tv CNN Newsroom with Poppy Harlow and Jim Sciutto CNN September 18, 2019 6:00am-7:00am PDT
a very good wednesday morning. i'm jim sciutto. >> i'm poppy harlow. >> it was political theater. a loyal trump aide echoing the president's attacks on congressional democrats and the russia investigation. democrats hoped to carefully build their case to try to remove the president from office. instead, the president's former campaign manager corey lewandowski defiantly dodged, debated and mocked for the entire six hours. >> within the manufactured drama, lewandowski is running for senate as a republican, was
this perhaps undercovered headline. lewandowski confirmed under oath that trump asked him more than once to tell the sitting attorney general to rein in the russia probe. >> that's what he wanted you to deliver to attorney general jeff sessions, correct? >> i believe that's an accurate representation. >> and he wanted you to deliver it to jeff so that jeff could say it to the people, right? >> i believe so. >> however, lewandowski's grand standing exposed a growing rift inside the democratic party. we're learning about harsh words from house speaker nancy pelosi on how her fellow democrats are handling the start of an impeachment inquiry. >> this is startling. a new report in politico highlights the widening divide within the party that could cost them politically. let's talk about that with our congressional reporter lauren fox from capitol hill. so go ahead and leak this? >> that's what pelosi said according to the report in politico.
nancy pelosi is arguing that the judiciary committee staffers are going far beyond where the caucus stands on impeachment. we should remind viewers that a majority of democrats now support moving forward with impeachment. pelosi's arguing the judiciary committee is going much further than the rest of the caucus is. but this comes after an explosive day yesterday on political with corey lewandowski coming before the house judiciary committee, refusing to answer a lot of questions and just here is a taste of how contentious things got. >> the witness may answer the question. >> i don't believe that was a question. >> yes, there was. >> could you repeat the question. >> i'd be happy to repeat -- >> just a rant. >> are you ashamed of the words you wrote down? >> president swalwell, i'm very happy of what i've written but you're welcome to read it. >> are you ashamed to read it out loud? >> i'm not ashamed of anything in my life. >> i don't think it's anyone's privilege to waive because i don't think it exists. i think the whole thing is
imaginary. it's like the tooth fairy. you didn't work -- >> my children are watching. thank you, congressman. >> and, obviously, this was a contentious hearing yesterday and it's just the latest in an episode where house democrats are trying to get to the bottom of what was in the mueller report, trying to bring it to life and many of the president's former advisers either refusing to come before the committee or coming before the committee like corey lewandowski did yesterday. and refusing to answer many of their questions. lewandowski also was on cnn's "new day" this morning and also dodged quite a few questions from our anchors. jim and poppy? >> lauren fox, thank you for the reporting. let's talk about this and more. eliana plot and former federal prosecutor and cnn legal analyst elliott williams. you guys will answer our questions. thank you for being here. eliana, we'll get to lewandowski in a moment. let's begin with this politico reporting. i find it startling that someone
so seasoned like nancy pelosi who has been through tough debates getting people in her own party on board before, you know, felt the need to, apparently, according to politico, say to those in the room, go ahead and leak this. just showing how wide the divide is between nadler and those on his team and the impeachment front and those siding with pelosi. >> so yesterday i think pretty unambiguously was a circus. that hearing with lewandowski. but i don't think that all falls on mr. lewandowski. i think that democrats, and especially senior democrats feel that because the caucus lacks any unity when it comes to what they want to pursue in terms of impeachment, if they did, in fact, go down that path, what they would want to impeach the president for. you have to remember, poppy, this is something that democrats, you know, take away the question of impeachment, but even those who want to impeach the president, they don't
necessarily have a cohesive understanding of what it would be for. would it be for something like emoluments or for obstruction of justice? and i think all of that was laid bare yesterday in that hearing. so while you have corey lewandowski, you know, obstructing, stonewalling, following the white house play book every step of the way in the last year, you also saw democrats kind of showcase the fact that they have a lot of work to do within their own caucus in terms of unity on so many different questions. and i think what, you know, pelosi's agreeableness when it comes to leaking this really does hint at the frustration that they're feeling and the different ranks of the party. >> okay, elliott, but you had a close adviser to president trump under oath admit, confirm that the president asked him to tell the sitting attorney general to rein in the russia probe. multiple times. and, yes, you have the division but why is that headline
