Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Kushner's Security Clearance; Warmbier Family Rebukes Trump; Inslee Jumps into 2020 Race. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired March 01, 2019 - 12:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:00:20] JOHN KING, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome to INSIDE POLITICS. I'm John King. Thank you for sharing your day with us.

Another big White House lie. The president on record saying he had nothing to do with his son-in-law getting a top security clearance. "The New York Times" reports he did and that his chief of staff and top lawyer wrote memos detailing their concerns.

Plus, a strong rebuke from the parents of Otto Warmbier. They are horrified the president says he accepts Kim Jong-un's word that he had nothing to do with their son's brutal treatment in North Korean prisons.

And the crowded Democratic presidential field now has its first governor. Washington's Jay Inslee says 2020 should be organized around one big issue, climate change. The vice president takes issue.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE PENCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The only thing green about the so-called green new deal is how much green it's going to cost taxpayers if these people ever pass it into law.

America will never be a socialist country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Back to 2020 politics in a moment.

But we begin the hour with a major credibility crisis for the Trump White House. One that involves the president's family, and, it appears, a series of lies. Presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner is at the center of this. He's crisis-crossing the Middle East right now with a top secret security clearance the experts did not want him to get. The president did want Kushner to have that clearance and the president has the power to grant it. Remember, though, just a few weeks ago, the president said he had nothing to do with it. "The New York Times" today detailing -- and the many details are important -- that the president actually had a lot to do with it.

The newspaper says both then Chief of Staff John Kelly and then White House Counsel Don McGahn wrote memos making clear they were uncomfortable with the process and with the decision to ignore the concerns raised by intelligence agencies and other senior administration officials. Those memos, "The Times" reports, do not track with this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAGGIE HABERMAN, "THE NEW YORK TIMES": Did you tell John Kelly or anyone else in the White House to overrule security officials? The career veterans?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: No. I don't think I have the authority to do that. I'm not sure I do.

HABERMAN: You do have the authority to do it.

TRUMP: But I wouldn't -- I wouldn't do it.

HABERMAN: You never (INAUDIBLE) --

TRUMP: Jared's a good -- I was -- I was never involved with his security. I know that he -- you know, just from reading, I know that there was issues back and forth about security for numerous people, actually, but I don't want to get involved in that stuff.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: I don't want to get involved in that stuff, the president says, nor does the new reporting in "The New York Times" track with this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

IVANKA TRUMP, ADVISER TO PRESIDENT TRUMP: The president had no involvement pertaining to my clearance or my husband's clearance.

There are literally close to a million people in the federal government who are in the pipeline to get their permanent clearance and are on temporary status.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So no special treatment?

TRUMP: No.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: When "The Times" asked for comment last night, the response from the White House press secretary, Sarah Sanders, is telling. She did not repeat the president's denial. She instead said, quote, the White House does not comment on security clearances.

Although, of course, you just heard the president, and his daughter, comment on security clearances.

CNN's Abby Phillip joins me live from the White House.

Abby, can they, how do they square this circle?

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, it seems, John, that they're not even attempting really to square this circle. These categorical denials that we've heard over the last year really fly in the face of this reporting.

And just this morning we heard one White House adviser, counselor to the president, Kellyanne Conway, essentially reiterating that the president has the authority to do this.

Now, she's right about that, he does have the authority to grant a clearance to basically anyone who he wants to. But the question here is why grant it over the objections of the people doing the background check trying to check for potential conflicts? In this case, it's not known exactly what was in Jared Kushner's background that caused some concern about granting him this top security clearance, but previous reporting has shown that there were some concerns about his contacts, his business contacts, with foreign governments, including the United Arab Emirates, Israel and also Russia.

And while Jared Kushner is at this very moment right on an international tour, it calls into question the very nature of his ability to do this job considering that many people in this government, career officials whose job it is to check these things out, believed that he had conflicts that should not give him access to the highest classification level in this government.

