of tariffs and retaliatory tariffs in the president's trade war with china this. move now on the mexico border, many business experts say is just the wrong call. john? >> christine romans, appreciate that. let's dissect that. the chamber of commerce says it would be a calamity. many business experts say it would be wrong. political advisers in his own party say, mr. president, please, no, which means he'll do it. i don't mean it to even sound that way because it's trademark trump. he says these are the same people that told me i can't win the nomination. stop talking immigration and trade that way. you'll never be president. don't impose these tariffs. it will tank the economy. don't stand up to china, it will ruin everything, so the president says, no, i'm going with my gut. >> the feels a lot like the government shutdown fight in some ways. >> which people said would hurt him. >> exactly. >> republicans were warning him not to go this route and not to demand money for the border
9:50 am
wall, saying he were -- they were going to lose that fight. the president doug in. that led to the longest government shutdown in history. the president ultimately had to reverse himself and reopen the government. that's a concern for the people advising him not to. what do you really get out of this? probably will have to backtrack anyways so what's the point of getting into this messing fight to begin with. the president has been further than most of his party, to the right on immigration, these launched fights that they have not been willing to take. the question will be how much of his party will ultimately stick with him if he does go this route? i think you'll see a divide. >> were from a political perspective it's not surprising that the president would brush off these hearings because he's heard this over and over again and the bad -- the bad -- you know, impact on the economy hasn't really happened and his poll numbers have stayed remarkably stable. on the economic side of this though, the thing that his advisers worry about and the thing that ruin cans worry about he's testing his luck. if you just look at cycles of the american economy we actually are probably due for a downturn at some point and he keeps
9:51 am
putting more and more pressure on that economy, and at a certain point it's going -- it's probably going to -- to show an impact, and he's only going to be able to kind of hold that will off for so long. he keeps going forward and forward and pushing it as far as he can right now. >> you have the intersection of two issues where the president has very strong feelings, trade and immigration, where he does trust his instincts over what people tell him. nick mulvaney and dick durbin, the chief of staff to the president and the democratic senator, do you cut off the aid? mulvaney says yes, you're cutting off the flow of migrants and dick durbin says you'll make it move. >> these country could do more, and if we're going to give these countries hundreds of millions of dollars we would like them to do more. that, jake, i would respectfully submit to you is not an unreasonable position. >> what we need to do is focus on what's happening in central america where three countries are dissembling before our eyes and people are desperately coming to the united states. the president is cutting off aid
9:52 am
to these countries will not solve that problem. >> mulvaney says use a stick and durbin says you use a stick and you make all the problems worse and more people will flee. >> a week ago nick mulvaney was encouraging trump to be the party of healthcare, to make the republicans a party of healthcare. walked over to us at the senate lunch on, trump declared the party of healthcare. he always comes back to immigration, trade, america first, nativist views. >> still waiting on the healthcare plan, yes. still waiting for that another. another public split between alexandria ocasio-cortez and the house democratic leadership. whether it's a year old or a few years old, we want to buy your car. so go to carvana and enter your license plate, answer a few questions, and our techno-wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds. when you're ready, we'll come to you, pay you on the spot, and pick up your car. that's it.
9:53 am
so ditch the old way of selling your car, and say hello to the new way-- at carvana.
9:54 am
moving? that's harder now because of psoriatic arthritis. but you're still moved by moments like this. don't let psoriatic arthritis take them away. taltz reduces joint pain and stiffness and helps stop the progression of joint damage. for people with moderate to severe psoriasis, 90% saw significant improvement. taltz even gives you a chance at completely clear skin. don't use if you're allergic to taltz. before starting, you should be checked for tuberculosis.
9:55 am
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. for all the things that move you. ask your doctor about taltz. if your moderate to severeor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio®, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio® works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract, and is clinically proven to help many
9:56 am
patients achieve both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio® may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. tell your doctor if you have an infection experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms, or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio®. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio®. entyvio®. relief and remission within reach.
9:57 am
another public split today between newly elected progressive and the house democratic leadership. alexandria ocasio-cortez and others speaking out about the new policy from the democratic congressional campaign committee that goes after vendors who work with primary challengers. the form says to the vendors, quote, the dccc will not conduct business nor recommend to any of its targeted campaigns any consultant that works with an opponent of a sitting member of the house democratic caucus. the dccc says the policy is in place to protect all incumbents and congresswoman pressley says this could undermine women and people of color and alexandria ocasio-cortez sakes it further urging people to sidestep the dccc. she tweeted if you're a small dollar donation pause your donations to the dccc and give directly to swing candidates
9:58 am
instead. one way to get their attention. attack the money. it's interesting in the sense that you have the three new members who won by beating incumbents saying stop. let it be. let's just have it open, all incumbents, i assume they mean even themselves, let people challenge us. >> democrats are afraid of turning into republicans eight years ago when the tear party just started challenging left and right incumbent senators, incumbent house members and it really drove the republican reign as they were constantly afraid of the right flank. they want to put a stop to this now and in particular there are lots of older cbc members, congressional black caucus members, on the target list for the next generation democrats that want to primary people. >> if you're the capital "d" democratic party don't it sound lower "d" undemocratic that we're going to black list people who challenge our candidates. >> this is what party committees
9:59 am
typically do. >> just usually not so explicit. >> the republican party did a similar thing to prevent against the tea party challenges. the democrats have avoided the intra-party ballots and during the observe ma era they were rather successful and in this aoc wing do they push the left-leaning candidates to go after the incumbents? >> and do they feel the same way if they push someone to run against ilhan omar? >> how can they raise money, the internet, all kinds of things, so to put the stake in the ground, i'm just not sure other than causing a lot of anger. i'm not exactly sure what it gets you all that much. >> we'll see the old guard versus the new guard, the technology age, a whole bunch of ways to peel this one. it's an interesting fight. thanks for joining us today on "inside politics." dana bash in for brianna keilar
10:00 am
who picks up the coverage right now. ♪ >> hey, everyone. i'm dana bash in for brianna keilar live from cnn's washington headquarters. under way right now, are officials inside the white house qualified to hear america's secrets? a whistleblower says more than two dozen trump officials were given clearance after they were initially denied. speaking of secrets, robert mueller's report is still not public, and soon democrats say subpoenas are coming. plus, he's not bluffing. the white house says the president is serious about shutting down the southern bothered as the administration makes a big move. and i'll talk to oneha


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on