confirming evidence of obstruction that was contained in the mueller report, why is that getting lost in this? >> what we're seeing is a congressional hearing in the age of the viral video and what people are latching on is the circus of -- and it was a circus. it was a circus yesterday and bad sort of optically for the democrats. let's break down what happened. he said that the president of the united states directed him to tell jeff sessions to kurt ail the investigation. that met and that was in the mueller report, all three elements of the crime of obstruction of justice. you had an attempt to obstruct. you had corrupt intent and official proceeding. so we can disagree as to whether you ought to charge the president. disagree as to whether you ought to impeach the president but it's clear and, look, i signed a letter with a thousand other federal prosecutors -- former federal prosecutors saying this was a crime. this is a chargeable criminal offense. and so if congress wishes to
proceed with impeachment or if a future prosecutor wants to go down this road, they are free to. but that's what came out of this hearing. you corroborated evidence of a serious offense committed by the president. >> and that's a really good point and, jim, i'm glad you highlight that because it's getting lost in the coverage. the headlines are a circus. they aren't, wow, lewandowski just said this and confirmed this under oath. and to that point, i think, you know, how jamie raskin put it, a democrat who sits on the judiciary committee, maybe explains part of it. quote, pelosi is talking about politics. and the party has to make this fundamental decision. do they want to go after, you know, these points of obstruction or do they want to go after it on the emoluments front, or are they looking at the polling that shows the majority of the american people aren't there on impeachment yet? >> unfortunately, you can never quite separate law and politics i think in a moment like this.
throughout the course of my reporting the last couple of months, as the mueller report has come into public view, what's become clear to me is that bill barr really got the first and, thus, final word on this report which is to say, when he came out that day at that press conference and said pretty plainly, no collusion, no obstruction, that was the sound bite that got played endlessly the rest of that week. that was the thing that, you know, you go to a town hall, say, in grand rapids, michigan. you had a woman tell nbc news, i had no idea there was anything in this report that was damaging to president trump. i thought, you know, he was totally exonerated. so in that way, you are contending with politics. so even though, as elliott said, we have probably the clearest, most televised moment to date of an ex-aide to this president admitting that he did in fact, pursue obstruction of justice for this president, you know, it's not even -- it doesn't even feel as earth shattering as it
should because you have the attorney general quite aptly at the beginning of this whole process set the tone, set the narrative and that's what democrats are always going to be fighting against. >> impeachment by its nature is a fundamentally political process because you need political votes to proceed to impeach and convict a sitting president. but, the democrats, they know that. they know they'll not kick the president out of office because you need two-thirds in the senate. it's controlled by republicans. their calculation here is keep the inquiry going up until election day just to remind people whenever you can of what they believe the president did wrong. does that strategy work? does that help them? >> yeah, because i think we're seeing this -- we're seeing the world as impeachment or no impeachment, forgetting that congress has a powerful oversight authority. they can call witnesses. they can subpoena witnesses and, frankly, they haven't started suing to hold people in contempt because, until they do that, they're going to continue to get appearances like you saw yesterday. and, look, this isn't just limited to this mueller sort of
russia stuff. in the context or the commerce secretary wilbur ross literally didn't show up to a hearing he didn't feel like. this is pervading the entire relationship between -- >> or the odni having to inform congress of a whistleblower complaint involving sensitive intelligence. it's across the board ignoring both law and precedent in these cases. great to have both of you on. >> thank you both. so moments ago, just really a few minutes ago, the president announced that he will impose new additional sanctions on iran. let me read this tweet to you. i've just instructed the secretary of the treasury to substantially increase sanctions on the country of iran. >> this is interesting because it raises the possibility that this is the response to the attack on the saudi oil facility. and not military. it could still change but it raises that possibility. the saudi ministry of defense will announce the results of its investigation into the attack on
those oil facilities. they say they will present material evidence that iran was behind the bombings. what does saudi arabia do? let's get to cnn's nick paton walsh in tehran. nick, iran is under some punishing sanctions. they can't hell oil. that's their only way really of making money. what's the reaction there to this latest round? >> it's literally just come out, but as you well know, the major tenet of iran thinking about talking to the united states has been a softening of sanctions. here we are going in the opposite direction. fair to say after the supreme leader ayatollah khamenei said talks weren't going to happen any time soon. you raise an important point. what is left to sanction? you mentioned oil. there's been talk of the gray market where iran may use separate corporate vessels, may use ship to ship transfers, possibly around the world to enable it to continue to trade oil. it says it's still legally allowed to do that under the jcpoa, the nuclear deal because it rejects the u.s. unilaterally pulling out of that.