But, you know, I think from the White House's perspective, what we are hearing from them is that -- that they're not going to comment specifically on the allegations, but they're doubling down on the president's right to do this. But that doesn't answer any of these questions about what exactly is in Kushner's background and why the president did this, specifically for his son-in-law, for a family member. There is some questions being raised already about the concerns about nepotism that have dogged this White House from the very beginning, John.

[12:05:17] KING: And why he said -- you're right, he has the power. Why did he say he had nothing to do with it?

PHILLIP: Yes.

KING: Abby Phillip, appreciate you, live at the White House.

With me in studio to share their reporting and their insights, Catherine Lucey with the "Associated Press," Olivier Knox with Sirius XM, CNN's Manu Raju and Lisa Lerer with "The New York Times."

And so there are two big issues. Number one, what were the concerns? What were the concerns raised by the FBI, the CIA and others about Jared Kushner? And then, two, the president does have the authority to say in the end, OK, I see those concerns. It's my decision, boom. But then why lie about it?

OLIVIER KNOX, CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT, SIRIUS XM: Why distance himself from the potential repercussions of doing it, is that what you mean?

I mean "The Washington Post" reported either last year or the year before there were concerns that at least four countries talked about their potential ability to manipulate Jared Kushner because of his financial dealings and because of what they described as his inexperience.

So to me, you know, lying about it just means keeping -- I had nothing to do with it, which means I had nothing to do with things that happen if this goes sideways.

KING: But -- but now we have a new -- this is more proof of the new world order we live in, in Washington now that the Democrats have authority in the House, because the grand ostrich party just sticks its head in the sand every time questions are raised about -- questions of ability at the White House. The Democrats have a different approach.

This letter just sent by Elijah Cummings, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, you remember it's the same committee that has Michael Cohen in the chair the other day, if true, these new reports raise grave questions about what derogatory information career officials obtained about Mr. Kushner to recommend denying him access to our nation's most sensitive secrets. Why the president concealed this role -- his role in overruling those recommendation, why General Kelly and Mr. McGahn both felt compelled to document these actions and why your office is continuing to withhold key documents and witnesses from this committee.

The problem for the White House now is that Democrats have the authority and if the chief of staff and the White House Council wrote memos saying, this smells, Congress is going to see them.

MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: They are. And that's why that -- Cummings says he wants those documents by Monday. This is -- comes after two years when he was in the minority asking for similar documents related to Jared Kushner because -- and others, Michael Flynn, others in the White House because he believes that security clearance protocols have not been followed by this White House and during the transition period. But (INAUDIBLE) they ignored it when he was in the minority. Now he's the chairman. He has the power to issue subpoenas. He has been asking for these documents. He wanted them by February 6th. It's now March 1st. And so if he doesn't get it by Monday, expect subpoenas.

And I talked to one senior member of the committee just this morning, Jerry Connelly, who said they wanted to talk to General Kelly, John Kelly, also bring him before the committee. Expect him, potentially Don McGahn. This is not going away anytime soon.

CATHERINE LUCEY, WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, "THE ASSOCIATED PRESS": And that's why -- I mean one of the things that's so important about these stories, which are excellent in both "The Times" and "The Post," they're not just talking about what the president did, but also the existence of these memos.

KING: Right.

LUCEY: That there are things on paper that they can find. And the fact that there are clearly people out there who want it known that there are memos floating around that could get into the details. But we just don't know about Kushner.

KING: Right, that people want -- this -- these things don't fall from the sky.

LUCEY: Yes.

KING: Let me just read quickly from this -- from "The Times" report.

Mr. Trump's decision in May so troubled senior administration officials that at least one, the White House chief of staff at the time, John F. Kelly, wrote a contemporaneous internal memo about how he had been ordered to give Mr. Kushner the top-secret clearance. The White House counsel at the time, Donald F. McGahn, also wrote an internal memo outlining the concerns he -- that had been raised about Mr. Kushner -- including by the CIA -- and how Mr. McGahn had recommended that he not be given a top-secret clearance.

