Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

FBI Completes Report on Kavanaugh Allegations; Ramirez Attorney Calls FBI Probe A "Failure"; Jeopardy Host Apologizes for Debate Moderating Performance; McConnell Betting Plenty on Kavanaugh's Success; Three Undecided GOP Senators Now Reviewing FBI Report; Dems, GOP Scale Back Ad Spending in Key Races. Aired 12:30-1p ET

Aired October 04, 2018 - 12:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[12:30:00] EVAN PEREZ, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: The FBI ended up including information that was unilaterally brought into the FBI through the tip lines because, you know, you see there were people calling, there were people who are sending stuff online.

The question is, what is in that information. Was the FBI able to corroborate any of it? It appears that if it was the tip line, it would be information they did not get to corroborate. They obviously did not do interviews with all of those people.

So, it is going to be interesting to see what senators take away from that. And going back to just to your point just now, the White House insisting that they did not interfere with this investigation. I mean, I guess that's true but the FBI -- the White House governed exactly what the FBI was going to do here. And look, that's the way it supposed to work.

DANA BASH, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: The White House is the FBI's client?

PEREZ: The White House counsel office was the client here and they told the FBI what to go look at, what they needed in this investigation, and that's what they did.

BASH: Tom, you have overseen probably more FBI background checks than you can count. Looking at the process here, looking what we know about what they found and didn't find, what does this tell you?

TOM FUENTES, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Well, it tells me that they were as thorough as they could be. You know, Kavanaugh had already been through prior background investigations including in this case. So they didn't need to go back over ground they've already covered. But in any background, the use of alcohol, drugs, other situations like that personal behavior is part of the routine background all the time.

So he would have been through those kinds of questions with classmates and professors and neighbors and relatives and friends. That would have already been covered. What was supposed to be covered in this case was, what's new based on what Ford said in her letter and in her sworn testimony. BASH: Given your experience, do you think that the FBI had the ability to do as extensive a background check supplemental check in the past few days?

FUENTES: Absolutely.

BASH: OK.

FUENTES: Because you already heard in this case a week ago, Saturday, they're not going to look at anything except Ford's allegations. And then the next day, you hear they already interviewed Ramirez. So -- and I'm hearing today that they've gone forward with some of the other interviews that were done and some of the other tips that they have gotten.

So, the White House just basically said we don't want you to do five years, 50,000 interviews in this case, but narrow it down as much as possible to the most recent allegations that are credible and take a look at that and it sounds like they did. Or these senators who have already looked at the report wouldn't be saying it look thorough to them.

BASH: And several of them are saying that Mark Judge in particular who is really a key person for a lot of the pivotal senators was talked to for three hours. Separately though, we do hear from the attorneys of both Christine Blasey Ford and Deborah Ramirez, that they're not really that thrilled with how it went down.

Let me just read you a quote from Deborah Ramirez's attorney. She was interviewed as part of -- she's one of the nine. "Fewer than four days later, however, the FBI apparently has concluded its investigation without permitting its agents to investigate. We are deeply disappointed by this failure. We can only conclude that the FBI or those controlling its investigation did not want to learn the truth behind Ms. Ramirez's actions."

The argument there is that she gave the FBI other people to talk to and it wasn't followed up on.

SHAN WU, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Right. I mean, the problem is that if you let me control who you ask questions to, I'm going to control what your answers are. And that's the big unknown because if Don McGahn at the White House was shepherding this whole thing, telling them and they are the clients as Evan said, telling them who they should talk to and that's all they can talk to. It doesn't matter how good they are when they're talking to them, they're only going to get the answers the White House already is prepared to have.

And that's where the problem is in terms of our consciousness of was this well done or not well done. It's technically probably done perfectly. But the problem is, if you control who gets to be questioned, you control the outcome of it.

PEREZ: Right. And I think a lot of people misunderstand what this process is. This is not a criminal investigation so this is not a normal -- this is not the normal thing that people think of when they think of the FBI.