possibly what donald trump may be talking about is a tightening around that mechanism. but they're already doing everything they possibly can to make that difficult. recall how they see the state department level to be offering cash rewards to captains of ships piloting oil around the world that may be in violations of sanctions. they've already put the revolutionary guard corps, designated as a military organization. there are moments where it appears parts of the world are simply ignoring the u.s. threats and much of this depends on how avidly the united states tends to prosecute or pursue those who violate their sanctions. the premise really is if you do business with the things we sanction in iran, then you cannot do business with the united states. and that's always been a problem under the nuclear deal where there was meant to be an awful lot of things suddenly possible to do in iran if you are, for example, a european company. donald trump came to power and didn't like the obama nuclear deal. people got concerned and began
to get allergic toward the idea of going back into business in iran. the devil is in the detail here. and we know the president of the united states isn't always a massive fan of digging into the weeds about what the sanctions may mean and what they might do but that's the key thing here and, too, implicit within this tweet is donald trump perhaps for the first time directly saying there's something perhaps to react towards iran for. maybe this is the beginning of him saying he believes iran is behind these saudi attacks. we simply don't know. >> nick paton walsh, thanks. we'll talk more in a moment with jason rezine. he was held in tehran. used to run "the washington post" bureau there. we'll get his take on all of this. still to come, elections in israel too close to call. benjamin netanyahu fighting to hold on. what's it look like there? we'll be live in israel next. plus, former president jimmy carter does not think an 80-year-old person could manage the duties of the office of president. saying he hopes there is an age
limit. how does he feel about joe biden? >> right. or president trump? later today, the trump administration is set to revoke california's authority to set its own vehicle emissions standards. this would impact then a dozen states. it's a big deal. we'll explain it, ahead. i...decided to take the dna test. and i...was... shocked. right away, called my mom, called my sisters. i'm from cameroon, congo, and...the bantu people.
i had ivory coast, and ghana...togo. i was grateful... i just felt more connected...to who i am. new features. greater details. richer stories. get your dna kit today at ancestry.com. performance comes in lots of flavors. ♪ (dramatic orchestra) there's the amped-up, over-tuned, feeding-frenzy-of sheet-metal-kind. and then there's performance that just leaves you feeling better as a result. that's the kind lincoln's about. ♪ run with us on a john deere 1 series tractor. beacuse changing your attachments, should be as easy as... what about this? changing your plans. yeah. run with us.
search "john deere 1 series" for more. yeah. run with us. a lot will happen in your life. wrinkles just won't. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair's derm-proven retinol works so fast, it takes only one week to reveal younger looking skin. making wrinkles look so last week. rapid wrinkle repair® pair with new retinol oil for 2x the wrinkle fighting power. neutrogena® when you have diabetes, ♪ dietary choices are crucial to help manage blood sugar, but it can be difficult to find a balanced solution. try great-tasting boost glucose control. the patented blend of protein, fat, and carbs
is part of a balanced formula that's clinically shown to help manage blood sugar levels. in fact, it provides 60% more protein than the leading diabetes nutrition shake and contains only 1 carb choice. enjoy the balanced nutrition of boost glucose control as part of a healthy diet. should always be working harder. that's why your cash automatically goes into a money market fund when you open a new account. just another reminder of the value you'll find at fidelity. open an account today. of the value you'll find at fidelity. driven each day to pursue bioplife-changing cures...ers. in a country built on fostering innovation.