So now, even though the president says, I had nothing to do with this. Ivanka says, no, father had nothing to do with this. When they get caught, they go, oh, well, we had the -- they had -- we -- he has the authority to do this, which he does. But this is just like, we didn't met with any Russians. Oh, we met with Russians, but they're -- nothing bad happened. They just change their story every time they're caught.

LISA LERER, NATIONAL POLITICAL REPORTER, "THE NEW YORK TIMES": Right. And I think part of what's happening here is the president adjusting to the world of divided government. I mean I don't -- I should say, I don't know if he's adjusted, but facing the realities of the world of divided government. I mean this is someone who was in business for a long time. He could have NDAs. He could have lawsuits where you make a settlement that's sealed. So details like this were less likely to come out in the public domain.

Then he came to --

KING: So lying's OK?

LERER: You know, I mean --

KING: I just -- it's just I get that --

LERER: Whether it's OK or it's not OK, it seems like it's -- there's a pattern, as you point out, and this has been part of his practice for, you know, a while. And it wasn't necessarily a problem for him. Then he came to Washington. Republicans controlled all houses of -- all parts of Congress. That give him some protection. And now he's in really a brave new world here.

KING: And so I want -- listen here, this is -- a couple of quick things. Number one, this is Abbie Lowell, who's Jared Kushner's attorney, on with Wolf Blitzer. This goes back to May 2018 as all this was playing out.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Who made the decision to restore his security clearance? How did that happen?

[12:10:03] ABBIE LOWELL, JARED KUSHNER'S ATTORNEY: The intelligence community and the FBI. It happened in the normal course. It happened the way it happens for thousands of people. There was nobody in the political process that had anything to do with it. There was nobody who pressured it. It was just done the normal, regular way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Except it was not. It was not done the normal, regular way if you look at this "Times" reporting and the chief of staff and the White House counsel writing memos they were so concerned about it.

And, again, this was Kellyanne Conway, just months ago, the issue is, what did the president do and why did the president, why did his daughter, say the president was not involved when the president was involved? This is the answer you get.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SANDRA SMITH, FOX NEWS: Was Jared Kushner -- was the president involved in Jared Kushner's security clearance process?

KELLYANNE CONWAY, COUNSELOR TO THE PRESIDENT: We don't discuss security clearances. I'm not even going to discuss my own. But I will tell you that the president has the absolute right to do what was described.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: A, nonresponsive, but, b, didn't we show video of the president of the United States, and his daughter, and Jared Kushner's lawyer discussing security clearance processes? We don't discuss it when we're caught. Is there another answer? Please, I'm happy to accept another answer.

RAJU: No. No, look, I think this is also why there are nepotism rules across the government. Of course, the White House doesn't comply with those. That doesn't affect the White House. It does affect other federal agencies because people -- they clearly were giving favoritism. The president was giving favoritism to his son-in-law. And the -- this has been something that has dogged this White House since the beginning. And the reason perhaps he probably lied about it initially is because he did not want to be seen as giving favoritism to his son-in-law. That's why they try to have rules to prevent that from happening. And also if there's someone who is in the inner circle, a member -- family member who is -- has a lot of baggage like Jared Kushner, it's very hard to just fire someone who is related to you, which is why they have these rules in place.

LUCEY: (INAUDIBLE).

RAJU: Exactly. LERER: Right.

LUCEY: I think another thing to think about as this unfolds is that this comes at a moment where Jared Kushner was really seen as rising in influence and power within the administration. He just came off of a successful run with the criminal justice bill in December. He played a role -- I mean he was not quite as successful, but he certainly -- he was drafted to help with the shutdown negotiations. He's now on this very, you know, sort of high-profile Middle East tour. You know, the president has been through, you know, any number of other top aides and he is still there. So he is -- he is viewed as someone very, very close to the president with the sort of unique role and influence in the White House.

KING: Someone the president trusts, which is back to the president's M.O., he likes having family members around him who he trusts.

We'll continue to track this story.