But this is a big part of what the FBI does. And so, you know, I think what the fascinating back story here that's going to play on is, you know, if the Democrats take over the House, they are going to spend time reviewing what the FBI did here. And so the FBI knows this and that's why you see a lot of this information including the tip line information as being sent up so that, you know, I think the FBI is kind of tired over the last couple of years of being sort of the political football for the politicians.

BASH: Yes, I would imagine. Real quick before we go to break, Tom. Blasey Ford's lawyers are saying that it's ridiculous that she wasn't talked to as well. As somebody who's done this before, do you agree or do you think that what she said in public is enough?

FUENTES: No, I disagree. What she said in public was under oath. You know, she tes -- she gave her letter, she gave her statements through herself and through her attorneys to Senator Feinstein back -- as far back as July, but she testified under oath for several hours as did Judge Kavanaugh. That's their statements, that's everything that needed to be said, and she supplied the names of who they should look at and talk to, corroborate their story.

[12:35:07] They went to them, they did that, and if they fail to corroborate her story, what else -- you know, where else were they going to go?

It sounds like they still don't have a date, time, place, or anything about this party.

BASH: Thank you all for your insights, your reporting, your experience. Appreciate it.

And up next, what popular game show host just apologized for his performance as moderator of the important political debate? A very important political debate. If you give your answer in the form of a question, you'll get it right.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:40:03] BASH: Topping our political radar today, the Justice Department is charging seven Russian intelligence officers with hacking, wire fraud, identity theft, and money laundering. They say the officers targeted international anti-doping agencies and officials supporting federations and nearly 250 athletes in effort to distract from Russia's state-sponsored doping program.

U.S. Capitol Police arrested a suspect for allegedly doxing lawmakers during the Kavanaugh hearings last week. Doxing is the publishing of people's personal information online. Police say 27-year-old Jackson Cosko of Washington posted private information of one or more senators. He is in custody and expected to appear in court today.

And "Jeopardy" host Alex Trebek is apologizing for his performance as moderator at the Pennsylvania gubernatorial debate. He was slammed after he added his own jokes and commentary during the face-off between Democratic Governor Tom Wolf and his Republican challenger, Scott Wagner. Trebek said that he had failed to recognize the seriousness of the event for voters and his role to just ask a simple question and then let the gentlemen go at each other. Here's a clip.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALEX TREBEK, HOST, "JEOPARDY": Please, sir, tell me the name of the starting defensive lineman for the Eagles who has won two consecutive Super Bowls, each one with a different team.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Then I guess you're going to want me to put that in the form of a question.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: So Alex Trebek is a smart guy, but maybe the person who should apologize isn't him. Maybe it's the person who asked the game show host to moderate a political debate. What do you think guys?

JEFF ZELENY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: That's unreal. My first thought is that I thought it was a bit of a joke actually, but, you know, he didn't -- he said he wasn't taking it serious enough. It would have been funny actually if they would have -- had to ask the questions or had to answer in the form of a question.

BASH: Yes, yes.

(CROSSTALK)

SAHIL KAPUR, NATIONAL POLITICAL REPORTER, BLOOMBERG: There are some debates where you could --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think (INAUDIBLE) on "Jeopardy". Like he wasn't reading off the card. I was like, you had the answer in front of you.

KAPUR: There are some debates where you can just probably let the candidates go and say nothing but at least (INAUDIBLE).

BASH: Yes, that is true. And I like the idea of potentially hosting "Jeopardy" but I'm going to leave that to the game show host I think at this point.

And before we go to break, one of the five key senators, Lisa Murkowski, she says, at least through her office that she is now looking as we speak at that FBI background report on Brett Kavanaugh. She is certainly feeling pressure from both sides back home and around the country as Kavanaugh becomes a lightning rod in the midterms for other senators.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:46:57] BASH: President Trump and his Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh are not the only ones with a lot riding on the results of a confirmation vote. A key question is, how will it affect Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's ability to keep his job because Republicans hold a very slim majority, 51 to 49.