here, they find breakthroughs... like a way to fight cancer by arming a patient's own t-cells... and a new therapy that gives the blind a working gene so they can see again. because it's not just about the next breakthrough... it's all the ones after that. ( ♪ ) only tylenol® rapid release gels have laser drilled holes. they release medicine fast, for fast pain relief. tylenol®. moments ago, the president announced he'll be imposing new sanctions on iran. obviously, this comes as it
seems like a clear response to the very likely possibility, according to the administration, that iran was behind the recent oil field attacks in saudi arabia. let's talk about this with someone who knows so much about this regime. jason rezine, opinion writer and global affairs analyst. also formerly the tehran bureau chief for "the washington post" and held for 544 days. you wrote the book "prisoner." thank you very much for being with us. >> thanks for having me on. >> so do you read the president's response this morning of increased sanctions on iran as a sign the response once again to iran, just as it was to taking down the drone is going to be diplomatic, going to be sanctions led rather than military? >> yeah, i think this was the most predictable response, sort of had to happen. i think there will be other responses in the coming days. but i think from the iranian side, this really forces the
iran issue as top of the agenda for the u.n. meetings coming up next week. >> jason, you saw lindsey graham's very open, rare public criticism of the president saying, and i'll read the tweet. the measured response by president trump regarding the shooting down of an american drone in june was clearly seen as a sign of weakness. if the president again balks at military retaliation, if it's determined definitively that iran is behind this, how does iran read that? do they read it as being given license here? do they read it as the u.s. blinking on this? >> i think they look at it as a bit of both. the likelihood of them to continue to provoke is really high. but as we know, in this attack, there were no casualties. it was a huge loss financially for saudi arabia. but i think this president, president trump has made very clear he doesn't want to get the united states into another war in the middle east or anywhere
in the world. so i think there is a real pursuit for fresh talks with iran. iran understands that very well. and their plan is twhois-pronged approach of provocation and at the same time, demanding new talks. >> so jason, you make a really important point which is that saudi arabia and arab kingdoms in the persian gulf in general see the real threat that iran poses. but you also say at the same time that the chances of a war breaking out between saudi and iran is just incredibly slim. help us understand that. >> look, i think that this slow conflict has been brewing for many years. it's been fought by proxies in yemen, in syria and other parts of the region for a long time. but that waterway, straits of hormuz, is so sensitive globally, iran and saudi arabia are so close geographically that
the impact of a larger direct conflict between the two countries would be catastrophic for everybody. and i also think that other kingdoms in the gulf understand very well that iran has the ability to be very destructive in the uae, in bahrain, in kuwait. and nobody wants to rattle that cage. >> jason, it's good to have you on and fascinating to watch in these coming days. i'm sure we'll have you back. >> always a pleasure. >> also in the region this morning, the israeli elections still too close to call. the latest projections show president benjamin netanyahu trailing his opponent, former military chief benny gantz by one seat. that could be enough. >> yeah, it could. still, though, neither candidate with a certain path to forming a ruling coalition. the second national election, this one is five months after netanyahu failed to form a
governing coalition following the april vote. back with us again, senior international correspondent sam kiley in jerusalem. you have these two men neck and neck with very different views about the path forward for israel. and now if this thing plays out the way it's looking, they'll have to come together and form some sort of unity government. >> well, that's certainly the preference of benny gantz and the leaders of the blue and white party. they are making a direct appeal, if you like, below the head of benjamin netanyahu to his likud party followers, particularly those who will be getting elected as a result of these elections. to form a national unity government. but they are saying that they want to do so without benjamin netanyahu because he has these three corruption court cases looming over him that could start to come to a head just as the coalition talks, if they ever happen, will be going
ahead. this presents the israeli president with something of a conundrum. these two parties, each with 32, 31 seats potentially. based on exit polls we should say can be very unreliable. and then they have a number of possibilities of knitting together coalitions with the center left or from likud's perspective with the more religious parties. none of them getting to that key figure of 61. no guarantee they'll get 61 seats in the knesset. it's going to be a lot of horse trade with no real sale at the end of it. >> the president now has a choice of asking one of these parties to attempt to form a government. since blue and white has this one-seat advantage, does that push the president to ask him to give benny gantz the first shot? >> well, if that were the official results, then he would still not be under an obligation
to do that. there has been one case in the past when he hasn't asked the leader of the biggest party with the greatest number of seats in the knesset. what he'll do is spend a week canvassing opinion from all the different leaders and parties in the 120-seat knesset and appoint someone he thinks is most likely to succeed in knitting together a coalition to have a crack at it. they'll have six weeks to do that. >> lots of head counting to come. sam kiley on the ground in jerusalem, thanks. former president jimmy carter saying there should be an age limit for u.s. presidents saying he could not have managed the office at age 80. well, you've got president trump, joe biden, they would be 80. we'll discuss, next. zempic®! ♪ (announcer) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than 7 and maintained it. oh! under 7?