When we come back, an American family, parents of a man who died after being released from a North Korea prison, are mad at the president for accepting Kim Jong-un's word.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:16:57] KING: The parents of an American student who died after being in imprisoned by North Korea lashed out at President Trump today, saying they can't stay silent after the president said he accepts Kim Jong-un's story that he was unaware of their son's brutal treatment. This from Fred and Cindy Warmbier today. We have been respectful during this summit process. Now we must speak out. Kim and his evil regime are responsible for the death of our son Otto. Kim and his evil regime are responsible for unimaginable cruelty and inhumanity. No excuses or lavish praise can change that.

Ouch, in the sense that you have these parents who are still grieving the loss of their son. They had been with the president -- and we'll get some of the history in a minute. But they listened to the president of the United States and actually -- they listened to the president of the United States. And let's just hear the president of the United States. You just heard from Otto Warmbier's parents. The reason they're upset is this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: He felt badly about it. I did speak to him. He felt very badly.

But he tells me -- he tells me that he didn't know about it. And I will take him at his word.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Now, I -- it was a slap in the face yesterday if you're the parents of this young man. He felt badly. Taking Kim Jong-un's words that he felt badly about it? The guy runs one of the most brutal regimes on planet earth. He runs -- he felt badly about it, and he told me he didn't know about it, and I will take him at his word.

KNOX: Right, the idea that an American prisoner in North Korea does not get the attention of North Korea's supreme leader doesn't -- that just doesn't fly.

We should note, this is -- this is a president who's no stranger to this kind of a conflict with grieving parents. The Kahn family, for example. In fact, American presidents in general are no stranger to having this kind of dynamic. Cindy Sheehan (ph) went after George W. Bush. There were others too.

I just want to make one quick national security point, which is, people -- people try to divest, people try to separate the idea. You know, Jamal Khashoggi is worth a re-evaluation of the U.S. Saudi relationship. Otto Warmbier is not worth scuttling these negotiations. But you're sending subtle messages about what you -- what you value and you're rewarding certain kinds of behavior. And what you hear from national security folks is, if you -- if you -- if you just wipe a sponge over it, if you just erase this stuff, what you're telling these people, these leaders, is, go ahead, be reckless.

KING: That's a -- that's a good way to put it.

And let's go back -- let's just remind people, Otto Warmbier was imprisoned. He went to North Korea for five days in December 2015. He was detained in Pyongyang, found guilty of hostile acts, sentenced to 15 years of hard labor. He contracted botulism according to North Korea and slipped into a coma. He was medevaced home at the end. The administration, to its credit, it helped get his release. And he died a few days after getting home.

I just -- I can't get my mind around what possessed the president to say, I accept Kim Jong-un's word here.

RAJU: The president doesn't do empathy. I mean that's part of the problem. I mean, you know, as Olivier was saying, that he's had fights with other gold -- other families, not showing sympathy to when, for instance, the death of a service member, one of the widows who was affected by the death of her husband after that deadly ambush in Niger. You know, you recall the feud that occurred after that.

[12:20:01] I will also say that that comment that the president made really marred the summit. I mean you -- people criticize how he handled North Korea. That's separate. But some Republicans were applauding the fact that he walked away from any deal with Kim Jong-un because they were concerned that he was going to do something bad.

But afterwards, this overshadowed virtually everything. And talking to Republicans yesterday, they didn't know how to balance the two. Mitch McConnell went to the floor, praised the president's handling of the summit, but then when he was asked directly about the Warmbier comments, he would not comment on that. It just shows what the president did was a huge mistake and has put his own party in a difficult position again.

LERER: And this is -- LUCEY: And that's also -- sorry. I just -- this is also -- we've seen this before, versions of this, with this president, that he values personal relationships so much he can invest in them with other foreign leaders, and he has been known to take the word of autocrats, you know, over his own intelligence communities. We've seen that with Putin on election meddling, the Saudis on Khashoggi. So there is precedent for him, when he gets into the room with these people and hears what they have to say, seeming to listen to them.