We are just five weeks out from Election Day the five U.S. senators you are looking at now publicly on the fence. Three of them are Republicans, if they can't be persuaded to vote for Kavanaugh, they won't make it.

Now so far, President Trump, McConnell, and the Republican-controlled Senate have made considerable impact. This often goes unnoticed, but they've made a lot of impact on the federal judiciary. They've installed one Supreme Court justice of course, 26 appellate court judges, 41 district court justices -- excuse me, judges. And Senator Mitch McConnell took to the floor in the Senate just a short while ago to talk about all this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R), MAJORITY LEADER: Let's not lose sight of the opportunity before us. This process has been ruled by fear and anger and underhanded gamesmanship for too long. It's time to stand up to this kind of thing.

We owe it to the American people not to be intimidated by these tactics. We owe it to the American people to underscore that you're innocent until proven guilty. It's the Senate that's on trial here, Mr. President. What kind of image will we convey to the public?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: So, this all speaks to what's going to happen in November, right? Because as I mentioned, there's a very thin majority. The Democrats who are in the toughest races are trying to defend their seats for the most part in very Republican states. The places where Donald Trump is super popular still.

And so, you know, particularly for those five -- on those five senators, two of the Democrats, those two Democrats who are in play, Joe Manchin and Heidi Heitkamp are in play frankly for those reasons. Because their constituents support the president and they're up for re-election in five weeks.

I just want to show one example here. (INAUDIBLE) on Heidi Heitkamp.

There was a poll that was recently taken asking if her vote on Brett Kavanaugh is going to make a difference for the voters, how they -- whether they support her or not. Only 34 percent said less likely which I guess but I shouldn't say only. Thirty-four percent is less likely. That's maybe pretty significant but 46 percent say no difference.

And so I'm not so sure how if you are the Heidi Heitkamp crowd, how you read that when obviously, you know, that there are so many other factors at play beyond Brett Kavanaugh.

JULIE PACE, WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF, ASSOCIATED PRESS: Well, if you look at where we were about a week ago, you had this rush of red state Democrats who are coming out saying that they were going to vote no which is actually kind of how we ended up in this situation. People like Joe Donnelly who's in Indiana, who's in a really tough race there. Clair McCaskill in Missouri.

And to the politics seem pretty clear that even in a state where Donald Trump won by a significant majority, they could win with a no vote on Kavanaugh.

[12:50:07] And so whether Manchin and Heitkamp feel the same way, it certainly the unknown at this point, but I think that it does speak to the fact that perhaps this vote is not as significant for them in their re-election process because of all of these other factors.

(CROSSTALK)

KAPUR: The point here is they have to worry about their own base as well. They cannot take their own base for granted. Heidi Heitkamp, every red state Democrat still needs the liberal base to be energized and the Democrats to show up.

LISA LERER, NATIONAL POLITICAL REPORTER, THE NEW YORK TIMES: I think that's why it's hard to universalize with these Senate races because the thing that we know about Kavanaugh from the polling, you know, that come out (INAUDIBLE) that's mobilizing on both sides.

Now, if you're Heidi Heitkamp, you're in a very, very red state. Joe Manchin, you're in a very, very red state. Mobilizing on the Republican side is way more significant for you than it is even for like Donnelly or McCaskill. So I think they're in a different position, they also have very different races. You know, Manchin has a pretty significant lead, Heitkamp is running from behind. That's been the dynamic of those races for several weeks.

BASH: You just hit a nail on the head. We're going to talk about House races after the break, but that's why Senate races really are different because the Republican base has been not as enthused to say the least. For Democrats, the fact that this is gaining the map is dangerous in the Senate races in red states.