(announcer) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (announcer) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? (announcer) ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration,
which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ (announcer) if eligible, you may pay as little as $25 per prescription. ask your health care provider today about once-weekly ozempic®. was in an accident. when i called usaa, it was that voice asking me, "is your daughter ok?" that's where i felt relief. we're the rivera family and we plan to be with usaa for life. see how much you can save with usaa insurance. see how much you can save at first slice pizza lovers everywhere meet o, that's good! frozen pizza one third of our classic crust is made with cauliflower but that's not stopping anyone o, that's good! doprevagen is the number oneild mempharmacist-recommendeding? memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.
here, hello! starts with -hi!mple... how can i help? a data plan for everyone. everyone? everyone. let's send to everyone! [ camera clicking ] wifi up there? -ahhh. sure, why not? how'd he get out?! a camera might figure it out. that was easy! glad i could help. at xfinity, we're here to make life simple. easy. awesome. so come ask, shop, discover at your xfinity store today.
this is cnn breaking news. >> this just in to cnn. president trump announcing in a tweet that he has selected a new national security adviser. he is robert c. o'brien. until now, special president envoy for hostage affairs at the state department. you may remember o'brien's name because he used that role as hostage negotiator in an unusual case trying to get asap rocky freed from stockholm, from a prison, where he was under charge for getting into a fight
there. joe johns is at the white house. joe, interesting choice for the president here for his new national security adviser? what's the background? >> well, there is a lot of background to this. and robert o'brien is something of a fixture over recent years in washington. he was connected, among other things, to the mitt romney campaign. he's also well known for being part of the judge advocate general's corps. o'brien is also, as you said, connected to the asap rocky case. apparently well liked by the president. also, factually, the president did say that he would, by this week, name someone else to be his national security adviser to replace mr. john bolton. and this is the president's choice. someone he had to quick -- i should say pick quickly and someone who appears nonoffensive
to this administration. we have been told there will not be a see change in policies here at the white house with the switch to o'brien from john bolton. that he's going to stay the course, if you will. back to you. >> joe johns, thank you for that update. let's talk about this with david swe swerdlick with "the washington post." the question for o'brien, joe said he's close to the president. the president likes him. will he have the president's ear over anyone else on this? is secretary of state mike pompeo still going to be the leading voice on that front and is he an ally of pompeo or will they have a division like pompeo and bolton did? >> good morning, poppy. close to the president and the president likes him is a qualification for a lot of positions in the administration. this one being no different. o'brien does have some experience in a variety of midlevel government roles. so i think he's probably meets the qualifications, but if you compare him to the previous
trump national security advisers, you can see a stark difference. general flynn had been the head of the defense intelligence agency. general mcmaster was a three-star. then you had ambassador bolton who was both the u.s. ambassador to the u.n. and then became the national security adviser, similar to susan rice. this is someone who is more like a midlevel functionary, not as known as a big brain or a team of rivals type guy, and i think that signals to me that they want to sort of in-house this a little bit and say that secretary pompeo is taking the lead role and that they'll have someone under him running the day-to-day. i will just say, though, that, yes, like joe said, they probably need to get someone in place with everything going on in the world. u.n. general assembly. potential war between iran and saudi arabia. i guess they thought they couldn't wait. >> as a matter of fact, david, is the actual dynamic here that the president is his own national security adviser? because, yes, mike pompeo has
enormous influence in the administration, but the president has shown his willingness to go a different course than pompeo as well. that he takes cues from himself in effect. >> yeah, i think that's fair to say. although i do think that secretary pompeo having been at cia and state and still sticking very close to the president, i do think the president values his input but, yeah, president trump, whether it's on national security, whether it's on press, whether it's on domestic affairs at times he does seem like his own last word to himself on some issues. sometimes that works out. that has worked out fairly well for him. sometimes it hasn't. if you go by the reporting of "the new york times" and others, back when iran shot down one of our drones, the last word in his ear was tucker carlson from another network telling him not to retaliate with a strike. the president takes advice from sort of all sides and all angles and then as you say, jim, in the end makes his own decision. whether that decision is --