LERER: But I think Olivier's point is a good one in that, you know, you can't separate this from broader policy. And this is an administration that has not prioritized human rights. We've seen that at the State Department. We've seen it with the Saudis. We've seen it with the Chinese. And this is another signal to these kinds of regimes that this is just not a priority for the United States.

And that, you know, beyond the tragedy of this one particular case and the grieving parents and the whole situation, it is sending a broader message that is, I think, notable, and that's part of the reason why Republicans yet again are in this complicated spot when it comes to the president's foreign policy.

KING: Well, we'll keep a watch on this one. Obviously it's just -- you read the statement from the Warmbiers, your heart breaks.

Up next, Washington's governor jumps into the 2020 race, testing if a single issue campaign can catapult him all the way to the White House.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:26:40] KING: Democratic presidential field, 11 candidates strong officially as of today and now includes its first governor. Jay Inslee of Washington state making his formal announcement this morning, serving notice he believes climate change is the defining issue facing the country.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. JAY INSLEE (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Our country's next mission must be to rise up to the most urgent challenge of our time: defeating climate change. This crisis isn't just a charter graph anymore. The impacts are being felt everywhere.

I'm Jay Inslee, and I'm running for president because I'm the only candidate who will make defeating climate change our nation's number one priority.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: CNN's Jeff Zeleny joins the conversation.

It is a risky bet, especially if you think winning is possible, to just say, let's organize everything around this. But it's an interesting bet.

JEFF ZELENY, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: It certainly is. And it's also more than -- he uses climate change as a vessel for everything else. Why it's a national security challenge. Why it's an infrastructure challenge. Why it's an economic challenge facing the country.

But the thing I was struck, first and foremost, for all the candidates, he's a governor. Finally a governor gets into the race.

KING: Right.

ZELENY: That used to be the path to the White House, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and others. In mean, of course, in recent times, it's not been, but that is one sort of striking thing other governors are looking at. He's the first to jump in.

I think the most interesting effect he has on the field is what he does to other Democratic candidates.

LERER: Yes.

ZELENY: He told "Rolling Stone" in an interview recently, a lot of these other candidates just want to check the box.

KING: Right.

ZELENY: So he is going to have a defining focus on this. Other candidates are going to have to up their game on climate change, I think, if he reaches the debate stage or even if not. So that's what the effect of these other candidates have (INAUDIBLE).

KING: Let's look -- let's look at more of that quote from Rolling Stone because it's important. This has to be the number one priority of the United States. Every agency has to be on board and it has to take priority over everything else we do. You have to build a mandate for this during the campaign. You have to express a willingness to spend your political capital to get this done. I think too many other candidates are going to say, I'm for the green new deal and now I'm done. That just doesn't cut it.

So, within the Democratic primary, we're going to have a debate about climate change, what to do about it, how much will it cost, where's that money come from, how much of it is government, how much of it is business, which is a good thing. In which any -- any policy debate is a good debate. The Republicans look at this more scornfully.

LERER: Right. I mean I sat down with Governor Inslee over the weekend. We knew that this would be coming soon. And, you know, I -- we talked to him about his platform, all these kinds of things. And at one point I asked him, well, so even if this doesn't happen, you don't get the nomination, you're ensuring that this is on the stage. And he just gave this smile, right? He didn't take the bait, but he knows what this is about. And he knows -- he knows that there was no a question asked about climate change in the general election debates last time around. And he wants to make sure that this is being talked about, that it's center stage, even if some elements of the party feel that it's a little bit risky. And it gives Republicans an -- you know, an avenue to attack them, particularly in, you know, transitioning industrial states like Michigan, like Ohio that are key to electoral success.

[12:29:42] The other interesting thing that's worth noting that he said in that interview is, I asked whether he'd be willing to use an emergency declaration to do something on climate change, and he did not rule that out at all. So you could see how a Democrat would be thinking about coming into the presidency with these expanding powers that could allow them to take very big action on a problem that they see as existential and immediate.