ZELENY: It is no question. That's what the president's central role is now. But look where he is not been going. Not been going to Florida, not been going to some places presidents would normally go. He is going to these reddest of red states.

So in many respects, the geography lines up for him perfectly because North Dakota, Montana, other places. Watch Montana too. I'm talking to some Democrats there who said Jon Tester, you know, is very Montana, always very comfortable in that state, but that is going to be an issue as well. He's a no vote against this.

The problem for Heitkamp is that there aren't enough Democrats to come out. Well, yes, there are some liberals in Fargo, but Missouri and Indiana, those are different states. There are Democratic minority voters there you can turn to. But as you said, we'll talk about House races are totally different. BASH: Totally different dynamic. Yes. We're going to talk about that. And you know, because it's less than five weeks away, it's decision time on where the money is being spent in these key House races. We have an update for you and what it really means for the balance of power. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:56:59] BASH: Thirty-three days until the midterms and Democrats and Republicans are both assessing -- reassessing where to spend their ad money.

Now Democrats need to win a net of 23 seats in the House in November to retake the majority. CNN currently rates 28 seats as toss ups with another 35 as either lean Democrat or lean Republican. And as we enter this homestretch, both parties are significantly scaling back ad spending in key races.

Now on the Republican side, the congressional leadership fund which is a big source of money, they're canceling $3 million worth of ads in Michigan, in Colorado. The House races there while the NRCC, the Republican parties are trying to get Republicans elected in the House. They're pulling ads in Kansas and Pennsylvania districts.

On the Democratic side, they're also axing spending in that Colorado and Virginia district. They say it's because they're confident that they're going to win there and they can use that money elsewhere.

Now, what do all these races have in common? They're in suburban districts where the Trump factor has Republicans on defense in a big way.

And also in suburban districts where as we talk about in the last segment, just more broadly, the Kavanaugh factor could actually hurt Republicans. But in these suburban districts where independents and women tend to decide the fate of these members. It looks like it could help tip the scale in the Democrats' way.

ZELENY: Right. Which is why over the next month, it's so interesting to see. Usually, the Senate and the House generally move in the same direction (INAUDIBLE). This year, totally different largely because of the geography, the president, et cetera. But watch these House (INAUDIBLE) for everything you hear in the next just several days about how the Kavanaugh confirmation has helped Republicans in the Senate. Probably the opposite in these House districts because college-educated suburban women are turned up by this, and independents of course.

BASH: Let me just put something up on the screen just to drill down. On one of these districts that we're talking about that shifted in terms of the money spent in suburban Washington, Northern Virginia. Barbara Comstock, she is down seven to her Democratic opponent, Wexton. And look at the factor here. The most important factor, 73 percent Donald Trump.

KAPUR: This is precisely the kind of district that in a previous era would have been Republican. A lot of suburban, lot and upper income voters. They have traditionally preferred Republicans. That has dramatically shifted because of Trump and I do think the Kavanaugh aspect and the gender gap that expanding in a district like that. Republicans are not at all optimistic about all of this.

LERER: The one that stuck out to me was Colorado because --

(CROSSTALK)

LERER: You talked about it the last time I sat at this table --

BASH: Sorry for (INAUDIBLE).

LERER: That is a congressman who always pulls it out, right? He knows his district and if Republicans feel like it's looking bad for him, not really, you know, isn't good indicator of where the House map is going.

KAPUR: And districts look like America too. It's diverse, it's a mix of urban and suburban, lot of Hispanics.

PACE: (INAUDIBLE) about Trump's impact, that is the worrisome piece for Republicans that they can't separate themselves. They can't just run these local races, they are tied to Trump.

BASH: The House Republicans?

PACE: Yes.

BASH: Very interesting dynamics. So much to talk about with all this for the next five weeks.

Thank you so much for joining me on the INSIDE POLITICS. Wolf starts right now.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, I'm Wolf Blitzer. It's 1 p.m. here in Washington. Thanks very much for joining us.