always works out for him is another matter. >> if you know, help us understand and our viewers understand where o'brien stands in terms of how hawkish he may be. people had a lot to go on with bolton because he had a long history. he wrote a lot. he wrote bomb iran to stop iran. and so they knew where he stood, even if that didn't come first, as jim says. the president's view came first when it came to iran and the situation in the middle east over bolton. and that ultimately cost him his job. do we know what o'brien is like on that front? >> i don't know enough about o'brien's background to give you a close read on that, poppy, but i will say that if one of his credentials going into this is that he was instrumental in the asap rocky extraction from sweden, that suggests to me that, again, this is someone who is coming in with the basic qualifications and no shade on him in terms of his capabilities. but in that situation, he was functioning more like an errand boy than an independent adviser
and senior state department official. so that, again, we don't know yet, but it suggests to me they are slightly downgrading this position. someone to manage the national security council but not necessarily be a bolton, a team of rivals, a counterpoint to the others in the administration. >> or a kissinger in that kind of role with that level of influence. let's talk for a moment about the asap rocky case because the timing is interesting here. that was a very unusual use of the position of head of hostage affairs. this is typically person who tries to get people, say, freed from a syrian jail, not get a rapper out of prosecution for getting into a -- essentially a bar fight in sweden. we know the way this president operates. you scratch his back and that puts you in a good position for senior roles. is it wrong to make a connection between that case and this? >> i don't want to draw too close of a connection, but, yes, with the asap rocky case, that
was not a hostage situation. that was an unusual situation for a white house or a state department to get involved in at all. asap rocky, without weighing in on his guilt or innocence, was in jail in a progressive western u.s. allied country, sweden, that has due process of law. the idea that he needed the personal intervention or intercession of the president of the united states and a state department envoy was strange and also probably inappropriate. >> and just talk about finally the context. this comes in the week of the unga, this comes as iran and the president are further and further divided on whether they'll even talk. >> right. i think we have to see how this week plays out because, with president trump, you just never know. it seems to me that iran is sort of waiting to see what the next move is from the united states and saudi arabia and how closely
we are working with saudi arabia on this. i don't know what the incentives would be for president trump to simply sit down with president rouhani at the unga now that this attack on the saudi oil facility has happened but with president trump, you just never know. at some level, president trump likes a surprise, likes a big reveal, likes the optics of saying, i took a meeting. none of my other predecessors would ever take. what he gets out of it is unclear. >> look at north korea. >> right. >> david, thank you for your brain and your insight on this breaking topic as it just came in. we appreciate it. we'll see you soon. we'll take a quick break and be right back.
♪ work so hard ♪ give it everything you got be a booker at booking.com. ♪ strength of a lioness ♪ tough as a knot ♪ rocking the stage ♪ and we never gonna stop ♪ all strength, no sweat. ♪ just in case you forgot ♪ all strength. ♪ no sweat secret. all strength. no sweat. and i recently had hi, ia heart attack. it changed my life. but i'm a survivor. after my heart attack, my doctor prescribed brilinta. it's for people who have been hospitalized for a heart attack. brilinta is taken with a low-dose aspirin. no more than 100 milligrams as it affects how well brilinta works. brilinta helps keep platelets from sticking together and forming a clot. in a clinical study, brilinta worked better than plavix. brilinta reduced the chance of having another heart attack... ...or dying from one. don't stop taking brilinta without talking to your doctor, since stopping it too soon increases your risk
of clots in your stent, heart attack, stroke, and even death. brilinta may cause bruising or bleeding more easily, or serious, sometimes fatal bleeding. don't take brilinta if you have bleeding, like stomach ulcers, a history of bleeding in the brain, or severe liver problems. slow heart rhythm has been reported. tell your doctor about bleeding new or unexpected shortness of breath any planned surgery, and all medicines you take. if you recently had a heart attack, ask your doctor if brilinta is right for you. my heart is worth brilinta. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. i that's the retirement plan.e, with my annuity, i know there is a guarantee. it's for my family, its for my self, its for my future. annuities can provide protected income for life. learn more at retire your risk dot org. ♪
yes ♪ hey sean hey dan ♪ welcome back. senator lindsey graham speaking on the hill about iran, saudi arabia and the president's response. have a listen. >> well, the first thing i want to do is congratulate president trump on picking robert o'brien to be the next national security adviser. mr. o'brien is a great choice. he understands the world for the dangerous place it is. he's got great negotiating skills as our hostage negotiator.
and i think he'll be a very sound policy adviser to the president of the united states and president trump made a very good choice in robert o'brien. as to iran, i am hoping that secretary pompeo can pull together a coalition that will act in a fashion to change iran's behavior. i support the idea of working on a regional coalition. i would like to see the president go to the u.n. and make the case that iran's behavior is an act of war against saudi arabia and must be dealt with firmly. whether or not the united nations would respond, i don't know. i appreciate the effort of the president to be measured when it came to the drone attack, but the point i'm trying to make is not what i think. it's what the iranians think and, clearly, they have not gotten the message. this attack on the oil refinery by any reasonable definition is
an act of war. it is attacking the world economy. the stability of the oil markets throughout the world and in addition to attacking the refinery in saudi arabia, the iranians are increasing enrichment, putting them closer to a bomb. why does all this matter? if the arabs believe the united states and our allies throughout the world will not stop iran from marching toward a nuclear weapon, the arabs aren't getting one of their own then you'll have a nuclear arms race. what i'm looking for is action by the administration and the world to restore deterrence because when it comes to iran's misbehavior, we have lost deterrence. >> when you look at the sanctions that president trump announced, he hasn't announced details of it, but is that enough of a punishment to deter, in your mind, iran from future attacks or do you think this is going to be perceived as weakness? >> well, the maximum pressure campaign has worked in the sense it's crippled the regime's economy.
it's made life difficult for the regime, but it has not changed their behavior. so what i'm looking for is the response to restore deterrence. if you do not deter iran, they will move forward even more aggressively, quite frankly, i am shocked they were this bold and brazen after the drone attack. the bottom line with iran is radical islam does not accept subtlety well. the only conclusion i think you can reach is that the iranians, while having been hurt by the maximum pressure campaign have not been deterred in terms of their provocative behavior. and it's going to take something, i think, beyond sanctions to achieve that deterrence. >> you don't think sanctions are enough? >> in the past they haven't been. time will tell. but i am looking for a response that would be unequivocal. if they don't pay a price for bombing a neighbor's oil fields, then all hell is going to break out in the middle east. i appreciate building a coalition. i think that's smart. i'm not looking for a response
immediately. but i am looking for a response that would restore deterrence, and my belief is that additional sanctions will fall short because the sanction regime in place is the toughest we've had in the history of the problem with iran. i give the president great credit for a maximum pressure campaign that has punished iran, but the goal is to deter their aggressive behavior, and we're not there yet. >> given the president's tweet yesterday about his disagreement with you on sort of how you characterize the drone strike. i'm curious. are you and the president on the same page when it comes to iran? >> i like the president. i like the maximum pressure campaign. i like his foreign policy. i think he's been a good commander in chief. but i am trying to make the point, and i've been consistent about this, iran, once you withdrew from the nuclear deal, which i thought was the right decision, you need to reinforce that we're going to stop iranian misadventure. and the point i was trying to
make, the restraint shown and the measured response, which made sense to me, i'm not the audience. it's the iranians. and the only conclusion you can gather is that what we did regarding the drone has not worked because this escalation is beyond what i thought they would even consider. can you imagine the thought process after the drone attack, after sea -- why don't we bomb and see what happens. so think for a moment the leadership that goes into the thoughts of iran when they say let's pout the table an attack on saudi arabia and see what they will do. i think this is a moment of testing for the region, the united states and i hope we pass the test in the eyes of the ayatollah. >> there have been reports iranian officials said any kind of response that the united
states has will be met with prompt -- the response will be prompt and strong -- >> one of the president's closest allies, lindsey graham, disagreeing with the president saying sanctions aren't enough to deter iran. jim, i thought it was interesting that he just said i'm convinced that this was an attack by iran going further at least for now, than the president has. >> also convinced, doubling down hoscriticism of the president yet via tweet that not responding militarily to the drone shootdown emboldened iran and may have laid the ground work for this. if you do not deter iran, they will act aggressively. that's a marked public difference between graham and trump. >> he said he hoped the ump.n. would take action. he said i'm not calling for this right away but if we don't take action beyond sanctions, iran will not change. a testing moment for the president and this country. significant. we'll be right back. run with us on a john deere 1 series tractor. beacuse changing your attachments, should be as easy as...
what about this? changing your plans. yeah. run with us. search "john deere 1 series" for more. great customizes your caru yewheninsurance, tual run with us. so you only pay for what you need. wow. thanks, zoltar. how can i ever repay you? maybe you could free zoltar? thanks, lady. taxi! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
performance comes in lots of flavors. ♪ (dramatic orchestra) there's the amped-up, over-tuned, feeding-frenzy-of sheet-metal-kind. and then there's performance that just leaves you feeling better as a result. that's the kind lincoln's about. ♪ should always be working harder. that's why your cash automatically goes into a money market fund
. all right, welcome back. a highly anticipated meeting by the fed, they are facing drone pressure from the president to cut rates once again by about 25 basis points. will that happen? this comes as a new survey out today shows more than half of the cfo's chief financial officers in the country think a recession could hit before the 2020 election. our senior business writer matt
egan is with me. 50% of cfos polled by doug say this thing is going to turn south. >> poppy, this is the longest economic expansion. >> ever. >> in history. it's going on a decade. business leaders are worried it might end soon. we got the trade war and a global growth -- both of those things are linked together and they're both causing uncertainty. that's why business optimism is at a three-year low. we made a screen to show this. right now, it's 12% of chief financial officers are more optimistic about the xi. >> wow. >> that's down from 44% a year ago. it's a really sarp decline. >> what's so interesting to me is many is preventible. many wouldn't feel this way if this trade war is getting escalated with china as if this were dealt with the perhaps another way. matt, also, a very scary sign. a craft in the strength of the economy and it's a little wompgy, but it's very important.
the new york fed has had to inject $128 billion in two operations, to basically shore up the overnight lending market. why does that average to the afternoon american? >> it matters, it's unprecedented. the new york fed hasn't had to do this emergency style liquidity plump since 2008. what happened was overnight lending rates spiked. >> that forced the new york feds to step in. that really important. we look at the dow, the s&p 500, the ten-year treasury. this is an important market central to financial -- >> it spiked from 2% to 10%. not a few points. >> exactly. that's why the new york fed stepped in here. it is a sign the market is having trouble absorbing these treasuries issued to pay for the trillion dollar deficit. that of course, linked to the tax cuts and the spending search. >> yeah. well, apparently democrats and republicans in washington don't care about deficits area. then you see things like this and they think again. >> they may have to care about
it. >> thank you. i think a million people read your story. >> something like that. >> if you haven't, you should read it on cnn business.com. thank you very much. we are following multiple break stories this hour. president trump announcing new sanctions against iran while adding a new national security adviser. there is more news. stay with cnn. oh! oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (announcer) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than 7 and maintained it.
oh! under 7? (announcer) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (announcer) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? (announcer) ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation.
some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ (announcer) if eligible, you may pay as little as $25 per prescription. ask your health care provider today about once-weekly ozempic®. they give us excellent customer otservice, every time.e. our 18 year old was in an accident. usaa took care of her car rental, and getting her car towed. all i had to take care of was making sure that my daughter was ok. if i met another veteran, and they were with another insurance company, i would tell them, you need to join usaa because they have better rates, and better service. we're the gomez family... we're the rivera family... we're the kirby family, and we are usaa members for life. get your auto insurance quote today. to call yourself an explorer? traveling to the darkest depths of the ocean. pushing beyond the known horizon.
passing through... "hey mom," "can we get fro-yo?", >>"yeah, fro-yo." "yes." the all-new 2020 ford explorer st. with intelligent 4wd and terrain management system. it's the greatest exploration vehicle of all time. some of the following has spoiling this is us for the few who haven't seen it. season 4 of this is us is almost here. to catch every past episode, just say "this is us" into your xfinity voice remote.
like the one where i... [ buzzer ] or the one where we show... [ buzzer ] when he was a... [ buzzer ] plus you can watch this is us anywhere with xfinity stream app. especially the... [ buzzer ] episode. awww, that one's my favorite. catch every episode of this is us with xfinity. what do you look for i want free access to research. yep, td ameritrade's got that. free access to every platform. yeah, that too. i don't want any trade minimums. yeah, i totally agree, they don't have any of those. i want to know what i'm paying upfront. yes, absolutely. do you just say yes to everything? hm. well i say no to kale. mm. yeah, they say if you blanch it it's better, but that seems like a lot of work. no hidden fees. no platform fees. no trade minimums. and yes, it's all at one low price. td ameritrade. ♪